PACP Committee Report

INTRODUCTION

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, commonly referred to as the RCMP, is a Canadian institution and icon. The distinctive red serge uniform is instantly recognized around the world. Since its establishment in 1873, the RCMP has built a strong reputation for its excellent police work and its high standards of ethical integrity. The RCMP’s 25,000 regular members and civilian staff are highly dedicated and provide a vital contribution to the safety and well-being of Canadians.

Unfortunately, the hard-earned reputation of the RCMP has been put at risk by the improprieties of a select few. In 2003, allegations arose within the RCMP of fraud and abuse during the outsourcing of the administration of the force’s pension and insurance plans. This soon led to an internal audit, a criminal investigation, and disciplinary proceedings.

In November 2006, the Office of the Auditor General tabled an audit that examined whether the RCMP had responded adequately to the findings of its internal audit and the subsequent investigation by the Ottawa Police Service. The Public Accounts Committee began its own study into the matter with a hearing on this audit. The Committee soon heard from several witnesses who detailed far more troubling allegations than the concerns laid out in the audit report. This led the government to appoint an independent investigator, and the Committee to conduct its own detailed examination. During the course of its extensive study, the Committee held 15 public meetings with 61 different witnesses.

This report represents the culmination of these hearings by outlining the Committee’s findings and recommendations. It does not contain an exhaustive outline of evidence presented to the Committee.¹ Instead, the report discusses numerous important issues that arose during the hearings. What follows is a brief summary of these issues.

The Committee’s study began with a hearing on the audit conducted by the Office of the Auditor General. The RCMP agreed with the Auditor General’s recommendations and committed to implement them. As considerable time has passed since the completion of this audit, a status report would help inform the Committee and the public about what progress has been made to implement the recommendations.

The various audits and investigations would not have occurred if not for the dedication of several RCMP employees who fought to bring wrongdoing in the administration of the pension plan to light. However, these individuals were not commended for their efforts, and instead they suffered reprisals. Rather than encouraging the disclosure of wrongdoing, senior management in the RCMP created a culture of fear and mistrust. The RCMP has committed to change its culture and practices with respect to the disclosure of wrongdoing, but it needs to make sure that the procedures in place for disclosing breaches of the RCMP Code of Conduct are consistent with those required under the new Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

Improprieties began when the RCMP moved to outsource the administration of its pension plan, and the problems were numerous. The options outlined in the business case for outsourcing were prepared by the eventual winner of the contract; normal staffing procedures were circumvented in favour of nepotism; and Consulting and Audit Canada was used to make directed contracts, engage in contract splitting, and backdate contracts for work already performed. Additionally, one firm, Abotech, was used as a shell to circumvent post-employment rules and direct contracts to former public servants. The RCMP needs to ensure that its employees have adequate training in contracting, and the government needs to examine ways to better enforce the post-employment rules.

In addition to its pension plan, the RCMP decided to outsource the administration of its insurance plans. Initial work was carried out by the underwriter of the insurance plans, Great-West Life, but as it believed it could not do the work, Great-West Life was persuaded to act as a go-between for payments to Morneau Sobeco, which had won the contract to administer the pension plan. As this contract circumvented the normal contracting process, it should be open to competition at the earliest possible date. The Committee also heard allegations of funds being improperly moved from the insurance plans to the pension plan, as well as the inappropriate alteration of meeting minutes in order to provide approval for this transfer.

The two individuals at the RCMP, Jim Ewanovich and Dominic Crupi, primarily responsible for the irregularities in the administration of the pension and insurance plans eventually lost their jobs. However, they remained on the RCMP payroll for many months after the internal audit brought those irregularities to light. The Treasury Board Secretariat needs to examine ways to make it easier for government departments to dismiss immediately public servants found guilty of gross misconduct. No other individuals were disciplined because the RCMP waited too long to begin its disciplinary proceedings. Compelling Appropriate Officers to act on any Code of Conduct violation in the prescribed time-limit would help ensure that in the future RCMP members are held to account for their actions.

The RCMP received two requests under the Access to Information Act for the internal audit and the Ottawa Police Service summary report. While requests are normally supposed to be processed within 30 days, it took the RCMP almost a year to release information to the requesters. The documentation was sent twice for a legal opinion, and it was sent for comment to an individual named in the police report. The RCMP needs to take more care to ensure that it handles of access to information requests in a timely manner and avoid the perception of a conflict of interest. However, the RCMP’s Access to Information Branch needs to have senior management support and sufficient resources in order to process the large number of requests received.

The Ottawa Police Service (OPS) led a criminal investigation into improprieties in the administration of the pension plan. However, it took significant prodding for the investigation to commence; the investigation staff was composed primarily of RCMP members who were working out of RCMP facilities; a memorandum of understanding between the OPS and the RCMP had the senior OPS investigator report to a RCMP officer, Assistant Commissioner David Gork, and there were allegations that the insurance portion of the investigation was stopped prematurely. The Independent Investigator, David Brown, concluded that the investigation was not independent. External civilian review can help to ensure that police investigations are conducted in conformity with the law and standards of propriety. However, the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP does not the authority to initiate its own reviews, and is also constrained in its access to information held by the RCMP. Enhancing the Commission’s powers would allow it to conduct more thorough reviews of the RCMP’s policies and practices.

The RCMP’s normally high ethical standards were violated in this case. Unfortunately, RCMP senior management allowed an ethical culture to develop which discouraged the disclosure of wrongdoing and did not hold individuals to account for unethical behaviour. This has led to a crisis of confidence amongst the RCMP rank and file members. While the RCMP does have an Ethics Advisor responsible for promoting ethical standards of behaviour, it is part of the hierarchical management structure; the RCMP needs a more independent voice on ethical matters. An independent ethics advisor would ensure that accountability for ethical behaviour is imposed by, and in some instances, imposed upon, senior management.

The wide array of problems uncovered during this study indicates that the RCMP suffers from serious management and administrative shortcomings. Ordinarily, deputy ministers, under the direction of their ministers, are responsible for departmental administration. While the Commissioner of the RCMP is under the direction of the Public Safety Minister, the principle of police independence has meant that ministers have taken a hands-off approach to all aspects of the RCMP operations and administration, which, as this case demonstrates, has not served the RCMP well. Modifying the governance structure of the RCMP by having a civilian police accountability board would help provide more oversight to the RCMP.

Shortly after it began its study, the Committee realized that it was not the best venue for a full investigation of the issues involved, and the Committee adopted a motion calling for a full public inquiry. Unfortunately, the government did not agree with the Committee and instead appointed an independent investigator to examine the issues in private, and subsequently a task force was given a mandate to examine governance and cultural issues at the RCMP. Many members of the Committee continue to believe that a public inquiry is necessary to properly investigate the allegations of wrongdoing. However, the Committee recognizes that the government does not agree with this approach and has followed a different path.

A section entitled “Key Findings” summarises the main points of this report and also takes account of observations that do not necessarily fit into the larger narrative provided here.