ARCHIVED - RPP 2007-2008
Military Police Complaints Commission

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

SECTION II — ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITY BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

Strategic Outcome

The Commission has one strategic outcome: a military police organization that performs its policing duties in a highly professional organization, free from interference and with the confidence and support of those it serves.

This strategic outcome aligns itself with the Government of Canada outcomes of maintaining safe and secure communities both within the country and around the world.

Program Activity

The Commission has one activity: providing complaints resolution services. The Commission conducts investigations into complaints about the conduct of military police members as well as complaints of interference with military police investigations. As a result of these investigations, the Commission provides fair, impartial and timely recommendations to DND in response to identified needs, gaps and flaws in the quality of military policing.

Following the release of the investigation reports, the Commission expects the following results:

• the timely implementation of corrective action by DND to improve on the quality of military policing; and
• increased awareness — on behalf of the military police, the Canadian Forces and the public — of military policing issues and an overall improvement in military policing practices.

The two priorities identified in Section I contribute to improving the Commission's ability to conduct investigations, provide meaningful recommendations for change, and communicate information relating to the quality of military policing.

Program Activity: Providing Complaints Resolution Services

Financial Resources ($ millions):

2007 – 2008	2008 – 2009	2009 – 2010
$3.4	$3.4	$3.4

Human Resources (FTEs):

2007 – 2008	2008 – 2009	2009 – 2010
18	18	18

Description

The Commission oversees the military police complaints process, ensuring it is accessible, transparent and fair to all concerned. There are two types of complaints: complaints about the conduct of military police and complaints of interference with military police investigations. The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction for the investigation of interference complaints while the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal — the chief of the military police — has the first instance responsibility for the investigation of conduct complaints subject to review/re-investigation by the Commission at the request of the complainant. The Chair may also determine that the investigation of a conduct complaint (by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal) is in the public interest. In that case, the Commission would assume responsibility for the investigation and, if need be, could decide to hold a public hearing into the complaint.

Conduct Complaints

Anyone, including civilians, may file a complaint about military police conduct. The Provost Marshal is responsible in the first instance for the investigation of the complaint. The Commission is notified when a complaint is received and it monitors the Provost Marshal's handling of the complaint. At any time during the handling of the complaint, the Chair may determine that it is in the public interest and assume responsibility for the investigation. As well, a complainant, if not satisfied with the results of the Provost Marshal's investigation, may ask the Commission to review the complaint. This review by the Commission becomes a new investigation from a new perspective.

The Commission releases an Interim Report to senior officials in the Canadian Forces and/or DND, providing the results of the investigation and soliciting responses to the Commission's recommendations. The Commission will receive a Notice of Action to its Interim Report indicating what action, if any, has been, is or will be taken in response to the recommendations of the Commission. The Commission will then release a Final Report of findings and recommendations. These recommendations may relate to a more effective and fair resolution of the complaint, but may also recommend changes to military police policies and procedures.

Interference Complaints

Only members of the military police may file an interference complaint, and they may do so only if they have conducted or supervised the investigation to which the allegation of interference applies. The Commission, with sole jurisdiction over this type of complaint, conducts the investigation.

The Commission releases an Interim Report to senior officials in the Canadian Forces and DND, providing a summary of the Commission's investigation as well as the findings and recommendations. The Commission will receive a Notice of Action to its Interim Report indicating what action, if any, has been, is or will be taken in response to the recommendations of the Commission. The Commission will then release a Final Report of findings and recommendations.

Plans and Priorities

The priorities developed and the plans that support them are aimed at improving the Commission's ability to issue fair, impartial and timely recommendations to DND. These recommendations will contribute to improving the quality of military policing and to increasing the confidence of the military police, the Canadian Forces community and Canadians overall in the professional manner in which their policing duties are being performed.

Priority 1: Improving the effectiveness and the efficiency of the complaints resolution process

The Commission developed and adopted late in the last fiscal year a new service standard and a new approach to investigations. These new standards are intended to reduce the time required to resolve a complaint. As well, the Commission examined and adjusted its reporting process to be a more streamlined and effective method of reporting findings and recommendations. Over the next several months, the Commission will monitor its timeframes and the quality of its reports, making whatever adjustments are necessary in order to meet the tighter time and quality standards that have been developed for investigations.

