PACP Committee Report

CONCLUSION

The Committee’s hearings on Chapter 9 of the Auditor General’s November 2006 Report, Pension and Insurance Administration — Royal Canadian Mounted Police, led to an unexpected series of meetings. What began as an examination of whether the RCMP had responded adequately to the findings of its internal audit and the investigation by the Ottawa Police Service quickly became an investigation of several issues that even the Office of the Auditor General did not touch on in its report. These issues included:

• the poor treatment of the RCMP members that disclosed wrongdoing;
• the circumvention of contracting policies and procedures in order to outsource of the pension and insurance plans;
• the lack of disciplinary measures meted out to those who committed wrongdoing;
• the failure to process access to information requests in a timely manner;
• the inability of the civilian oversight body to conduct an independent review; and
• the culture of fear and mistrust created by senior management of the RCMP.

The numerous investigations into this issue have not been able to satisfactorily lay to rest the issues surrounding the administration of the pension and insurance plans. To address the over-reaching themes that were raised by the various investigations, the report of the Independent Investigator into RCMP Pension and Insurance Matters included a recommendation to create of a Task Force to examine the issues of and make recommendations on the governance and organizational culture at the RCMP.¹ The Minister of Public Safety, the Honourable Stockwell Day, announced on 16 July 2007 the creation of the Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change and stated that it was to be chaired by Mr. Brown. The Task Force is mandated to review and consider the challenges faced by the RCMP as set out in the Brown report, and to make recommendations on the following issues:

• the internal management structure of the RCMP including committees and branches, and ways to better ensure they are properly mandated according to modern governance principles of accountability and transparency;
• means by which a challenge and oversight function could be introduced into the internal management of the RCMP, including how such functions could be effectively integrated into the structure and culture of a modern police organization;
• means to ensure that senior management is held appropriately accountable;
• identifying a process to better ensure that the Commissioner and senior management establish and maintain an appropriate ethical structure based on the RCMP’s Mission, Vision and Values;
• ensuring that the RCMP’s workplace disclosure policy is appropriate, that mechanisms are in place to ensure protection from reprisal, and that appropriate, clear and decisive corrective measures are taken;
• ensuring compatibility between an effective workplace disclosure policy and the process for reporting possible breaches of the Code of Conduct;
• ways to improve the accountability, timeliness and effectiveness of the RCMP disciplinary scheme in the RCMP Act and Regulations, including possible changes to the Code of Conduct and the one-year limitation period; and
• considering ways of fostering a constructive partnership between civilian and public service employees and regular members at the executive level of the Force;²

The Task Force is required to report back to the Minister of Public Safety by the end of 2007.

The Committee is pleased to state that it was able to address most of the issues included in the mandate of the Task Force and that this report offers recommendations on how to improve the organizational culture and governance of the RCMP. The Committee hopes that the Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP will be able to make use of the work provided here.

The greatest challenge facing the RCMP now is to change its governance and culture so as to become the accountable, transparent and honest police organization that Canadians demand. The Committee heard testimony stating that this change would not be an easy task. Professor Linda Duxbury told the Committee that “the RCMP is definitely not change ready.”³ She continued, stating that:

Cultural change is the most difficult kind of change. The majority of cultural changes fail. We know that even if all the stars are aligned, it takes five to ten years for cultural change to occur. And not all the stars are aligned here, so I would just caution the committee that we have to give the RCMP a chance here. We can’t expect miracles and overnight things to happen⁴

The Committee understands Ms. Duxbury’s recommendation for caution, but believes that the RCMP is committed to learning from its past and that it is ready to begin making the changes necessary to avoid a similar situation from happening in the future.

Lastly, the Committee would like to commend the courageous and tenacious members and employees of the RCMP who worked hard to bring the full issue of the administration of the pension and insurance plans to light. Staff Sergeant Mike Frizzell, Staff Sergeant Ron Lewis, Chief Superintendent Fraser Macaulay, Ms. Denise Revine, Staff Sergeant Steve Walker and Assistant Commissioner Bruce Rogerson all worked with incredible integrity. The Committee believes that the RCMP, and the public service in general, has become a better place to work given the commitment to the values and ethics of good governance displayed by these people.

