Evidence of meeting #1 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Do you want me to read this letter now?
We have to plan the meeting for next week, right?
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Mr. Davies and others who have been on the committee will understand what I am about to read. I'll just read it to you.
As you are aware, the Government is launching a publicly-advertised, comprehensive recruitment and selection process for the next Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
The RCMP is an iconic symbol of Canadian national unity, and its Commissioner plays an important role in law enforcement within Canada and internationally. As the head of Canada's national police service, the next Commissioner of the RCMP will need to demonstrate exemplary leadership skills, have a proven aptitude for strategic management, deal sensitively with issues relevant to the RCMP's many stakeholders and to Canada's diverse population, and be able to develop and implement a corporate vision that will be endorsed by the RCMP and its stakeholders.
With this in mind, I am writing to you to ask for the Standing Committee's input into the selection criteria (draft attached), which will serve to guide us in the selection of the next Commissioner.
I would appreciate if you would provide me with the Standing Committee's views and input on the selection criteria by June 30, 2011.
Ms. Hoeppner, I think you had a motion, if it's in order. It is to give us new direction for Tuesday.
6:15 p.m.
The Clerk
You've just adopted a notice of motion.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Can we have unanimous consent to give direction to look at this?
Go ahead, Mr. Davies.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Normally we would require 48 hours' notice of motion, but could we hear the motion first and then let you know if it's something we could dispense with?
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Notwithstanding any routine motion, I propose that the committee study the selection criteria for the new commissioner of the RCMP found in annex A of the letter from the Minister of Public Safety to the chair, and that the criteria be studied for one meeting.
That's the motion. I'd like to just speak to it for a moment.
A lot of us are new members on this committee. Because our time is short and we really don't know how long we're going to be here, whether it will be past next week, it would be good if we could get officials in or get moving on this so we can ask questions. Apart from Rick and Don, the rest of us are all new--and Brent. He's so far away I forgot about him.
That's the motion. The reason for it is that we have a very short timeframe.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Then the objective here would be for the department to explain the process. He's also asked that we have input into this.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
I think all of us would welcome the opportunity to ask the officials any questions about what the criteria should be and what they see as relevant and important criteria. I think we could very easily ask them questions for a couple of hours in direct relation to appointing the new commissioner.
6:20 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
One question would be whether it's Tuesday or Thursday. The second thing would be whether there would be an opportunity to suggest a witness or two. I'm thinking that the last time we had some RCMP--remember Assistant Superintendent Souccar and some other people. It may be worthwhile to consider calling one of those types of people to come and give us their views.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
First we have to see if there's unanimous consent that we even have this discussion.
Is that correct? We're discussing it now.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We're discussing it.
Do we have unanimous consent to bring forward this motion or a motion--
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
--and deal with what we're going to do next Tuesday?
All in favour?
6:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
That would be my motion.
Notwithstanding any routine motion, I propose that the committee study the selection criteria for the new commissioner of the RCMP found in annex A of the letter from the Minister of Public Safety to the chair,and that the criteria be studied for one meeting as soon as possible.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Can I speak--I guess not off the record, but my sense is that if we opened it up to a lot of witnesses we would have to be very careful, because you would probably disqualify anyone. It could be viewed that they would be disqualified if they appeared here. It could jeopardize any discussion based on what they might say. What I understand from your motion is that this is the department explaining to everyone the process. There won't be any names. There won't be any going back to the present commissioner. It's procedural. It's how we're going to go through this. I don't know how long we're going to be around here, but this is basically putting this topic as something that is time sensitive before our committee. We can discuss anything further. Probably for the Tuesday meeting it will be the department.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
I'm a little worried about waiting until Thursday. We don't know what's going to happen, but with Friday being a holiday, if all of a sudden--I'm just guessing--they decided to move Friday to a Thursday, we probably wouldn't even be meeting. That's why I'm thinking Tuesday would be good.
6:20 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I don't think we have an issue with it being Tuesday if it needs to be. I understood this process to be, quoting from what the Prime Minister said, “a comprehensive selection process” to find a replacement. He said the government would consult the public safety committee on the selection criteria. It's my understanding that it's not just to have the RCMP come tell us about the process, although that would be helpful. There's no problem with that.
The committee wants to have a discussion about what the selection criteria should be and what our recommendations would be anyway. It's up to the government, the Prime Minister, and the minister. To help the committee determine what the selection criteria should be, I wouldn't have a lot of witnesses, but I'm thinking you could have two or three varied witnesses who could answer questions from the committee on what they think the selection criteria should be. I'm not sure if it's only department officials. I think you'd want to hear from some sworn officers of the RCMP and ask what they want to see in a chief and what criteria they think are helpful.
We're very sensitive about not opening up. It was a traumatic thing to go through. I can speak for the official opposition and say that we're not interested in embarrassing anybody or making any kind of hay out of Mr. Elliott's tenure. It's time to move on. What we want to do is ask what the criteria should really be to make sure the next commissioner is the best possible choice.