Common menu bar links
Breadcrumb Trail
ARCHIVED - Royal Canadian Mounted Police - Supplementary Tables
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Horizontal Initiatives
Name of Horizontal Initiative: Games Security and Public Safety (GS&PS) for the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games
Name of lead department(s): The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) led a multi-organizational, Integrated Security Group known as the Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security Unit (V2010 ISU). The Departments and Agencies that formed the V2010 ISU were: Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC), Department of National Defence (DND), Health Canada (HC), Industry Canada (IC), Privy Council Office (PCO), Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Public Safety Canada (PS) and Transport Canada (TC).
Lead department program activity: Protective Policing Services
Start date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2004-2005
End date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2010-2011
Total federal funding allocation (start to end date): Approximately $900M
Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
As the lead agency responsible for the development and delivery of the 2010 Winter Games security, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) led a multi-organizational, Integrated Security Groups known as the Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security Unit (V2010 ISU) which had the overall responsibility for coordinating and providing security for the 2010 Winter Olympic Games.
The participating Departments and Agencies worked closely together, using a four-phased approach to major event planning: design and planning; a robust exercise and testing stage leading to a declaration of operational readiness; Games operation; and demobilization/debrief.
The overall goal of the V2010 ISU was to provide a “safe and secure game” for the athletes, officials and visitors. This was accomplished through and integrated security model and in close collaboration with partners, including all levels of government, Vancouver 2010 Organizing Committee (VANOC) and private corporations.
The total budget for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games is estimated at $900 million, in which the Province of British Columbia cost-shares a portion through a 2010 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Security Cost Sharing Memorandum of Agreement.
Shared outcomes:
a. Safe and Secure Games
- When a safety or security issue did occur, it did not result in a disruption to the Games.
b. Effective Policing in Games Security area and Urban Domain
- RCMP – Access control was successful in prohibiting the ability for unauthorized vehicles, material and people from entering a designated area.
- RCMP – The athletes, officials and other accredited individuals were transported successfully between the athlete’s village and all venues in accordance with the plan.
- RCMP – Traffic patterns and flows in the area on an approach were managed.
- RCMP – Flow rates were met without compromising security procedures.
c. Effective Land Security
- DND – Land interdiction operations were successful.
- TC – Level of compliance with policy, regulatory and/or voluntary requirements.
d. Effective Air Security
- DND – Air interdiction operations were successful.
- RCMP – Systems and forces provided effective early warning and detection of aircraft into the Olympic Control Area (OCA) being breached.
- TC – Level of compliance with policy, regulatory and/or voluntary requirements.
e. Effective Marine Security
- DND – Maritime interdiction operations were successful.
- RCMP – Breaches of unauthorized vessels in the exclusion zone (EZ) were dealt with successfully.
- TC – Level of compliance with policy, regulatory and/or voluntary requirements.
f. Effective Intelligence
- CSIS – Effective and efficient disclosure of information and intelligence to the Joint Intelligence Group (JIG).
- DND – Appropriate information/intelligence shared in a timely manner.
- RCMP – Intelligence shared was accurate as possible.
- TC – Effective information flows between JIG and TC.
g. Effective Border Integrity
- CBSA – Successfully delivered integrated border services.
- CBSA – Was able to provide an assessment of increased volumes and heightened security in a pre/during/post Olympic Games operational environment to senior management which will help in decision making for future major events.
- RCMP – Detection and interdiction of illegal entry into Canada between ports of entry were dealt with successfully.
- RCMP – Response to reports of international or organized crime human trafficking were dealt with in an effective and timely manner.
h. Effective Operational Support
- CSIS – Respected the Service Level Agreement (SLA) that was established with the RCMP in regards to the accreditation program.
- CSIS – Participated fully in the Exercise program; this validated the flow of information and intelligence and the roles and responsibilities of CSIS officers who were deployed for the Games.
- DND – Personnel were deployed in a timely manner.
