Public Safety Committee on March 5th, 2013

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

There have been no issues that have been brought to my attention.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Leef.

Do any of those other departments show that this will be a cost savings for them? Was it used extensively? Is some of the streamlining for some of the other departments going to be a cost saver for them, then?

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

Do you mean for the obtaining of federal documents?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I mean if some of the other departments now are going to fall under Bill C-51—he mentioned Border Services—is that only for the securing of documents, or is that—

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

If you mean for these other agencies being able to refer people into the witness protection program, I see that as affording them another avenue in their investigative toolbox for the protection of potential witnesses or people who are assisting them in their area of responsibility.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. We will move back to Mr. Rafferty.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

First of all, I just want to make a comment about Mr. Scarpaleggia's comments. I think he left the impression that this body that was recommended was, I think he said, for making decisions about the files. I think the body that was recommended was to review the files, not to make the decisions on the files.

I wonder if you'd like to make a comment about why there would be some benefit to having a body to do that sort of thing.

[Trevor Bhupsingh]

I think primarily the independence of the function itself has been well-suited in the RCMP for over 25 years. I think that at the end of the day, when we looked at whether or not an independent body was required, we didn't think that was necessary.

Given the changes that have been made, as Assistant Commissioner Shean has said, to separate the investigations now and the program of decision-making itself, we're fairly comfortable that it would address the independence issue.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you for clarifying that.

You've all been very clear, in fact all the witnesses have been very clear, about the ability of the RCMP to absorb costs in this program, and to actually absorb costs on a continuing basis.

I'm just thinking about the 800 to 1,000 people in the program now. Of course over time, over the next five years or ten years, that number will increase. I see that the hope is that they will become self-sufficient.

Would you have any idea of the percentage of that 800 or 1,000 who are not self-sufficient or would never become self-sufficient? Do you have any sense of what that percentage might be?

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

I don't know that percentage per se, but with the improvements and the enhancements to the program, we are going to see, in my estimation, more and more becoming more self-sufficient more quickly.

The case management plan has a lot of rigour around it. There is the training we're providing to the handlers and the officers who are engaging these protectees. The program is much more protectee-focused. I see it becoming even less and less....

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

On an ongoing basis, then, for the people who are in the program permanently—because you indicated that most people are permanent—the rise in fixed costs for this group of people, which increases over the years, is not going to be significant enough to impact, over time, the RCMP budget. Is that what I am to understand?

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

My sense is that the effort we are putting in on the front end is going to pay huge dividends for us on the back end.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I assume when these people become self-sufficient they are like any other Canadians or Canadian family; health care and everything else is simply covered. The onus is not on the RCMP, except for some very slight sort of ongoing supervision. Is that correct?

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

That is correct. We are always there in the background in the event they are passing 123 Main Street and run across somebody from their past life. If they have a fear or if a threat of some kind surfaces, we will come back into the picture as required. Aside from that, you're absolutely correct that the idea is for them to live within Canadian society and become self-sufficient.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Garrison, do you have a question?

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

I have just one, if I might.

Following up on questions that Madame Doré Lefebvre asked about age limits and youth, in 2010 there was a recommendation from the RCMP to the government, which was released through ATIP, with regard to witness protection. In that recommendation, the RCMP said that young gangs should be included in the program.

We've just been going back and forth about whether or not they have been included. That recommendation seemed to imply that they were not covered by the witness protection program.

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

I would have to see the specifics. There is no identified crime. It doesn't specify that you have to be involved with a specific group or crime. It's simply based upon the risk they're facing, and the decision is made at that time as to whether they should be considered for entry into the program. I apologize, but I....

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Rousseau, you have a question.

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

This question is for both organizations.

In addition to this bill, is there enough research being done to adapt to organized crime, which is investing increasing amounts into technology and the production of counterfeit documents, ID and others? Is there enough of an effort by both the Department of Public Safety and the RCMP to adapt to the various technologies, and more importantly, to progress in communication and information technology?

[A/Commr Todd G. Shean]

For me, the simple answer would be yes. We are always learning. We learn thanks to research, our investigations and meetings with witnesses who were part of organized crime.

So I would say yes, but we are always learning.

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

I see.

How about at Public Safety?

[Trevor Bhupsingh]

I would have to agree with the observations of my colleague at the RCMP. This is an ongoing and iterative sort of process.

I think the bill before us allows the flexibility for the RCMP, which is managing the program, to adapt to that. Assistant Commissioner Shean has mentioned that there's research; there's the investigation, and certainly there's continued consultation with all the key stakeholders who are involved around this program or who would be implicated by this program.

Through those measures, I think there is a flexibility and adaptiveness to it to continuously learn and address the ever-evolving challenges with organized crime.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Rousseau.

In conclusion, I would like to go back to something Mr. Garrison said in his initial question. He wants to be sure we got it right. That's what this committee is tasked with. We're tasked with going through this bill. We're hearing a lot of people say that it sounds as though we got it right.

Do you have any hesitation? Is there anything you feel could have made it a little better? Is there anything that the committee should know that we haven't perhaps had on the record yet that you think may be an area where an amendment or some changes could be made, so that we do get it right?