Public Accounts Committee on May 31st, 2017

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I appreciate that. Thanks.

That's all I have, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you for yielding your time to me.

I'm interested in the peer-to-peer work that you do, because it was mentioned. Can you give us some concrete examples of how that works, and possibly even beyond that? I'm sure you've witnessed the successful integration of someone who has had some issues and has come back to the force. Without giving the names of the people, obviously, are there any actual cases that you could talk about? How does the peer-to-peer process work?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

One of the things I can add is that every week, on Wednesday, I have all the COs of the country on a big video screen with all the department heads in Ottawa, and we go across the business of the nation, as far as the RCMP is concerned.

Every commanding officer who reports on a particularly traumatic event.... In fact, there was one this morning. I won't talk about it because it's still under way, but officer-involved shootings, child deaths, and high-profile investigations that happen across this land are reported in. We hear about what they're doing, and every one of those reports from the COs now features an engagement for the mental health of the individual officers who are engaged. That way we have secured peer-to-peer support for the member.

The peer-to-peer program takes away the weight of management assessing the officer's reaction to the event. It's designed to support employees in a confidential way to make sure that they have someone to lean on and that this person can interface with our health services, with supervisors, and with commanding officers to make sure that the officers are getting the support they need. It happens all the time.

Again, this is somewhat anecdotal, but there is certainly a shift that has happened in recent years in how managers and senior officers are acting in the moment to help prevent the impact of those traumatic events. Peer-to-peer is central in all of that.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We still have one minute, so as part of the same party, I'm going to ask a very quick question as well. Then, we'll come back here.

I have a very close friend right now in the RCMP who is off on sick leave after being involved in a shooting. At first he believed there was no issue and that he would be all right, and then he found out that he isn't.

We've heard people say there's an expectation that sometimes you play while hurt. It's like when you're a hockey player and you end up having to play hurt, or you suck it up and get back out there.

We've been through a lot over the last couple of years with our veterans, and we've seen the same kinds of issues. These guys come back not expecting there are going to be issues and finding out all of a sudden that there are. It may not just come on like that; it may be over a long period of time. There are challenges.

I guess, I'm thinking here, from the testimony and the frustration in some cases, that one may want to see this succeed and another may say that it's just another report that, while it's not condemning the force, is coming down hard on you.

Is there an issue here with access to that health care? You say we access health care.

We know that in Veterans Affairs, sometimes it was tough finding enough psychologists and psychiatrists. Is that part of it?

Is there an issue of a rural/urban split?

I'm from a rural area. I know that access there to some of this health care is not available like it may be if you're in downtown Vancouver, Toronto, or Ottawa.

Are there areas where we can say that you're working on it and plugging away at it but that demographic and geographical factors are involved?

Maybe you could make just a few comments, then we'll go to Mr. Harvey.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Well, first of all, I think that's accurate. There are geographic disadvantages to some locations where our folks are, because there are just no services there. That falls to the organization, and it also falls to the second part of my answer, which is the challenge of recognizing that people need help. That is very challenging in the mental health business for police.

Someone may begin to act out in ways that get them either in disciplinary proceedings or in trouble when, really, the underlying problem is a mental health issue that perhaps was overlooked by a supervisor. Perhaps the individual is not willing to self-identify as needing help. That's all part of our strategy. It's a very complex problem, particularly given how the organization is spread out.

However, within the reality of the deployed, decentralized model that we exist in, we have developed strategies that aren't the same for a two-person detachment in one of our territories versus someone who's in the metro area of the Lower Mainland and has access to all sorts of support.

Those challenges feature in our strategy and we're trying to address them. One of our systems—which I have direct knowledge of myself—is the availability of support through the 1-800 line. When we learn of somebody calling in, we leap into action and get people flown out, or get people flown in.

It turns on identifying the problem as a mental health issue and also overcoming the geographic barriers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much. We did go a little over time because of me. I apologize.

Mr. Harvey, please.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

You're forgiven this time.

Mr. Commissioner, I want to thank you and your staff for being here today. I have the most respect for you and what you do.

I have a couple of quick questions that are centred around where we are today, where we've come from, and where you're going. I commend you and your organization for taking this on and being a pioneer in it. Absolutely, over the last five years there have been tremendous strides made in the mental health portion of health care and in recognizing some of the deficiencies. I think it's important that we take all those factors into account here today.

Reflecting upon how we got here today with the Auditor General's report and the intricacies of your job, if you could go back in time, what things would you have preferred to do differently, or would not have done differently over the last period of four or five years?

