Public Accounts Committee on April 23rd, 2007

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

But you're the check and balance, sir. It seems to me you should have been in there sooner.

Thanks, Chair. I'm out of time, I know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Christopherson.

Ms. Sgro, three minutes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

You indicated that you don't have a lot of knowledge of the pension problem, since it was the responsibility of Mr. Ewanovich. I have two questions.

Where is Mr. Ewanovich's office in relation to yours?

The second question moves into the fact that you are also a member of the pension advisory board. How is it possible that you wouldn't have known what was going on?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

First of all, my office is quite close to Jim Ewanovich's. In the RCMP, we have an executive wing, and all our offices are very close to one another.

In terms of the pension advisory board, yes, I was a member, but there were about 10 other members there. There were two staff relations officers. There were retired veterans who participated on that.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

But you were also chair of the subcommittee on finance for the pension advisory committee as well.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

No, I wasn't. There wasn't a pension subcommittee.

Anyway, there were lots of people there.

I would like to recommend to the committee--and I know you're very busy and you're talking to a lot of people--that you invite three staff relations officers who are the very brightest, and excellent, who pushed this outsourcing. They are Kevin MacDougall, from Winnipeg; Don Taylor, from Saskatchewan; and Bruce Morrisson, from British Columbia. I'm sure they will give you a good accounting on what went on in the pension advisory committee. I can assure you that if we had known that any of this was going on, we would have put a stop to it much earlier than we did. It's very unfortunate that this didn't come forward.

There's a question as to when Mr. Macaulay knew. If he had known earlier--I don't know when he knew--and had brought it forward, I assure you that we wouldn't have gotten into the mess we did.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I have one last question, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Ewanovich, in his testimony, said that he told senior executives of finance that Mr. Crupi had to be removed. If your office is very close to his, and you are the chief financial officer, why wasn't action taken to remove Mr. Crupi completely--not just from the contract area, but removed completely from the organization?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

Again, as I mentioned, that wasn't my responsibility; this was an HR issue. I don't deal with HR issues. I'm sorry.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

It's so disappointing when everybody is just passing the buck to the other one.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

No, I'm not passing the buck. I deal with HR issues for the organization that I have, and I have about 400 people. That's my responsibility.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

You're the chief financial officer, sir, and the buck has to stop somewhere.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

That's the way it works in the government--

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I'm well aware of how it works.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

--and in any other organization of that size.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Ms. Sgro, and thank you, Mr. Gauvin.

Mr. Lake, three minutes.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I know there were some concerns about this getting political, but after Mr. Rodriguez's comments, I feel I need to say a few things.

I'm looking at Mr. Sorenson's questions from April 19 and April 21, 2004, and I'll read some of the comments he makes over his four questions. He says:

In fact, it was that commissioner who shut down the initial probe into the possible fraud and abuse of authority within the force. Only after the scandal was made public in the media was the Ottawa police service called in to investigate. [...] Are the Ottawa police investigating the commissioner's conduct as well as the misappropriation of funds?

Later he says:

...the RCMP commissioner's job is to defend and protect past and present members of the force, not to run defence for this scandal plagued government across the way. The mismanagement of pension funds strongly suggests that the RCMP commissioner has betrayed members of the force and, in so doing, has failed to do his job.

Later, on April 21, he says:

...the Minister of Public Safety was quick to defend the commissioner of the RCMP when questioned about his potential involvement in the misappropriation of $4 million... It is the duty of the minister to protect and defend Canadians' interests, including 4,000 RCMP pensioners. Why has the minister prejudged this investigation?

The only comment that the minister made at the time was:

...let me reassure everyone in the House that there is no conduct on the part of the commissioner that needs to be investigated.

Over and over again, Mr. Sorenson went directly to the heart of the matter that we are discussing today, which we've been discussing in this committee: RCMP senior management's covering up the issue.

Over and over again, actually, in your further answers to the questions, you said the one comment, and then you just ignored the question and talked about something completely different every single time.

