Public Accounts Committee on April 23rd, 2007

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Williams.

Mr. Sweet.

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

Mr. Chairman, on that note too, I just wanted to say we've had a number of circumstances in this committee over the last year where questioning by members has sometimes become zealous to try to get the witnesses to shorten their answers so that the members can establish their time, and I have yet to hear the chairperson call them ignorant members.

So I just want to say I don't think name-calling of members would be appropriate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Sweet, the member accused me of trying to help the member questioning, and I don't appreciate that at all. I don't think that's fair to the chair. We certainly didn't do it to the previous chair. If that's the respect with which certain members want to treat the chair, then I take offence to it. It's not the way parliamentarians conduct themselves.

And I wasn't trying to help any member in their examination; I was trying to carry out these proceedings to the best of my ability.

It's a difficult issue. The questions are long. There are long preambles. Sometimes it is difficult with the answers, but I do not appreciate a suggestion being made that I am trying to help a member, and that's what I was having to deal with, Mr. Sweet.

I know it wasn't you, but that's the situation we dealt with here today.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes, I just think it's important for you to establish, as chair, a consistent set of rules regarding how members can intervene to continue their questioning when it appears to them that their clock is being run down. I know other members from the other side intervened numerous times to shorten the responses of witnesses. You had no problem with that, and I think you were conducting yourself appropriately in not intervening in their method of questioning.

The public can see these hearings, they can judge whether or not members are behaving properly, so I would just hope you would establish a consistent methodology as opposed to picking and choosing how individual witnesses will be treated.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Poilievre. I think my rulings have been consistent throughout this committee.

Colleagues, we are going to deal with two issues now. The first issue, I think, should be dealt with fairly expeditiously--I may be wrong--and I'm going to deal with Mr. Laforest's motion.

All that Mr. Laforest is looking for--and this has already been asked for informally by the RCMP--is that the public accounts committee file a formal request with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police authorities for that institution to provide the committee with, as soon as possible, detailed charts covering the period 1997 to 2007, along with a brief description of the responsibilities of the people involved, and all the hierarchical links that bounded them.

That's been circulated in both languages. I think that should receive unanimous consent, should it not?

(Motion agreed to)

The next item is--

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. At the last meeting I had a motion, which passed unanimously, requesting that Sergeant Keith Esterbrooks appear before the committee. And then I also requested that files that needed to be translated be brought before the committee.

In making the motion, the way it was worded, my intention was for Mr. Esterbrooks to come forward with all relevant documents and files. Now, if there are a lot of files among those ATIP that would preclude his appearing in a timely way, if you read the motion that passed, we could in fact have Mr. Esterbrooks appear expeditiously. And I would suggest that the next time Mr. Gauvin appears before the committee be when Mr. Esterbrooks comes forward, as it deals with documentation and perhaps with Mr. Gauvin's potential suppression of these documents.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

When your motion was tabled and passed at the last meeting, perhaps the staff and I interpreted it to be that you wanted Mr. Esterbrooks with the files, and we didn't want to bring Mr. Esterbrooks without the files. You're now saying that it's appropriate for--

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Yes, with all relevant documents, the way it was worded in the motion, and then also--and it doesn't have to be at that particular meeting--that those documents come forward to the committee.

I think it's important that Mr. Esterbrooks appear before the committee in the not-too-distant future and at the same time as Mr. Gauvin appears, or perhaps even prior to Mr. Gauvin's appearing before the committee again, to answer some of the questions we didn't have the time to ask.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Does anybody want to discuss that?

Mr. Fitzpatrick.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

On a point of clarification, I want this witness here. Obviously the member feels he can shed some light on it. I think it's key when we're planning our meetings that he's at the right meeting.

We have an outsourcing issue with Dominic Crupi--and that's one kettle of fish--we have a pension thing that's internal in the RCMP, we have the insurance issue, and we have the Ottawa police force investigation. In a lot of ways, they're different. I think we should have a focus at our meetings so that our witnesses are dealing with the main topic when we're hearing it. Perhaps the member could shed some light on which area he'd be most helpful in.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Yes, I'd in fact assumed he would be here today. Obviously it was an incorrect assumption. Even if he were to arrive at a subsequent meeting, either prior to or at the same meeting as Mr. Gauvin is scheduled to appear, it would be tremendously helpful.

