Public Accounts Committee on Sept. 7th, 2007

[Commr William Elliott]

Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, as I have mentioned a few times, we need to have the mechanisms and practice in place where we do what we can to ensure that we have an environment where people feel at liberty to come forward and discuss their concerns, to make allegations or bring forward information.

With respect to the performance of people in the RCMP, including at the most senior ranks, I certainly think we have to hold them to account not only for what they do, but how they do it. I will certainly be looking at building those kinds of expectations into the performance accords of my direct reports and those who report to them and throughout the organization.

I talked about the fact that we have done quite a lot of work over the last few years to survey people. I think we should look at other means to get feedback from people. When we're looking at the assessment of leaders, for example, I and other organizations have seen the utility of feedback on a 360-degree basis, where you solicit feedback from superiors, peers, and people in lower ranks of the organization. I think there may be other tools that we can look at where we can solicit views of employees on issues in addition to a survey that takes place every year or two.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lussier, you have four minutes.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, Mr.Chair.

Mr. Elliott, you have undertaken the reform of the RCMP and you mentioned in your document that it was your intention to improve its transparency. When you hide behind confidential recommendations or even national security, people wonder about this fine transparency in the RCMP.

As to the fraud in the RCMP's pension and insurance plan, was Mr. Brown's inquiry conducted with complete impartiality and independence? Are you satisfied with Mr. Brown's recommendations?

[Commr William Elliott]

First of all, with respect to the view of Canadians, I again cite our survey results that indicate, in 2007, 87% agreed with the statement that the RCMP is an organization with integrity and honesty. So I do not accept the premise that Canadians believe, by and large, that the RCMP is an organization that differs from that.

With respect to Mr. Brown's report, as I indicated in the answer to a question posed by Mr. McGuinty, I accept the report and recommendations of Mr. Brown, as I believe my predecessor, Commissioner Busson, did on behalf of the organization.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Are there still matters to look into? Will RCMP investigators continue to dig into the fraud?

[Commr William Elliott]

The only ongoing investigation, to my knowledge, is the investigation being conducted by the Ontario Provincial Police.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

So no officer or investigator is looking into the matter.

Turning to the Brown Report, was Mr. Brown involved in the police groups that included officers from the Ottawa Police Service and the RCMP? In previous investigations, was Mr. Brown involved in joint groups that included the Ontario Provincial Police, the Ottawa Police Service and the RCMP?

[Commr William Elliott]

To my knowledge, no. With respect to the pension and insurance matters, to my knowledge, Mr. Brown's involvement began when the government appointed him as an independent investigator. I'm not sure I completely understand the question. I suspect that in his capacity with the Ontario Securities Commission, Mr. Brown may have had some dealings with the RCMP and other police services with respect to investigations.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Could we be talking about financial investigations?

[Commr William Elliott]

Perhaps.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Let me come back to one point. Earlier, you said that you wanted to have direct contact with your officers and your employees in your office. But Ms. Ebbs, who often deals with grievances in her role with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee, told us yesterday that not all grievances are brought to her attention. According to what we gathered yesterday, the commissioner has the power to screen those grievances. Some employee grievances do not reach the Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee because the commissioner has the power to screen them.

Are you aware of that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Elliott.

[Commr William Elliott]

I believe that the mandate of the External Review Committee has limitations with respect to the types of issues they can deal with. I think for a number of grievances I am, as commissioner, the final-level decision-maker.

I guess the other thing I would say is that we have an organization of 26,000 people, and although I'm encouraging people to communicate with me directly, I obviously can't by myself deal with all allegations or situations of impropriety. We need to have the mechanisms in place, which include the grievance processes and the roles for the ERC and Mr. Kennedy's public complaints commission, to deal with issues as well, in addition to the other officers to whom I have referred earlier.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Lussier.

Mr. Sweet, for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a comment upfront about some of the conversation and questions that have been going on regarding the Brown report.

I think it's important to note on the record that Mr. Brown drew from multiple investigations, including the work of this committee, and in nine weeks brought together reams and reams of information. I think 35,000 documents and thousands and thousands of e-mails have already been investigated and have culminated into a report. So although the figure of nine weeks has been used quite a bit, it's been years of investigation at different levels.

Mr. Elliott, I'm glad to hear about the increasing numbers on trust and also your realization that there's still a substantial way to go. I'm also very happy to hear about a true, confidential, 360° review. You mentioned that this worked in other organizations you've been with. I hope it's something that's implemented. It's something that will bring a lot more trust, and people will be more open.

In that regard, yesterday we had the chairman of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, as well as the chairman for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police External Review Committee, as well as Assistant Commissioner Conlin. The questions were around exactly what kinds of initiatives were being taken now to move towards providing a place for members like Denise Revine, Staff Sergeant Lewis, or Chief Superintendent Macaulay, so that when have a concern, they can understand that they have protected, unfettered access to a place where they can get resolution easily and fairly when the mission and vision values of the RCMP have been corrupted by another member. In every case when we were asking those questions, it seemed that there was no place to go. Assistant Commissioner Conlin mentioned that they could certainly go to her, but she had no authority to actually make changes.

