Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Many terrible and hurtful things have been said about me in this protected room, published in the newspapers, and spread across the media. I thank the committee for the opportunity to provide my side of the story. I have not had the opportunity to do this beforehand.
The first 22 years of my career were in progressively responsible HR positions as a public servant in the RCMP. I spent 12 years in the Treasury Board Secretariat in the HR policy branch, during which I was responsible for HR planning, business planning, departments, and led major initiatives, including interdepartmental committees for the renewal of the personnel community, the science community, and the IT workforce.
Recollecting my 34 years before rejoining the RCMP, I do not remember ever receiving a complaint or a grievance from employees, and definitely not ever discipline from management. I did receive awards, letters of commendation, and the Head of the Public Service Award. Indeed, my reputation was one of success, especially in building relationships with senior managers, departments, bargaining agents, and associations.
I was appointed in October 2000 following a competition as chief human resources officer. There appears to be a misconception about my role in the RCMP. The director of the National Compensation Policy Centre, NCPC, Dominic Crupi, did not report directly to me; he reported to the director general of human resources programs, a chief superintendent, who in turn reported to me. Indeed, there were five DGs who reported to me, with approximately 300 employees under my direction and another 1,000 across the RCMP.
When I arrived at the RCMP in 2000, the HR challenges for an organization of 24,000 members and employees across Canada were enormous. Quite frankly, it was described as the hardest job in the RCMP. I was recruited following the recommendation of the former commissioner to add civilians to the senior administrative positions in the RCMP. However, it is evident to me that, for whatever reason, there is still a certain faction within the RCMP that believes public servants should not hold office in senior positions.
Time does not permit me to discuss them all, but I'd like to discuss and explain a few areas that worked.
We established leading-edge succession planning, senior staffing, mentoring, and management and executive development. An overburdened grievance system, which had hundreds of grievances more than two years old, was revised and streamlined. RCMP Depot was refitted, ramped up to 1,200 candidates. We also proudly graduated the first Inuit troop for Nunavut.
Part II of the Canada Labour Code was implemented. Diversity in management exceeded government standards. We modernized an outdated classification system. A new comprehensive learning strategy was developed. Compensation issues were negotiated with Treasury Board. With the division representatives, we overhauled the labour management regime with a new constitution, bylaws, and assigned protocol with the commissioner.
We improved human resources information systems and had extensive workshops on internal investigations. We improved the promotion system. We resolved many issues for members in the north. An extensive project was undertaken to combine two categories of civilian employees to save $4 million to $5 million. We resolved HR issues surrounding summits, the G8 and other major events, including research completed on establishing a reserve force to handle unusual demands.
Firstly, I mention some of these because I am proud of the success we have with the long, hard work and cooperation of HR employees, division reps, and managers in resolving these issues.
Secondly, I mention them because, as far as I'm aware, none of the other programs or these issues or policies or projects under my responsibility had the financial issues or employment issues of the pension area. There was never any corruption that I was aware of under my responsibilities, and I deny any allegations that I was corrupt.
The pension initiative was only one of hundreds of issues on my plate. I became chair of the pension advisory committee in March 2001, wherein the pension outsourcing initiative was already in place. The committee consisted of deputy commissioners, two division reps, outside representatives, a retired member, representatives from the Solicitor General of Canada, legal service, and members from the office of financial institutions. This committee was supported by the director of NCPC and secretarial staff.
With respect to contracting, I did not participate in the selection or the management of contractors. I would like to explain, however, the actions that I took when flags were raised.
When I was approached in, I believe, early 2002 by senior representatives of finance and the director general, they advised me of irregularities and breaches of contracting rules by the director of NCPC, Dominic Crupi. As a result, I asked them to remove his contracting authority.
In June 2002, issues were raised by procurement and staff verbally about contracting expenditures, costs, and charges surrounding the pension project. As a result, I initiated the A-base review of HR funding and expenditures. This is the review that Ms. Denise Revine undertook and subsequently reported on in 2003.
A pension accounting unit approved by the pension advisory committee was set up in July 2002 to prepare financial statements to record, track, monitor, and report on financial activities. As well, the committee approved the creation of a PAC finance subcommittee to review the financial statements and monitor investment returns and administrative costs.
In April 2003, the advisory committee hosted officials from the Office of the Auditor General who reviewed the financial statements of the plan and stated that transactions of the plan that had come to their attention during the audit were found to have been in accordance with the RCMP Superannuation Act and Regulations.
In June 2003, the internal RCMP audit was launched, the results of which were not given to me until late November.
I'd like to discuss the hiring practices and the nepotism. I was approached by the director of staffing policy, I believe in April 2002, concerning the director of NCPC not following staffing rules. He apparently quoted me as saying that he could hire casuals. Yes, he did have the authority to hire casuals, but not to bypass RCMP staffing rules and regulations. I personally spoke to the director of NCPC and told him he must use staffing and the staffing process. Approximately six months later I specifically asked him if he had gone through staffing, and he stated, yes, he had followed the staffing rules.
In early 2003—April, I believe—I spoke to his supervisor, the director general, because it had come to my attention once again verbally that there were problems with the staffing in NCPC. I asked him to investigate. He advised me there were problems with the hiring of friends and family. I asked him to identify all the employees who had been improperly staffed and that none of them were to be extended or rehired. Once again I spoke to the director of NCPC and confronted him as he stated that he had followed the RCMP rules. I did not take further action as at this time I was advised that an internal audit was being launched.
It has been stated that my daughter was one of the hires in the pension area. I believe it is important to make clear that my daughter did not work in the pension area or anywhere that was under my direction. I state emphatically that I did not influence, ask, direct, or get involved in the hiring of my daughter. Anyone who says differently is simply not telling the truth.
There have been and are many generations of police officers and civilians who have a tradition of working in the RCMP. As well, there are many spouses and children of public servants who work in the government, all staffed through proper process.
I have now been through four Auditor General reviews, an RCMP internal audit, an internal investigation, and a year-long investigation by the Ottawa Police Service, which was conducted by thorough and professional investigators as well as an independent forensic auditor. It was found that all moneys were accounted for and that issues, while serious, were administrative in nature rather than criminal. I have not read in any of these reports that I was corrupt or responsible for fraudulent practices.
This committee is about accountability. When I read the draft RCMP audit report in October 2003, I was shocked at the seriousness of the findings. Although not directly responsible, I discussed it with the commissioner, and in spite of all the other successes, it happened under my watch, so I took accountability, stepped down, and resigned. Not satisfied with my leaving, three and a half years now after I retired, certain witnesses to this committee have turned to using vindictive character assassination as their offence.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