Further to that point, I see that the two assistant commissioners, Mr. Rogerson and Mr. LaFosse, are on the list, but it's not indicated when they'll appear. I would assume it will be a very quick appearance, dealing strictly with the issue of the testimony we heard from Deputy Commissioner Barbara George. I assume that as she is reappearing on April 30, it would be appropriate for those assistant commissioners to appear at that time. They could then reference the e-mails that have been tabled here and make clear what the conversation was between them and Barbara George.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Is that when you'd want that person here?

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

No, I think Esterbrooks can appear on Wednesday. I'm not sure when we'd like Mr. Gauvin to come back before the committee.

Obviously there are a lot of questions. Mr. Williams said he had a lot of questions that he didn't have time for. Others are in the same predicament as well.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I'm curious. What area is he shining light on?

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

The motion specifies access to information requests around the financial aspects of this criminal investigation, the Ottawa police investigation. He worked there, and there are allegations of suppression of evidence. We've heard it over and over again in a number of meetings.

I think it would be helpful for him to appear either prior to or at the same time as Mr. Gauvin appears. I'm suggesting Wednesday.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Are there any comments?

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

I have a couple of comments, Mr. Chairman.

One, I've raised this before, and I'm going to raise it again. I'm going to ask if you, as chair, and the clerk can stipulate that any witness or any member of the committee who intends to use e-mail, or any other documentation, deposit it with the clerk, have it translated, and circulate it in a form so that we can readily find it when they're making reference to it during a committee hearing.

We are totally at a loss. We're at sea when it comes to quotes of e-mails, and we have no idea what's going on. I would ask you and the clerk to sit down and ensure that witnesses provide the information in advance. You're in a position to have it circulated to all members.

The other point I want to make, Mr. Chairman, is that we have one member of the committee giving all kinds of information to a member of the steering committee. I would have thought most of the work as to who is coming forward would be hashed out at the steering committee. The steering committee can come forward to say who they recommend and why, without an interrogation of members back and forth across the table on who is coming forward and for what reason.

I know Mr. Wrzesnewskyj has a great wealth of information on this, and I'd ask him to share it with the steering committee. He should give his documentation to the clerk so that we can continue this in the most professional way that we can.

As has been pointed out, reputations are being besmirched. There are accusations and allegations of perjury and whatever else is going on around here. We have to try to manage ourselves in the most professional and most efficient manner possible so that we can do a good service to the RCMP and the people of Canada as we continue this awkward and difficult investigation.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Just to respond to Mr. Williams' inference that I have a wealth of information that's not being shared, in fact the opposite is quite the case. If you check the record, any time I have heard allegations I've made them clear. I've documented them and tabled documents here of allegations. When I've come across any e-mail, I've tabled it here.

At the present time I am requesting Mr. Esterbrooks to appear and bring his documentation. If there's documentation that he feels is necessary to bring forward, besides his personal recollections, I think the clerk will request that when speaking with him so it can be translated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, I just want to clarify an issue.

You point out that you'd like to have Sergeant Keith Esterbrooks brought here as soon as possible, and it's not related to the files. That is why we had the delay. But I want to read to you the motion that was passed by the committee.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

For the sake of time, I do have it in front of me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay. Starting with the third line it says, “and that retired Sergeant Keith Esterbrooks bring along with him the files with the following ATIP number involving pension fund investigation”--and then we list them--“and, that these documents be translated prior to his appearance before the Committee.”

That's the motion that the clerk, the analysts, and I are dealing with. The fact that he wasn't here today or Wednesday is not our fault. We interpreted that motion to read that you're looking for the ATIP files.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

That's fine. But I'm requesting of the committee that Mr. Esterbrooks be--

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I realize that now.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

There is one other thing that was pointed out to me. The other individual who was mentioned several times was Ottawa police officer Doug Lang. He was involved in having Mr. Frizzell removed from the criminal investigation. His name was mentioned a number of times, so I think it would be helpful for him appear at the same time as Assistant Commissioner LaFosse and Assistant Commissioner Rogerson. I don't think any of them will be speaking at length, but it will help us to hear information first-hand as opposed to second-hand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay. We have a list of witnesses. We have our roster set for Wednesday. Next Tuesday we're going to hear the report from the Auditor General. Wednesday is our meeting on the report from the Auditor General.

Mr. Macaulay.