October 16,

2012 PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

COMMITTEE

The Committee met at 10:00 a.m. in the House of

Assembly Chamber.

CHAIR (Bennett): Good morning.

This is a meeting of the Public Accounts Committee of

the House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I am the Chair of the Committee, my name is Jim

Bennett. I welcome individuals here today from the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary, as well as from the Auditor General's office, committee members,

our staff individuals, and a new Page we have with us today. The individuals who

are here will introduce themselves. Everybody will introduce themselves.

The people who have come from the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary today are here of their own volition. Nobody has been subpoenaed.

They have been asked to come and provide some explanations, and they have done

so. All of these proceedings are recorded. Anything that is said at these

proceedings, nothing can be used against any individual, no evidence, the same

as would pertain to any privileged communications within any Legislature.

Generally with the questions, we start with an

Opposition member, who goes for ten minutes, then we will go to a government

member, then we will go to an Opposition member, and then we go to a government

member. The ten minutes is a rough time estimate and the individuals from the

committee will ask questions. When they have concluded, I generally ask

questions if there are any areas that seem not to have been completely covered.

Then committee members are invited to ask additional questions.

The Auditor General's staff are here. They assist us

and take

part in the proceeding. The witnesses are either sworn or affirmed, as

is their choice. I am going to ask individuals who are here to introduce

themselves, initially starting with the Vice Chair, Mr. Brazil. When we conclude

that we will swear the witnesses.

Mr. Brazil.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

David Brazil, I am the Vice Chair of the Committee,

and I represent the District of Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. S. COLLINS: Sandy Collins, I represent the

District of Terra Nova.

MR. K. PARSONS: Kevin Parsons, District of Cape

St. Francis.

MR. CROSS: I am Eli Cross. I am the MHA for

Bonavista North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Christopher Mitchelmore for the

District of The Straits White Bay North.

MR. PADDON: My name is Terry Paddon. I am the

Auditor General for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MS MARTIN: My name is Jayme Martin. I am an Audit

Senior with the Office of the Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MS RUSSELL: Sandra Russell, Deputy Auditor

General.

MR. HICKEY: Dave Hickey, Executive Director of

Support Services, RNC.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Alban Singleton, Deputy

Chief of Patrol Operations, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

MR. MACPHEE: Michael MacPhee, Audit Manager, RNC.

MS MURPHY: Elizabeth Murphy, Clerk Assistant and

Clerk of Committees.

MR. DROVER: Craig Drover, Researcher of the

Committees.

CHAIR: We have a new Page starting with us today,

Shelby Marshall. Thank you for joining us.

Ms Murphy will administer the oath. First, one of our

committee members, Mr. Joyce, is unable to be here today. He will have a

replacement from the Opposition this afternoon. We have a quorum, so we are

going to proceed in any event.

Swearing of Witnesses

Ms Martin

Mr. Hickey

Deputy Chief Singleton

Mr. MacPhee

CHAIR: Thank you.

Mr. Paddon and Ms Russell were previously sworn and

their oath carries over until today. Unless anybody has any questions, I will

start the questioning with Mr. Mitchelmore.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I would like to thank you so much

for being here today for the Public Accounts Committee hearing on the RNC

firearms.

I have some questions starting with the RNC response

on page 150 of the Auditor General's report which carries over into 151, which

in the response stated: "During operational and training exercises, the OC

canisters are often accidentally switched as one member simply picks a

canister." I am just wondering, why is this the protocol to allow such switching

of OC canisters instead of having a direct canister to a member so that they can

be properly tracked?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: On that point, with regard

to ongoing training. During training sessions members wear duty belts. Duty

belts carry, of course, all their applicable use of force equipment.

At times during training, there are times when members

inadvertently whether it is at the firearms cleaning station, they may have

their pepper spray laid down and another member may take it inadvertently. All

of the OC canisters are serial numbered, are tracked from our inventory system

and are considered part of the equipment that goes into their firearms storage

locker to ensure that it is safely controlled and inventoried.

During the firearms locker inspections, all serial

numbers are checked to ensure that any breaches or any issues of switching can

be identified; but it does occasionally happen, that during training exercise

members may inadvertently pick up the wrong canister.

MR. MITCHELMORE: With the serial number, is it a

long-digit number or are they just unique to the canister? Does each member with

the RNC, are they given a specific number that they can match to equipment?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, there is a unique

identifier on each canister, along with an expiration date. It is just that at

times they are inadvertently switched. As part of their use of force equipment,

each officer would have OC spray. It is just that in some cases they

inadvertently take the wrong canister or they are accidentally switched.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Right, okay.

If I picked up a canister would I be able to easily

identify, based on the serial number, that it is my canister or would it be

something that would have to be looked at? Would the digit be, say 134, and I am

member 134? So I know this is my canister, or is it just

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No, it would not be

identified by the officer's regimental number. It would be I think it is a

seven or eight-digit number on it. Depending on the age of the can, the use of

the can, sometimes the numbers are a bit difficult to read, but this is usually

found during the quarterly firearms locker inspections.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay.

I have some concerns about expired OC spray. Are these

logged into a system when they are purchased, who is using them and when the

expiry is, or is the onus on the member or the person who is responsible for

locker inspections to determine when cans are expired?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: They are logged into a

system and part of our inventory. At times, the expiration dates could be

checked during the quarterly. The member may notice it. It could be checked

during the quarterly locker inspections. When a member re-qualifies on the

range, their use of force equipment is again checked against our inventory

counts and the dates etc, but there are occasions when, I guess, the date will

lapse.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay.

I want to ask you about, in 3A Use of Force Training

Database, on page 151. It says, "The key here is, of course, that the training

was completed for these members. However, it was actually recorded twice in a

database and again on an Excel spreadsheet. The database is old software (access

97) and that is why we are now using a spreadsheet system as well."

I have some concerns that there is such duplication of

staff resource to enter information into an Excel spreadsheet. Access 97, what

is the barrier to not upgrade to a more present version of Access to meet your

needs?

MR. MACPHEE: After the report was released, we

looked at the database that was used. After discussions with the Use of Force

Training Unit we made the determination that the database was used primarily to

track the annual training activity by member. Therefore, we decided to stop

using the database. We would go to a simpler approach for the use of Force

Training Unit whereby we use training logs that are signed by the members

obtaining the training on a daily basis, or on the daily course offerings. They

sign it and then we enter it into a password and field protected spreadsheet.

That achieves the same objectives as what the database uses provided.

CHAIR: If I could interject.

Each time we change a speaker, if the speaker could

introduce yourself, because we will have a transcript and it is important to

know who is giving which evidence.

MR. MACPHEE: Sure. That was Michael MacPhee.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MR. MITCHELMORE: The concern I have with using an

Excel spreadsheet and I saw in the response that you are using more enhanced

security features such as password protection and protected cells. Who has

access to the spreadsheet? Do they require all of this information for doing

search ability to see who has training? Would there be some privacy implications

by using an Excel spreadsheet? Also, the fact that an Excel spreadsheet can

easily have data deleted or adjusted without proper tracking as to who is doing

the deleting and things like that.

MR. MACPHEE: The Use of Force Training Unit

sergeant is the individual who is in charge of populating the data into the

spreadsheet.

With respect to completeness of training and accuracy

of the database; we will be, on an ongoing basis, monitoring the completeness of

the training by taking it back to the source documents, which will be the

training logs. We will easily be able to detect any missing data that may have

inadvertently been taken out of a cell. It is the sergeant in charge of the Use

of Force Training Unit who will be the individual using it. There should not be

any privacy concerns either. He is the only one with access to it.

