Public Safety Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2016

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant (Don Valley West, Lib.)), Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Good morning. I call the meeting to order.

This is the fourth meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. Je vous souhaite tous la bienvenue.

Thank you very much to our witnesses for joining us.

As committee members will know, we've received a notice of motion from Mr. O'Toole. I have checked with him and I want to let the committee know that we'll be meeting within this meeting for the last 15 minutes to deal with his motion. He has agreed to that arrangement, which means that each of these rounds will be 50 minutes rather than 60 minutes.

We're going to welcome our guests, Mr. Paulson and Mr. Coulombe. Mr. Paulson will go first, for 10 minutes.

Welcome and thank you.

We'll have both our witnesses give their presentations at the first. Then the questioning will open, and you can direct your questions to either of our officials.

Thank you.

[Commissioner Bob Paulson, Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and good morning, members of the committee.

Thank you for the invitation and the opportunity to come to introduce the RCMP to you.

I don't have any prepared remarks. What I do have is a presentation that is in for translation. It is available in one language and will be distributed subsequently, along with the French version. I might just go off this presentation if that's all right with the committee. Thank you.

The idea is that I'll give you a high-level overview of the organization, the RCMP: what it does, where its authority comes from, and some of the challenges we're facing in our present operating environment.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act outlines the mandate for the RCMP, and it is essentially threefold: it provides for the apprehension of offenders, criminals; it provides for prevention; and it provides for the protection of specific individuals, so there's a threefold mandate in the RCMP Act.

We operate as one force, but we have very many contexts, very many business lines. For example, federal policing is our core mandate; however, contract policing, in which we provide front-line police services to provinces, municipalities, and territories, is the largest part of our business. We also are engaged in specialized police services that support police activities across the country.

I've included in the presentation that you'll get the list of my senior executive committee and their functions.

The RCMP is about a $4.5 billion operation. Often when the estimates are provided, they refer to the federal appropriations and don't take into account the revenue that we receive from the contracting jurisdictions, which make it a $4.5 billion operation.

In February of this year we had over 30,000 employees; it was 30,101 as of February 1. They occupy a variety of positions, including police officers, or what we refer to as regular members; civilian members, who are civilians hired to discharge our responsibilities under the act; public servants; and, in many cases, municipal employees.

We have three operational business lines. I mentioned federal policing, and that includes organized crime; terrorism; counterterrorism; investigations in partnership with my colleague, the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service; and enforcement of many other statutes in the federal context.

The specialized police services provide critical front-line police services such as laboratory services, DNA services, and information management services along the lines of CPIC. You may have heard of the Canadian Police Information Centre, which manages the existence of warrants, criminal records, fingerprints, and so on. Also, child sexual offenders and cybercrime are in our specialized police services.

Contract and aboriginal policing services are what we refer to as our contract policing function. In all of the provinces except for Ontario and Quebec, we are the provincial police force. We are the territorial police force in the three territories. We police more than 600 aboriginal communities and 150 municipalities, and it is a big source of day-to-day complexity in terms of delivering police services to Canadians.

In the last several years, we have undertaken efforts at our transformation. You will have heard much discussion around the cultural transformation of the RCMP. Efforts have been ongoing for years and certainly have increased in the last four years, while I have been commissioner. We have worked toward restoring the traditional ethos of the RCMP. We have worked along the lines of developing a gender and respect action plan, which came on the heels of a gender-based assessment of our policies and practices stemming from the very public presentation of internal harassment issues and sexual harassment allegations within the organization.

We've also succeeded in securing a new RCMP act called the Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, which has been very instrumental in bringing to bear a more repairing approach to discipline and human resource management.

We have developed a mental health strategy and deployed a mental health action plan, which is in place. We've changed the mission profile of the organization to one that is called “results and respect” while at the same time trying to develop and maintain and promote a respectful workplace. Also, keep in mind that we are in the business of providing policing services to Canadians.

Challenges remain, of course, some of which have become public just recently. There continue to be efforts to transform the culture of the organization into one that is more tolerant and inclusive of all dimensions of our communities. We also have challenges in the area of labour relations as we move into a new world where RCMP members will have the opportunity to seek certification as a bargaining agent once the government completes its work on the new enabling legislation.

We have struggled with some RCMP funding shortfalls and challenges with respect to balancing our various responsibilities. We are engaging now in a complete program review, which will seek to put data around the demands that are being made on the organization. There is a continuing need for the ongoing maintenance of legal and investigative support tools as society evolves and threats evolve and present themselves.

Our strategic priorities continue to be along the lines of serious organized crime, national security, youth, aboriginal communities, and economic integrity. In the last few years we focused on some additional priorities, which include national security investigations, cybercrime, child sexual exploitation, and the workplace health of the RCMP.

The organization is very broad; it has 16 divisions. All the commanding officers of those divisions report to me, along with the senior executive. The divisions are, for the most part, aligned with the provinces and territories. You get to 16 by adding Depot, our national headquarters, and an area called our National Division.

