Public Safety Committee on June 1st, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I'd like to bring this meeting to order.

This is the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, meeting 22. We have two items on our agenda.

First of all, we have a motion. Four members of this committee have requested to address the issue of obtaining two RCMP documents. I'll entertain that motion at this time.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair....

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I said I will entertain the motion. Somebody can introduce the motion to address the issue of obtaining two RCMP documents.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Right. At the last meeting I articulated the two documents that were being sought. One is the Canadian firearms program evaluation of February 2010, and the second is the internal RCMP audit of the Canadian firearms program that was around the same period of time. I'll move that as a motion.

It's clear that the committee would be requesting these documents of the RCMP commissioner.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay. You've heard the motion. Is there any discussion?

Mr. MacKenzie.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Chair, first off I'd like to deal absolutely with the motion. But I'd also like to bring to the attention of the committee that there have been a number of allegations made both in the House and in the public domain about a report from the RCMP on the firearms registry, that we had somehow done something with that report and not provided it. I'd like to suggest to the committee an article in the Toronto Star, written by Tonda MacCharles back on November 7. I'm sure my colleagues opposite have heard of the Toronto Star and Tonda; she frequently comes into our meetings. The last paragraph from Tonda was: “Responding by email to questions from the Star, RCMP Sgt. Greg Cox said late Friday the force submitted its 2008 firearms report on Oct. 9, four weeks ago”.

So the report was tabled in the appropriate time. I think somehow members may have misconstrued some of the information that was out there. I would say particularly to the members of Liberal Party that if they talk with some of their former cabinet members they will tell you that many letters get sent with dates on them, but the reports frequently do not show up at the same time. That's just for clarification on that particular issue. It was in fact confirmed by Toronto Star reporter Tonda MacCharles.

On the reports that were asked for, we have not been in any way, shape, or form trying to hold them back. The problem is, we couldn't figure out the reports that are in this motion. We're not certain what those reports are. We're certainly not opposed to making relevant and timely information available to the committee, but we need to know exactly what those are. We think that the report being referred to is an internal audit and evaluation done by the RCMP. We think that's what was referenced in the committee. We're not sure that those are complete, and we're not sure where they've gone. We know by Treasury Board guidelines that the internal documents are not approved by the minister, and the normal process would provide that, once final, those audits will be posted in both official languages on the RCMP website.

I am satisfied from what I have been told, and from what questions I've asked, that the minister hasn't seen them, nor likely would see them until they were made public anyway.

Mr. Chair, from our side we'd encourage you to instruct the clerk to write the RCMP and request the internal audit and evaluation, because that's what we think the opposite side is asking for. We have no idea whether they're done or where they are, but they will be a public document, so it would only be appropriate that if we want them, we ask for them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Is there any other discussion?

Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Chair, just on that, could we make a request that if those documents are not as yet translated, they be given to the clerk? Of course they would be translated before they would be disseminated to members of committee, but I don't want to get into a situation where they say they're sorry but it's not translated, and seven months later the documents come to us.

In other words, when we're making that request, if they haven't undertaken the translation yet, send it to the committee and then allow the committee to undertake the translation. As I understand it, one of them is about a 60-page report, and I'm not sure of the other's length. I just want to make sure we aren't caught in a situation, because we've already waited since February for this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. MacKenzie.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

We have no objection to that whatsoever, Mr. Chair. I think what we want to make perfectly clear is the minister's office doesn't have them, so the request would have to go to the RCMP. We think the documents you're talking about are the internal audit and the evaluation.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

That's correct.

If I could, as well, through you, Chair, to the clerk, perhaps we could have that go out as quickly as possible and make reference to the fact that the committee is already in the middle of clause-by-clause consideration of this bill and it could or could not come to the House very soon for a vote. And therefore his timely response would be appreciated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay.

Ms. Mourani.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I would simply like to indicate, for the clerk's information, that documents must be provided to us in both official languages. Indeed, I received the minister's responses in English. When the minister appeared before us, a few months ago, we asked him several questions to which we have received answers. I do not know if everyone received them in the same format as I did. In these answers, there were parts in French and others in English. I do not know if this went through the clerk, but I, for one, did not receive the full answers in French.

I would therefore like to have the minister's answers as well as these documents, in French, as quickly as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay.

Does anybody else have any comments before I call the question?

Seeing no more comments, we'll vote on the motion.

(Motion agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

One of the members of the committee has indicated they would like to bring forth another motion at this point.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Chair.

For the sake of those who might be waiting with bated breath in anticipation of our embarking on clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-391, as I understand, there have been discussions that have taken place that would move the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-391 to Thursday and next Tuesday. I wanted to clarify that this was the understanding of the committee before we embark on other business.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

We'd have to have a motion to that effect, if we're going to do that. If you have discussions, they still have to be brought forward and approved by the committee. Does somebody want to bring that forth?

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

What a delight it is to be back among my colleagues here on this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You are more than welcome, sir.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you.

I would move that motion as indicated by Mr. Holland, that we defer the clause-by-clause until Thursday and Tuesday. I appreciate the collegiality of Mr. MacKenzie and the chair in accommodating that request.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Is there any discussion in regard to that?

Ms. Mourani, you had your hand up first, then Mr. Rathgeber.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Chairman, there is something that I do not understand. I was under the impression that Mr. Holland had a motion to put forward regarding Bill C-391.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Could you repeat the question? I did not hear it.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I was under the impression that you had a motion, but I am perhaps mistaken.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

At the beginning of the meeting, Mr. Davies had a discussion with Mr. MacKenzie and the matter of changing the dates was brought up. I mentioned that I had no objection, but that if it were a problem, I would be in favour of the committee moving to clause-by-clause today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

We have a motion before the committee and I have a list of speakers here.

Mr. Rathgeber, then Mr. MacKenzie and Mr. Norlock.