Public Accounts Committee on April 23rd, 2007

[Chief Superintendent Fraser Macaulay, Chief Superintendent, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

This is a generic binder for the public accounts committee appearances and in it there was a timeline prepared by somebody in the RCMP. It says that on March 10, 2004, the deputy minister formally notified Minister McLellan. On March 15, at the request of Deputy Commissioner Loeppky, a criminal investigation known as “project probity” was launched by the Ottawa Police Service.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

If that's a comprehensive chronology of the events, I would like to see it tabled.

[C/Supt Fraser Macaulay]

I believe Mr. Lewis has tabled this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

It's been tabled, I'm sorry.

Have we noted the time?

Point of order, Mr. Williams.

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

I'm at a loss, with documents having been tabled all over the place. I've already asked the clerk to have a comprehensive summary of all the documents that have been tabled before this committee. I'm not sure if I've received it at this time, but I don't recall seeing a binder containing that amount of information tabled before this committee before. We have members of the committee who seem to be totally conversant with the contents of binders that witnesses have, and the rest of us are at a loss.

I don't know how we can get a handle on this, but somehow we have to get these documents to the members of the committee so we can prepare ourselves and ask intelligent questions of the witnesses, rather than it all being in the hands of one particular member who seems to be privy to information that nobody else has.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

In fairness to the member, you'll find a list in front of you right now outlining all documents tabled before the committee. We haven't done it yet, but we're working on putting them in a binder and having the documents tabbed.

Mr. Macaulay, the document we're referring to has been tabled, so we all have it in our possession.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, how long will it be before we have the binder that Mr. Williams was referring to properly tabbed so we can all have the same information--including the witnesses coming before us, who are asked questions about a variety of documents they haven't seen either? It's only proper that our witnesses know what document we're referring to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

The clerk has informed me that you'll have it this Friday.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj is next for one minute.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Williams' point is actually quite important: who knew what and when, and ongoing, how we get information.

I'll read from a March 29 committee meeting and quote Mr. Poilievre. The former ministers are here before us because during that meeting Mr. Poilievre said in his preamble, “They were informed of what was going on and did absolutely nothing.” He went on to say further, “Ms. McLellan was given all of this information in February 2004, years ago, and yet did nothing.” He went on to say, “Mr. Alcock, the Treasury Board president, was given the same information back in 2004. He, too, did nothing.”

Then it appears that when Mr. Williams was questioning Mr. Zaccardelli about when the minister knew, Mr. Zaccardelli said, “It would be briefing notes. I do not specifically recall speaking to Minister McLellan. I do recall some discussions with Minister Day”.

I would like to provide the opportunity to the former ministers. It was unequivocal. It was stated here in the committee that you did absolutely nothing. We've heard the opposite. Are there any comments?

[Reg Alcock]

Now that the individuals who said that have the information, I would just await their apologies.

[Anne McLellan]

I think my statement speaks for itself. In fact, we acted when we were in receipt of Staff Sergeant Lewis' information. We proceeded to deal with the commissioner. Within days of Staff Sergeant Lewis' information coming to my attention, an independent criminal investigation was launched. When my chief of staff talked to Commissioner Zaccardelli about Staff Sergeant Lewis' concerns, he responded that this was going to be turned over to the Ottawa Police Service for an independent investigation.

My comments have made it plain that I believe there are appropriate processes to be followed in these kinds of cases to protect the integrity of the force and the integrity of the individuals, whatever level they're at or office they hold within the force. I believe those processes were followed appropriately in this case.

Does that mean they get the result everybody wants every time and as quickly as they'd like? Probably not. But I do believe that to protect the integrity of both the process and individuals, you follow the process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Monsieur Laforest, for seven minutes.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Hello.

Ms. McLellan, you were the minister of Public Security in January 2005. Mr. Lewis tabled a letter that he had sent to Ms. Bloodworth. She was your deputy minister at the time. In this letter, Mr. Lewis raises concerns that several senior officials were in a conflict of interest regarding the management of the pension and insurance funds.

Were you aware of this information received by Ms. Bloodworth?

