Yes. There are no additional funds required. This defines standards for investigations, addresses training and qualifications of investigators and the independence of investigative operations in line with best practices.
There is considerable evidence of superficial, incompetent, biased and even maligned investigations by PSIC. It's their standard practice to completely exclude whistle-blowers from the process, keeping them uninformed or misinformed about progress, failing to interview them or process the information that they have, failing to interview other key witnesses they suggest and denying them sight of the final report so that they are unable to refute false information.
In one case investigated by FAIR, PSIC effectively sabotaged an important investigation that was making good progress by quietly allowing the investigator's contract to lapse. They then closed the case abruptly without following the lines of inquiry already established.
With this amendment, the investigations would be conducted competently and independently, thus ensuring proper due process for all parties. Without opportunity to pressure or bias investigations, wrongdoers would more reliably be exposed. The public interest would be better protected. Wrongdoers would be denied the opportunity to expand their powers and conduct more serious wrongdoing examples like Phoenix and Lac Mégantic.
In PSIC's primary mandate, the words “investigate” or “investigation” appear more than 100 times in the PSDPA. This is a responsibility that should already be budgeted for.