Proceedings of the Standing Committee on
Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament
Issue 5 - Evidence of Proceedings - June 5, 2013 - afternoon
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 5, 2013
The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament met this day at 12:12 p.m. for the consideration of the case of privilege concerning a witness.
Senator David P. Smith (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I apologize for being a bit late. Every now and then, our caucus runs over. When the leader is speaking, you just cannot get up and walk out. I hope you understand; these things happen.
We do have our representatives from the RCMP here, and we had not quite finished questions. Therefore, I think the two that were still on the list were Senator McCoy and Senator Fraser.
Senator Furey: Chair, I am looking around the room. I do not see Corporal Beaulieu. Is he coming today?
Charles Robert, Clerk of the Committee: No. Steering did not approve his staying over.
Senator Fraser: Why not?
Mr. Robert: I cannot give you the reasons; I am just telling you what happened.
Senator McCoy: Who is steering?
The Chair: I am on it. We did not actually meet. I did not have a problem, but I guess —
Mr. Robert: It was not approved by majority, so he could not stay.
Senator McCoy: Who else is on steering?
Mr. Robert: Senator Comeau and Senator Braley.
Senator Furey: I think it is important. As a matter of fact, I would like to hear again from Corporal Beaulieu because of some points that were made subsequent to his appearance.
I move that the committee do now adjourn and reconvene at an appropriate time when Corporal Beaulieu is invited back to be here for the proceedings.
The Chair: Did he fly back?
Mr. Robert: My assumption is that he did.
The Chair: Does anyone know?
Staff Sergeant George Reid, Protective Services Section, "E" Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: I have not spoken with Corporal Beaulieu today at all. I do not believe I have with me any contact information for him.
Mr. Robert: I have his cellphone number.
The Chair: See if you can get him on the cellphone. If he is in town —
Senator Furey: Did I hear right, Mr. Chair, that his expenses were not approved for an additional night?
The Chair: What I heard was that he needed a hotel for the other night and for last night, and I did not have a problem, but —
Senator Furey: Is not this all part of why we are here? Am I missing something?
The Chair: No, you are raising something, and you are right to raise it.
Senator Fraser: This is about him, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: Do you know where he was staying?
Mr. Robert: No.
Senator White: If I may, with all due respect, I do not think this is about any individual. This is about rules, and that is why we are here. I do not disagree with having a dialogue around whether he should be recalled — or questions to the corporal — but we do have witnesses here of whom I think everyone here has questions. I would appreciate having the opportunity to ask them.
Senator Furey: I do not disagree with you, Senator White. The only problem I have is that I think Corporal Beaulieu should be here to hear that testimony because there are conditions under which he may be recalled. If he does not hear the whole thing, he is put at a disadvantage to answer questions we may put to him subsequently.
Senator White: I think providing him with transcripts would be appropriate.
I am not arguing whether it would be okay to have him here; I have no issue with him being here, but he is not. I do not want to miss an opportunity as well, though, to walk through this. It is not the best-case scenario, but it is the best scenario we have in front of us.
The Chair: Senator Braley?
Senator Braley: I got an email from the clerk. I interpreted it as saying, "Do you feel it is necessary that Corporal Beaulieu is here?" I then responded no. I never spoke to you or anyone else about it; it was never discussed.
The Chair: Okay.
Senator Braley: That is how I interpreted the memo: "Does the committee wish Mr. Beaulieu to appear as a witness tomorrow to respond to any questions we may have?" I just made the comment that I thought it was not necessary for him to be here, because I did not think he was coming back to the —
My executive or administrative assistant — I do not know what the titles are — responded on my behalf.
What did you do, Mr. Chair?
The Chair: I said I had no problem with him being here. I was asked if I had a problem with him getting a hotel room for one more night. I think that was the question. I said, "I do not have a problem; I do not know that he would be asked any questions, but he certainly has the right to be here."
Senator Braley: Exactly. I never heard about a hotel room. All I was asked is whether it was necessary.
The Chair: Do you wish to add anything, Senator Comeau?
Senator Comeau: Mr. Chair, I got a note yesterday asking if I thought it was a good idea to have Mr. Beaulieu stay on for today, and I said no.
