Public Accounts Committee on March 1st, 2011

[William V. Baker]

This isn't about convincing me, and it isn't even about convincing the Minister of Public Safety. Ultimately, as both the commissioner and I have indicated, it's a royal prerogative in terms of the establishment of the machinery of government. It ultimately rests with the Prime Minister to make those decisions.

We are doing due diligence on this. Work is being done. An analysis will be undertaken. Ultimately I will be comfortable to be in a position to present the minister and the government with the assessment of this--the pluses and minuses--so that a decision can be--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

How many more years?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Your time is over, please.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

How many more years of--

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Saxton, please.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being here today.

When the RCMP Act was amended in 1986, two separate agencies were created for handling complaints involving the RCMP: the RCMP public complaints commission, which became operational in 1988; and the RCMP External Review Committee, which became operational in 1986.

Can you please comment on how those two mechanisms have evolved since then, especially in light of the Auditor General's report of 2006 on pension and insurance administration? Either one of you may answer.

[William V. Baker]

I'll take a stab at that, and perhaps the commissioner can add as well.

Of course, the External Review Committee looks at complaints from staff and disputes involving staff and management. If you were elsewhere in the public service, the Public Service Staff Relations Board would concern itself with these affairs. The public complaints commission is for complaints against the RCMP by members of the public.

Since the Auditor General's report in 2006 and the deliberations of this committee, two pieces of legislation have been introduced in the House of Commons. Bill C-38 establishes the new commission for public complaints, and I'm sure members have had an opportunity to study that bill. It has far-reaching consequences in the mandate, scope, powers, and authorities, and is really designed to create a very modern, very functioning public complaints body.

Staff relations concerns are contemplated in Bill C-43, which is in the House, tabled by the President of the Treasury Board. It would establish a new labour relations regime for the RCMP. If and when that bill passes, the External Review Committee would cease to exist, because those responsibilities would be transferred to the Public Service Labour Relations Board, and in some cases there would be implications on the RCMP itself.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

Commissioner, do you have anything to add on that?

[Commr William Elliott]

No, other than the fact that both the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP and the External Review Committee are very busy. I think we have a mature relationship with them.

Speaking of the CPC, it has been pointed out that it does not have all of the authorities that might be desirable. Those authorities are proposed to be provided in legislation before Parliament. We're very supportive of that.

We're very supportive of strengthened oversight and review of the RCMP, including a board of management, because we think that will make us a better organization; it will certainly increase our accountability to the public; and I think it will contribute significantly to the trust Canadians place in the RCMP.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

The Marin commission of 1976 originally recommended a single authority at the independent review stage that was referred to as the “federal police ombudsman”. Why were two organizations created instead of one, as was recommended by the Marin commission?

[William V. Baker]

You're referring to the 1986...?

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

It was the Marin commission of 1976, which originally recommended a single authority.

[William V. Baker]

It was 1976. Okay. My apologies; I'm not familiar with that report.

There may be a rationale. Perhaps the commissioner can offer something on that. We'd be happy to look at the report and advise the clerk on whether that rationale was set out.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

In regard to Bill C-38, Ensuring the Effective Review of RCMP Civilian Complaints Act, could you explain how that will affect the RCMP? How will it strengthen and modernize the RCMP?

[William V. Baker]

In designing that piece of legislation, as you can imagine, a lot of work went into it. The government looked at complaints bodies that dealt with policing in Canada and abroad. Input was far-reaching to identify what the best ingredients were for such a commission. I believe that has been built into the legislation.

I think it is a very fulsome set of authorities that the new complaints commission will have. It goes far beyond the existing body in terms of the ability to compel testimony or to call witnesses. It can initiate policy reviews, which the current commission cannot undertake. It does not simply need to react to a complaint.

It can work in tandem with provincial and territorial complaints commissions as well. There's an efficiency there; as we've seen in the past, there are sometimes several reviews going on. One is handled provincially or territorially, one is handled federally, and there may be another one on top of that. So I think this is a good design that will generate, once it is enacted, a very strong and performing commission for public complaints.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

In regard to access to information at the RCMP, what changes have been made to improve the transparency and efficiency?

[Commr William Elliott]

Mr. Chair, perhaps I can comment.

The legislation in general terms would provide to the complaints body the authority to compel evidence and to subpoena witnesses. There is a provision, as the deputy minister referred to in his opening comments, with respect to providing privileged information to the commission. It really is strengthened in the sense that they will be able to compel evidence and to compel testimony.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

Could you quickly explain, in 30 seconds or less, how Bill C-43, the RCMP Modernization Act, will have an impact on the RCMP?

[Commr William Elliott]

I guess most fundamentally for those employees of the RCMP who are governed by the RCMP Act, and who currently do not have an avenue open to them to pursue collective bargaining, it will provide an opportunity to pursue collective bargaining and to be represented by a union if they choose to be so represented.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much.

That finishes this round.

In order to try to get in everybody here, we're going to shorten the questioning. We're now going to drop down to four minutes.

We'll again start with Mr. Wrzesnewskyj .

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Baker, when I finished questioning the commissioner on whether or not it was the Prime Minister who was blocking the establishment of this board of management, the commissioner stated that the Prime Minister had not been briefed on governance changes.

You clearly indicated in your opening remarks, and you repeated, that:

I would note that any decision on RCMP governance is a Machinery issue that ultimately remains the prerogative of the Prime Minister.

We have a federal institution, our federal police force, that's been terribly broken. We had over a year-long parliamentary investigation. The key recommendation was this board of accountability, of management.

The key recommendations of the task force, the key recommendation of the Reform Implementation Council, stated:

The first requirement is for the Government to appoint a board of management to provide the RCMP with a necessary external perspective on how it can best achieve its mission, to serve as a check on decision-making at the highest levels.

Everyone has said this is the key recommendation. It's unanimous.

We've heard from the commissioner that the Prime Minister hasn't even been briefed about this.

I'd like to know, do you feel that you've received direction from the Prime Minister's Office on whether or not you're to move on this? It's taken three years. Has this been an abdication of duty? The RCMP is a critically important federal institution. It's our federal police force.

[Commr William Elliott]

If I could, Mr. Chairman--

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

The question was to Mr. Baker.

[Commr William Elliott]

Yes, but if I may, I'd just like to clarify my earlier answer.

I'm not in a position to speculate on a briefing to the Prime Minister other than by me and the RCMP. So I'd like to clarify that I've not briefed the Prime Minister or his office. The RCMP, to my knowledge, has not briefed the Prime Minister or his office.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

That's fine.

The question is now directed to Mr. Baker, just to respond to Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, please.

Thank you for the clarification, Mr. Elliott.