Public Accounts Committee on May 14th, 2007

[Supt Pierre Lavoie]

My understanding of what took place is that Mr. McConnell came directly to me with a memo indicating what I stated several times before, that they did not want the report to be released because of personal information and so on and so forth.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Now, that was Mr. Gauvin's office that didn't want that released?

[Supt Pierre Lavoie]

That was a memo signed by Mr. Gauvin, telling me that their position was that there was personal information in the investigation and the report should not be released.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm noting that in one of the memos from Mr. Estabrooks to you, Mr. Estabrooks makes the point: “I find it most interesting that the only response generated from all the heads-up that were forwarded to your requested locations has come from Mr. Gauvin.” Is that correct? Is he the only one who gave that kind of feedback?

[Supt Pierre Lavoie]

That's correct, yes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you. Go ahead.

[Supt Pierre Lavoie]

So anyway, Mr. Estabrooks gave me the memo that was referred to. At that point, he was complaining to me about the fact that the report was not going out, and that's the way I took it. And I took it to mean that some action had to be taken in terms of that report being released. So that's exactly what I did.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Christopherson.

Ms. Sgro is next, for five minutes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Gauvin, I have the auditor's report that started all of this, dated November 2006. It goes on about what she found and what was done by the RCMP to deal with the pension issue, and so on.

We are now in May 2007, and I think this is important for anyone who's watching. Can you give me the current status of the pension fund? How is it being administered? Is it being paid for out of appropriations? Exactly what's happening on that?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

I'm glad you asked the question, because the auditor's report said that a certain amount had been charged to the pension fund and should not have been charged. I can announce today that everything that was charged to the pension fund that should not have been charged has now been cleared out. I had a meeting on Friday with the Deputy Minister of Public Works, who agreed to reimburse half of the remaining balance of the CAC charges. We've had discussions with Treasury Board to reimburse the other half. So now the pension fund is exactly where it should be.

In addition to other things that were done, we now have an oversight committee that watches everything that's charged to the pension fund. Every three months, all transactions over $50,000 are checked again. So the checkers are checking the checkers to make sure this doesn't happen. An accounting unit that was part of the pension unit in NCPC now reports directly to finance, so we make sure there's no interference there.

So a lot has been done.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

What about the administration costs for the insurance fund?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

The administration costs for the insurance fund are now under review by HR with the Treasury Board Secretariat. They are looking at a number of options--whether we should take the public service plan or keep the present plan. There has to be discussion with the members. Then a number of options will be proposed. One is to go back to look at everything that was charged to the insurance and see if it can be paid back retroactively. But that would require Treasury Board approval.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

At one point in this process you had to go for some ethics training.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

Yes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Could you tell me a bit about that and what you learned? I think you had a day of ethics training.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

Yes. I went for a day and it was an excellent course. It was so good that I have asked every one of my employees to take that course. As new people come into our branch they immediately go into the ethics course.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Spice, on the comments by Mr. Gauvin, you're no longer there; you're retired now.

[A/Commr John Spice]

That's correct.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Who has replaced you, and when did that happen?

[A/Commr John Spice]

There have been three individuals in that position since I left. I believe that Sandra Conlin is presently in that position.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Why has there been such a turnover?

[A/Commr John Spice]

I can only speculate. I might still be there if the frustration level hadn't become so high, but I had 35 years and, quite frankly, was ready to go. It's a high-stress job, because you're dealing with negativity all day long. The first fellow who replaced me was moved to London, Ontario; the second one retired; and we're now on the third one.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I would think your role was a really important one in order to have continuity for employees. They could have honest conversations as needed if they felt threatened and were working in an uncomfortable environment. How can that happen if people are continuously being moved?

Can I go back to people being moved, which is all part of this? Maybe this wouldn't have happened had there been better communication from day one, once some of these issues were discovered. It seems that as soon as anybody got into an issue and was asking about things being questionable, they were moved. Do you have any options when it comes to being moved when you're in the service?

[A/Commr John Spice]

Certainly you can refuse transfers, and people have. I don't know if it's fair to say that as soon as somebody starts asking questions they get moved. I don't believe that to be the case; nor do I believe--as I heard in these hearings--there is no such thing as a punitive move in the RCMP. We certainly don't have a policy about calling them punitive moves, but I know that people have been moved because they had issues within their work environment. They were seen to be problems, and as a consequence they were moved.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

If Ms. Ravine hadn't come forward with the information that she did, would any of these issues have been found out about?