MR. MITCHELMORE: It seems like there was a

discrepancy in the Use of Force Training activity as to what the Auditor General

found and what the response was in terms of the number adjustment on page 152

stating there was 380 who received training, not 376, twelve not sixteen, et

cetera.

Can you further explain this discrepancy? Have these

people who have not received the training, finally received their training which

is required?

MR. MACPHEE: I am sorry, is this on 3B Use of

Force Training?

MR. MITCHELMORE: Yes, 3B.

CHAIR: I would like to note that the Committee has

been joined by Mr. Joyce, MHA for Bay of Islands.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: In a subsequent response,

of the 392 members requiring Module 1 training, 380, not 376, have now completed

the training. While twelve, not sixteen, had not yet completed the training.

At times when you are doing module training and

working with in excess of 400 members, there will be occasions when members for

different reasons cannot attend or receive training. Some members may be on

leave for various reasons. There will be occasions when some of the members will

not receive their Module 1 as per our scheduled module training with the four

modules. For different reasons there will be people, but I know our Use of Force

Unit tracks the training requirements and operational officers requiring

training will receive it.

MR. MITCHELMORE: My concern is where you are using

an Excel spreadsheet. Is there a mechanism to track those who are not using

how elaborate is the spreadsheet for date, time, and also looking at your

database for your management of weapons and inventory in the armoury?

Simple database management software should be able to

track and enter all of your OC spray, when the expiry is, and prompt that this

is expired and be able to get rid of it on that day. There should be no excuse

as to why officers could be putting the public at risk or themselves using

expired OC spray. I am just wondering about the usefulness of using the Excel

spreadsheet itself as the best practice versus proper database management

software.

MR. MACPHEE: There are two separate databases, if

you will, being used. There is one to track the training and then there is the

armoury inventory system which is the system which tracks OC spray and all other

use of force issued items.

There is a function within the armoury inventory

system which allows for expiration of dates to be inserted for OC spray. There

are some issues with respect to that module, which we are working with OCIO to

correct. It is important to note that on a quarterly basis we are looking and we

are assessing for expiration of OC spray. We do have a process in place

currently which will detect if a member is using an expired OC spray canister.

With respect to the training, the Excel spreadsheet

does track the training dates of the members, when they obtained the training,

what module was provided on that day to the members. Within the training

documentation procedures which we have developed, the sergeant in charge of the

Use of Force Training Unit is required as soon as practically possible to enter

the training dates into the spreadsheet to track it, so we can very quickly

assess who has not been trained before year-end.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Mr. Brazil, you have questions.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to welcome the Auditor General and his staff,

and Deputy Chief Singleton and his staff also. As deputy chief you may note that

the Auditor General made this as a concern. When we reviewed it, it is a bit

different than the norm of what we deal with because we normally deal with

direct financial costs and issues around control and those types of areas.

Because of the perception here when you talk about

inventory accountability and particularly around firearms and ammunition, these

types of things, there is a different perception if we have to make sure that

the accountability is there. The questions that we are going to put forth will

be about particularly, from my perspective, the accountability. After reviewing

the responses, I am satisfied that if everything here is implemented as

outlined, then the accountability issue should be covered off fairly easily and

very professionally.

What I do ask, if you could take me through the

process, because I have gone through them in-depth, what the Auditor General had

outlined and your responses. Just take me through the process of how you decided

how you move forward on the armoury inventory procedure and the training

documentation procedure. I know it is a new implementation, when you reassessed

it. I would like to be clear on how you got to that point, who you engaged as

part of that process to identify the issues about the inventory procedures.

MR. MACPHEE: I started with the RNC on January 3.

One of the first tasks was to read the Auditor General's report and get

acquainted with the system, the findings and the issues, and then go and

basically determine the processes involved in inventory tracking of use of force

equipment.

I was in charge of developing a description of the

system and then assessing where there is improvement for internal controls to

come in and rectify some of the issues. There were controls that were operating

effectively beforehand, it is just the armoury inventory procedures, the

objectives are specified in the response, but it is to provide a better property

accountability of the use of force equipment that the RNC possess and track. So,

it was really achieved by talking to the Use of Force Training Unit who are

really knowledgeable in inventory management and know what is under their

control.

Finding of the issues, it is a system and there were

some quirks to it, so we developed the armoury inventory procedures to add that

additional guidance in the event that if a member left, a new member could come

in and pick it up and become an inventory management professional and easily

account for the property. From that, detailed armoury inventory procedures have

been developed. They are still in draft form because we are fixing some of the

issues in the system to improve them, but they will be rolled out in the very,

very near future.

The armoury inventory procedures cover different

phases of inventory control from acquisition, how to record armoury at the front

end, what you need to do when you transfer because that was an issue, the

timeliness of inventory transfers so we have developed detailed procedures on

inventory transfers which will rectify lots of the findings that were identified

in the report.

We have also centralized the recording function to the

inventory communications co-ordinator for the RNC. A centralized system of

recording will allow us to definitely prevent some of the timeliness issues in

terms of recording transfers.

Then we also developed procedures on quarterly armoury

counts. Armoury counts have never been part of our formal policy, but we have

been certainly conducting them for a number of years now, and so looking at best

practices in other areas, specifically looking at GAO reports from the United

States and looking at the procedures that other federal jurisdictions in the

United States use to conduct armoury counts, we built those into our armoury

inventory procedures as well.

MR. BRAZIL: Just so I am clear, who monitors this

process? Is this at the constable level, is at the civilian employee level, is

it at the officers' level, or is it all-inclusive for the training for

everybody?

MR. MACPHEE: The Use of Force Training Unit and

the inventory communications co-ordinator, they drive the recording function and

the armoury count function within the system. The inspections officer, a newly

appointed member since January 2012, is the individual who oversees the actual

firearms locker inspection process.

MR. BRAZIL: Am I reading in some of the responses,

part of it was not having the resources, as you put the process in place, to

really identify and deal with some of the issues that the Auditor General had

put in place. Was it a resource thing as you were moving forward as one of the

concerns?

MR. HICKEY: I am just going to add, that we have

added two additional positions. We filled Mike's position as the Audit Manager

in January. That had been vacant for a while. Of course, he will be doing the

next firearms audit as well.

Also, we added, as Deputy Chief Singleton said, the

inspections position. We have assigned a full-time sergeant within the RNC to

the inspections role. Those are two key additional resources that were not in

place at the time of the audit.

MR. BRAZIL: Okay. So there are additional

resources there to identify that?

CHAIR: Deputy Chief.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Also on that, as part of

the response to the Auditor General's report we did certainly see a need for a

manager in audits and compliance, and we identified at the executive level the

need to have an inspections officer.

The inspections officer will carry out the quarterly

inspections. In each region we have a person who assists him, the sergeant, in

co-ordinating this. Of course, the sergeant has other roles besides the

firearms. Those are issues around dress and deportment, and assisting with

establishing policies and procedures in other areas. The inspection officer

works very closely with our audit manager on such issues around our firearms

policies and is involved in the drafting of the policies in this regard.

Also, we centralized, as Mr. MacPhee says, the data

entry into one person working from the paper backup to ensure the data integrity

is more effective.

MR. BRAZIL: Okay, perfect.

I know some of these things are already in place. Some

are in the design process. Some are actually ready to be implemented. What is

your time frame for being able to address all the issues outlined here?

