Evidence of meeting #49 for Public Safety and National Security in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was person.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
I'm sorry, I don't know anything about that.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Do you want to give a brief explanation as to what we were told the other day, that they have a separate agency? Is that your question?
11:25 a.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
No. I will tell you why some day. We heard from Mr. Shur. Is he not the president of that organization? And the RCMP is not aware of that? Perhaps we could get some clarification on this.
June 7th, 2007 / 11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I may be wrong, but I think what Mr. Ménard was asking, and it's a good question, was that we heard from Mr. Shur about the United States Marshals Service's program, that they looked after that. I think the question was, would the RCMP have an objection if there were a similar organization in Canada that did that and it was not the RCMP?
Was that...?
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
You mean a separate law enforcement agency that would look after it?
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
The U.S. Marshals Service handles it, independent of the police...the way they do in the U.S.
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
I'm not really sure. And my impression was that the U.S. Marshals were a police agency in the United States.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I think they are, but it's a separate organization that handles it across all jurisdictions.
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
Well, it may sound a little bit self-serving, but we are the national police force and there is not another police force that does have jurisdiction across the country. I can't imagine that another law enforcement agency would be in a better position to manage the program.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I'd like to follow on a little bit with what Mr. Cullen was talking about, because I think there is room for a little confusion. I understand the responsibility to protect and so on, but it seems to me, and I think it seems to Mr. Cullen, that once you are a protectee, you're virtually always then a protectee, no matter what you do.
When you terminate someone from the protection program, you still protect the information that you have. But if that person says “I don't want to live in Winnipeg, I want to move to Edmonton”, and you say “Fine, have a nice day, carry on”, you won't disclose anything about it, but they're on their own in terms of going to Edmonton and re-establishing and whatever. Is that a fair statement?
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
Yes. The difference is that we will have some obligations to a protectee who is in the program. So we may agree to do additional training. We may pay their rent. We may help them. We may buy a car for them. We may do several different things. And we may move them from one location to another if there is a requirement.
Once we terminate them, their identity is still kept secret, so none of that changes. The only change is that we don't feel we're under any further financial obligation.
But rest assured, if that person phoned up in the middle of the night and said “I'm under threat”, then the police of jurisdiction will respond, guaranteed.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
So they really never become not a protectee. Is that...?
11:25 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
They can be terminated from the program, but they will never revert back to their old identity. Once they've been given a secure name change and new identity, that new identity will remain.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
So the local police, let's say in Edmonton, for the sake of argument.... If whoever that person is has moved to Edmonton on their own, paid their own way, and they decide they're under threat and they call the Edmonton Police Service and say “I feel threatened, and I was a protectee”, does the Edmonton Police Service then call you and say, “Hey, we've got this guy. What's his background?”
11:30 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
If the person self-discloses, then we would get a call.
11:30 a.m.
C/Supt Derek R. Ogden
But if the person didn't self-disclose, Edmonton police wouldn't be aware that person had been in the witness protection program.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Okay.
You said there were nine people terminated between April 2004 and April 2007 for offences. Are those people in jail, or are they back out on the street? Do you know?