One element that is critical to the success of the Commission is for it to increase the awareness of its mandate and mission among its stakeholders: the military police, the Canadian Forces and Canadians in general. Over the planning period, the Commission plans to strengthen working relationships with certain key Canadian Forces stakeholders, such as the Chief of the Defence Staff, the Vice Chief and the Judge Advocate General, by meeting with them more frequently, as required. This approach will be applied in the same manner with representatives of the Office of the Provost Marshal. The outreach program will continue over the planning period and the Commission will visit a number of Canadian Forces bases and give presentations to military police members, various Canadian Forces members and other stakeholders on these bases.

Internal awareness of the Commission's mandate and mission is also important. The Commission will continue to hold monthly staff meetings where problems and concerns can be raised — from both management and staff perspectives — addressed and resolved. The Commission also intends to monitor and evaluate feedback from presentations and exchanges with clients and stakeholders as well as from internal performance reports. The Commission's website will be monitored for traffic and usage patterns to determine if changes need to be made to the Commission's information packages.

As mentioned in Section I, the Commission does not control the number, the complexity or the timing of the complaints it receives. As a result, in order to minimize costs, to prevent downtime, to ensure availability and to better match investigation requirements with investigator skill sets, the Commission outsources its investigations. Over the planning period, the Commission will continue to increase its inventory of skilled investigators in order to give the Commission greater flexibility in investigator selection and cost management. As well, the Commission will continue to improve on its methodology for the effective planning and conduct of investigations.

Late in the last fiscal year, the Commission restructured the organization. One key aspect of this restructuring was the inclusion of the communications program with the complaints resolution activity. Over the planning period, complaints resolution management will review and adjust, as required, the communication products based on the results of the complaints resolution activity.

The following table outlines the Commission's key plans and related performance indicators regarding improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process.

Plans	Performance Indicators
1. Implement new standards, practices and performance measures	Processing time Cost per investigation
2. Increase awareness of the Commission's mandate and mission	Stakeholder satisfaction
3. Enhance working relationships with stakeholders within DND	Responsiveness to recommendations Stakeholder awareness Cost per investigation
4. Outsource investigations, as required	Quality of investigations Timeliness of investigations
5. Restructure organization	Employee satisfaction Processing time

Priority 2: Improving management accountability

The Commission is committed to improving its management accountability. There will be a significant focus on compliance with the standards issued by the central agencies in the areas of procurement and contracting, finance, human resources, and information technology. Work will continue to finalize the calendar of deadlines for all corporate services. Once completed, the Commission will be able to assess its reporting performance and make whatever changes are necessary.

As well, internal audit policy and plans will be updated, based on Treasury Board's internal audit policy. Clarification will be sought regarding audit so that compliance can be achieved within the next fiscal year. Another staffing audit as well as an audit of information technology will be conducted during the planning period.

The Commission will maintain its focus on developing its human resources. Effective human resource planning will be continued, stressing integration with business planning. With the increased business volume and the single human resource per corporate function, plans will address capacity, retention, training, staffing and replacement.

Service partners will also continue to be a priority. Individual arrangements and memoranda of understanding will be reviewed to ensure that required services are being provided as agreed upon and that costs are not excessive. In addition, opportunities will be explored to create new partnerships.

Specific areas of corporate services will be targeted for improvement during the planning period. Fixed assets, including informatics assets, will be subject to increased internal controls. Asset management and a charge-out system will be formalized for assets in use outside the office. Life-cycle asset management will be strengthened and the Commission will introduce its "evergreen" program for asset replacement. Compliance with the Management of Information Technology Security Standards will also be addressed during the planning period, and the Commission's disaster recovery capability will be reviewed.

The format and content of internal financial reporting has been significantly changed. Efforts will now focus on regularizing the generation of financial information in the most efficient manner.

The following table outlines the Commission's key plans and related performance indicators regarding improving management accountability.

Plans	Performance Indicators
1. Adhere to the legislative and policy requirements of the Commission and central agencies	Audit reports Central agency report cards Timeliness of central agency reporting
2. Attract and maintain a high-quality workforce	Employee satisfaction Training investment per employee Attrition Effective use of partnerships
3. Implement improved management practices	Evergreen program/asset loss Obsolescence/cost of repairs Results from disaster recovery tests Issues raised from monitoring high-risk staffing areas Accuracy, completeness and timeliness of internal financial reporting

 

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page