[Anne McLellan]

I was aware of the information that Staff Sergeant Lewis had provided in his package of materials. I was aware of the concern that he, and apparently others, had in relation to some of the internal workings of the force. In fact, my deputy minister responded to Staff Sergeant Lewis, and I would like to read some of that, if I could, into the record.

On May 18, 2005, an e-mail was sent to Staff Sergeant Lewis in response to some of the concerns he raised. I would point out that Margaret Bloodworth, then deputy minister, acknowledges the fact that: “You have expressed confidence”—“you” being Staff Sergeant Lewis—“in the criminal investigation process”.

She then went on to write the following: “With respect to your comments regarding internal investigations, for any RCMP code of conduct violations, these are not matters in which either the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, the minister, or the deputy minister become involved. Therefore, I am unable to provide you with any information on this issue.”

She went on to say—and I think this is important--“Should you have concerns regarding any aspect of the code of conduct process, you may lodge a complaint with the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP. As you may know, the CPC is a civilian agency created by Parliament in 1986 to ensure that public complaints”--and complaints can be laid by a member of the force against a superior officer, and that, I believe, was determined by the department in terms of the jurisdiction of the CPC--“regarding the conduct of RCMP members are examined impartially and thoroughly.”

She went on to provide Staff Sergeant Lewis with the contact information—address, e-mail, and telephone number—for the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, if he wished to pursue his concerns with the commissioner, or any other of his colleagues, wherever they were in the hierarchy of the RCMP.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Can you table that document, Ms. McLellan?

[Anne McLellan]

Yes.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Ms. McLellan, in your answer to my question, you stated that Mr. Lewis and other persons made you aware of the concerns we are dealing with today. Who are these other persons? Are they divisional representatives? I was told that divisional representatives came forward with information. Mr. Lewis was a divisional representative. Did other divisional representatives raise these issues with you?

[Anne McLellan]

No, there were not others who raised concerns with me. I presumed there were others besides Staff Sergeant Lewis because of his own words, which are, in fact, when you read the documentation he provided to me and Mr. Alcock—

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

You are the one who said earlier that Mr. Lewis and others came forward with that information.

[Anne McLellan]

No, no, I didn't. I'm sorry, that's a mistake, and the notes are here. You can read my statement if you want.

In fact, if you read Staff Sergeant Lewis' materials, it's quite clear that he was not speaking only on his own behalf—and I would suggest that Mr. Macaulay could confirm that—but was speaking on behalf of others in the force. He makes that quite plain throughout his documentation.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Do you believe that the individuals Mr. Lewis alluded to were sufficiently protected within this process? We know that there is no union at the RCMP. Officers are therefore not unionized. In your opinion, is it possible that those who raised the problem with people of a rank as high as yours, within the Department, paid the price for that later on?

[Anne McLellan]

I can't comment on that. What I know is that there are internal processes within the RCMP. There's a code of conduct. There are expectations. There are officers, I believe an equity or integrity officer. I think there's an ombudsman within the RCMP.

My deputy went out of her way to inform Staff Sergeant Lewis that he could in fact lodge a complaint with a civilian body if he felt, or if others felt, that the commissioner or other senior managers were conducting themselves improperly. That existed. It's a mechanism that is found in the RCMP Act. It is external to the force itself. It is external to the minister and the government.

There's also something called the external review committee. It's also found in the RCMP Act, and is external to government and the RCMP. Quite truthfully, I don't have sufficient knowledge as to whether or not that process.... It's an opportunity for officers to bring grievances at a certain level. I can't comment--I'm sure there are others more fulsomely informed than I am--as to whether officers could have or would have thought it appropriate to bring the kinds of concerns being raised here about internal management to those independent external bodies.

Certainly we all need, whether it's the RCMP or any other organization, to be concerned about the fact that those who believe something is going wrong can follow the correct processes. I do not believe in people jumping over processes. I believe processes are there to protect the integrity of an institution or a system as well as the reputations and integrity of the individuals.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Laforest, and thank you very much, Ms. McLellan.

Mr. Sweet, seven minutes.