Lots of work is going on in lots of dimensions. It is a tremendous organization comprising devoted and committed men and women who love the work they do. I'm very pleased to come here and help you understand the organization.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much, Commissioner.

Mr. Coulombe is next.

[Michel Coulombe, Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service]

Good morning. I do have opening remarks.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

I am pleased to be here today to provide an overview of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, and to speak briefly to the key features and trends affecting Canada's national security and what they mean to the service and to Canada.

My goal today is to leave you with a good sense of what we do, how we do it, and our current priorities.

Everything we do at CSIS is grounded in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, which clearly articulates our mandate and authorities. There have been changes to the act, but many of the fundamentals have not changed.

There are three main pillars to our mandate. First and foremost, we collect and analyze intelligence in response to activities suspected of constituting a threat to the security of Canada. Our act clearly defines the threats that we are authorized to investigate and in this regard has remained unchanged since 1984. We investigate espionage, sabotage, foreign interference, and, of course, terrorism and extremism.

Of note, the CSIS Act explicitly excludes the investigation of advocacy, protest, and dissent unless it is carried out in conjunction with the previously mentioned threat-related activities. It is important to note that the power to arrest, detain, and enforce the law remains the purview of our law enforcement partners. CSIS is not a police service.

We provide advice to government in a number of ways, including through the production of intelligence assessments and reports that are disseminated to clients across the Government of Canada.

CSIS may also take measures to reduce threats to the security of Canada. These authorities are similar to those exercised by many of our foreign partners.

To fulfill the second pillar of our mandate, security screening, we provide advice and assessments to government partners. We share advice with our immigration partners to help them make decisions about an applicant's admissibility to Canada. We also provide security assessments to government partners to support the screening of employees and contractors who require access to sensitive government assets, sites, or information.

Lastly, section 16 of the act authorizes the service to collect foreign intelligence in relation to the defence of Canada or the conduct of international affairs, but we may only do so at the written request of the Minister of National Defence or the Minister of Foreign Affairs. It is also important to note that this collection of foreign intelligence may only be undertaken within Canada and may not target Canadian citizens or permanent residents. There have been no changes to this mandate.

In order to fulfill our mandate, CSIS maintains strong co-operative relationships with many federal partners and with provincial and territorial authorities. These partnerships facilitate both lawful sharing of information and provision of advice as well as operational deconfliction. These relationships are essential to active CSIS investigations.

The relationship between CSIS and the RCMP is critical to addressing the terrorist threat. Both agencies have a clear understanding of their roles and work together effectively to support public safety. The number of successful terrorist prosecutions since 2002 is a testament to our level of engagement and the priority placed on countering this threat.

Mr. Chair, having outlined our mandate, I would like to add that review and accountability were key considerations when the service was created in 1984 and they continue to play a significant role in how the service operates today.

Accountability is exercised in a number of ways, beginning with the minister, who may issue written direction on any matter relating to CSIS, including its investigative and analytical priorities, the conduct of operations, and when and how the service informs the minister of its activities. CSIS also seeks ministerial approval for our arrangements to cooperate with foreign and domestic partners and for warrant applications to the Federal Court.

The CSIS Act establishes clear reporting requirements, another key element of accountability. Each year, the service produces a classified report on its operational activities for the minister. A copy of this report is also provided to our review body, the Security Intelligence Review Committee or SIRC, for certification, allowing the review body to verify that CSIS is operating effectively and appropriately within the rule of law.

CSIS also produces a public report tabled in Parliament by the minister that provides a high-level overview of the service's operational priorities and highlights. This is an important effort intended to raise public awareness and to inform public debate.

Of course, independent review is a significant element of the service's accountability regime. SIRC investigates and reviews CSIS activities and complaints. It has access to all CSIS documents, excluding cabinet confidences, and it produces an annual report that summarizes its review and complaint findings.

While the report is tabled annually, the dialogue between CSIS and SIRC is ongoing throughout the year as reviews and investigations into complaints evolve. SIRC's recommendations are given serious consideration and routinely inform service policies and practices. This fosters within CSIS a culture of continued learning and improvement.

Further, in terms of accountability, we appear regularly before Senate and parliamentary committees such as SECD and SECU, and we are subject to review by the privacy and information commissioners as well as the Auditor General. These frequent interactions between the service and external review bodies help CSIS to become a more effective and professional organization, and this accountability is essential for the public confidence and support required for the service to be effective.

Mr. Chair, CSIS is a diverse and dynamic institution. It currently employs approximately 3,400 employees in six regional offices, overseas, and in our national headquarters here in Ottawa. Sixty-eight per cent of our employees are bilingual and around 20% have a good or excellent knowledge of a language other than French or English. Collectively, our employees speak over 100 languages. The diversity of our employees ensures an engaged workforce and innovative thinking, and ultimately helps us achieve our objectives.