MR. MACPHEE: The armoury

inventory procedures will be rolled out in the very near future, within a month

or so. We are working with OCIO now to fix some of the system issues. Once those

are done we will have to go back and re-jig a little bit of the armoury

inventory procedures for the system changes. Then we will be rolling them out.

It is key to note, we currently possess internal controls that will detect

discrepancies in our inventory right now as well.

CHAIR: That response was provided by Mr. MacPhee.

MR. BRAZIL: Okay, perfect.

One last comment here; it has been noted that Labrador

and Corner Brook seem to have some other issues relevant to this. As I know, the

RNC is expanding on a daily basis to meet the needs in various areas.

Is it the old clich: outside of the main headquarters

it is a lot harder to monitor or identify resources? I know you have outlined

how you are going to draft those, but just for a part of the history process.

Why was it that the reporting process is a little bit more delayed before it

gets to the headquarters?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No, it was certainly

something that was identified in the Auditor General's report. We have been

proactive in identifying a regional officer in each area who will be responsible

for our firearms inventory.

There were issues around we do have a lot of

transition in and out of these areas at times with transfers and members moving.

We have been proactive in that. Even when members are being transferred, they

are advised in personnel orders about the transfer of their firearm, to turn it

in here and it would be shipped to the other region.

In addition to that, since coming on staff Mr. MacPhee

has visited both Labrador and Corner Brook to look at our armoury inventory and

the way we operate, so that it will be more congruent with what is happening on

the Northeast Avalon. We will not have this outside of St. John's or the

Northeast Avalon different ways of operating.

The Use of Force Unit is engaged on a daily or weekly

basis with the officers in each region to co-ordinate training and other issues

around inventories. Right now, I believe a lot of the issues that may have been

there have been addressed in the last six, seven months.

MR. BRAZIL: Perfect.

Mr. Chair, with that being said, I am satisfied with

the responses by the witnesses. At this point I have no other questions. I will

turn it back to one of the Opposition members.

CHAIR: Mr. Joyce.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you.

First of all, I apologize for being a few minutes

late. I caught a flight in this morning from Corner Brook. I apologize for being

a few minutes late. Also, I thank the Auditor General and his staff for being

here, and the people from the RNC.

When we are discussing the RNC, I think it is more for

the public confidence to have it on record that things are being taken seriously

of the Auditor General's report and the recommendations. That the Constabulary

are responding to the recommendations to ensure the public there are no bullets

out there or guns out there that no one could find or they are out on the street

somewhere.

In the Auditor General's report he mentioned from 1999

to 2006. I was on the last hearings the Public Accounts had with the RNC and

some of the same things are still arising. I will just speak for a minute. At

that time everything was accounted for. It was more administration than actual

guns missing or bullets missing, or anything of that nature. I just want to make

that clear from back in the 2000s when we did the Public Account meetings, that

everything was accounted for. It was more administration than anything.

They mentioned from 1999 to 2006, is there a big

change in the procedures before the new Auditor was hired from back in 2000

to the present Auditor General's report when they went back, I think six years

after? Were there any changes implemented internally?

MR. HICKEY: I will just mention that Mike is not

the first occupant of our audit manager position.

MR. JOYCE: Yes.

MR. HICKEY: We had a previous Audit Manager, Pam

Healey. We had a bit of a gap there between the time that she left and we hired

Mike. She did introduce a lot of procedures and so on that we are still

following today. We are just trying to make improvements based on what the

Auditor General has identified in this latest report.

Mike has been working hard, particularly on these

procedures. We do not have copies of them here today but they are very detailed

audit implementation procedures. They will be implemented, as he said, in the

next month or so.

MR. JOYCE: Yes. We can go through each one. For

example, "Based on the results of inventory counts, we concluded that the

officials at the Corner Brook and Labrador West armories could not account for

all of the items under their control."

After the Auditor General's report was brought up

and, of course, I am assuming there was an internal review was everything

accounted for at a later date?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No. Our subsequent

follow-up on that, there is no indication there was anything missing from these

locations. I think there were some errors, but there were no inventory items

missing.

Mr. MacPhee just reminded me, there may have been one

baton when a member retired that was not recovered or turned in. The thing is,

Mr. Joyce, as alluded to in an earlier report or just from our follow-ups, there

are no firearms missing. We take it very seriously, the inventory control of our

equipment, plus our training with regard to firearms and other types of use of

force.

MR. JOYCE: Yes, and I just want to get that on

record for the public, there was never any guns missing or ammunition missing.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No.

MR. JOYCE: I am going on memory now. I see in the

report where some of the guns were in people's individual lockers, not stored in

the safe places where they were supposed to be.

From my recollection, and you can correct me, I just

ask again: Some of the members may be out on long duties and need extra time or

they had to work a lot of overtime, so tiredness or whatever, and they just put

it in their locker instead of in the safe areas where they were supposed to be

placed. Can you just explain that?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: There have been occasions,

sir, where members have placed their use of force equipment in their personal

lockers in the dressing room. The procedure is: When an officer comes off duty,

they go to the firearm storage locker, take out their firearm, ammunition,

pepper spray, and put it into a locked compartment and then they change in the

change room.

Some members have, on occasion, as referenced, for

some reason or another went and placed their duty belt in their locker with

their use of force equipment in it, but the locker itself is locked. So it is

still in a locked, secure location. It is just that it is not the one that we,

the RNC, identify as being our designated storage compartment for their use of

force equipment.

MR. JOYCE: Again, I just want it for the record.

At no time was it in an unsafe area that was not under lock and key, and that

the member himself placed it in his own locker under his own lock and key.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, and at no time were

other employees, staff, or the public at any type of risk.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you for that.

The other thing that was brought up again I am going

back in the 2000s was the ammunition. I guess it is probably during training,

a lot of the ammunition is not accounted for, do not mark it off the inventory

sheet can you explain that?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: There were occasions, sir,

where through training at the time and you are going back ten, twelve years

ago where we had firearm safety officers conducting Use of Force Training and

we had several of them and there were times when ammunition was used for

training and may not have been properly recorded.

I think a lot of that has been reconciled through the

establishment in 2009 of the Use of Force Unit, because at that time we saw the

need, one, to have centralized control over our training and policy development.

I believe it was July 2009, it was recommended to the chief of the day to

establish a Use of Force Unit, which is operating today. Some of these controls

that were identified or issues around inventory counts identified by the Auditor

General, I think they have been addressed through the work of Mr. MacPhee and

working with the Use of Force Unit and by centralizing our training in one, but

also educating our members over the importance of inventory control.

MR. JOYCE: Yes. In the report it was mentioned,

"We also found that quarterly firearm storage locker inspections were not being

conducted as required...". Has that been taken care of now?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir, that was a

concern. It was whether or not they were conducted, or records that were

conducted were an issue identified by the Auditor General's office. We have

taken, I believe, a proactive approach in that. One of those duties was assigned

to our inspections officer. To add support or some authority to the position, we

made it a supervisory rank. The inspection officer reports to the Office of the

Chief of Police. The person he currently serving in that position does not

report to a

section or a unit, they report to our office.

All the reports completed on a quarterly basis are

sent to my office. They are reviewed and quite often any issues or, say,

suggestions, I will convene a meeting between myself and Mr. MacPhee and our

inspections officer to aid us in policy development.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

Just a few more, I know my time is almost up, Mr.

