Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 8th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Good morning.

This is meeting No. 11 of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for the first session of the 42nd Parliament. This meeting is being held in public and is televised.

Before we start, I'd like to acknowledge our honourable veteran chair of the committee, Mr. Joe Preston. I begged him on hands and knees to take the chair, but he wouldn't. I think we should welcome him.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

The first business today is the supplementary estimates (C) for 2015-16, followed by an examination of the last of the federal appointees to the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments, and finally, some committee business.

I will now call vote 3c under parliamentary protective service of the supplementary estimates (C) for 2015-16.

Our witnesses are the Honourable Geoff Regan, Speaker of the House of Commons and chief superintendent Michael Duheme, director of parliamentary protective service.

So that Mr. Speaker and committee members know, we also have the main estimates later this spring, so you'll probably be back. This is only for the supplementary estimates (C) for one part of your department, Mr. Speaker.

The floor is yours.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Speaker of the House of Commons]

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and colleagues.

It's been a long time since I've sat at this end of the table. I'm very pleased to be here this morning to discuss the parliamentary protective service's supplementary estimates (C), or the supp C's as we call them, for 2015-16.

I'm going to begin by asking Mr. Duheme to introduce the people who have come with him today.

[Supt Michael Duheme, Director, Parliamentary Protective Service]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With me are Charlotte Hibbard, who is part of our communication team; Sloane Mask, our chief financial officer; Mr. Jean Forgues, who is responsible for all our components to do with HR for PPS; and Melissa Rusk, who's the executive assistant with regard to strategic planning and ethics and quality control and development.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

For your benefit, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Michael Duheme is the Chief Superintendent and Director of the Parliamentary Protective Service.

Before continuing, I will give everyone time to access the simultaneous interpretation. As usual, the interpreters do an excellent job.

At times I will use the acronym, PPS, to refer to the Parliamentary Protective Service.

The supplementary (C)s for the PPS total just over $17 million. I'll provide you with an overview of the items as follows: first, Parliament Hill security model enhancements; second, parliamentary protective service transition and establishment initiatives; and third, employee benefit plans.

Before I start, I must stress that for security purposes, of course, I'll be a bit limited in the level of operational detail that I can provide, or that we can provide, and I thank you in advance for your understanding.

As you know, the PPS is quite new, having been established by statute on June 23, 2015. The service is responsible for all matters relating to physical security throughout our parliamentary precinct and the grounds of Parliament Hill.

The Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons are responsible for administrative oversight and providing general policy direction to the service, which is under the operational control and management of its director, Mr. Duheme, a member of the RCMP. The governance was designed in this manner so that both Speakers could ensure that the powers, privileges, rights, and immunities of the Senate and House and their respective members remain paramount in the delivery of enhanced protective services.

The need for greater operational coordination among the security partners has long been identified as a priority. In fact, Mr. Chairman, in 2007, the Senate, the House of Commons, and RCMP created the master security planning office to achieve just that. Recommendations from the Auditor General and various parliamentary committees further reinforced the need for integration. Prompted by the events of October 22, 2014, members of the House of Commons adopted a motion calling upon the Speakers of both chambers to invite the RCMP to lead operational security throughout the precinct and the grounds of Parliament Hill, while respecting the privileges, immunities, and powers of the respective Houses and ensuring the continued employment of our existing and highly respected parliamentary security staff.

This culminated in the creation of the PPS seven months ago. With that, the RCMP's Parliament Hill security unit and the protective services of the Senate and House were formally integrated.

The establishment of the PPS was a significant step forward in removing silos among the three security partners. Each of course brings unique expertise to the partnership, and as the organization works to fully complete its transition to a single and fully unified entity, our ability to protect senators, members, staff, and visitors, who are all vitally important to all of us, is enhanced.

As of today, PPS is well prepared operationally to deliver on its protective mandate proactively, efficiently and effectively.

Since its inception, PPS has implemented a number of initiatives that are focused on enhancing and improving interoperability, security and integration within the Parliamentary Precinct and on the grounds of Parliament Hill.

The PPS focus is on deploying resources in a manner that effectively uses the range of expertise that already exists within the current complement of employees. This integration is further strengthened by the implementation of a single command oversight mechanism, the formalization of an intelligence unit and general improvements to information-sharing in threat detection and coordination.

As well, Defence Research and Development Canada is currently completing a review to inform the physical security infrastructure within the precinct. Their objective is to provide research-based advice for the PPS to consider as it moves forward.

At the same time, the PPS, along with the Senate corporate security directorate and the House of Commons corporate security office, is establishing security awareness initiatives aimed at ensuring parliamentarians, our employees, administrative staff, and all others who provide us support here on Parliament Hill know exactly what to do during an emergency, something we can all see the benefit of.

Finally, the PPS is currently establishing specific policies and procedures that will effectively support the service's work. While the former Senate and House of Commons protection services and the RCMP are now an integrated unit, the PPS is still very much an organization in transition, which brings me to the content of the supplementary (C)s.

