Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
By way of introduction, I am currently privileged to be the assistant commissioner in charge of provincial and territorial policing, or community, contract and aboriginal policing--CCAPS, as we call it. I am posted here in Ottawa at our national headquarters.
I understand that I am here to possibly bring some clarity around the matter of Staff Sergeant Mike Frizzell's transfer from his temporary duty back to his original duties within my area of responsibility.
By way of context, I have to go back to 1995 when I first met Staff Sergeant Frizzell. At that time, we were both posted to E Division, British Columbia. Staff Frizzell was as a constable at the Nanaimo detachment, I believe, and I was a newly commissioned officer at our divisional headquarters. Including my regular duties as the executive officer to the deputy commissioner, Pacific region, I was asked to participate in a project that saw me collaborate with four other members, including Staff Sergeant Frizzell.
Over the years between my departure from British Columbia in 1997 for Nova Scotia and his arrival in Ottawa in 2003, we would run into each other periodically. But we did not work together.
While in my current role, I learned that Staff Sergeant Frizzell had competed for and won a promotional transfer from British Columbia to sergeant in the operational policy section in my area. I was pleased because I was aware of his abilities and knew that he would be a good fit for the operations in that section.
After his arrival in December 2003, I received a telephone call from Assistant Commissioner Dave Gork, indicating that he had been tasked with finding resources for an investigation and asked if I could contribute one regular member to the team. I spoke with my management staff and Sergeant—his rank at the time—Frizzell's name surfaced, as he was fresh from the field and had the recency and skills to fit the requirement. Sergeant Frizzell was assigned to the investigational team during April 2004. I was never given details of the investigation, nor was I particularly interested.
Please understand that regular members, by their very nature, are moved from task to task as the need arises. His move to this project was perfectly natural.
On June 15, 2005, I received a penned note from then Assistant Commissioner George. I do not have a copy of that note but recall that it confused me considerably. I must point out that upon reading the document, even partway through, it was evident to me that she was upset with Sergeant Frizzell and wanted his actions on the investigation addressed. I cannot be more specific on the contents of the note, simply because I dismissed any possibility of my involvement or contact with Sergeant Frizzell, because he didn't work in my area any longer.
Assistant Commissioner George's note prompted me to immediately write the following e-mail:
Subject: Your penned note. Pls give me a call on your note...Mike has not worked here in over a year, matter of fact we are staffing his position.
I signed it “Darrell (Still Confused)”.
As a result of my e-mail, Assistant Commissioner George called me. It was a very short phone call lasting no more than a minute. It was clear to me that she was very upset with the actions of Sergeant Frizzell and in fact wanted him removed from his assigned duties.
I quickly told her that he was not my responsibility, and she should call either Assistant Commissioner Rogerson or Assistant Commissioner Gork.
We ended the call, and subsequent to my original e-mail, she sent me an e-mail stating that she now understood and would communicate with Assistant Commissioner Rogerson.
I then composed a short message to her asking the following: “Want your note back?” She responded with words to this effect: no, please don't leave the note lying around, and she would compose another note to Assistant Commissioner Rogerson.
From that telephone call, I walked into the office of Chief Superintendent Macaulay, who works in my shop, and said the words to this effect: You won't believe who just called; Barb wants Mike removed. I don't recall Chief Superintendent Macaulay's reaction or the discussion that followed.
I ask that the committee members understand that at the time, the telephone call had no bearing whatsoever on my operations and in fact only touched on a member who at one time had worked in my area. Any discipline or guidance would not have been my responsibility, and in fact I had no reason to question the legitimacy of her concerns.
In short, once I pointed Assistant Commissioner George in the right direction to the appropriate supervisor, I completely dismissed the note or telephone call.
In closing, I must point out that my total contact with Deputy Commissioner George on this matter did not last longer than one minute. I simply pointed her in the appropriate direction to voice her concerns. At the time, it seemed a simple question of her believing that Staff Sergeant Frizzell was still my responsibility. When I explained that fact to her, she accepted the answer and I believe telephoned either Assistant Commissioner Rogerson or Gork. I had no idea, then or now, whether her concerns were founded or not.
Thank you very much.