Chair. In the report it stated that while each locker has a key, there have

never been controls in place that would have prevented the duplication of keys

and/or ensured the returning of keys when a locker has changed. Has that been

also looked at whereby you may change a locker and you may be able to duplicate

the keys?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: It is not so much that

keys can be duplicated but, at times, when you are buying several hundred

lockers, one key may fit another locker.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: These lockers are not out

in a hallway; these lockers are behind a secure door that is coded. We have

taken steps, sir, in that regard. I know in some detachments we are looking at

the replacement of lockers. With our current setup, where our headquarters

building is being redeveloped, we have members displaced at different offices.

The lockers that we have purchased have the cam lock, which is a more secure

locking system, and we are working with the consultants on the redevelopment of

headquarters with regard to the acquisition of new lockers for our new

headquarters building, which we hope to be in next year.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Joyce.

Mr. Collins.

MR. JOYCE: I will ask just one more just very

quick on this, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Okay, go ahead.

MR. JOYCE: I just want it for the record, also.

Even with mention in the Auditor General's report and I know it has been

rectified, but there has never been an incident where the duplication of a key

has caused any problems with anything missing or anything.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No, sir. A subsequent

inspection would locate that officer A had the firearm for officer B or

something like that, but there is no firearm or ammunition or pepper spray

missing.

MR. JOYCE: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Mr. Collins.

MR. S. COLLINS: Thank you.

Continuing on the same train of thought as my

colleague with regard to locker inspections, can you explain the process? In

amongst that I know we have been talking about quarterly checks, I am just

wondering: Is there any randomness to the checks, and if you could just walk us

through the process of what a locker check would look like and how it would be

conducted?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: There is no announcement

saying on October 17, the lockers are going to be inspected. Sergeant O'Reilly,

on a quarterly basis, will conduct an inspection of the firearms locker. He will

go to the locker room. He will have the inventory sheets with regard to, for

example, what firearm and OC spray is assigned to each individual officer. Each

individual officer would be assigned so many rounds of ammunition. You have your

firearm clips, your magazines, and your ammunition to use in your firearm, and

you have your OC spray.

So, the officer, say, on the Northeast Avalon will go

to each detachment or each building in the districts which has a locker

inspection. Locker one, for example, if it was mine, Deputy Chief Singleton

should have this firearm, should have this amount of ammunition and this pepper

spray. They will go through and you will hit lockers that have nothing in it,

there are empty, so then he will check the daily duty rosters and say, okay,

this particular constable is working, so there is a reason for.

Not only is he checking the lockers for the

inventoried equipment, he is also checking the firearms for safe storage. These

are semi-automatic weapons. So he takes it out and the magazine is still in the

firearm then he will render the firearm safe, he will note in his report, and

there is a subsequent follow-up identifying that it is a breach of our policy to

store a firearm loaded.

He will identify those breaches or follow up on: The

member is not working and their firearm is not there, why? Then we find out, as

in earlier question I believe from Mr. Joyce, that the firearm may be stored in

their locker, they got a call during work for some issue or something outside of

work, and they inadvertently put it in their personal locker, locked. There is

follow up to this.

In addition to firearm locker inspections, there are

also actually personal inspections conducted, I believe, biannually. Each member

has to appear in uniform with their use of force equipment so that you know they

have their handcuffs, soft body armour. All use of force equipment is also

checked when members attend at a firing range to complete firearms training.

This is another opportunity. In addition, say, to a person's firearms locker

being inspected four times a year, their equipment is also inspected during

personnel inspections and when they attend for firearms training.

MR. S. COLLINS: Thank you.

In the rare event, I guess it would be, where you find

non-compliance by officers not having things stored properly, whatever the case

may be, or not having it stored on site, walk us through the process then. How

is non-compliance issues addressed within the ranks?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Any breaches or potential

breaches of our policy are reported up the line to me. I know from my own

experience, being assigned to professional standards, that we conduct internal

investigations where members are disciplined internally for breaches. The

discipline will correspond with the breach. If it is a minor breach, it may be a

verbal reprimand or a written reprimand, up to where we have had members

suspended, depending on the type of breach of our regulations.

MR. S. COLLINS: Okay, fair enough.

Not to belabour much of what has already been said, I

just have another question. It is not really random, as such, but it kind of

follows up on what one of my colleagues had asked earlier with regard to the

spray and the expiry dates and those types of things.

How does it work with firearms, the life cycle of the

firearm? How is it decommissioned? How is it safety checked, those types of

things?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: If a member has a firearm

issued, say they dropped their firearm or something happens to it, it gets wet,

then they would report that to the Use of Force Unit. The Use of Force Unit,

when annual qualifications are done, the members actually inspect the firearms

to make sure that the firearms in addition to being trainers, these people are

also armourers. They can service the revolvers.

We had people from SIG Sauer down in the United States

come here to St. John's and train our members to be armourers so that they can

do most of the maintenance on all the firearms. The firearms do have a life

cycle that after so many years and depending on the usage. Some members are

front-line operational, they are working the full year,

whereas other members

may not get the same amount of usage and wear and tear.

The firearms do go through a scheduled inspection to

ensure it is working properly. You have sliding mechanisms and things that you

need to ensure that the equipment is functioning. It is a major officer safety

issue.

MR. S. COLLINS: Okay, thank you.

That is everything.

CHAIR: Mr. Mitchelmore.

MR. MITCHELMORE: It certainly seems, from the

information that is already provided, that having the role of an audit manager

is vital to ensuring proper inventory management and keeping the information up

to date, because it was reported there were significant backlogs of being able

to enter data into systems and things like that.

I am wondering, at this point, has the backlog of data

been adjusted? Has everything been entered into the system? Are you still

working through a backlog of data?

MR. MACPHEE: There is no backlog in the data. The

armoury inventory system is updated. It is not a perpetual system. We are

reliant on updating it with our source documents, that being stock sheets, but

they are updated and any discrepancies identified quarterly and those issues are

adjusted for.

With respect to the Use of Force Training Database,

there is no backlog as well. The documentation procedures require the Use of

Force Unit to, in a very timely fashion, enter that data.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay.

On page 129 of the Auditor General's report, stock

slips not being used. Are you still using paper stock slips, and have you done

an education process around members to ensure they are reporting and completing

stock slips appropriately to match up inventory?

MR. MACPHEE: Yes, we still are using manual stock

slips. The process is in a little bit of change whereby, again, the inventory

communications co-ordinator in the Northeast Avalon region will enter all that.

They will actually electronically scan these stock slips to her, and then we

will marry it up with the paper copy when it comes into the headquarters.

The members, through the armoury inventory procedures,

details the usage of stock slips for all movements of inventory. Inventory does

not move unless there is a stock slip prepared for it. Again, it will get

identified when we reconcile our armoury inventory on a quarterly basis, and we

currently do that.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay, right.

That is what I was getting at, is to confirm. It seems

very positive that you are centralizing the service, that you have dedicated

staff to be able to make sure that it is up to date. I wanted to make sure there

was compliance to do that check, to make sure that things are matching up

because on page 129 it seemed like there needed to be adjustments.

How is the system of our inventories adjusted? Are

there special notes to account for any errors or missing ammunitions or things

that are disposed of, because ultimately, no system can be perfect? There would

have to be some pieces that are going to get lost or missing or whatnot at some

point.

MR. MACPHEE: The system is reconciled quarterly.

We have quarterly armoury count sheets that will identify the system quantity.

Compare that to the count quantity, and if there is a discrepancy there is an

explanation field, and there has to be a reasonable explanation put in. A good

explanation would be: we used additional rounds on the range and here is the

stock sheet number to recognize the adjustment in the inventory balance.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay.

