Public Safety committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. With your kind indulgence, I would like to make a brief opening statement of approximately ten minutes. The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP was created by Parliament in October 1988. Under part VII of the RCMP Act, a member of

Public Safety committee  There is one case currently that has been appealed to our commission for review. The ruling was given, I believe, in 2006 at the first instance, and we're currently conducting discussions with the RCMP in terms of access to the information relevant to hearing that appeal. There

Public Safety committee  I've shared that with everyone. I have not at this point in time, obviously, received any feedback on my model. I think I've appeared before numerous groups and talked about it. A lot of people seem to be supportive of that theory, but clearly the minister will have to speak for

Public Safety committee  I'd have to look and see. We didn't analyze it for that purpose. I pointed out that the cases go back prior to this legislation being put in place. As a matter of fact, the two that I referred to in specific were both, I think, in 1991 and 1992. Regarding the 27 that are complain

Public Safety committee  Yes, it's fair to say. And I indicated that the recommendations were made in 1992--the legislation was 1995--and part of the challenge at that time was the articulation of criteria and so on. In June 1996, the legislation was passed. It mapped out criteria and so on. That certain

Public Safety committee  Part of the challenge we have is that some of them were obviously generic in nature. I pointed out in my submission that we don't have an audit or review power generally, so for you to find out if they've been implemented, you would have to go and look in a broader base to see if

Public Safety committee  One of the ironies is that this legislation was put in place in October 1988, which was six years after the access and privacy legislation was in place and four years after SIRC was put in place. Their powers are quite similar. As a matter of fact, SIRC's powers were almost copie

Public Safety committee  Yes. I have it with me. As I read my notes this morning, I thought somebody was probably going to ask for that.

Public Safety committee  Yes. We have copies in both official languages that we'll share with you.

Public Safety committee  I wasn't merely speaking in terms of the need for enhanced powers just for that purpose. I spoke to those powers because I think it relates directly to the efficacy of the commission to look at the program you're looking at. When I look at the Hansards back in 1995-96, when the

Public Safety committee  That has improved through the years. It has improved recently, relative to the history of the organization, and I'll put that in the following context. The organization had historically had a backlog, and when I came on board, the first case I signed was in the commission for six

Public Safety committee  The process is that when we receive a request for a review by us, we notify the RCMP that we have gotten a request, and we ask them then to forward to us any of what's called the relevant material that would have been considered by the RCMP in the first instance when they were ad

Public Safety committee  I'd say it's better. I'm very familiar with the comments of my predecessor. I think it's different. What I've endeavoured—and this is not to make a contrast, because I just prefer to speak for myself—is to professionalize the relationship with them and to find out, if someone i

Public Safety committee  I indicated that I have one right now where that is a problem. But they are actually working with us and trying to get the individual to waive...in other words, to get the individual to consent, and therefore, they would say there's no problem with the statutory prohibition becau

Public Safety committee  In this case, the individual in the program is the complainant.