In addition, the Committee would like to commend former Commissioner Beverly Busson. Commr Busson took on a very difficult job in the RCMP in her very short time as Commissioner. The Committee admires Commr Busson for her commitment to address the issues raised during Committee’s hearings and for her drive to improve the overall management culture of the RCMP. Her tremendous leadership was exemplary, and the Committee hopes that the current Commissioner, William Elliott, will be able to continue the good work former Commr Busson began. The RCMP needs this sort of strong leadership in order to overcome the many challenges it now faces in restoring its reputation as one of the world’s finest police organizations.

KEY FINDINGS

This section of the report discusses observations of the Committee that, while they do not fit into the larger narrative, are very important to add to the public record of the study of the administration of the RCMP pension and insurance plans.

• The Committee commends all RCMP members and employees who played a role in uncovering malfeasance in the administration of the RCMP pension and insurance plans. Without the courageous tenacity of the individuals discussed here, in addition to others who did not come forward to the Committee, the serious wrongdoings in the administration of the plans would not have been discovered.
• The Committee was disappointed to learn that several individuals involved in the serious issues discussed in this report were able to leave the situation in the RCMP and move to different government departments. Rosalie Burton was in no way reprimanded for her involvement in the reprisals against Denise Revine; indeed, she now works as a Director General for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. In addition, David Smith, who owned Abotech Inc, the consulting firm that acknowledged that it hired contractors to assist them in circumventing post-employment rules, now works at the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. That these individuals can move freely through the public service despite having participated in questionable practices is perhaps indicative of the weak system of discipline in the public service.
• Deputy Commissioner Paul Gauvin received what the Committee believes was a “soft landing” for his involvement in the administration of the plans. The Committee is incredulous that the Chief Financial Officer of the RCMP was so ineffective in the management of the contracting authorities of RCMP staff who were knowingly violating the Contracting Policy. The excuse given by D/Commr. Gauvin that he had no responsibility over staff in a different branch of the RCMP rings hollow. The Committee hopes that RCMP, and all other government organizations, learns from this experience that the Chief Financial Officer is ultimately responsible for the financial management of his or her department.
• The actions of several contractors detailed in this report were appalling. Kim Casey, Pat Casey, Anthony Koziol, and Michael Onischuk all participated in contracts with the National Compensation Policy Centre, which was managed by Dominic Crupi, that were found to be in violation of the Treasury Board Contracting Policy. The Committee was greatly disturbed by the actions of these individuals, and sincerely hopes that they will barred from receiving any more contracts from the federal government.
• Public Works and Government Services Canada did not discuss the questionable procurement practices of Consulting and Audit Canada in its Departmental Performance Report (DPR). Given the fact that the DPRs are one of the only ways to communicate departmental actions to parliamentarians, the Committee is distressed that something as important as the serious violations of the Contracting Policy at Consulting and Audit Canada could be so easily glossed over in PWGSC’s DPR. The Committee expects to see more balanced reporting in PWGSC’s DPR in the future.
• The Committee heard from 61 witnesses during its study of the administration of the RCMP pension and insurance plans. Throughout the study, the Committee heard conflicting testimony on quite an unacceptable number of occasions. Unfortunately, this indicates that some witnesses were not being fully truthful with the Committee. The Committee would like to stress that it takes the truthfulness of witnesses very seriously, and providing false or misleading testimony to a parliamentary committee could constitute contempt of Parliament.
• The Committee is discouraged and frustrated with the lack of authority and/or the unwillingness of the government to dismiss employees found guilty of gross misconduct.
• The Committee is concerned with the lack of respect paid to the Access to Information Act in the RCMP. The legislated time deadlines were ignored by various members of the RCMP, including D/Commr Paul Gauvin and Louis Alberti, with respect to the release of information concerning the various investigations into the administration pension and insurance plans. In addition, the Committee was not pleased to hear of the alleged serious improprieties committed by D/Commr Gauvin concerning the calling of an officer into the Commissioner’s boardroom to switch documents related to an Access to Information release. The Committee sincerely hopes the RCMP will fully respect the Access to Information Act in the future so as to ensure the goals of transparency and accountability embodied by this Act are upheld.