Public Safety Committee on May 8th, 2007

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

Well, the Crime Stoppers program is an excellent program, and we've reaped many, many benefits, solved many homicides, solved many very serious occurrences through our Crime Stoppers program. We're very proud of that program.

About the reluctance of people to come forward in that program, they have many options. They can come forward as a confidential informant. They can give us the information through Crime Stoppers, or they can give us the information through being a witness.

The thing we have found in these communities that you're talking about, some of the more vulnerable communities, is that there is great suspicion placed upon individuals who live in those communities in terms of who's actually speaking with the police. When the police show up with a search warrant, who talked to the police about that? So we face that challenge every single day.

I can tell you we had some recent cases, without getting into specifics again, where we've actually had multiple witnesses come forward whom we've had to provide some level of protection for in homicides, and they came forward when they had acknowledged that there was an avenue, a forum, for them to gain protection, that we weren't just going to leave them on their own once they came forward and gave us their statement, that we would look after their interest.

That's what I talked about in my opening remarks: this is part of the trust factor. When people start to hear about the success of the program, that will hopefully increase the use of the program.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Staff Inspector, you talked about a sort of reluctance to access the federal program. Now, many of the prosecutions will come through the province. You talked about a federal prosecution in the case of importation of drugs, and there are others. Terrorism is one, I suspect. I forget the list now; it's been a while since I've looked at it. You intimated that there could be opportunities where you could avail yourself of the program, but right now it's just too complicated fiscally and procedurally.

What would you like to see happen to the federal program to make it more accessible to you, and would you use it?

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

To clarify one point, we have access to the federal program any day of the week. It's available to us, but it's on a cost-recovery basis. If we access the program, it's entirely on our dime. It's complete cost recovery, based upon a bill-back from the RCMP. So it is available to us.

What would we like to see? We currently enjoy the flexibility and the speed with which we can get people into a protective area of safety. If we were to envisage a system in relation to the federal witness protection program, we would envisage one that had a very flat decision-making process, with the funding, as I say, not to be provided to our organization but to be provided, perhaps, to the RCMP or the Department of Justice. I do not want to enter into a debate between the two agencies, but the funding would be provided so that it could facilitate a seamless...you know, here's a witness, we need protection, and then the mechanics would already be there.

Right now that exists on the provincial side.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Now to the Bloc Québécois.

Mr. Ménard, do you have any questions?

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I will be handing over my time to Mr. Comartin.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Comartin.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Merci, Monsieur Ménard.

To follow up on Mr. Cullen's question, and perhaps, Superintendent, you'd want to comment, is this a situation where it would actually be better if the money were passed down to the province--they'll never pass it down to the municipalities, at least not in our lifetime--in order to continue to have that kind of flexibility and speed? Would that be the best result, assuming we could get the feds to cut the cheque?

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

I didn't come here to make this a real money issue on where the money goes; I just wanted to talk about flexibility, autonomy, and how our success has worked. But if you would speak to the Ministry of the Attorney General, that is something they'd be very interested in, because the infrastructure is already in place, the mechanics are already in place, and they would gladly facilitate administering both the federal and the provincial matters in terms of witness protection. I received that commitment from the ministry prior to attending here today.

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

If I can make a comment, specific to those provinces with provincial programs, I would suggest that yes, money to the provincial approving entity would be entirely appropriate. Unfortunately, there are many provinces that don't have provincial programs. My suggestion is that as long as there is money available...for instance, if in Halifax they need to put somebody into the witness protection program, as long as there's money there somewhere so that when they enter into the program they can utilize it, then it would be appropriate.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Superintendent, if I understand the situation in Manitoba, at least half of Manitoba, perhaps a bit more, is covered by the RCMP for regular policing. Is that roughly accurate?

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

As far as actual area is concerned, more surface area would be covered by the RCMP. In terms of personnel, there are more municipal police in Manitoba than there are RCMP.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I'm talking about borders here. Do you have the RCMP functioning right beside the Winnepeg police force?

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

Yes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

If a murder occurs and you have a witness who sees the murder and it's out in the regional area, under the RCMP, that witness is covered by federal funds. For the same crime just over the border in Winnipeg, there's no coverage from the federal government.

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

That's correct.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

It's the Criminal Code that's been breached in both cases. That's the situation.

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

Yes, that's correct. There could be a possibility of going through the national program for us in that particular case.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

But you'd have to pick up the costs.

I want to go back again to where the programs haven't worked. I want to talk about supervision of the individual in the program.

When Assistant Commissioner Souccar was here, if I understood him correctly, he said if they're not involved in those 300 cases currently--so if it's an entirely provincial or municipal force--it's the provincial or municipal force that provides the supervision of that individual. That's correct?

I'm sorry, could you say yes?

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

Yes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

It's like being in a courtroom.

If that's the case—and I'm going to ask about Ontario first—who sets the standard as to what type of supervision of the individual in the program is to be provided in Ontario?

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

Once again, it's a program that's run and operated by the Ministry of the Attorney General. It's the ministry's program, and they set all the standards associated with the program.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Okay. Again, that covers all of the forces in Ontario?

[S/Insp Steve Izzett]

Yes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Is the same true in Manitoba?

[Supt Gordon B. Schumacher]

Yes, it is.