Madam Speaker, the ability to question any perceived wrongdoing makes up a fundamental component of our criminal justice system and indeed our human rights as a nation.
Under the RCMP act, members of the public can make complaints regarding the conduct of RCMP members to the public complaints commission which has the power to look into and make recommendations on the conduct of RCMP members.
The terms of reference of the APEC hearing show clearly how broad the scope of such an inquiry can be. The APEC panel will hear all evidence and will report on “the events that took place during or in conjunction with demonstrations during the APEC conference in Vancouver”.
The chair of the public complaints commission has stated that the panel will follow the evidence where it leads and that the scope of the investigation will be broad. Any questions regarding RCMP operations prior to and during the APEC summit are squarely within the scope of the hearing.
The hon. member from Tobique—Mactaquac has inferred that there was inappropriate political interference in the actions of the RCMP with regard to security at the APEC conference.
While the solicitor general is the minister responsible for the RCMP it must be remembered that it is the commissioner of the RCMP who is solely responsible for criminal investigations undertaken by the RCMP.
As the solicitor general has pointed in the House on many occasions, he does not get involved in operational matters of the RCMP. With regard to the APEC conference he was kept informed by the commissioner in general terms about security for this major event.
In the case of the APEC conference, as with other large and complex international meetings, it was appropriate and necessary that the RCMP consult with interested parties such as the Departments of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the Prime Minister's office in finalizing security arrangements. The RCMP, however, made the decisions regarding security in this event.
Police officers work in difficult circumstances.