Public Safety Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Very quickly.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Can you explain briefly what that civilian investigative body would look like? I'm from British Columbia. Can you give me an example from my province?

[Richard Wex]

Yes, thank you.

It's interesting. Over the past five years, there has been a blossoming, if you will, of these civilian investigative bodies across the country. Most recently in British Columbia, the IIO, the Independent Investigation Office, has been established. Alberta has one. Manitoba recently introduced legislation. Ontario has had one for a number of years. Quebec recently, prior to the new government, had introduced new legislation, and Nova Scotia recently established a serious incident investigative body, led by a civilian, to investigate the police.

In British Columbia, if there's a serious incident, the RCMP has an obligation to inform the province, and the province would refer that investigation to the new IIO.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Mr. Hawn.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I'd like to pick up on what we just talked about, because it left me a little bit confused. We have the new Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, on which no RCMP officers current or past will serve.

What kind of experience would they be looking for? Who would typically serve on that kind of body?

[Richard Wex]

There's a Governor in Council appointee, so there's a process that's established. It's available on the Privy Council website, which says how it's run. Presumably it would be somebody with a background in criminology, law, or policing.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

It could be a former police officer from some other force.

[Richard Wex]

It could be a former police officer from another police service, yes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

What confused me was that you talked about these other provincial bodies that have sprung up. I guess it left me unclear as to who would deal with these complaints, a provincial body or the new CRCC.

[Richard Wex]

I'm not surprised about the confusion. Life's a little complicated, and this is particularly complicated.

If it's a public complaint, if it's a complaint from an individual who is not happy with how he's been treated by the RCMP, he would register his complaint at first instance, as is the case now, with the RCMP. There's informal conflict resolution that could be applied. At the end of the day, after the review by the RCMP, if this individual from the public is still not happy with how the complaint has been resolved, he can refer the matter to the new body, this independent Civilian Review and Complaints Commission. Then that body will exercise its new powers and new mandate to get to the bottom of the matter and provide recommendations to the commissioner about how it should be disposed of.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

You couldn't have one of these provincial bodies and the CRCC investigating the same incident.

[Richard Wex]

You could, in fact. Policing is becoming increasingly integrated. There's a lot of cooperation between the RCMP and other police services. In the event that there is a complaint dealing with one of these integrated operations, rather than having two complaint investigations going on by a provincial body and the new CRCC, this bill will for the first time allow for joint investigations. This is to reduce the redundancy in investigations—witnesses testifying twice, and so on. It is one of the requests the provinces and territories had of us. This is in the context only of public complaints.

In the context of criminal investigations, it will be the provincial civilian investigative body that will, at first instance, review. If they're not available, it will be referred to another police service of jurisdiction in that province. Only as a matter of last resort, where neither the civilian investigative body nor another police service is available, will the RCMP investigate itself. There are provisions to deal with that, including the possibility of appointing independent observers to report on the impartiality of the investigation.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

You're talking about trying to combine the previous streams, and that's laudable. With all that we have just talked about, do you see any potential for territoriality between the CRCC and one of these provincial organizations? You say they could do a combined investigation. That means a few members from the CRCC and a few members from the provincial one would get together to form an ad hoc body. How does that work?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Let me give you a quick illustration. In the G-8/G-20, we had the CPC doing an investigation of our engagement there, and then we had the Ontario review/complaints body doing a similar investigation. Because we had an integrated plan to respond to the G-8/G-20, there was all sorts of crossover.

All of those review bodies agree that they need the opportunity to integrate their review mechanisms the same way we have integrated our operations. So I don't suspect you're going to see any territoriality.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Obviously, it could still take a while to work out the kinks, but you're satisfied it will address....

[Commr Bob Paulson]

If I can express a little self-interest here, the RCMP needs to be recognized for having always been open to review. I don't know why we've worn the assumption that police have investigated themselves. That's not our preference. We want to have other people investigate us. The more the merrier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Commissioner.

We'll now move back to Monsieur Rousseau.

Mr. Rousseau, you have five minutes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In his brief, Mr. Toews said:

To increase human resource efficiencies, the proposed legislation provides a mechanism through which Treasury Board may convert current civilian members to public service employees, thus reducing the number of categories of employees by one.

Therefore, you want to merge three categories into two, with a workforce of about 25,000 employees. In terms of human resources management, the trend is to have a few more groups in order to have better oversight over the workforce as a whole, with audits and controls in strategic areas.

What were the reasons for your decision?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Greater efficiency was the main driver. There are three systems for three categories of employees.

There's no provision in the current RCMP Act for even the category of civilian employee. It's important to understand the evolution of that category of employee, because in many cases they are doing the jobs that public service employees are doing, and there has been a little bit of disarray in our HR approach to managing that category of employee.

The idea is that it'll be much more efficient to manage two categories of employees, that the opportunities for growth and advancement for civilian members will be enlarged considerably by having access to the breadth and scope of the public service, and that we will be able to form a more cohesive team approach. Frankly, if it were up to me, I'd have one category of employee, and that would be RCMP employees. That's really where we want to end up.

I think there are opportunities for efficiencies and streamlining our HR processes, so that's why.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Are you not concerned that this measure will lead to problems with the recognition of employees' seniority and skills? A fair bit of work will be required to sort this all out. How long do you expect it will take to complete this task?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

I believe it will take one year. We have to consult employees. We have to ensure that there is a fair allocation of the benefits to which they are currently entitled. We have to review the mechanisms with Treasury Board to keep

the current slate of benefits they have right now. We need to have a system to translate the category of employee; it won't just simply be “boom, you're in the public service”. It's going to be a negotiated consultative process to recognize those—

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

A lot of mediation, too, I suppose—

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Yes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

—and a lot of jobs for human resources management.

With respect to human resources management, I would also like to address the quality of labour relations in view of the fact that the bill gives the Commissioner the final word on hiring and firing. He will also have the right to make the final decision in appeal applications. How will this appeal mechanism work in the new disciplinary process? Will all human resources managers observe an unwritten rule, that is, the gradation of disciplinary sanctions, which is recognized by the various labour tribunals?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

First, the authorities that are proposed for the commissioner here are not authorities that aren't available to existing deputy ministers within the public service. It's not like I'm getting any sort of big, spectacular enhancement of powers.

Now, that said, it's important to understand that appeals and grievances will still be available to employees, and that in cases where we are seeking dismissal of employees—not just in dismissals, but in other cases—they'll have the opportunity to seek the External Review Committee's review of the circumstances. We have all sorts of labour laws that we have to be held to account on, and while ultimately it's my decision, it'll be informed by all of that analysis. Ultimately, if there is a continued dispute, we will go to the Federal Court.

It's important, though, to be fair and inclusive. What will change now is that in instances where there is a properly arrived at decision to dismiss a member, then the pay of that member will cease. Right now, the process is one where, if a grievance is launched, if an appeal is launched, the member is kept on the books. In some cases recently, it was for seven years.

I don't think Canadians are interested in seeing that, so that will change here. But the appeal process, the due process, and the means of grieving decisions will remain, and members will be represented.