There were a number of instances, or a few at least,

noted in the report around the transfer. Members had transferred from the

Northeast Avalon to Lab West, to Corner Brook, visa versa, where the firearms

were not being updated accordingly. They were being listed elsewhere. You had

noted that now it is centralized, that for the transfer they have to turn in

their weapon and it would be shipped. Was the process different otherwise?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: The process may have been

different, and also there may have been some issues around the recording of the

actual transfer or the effective transfer. A member leaves St. John's on

September 1 and arrives in Labrador City on September 5, they are reporting on a

Saturday. They start their shift and the person at the time may not have

recorded the fact that they even reported or recorded that the equipment was in

St. John's.

What we do now is in announcements we call them

personnel orders when transferring staff that it is written into them. They

are told during transfer meetings, they are directed to turn in their use of

force equipment at their local, regional, whether it is the Northeast Avalon,

Corner Brook or Labrador West and then have it reassigned in the new location,

to put tighter controls on it because it was a finding of the Auditor General

and it was an issue for us. I think that some of the new policies and procedures

put in place have addressed those.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I would like to know why firearms

are transferred from sites. If there are similar firearms being used, is there

an attachment based on the officer?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: They may very well

transfer the firearm or they may very well issue a new firearm in that

detachment. It is only a matter of having sufficient inventory in place in the

receiving. Having the same firearm, you can track the usage of it and the

ownership of the firearm during an officer then if there is an issue with the

firearm you know where it is.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay.

I am looking at the composition of firearms, the type,

the handguns, shotguns, rifles and location. Is there anything specific as to

why there are so many handguns, shotguns, for example, no rifles at the Corner

Brook office? Is there a particular reason for this? That is on page 123 of the

Auditor General's report.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: With regard to the

allotment of firearms, some of the firearms, handguns, would be assigned due to

the size of each region the Northeast Avalon being the larger, followed by

Corner Brook and Labrador West. In Labrador West we have two detachments; one in

Labrador City and the other one in Churchill Falls. There are shotguns in all

locations, and these are usually used for operational reasons or are usually

used when we are requested to dispose of an animal.

You mentioned about Corner Brook having no rifles.

Rifles primarily, for the RNC it is not primary, but rifles for the RNC are

used by our tactical rescue unit. For operational reasons, there are none in

Corner Brook right now I am just looking at the numbers. In Labrador there may

be a need to have those, as opposed to in Corner Brook.

From an operational perspective, in the event we had

an incident where special services were required, such as our tactical rescue

unit, we would send them from the Northeast Avalon.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay. Thank you for that

clarification and information.

The locker piece, it seems that the RNC is moving

forward in using technology, the swipe cards and using separate passwords, in

your response, and that is moving forward. Is that moving forward on all

locations, or just the Northeast Avalon here?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: We are looking at new

technology, especially in the headquarters building, and we are working with the

consultants on that. In the other locations we are looking at the acquisition of

new firearms storage lockers and ways to enhance the security around the whole

issue around firearms storage and our firearms storage lockers.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I guess it would be no different

than a corporation when you are looking at the financial piece of somebody

signing the cheque and somebody keeping the books (inaudible)

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: It is a big financial

burden or cost to completely replace. When a consultant comes back and says this

is what it is going to cost you, then that will be a factor that we would have

to consider and is there a happy medium that we can go to, to ensure, one, that

everything is properly stored and, two, do we have control or ways of monitoring

the firearm storage area.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Right.

If you did implement a pass code and a swipe card, you

would not want one individual having access to the master swipe code and all the

master passwords, in one sense; there would have to be that security piece as

well.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, in any password or

electronic password swipe card, it is usually controlled. You have a person

behind the scenes in your OCIO who designates the carding and recording of it so

that not only does the system allow you to indicate that this card is for this

door but some systems will also show you that there was a false attempt or an

attempt by an unauthorized card to enter a certain door. With technology, the

sky is the limit.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Yes.

I am wondering if the

CHAIR: Is this the same subject?

MR. MITCHELMORE: Is it the same subject, just one

quick question.

CHAIR: Okay (inaudible)

MR. MITCHELMORE: If the RNC would be looking at

using Radio-Frequency Identification technology, the RFID, where you basically

scan what would be a barcode or a serial number and can track the equipment,

whether it be a firearm or whether it be OC spray or whatnot, knowing where its

inventory is at all places. There is a company, Cathexis, here in the Province

that deals with that technology.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: We have discussed barcodes

in other areas, such as in our property control center. Adding a barcode to a

firearm may be problematic in it is something that is handled daily, it is

exposed to the elements, and you would have to be very careful about the

placement of anything that may render it unsafe or inoperable.

With regard to barcodes for firearms, it is not

something we have discussed to date.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay, thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons.

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you very much.

I just have a couple of questions that I would like to

ask this morning. First of all, just to follow up there, when you talked about

training the members, there were some members who were not trained because of

activities that they were involved in, whether they were off on leave or

whatever. What procedures are in place to ensure that all members do get

trained? If there is somebody who is off, on special assignment or whatever, is

there something in place to make sure that everybody at the end of to year, do

you have to have

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir, when it comes to

training, the training for me, or any other member to attend at the range to

re-qualify, it is not left to the member to say: Oh, I have to go down this year

and re-qualify. Our Use of Force Unit has the records and they are very

proactive in getting members down to the range. You will receive an e-mail: On

this date, you are required on the range to re-qualify.

Some members, when they are off for extended periods,

maternity leave, long-term, sick or other reasons, quite often their use of

force equipment is removed from their locker so that they cannot go operational

unless the person attends training. We have had that in the past.

There is follow-up on it. The Use of Force Unit is

proactive in identifying members who need to be trained.

MR. K. PARSONS: Is there a time frame, like, you

have to be at a certain level each year?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Annual.

MR. K. PARSONS: Annual?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes.

MR. K. PARSONS: Okay.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: There is an annual

recertification and then there are different modules. There are four modules in

our Use of Force, so every year it is Module 1, which is firearms, and then

every other year is another module. It is like it is one and two, one and three,

one and four, so there is a cycle that the Use of Force Unit works through in

training, but the firearms is yearly.

MR. K. PARSONS: Okay.

I am very proud actually of the RNC. I think you are

doing a great job. I look at our new recruits who are coming on stream on a

regular basis. I am just wondering because you see a lot of them around town,

they are younger individuals is there a certain procedure in place for the

newer members of RNC, say, for training versus a gentleman who has been there

for twenty years? What are the procedures in place?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: The RNC, in 2004, started

the Police Studies Program, which is a partnership with Memorial University. At

that time the RNC took on not only running a police service, but they also took

on running a police academy. As part of the cadet training program under the

Police Studies Program, there is a fairly extensive use of force training, which

begins early in the program and runs all year because this is an

eleven-and-a-half month program. It starts when the university opens and it runs

till the end of August next year, so it is almost a complete year.

The training portion, the first two semesters, the

fall and winter semester at Memorial University, is co-ordinated that there are

no university classes on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Those days are used by the

training

section to give different training, but incorporated in that training

is our use of force training, the different tactics, and firearms are part of

the training.

So, they receive a comprehensive training program

during their initial year, and they have to pass in order to graduate, they

have to meet all of their training requirements for use of force, and our other

required training areas. Once they graduate, they enter then into our annual

requalification process.

MR. K. PARSONS: Okay.