As the transition continues, the PPS remains committed to enhancing security awareness and exercising stewardship over all of its resources through operational efficiencies, capacity development, and enhancing interoperability. As noted earlier, the total amount in these estimates is just over $17 million for security model enhancements, transition and establishment initiatives, and employee benefit plans.

I'll first discuss the Parliament Hill security model enhancements.

The amount required is $14.4 million for the PPS to maintain an enhanced posture on Parliament Hill that is reflective of the current and evolving threat environment. As I understand it, essentially these funds are being transferred from the response money of the RCMP over to the House.

As of June 23, 2015, the responsibility for the RCMP Parliament Hill detachment was effectively transferred to the PPS. The $14.4 million will stabilize the RCMP's human and financial resources dedicated to supporting the enhanced security model on Parliament Hill and throughout our parliamentary precinct.

Second is an amount of $2.5 million for the Parliamentary Protective Service transition and establishment initiatives. This funding supports establishment initiatives required for PPS to become an independent Parliamentary entity. As well, the funding is used to manage the transition to a unified service and develop an organization structure that is aligned with the PPS mandate. This includes telecommunications, computers, software licences, project management fees as well as new full time equivalents to support operations and corporate functions such as information technology management, corporate finance and human resources.

The third item is an amount of $275,532 needed for employee benefit plans, a statutory cost currently borne by the PPS.

In conclusion, I'd like to thank every member of the PPS for their service. I must say that this morning when I arrived at the back door of Centre Block, at about seven minutes to seven—normally the door is open at 7 o'clock—I was really pleased that there was actually someone there to open it a few minutes early. I really appreciated that, just as I always appreciate the work of our service.

I would also like to thank you once again for giving me the opportunity to provide you with an overview of the Parliamentary Protective Service supplementary estimates (C). Chief Superintendent Duheme will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We really appreciate the great work you're doing in the House.

Our first questioner will be Ms. Petitpas Taylor.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you Mr. Chair.

Mr. Regan, thank you very much for your presentation.

I would also like to thank you, Mr. Duheme. You can answer questions in English, if you so wish. However, with your permission, I will be asking my questions in French.

First of all, I would like to thank you for the services that you provide to the Parliamentary Precinct. Before becoming an MP, I worked for 24 years at the RCMP's Codiac regional detachment in Moncton. That is why I have a great appreciation for your work. I know the dangers that security personnel face. In Moncton, we experienced a great tragedy shortly before yours.

I am a new MP here in Ottawa, and I would like to know if you could give us an overview of the protection services before the events of October 2014 and explain what changes have been made in order to ensure that security is now adequate for everyone.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

Firstly, I'd like to thank you for your comments on RCMP services.

I assumed my new functions on June 23, after the changes to legislation. Before those changes, there were three separate entities. Everything that happened or that was located outside, up to Wellington Street, was the RCMP's responsibility.

Everything indoors, on the House of Commons side, was the responsibility of the House of Commons security service, directed by the Sergeant-at-Arms. Finally, everything on the Senate side was the responsibility of the Corporate Security Directorate. There were challenges, but as the Speaker mentioned, there were already talks going on with the aim of integrating these three entities.

That's an overview of how things were before. I will spare you the details of the difficulties that occur when three distinct organizations do not share a communications network. There are also challenges with regard to the culture of each separate entity.

The new legislation came into force and a single entity was created. The objective for the first year is to establish interoperability within the PPS. We are doing a lot of things that had never been done before. As was recommended after the tragic events of October 22, everyone can now use the same communication channels. That was not the case in the past. It's something more that we have now. This is part of everyday activities.

With regard to communication, I believe that awareness of situations has improved. There are weekly meetings with the people in charge about all operations that take place on a given day. This information is then provided to people working on the ground. We get a better sense of what's happening outside Parliament Hill and we share that information with people inside.

With this new unification initiative comes a new uniform. We hope that this new uniform will be available as of April 1.

Earlier, I spoke of the culture of the three entities. When three entities are brought together, a new culture does not immediately develop. That will take years. I expect that by the time this new culture will have fully taken root, I will not be here anymore. Nonetheless, we are moving forward gradually.

In September 2018, we are going to move into a new workplace so that everyone can work together. I think that's when people will start to become closer. They will meet elsewhere than in their work stations, like in briefing rooms, for example.

All of this, as well as the new uniform, will help create this new culture that we want to develop.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

As I understand it, you are responsible for all services.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

I am the director.

As I often say, within the Parliamentary Protective Service, the RCMP will always be the RCMP. RCMP officers will keep wearing their uniform. They will be subject to the RCMP's policies and code of ethics as well as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act. However, everyone will be working within a common operational system.