My question to the assistant commissioner, and it would be the same to you, is this. This task force is working. I understand that you want to wait for the results of that and I understand you've only been in the position for a couple of months as well. However, as a leader now, are you formulating some ideas about some recommendations that you're going to make to the task force to make sure no member will have any fear in the future of coming forward with a complaint that goes to the core of the mission and vision values of the RCMP?

[Commr William Elliott]

I certainly think we need to have mechanisms, processes, and practices in place for people to come forward. I think those need to be multi-layered. I think you need to start with internal mechanisms. It would be ideal if there was an ability for issues to be identified and resolved without going to extraordinary measures. Perhaps the word “extraordinary” isn't the most apt.

For example, we've touched on grievance procedures. To me, most grievances are an indication of a failure on behalf of the organization to resolve issues. Be that as it may, some issues don't get resolved and you need to have internal mechanisms like the grievance process. There is certainly a role for supervisors, CEOs, and executives, but I think we also need to look at the ability of people to go outside the organization.

One of the options that I think should be looked at is the potential for an ombudsman with more defined authorities than we currently have for the ethics adviser. Certainly one of the things the task force is looking at is the notion of a police board. I know that in the exchange yesterday, there was an indication that in other jurisdictions, including Quebec and British Columbia, there are mechanisms outside police forces for redress.

I certainly think the role of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner can also play an important role with respect to the RCMP, which of course is covered by the legislation and the mandate of the commissioner.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sweet.

Mr. Christopherson, for four minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Again, to Commissioner Elliott, along the same vein as Mr. Sweet's question, I'd like to hear a little more about how you're going to try to separate those who are categorized as being disgruntled employees from those who have a legitimate complaint.

It's a very stark question. I've asked it in that way because let's not forget it wasn't that many months ago when, after hearing from senior police officers before we called anybody in or before we even agreed, we heard the world was wonderful and there were no problems. If there were problems, they were attributed to other things, but it was not because there were real problems.

The opposition all voted, in a formal vote against the government, to have Frizzell, Macaulay, Revine, and Lewis come to speak. Remember that when it happened, at that time, they were troublemakers. They were disgruntled employees. It's in Hansard. I won't name names, but government members said they weren't going to let them come here and be given a platform to launch against senior officers just because they were disgruntled employees. We brought them here and started to hear from them. It's when this started to unravel.

It wasn't that long ago that the names—and I'm going to say them again—Frizzell, Macaulay, Revine, and Lewis, who are now going to be legendary heroes in the RCMP, were troublemakers. It was a few months ago.

I'd like to know what you're going to do. I know you don't have the steps, but what's your vision of how you're going to be able to separate them? There are disgruntled workers and employees, and then there are legitimate people who are concerned about the organization. How are you going to do it?

I have one last thing, because I won't get another question.

We heard Chair Kennedy from the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, Chair Ebbs from the External Review Committee, and former Assistant Commissioner John Spice, the former ethics adviser, make a recommendation around an ombudsperson. I'd like to know what level of support you have for the recommendations they made.

I think you're going to find that our report is going to contain a lot of support for what they've suggested on both legislative changes and the creation of the ombudsperson. I'd like a sense of where you are on those and an early indication of how much support you're prepared to give their recommendations.

[Commr William Elliott]

Thank you. I have several things to say in response.

There are various models out there, but I think we need to have mechanisms and processes in place so people can come forward and bring information or make allegations without fear of retribution. We need to be able to have an independent examination of that information and allegations. There are several ways that can be done.

I'm not yet in a position where I have a specific recommendation on what the best mechanism might be for the RCMP. I think you need to tailor your mechanism to some extent to reflect the reality of the organization you are dealing with.

The other comment I would make is this. I'm not suggesting this is a solution in and of itself, and I would be interested in the view of Ms. Duxbury, but in my view, leadership matters. It matters not only to the individuals you have named but to the entire organization that Commissioner Busson recognized them for doing what it did. I and others are saying to people that if there are issues, they should bring them forward. They will be treated with respect, and the situations will be appropriately investigated and dealt with.

My saying that is not enough. We need to have the mechanisms and processes in place to do that. I look forward to the recommendations of this committee and the task force to help us put those mechanisms in place. Some of them will be within the purview of the RCMP to do, and some of them, I anticipate, will be external to us and may require legislation.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

You might just want to hold off on the “leadership matters” phrases for the next five weeks.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Christopherson.

Thank you, Commissioner Elliott.

Mr. McGuinty, you have four minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Elliott, I'd like to come back to a line of questioning that you were exposed to a few minutes ago. It has to do with your relationship with the minister.

Does the minister regularly sending e-mail to the staff of your organization?

[Commr William Elliott]

The minister, as I understand it, periodically sends e-mail to employees in all of the agencies within his portfolio.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Are you in a position to table that e-mail with this committee?

[Commr William Elliott]

I expect I could do that. The only e-mail within my direct control, if I can use those words, is e-mail that has gone to members and employees of the RCMP. I know that the minister has sent e-mail to others. I'm aware of at least two or three occasions where e-mail went to the RCMP, and I'd be happy to table that.