Public Accounts Committee on June 18th, 2024

[D/Commr Mark Flynn]

Sir, in the context that you're asking the question, I believe it would be inappropriate for me to get into details. However, I can very cautiously move outside of the context of the question, if you'll allow me to—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Please.

[D/Commr Mark Flynn]

—and that say anyone who takes any steps that thwarts a criminal investigation can face consequences for doing so.

There are numerous offences that could be applied in those situations, including obstruction, but I do not answer that in the context of the initial question. I just simply say, to try and aid you in your work today, that any destruction of documents that are relevant to a criminal prosecution with intent to interfere with that could face criminal consequences.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Next is Ms. Bradford.

You have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both of our witnesses for being with us today.

Commissioner, you mentioned earlier that the leader of the Conservative Party sent you a letter demanding that you investigate ArriveCAN. How does that impact your independence and how did you respond to that letter?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

We, upon receiving the letter, responded to Mr. Poilievre that, with regard to that, we are assessing all the information part of the overall investigation.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Can you provide members of this committee with a copy of that letter and your response?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

I would have to follow up with the team. If I can, then yes.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

Given the nature of what has been happening in the media and the questions that have been asked today, do either of you feel it's appropriate for the Leader of the Opposition or other political officials to attempt to interfere with the RCMP's independent work in investigations like this?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

I would say that no one should interfere with the work of an ongoing investigation regardless of the police organization that's leading that investigation.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I've seen some allegations from some Conservative members that the RCMP is at the beck and call of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Is that true?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

No, it's not. We have complete police independence. Since I've been in the chair, and in my previous chair as well, the only dealings I've had with the Prime Minister or other ministers are briefings on files. I would say that they were more or less one-way briefings more than anything else, and answering questions.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

As I'm sure you're aware, the committee voted to bring GC Strategies co-owner Kristian Firth before the bar of the House of Commons after he refused to answer questions here at the committee. Mr. Firth has stated that he did not want to or feel like he was able to answer certain questions specifically because of the RCMP's ongoing investigations into ArriveCAN.

Could you please explain to the committee how the RCMP deals with the concept of parliamentary privilege in parliamentary proceedings?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

It is a factor that we must contend with when we lead our investigations. We usually consult with some subject matter experts in the field to see what can be used and what cannot be used. It does pose a challenge when we deal with these types of investigations.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

How does that work, then, given that witnesses are protected by parliamentary privilege and the responses or information they provide cannot be used against them in a criminal investigation? What if the RCMP heard something in the committee testimony that relates to an investigation? Would you be forced to find this information in another way, then?

[D/Commr Mark Flynn]

In most situations, yes, we would be forced to find it in another way due to the protections that you articulated. However, there are so many variables that it would take a very highly skilled legal expert to analyze and give exact answers to that in those varying situations.

[Commr Michael Duheme]

If I may add to that, everything we produce in a criminal investigation must be disclosable and obtained legally. This is sometimes a challenge for us when it comes to parliamentary privilege.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I understand.

To avoid this situation in the future, how can we ensure that witnesses feel safe and secure enough to be able to speak honestly in committee or other parliamentary proceedings?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I have to think about that one. How do we provide that safety net for the individuals who come so that they feel protected?

Mark, would you like to add to that?

[D/Commr Mark Flynn]

That's really a question that each individual would have to answer with their own legal advisers and potentially with advice from this committee's legal advisers.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I'd like to ask you a question about classified information and how it relates to ministers of the Crown and the Security of Information Act. Minister LeBlanc recently mentioned in his scrum that he'd asked you, Deputy Commissioner Flynn, what would happen hypothetically if he were to release classified information publicly. He said you responded by saying that the minister would be subject to criminal prosecution. Is that true?

[D/Commr Mark Flynn]

That is correct, and what I stated was that anyone who reveals classified information is subject to the law equally. Obviously, in this case, those names are classified at this time and to reveal them publicly would in fact be a criminal offence.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

There are many rules and parliamentary procedures to adhere to as members of Parliament, one of them being that you cannot do indirectly what you can't do directly. When someone puts out a tweet and says that the RCMP or another law enforcement agency must do this or that or insinuates that the RCMP lacks operational independence, one could argue that they could be indirectly trying to influence the RCMP.

Could you share your opinion on that, Commissioner?

[Commr Michael Duheme]

One can argue, but our investigators across the country are very professional. Again, as I mentioned earlier, we will follow the information and the evidence to lead us to the potential charges and whatnot.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

I'm afraid that's the time, Ms. Bradford.

I'll now give the floor to Ms. Sinclair‑Degagné for just over two and a half minutes.