Thank you very much, Ms. Stubbs.
Defining police independence, I think, is important because, frankly, there's a degree of—how can I put this nicely—reticence for a minister to direct or send directives to the RCMP. Police independence has sometimes been overinflated to incorporate all kinds of operational independence, where I think the minister really should take more responsibility and issue public directives.
For the research I'm doing right now, I have submitted an access to information request for all ministerial directives to the RCMP. I have heard nothing for over three months. To me, all of these directives, minus any sensitive information, should be readily posted on the web.
With regard to police independence, we don't want the minister telling the RCMP to investigate Mr. X but not to investigate Mr. Y—or charge. However, with everything else, things like “Mr. Big” operations, which are a litigation magnet, I don't see any reason why the minister cannot say that from now on we're not going to do them, or we're only going to do them in these ways. I believe in democratic policing.
As for the Brown report, we need to think not just about oversight. I've already said that the existing RCMP complaints body is under-resourced and underpowered. It has no power to impose any sort of remedy, and frankly, most law faculties have three or four times the budget that it has. The people there are trying their best, but they're having to deal with or supervise complaints from coast to coast to coast.
I also think that we need a real police board for the RCMP. I think society now is more complex, and this idea that there's the minister here and the commissioner there and that somehow it all works out with the provinces and territories, I don't think is sufficient.
I also think we need to have the RCMP work with other parts of the federal government—Health, Indigenous Affairs and so on—to take a more whole-of-government approach to safety and security.