One thing is for sure; I'm not an RCMP officer, nor am I a mental health expert, so I'm looking to you for some guidance as to the best practices you would have changed.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

I think it goes back to the Auditor General's report and the recommendations, and in most cases the findings are accurate. Had we done that and had a more structured, clinical strategy and—as it's referred to—a business case with sufficient funding and more milestones.... We did it on the back of a strategy and an action plan that have come under criticism. I think we could have done that better, and I would like to have done that better.

I'm very proud of the work we've done in terms of socializing the organization. It's somewhat like working on an airplane in flight. It's hard to do, because there are a million things that are going on and any number of reasons why you don't focus on these kinds of things. But a more focused prevention....

What I was about to say I'm proud of is the way the channel has changed within the organization in terms of how we talk about it. People are less inclined to be judgmental. They're very inclined to be supportive of their colleagues.

So, I think a crisper, more precise business plan and more careful attention....

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

I want to make sure I'm being respectful in the way I ask this question, because I have the utmost respect for the Auditor General, and I want to make sure he understands that I have the utmost respect for him. My question isn't centred around this audit, because I think the audit was very well done.

My question for you, though, Mr. Paulson, is whether you feel that, had the audit focused on all the pillars and segments together, it would have painted a different picture of the program in general, or do you feel that the pillars stand somewhat on their own? I'm just looking for a little bit of reflection from you.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Sure.

I think the recommendations, as they were produced, would have been produced in any case, and likely there would have been recommendations in respect of our other pillars as well.

My defensiveness—and I hate to use that word, because I've resisted being labelled “defensive”—is around the idea that, in the simplest terms and perhaps just in my little head, we deployed, in the face of a stagnant sort of environment, a mental health strategy and an action plan. We have engaged within our existing appropriations to do a lot of things. While we are appreciative of the recommendations, as we've seen from the style of some of the questions, it's being seen as a sort of condemnation—again—of another thing we haven't gotten right. That is difficult for me.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

That's the end of my questions, but I really want to thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll have a chance to come back for a full round for you.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Yes, your characterization is absolutely correct, and I think that's fair. I think that's the history of the RCMP in terms of these big things and making the changes.

That's why I felt the need, in this environment, to lay down my bona fides in policing. I understand the complexities and all of that, but yes, there are legitimate criticisms, and there seems to be a huge problem with, first of all, getting the attention of the RCMP, then getting them to do what needs to be done, and then making sure that it gets done properly. At the end of the day, we get there, but oftentimes it's through a whole lot more angst than one would hope.

I do want to reflect, Commissioner—again, this is my own personal opinion—that in the course of your answers, the tone had been different. Had those basic things you said about the audit and the findings during the course of the discussion been reflected in your opening remarks, certainly my tone would have been different. That's what put me on the wrong foot to start with. It was the tone. I'm sorry, sir, but in my opinion it comes across as defensive, as borderline arrogant in terms of a refusal to acknowledge when a problem is real.

Now I want to go back to an area, because this issue of fairness is really important. I mean, these are tough meetings. This is not meant to be fun. None of us likes to be held to account. We are all the time—every day, actually—but here's what I want to focus on. Again, having been the civilian head of the Ontario Provincial Police, I'm somewhat familiar with policing budgets, at least as they were in my day. I fully understand that you can have a program and that just because you don't have a business case, it doesn't mean that you're not doing anything.

On the fact that you're bringing a lot of resources from across the organization and bringing them to bear, I get that, but I think it's fair to say, and I think, Commissioner, unless I'm mistaken—I don't want to put words in your mouth—you said as much: that in the beginning, had the strategy been there, and had there been a business plan attached to the action plan and the funding there, you probably would have had a different outcome. Again, I think it's fair criticism to point out that while you may be spending other money, the absence of an actual plan that spoke to the resources is a fair criticism.

Do you not think so, Commissioner?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Yes, I do.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Sorry?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Yes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes? Good. Thank you. I appreciate that.

See? As we move along, things get better and better.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

You're out of time, Mr. Christopherson, but I'll give you another minute.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, we're not adjourned yet, so....

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

No, you're good. Keep going.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Okay? All right.

In your opening remarks, Commissioner, you mentioned some of the things that you've found. I don't think anybody has said it yet, but there is an appreciation and I thank you for your service, because I do think you've announced that you're stepping down, correct? At some point, we need to acknowledge that this doesn't reflect your whole time, and many thanks for that effort and dedication, truly.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Thank you for that, but it does reflect my whole time.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, no, not to me.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

This is my strategy, and we put this strategy in place in 2014. That was me, so it kind of does.