Ultimately, the goal is for all employees, whether they be with the RCMP or the PPS, to be trained and respond to incidents in the same manner. We are currently headed towards that.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So that means the tasks will not be different.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

The tasks are different in certain respects. Some positions viewed as static are similar. However, other Parliamentary Hill positions are different. But I would venture to say that the differences are minor.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I have another question about the communications networks. As I understand it, everyone can now communicate on the same channel.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

With respect to communications, our system has allowed us to connect everyone on the same frequencies. We have now tested the system on several occasions. We use it when we must advise everyone of an incident taking place on Parliament Hill. A good example is a fire alarm. We have been putting it to use and we know it works.

The ultimate goal, madam, is to use a single channel. You must remember that previously, the three entities had their own channels. Old habits are hard to change, but we are moving in the right direction. There used to be three channels. We now have two and eventually, there should only be one channel for communications.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Without mentioning the things you are not allowed to talk about, what are the biggest challenges with regard to integrating these three entities after one year of operation?

[Supt Michael Duheme]

The biggest challenge is changing the culture. When it comes to organisational change—especially when it's an integration like this—some people are for it, others will go along, and some are completely opposed.

You have to be careful about how you communicate and who does the communicating. Sometimes, those who are against the integration and who are still hanging on to the old ways will say certain things. But in reality, only a handful of people will be like this.

I go around Parliament Hill twice a week. I talk to people and morale is good. At our weekly 8 a.m. operational meetings, I always ask how things are going and I'm told that morale is good.

Of course, there are small challenges, which is normal for any organisation. We're not even a year old. We've been in existence for only eight months. It will take time for us to get to where we want to go.

The secret to integration is to change the culture. That's what has to happen.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you. Sorry, we're at time.

We're going to Mr. Schmale now for questions or comments.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for all you do, and Mr. Duheme, for everything you and your brave women and men do on a daily basis for us.

I have a couple of questions.

You mentioned a new culture a few times, and I was wondering if you could quickly expand on that in a bit more detail.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

For starters, thank you for the kind comments.

When I'm referring to a new culture it's the PPS having its distinct culture.

I think that will come with time, and it will come with our integrated teams that are working together. We have several integrated teams and once the message gets out—I kid you not, some comments were made when the RCMP came in and there was a certain apprehension that the RCMP would be changing everything. That by far was the way we wanted to proceed. We have everybody involved from the bottom up in different committees, we look at the response on different servers, and it's fairly high so people are engaged.

It's developing that unique culture because even within Parliament right now there's a different culture on the Senate side and the House of Commons side. It shows in the security and the protection services that were there before. So it's putting aside the RCMP culture and the old Senate and House of Commons culture. PPS has its own culture.

It's a work in progress.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Absolutely.

I remember the incident of October 2014 and reading about the fact that everyone was on different frequencies and not able to speak with each other. I thought that was quite surprising and I'm glad it's being addressed because it's very important.

In continuing to evaluate security, a few weeks ago on a Wednesday we were having a caucus and the fire alarm went off twice. It seemed the same procedure—we did exactly the same thing twice—and it was mentioned that if anyone were watching and wanted to do bad things....

Are there plans to address that?

[Supt Michael Duheme]

There's probably one thing you didn't notice. Contingency plans are in place within PPS when something like that happens. Without going into details, some of our positions on the Hill will change slightly to ensure the protection of the people when they're gathered like that.

I would have to bring your point to the CSO, the corporate security office, that's responsible right now for everything to do with the fire evacuation plan. We worked jointly on several initiatives and it's something we could look at: if there are two alarms back to back, is there a willingness to have two separate sites when we evacuate?

I'll bring it up with Pat McDonell.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

That's perfect. As an observer, I'm curious. We were all standing out there, so I appreciate your doing that.

In terms of the public grounds, one of the biggest concerns I had after October 2014 is the reaction to that kind of thing is to shut things off and keep the public out. I'm glad it didn't happen. I'm glad to hear that tours resumed within a couple of weeks and precautions were taken to ensure this ground stays open to the public. It is a public building, and we are officials of the public.

Without your going into too many details I was wondering if you could comment on whatever measures are being taken to allow the public to have access to this place, to this building, and to the grounds.

[Supt Michael Duheme]

I'd say that other than the security posture on the Hill following the events, nothing much as far as access for the visitors, tourists, and the public to the grounds has changed. We don't prevent them from going anywhere. It's the same access as they had before. It's that challenge of balancing security measures and the freedom of people to roam around on the Hill.

Other than that the security posture has changed slightly, accessibility to the Hill hasn't changed whatsoever. We maintain the tours. They go across the street to get the tickets, and then they go through the screening process before they enter Parliament. There are certain days where we limit the tours. We do limit the tours and the number of people in the tours during the regular days also, but as far as accessibility, nothing has changed.

As the Speaker mentioned, we do a lot of work with DRDC. PPS, along with the corporate security office, the corporate security directorate of the Senate, and DRDC, have asked to have a review of the entire Hill itself, to look at everything you can think of security-wise. As you know, with the upcoming closure of the Hill, we want to see what can be brought forward to ensure—I'm not going to say a better security, but maybe an enhanced security.

[An hon. member]

Do you mean the closure of the Centre Block, or is it the Hill?