Public Safety Committee on Oct. 29th, 2012

[Cpl Patrick Mehain]

That is correct.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

That is correct, but you're not referring to information that he or she has gleaned from their investigation.

[Cpl Patrick Mehain]

No.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Okay, thank you very much.

I think it's important to make that distinction. Some people, such as the average civilian who is not a police officer working within the police community, wouldn't understand that.

To go back to Bill C-42, I am interested to know why you don't believe that a timely resolution to problems or complaints wouldn't be in the best interests of the officers themselves. This committee has heard evidence from other witnesses....

Mr. Creasser, these questions are for Mr. Mehain, since he's a serving member, but please feel free to kick in if necessary.

In your opening statement you said it has taken up to seven years. Under proposed Bill C-42, many or most of these complaints would be dealt with in a far more expedient manner. I'm interested to know why you don't think that's a good thing.

[Cpl Patrick Mehain]

We do think that's a good thing. What we're saying is that Bill C-42, the way we have read it, provides an avenue for a speedier investigation against a member without that member being able to defend himself.

The complaints that go on nowadays have gone on for the last 15 years. They have gone on since the inception of the RCMP. There is a grievance process in place under which a member has 30 days to file a grievance. They are then given set deadlines to respond.

Management has zero deadlines. The reason the grievance process goes on and on isn't because of the membership: it is because management is too busy, because they have everything else and this is thrown at their lap, or they don't care or are somehow implicated in the complaint.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

The way I understand it, Bill C-42 also encourages management—as a matter of fact, it legislates management—to make decisions in a timely manner. In what you referred to that happened in the past against a member, the member may very well be innocent. If it takes seven years, that member is living under the weight of an accusation. In my experience, most or many of these complaints or grievances, when investigated, usually come out to the benefit of the officer.

Isn't it better to have a timely response? You say yes, it's timely, but there is no demand on management to give a timely response. My reading is that it legislates management to give that timely result. You can elaborate somewhat on the answer because we have a couple more questions, but isn't it better than what you have now? At least it's moving in the right direction.

In other words, you may not have the full loaf of bread, but it's better than what you have right now. Would that be correct?

[Rob Creasser]

I think, sir, you are correct, but only in terms of the timeline. I think a speedy timeline is beneficial. Having been under the weight of one of those complaints that dragged on and on for years, I can tell you it does drag on you. I think the bill has improvements in that resolution period, yes.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

I would like to go back to some of the testimony we heard from Ian McPhail, the current interim chair of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, who recommended that since members of the commission are provided immunity for exercising their duties and powers, those same immunities should be extended to the chairperson.

Would you see having this immunity as beneficial to the chair of the commission in his or her duties? In other words, as you have said in some of your intercessions here, it would be so that they wouldn't have undue pressure put on them.

[Rob Creasser]

I would agree with that. I would think the chair should be immune.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Mr. Mehain, do you agree?

[Cpl Patrick Mehain]

I agree.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you.

This question, once again, is more for people at home.

Canadians have asked for action in regard to the behaviours of a few. I think it's important for everyone out there to know that it's only a few of the thousands of RCMP, a few of the individuals within the RCMP. Our government is trying to give Canadians that assurance.

Do you not believe that it's a positive step to implement immediate amendments to the discipline process as we perhaps work towards an even better system in the future?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Norlock.

Go ahead, Mr. Creasser.

[Rob Creasser]

I think it's important that it does happen quickly, but one of the disturbing issues for me is that up until this point, the official representatives of labour relations in the RCMP knew nothing. I can tell you that the members out there who are educating themselves about the RCMP or this new bill are calling it the Patriot Act for police. They're worried.

I think everybody would have been much more comfortable if the members, the 24,000 employees of the RCMP, had been viewed as stakeholders in this process. Having worked alongside some of those people who have been in the media for all the wrong reasons, I am very vested in making sure they don't work alongside me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Creasser.

We'll now move to Mr. Scarpaleggia, please, for seven minutes.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Creasser, this has been a very interesting presentation, because you've made it very concrete. Up until now we've had a lot of talk about organization charts and process, and this really makes it real in many ways.

You made the statement—and correct me if I misunderstood—that the people representing RCMP on labour issues don't know much or aren't aware of much. I don't mean to put words in your mouth and I know you weren't trying to be disrespectful, but do you say they don't know what's going on? I know you didn't mean it in those terms.

[Rob Creasser]

Simply to clarify, sir, they may well be aware of the bill, but that certainly has not been communicated to the 24,000 employees. They may well be aware of what's taking place, but communication about this bill has not been transmitted to the front-line membership.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Do you feel that if you had a veritable union, in the strict sense, this problem would not occur? I mean if you were unionized in the strict sense.

[Rob Creasser]

I think there would be more engagement from our members, yes.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I agree with Mr. Norlock. There are problems within the RCMP, but we don't want to tar the vast majority of superb officers with the same brush. That's not what I'm trying to do, but we know there are problems, and you mentioned the fact that there are problems in the current culture.

I'm not quite sure I understood what you feel are the root causes of those problems, of that imperfect culture. Some people have told us that if we have a culture in the RCMP of letting things go by, it's because the arbitration processes are too long. The minority of members who have done something wrong feel this will go on for years and there's not going to be any sanction, really, and this sends a message to everybody else in the organization that complaints may not amount to much or be taken seriously for a long time.

You're saying these processes that we have today are due process--you call them due process--and maybe they have to be strengthened. I'm only trying to understand what you feel the reasons are for the current situation inside the force.

[Rob Creasser]

First and foremost, most of the high media profile issues that we're focusing on as matters that have obviously caused concern to the public and for us deal with the front line.

I have to tell you, sir, that probably a couple of the worst days that I experienced in my service occurred when I was in the public accounts committee room when former commissioner Zaccardelli and current Deputy Commissioner Barbara George testified before that committee. I have never been more ashamed to be a member of the RCMP than I was in those two days.

Commissioner Zaccardelli lied to the committee. Deputy Commissioner George gave such misleading testimony that I'm sure if she had been in front of a provincial court judge, she would have been found in contempt. As it was, she was found in contempt of Parliament.

So the issues are not only the ones that make the newspapers.

Also, to address your issue about culture, in Chief Superintendent MacMillan's thesis, he said the following:

Although police are frequently considered to be a homogenous occupational group with the same interests at all levels, this thesis shows this is not the case. Due to history, tradition and rank structure, the RCMP is a perfect example of two cultures operating within a single police structure.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

So there is one culture that is appropriate and good, and there is another that is, I suppose, harming the force. Is that what you're saying when you say there are two cultures?

[Rob Creasser]

Well, the cultural difference I was referring to, sir, was the management executive versus the front-line operations.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Right.

How did the executive culture become so negative, from your point of view? How did that happen?

[Rob Creasser]

To be honest, they've never been held to account, not to the same level. There is a saying within the organization that the further you move up in the rank structure, the less accountable you are for your actions. I firmly hold to that belief.