Evidence of meeting #49 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was zaccardelli.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much, Mr. Poilievre; and thank you, Mr. Crupi.
Mr. Christopherson, for seven minutes.
April 16th, 2007 / 4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you all for coming today. We appreciate it.
I want to begin, Mr. Chair, by acknowledging that at the end of our meeting we'll be dealing with my motion to have this committee recommend to the minister that we go to a full public inquiry, that the shortened version, this quickie look, is not going to be sufficient.
I open with that to point out that the reason for that, in part—and I'll get into my arguments later—is to make sure that everybody here has a fair chance at fair representation. We are not a courtroom, and we're now getting to the level of detail at this meeting and subsequent meetings that we will continue to hold until such time as we get a full public inquiry, but this is not the place. I think the evidence is there, just from what we've had so far. So I hope members will keep that in mind when we deal with the motion at the end of this meeting.
My first question will be to point out that we have two main issues in front of us, and we keep going back and forth with the two. It has to be difficult for anybody watching to follow where we are, because part of it is what happened, was there wrongdoing, what are the details of that, and getting around to determining who perhaps conducted themselves in an inappropriate and unacceptable way. The second one is the allegation that there has been an attempted cover-up, an attempt to quash this, to keep it from seeing the light of day. Those are two very different issues. So I have questions on one stream, and then questions down the other stream.
In the first round, I'd like to deal with the issue of the alleged cover-up, and one of the questions that comes to my mind is to Mr. Zaccardelli.
There are at least four people I can identify—maybe more, sir—for whom it looks strangely and questionably coincidental that they were reassigned and taken off the investigation.
The four people I can identify are Denise Revine, whose position was structurally eliminated; Chief Superintendent Fraser Macaulay, who was transferred to the Department of National Defence; Assistant Commissioner David Gork, who was seconded to INTERPOL in France; and Staff Sergeant Mike Frizzell, who was removed from the investigation--and in fact, his removal is part of our discussions here.-
Mr. Zaccardelli, are they coincidences? Is that merely a coincidence? It doesn't look good. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.
The other thing is that your previous deputy commissioner, Barbara George, said when she was in front of us, regarding Staff Superintendent Macaulay's transfer, “It was felt at that time by the then commissioner”—that would be you, sir—“that Chief Superintendent Macaulay would benefit from a secondment. He was actually given a short secondment with the military.”
You know I'm going to ask Mr. Macaulay. So I will ask you to comment on it overall. Is this coincidence? Is that what happened and you'd like us to believe that? Secondly, I'd like the specifics around Chief Superintendent Macaulay.
4:35 p.m.
Former Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
Mr. Chairman, I will try to answer as quickly as I can, but these are not easy issues.
I've been given four names. I can tell you right off the bat that I know Ms. Denise Revine, but I had nothing to do with her. I never interacted with her. I was not involved in any discussions about what happened in terms of the reorganization. I gave no instructions whatsoever. I only learned recently from this committee that she's working at home.
In terms of Mr. Frizzell, I wouldn't know him if he walked in the room. That's not being disrespectful; I simply wouldn't know him. But you have clear evidence in front of this committee that was given to you by Assistant Commissioner Dave Gork, who testified before this committee that he was asked by Inspector Roy, from the Ottawa Police Service, to remove him for certain good cause from that investigation. Again, I was never consulted. I had nothing to do with that particular point.
I want to get to the issue of Chief Superintendent Fraser Macaulay. After I had discussed the matter with Mr. Lewis, I decided what my course of action on this, based on the information I had, would be, and it was to have the audit. Shortly after the audit had been initiated, Barbara George came to me and said, “Chief Superintendent Fraser Macaulay appears to have some problems about what is taking place relative to the pension fund. You should talk to him.” I said, “Fine, please bring him in.”
She brought Fraser Macaulay into my office. There were the three of us there. These, Mr. Murphy, are my exact words.
I said, “Fraser, I hear that you have some concerns about what happened with the pension fund.” He said, “Yes, Commissioner, I've had a lot of concerns about how this has been run and what's been going on.” I said, “Fraser, how long have you known about this?” He said to me, “Almost a year and a half I've known about these concerns.” I said, “Fraser, who have you told about his matter?” And his answer was, “Commissioner, I haven't told anybody.” I said, “Fraser, why haven't you told anybody?” He said, “Because Jim Ewanovich is my boss and I'm afraid if I told anybody it would affect my career.” I was clearly very disappointed and hurt by his statement. I said, “Fraser, I want you to come back to me here in a little while and send me a note and tell me what your concerns are.” He left the office.
I had Barb George in my office. I said to Barb George, “Barb, Fraser has made a serious error in judgment in this case. He's a good young officer. I've known him since he was a very young member. I believe in him. I want him to recover from this and I want him to move ahead. I need you to get him out of this environment that he's in, and I want you to find a good job for him. Find a good job. This is a man I want to save, because I believe in him.”
She left and she came back to me a few days later. A few days later she came back and said, “Commissioner, I think I have a recommendation on what we should do with Fraser Macaulay.” I said, “What is that?” She replied, “There is a secondment that's been requested by DND. It's a very good job. It's an important job. DND want this. Fraser has the expertise to do this work.” I said, “Great. I want him to move there because I want him to learn from this experience.”