The Chair: Okay.
Senator Furey: Where are all these notes coming from?
The Chair: From him.
Senator Furey: This is not all on your initiative, is it, Charles? These are in response?
Mr. Robert: It was just a question of coordinating efforts to determine whether or not there —
Witnesses are chosen or selected often enough by steering. The issue is that we do not normally keep a witness over an extra day for no reason. If there was no expectation of having him appear before the committee, then the idea would be that we would cut him loose. If there was an expectation by steering that he would be required to be here, then we would keep him on.
Senator Braley: Can I help you there? "Does the committee wish Mr. Beaulieu to appear as a witness tomorrow to record any questions that may appear?" I was not aware of anyone. That is how I responded to the question.
Senator Furey: I am prepared to accept that this is just an innocent mistake — a communication problem. I am not attributing any ill will or bad motives to anyone here, but if we accept that it was a mistake and a miscommunication, I still stand by the fact, despite what Senator White said, that it is important for Corporal Beaulieu to be here in the event that we as a committee decide to recall him and to hear the rest of the evidence. That is just normal course. I do not see any real problem with that.
The Chair: I think we can all agree that we immediately send him a transcript —
Senator Furey: There is a big difference between reading a transcript and being present to see and hear the evidence live. There is a huge difference.
The Chair: I agree. I said I was fine with him being here. I was asked about the hotel.
Senator McCoy: He may have actually wanted to respond to some of the testimony today. That opportunity has been made more difficult.
The Chair: Clerk, what was the dialogue with him? Did he raise whether he wanted to say anything more, or was he pretty clear that he did not have anything more to say?
Mr. Robert: I did not actually directly communicate with him. We communicated by email. I tried to call him. I called him twice on his cellphone and was not able to get through.
Senator Furey: Can we vote on my motion, chair?
Senator Comeau: Do we have a motion on the floor?
The Chair: Yes, we do.
Senator Comeau: Yesterday, we agreed as a committee that we would continue hearing from the RCMP to wrap up the line of questioning. It was suggested, I think, that three senators had not wrapped up their questioning. It was Senator McCoy, Senator Unger —
The Chair: Senator Fraser.
Senator Comeau: I think there were three. I am almost positive, and there may be four. However, we did agree that this was going to be the testimony of today. If we are going to start changing the rules day by day, we are going into different territory. We did agree yesterday that we would be wrapping up today with the final questions to the RCMP.
Senator Furey: We did agree, Senator Comeau, that that would be the testimony of today; we are not changing any rules. Just because we agreed yesterday that there were a couple of senators who wanted to ask questions does not preclude anybody else on the committee from intervening or from having further interventions.
I go back to my original point. I believe it is important for Corporal Beaulieu to be here and hear the rest of the testimony.
The Chair: Was there any response to his cellphone?
Mr. Robert: I have not tried to call him.
The Chair: Yes. Why don't you get somebody to try it?
Senator Furey: Can we adjourn for a few minutes until we hear back?
The Chair: Let us take five-minutes.
Senator Fraser?
Senator Fraser: In response to Senator Comeau's assertion, yesterday I was one of the ones who said, in part because we were interrupted by the fire alarm, that I had not finished my questions for the witnesses who were then before us and who are back before us this morning. I never said and I never made any commitment, nor I did have such a thing in my mind, that that would be the end of it, that we would not want to hear from Corporal Beaulieu or anyone else that the testimony might indicate was necessary for us to do our work properly. I do not have a hidden list of people I want to hear from. I just want it to be on the record that I never ever said, "Oh, two more questions and it is done." That was not my interpretation of the proceedings.
Senator Comeau: We can always go back to the transcript, Senator Fraser.
Senator White: To Senator Furey, my other friend from the East Coast, the Supreme Court of Canada relies on transcripts every single day to make decisions, and I am sure that Mr. Beaulieu and anyone else he might have assisting him could rely on transcripts as well. I have no issue if he is here, but he is not here, and to waste a day to hear from witnesses I think is a wasted day. If that means they have to be called back again later or he has to be called back again later, I am fine with that. However, I truly believe we do have to hear from these witnesses, personally.