Just another little thing, your new headquarters, the

renovations done on your new headquarters can you tell us anything new that

will happen to enhance training or with the inventory or security? What are the

new renovations down there going to mean to

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: On the headquarters

redevelopment, one thing is that we hope to be in it by 2013 early. There is a

new firing range in it. Of course, that is one of the things right now we do not

have, is access to our old range. There is a new range; we are working with the

consultants with regard to the firearms storage. There are different camera

systems going to be installed in the building, and the whole issue around access

keys are an issue, and I know under Mr. Hickey's shop

MR. HICKEY: Just to expand a little more,

basically we have two buildings on Parade Street. We have the headquarters

building and what we call the Annex Building, which is the former Fisheries

College. So, the project is being done in several phases. The headquarters

building should be ready to be moved into next spring, and that is going to

triple the size of our offices there in the headquarters building, provide a lot

more opportunities for improvement of service.

The Annex Building, which is the former Fisheries

College, or former Memorial College, that building is going to undergo a total

renovation as well, but the tender has not been called for that yet. So, by

probably late 2014, that will become sort of a training institute. There will be

training made available to not just the RNC, but to Fish and Wildlife,

Corrections, and other parts of government as well. That facility will include

other features. The training will be located over in the Annex Building. Right

now we have it located at the School for the Deaf on Topsail Road.

MR. K. PARSONS: Okay. I just have one more

question.

I am just looking at best practices in other

jurisdictions. Do you follow up with other jurisdictions on best practices and

how they do theirs? Can you explain what you do to ensure that you are getting

best practices that are in other jurisdictions?

MR. HICKEY: There has been no formal reach out to

other jurisdictions in Canada, but I have been doing a lot of investigation into

best practices in other areas, and doing research on-line and reading up on

inventory control procedures in other law enforcement jurisdictions and other

areas, and making sure that is something that can be built into our processes.

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you very much. That is good

for me, Mr. Chair.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Joyce.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you again.

I will just ask the Auditor General: Do you feel that

the recommendations that you made and I am sure they are that the

Constabulary are following up on the recommendations and putting the safeguards

and the audits in place?

MR. PADDON: The responses that the RNC provided to

your questions from the summer, I have not had a chance to look at; they were

just provided today, so I cannot really comment on that. So I will just flavour

my comments based on what I have heard here this morning.

If I categorize the recommendations, perhaps, they

fall into a number of categories. One would be around documentation, record

keeping, and those sorts of things. Then there would be issues around physical

control of use of force equipment, and then compliance with policy; so three

distinct areas, shall I say.

The hiring of Mr. MacPhee into the position in

January, I would suggest, is a fairly positive step in terms of ensuring that,

one, the record keeping documentation side of it will be improved, and we will

follow up on our recommendations after a two-year period. We give the RNC an

opportunity to put new procedures that they feel are warranted in place. So, we

will follow up in 2014 to see what has been done, and we will report on that in

In terms of physical control, those sorts of things, I

think the procedures that have been talked about here in terms of the quarterly

inspections, those sorts of things, are the things that you would expect to

ensure that issues around physical control of equipment is working properly and

in compliance with procedures.

In terms of compliance with policy, it is really

difficult to say. You tend to have more human error, I suppose, when it comes to

policy issues. It really will depend on what we see in 2014 as to how that is

happening.

As a general comment, I would suggest that based on

what I have heard today and the comments from the representatives from the RNC,

I would expect that you would see some improvement along the areas that we have

looked at.

MR. JOYCE: In your review with the RNC and

again, I just want it for the record, and I know Deputy Chief Singleton already

said it there were no findings that there was ever a gun that no one could

ever find or locate or may be it is stored in someone's locker because they may

have been working twenty-four hours straight because of some emergency, but

there was never any incident that you found in your report.

MR. PADDON: Just to correct you, that it was not

my report, because this was the report of my predecessor, Wayne Loveys. My

understanding is that you are correct, and the deputy chief is correct.

Subsequently, all items were either located or the record keeping was brought

up-to-date. I will just ask my two colleagues if that was the case so yes,

they confirm that is the case.

MR. JOYCE: Just so we can have it on the record

and in the public. There was never, at any time, or in any of these instances

that it was more bookkeeping, that any of the general public was ever in any

safety or any concern for the general public. It was always a more procedural

thing and not a major issue for any of the general public with the equipment for

the RNC?

MR. PADDON: Yes, I think that would be a fair

comment, Mr. Joyce.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

My last question: Do you feel confident now that some

of the recommendations that the Auditor General has put forth can be implemented

by the RNC and steps and we all know human error; sometimes someone who is

tired may put something in their locker. I mean, that is human nature the

majority. Do you feel confident now that things are moving forward to ensure the

compliance of the regulations?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir, I feel very

confident with our follow-up from the Auditor General's report, and they did

identify some issues and concerns, as the Auditor General has stated. I think

that we have been proactive over the last several years, especially in the last

year, with the replacing or filling our audit manager position, and with the

creation of the inspections officer position, because that was part and parcel

to address some of the issues in the Auditor General's report, and also to

address some internal issues just around dress and deportment, but it is a

position that I feel is very important.

I do believe that what we are doing will address the

concerns that have been expressed in the past by the Auditor General. I feel

comfortable that we will be able to prove that in the timing of their next

visit.

MR. JOYCE: I will ask a personal question. Going

back in early 2000, do you feel that it helps and is beneficial to have the

Auditor General come in to review your own procedures and protocols just to see

where you can make improvements?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: When people say they are

having a visit from the Auditor General's office there are some stressors to it,

but it does allow that transparency or the objectivity of having someone come

in.

Since me taking on this position and working with our

past audit manager and our current audit manager, they bring a different

perspective to the organization. The skill sets that we have in our civilian

staff to look at things from a non-policing role but from an accountability

role, visits by the Auditor General certainly serves a great purpose.

MR. JOYCE: I will make a comment, Mr. Chair, and I

will clue up for now.

I think you do a great job, by the way. You are like

the fire department, no one ever wants to call you but when you do get a call we

know you are there.

On a personal note, I would like for you to pass on to

the Corner Brook detachment because I know the work they do out in Corner

Brook and on the West Coast, and I know they are heavily involved in the

community on the West Coast also. I know they do a great job because I know some

of the work they do and some of the people involved personally. Will you pass on

my best regards and thank you to the West Coast detachment office?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Thank you, sir.

I will certainly pass that on. I expect to be visiting

our Corner Brook region in, hopefully, November or early December.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Cross.

MR. CROSS: I guess none of us have really followed

through the report. We have been bouncing all over the place. I have a couple of

places where there are probably a couple of unanswered questions or comments

that I want to make. Then, maybe it might generate a response.

I am looking on page 151. I am reading the underlined

or the bold

section there. It says, "we feel the security is strong since they

are in locked steel boxes only accessible by our officers and monitored by a

security camera inside a locked room inside a secure building. Therefore, the

public is not at risk."

I think that message has been portrayed through most

of what we said this morning, that at no time has the public ever been at risk

or any other things. Is it such that because it seems like such a safe

environment it is locked, they are inside, there are cameras, it is monitored

that sometimes you act differently because you feel safe and you feel like it

is there?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: The firearms locker is

behind a locked door. The area of the building is restricted in that the public

do not have access to begin with, and anyone in that area of the building would

have to be under escort.

The thing is we tried through policy and through

inspections to have officers what I take that you are looking at is

complacency, and that officers not become complacent. This is a very important

piece of equipment for our officers and it is also a very dangerous piece of

equipment. There are procedures we follow in loading and unloading firearms.

That is why we do the inspections, to get away from,

hopefully, that officers do not become complacent around this. I think that

through our policies and inspections this is being addressed.

