Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Back on June 11, 2007, in a public accounts committee meeting, there was testimony from the officer in charge of the ATIP section for the RCMP, on a file, by the name of Michel Joyal, who appeared before the committee and made some very serious allegations. He stated that on an access request, he received a call from a deputy commissioner, Deputy Commissioner Gauvin, who then requested that he bring his file and then met with him in the commissioner's office—the commissioner of the day was Mr. Zaccardelli—with several other officials. Commissioner Zaccardelli was not there, but Deputy Commissioner Gauvin was there and several of his officials. They had prepared a separate docket for release--not the ATIP docket documents but their own--and attempted to do a switcheroo, which Mr. Joyal refused to do.
This was confirmed in testimony before the committee by Superintendent Christian Picard.
This is our federal police force. These were very serious allegations that touched on a deputy commissioner directly and, indirectly, the office of the commissioner.
Was there ever an investigation initiated? I understand that there has to be a complaint on an ATIP. If there wasn't, this is of tremendous concern.
We also heard testimony that documents would at times go missing, or would be improperly labelled so it would be difficult or impossible sometimes to find them or access them.
If there wasn't an investigation of these very serious allegations, is there a mechanism...? It's not an actual ATIP complaint. It's a complaint regarding the conduct. With the legislation passed in 1999, it would appear that this sort of action would be criminal in nature under the amendment to the legislation.
What has happened with this, and how would one proceed?