Before he left, I had Fraser in my office and I said, “Fraser, I know you're not happy with this, but I believe in you. You're a good member. I want you to recover from this mistake. You go down to DND, show them what we're made of, and you'll come back and you'll have a very good job.”
Now, I know this notion has been thrown around about a punishment transfer. There are no punishment transfers in the RCMP.
When he came back—
4:35 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:35 p.m.
Former Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
I'm glad to see we have a lively audience, but—
4:35 p.m.
Former Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
I'm glad to see we have a lively audience.
I have never, ever transferred anyone or directed anybody to ever be transferred for a punishment purpose.
When Fraser Macaulay—
4:35 p.m.
Former Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
I have—
4:35 p.m.
NDP
4:35 p.m.
Former Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
No, but let me finish. Let me finish my answer.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
No, I think you've gone on long enough, Mr. Zaccardelli.
You have one final question, Mr. Christopherson.
And before you do that, I'm going to say to anybody in the audience that we don't need any gratuitous comments or anything at all. This is a parliamentary committee.
Mr. Christopherson.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you for both rulings, Chair.
Chief Superintendent Macaulay, your response to what we've just heard from Mr. Zaccardelli, please.
4:35 p.m.
Chief Superintendent, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Well, I can tell you that I knew nothing of any of these matters until May 28, when I received a call from Jim Ewanovich after Ron Lewis had been in his office with Assistant Commissioner Spice. I was in P.E.I., and I got a phone call from Mr. Ewanovich. He was all upset that I had “ratted him out” to Ron Lewis about the hiring of his daughter. Subsequent to five minutes on the phone with him, where I told him I hadn't spoken to Ron and I didn't even know what he was talking about, I met Ron at a meeting in Niagara Falls around the reserve program, which was referred to earlier.
After that, between June 3 and June 6, I met with Denise Revine, who started to tell me what was going on based on the A-base review. At that point I spoke to Assistant Commissioner Spice, who is our ethics adviser. Mr. Spice had received a complaint from Suzanne Perron, who was referred to here earlier, about a threat to her made by Mr. Crupi. I spoke with her. She was very upset. She's a 28-year public servant in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and she had been threatened with what she felt was her job. I spoke to her for a few minutes, and then I went to Mr. Spice. I advised John that Denise had started to find a lot of things going on in the NCPC area, N2020, and to give me a little time, and we would keep digging and find out what we could about it.
Subsequent to that meeting there was a senior management meeting, which is the senior executives of the mounted police. At that meeting, John disclosed to both Deputy Commissioner Barb George and then Assistant Commissioner Vern White about my knowledge. The reason that came up is that she kept.... So she came to see me and told me about a little bird in A Division who had told her that there was a complaint or something laid in A Division. Unbeknownst to me, Mr. Lewis had laid the complaint in A Division.
On June 17, I met with Commissioner Zaccardelli--at Barb George's request, not mine. I was still trying to dig. I left him with three or four pages of documents, which we left with you at our previous meeting. At that meeting, and subsequent to that meeting.... That is the reason I was removed. There is absolutely no other reason. Deputy George made it clear to me that it was Commissioner Zaccardelli's decision. She told me it was for performance on HRMIS in the first place, and I have notes throughout the next three or four months where it continues to change.
The bottom line is that it was a very clear message to the employees that you don't put your hand up. Did we have the conversation about why other people weren't coming forward? Yes, we did. And it was made very clear to him that nobody was happy and that they didn't trust that anyone was going to do anything.
I'm back in the organization. If I was so afraid for my career, why would I be here today? Why would I have done what I've done in the last three and a half years? Why would I have continued along, hand in glove with Denise Revine, with a commitment that I made to her when she found this about my organization?
I've heard it many times. I've heard it many times from Mr. Zaccardelli. He let us down. He came in here...and he talks the values and he means them--most times. This is a leader who got to the top of this organization. He has made a mistake, and now we're back into the same stuff. We have the notes. We have the paper. We know what's going on here.
I was removed because I came forward. That is all.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much, Mr. Macaulay.
Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.
Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, seven minutes.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Mr. Crupi, at the end of the last session, you went into the various details of why people were hired. But the fact is that you were relieved of your position because of rampant nepotism.
I asked a question about why Suzanne Perron was so intimidated by you. It was in her department that your stepdaughter was hired. You provided $800,000, two years in a row, to her department. In 2003, I understand you told Mrs. Perron, and I quote, “If people don't do as I say, I get rid of them. And if not, I close the office.”
Mr. Crupi, where do you work now?
4:40 p.m.
As an Individual
I work with National Defence. I'm a casual employee with National Defence on a short-term contract.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Do you have any contract with the Canadian Security Establishment?
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
So it's actually with the Canadian Security Establishment that you're working at this time?
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
The Ottawa Police investigation couldn't even list all of your violations in a 40-page summary. How could you get a reference, and who provided you with a reference to go and work at the Canadian Security Establishment?
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Can we have the names? Was Mr. Zaccardelli one of those references?