Senator Furey: I have the greatest of respect for Senator White as he knows, but Senator White is a seasoned law enforcement officer in his former life and he is well aware of the difference between a trial court and an appellate court.
The Chair: What would be nice is if he can get him on the phone. He has got a cellphone and he can come on via Skype.
Let us just wait to hear from Mr. Robert. If Mr. Beaulieu is at his home and he has an iPad or a BlackBerry, we can connect with him via Skype. I want to be cost effective, too, with all these witnesses here.
Senator White: We could see if he has a television and he could watch the evidence being presented, possibly.
The Chair: That is if it is on.
Senator White: I think the sign says public broadcast, so I am sure he could watch the evidence being presented or on the Internet, or he could be provided with a video if he would like.
The Chair: One of you go out and tell Mr. Robert, if he has him on the phone, if there is any chance he is —
Senator Braley?
Senator Braley: I assume nobody expressed to Mr. Beaulieu that he could not be here.
The Chair: I was not talking to him, so I would hope you are correct.
Senator Braley: The only question I was asked —
The Chair: The way it was put to me was that it was a cost item. They do not like paying for hotels if someone does not have to be here, and he did not want to pay for himself, I guess. I was not talking to him.
Senator Wallace: Does it not come down to the fact that Corporal Beaulieu could be here if he wished to be here? He has decided, for whatever reason, not to be here. It is a public hearing. If it is important for him to be here, he would have decided to be here.
Senator Furey: The problem with that, Senator Wallace, is that when we call witnesses in, we pay for their carriage to get here and we pay for their time staying here. If this particular witness has been told for some reason, whatever it is, that we as a committee are no longer going to take charge of his expenses while he is here, that puts it in a completely different category. You know that, Senator Wallace.
Senator Wallace. The choice is his. It is a public hearing. If it is important to be here —
Senator Furey: The guy lives in Vancouver.
Senator Braley: Have we even been told that he was told that?
The Chair: I cannot shed any light on it.
Does Mr. Robert have him on the phone? Were you able to reach him?
Mr. Robert: "Please hang up and try again."
The Chair: Just before we have Senator Furey speak to his motion, what I did ask of our clerk — and I asked him to communicate with our legal adviser as well — was that as soon as the questions to the witnesses are completed, that they give us a briefing on what the committee has to really focus on here, what we do not have to focus on and what we do have to focus on, because really it is a question of privilege on which a prima facie case was determined to be the situation by the Speaker.
Senator Furey: You are not suggesting that that be done with witnesses here, are you?
The Chair: No, I am not, but I am just trying to advise members of the committee what our agenda was going be if in fact we proceed.
Senator Furey: I think I have said what I need to say about this particular motion. I cannot add anything else.
The Chair: Okay, so your exact wording is?
Senator Furey: That we do now adjourn and reconvene at a time that is appropriate to have Mr. Beaulieu here for the testimony of the present witnesses and in the event that he needs to be recalled by the committee.
The Chair: I think the clerk says he has some new information.
Mr. Robert: He is at the airport. His flight leaves in about an hour, but he said he is willing to come back.
Senator Furey: I do not think we have an hour, do we?
Mr. Robert: No.
The Chair: Is there a time tomorrow that we could meet?
Senator Comeau: Mr. Chair, do we not have a time slot this evening at 6:45? If that is the will of this group, we could re-invite Mr. Beaulieu to appear before us this evening and do it then. As I see it, the agenda we have right now does not list Mr. Beaulieu anyway. Let us hold the session this evening if it is agreeable with senators.
Senator McCoy: The point is having him here while the proceedings continue. I am in favour of meeting this evening. I can make myself available for that, but the point is having him present during the full proceedings.
Senator Comeau: That would be so he can hear and rebut whatever is said and so on.
Senator Furey: Not necessarily rebut.
Senator McCoy: If he wishes.
Senator Furey: He may be called back.
Senator Fraser: We may have questions for him based on the testimony we have already heard.
Senator McCoy: That seems to be a reasonable solution.
The Chair: Do we have a consensus or do we take a vote?
Senator Comeau: Why not meet this evening, unless my colleagues on my side want to overrule me?
