Public Safety Committee on Oct. 15th, 2012

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

So you'd be encouraged, then, by at least the commissioner's comments that he recognizes that a necessary part of fully integrating this act is the training down to the members who are going to be asked to deal with this discipline.

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

Yes.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

You were present for the testimony we heard a little bit earlier as well, and that I think is somewhat encouraging, that they recognize right now that they can't nail down the details of this, so we're not dealing with the core specifics; that will come through consultation and come through development through the members of the RCMP.

Is that encouraging to you? Is that hopeful? Is that something you see your members being able to do, to contribute to the training and development that the commissioner has certainly recognized is an important aspect of laying out this bill properly?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

The members we represent will step up to the opportunities, step up to the challenge. With anything there's always a balance between your core business—what you have to do day to day in policing—and these new responsibilities in relation to human resource management. It's been my experience that if the opportunity is there, as the commissioner described it would be—and it would be a necessity, for this to work—then I'm encouraged by that. We'll look forward to that level of accountability throughout the organization.

For this to work, there has to be buy-in from top to bottom.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Right. You make a good point there, and as a former front-line guy, I think the concern is always that this discipline is going to be meted out at the lowest possible level to the lowest possible level. This act does speak to accountability and discipline that ranges right up to the highest levels of the RCMP.

I guess my vision would be that if a supervisor wasn't meting out discipline in an appropriate fashion, then they themselves would be accountable for discipline. If somebody failed to act upon that, they would be accountable as well, so it wouldn't always fall down and be applied to the front-line officers who, I'm guessing—and please tell me—would be the people you're hearing most from as those with the greatest level of concern about the range within which we play with discipline. Would that be accurate?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

In terms of numbers, we hear more often from the front-line members, the lowest level of our employment, at the constable level. Their apprehension is about how this is going to be dispensed. As we move up the rank-and-responsibility ladder, we hear the concern, “We're going to get this new authority, but we'll have no tools to go with it.”

The concern is very alive in the organization: “What will this look like?” As you go further up the chain of command, people ask, “Will I get the necessary knowledge, skills, and ability? Will I be trained to the point where I can make a meaningful contribution to this?”

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Leef.

We'll come back to Mr. Garrison, please.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you very much.

Your appearance today is I think very valuable to us. One of the statements you made in your presentation is actually quite shocking to me, and I just want to reconfirm that I heard correctly, since we don't have a written copy. I believe you said that the organization you represent was not consulted in any way in the preparation of this bill.

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

We were not consulted on Bill C-42.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Has there been any consultation with you since its introduction?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

Since the introduction of the bill, there has been.

In fact, as recently as Friday of last week, Superintendent O'Rielly and Chief MacMillan presented to our caucus of 42. We have caucus meetings going on right now. Prior to that, shortly after the bill was introduced, we met with Superintendent O'Rielly and scoped out a process and a pattern of consultation as we look forward to new regulations.

There was no consultation on Bill C-42, but we all recognize that once the bill is out in the public venue, there will be regulations, rules, and policies that will actually make this bill operational. As recently as this morning we had discussions with the commissioner, and he again committed to the consultation. In fact, he said this won't work unless we work together.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I'm glad to hear that looking forward there is consultation. It seems to me that it leaves a little gap here, because you brought some suggestions to us of improvements that need to be made in the bill itself. There have been no discussions like that with you. It's taking the bill for granted and doing consultations moving forward from, let's say, royal assent. They're talking about developing things with you but still not discussing the bill with you.

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

We believe it's very important that the bill is now with this body.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Okay. We'll take it very seriously.

I thought one of the other statements you made was very interesting, because it was about something I've run across before in my experience with policing. You said that the rank and file have an interest in good external review.

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

Yes.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

We've had all the controversy over sexual harassment in the RCMP. Would it be fair to say that the rank-and-file members have that same interest in coming up with an effective policy for dealing with sexual harassment? Is that something you hear from them?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

Yes.

As a representative who has represented direct clients for several years, and from speaking with my colleagues who are representatives.... Our current harassment prevention investigative policy...it's been a failure since it was authored some nine years ago. There has been nobody who is satisfied with living through the process as an alleged victim of harassment or as an alleged accused of harassing.... The process was terribly, terribly broken.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Have you been involved in any reviews of the process or asked for your input on the process?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

Our caucus has made submissions time and time again in relation to the process: criticism of the process, suggested amendment of the process.... For me, this goes back to...I believe the first working group that I personally attended was six months after the policy was introduced—a meeting in Winnipeg. I said, this is not going to work for our members because there is the absence of participation without prejudice, if I can put it this way. They were worried about it. They said, if I participate and look for a resolve, then the gorilla is going to come into the room with the code of conduct and whack me, so I'm just going to sit back and protect my interests.

Now, that wasn't always the case, but that was always the elephant in the room. How do we deal with that? There was a collision of two policies: ours in relation to the code of conduct and Treasury Board's in relation to resolution.

Hopefully we will be able to sit down once there is royal assent and the commissioner decides to build—and he will have to build—a policy around harassment. In our organizational response to it, we'll be able to sit down and develop something that's meaningful given the uniqueness of our organization and the context of the broader public service. One thing that we'll take into consideration is our organizational needs. That would include training: awareness training—a meaningful awareness training program.

We live in an environment in policing where there are dark moments that you don't necessarily see in other clinical environments. There has to be an awareness created of harassment, of the sensitivities of others. That's all something positive that we look forward to, because we haven't been satisfied with what was there in the past.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

In the materials that didn't get circulated today, is there any material on sexual harassment and your experience with it that we might have the benefit of?

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

There is no material, but if it's the will of the committee, we can make a separate submission in that regard.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

If you feel comfortable doing that, I think the committee would benefit from hearing what you have to say about that process, as the representatives.

[S/Sgt Abraham Townsend]

If that's....

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Garrison.

We'll move back to Mr. Hawn, please.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses.

Just carrying on from that, we've done a little bit of looking back, but now I think we need to look forward. Are you comfortable with the prospect of the consultation in the follow-on? I mean, it's going to get passed in some form, and obviously, as we've heard before, there's going to be some follow-on activity of consultation. Are you satisfied or encouraged by that?

Also, you talked about tools. Can you give us an idea of some examples of specific tools that you're talking about to make it work?