MR. CROSS: Okay.

I think we have some clarification and some

reassurance that like page 133 here, the inspections that we could not find

the records of, even though we assume the inspections were done through all

levels, the Northeast Avalon, Corner Brook and Labrador, that this will not

repeat itself obviously.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No.

MR. CROSS: The checks and balances are in place.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, and that

recommendation or that finding would have been one of the reasons why we created

the inspections officer position and tasked them with the quarterly firearms

inspections and also had the position report to the Office of the Chief of

Police, which I deal directly with the inspections officer. There is a good line

of communication there on any issues or policy development.

MR. CROSS: Okay.

I feel the types of questions we have been asking here

this morning through all levels of government and the Opposition and Third Party

have been in sync with each other, and I appreciate the frankness of your

responses. Many of the questions asked covered things that I would have noted. I

will not belabour the time by continuing with questions again.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Thank you.

MR. CROSS: Again, thank you for your frankness and

openness.

CHAIR: Mr. Mitchelmore.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I would just like to say that we

are certainly living in an information world and good control of data and

reporting is essential. We are seeing that the RNC has made significant progress

in looking at how it is reporting documentation. I see a lot of this probably

came about during a period of time, during 2007 onward, when there were no

internal firearm audits done, or that is what the Auditor General reported.

It says that these reports are supposed to be sent to

the Department of Justice annually. Did the Department of Justice there is not

a representative here but is some onus of the responsibility on them to ask for

the report if they did not receive it for consecutive years? Would that be

typical policy? I would ask the Auditor General or somebody at the RNC. How

would this process normally be?

MR. PADDON: It is difficult for me to answer that

question. It is probably more appropriate perhaps for someone from the RNC or

from the Department of Justice to answer it. Generally, if there was a

requirement to do something, yes, somewhere along the way you would expect to

see some element to follow-up for sure.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Does the RNC have a response to

that?

CHAIR: I think that issue comes up on page 123 and

it comes up again on 145. In the middle of page 123 it says, "In November 2007,

the Department of Justice confirmed that the annual firearms audit, being

conducted internally at that time by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, was

acceptable to the Minister. As a result, the Office agreed to cease the annual

review of firearms at the RNC."

MR. MITCHELMORE: Yes, and then it was to be done

internally, but a report was still to be submitted to the Department of Justice.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: This is something that we

are aware of I guess on an annual basis that we need to identify any issues

around the firearms itself to the department.

MR. MITCHELMORE: My concern is more so the

communication. We have seen with staff changeovers and positions being unfilled,

how it could relate to some problems with things not being communicated. I am

not sure, I guess the question would be best asked to someone at the Department

of Justice as to: Was the person responsible? Did they meet their requirements,

or did they change positions or something along those lines? I will not belabour

my questioning on that. We can actually ask the question to the Department of

Justice, I am sure.

I wanted to ask a question around the firearms

storage. It says, "The Firearms Policy also states that should a firearm or

ammunition be unaccounted for, an immediate report will be made to the Chief of

Police." Is that policy being complied with? That is page 134.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Any findings or breaches

of the policy found during annual inspection would be reported to the Office of

the Chief of Police and those reports do come to me. I have not had any instance

yet where we had inaccurate accounts.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay great, thanks.

On page 137, under 2E Shotgun Policy, there was no

evidence that policy was being followed. This was during the review, "we were

informed that the log book for the Northeast Avalon region is no longer

maintained." Also, the inventory counts that all shotguns were assigned for at

the headquarters armoury in St. John's were all present at the time. This would

suggest that supervisors were not on patrol or they were out without a shotgun,

which is a violation of policy. Was this matter investigated?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: This matter was

investigated and we have taken steps, sir. We are in the process of drafting a

new policy relating to the adoption of a utilization of a less lethal option.

Shotguns traditionally have been carried by police as

a less lethal option where you can use different types of shot in them. We have

purchased what we call less lethal kits, which gives the police the ability to

use less lethal options. We are drafting policy in that regard.

We are currently looking at the installation of less

lethal shotgun cases in the new fleet of supervisory vehicles on the Northeast

Avalon. Kits will be also in Corner Brook and Labrador West region in designated

vehicles. The purpose of this is to allow the availability of a less lethal kit

to the officer.

If we get a call and wildlife is not available to

dispose of an animal then we will make arrangements to have the animal disposed

of, but the primary reason, what we are looking at is having a less lethal

option available to us. There are shotguns in there for what we call beanbag

rounds. There is JPX, which is another firearm that is used for shooting tear

gas. There would be larger tear gas and things.

We are looking at implementing. We have the policy in

draft. We have the equipment purchased. We have to look at the installation of

less lethal kits in the cars and have the training conducted as opposed to

having a shotgun. Right now, the shotguns are not in supervisory vehicles. We

have opted to go with a less lethal option, which from an operational

perspective, I guess, you look at the overall impact that this is the best

option to follow.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you for that response. It

is very positive to hear that this type of action is being taken for the public.

On page 143, I have a question around the use of force

reports not always being reviewed. It says, "that 17 of them were not signed as

evidence of the required review by the District Inspector/Divisional Commander."

Can this be further explained and clarified?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir.

The procedure on the Use of Force Reporting Policy

being followed was identified. Working directly, myself, with our audit manager,

the verification monthly use review process has been improved through the

development option and the use of force monthly

summary report.

Each time an officer uses force, in accordance with

policy that needs to be reported, they complete a use of force report. The use

of force report will be reviewed by their supervisor, their respective

inspector, right up to the superintendent. The superintendent is the divisional

commander. In the RNC there are four superintendents: one in charge of the CID,

operational support, patrol services, and one for the Corner Brook, Labrador

West region.

The process of a new policy, and this is in place now,

there was an order put out on it that the use of force report, our form called

096, will be prepared by the officer and assigned through the appropriate

levels. Then, while it is being reviewed, a determination will need to be made

at the inspector's level whether or not there is a remedial training issue

identified.

It is a form that has to be filled in electronically,

and there are dropdown menus consistent with our policy about whether it is

firearms, pepper spray, use of force. Each platoon, section, unit would have a

monthly report accounting for all reports. This new form, RNC 324 form,

completed by the inspector would be signed by the superintendent. Once signed by

the superintendent, the forms would be ascended to my office or the other deputy

chief in charge of the CID, but will go to me for the Use of Force Review Board.

The Use of Force Review Board now will review cases

where a supervisor has identified a training issue or remedial training. What

this allows me to do in my capacity is that I can send this to our Use of Force

Unit: Please conduct a review of the use of force training by this officer. Then

they can go back to prior reports and also identify: Look, there is a remedial

issue here, or someone has flagged that this is remedial training.

In this case, the officer did use appropriate force.

Their findings, the remedial training discussion can be discussed at a Use of

Force Review Board or a Use of Force board meeting. At that level, then we can

make an informed decision with regard to the use of force.

I think that our new policy with regard to the new

monthly which was not consistent from region or divisions, some would have a

covering letter, some would have a table. We are now going with a standardized

form for reporting all incidents of use of force that is required under policy.

There is a requirement that the form be signed by the inspector, which is the

first level of management, and by the superintendent, which is the rank between

inspector and deputy chief, to verify they have reviewed the form and identified

whether any training issues are required.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Great. It sounds like you have

improved the process there significantly.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I have a significant question

around the board meeting not documented. I would like to know, it says it was

reported that a meeting had taken place in June, or July of 2010. That is on

page 144. Was there a meeting or was there not, because there were no documented

minutes? It is standard, if there is a board meeting that minutes are

documented. What is the explanation for this?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: There was an incident

where that meeting in June of 2010 there was an issue with regard to the

person who had actually taken the minutes or had the minutes and their being off

on extended sick leave. From reviewing, or in response to the Auditor General's

concerns, we did see there was an issue around accurate or up to date, or minute

taking in itself. We do have minutes taken and the minutes that are taken would

be reviewed at the next meeting and approved. That was a concern. It was an

issue and has been rectified.

