Public Safety Committee on Nov. 1st, 2023

[Randall Koops]

We appreciate it may be a bit difficult to follow. It's actually a new paragraph (o.1), so it is not an addition to (o). It would simply provide for the Governor in Council to have the authority to make regulations. Proposed section 87 is the list of all the grounds on which the Governor in Council can make recommendations. This adds to that list regulations that could deal with effective information sharing between the commission and NSIRA or other bodies, while at same time ensuring that their independence and their respective mandates are maintained. That is in response to a recommendation from the chair of the commission.

My colleagues may have more detail on that.

[Joanne Gibb]

The commission regularly meets with and consults NSIRA on a number of matters, and this has come up. There could be instances when it is related to a complaint where, for example, NSIRA's investigating the national security elements but, say, there's a use of force aspect to it. That is not national security, per se, as I think we all understand it; it's much more directly in the realm of policing and policing authorities. How, then, would we deal with that?

We've had these discussions. We were actually looking at getting into an MOU with NSIRA, but this would be much clearer if it was in the regulations, so that we could work with it and it could share the information with us, and we could exercise our mandate as it exercises its mandate in the respective elements of a complaint.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Are you done, Mr. Motz?

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Just hold on a second.

I'm done. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We will go now to Mr. Shipley.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

There was some confusion. I just need a moment, Chair. I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Are you done? Okay.

That being said, are there any further interventions?

Mr. Lloyd.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Has there been a new subamendment added? Have we been provided with the change in writing?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I don't believe it's a subamendment. I think Ms. O'Connell misspoke.

She is moving the amendment.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Okay, so there has been no change to it. I think the confusion was that we heard “subamendment”.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

That's fair enough.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 87 as amended agreed to on division)

(Clause 88 agreed to on division)

(Clause 89 agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

(Clause 90 agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Mr. Julian is not moving the amendment to clause 91. Okay.

(Clause 91 agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

(Clause 92 agreed to on division)

(Clause 93 agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

(Clause 94 agreed to on division)

(On clause 95)

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

That brings us to NDP-60.

Go ahead, Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

This will be an important discussion. It is a recommendation from Breaking Barriers that reservists within the RCMP should be covered by the provisions of the proposed public complaints and review commission act. Currently, clause 95 states:

Except as provided by the regulations made under subsection (1), this Act and the Public Complaints and Review Commission Act do not apply to reservists.

Mr. Chair, Breaking Barriers has recommended that it should apply to reservists. It does make sense, when it comes to law enforcement and any concerns that are raised; the public complaints and review commission act really should also apply to complaints made against reservists.

I am moving that amendment, NDP-60.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

We'll go now to Mr. Motz, followed by Mr. Gaheer.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With respect to this particular amendment, Mr. Julian, back in May, asked the RCMP how many complaints there have been against reservists in the last five years. The RCMP has provided us with that information, and I'd like to read it into the record as we discuss this amendment.

The response from the RCMP to that question was as follows:

“The RCMP reserve program provides access to experienced police officers to alleviate operational pressures due to planned and unplanned events, emergencies and temporary resource shortages such as vacancies and absences.

“The reserve program provides the RCMP access to a pool of qualified former police officers to provide short-term relief to help fill human resources gaps until permanent resources are in place. The reserve also provides the RCMP with surge capacity to quickly deploy resources to address emergency situations.

“The RCMP acknowledges that public complaints made against reservists are not governed by the current part 7 of the RCMP Act, and thus not subject to a review by the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP. The public complaint regime set out in part 7 of the RCMP Act applies to regular members, civilian members, special constables and supernumerary special constables. At this time, it does not apply to reservists.

“Reservists are subject to the Values and Ethics Code of the Public Service. Any complaint made against the conduct of a reservist is managed by the applicable divisional reservist coordinator.

“Each incident of alleged misconduct is considered. Reservist misconduct can be addressed through operational guidance, additional training and, in some cases, revocation of appointment as a reservist.

“Divisional reservist coordinators are encouraged to inform complainants of the outcome of their complaint against the reservist. Since complaints against reservists are managed divisionally, they are not recorded in the national database used to track admissible public complaints pursuant to part 7 of the RCMP Act. As such, a manual survey of each division was required to determine how many complaints have been made against reservists in the last five years.

“Based on the available reporting, the RCMP estimates that approximately 59 complaints were received by the RCMP in the last five years, involving reservists. Since complaints against reservists are not recorded in a formal database at this time, this sum represents the RCMP's best available estimate at this time. For perspective, the RCMP currently employs 462 reservists across the country.”

I appreciate that information, because I think it provides a good indication of whether or not the RCMP...or whether the PCRC complaint mechanism and process should apply to reservists. They're obviously absent now.

My question to the witnesses would be this: Do you see a need to add this? Is there an issue from the RCMP's perspective, from the commission's perspective or from the department's perspective? What are your thoughts on now adding reservists into this mechanism, and what impact will that have?

[Deidre Pollard-Bussey, Director, Policing Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Maybe I can start. The policy intent behind the original clause 95 of the bill was to follow through on the existing mechanisms within the RCMP Act. There are things within the RCMP Act that fall outside of the complaints regime and are HR-related items. That's the reason the bill was drafted the way it was.

The way we read this particular amendment is that it's not just about the PCRC Act. It would also include the full application of the RCMP Act to reservists, so we do have some concerns with the way the amendment is written.

In terms of the impact of this regime on reservists, I will leave it to my RCMP and other colleagues to comment on that.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

What is the impression of the RCMP of adding this into this bill and the implications that would have on your moving forward with the change to your act?

[Alfredo Bangloy]

My understanding of this is that, if the intent is to include reservists under the PCRC regime, I believe all that would be required would be to remove this clause 95 from the bill. Then reservists would be included in the PCRC regime, and that would give complainants the ability to seek a review from the PCRC should they not be satisfied with the RCMP's handling of their complaint against a reservist.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

If I understand you correctly, you said to take section 95 out of the bill—remove it completely.

[Alfredo Bangloy]

If section 95 were removed, then my understanding is that the PCRC act would apply to reservists, and the RCMP Act would remain intact, because the RCMP Act would remain as is.

[Kathleen Clarkin, Director, National Recruiting Program, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

I'll just maybe add on some clarity to my colleague's comments. As the PCRC act is written now, it talks about those appointed under the RCMP Act. With our interpretation with Justice Canada, because the regulations to create the reserve program are part of the RCMP Act, that does include them by means of that definition without—as my colleagues from Public Safety have flagged—having to encroach on all of the other parts that impact, like compensation and other HR matters. Therefore, without specifically naming them and by being silent, we have that coverage that a reservist's complaining against them could be brought to the commissioner.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

From the department's perspective, what are your thoughts, Mr. Koops, on having clause 95 removed from the act?

[Randall Koops]

That portion of the bill is the responsibility of my colleagues in policing policy, so they are better placed to speak to it than I am. Thank you, though.

[Deidre Pollard-Bussey]

We recognize that this is a gap. It creates a class of individuals who are not currently covered under this particular clause of the bill, but, as I said, in terms of the impact on operations and resources, that would be a question for the commission or the RCMP.