- DND – Accommodations and/or transportation for the key Canadian Forces (CF) security delivery assets were available and needs were met.
- IC – Number of security agencies requesting the use of the radio frequency spectrum provided fair access to the radio frequency spectrum; where and when appropriate, provided alternatives to requests that cannot be accommodated.
- IC – Confirmation of advanced planning by demonstrating that each radio frequency assigned to a user was disruption-free or highly unlikely to encounter disruption as a result of a detailed analysis of the proposed system and knowledge of radio frequency environment.
- IC – Number of incidents of disruption to radio communications systems investigated and resolved in a timely manner.
- IC – Assignment of highest priority of service granted to security system service requests.
- PS – All required stakeholders at regional, federal and municipal levels are engaged to support Situational Awareness and response activities.
- PS – Effective communications between PS, PREOC and the GOC: vertically between the GOC and the FERP Governance and horizontally between the GOC and federal/provincial partners in the activation of an emergency response.
- RCMP – Background checks were conducted efficiently with the tools available.
- RCMP – Control measures were in place to ensure compliance to recommendations given by the Accreditation Screening and Verification Team (ASVT).
- TC – RCMP requirements for staffing Operations Centres were met.
- TC – Provision of timely and accurate information to ISU and TC Senior Management.
i. Effective Information Technology
- CSIS – Installed telecommunication technologies to ensure those CSIS officers who were deployed for the Games could effectively and efficiently communicate with other CSIS colleagues and colleagues from other departments and agencies.
- DND – The uninterrupted provision of accurate and relevant information to decision makers.
- RCMP – Attempts of intrusion at the venues were detected by PIDS successfully.
- TC – Effective resolution of service calls taken by TC IT support.
Governance structures:
The Games Security and Public Safety Group has completed a security Results-based Management Accountability Framework (RMAF) as required by the Treasury Board Secretariat. The RMAF formalizes the federal commitment of the RCMP and its federal partners to be accountable for the implementation of this initiative.
The RMAF describes the roles and responsibilities of Key Federal Departments and Agencies participating in this horizontal initiative, as well as its goals and objectives, its related components and expected results and a coordinated performance measurement and evaluation plan.
The Commissioner of the RCMP reports to the Minister of Public Safety Canada. The participating departments/agencies have a working relationship with the RCMP and report to their respective Ministers.
The Deputy Ministers Working Group is chaired by the Coordinator for 2010 Olympics and G8 and G20 Security. This working group is comprised of the respective Security Departments and Agencies participating as members in order to facilitate an integrated federal approach to security.
Planning Highlights:
N/A
| Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) |
Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Planned Spending for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Risk Assessment | $5.311 | $0 |
| PA2 | Enforcement | $1.095 | $0 |
| PA3 | Facilitated Border | $3.780 | $0 |
| PA4 | Conventional Border | $2.134 | $0 |
| PA5 | Trade | $0.184 | $0 |
| PA6 | Recourse | $0 | |
| PA5 | Internal Services | $3.296 | $0 |
| Total | $15.8 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a. Safe and Secure Games: Finalize/implement plans, processes and policies. Deliver training and perform accreditation screening. Operational Readiness.