MR. MITCHELMORE: The minutes just for

clarification that were taken by the person who is on extended sick leave is

available?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: I do believe that Mr.

Hickey just mentioned to me that person, we did have an opportunity to have

those meetings subsequently provided.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay, great.

I guess the only other questions that I would have

would be around the Select Committee recommendations and the response was that

the RNC was not going to be implementing some of the things that were never

completed from the March 31, 2003, that five-year plan. Why is that? That is on

page 145.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: That is in regard to

covering the five years up to March 31, 2003. I guess the appointment of the

Select Committee is not within the control of the RNC or the RNC executive, and

we have not received any indication that this will take place. We do not have

the intentions to revisit this matter. That is outside of the RNC the Select

Committee.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Would this be something that the

Department of Justice would have to move forward on with the Select Committee,

if they wanted to push the recommendations I guess you do not have to accept

anything of a Select Committee and you are obviously choosing not to accept

those recommendations.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Well, like I said, the

appointment of the Select Committee is not within our control. Certainly from

2003 to 2012, I would not see us revisiting the arming of the RNC in no way,

shape or form.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay, thank you.

I do not have any further questions, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Mr. Brazil.

MR. BRAZIL: I am going to conclude and say that I

am satisfied that the RNC took a very professional and a very positive approach

to addressing the Auditor General's concerns, and have implemented procedures

that I am confident, as the Auditor General in the next two years will review,

will address those types of issues.

I just want to thank the RNC and the representatives

for coming forward and giving us the lead by putting the information together so

we had a better idea of exactly how you were addressing those concerns.

Mr. Chair, that is it for me.

CHAIR: Mr. Joyce.

MR. JOYCE: I am fine. Again, thanks for

everything, for keeping everything safe, and make sure you pass it on to the

boys in Corner Brook and the ladies in Corner Brook, because if I do not, some

will get me on the basketball court or something and remind me I did not mention

them.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Another government member.

MR. K. PARSONS: Again, I would like to say thank

you for coming this morning. I know, as a Newfoundlander, I am very proud of the

work that the RNC does. I have a lot of good RNC officers in my constituency and

they are very well respected and very professional people. I am very proud of

them.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Thank you, sir.

CHAIR: Mr. Mitchelmore.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I would just like to thank the

RNC as well for their time in coming out and clarifying a lot of the issues that

were raised in the Auditor General's report. I am very satisfied with the

responses and I have all confidence in the work that you are doing to make

changes to some of the recommendations, as well as the work that you do on the

ground. So, keep up the great work.

Thank you.

CHAIR: I have a few questions, gentleman.

Customarily, the other members ask their questions

first and if there are any questions that I feel should be asked, then I go back

to those.

Right now, are you using any revolvers?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No, sir.

CHAIR: Nothing used at all?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: No.

CHAIR: There is some reference to 5,000 rounds of

ammunition.

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, I believe it is in

our response to the Auditor General. The former Ruger revolvers, there was a

plan in place or was put in place to have those removed from our inventory. The

RNC now uses a semi-automatic Sig Sauer, 40-calibre firearm.

CHAIR: To go back to the use of force reports,

right now is there a use of force report done every time force is used?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir. Policy

identifies when a use of force form must be completed. The officer completes

form 096, it is signed by their appropriate supervisors and signed by their

inspector, then, all of the forms for a month, for that particular division, are

tabulated into a dropdown spreadsheet. The form or forms are reviewed for

remedial training issues. That form then is reviewed by the divisional

commander, the superintendents, and then the forms are sent to my office for a

further review. So if there are issues arising, I can have the appropriate

persons review the forms to address any training issues.

CHAIR: On page 138 and maybe this was asked

already and I may have missed it in the top paragraph it refers to no plan to

correct firearm locker security issues. The last sentence in the first paragraph

says, "The Executive Director of Operations informed us that there are no plans

in place to address these shortcomings of the firearms storage lockers."

What is the status of that right now?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: Yes, sir.

It is the RNC's intent to address the issues around

the storage lockers, one through cam locks, which we have implemented in some of

our detachments.

As previously referenced, we are working with

consultants on the redevelopment of headquarters, which would also be

subsequently, as Mr. Hickey pointed out, the redevelopment of our Annex building

with regard to more enhanced fire storage lockers.

CHAIR: By what date do you feel that would be

complete?

DEPUTY CHIEF SINGLETON: The thing is, sir, we have

not even moved to the acquisition. We are in the process of tendering for the

furnishings for the new headquarters building which we hope to be in, Mr. Hickey

gave the date of spring 2013. Following that, there is the whole development of

the Annex. This is all part of the tendering process, and we certainly hope

there are no unforeseen issues around budgeting, et cetera, that may prohibit

this. It is our plan to have enhanced firearm security lockers for our firearms.

MR. HICKEY: Just to add to that, we are in the

process of preparing a tender now with the architect Gibbons and Snow. The

tender should go out this fall for the equipment that is needed in the

headquarters building. The tender has not been issued yet; again, we are aiming

towards spring. That might drag into April or May before we are actually into

the building and have all the equipment in place, but anything to do with

firearms is a priority.

CHAIR: On page 148, in the middle of the page, the

third paragraph says, "there are more 12 gauge slug rounds" There was a

difference of forty. Then with 12 gauge Buckshot there was an overage of forty.

Is it possible that someone mistook the two types of

ammunition, it is the same number? Short forty slugs, and over forty Buckshot.

MR. MACPHEE: A possible explanation for that could

be that the counter inadvertently counted the number of rounds as opposed to

boxes, and not checked the number of rounds within the box and do a calculation

that way. All ammunition again, for the record is reconciled quarterly from

a physical count to a system count. Any variance is explained and adjusted for.

CHAIR: If we had an audit today, right now today

Mr. MacPhee, you have been on the job since January 3, presumably you have had

this report and obviously been working on it. What would an audit say today?

MR. MACPHEE: If we had the audit today, if field

work commenced today on firearms audit many of the findings to the physical

variances or the count variances would not be there. That is by virtue of

instituting internal controls related to timely and verifiable and accurate

quarterly inventory counting of both firearms lockers and the actual armouries

themselves.

CHAIR: What items, if any, would not be in

compliance today?

MR. MACPHEE: I am sorry?

CHAIR: What items, if any, would not be in

compliance today?

MR. MACPHEE: As Deputy Chief Singleton made

reference to, we are currently improving the shotgun policy. That is one area

that still requires some improvement, and we are working towards achieving this

through instituting less lethal options into the supervisory vehicles.

CHAIR: Thank you.

I have no more questions, but I am going to go back to

the other members to see if they have questions.

Mr. Mitchelmore? Does any member have any questions?

I would like to go to the Auditor General and ask if

there are any areas that you feel we should cover that we have not covered.

MR. PADDON: No, Mr. Chair.

I think the questioning has been fairly comprehensive.

It covered all the relevant areas. The answers have been fairly forthcoming as

well.

CHAIR: Okay. Thank you very much.

In that case, we will conclude this hearing.

Thank you very much for coming and being so helpful.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.