CSIS is recognized as an employer of choice, and I am happy to report again this year, for the eighth year in a row, that CSIS has been named one of Canada's Top 100 Employers.

I would now like to provide the committee with a brief update on the threat environment.

As members will be aware, terrorism, including the radicalization of Canadians, remains the most prominent, serious and immediate threat to Canadians and Canadian interests both at home and abroad.

It is my job to give the best assessment of the nature and the scope of the threat environment. I will not overstate the terrorist threat, but I feel strongly that we must resist complacency in the face of this complex and evolving environment and that minimizing this threat would be to gamble with the security of Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Excuse me; I'll let you know you have about one minute.

[Michel Coulombe]

It is important to understand that some people look at what happened in Ottawa in 2014 and say that as tragic as the events were, in fact it was only two events. To me, that is wrong logic that forgets important factors.

We must not forget the number of people who are currently in prison for terrorist activities, the economic impact that terrorist activities would have on our country, the Canadian victims of terrorist attacks abroad and the Canadians who have taken part in terrorist activities in other countries, including Algeria in 2013. It is important to look at the terrorist threat in a global context and not limit it to the incidents that have occurred in recent years.

Thank you. I welcome any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much to both of you.

We begin our questions with Mr. Erskine-Smith. You have seven minutes.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks very much.

Thanks to you both for the presentations.

I'd like to begin with the allegations against the two former RCMP instructors and the long and documented history of workplace harassment in the RCMP.

Mr. Paulson, can you update this committee with the status of the investigation? When can we expect to receive a report?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Thank you for that question.

I think it would be helpful to throw a little context around the allegations.

In April 2014, a complainant at the Canadian Police College in the explosives training unit came forward to make allegations relating to conduct of two individuals in 2012-2013. The director general of the Police College ordered what we call a code of conduct investigation, and that went forward as it would have in the old system, ultimately resulting in four and five days' pay docked against the individuals whose behaviour was impugned.

In November 2014, at about the time we switched to the new act, the Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, another employee came forward and made another allegation against one of those two individuals. Let me just say that those two individuals had been suspended while the investigation took place in the first instance, and they went back to the Police College, but not directly to the work site. Managers there were somewhat challenged, as the accused officers started to complain about entitlement to their old employment.

In any case, a new allegation came forward and was handled pursuant to the new act, ultimately resulting in 15 days of discipline against that individual.

I want to point out that the new act features an ability of the organization to review and appeal instances of discipline when the view is that the discipline was not commensurate with the behaviour, which wasn't a feature in the old system. That process was under way up until the point where I got an email on February 9 from an individual who broadened the allegations once again. That led to the almost immediate transfer of those individuals. At first I wasn't acquainted with any of the facts, but I got acquainted with them and moved those individuals out of the workplace. A couple of days later, a new code of conduct investigation was ordered, and they were suspended.

By way of an update, we have an experienced team of investigators going in to investigate these new broader allegations, which hadn't until then been known. We formed a multidisciplinary team of individuals to do a couple of things while this investigation was under way. These things included making sure that the victims and the complainants were properly attended to and supported. Looking at the decision-making all along that spectrum of time I just described—

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Paulson, I don't want to cut you off, but I have only seven minutes, and I do have other questions. Is there a timeline for when we can expect a report?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Well, the code of conduct investigation is under way. The review of all those things is under way, and they are proceeding with all deliberate speed. It would be a disservice to the men and women who are doing that work to guess at a date, but I would say it will be completed very quickly.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

In February 2012, the RCMP public complaints commission found rampant bullying in the police force. I note that in 2013 there was an action plan on gender and respect issued from your office that proposed 37 steps. How many of those 37 steps have been implemented by the force?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

All 37.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Great.

When individuals do complain, is there an opportunity for them to complain to an external party, or is it all done internally?

[Commr Bob Paulson]

There's an opportunity. People are free to complain to anyone they want. The process includes internal paths, but we have created a number of different points of access for lodging complaints.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

So at the moment there's no independent individual a complainant could go to, to avoid the perception of perhaps bias—

[Commr Bob Paulson]

Sure there is. There are any number of individuals. They could go to you.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I see. However, there's no individual designated by the RCMP.

[Commr Bob Paulson]

No.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks very much.

Moving to Mr. Coulombe, have preventative detention powers been used since Bill C-51 was adopted?

[Michel Coulombe]

That would be a Criminal Code enforcement. It wouldn't pertain to the service. It would be police forces that would do that.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Let's move to something that is directly under CSIS, then.

Have the new disruption powers been used since Bill C-51 was adopted?

[Michel Coulombe]

Yes, they have.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

With respect to information sharing, has information sharing increased since Bill C-51 was adopted?

[Michel Coulombe]

We'd have to go back and check. We have daily information sharing, and I wouldn't be able to say if it has actually increased since the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act came into force, but I can get back to the committee with that information.