g. Effective Border Integrity
Federal Partner: CIC
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | a) Selection and processing of temporary residents |
$ 5.1 Incremental funding $ 2.1 Foregone revenue |
$0 |
| Total | $0 | ||
Expected results by program:
a. Safe and Secure Games
g. Effective Border Integrity
Federal Partner: CSIS
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | a) Intelligence Program | $11 | |
| b) Security Screening Program | |||
| Total | |||
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
f) Effective Intelligence
h) Effective Operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Federal Partner: DND
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | a) Conduct Operations |
$ 231.1 ($212 + $19.1 |
$0 |
| Total | $ 231.1 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
c) Effective Land Security
d) Effective Air Security
e) Effective Marine Security
f) Effective Intelligence
h) Effective operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Federal Partner: HC
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Sustainable Environmental health |
$1.196 |
$0 |
| Total | $1.196 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
b) Effective Policing in Games Security Area and Urban Domain
h) Effective Operational Support
Federal Partner: IC
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners |
Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Provide access to the radio frequency spectrum |
$9.8 | $0 |
| PA2 | Minimize the impact of interference to radio communications systems |
$0 | |
| Total | $9.8 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
h) Effective Operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Federal Partner: PHAC
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Emergency Preparedness and Response |
$0.9 | $0 |
| Total | $0.9 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
f) Effective Intelligence
h) Effective Operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Federal Partner: PS
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners |
Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Emergency Management and National Security |
$1.2 | $0 |
| Communications | $0 | ||
| Law Enforcement and Policing |
$0 | ||
| Total | $1.2 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
h) Effective Operational Support
Federal Partner: RCMP
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Protective Policing Services |
$558 | $0 |
| Total | $558 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
h) Effective Operational Support
Federal Partner: RCMP
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | Protective Policing Services |
$558 | $0 |
| Total | $558 | $0 | |
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Games
b) Effective Policing in Games Security Area and Urban Domain
d) Effective Air Security
e) Effective Marine Security
f) Effective Intelligence
g) Effective Border Integrity
h) Effective Operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Federal Partner: TC
($ millions)
| Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners |
Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) |
Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PA1 | A safe transportation system |
$ 8.3 NAV Canada 08/09 - $6.6 09/10 - $17.9 10/11 - $0.250 *numbers were re-profiled |
$0 |
| PA2 | A secure transportation system |
$0 | |
| Total | $0 | ||
Expected results by program:
a) Safe and Secure Game
b) Effective policing in games security area and Urban Domain
d) Effective Air Security
e) Effective Marine Security
f) Effective Intelligence
g) Effective Border Integrity
h) Effective Operational Support
i) Effective Information Technology
Results to be achieved by non–federal partners (if applicable): N/A
Contact information:
Inspector Jane MacLatchy
Federal Security Coordinator, Vancouver 2010
Protective Policing, Major Events
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
(613) 949-2120
Name of Horizontal Initiative: Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBET)
Name of lead department(s): Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Lead department program activity: Federal & International Operations
Start date of the Horizontal Initiative: May 2002
End date of the Horizontal Initiative: Not applicable
Total federal funding allocation (start to end date): Ongoing
Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
The mandate of Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBETs) is to enhance border integrity between Canada and the United States by identifying, investigating, and interdicting persons and organizations that pose a threat to national security or are engaged in other organized criminal activity.
Shared outcomes:
There will be enhanced border security coverage and improved international relationships along the shared border, as a result of focusing on improving information-sharing between Canadian and US law enforcement agencies and conducting intelligence-led investigations. Border-related investigations, based on intelligence from all IBET partners, will be more effective, rather than random enforcement activity. Law enforcement interoperability will improve with the development of a technically successful communications system linking multi-agencies that will facilitate joint operations, while addressing health and safety concerns for law enforcement officers along the 49th parallel.
Governance structures: International Joint Management Team (IJMT), regional Joint Management Teams (JMT), National Coordination Team (NCT).
Planning Highlights:
- Improving operational integration of IBETs through co-location
- Enhancing IBET program profile through an IBET communications strategy
- Re-defining and implementing an enhanced reporting mechanism and metrics
| Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) |
Names of Programs for Federal Partners |
Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) |
Planned Spending for 2011–12 |
Expected Results for 2010–11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Canadian Mounted Police | IBET | See Link 1 | ||
| IBET | See Link 2 | |||
| IBET | See Link 3 | |||
| Total | ||||
Expected Results:
Link 1: Approval of Shiprider legislation and the running of one co-location pilot project for IBET.
Link 2: Continued engagement with both US and Canadian governements to promote the IBET program and secure additional support and funding for IBET Initiatives.