Senator Furey: So as not to be disrespectful to our witnesses, let us ask if they are available this evening.
Senator Comeau: That is another thing.
The Chair: What are your current plans? Is this doable?
Senator White: You can be blunt, please.
Senator Fraser: Will you be here this evening or not?
Chief Superintendent Kevin deBruyckere, Deputy Criminal Operations, Federal Policing, "E" Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: I may have to unpack. I will have to change some things for tomorrow, but I can make it work.
Mr. Reid: Likewise.
Assistant Commissioner Gilles Moreau, Director General, HR Transformation, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: I will cancel my swim in Meech Lake tonight.
Senator Batters: Would that mean you have to change flights?
Dr. Isabelle Fieschi, Chief, Health Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: We will likely have to stay overnight as well because it will be too late to catch another flight.
The Chair: That is reasonable.
Let me ask one more question. Given the whole question of how much time we can deal with this stuff and give to our staff to hopefully have a draft report possibly for our meeting next week, what about getting the briefing? Does Mr. Beaulieu have to be here for the briefing we are getting from the clerk and our legal counsel as to what we as a committee might focus on? If not, maybe we can have an in camera session if we decide to go back in public tonight.
Senator Fraser: I am not really keen on getting any briefings until we have heard the evidence, chair.
Senator McCoy: That is right.
The Chair: The briefing would be in camera.
Senator Fraser: I understand that, but my understanding of a briefing would be influenced by my understanding of all of the evidence that we at that point would have heard.
Senator McCoy: We can always stay a little later tonight or be given the briefing in writing.
The Chair: The legal precedence we will need to focus on will not change because of the evidence.
Senator Batters: It would be a 15- or 20-minute cab ride at this time of the day. What about calling him right now to see if he could get here so we could start again at one o'clock and get half an hour in before the Senate recommences?
The Chair: We have to rise at 1:30.
Senator Batters: We did anticipate this meeting to be a half hour or 45 minutes long in our discussion yesterday.
Senator McCoy: The whole point is to have him here, senator.
Senator Batters: Yes, to have him here. From the airport, he could be here comfortably by one o'clock at this time of the day.
Senator Furey: From the airport?
Senator Batters: Yes; it is a 15- or 20-minute cab ride. I take it every week.
Senator Fraser: You had better tell him not to get on that plane.
Senator McCoy: Has that communication been made?
Senator Furey: Do any of the committee members have a problem with 6:45?
Senator Batters: Three people have to change flights again, so why not try to get half an hour in? Maybe that will do it.
Senator McCoy: They will not get a flight to Vancouver tonight.
The Chair: Will the Senate allow us to meet while they are doing Senators' Statements?
Senator Fraser: What about this evening? That is not a problem. It is a good suggestion from Senator Comeau. Let us adopt it.
The Chair: Does it have to be at 6:45? I see that other committees rise at 6:15. Maybe it could be at 6:15.
Senator Fraser: Usually the committee I sit on runs past 6:15.
Senator Furey: Let us meet at our regular sitting time of 6:45.
Senator McCoy: Is that here, then? Will we meet here?
Mr. Robert: I will send out another notice.
The Chair: Assume it will be here. If it is not, the clerk will send a notice.
Mr. Robert: I will send a notice in any case.
Senator McCoy: Good point.
Senator Comeau: Mr. Chair, it has been suggested that I made a good suggestion. I think most of us, including me, have to cancel what we had planned for this evening, but I am doing it for the sake of getting on with this thing. Eventually, one way or the other, it has to come to some conclusion. That is why I am cancelling whatever I had on tonight in order to be here.
The Chair: Are you making the motion for 6:45?
Senator Comeau: Yes.
The Chair: We have a motion that we now adjourn and reassemble at 6:45. All in favour?
Senator Furey: We have two motions on the floor, so just to be technical, let me withdraw mine and go to Senator Comeau's.
Senator McCoy: Yours is withdrawn. Are we voting on Senator Comeau's motion?
The Chair: Right.
All in favour of the 6:45 motion?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator White: On division.
The Chair: The committee will meet at 6:45 tonight.
(The committee adjourned.)