Yes, I was.
Evidence of meeting #57 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 rcmp.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #57 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 rcmp.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
If I recall, Mr. Estabrooks, the last time he was here, said that it was highly unusual for someone who was mentioned in the report to be given the opportunity to critique the release before it went out.
Is that correct, Mr. Estabrooks?
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Was this report critical of your work at the RCMP, Mr. Gauvin?
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Or have a negative impact on your reputation, or it was less than positive, shall we say?
Conservative
D/Commr Paul Gauvin
No. I didn't ask for anything to be removed. I just said that not only my name but others...that there could have been some concern regarding the Privacy Commissioner. There could also have been repercussions for the RCMP in terms of civil actions. That's it. But I had no authority to do anything more than that. It was strictly an opinion, and I had zero authority over what's released or what's not released.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
I'm still confused why they even would ask.
Mr. Lavoie, do you have any idea why Mr. Gauvin was asked for an opinion on something where he has no line authority, where he's mentioned in the report, shouldn't be seeing it, and so on? Why was he asked for an opinion?
Supt Pierre Lavoie
Sir, it wasn't unusual. We were just a processing centre, so whenever we had a request we would either, up front, go to the policy centre to request the materials and ask them to provide any concerns that they had to assist us in processing the file—
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Mr. Estabrooks is your employee within your department. Am I correct in saying that?
Supt Pierre Lavoie
We have a processing unit that orders the materials before they get to—
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Yes, I know, but my question was did Mr. Estabrooks report to you?
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
He said that it was unusual to send it up to someone who is named in a report.
Are you right, or is he right?
Supt Pierre Lavoie
There was nothing that would prevent me from doing that, to consult before releasing the report, if it assisted me in processing the information request. Additionally, we can't lose sight of the fact that under the Privacy Act, Mr. Gauvin or anybody else named in any document in the RCMP—
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
My question was, are you right or is he right?
He said it was unusual to send the report to somebody who was named in the document. You're saying it was fairly common practice.
Supt Pierre Lavoie
No, I didn't say it was fairly common practice. I agree it was unusual.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
To send it to somebody whose name was in the document to be released.
Supt Pierre Lavoie
No, I didn't say that. I said it was unusual to send a report of that nature before it was released.
Conservative