Link 3: Creation of a reporting mechanism to allow consistent reporting to government on IBET success.
($ millions)
| Total Allocation For All Federal Partners (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|
| $229.541 | $26.529 |
Results to be achieved by non–federal partners (if applicable):
The IBET core partners include US Customs Border Protection/Border Patrol, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, US Coast Guard. The IBET program contributes significantly to their objective to enhance border integrity between Canada and the United States by identifying, investigating and interdicting persons and organizations that pose a threat to national security or are engaged in other organized criminal activity.
Contact information:
Supt. Warren Coons, Director, IBET
Name of Horizontal Initiative: Investments to Combat the Criminal Use of Firearms (ICCUF)
Name of lead department(s): Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)
Lead department program activity: Canadian Firearms Program
Start date of the Horizontal Initiative: May 2004
End date of the Horizontal Initiative: Ongoing
Total federal funding allocation (start to end date): Originally $49.9 million over 5 years, now extended indefinitely (see Total Allocation).
Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):
The overall aim of the ICCUF is to improve the national collection, analysis and sharing of firearms-related intelligence and information. Funding is distributed within the RCMP to the Canadian Firearms Program (CFP), Criminal Intelligence (CI) and the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada (CISC). The initiative also provides funds to Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and Public Safety Canada (PSC).
The ICCUF directly supports the Government’s objective to tackle violent crime (especially firearms-related offences in relation to organized crime and street gangs), as outlined in the 2008 Speech from the Throne.
Shared outcome(s): Enhance the RCMP and CBSA’s capacity to gather, analyze and share criminal intelligence in order to improve individual investigations, and to increase knowledge of the extent and patterns of smuggling and trafficking of firearms used in crime. These will support the development of an intelligence-led national enforcement strategy.
Governance structure(s): A Joint Management Team (JMT) coordinates ICCUF efforts. Partners will be heavily involved in JMT meetings.
Planning Highlights:
Public safety in Canada continues to be threatened by the criminal use of firearms, many of which are smuggled into the country or otherwise illegally obtained. Analysis of trafficking patterns is improving as more information is collected from the field.
Law enforcement will be directly supported with high quality technical and investigative services and expertise from the CFP and its ICCUF partners in the investigation and prevention of firearms related crimes. There will be a focus on analysis and sharing of firearms related intelligence and information on smuggling and trafficking patterns.
Expected Results: Provide independent policy advice to the Minister of Public Safety on firearms and crime and support research on the relationship between crime guns, street gangs, youth and organized crime.
| Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) |
Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Planned Spending for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Canadian Mounted Police | Canadian Firearms Program | Ongoing | $7.7* |
| Criminal Intelligence Program | Ongoing | $1.12 | |
| Total | $8.82 | ||
*Note: As a result of restructuring within the RCMP, a portion of planned spending for 2011-2012 will be held by a separate unit/directorate (RCMP Laboratory for the Canadian Integrated Ballistics Information Network).
Expected Results: Reduce the impact of organized crime through continued support to law enforcement agencies by providing specialized assistance to effectively investigate, gather evidence and share criminal intelligence to successfully prosecute individuals involved in the illegal movement and criminal use of firearms.
| Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) |
Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Planned Spending for 2011–12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canada Border Services Agency | Intelligence and Targeting Operations Directorate | Ongoing | $1.33 |
| Total | $1.33 | ||
Expected Results: Valuable criminal intelligence shared in support of firearms crime investigations.
($ millions)| Total Allocation For All Federal Partners (from Start to End Date) | Total Planned Spending for All Federal Partners for 2011–12 |
|---|---|
| Ongoing | $10.15 |
Results to be achieved by non–federal partners (if applicable): N/A
Contact information:
C/Supt. Geoffrey Francis
Director, Firearms Investigative and Enforcement Services Directorate
RCMP Canadian Firearms Program
73 Leikin Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OR2
Email: Geoffrey.Francis@rcmp-grc.gc.ca