Building confidence by improving effectiveness

Updating Civilian Oversight of Canada's Military Police: Achieving Results for Canadians

Over the six years of its existence, the Commission has identified statutory, regulatory, policy, and operational constraints that have a very real impact on the effectiveness of civilian oversight of military policing.

These issues (described below) have been raised both formally and informally over the past several years. The Commission wishes to work with its stakeholders, including military police, the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, the Canadian Forces, and the Department of National Defence, to develop options for addressing these matters, such that they can collectively meet their shared objective of maintaining and enhancing the confidence of Canadians in the military police.

Fairness for subjects of complaints –

At this time, the military police member who is the subject of a complaint does not have the right to request the Commission to review the disposition of that complaint by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal. It is only the complainant who may do so.

Disclosure –

There continue to be very different perspectives held by the Commission and the Canadian Forces about disclosure of information related to complaints. One relates to the interpretation of the term “record of complaint”, to which the Commission is entitled, and another relates to whether the terms of agreement of informal resolution of complaints ought to be shared with the Commission.

Scope –

Complaints about military police duties or functions that relate to administration, training, or military operations that result from established military custom or practice are specifically excluded from the complaints process. These exceptions mean that military police are not subject to civilian oversight for their conduct in significant areas of their responsibility.

Powers –

While the Commission has the power to conduct an investigation of a conduct complaint as a matter of public interest, it does not have the authority to compel testimony or the production of evidence in such an investigation, nor can witnesses be assured that any statements they make during the investigation would not be used against them in some future proceeding. This significantly hampers the ability of the Commission to conduct an investigation. The Commission does have this authority in the event that the Chair calls a public hearing - a step that is both exceptional and costly.

Interference Complaints –

Although there are very few complaints filed with the Commission about interference in police investigations, feedback during visits to bases indicates that there may be more instances than are reported. Fear of reprisals and career risks have been cited as reasons why military police would not make interference complaints. This is a complex matter and will require several issues to be addressed by the Commission and its stakeholders.

For further description, see the September 2005 Special Report, “Updating Civilian Oversight of Canada’s Military Police: Achieving Results for Canadians”, www.mpcc-cppm.gc.ca/300/300_e.aspx

ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

Building on significant changes implemented in 2004, which included a major realignment of its management structure and a substantial downsizing, the Commission continued to refine and improve its operating practices during 2005, recording a number of notable achievements. For example:

• Improved service was a focus of a Strategic Planning Session held in Gatineau, Quebec, in March of 2005. All staff members participated actively in the two days of discussions, offering their thoughts on the organization and its direction. Staff re-visited the Commission’s Mission, Vision and Value statements and revised these statements to more closely depict what the Complaints Commission means to them, to Canadian Forces military police, and to Canadians. They established a series of strategic objectives, setting a clear course for the future of the organization and detailing what must be accomplished in both the short and longer terms in order to fulfill the Commission’s Mission and Vision.
• The Commission implemented all of the recommendations arising from an audit of its staffing practices completed by the Public Service Commission in October of 2004.
• The Commission implemented the first and second phases of the Public Service Modernization Act (PSMA). This involved meeting the requirements of a new Public Service Labour Relations Act, such as establishing an informal conflict management system and formalizing the terms of reference of the existing Labour-Management Consultation Committee. The Commission complied with amendments to the Financial Administration Act and fully implemented the changes in staffing required by the PSMA by December 2005.
• The Commission launched the process of activity-based costing for key activities, and completed a risk-based internal audit plan. This plan was reviewed and approved by the Comptroller-General, and ensures that the Commission meets the requirements of the Government of Canada’s new internal audit policy.
• The Commission carried out a preliminary self-assessment against the elements and indicators of the Management Accountability Framework, and completed a threat and risk assessment, the first step in the development of a business continuity plan.

Financial Management

In budgetary matters, the Complaints Commission reduced its overall financial requirements by almost 20 per cent during 2005-06. These savings are already being realized, but the permanent reduction of $760,000 in the Commission’s reference levels will not be formalized until the 2006-2007 fiscal year. The Commission’s reduced funding requirement was included in the Supplementary Estimates tabled in the fall of 2005, but Parliament was dissolved before considering the Estimates. (Additional financial data can be found at Annex C of this Report.)

The Commission realized additional cost savings by redesigning its office layout and finding another government department to occupy – and pay for – the resulting surplus office space.

Human Resources

The Commission continued its efforts to ensure that it remains a workplace of choice for current and future employees. Among other initiatives, a new Learning Policy was implemented to assist employees in pursuing their professional and career goals, and to help to assure the Commission of a well-trained workforce into the future. A new Employee Guide provides staff with a convenient way to familiarize themselves with the Commission’s policies and procedures, and the roles and responsibilities of each position in the organization. The Commission launched an Awards and Recognition Program to acknowledge the efforts of its employees.