Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 21st, 2007

[D/Commr Barbara George]

I'm answering you.

It was felt at that time by the then commissioner that Chief Superintendent Macaulay would benefit from a secondment. He was actually given a short secondment with the military.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

At that point, Mr. Zaccardelli made the decision that Mr. Macaulay would benefit by being removed from the RCMP, where he'd been for years. He'd worked hard, and he'd been a very dedicated RCMP officer, and he was removed. The original whistle-blower was removed, and Mr. Frizzell was removed.

I understand that Assistant Commissioner Gork didn't lead the Ottawa Police Service criminal investigation, although he decided which officers would be put on the investigation. Perhaps when we get the documents, we'll see that he was removing individuals. We have this important investigation, and midstream I understand he's removed to Lyon, France, to Interpol. Is that correct?

[D/Commr Barbara George]

He requested to have an opportunity to work in Lyons, France.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

So everyone's requesting to leave.

[D/Commr Barbara George]

I can only speak to Assistant Commissioner Gork's request to partake of an opportunity to work in Lyons, France.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Bevan, you referred to criminal standard. I would assume if there's evidence that shows the mechanisms, the actual calculations, and it's a concrete document showing how to go about misappropriating funds for personal benefit, that would be criminal. Is that correct?

How would you feel if days-of-leave documents were provided that could be shown to have been adjusted after the fact?

[Chief Vince Bevan]

I would certainly like to look at those documents. I'm not aware of those documents. I can tell you that in the final analysis, what persuaded the Crown was that there was no evidence that any money had gone from any of the pension funds or the insurance system into any individual's pocket. That was very persuasive to the crown attorney after an extensive and thorough investigation. With all of the interviews, the 75,000 pages of support documents, and the forensic audit, they could not prove that any money had gone into any individual's pocket, which is the determining factor for misappropriation of funds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

Thank you, Chief Bevan.

Mr. Sweet.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chief Bevan, have you ever had to call a criminal investigation into any allegations in your own department?

[Chief Vince Bevan]

Yes, sir, we have.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Is that a hand-wringing, tough decision to make?

[Chief Vince Bevan]

It depends on the circumstances. Sometimes it's the easier decision to make, sir.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

But you wouldn't make it lightly.

[Chief Vince Bevan]

Never.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I think I caught it correctly that Deputy Commissioner George said that after calling for an investigation, the then commissioner wanted to know what was going on. If you were going to call an investigation of criminal allegations in your own organization, you would have thoroughly thought through those things--that's why I asked you the question--would you not have, Chief?

[Chief Vince Bevan]

I'm not sure I follow.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

In the case of a criminal investigation, you would think through the accounting things and all the ramifications.

[Chief Vince Bevan]

I agree with that point.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

With that in mind, Commissioner, is it not odd--and wouldn't you think it's why my colleague is having a problem with this whole notion of not only having to be just but appearing to be just--that this investigation was called, it was cancelled, then an audit was called, there was a massive amount of delay before another criminal investigation happened, and then it was 18 months before the answer came about? During all this time, of course, the limitations of the RCMP Act were able to bleed out.

Would this not indicate to you, as an investigating officer, that there was more to be had here?

[Commr Beverley Busson]

It's difficult to analyze other people's decision-making. My understanding around the first criminal investigation was that it was not the commissioner who ordered that investigation but someone else. In his review of that, he turned it into an internal audit for whatever reason he felt was expedient. Again, it's a hindsight kind of question, and I can't get into his head to answer it.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

For the record, though, any time you call for an investigation into your own department, I would think the protocol would be that the commissioner would be involved in that decision.

[Commr Beverley Busson]

I'm told so.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I'm certain you wouldn't want to come in tomorrow morning and find out that a criminal investigation was going on in the RCMP and you were never advised of it.

[Commr Beverley Busson]

Unfortunately, that happens all the time.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

That happens all the time at the RCMP?