Justice Committee on Feb. 16th, 2012

[C/Supt Michel Aubin]

If I may—and thank you for identifying these items—as we're moving forward, I have to say that the process is becoming more and more refined. We're refining it.

As I say, going into 2012 we have all provinces participating. There are actually a number of areas in the collection process that have also been further refined.

I would suggest that as we move forward there will always be a fluctuation on these numbers because of the reality of fluctuation in organized crime groups across Canada, and other challenges, but the process itself of reporting, and the quality of reports, is getting better and better.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

You may have already given this information, but I wasn't here in the last Parliament when the study started, and it was a long time ago when I read the actual report.

You talked about how 57% of the criminal marketplace is through illicit drugs. Do you ever break down that number into the various categories: cocaine, cannabis, synthetic drugs? Do you have an idea of those numbers?

[C/Supt Michel Aubin]

I don't have the breakdown on what we call the submarkets, the market being illicit drugs. As we reported, 57% of the market share is illicit drugs. We also see that 83% of the organized crime groups are involved in the illicit drugs business line.

In terms of the exact numbers, I don't have them at my disposal right now, but by way of priority, cocaine remains the most predominant, followed by cannabis, and then followed by the pharmaceutical opiates, such as OxyContin.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

You talked about ACIIS, the automated criminal information system.

Do you have any estimates on the cost of replacing that system? I know you don't go into Walmart and take it off the shelf; I assume you'd have to have a custom-designed piece of software.

[C/Supt Michel Aubin]

We do, sir.

I'll try to keep it short. What happened is that in 2006, the governing body for CISC, the national executive committee, identified the need to replace it. There was actually a national effort that was done and a business case was put together. We've identified a new system that would be modern and would meet the needs of all.

There was an evaluation of the cost that was done at the time, and it was quite significant, around $70 million. We're in the process of reviewing the cost, and in light of the business case and the architecture as well, making sure it is compliant to the current industry standards. That's under way right now because our ask for the replacement of the ACIIS system is now being directed to a new governance body for national police services.

As I said, in 2010 it was around the $70 million mark. That being said, I have to add that the RCMP has procured some of the components of this new system and they're in the process of piloting it.

We're in the process of evaluating these components against the system, so there could be some cost savings that are going to happen there as well.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Great. If there's any time left, I know Mr. Jean seemed to have a question.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Seeback.

Just very quickly, I noticed by the cost ratio that there's almost $4 in RCMP officer cost for every $1 cost for the witness protection program. Is that right?

It's $9 million, compared to about $1.8 million directly going to witnesses. So for the officer cost, it's about $4 for every $1 cost.

[Insp Greg Bowen]

Yes, the figures are the figures. That's the best we have.

Clearly the largest part of the compensation is for the people who do the actual protection. As you can imagine, it's a very laborious job.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I understand it could be.

Since the numbers are so dramatically reduced, why have the costs not reduced correspondingly?

[Insp Greg Bowen]

Well, it depends. I guess I'll have to generalize. The costs of protection have increased. Some of the cases we've been challenged with over the last several years have been considerable, and as a result protection costs go up. With the amount of attention to detail, for instance, I believe the program today is far more protectee-focused than it was at the inception of the program.

All of these in concert result in the costs we have today. A lot of those costs for compensation would also include, for instance, overtime costs. Our coordinators have to travel, in some cases considerable distances, to meet with protectees.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

What portion of overtime costs would be—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Sorry, Mr. Jean, but your time is up.

[Insp Greg Bowen]

I don't have that specific data. If you wish, I could probably get that for you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

The analyst had a question, though.

He heard Superintendent Slinn yesterday before the Senate indicate that cannabis was the biggest....

[Supt Eric Slinn]

Statistically.... Let me recouch my statement. I see that my words are coming back to haunt me.

Cannabis is, for organized crime, the jet fuel. I think that was the terminology I used for organized crime. There's sort of a low deterrence in the sense that the punishments are not harsh for cannabis and the financial return on cannabis is huge, because the market in the United States is so high.

I'm not basing that on a statistical analysis; I'm basing that on, from an operational standpoint, my knowledge of organized crime, that a lot of these groups are involved in marijuana grow ops.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Just before we leave, I'll let you know that the analyst can draft a report hopefully next week when we're away. We can have it back at a point not long after. I think one of our analysts is going to leave us for a little while. The sooner we can have a look at it when we get back....

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Chair, I guess there is one letter that remains unanswered. That is the letter written to Don Head of Correctional Services Canada. I understand it was written four times. It dates back to December 15, 2011, or thereabouts.

Where does that leave us with finalizing this?

[A hon. member]

Subpoena him, I suppose.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

There's that, but it means that—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

It'll mean that we don't get the report done. That's what it really means.

All you're doing there is organized crime within the prison, updating those numbers. I'm not sure if it matters.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

I'm still not impressed to know that somebody is not answering our letter. I'm in shock to hear that, honestly, coming from somebody of that stature.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I'm of equal mind. I'm willing to wait. But how much longer? Or do we press ahead and waive the information?

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

There is an interim way of doing it, and we could pass a motion suggesting that if we don't hear from him by such and such a date, we'd ask to have him subpoenaed.

I don't mean to—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

My problem here is what you want to do about—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Is there a gentler way of doing that? I agree with my colleague that we're asking for information, and their cooperation with parliamentary committees is to be expected.

I would move that if we don't get a letter from Don Head, the commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada, by the time we're back here in 10 days, we consider what measures might be required to have him appear before us.