Public Safety Committee on Aug. 16th, 2022

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

To be clear, I haven't actually watched the entire testimony of the minister or the commissioner prior to this.

What I can say is that my recollection of the meeting I had with the commissioner is reflected accurately within the notes that I made and the testimony that I provided, both at the Mass Casualty Commission, under oath, as well as before this committee.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay, thank you.

Minister Blair said:

I did not ask the commissioner to release that information, and nor did she promise me that she would.

Then the commissioner said:

Regarding my use of the word “promise” during the meeting I had with my team following that press conference, at that time and in that context, I was trying to convey that I had confirmed to the minister that the information about the weapons would be released during the press conference—a confirmation that was made based on information that I had been provided.

One of the things I was curious about was the testimony we heard from Lee Bergerman, who said, “it should have never been shared with her”—“her” being the commissioner—“that we were going to release details of weapons and calibres or whatever”.

I'm curious about this, Superintendent Campbell. Why would the commissioner not have been given that information? Why should that not have been shared with her?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

I think what Assistant Commissioner Bergerman was referring to was any promise being made to the commissioner that we would release that information. That's how I interpret that passage from her testimony. It wouldn't necessarily be about not wanting to release information about the guns to the commissioner, to stay within the organization. It was about making a promise to release it publicly—that's how I interpret that—and that should not have happened.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay. That wasn't my recollection of her testimony, but we'll leave that as it was.

When was the information released to the public about the weapons, and how did that become public?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

I'll refer to my opening remarks.

I think it was on November 20, 2020, that the information was released, not by the RCMP but actually via an ATIP request to the Prime Minister's Office. I would assume that it was a briefing note that was prepared for the Prime Minister's Office, which outlined the details on the guns, as well as the name of one of our officers who was actually involved in the fatal officer-involved shooting of Gabriel Wortman.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

But it was never released by the government, the RCMP commissioner or yourselves. It was only released as a result of the access to information request. Is that correct?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

That is correct.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay, thank you.

In terms of your interactions with the commissioner and those of the commissioner with the government, it is her.... As she's the head of the RCMP, at the end of the day, she makes the decision on what she shares with the government of Canada.

COVID had just started, and I think the entire country was in shock. You testified that you had just been through two hours of a press conference, which must have been absolutely gruelling for you, sir. I can't imagine how difficult that was.

Would it not be fair to say that tensions were probably a bit high? I guess that's not the right term. It was very emotional for everyone at that time and during that phone conversation.

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

I would agree that emotions were high during the incident, and to this day they continue to be high. That was reflected within that conversation as well, on April 28.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay.

I only have 10 seconds left, Madam Chair, so I will turn it back to you.

Thank you very much for your testimony, sir.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, MP Damoff.

We're going to go now to the Bloc Québécois.

Ms. Normandin, go ahead for six minutes.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to begin by thanking the witnesses for joining us today. I would also like to acknowledge the quality of their opening remarks.

I would like everyone to keep the following in mind as they answer. In her June 2022 press release, Commissioner Lucki said that she would never take any action or make any decisions that would compromise an investigation. I would like you to refer to the April 28 conversation.

Mr. Campbell, at that time, did you feel that the commissioner understood the scope of her request in terms of the risk that it could pose to the investigation?

Did you feel that she was aware that disclosing the type of weapon could compromise an investigation by the Canada Border Services Agency or the FBI, for example?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

Thank you for your question.

I do believe that the commissioner, as a seasoned police officer, would understand that certain information should be protected, particularly if there are multiple-agency ongoing investigations. I can't speak for the commissioner; however, I think it's reasonable for me to answer that question in that way.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

At the time of the discussion on April 28, you yourself raised the issue of compromised investigations with Commissioner Lucki.

Is that correct?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

I did, in terms of not just the investigation that was being handled by the RCMP at that time but also, as I stated earlier, multiple investigations by multiple agencies, including international agencies as well. That was made clear to the commissioner. That was made clear to my colleagues.

In fact, leading up to that press conference, I had been asked by my colleagues within strategic communications in Nova Scotia if I could say more about the firearms. I explained to my colleagues in Nova Scotia the reason that I could not. That was clearly communicated to everyone. It was actually quite simple.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

How did Commissioner Lucki react when you reminded her of the importance of not releasing that information, especially because of ongoing investigations?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

Chair, as I explained in my opening remarks, the commissioner was upset. The commissioner made me feel as if I was stupid and I didn't seem to understand the importance of why this information was important to go out, the information specific to the firearms as it was related to the legislation. She didn't seem to appreciate or recognize the importance of maintaining the integrity of an investigation.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Approximately, how long was the portion of the discussion that dealt specifically with the risks of revealing the type of weapon used?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

Well, of course I'm going back more than two years, since that conversation took place, but I would say that my comments to the commissioner and others who were in that meeting probably lasted at least two minutes of me trying to explain. It was on the heels of that explanation that I was provided information or I was told that this was very important because this was about legislation that was going to make officers and the public safer. That was the response I received to my rationale provided for not releasing the information.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

At any point, did Commissioner Lucki attempt to refute your arguments regarding the risk that may be posed by revealing the type of firearm used?

Did she try to convince you that there was no risk?

Did she want to disclose the type of firearm used for other reasons?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

My recollection is that the commissioner did not dismiss what I had said in those terms, meaning that she didn't believe that it would have a negative impact or try to provide a different perspective. She immediately linked it to ongoing efforts to bring forward some new legislation.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

In summary, the conversation about the risks of revealing the type of weapon was very short. The commissioner did not make an argument to refute that there was a risk. The question of risk, she argued, would therefore have been irrelevant to the disclosure of the type of weapon.

Am I summarizing the conversation in question correctly?

[C/Supt Darren Campbell]

If you're asking for my opinion, I would say that the commissioner felt that the release of the information was more important, in her view, because the focus of that discussion was around the fact that I did not release that information specific to firearms.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

Madam Chair, I think my time is up.

I thank all the witnesses, as well as Mr. Campbell.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Raquel Dancho]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Now we have the New Democratic Party and MP MacGregor.

Please go ahead, Mr. MacGregor. You have six minutes.