As for Mr. Wrzesnewskyj's comments, it seems that his main argument in this issue is this: why haven't you uncovered all of our Liberal government's mistakes and mismanagement fast enough? That seems to be the main criticism that he has, that we're not doing enough.

We're trying as hard as we can, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, but there's a lot of mismanagement to find.

My question is for the minister. You said you spoke regularly with the commissioner, but you never spoke with him about this issue, which I find quite astonishing. It was a very serious issue at the time, so why not? Why did he not bring it up with you when you found out about it? Why didn't you ask why he didn't bring it up with you? It seems that it would be a very serious issue.

Of course, part of the issue was the cover-up, which Mr. Sorenson brought up time and time again. Wasn't there a question in the back of your mind that maybe, by not even bringing it up with you, perhaps he was covering it up from even you?

[Anne McLellan]

First of all, let me say, Mr. Chair, that Mr. Lake has repeated what are assertions or allegations, and not proven facts. In fact, there are processes that one hopes will get to the facts, if you like. You've seen it yourselves, as you've had a lot of “he said, she said” and so on.

Mr. Sorenson, as far as I'm concerned, took assertions and allegations and inferences probably found in the document from Staff Sergeant Lewis. Staff Sergeant Lewis was completely up front with everyone, as far as I can tell, in putting his document together and sending it to the relevant people. That's perfectly fine. But they were assertions and allegations in terms of what he believed, and what he believed he saw. Consequently, you need other processes to get to the bottom of the situation.

My concern with Mr. Sorenson, and with so many others in the House of Commons, especially during question period, is that they throw out assertions or allegations as facts, and people don't seem to care what that does to the reputations of the individuals involved, or even, potentially, to the integrity of the institution, whether that institution is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police—for which I have the highest regard—or the institution of Parliament itself.

Therefore, if Mr. Sorenson had any reasonable belief that Commissioner Zaccardelli should have reported a crime, it was his obligation to report that to the relevant police, and then to ask that it be investigated. Instead, what he does—

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You were as high as the chain went.

[Anne McLellan]

--is go to question period, under privilege, and make those allegations.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You were as high as the chain went.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Order, please. Do go on.

[Anne McLellan]

In fact, Mr. Lake quotes selectively from two questions that Mr. Sorenson asked me. One was a supplementary question on the 19th and another on the 21st. Other than the comment I made in relation to criminal conduct and the assertion that Commissioner Zaccardelli had committed a crime, I talked about the fact that the Ottawa police force was independent and needed to be allowed to do its work, and that in fact is what it did.

Now, people may not like these processes. They may not like the outcomes of the processes. That may be true for me; that may be true for Staff Sergeant Lewis; it may be true for Commissioner Zaccardelli, but there are processes in place. We have them to protect people's reputations and integrity and the reputation of institutions.

Therefore, if you want to say I responded strongly to this assertion, yes, I did. And if Mr. Sorenson had any information as to Commissioner Zaccardelli's committing a crime, he was under an obligation to report that to the relevant police force.

[An hon. member]

And report it to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Ms. McLellan.

That concludes the second round, colleagues.

First of all, I want to thank the witnesses very much for appearing here today. We have a couple of motions to deal with, and I certainly want to thank everyone for their attendance and answering the questions.

Mr. Williams.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

I have a point of privilege before you dismiss the witnesses, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Alcock brought to my attention earlier on—I can't remember his exact words—that I had besmirched the reputation of Ms. McLellan. He quoted me from the meeting of March 28, when I had said regarding Ms. McLellan, “This was actually a political intervention with the minister, Anne McLellan, who was the minister”, etc.

I read the testimony, Mr. Chairman, dealing with Staff Sergeant Ron Lewis, who was complaining about not being able to get the investigation going. Now, we've had all kinds of conflicting testimony by many people on many issues while we've been investigating this particular issue around the Auditor General, and again, the testimony given by the witnesses today contradicts what Staff Sergeant Lewis said.

I just wanted the minister to be aware that at no point in time would I ever besmirch anybody's reputation, and I feel that's a point all parliamentarians should abide by.