Public Safety Committee on July 25th, 2022

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

We can all disagree with people's management styles. We can disagree with how people come across in meetings. Is it possible or probable that the commissioner was expressing frustration as a result of the commitment or confirmation she might have given versus what was asked of her?

[A/Commr Lee Bergerman]

I'm unaware of that because I didn't know of any conversation prior to this teleconference that had gone on between, I'm guessing, Ms. Tessier, Ms. Scanlan and probably Dan Brien.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

You would not be able to say this with any certainty. Is that correct?

[A/Commr Lee Bergerman]

Not be able to say what?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

That what you're saying, that this possibly happened or this possibly happened [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[A/Commr Lee Bergerman]

I don't have any direct knowledge of conversations that were had prior to this teleconference.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you.

Ms. Tessier, you have been in the business of communications for a very long time and you have seen a lot in your career. Can you talk to us about how facts on the ground change the RCMP's or any national security agency's ability to communicate and what they can and cannot share?

[Sharon Tessier]

We always try to keep our credibility and the confidence and trust of our communities by sharing as much information as quickly as possible. As you've heard, information changes over time. What may have been something that we needed to withhold until it is clarified and confirmed, we can eventually share.

As time went by, they were able to share more information on the gunman. The information on the number of victims and the victims' names, the use of the replica police car, the uniforms.... As time passes, it's possible to release more information.

I am not a police officer. I always asked that they release as much as they could. I respected that some stuff would have to be withheld, but it never stopped me from asking them to release stuff so that they could take a look at it and decide if it would actually impede an operation or result in decreased operational integrity.

I understood my role and my lane and they understood their role. My goal at the end of the day was.... Confidence and trust in a policing organization is essential, so I was trying to keep our credibility as high as possible.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Is it safe to say that everyone involved here was aware of the lines and doing their best not to cross any lines?

[Sharon Tessier]

I think absolutely. That's common. Our members know that they need to provide us with the information. We can only share what we know, but they also know to keep a box around the stuff that has to be withheld. That's how we operate. We always have and it works well.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Would you say that was the case in this situation, notwithstanding the frustration people may have felt or what may have been perceived as anger or disappointment, as Commissioner Lucki characterized her own views as? Is it fair to say that everybody across the way acted with integrity and within their own lanes?

[Sharon Tessier]

Absolutely. They were working night.... We were all working night and day, but they were in Nova Scotia, right there, and there was so much extra pressure.

As I look back on this, there were clearly miscommunications between my group and the group in Nova Scotia, and it's very unfortunate that I ended up briefing the commissioner one thing and it went another way. I think that's what caused this whole dissatisfaction with our communications.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

If you were to reflect on this now.... There's a lot of political hay being made that the minister perhaps meant this, did that or said this to the commissioner and the commissioner said this or did that.

Can you go back to this point about miscommunication? With your own experience—however many significant decades of experience you have—can you speak to how miscommunication may have played a role or could have played a role here versus malice or bad intention?

[Sharon Tessier]

Just looking at the number of versions of speaking notes we had going back and forth, the discussions that were going on between Lia and me and the different discussion going on between Mr. Brien and Mr. Leather or Mr. Campbell, there were so many people trying to do their level best. Everyone had the same goal in mind.

We were working as well as we could together remotely for the first time. With COVID, it was terrible. We couldn't even see each other while we were working. It was very difficult, and I know that everyone working on this file was doing their level best and beyond that. People were making Herculean efforts, working night and day—and I mean night and day. People would shut off their computers at two in the morning and fire them back up at five.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much.

[Sharon Tessier]

You're welcome.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

I now turn the floor over to Ms. Michaud.

You have a six-minute slot. The floor is yours, Madame Michaud.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the three witnesses for being with us today. We very much appreciate it.

I'd like to come back to some answers they gave to my colleague earlier.

I agree with my colleague that it is somewhat curious for the Nova Scotia RCMP to remember the meeting on April 28 differently from the national RCMP. I just want to come back to that.

I will address Ms. Bergerman first.

Ms. Bergerman, could you elaborate on how this meeting went? Earlier, you stated that the RCMP commissioner appeared to be under pressure from the government, the Minister of Public Safety, the Prime Minister or their respective offices to publicly disclose certain information about the weapons used. You specifically mentioned the calibre and model of these weapons.

What made you believe or think that the commissioner was under pressure from the government? Could you go into more detail about your thinking or your reaction at that point? Does it reflect anything in Mr. Campbell's notes?

[A/Commr Lee Bergerman]

Thank you for the question.

I think it's important to remember that going into this conference call, I was taken aback by the tone and content of it because I wasn't aware of any of these conversations going on about what was required or what was wanted in the press conference. I was confused, and when it started off, it was evident that the commissioner was angry. There was no yelling, but you could tell. I know her well enough to know when she's angry. She used phrases like “I promised the minister”. She didn't say what minister. I understood a minister and that the calibre and types of weapons that were used in the mass casualty shooting would be disclosed in the press conference. That was her expectation.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Based on what we understand from Mr. Campbell's notes, his response was that he could not release the information at that time because it could compromise the investigation.

Do you also agree with that?

[A/Commr Lee Bergerman]

Not the inquiry, the investigation.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Very well.

Earlier, while listening to the interpretation, Commissioner Brenda Lucki thought I was talking about the commission, but I was also talking about the investigation.

Mr. Leather, can I ask you essentially the same questions on what you remember about the way that meeting went and your impression of the commissioner? Did it seem to you that she was under some political pressure?

Getting information and asking for information are not normally interference, unless it seems that there may be some pressure to get it faster. That may, indeed, be what happened.

Do you get that impression as well?

[C/Supt Chris Leather]

To the member, through the chair, I think it's important to provide some context in the lead up to the call of the 28th.

It was around April 22 that I got a phone call from the commissioner directly requesting the gun “inventory”, for lack of a better term—the list of guns, makes, models and serial numbers. Really, that's when it began for me in terms of this issue, and it was a request that, obviously, I took seriously, coming directly from the commissioner.

That would be out of the norm of communication to a criminal operations officer, but again, under the circumstances, and given the gravity of the situation, it didn't seem completely odd to me because that would be something that would make sense for the commissioner to share within her senior executive committee in Ottawa, the deputy commissioners and equivalents.

It was on April 23 that CO Bergerman and I actually had a conversation with SiRT. SiRT is the serious investigative team that oversees police activity, akin to the SIU here in Ontario for matters where there is a death in police custody or at the hands of police. It was quite clear from our conversation with the SiRT director that we would be allowed to provide a gun inventory to the commissioner so long as it was used within the RCMP—and that was it. That was the agreement and the commitment that we made to the director of SiRT, which I passed along to Ms. Bergerman, which presumably went up to Ottawa.

That's the background on the lead up, and then really for several days, until the 28th, and akin to what Ms. Bergerman said, there was no further discussion on the gun inventory or the speaking notes, or any sense of interest, from my perspective, in the inventory of guns being released publicly, internal to government or otherwise.

I would echo Ms. Bergerman's comments about the surprise that it came up the way it did on the 28th for an issue that I thought had essentially been resolved through obtaining this inventory and passing it along to be used for internal discussion and understanding.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much.

I would now invite Mr. MacGregor to begin his six-minute slot of questions. The floor is yours, Mr. MacGregor.