ARCHIVED - Military Police Complaints Commission of Canada
This page has been archived.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.
2008-2009
Reports on Plans and Priorities
Military Police Complaints Commission
The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay, P.C., M.P.
Minister of National Defence
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I - DEPARTMENTAL OVERVIEW
SECTION II — ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITY BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
SECTION III — SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
SECTION IV — OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Section I — Departmental Overview
Chair's Message
It is a pleasure to present the 2008–2009 Report on Plans and Priorities of the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC/Commission). The year ahead promises to be a challenging one for the MPCC but it is, I believe, well positioned to meet whatever challenges the new year brings.
This report highlights the plans and priorities of the Commission to contribute to the improvement of military police services and to the increased accountability of the leadership of the military police, as well as the Canadian Forces chain of command, for the provision of policing services within the military community that meet the highest Canadian standards. The most critical challenge for the MPCC, as always, will be to provide its oversight services successfully in an environment that requires the complete cooperation, throughout the entire process, of the organizations it is overseeing — the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces. Without that full cooperation, effective oversight cannot be exercised and the Commission cannot succeed. The Commission stands ready to assist, in any way possible, efforts to ensure the model for Canadian military oversight evolves in a manner to meet growing public expectations.
The Commission must also address its own ability to provide effective oversight services in the face of a caseload that is increasing in terms of both volume and complexity. The adoption of best practices for civilian oversight agencies will continue and the introduction of further refinements to the complaints processing system will help to expand the capacity of the Commission. As well, with the stabilization of the workforce that has occurred over the past several months and the growing emphasis the Commission is placing on learning, the quality of the complaints resolution services will continue to improve.
The Commission intends to do more with the resources it has by working more efficiently and economically. Over the planning period, operating systems will be reviewed to eliminate inefficiencies, saving both time and money. The continued use of standing offers will provide further cost savings. Additional partnerships will be explored in the corporate services area to further reduce costs.
The Commission will continue to deliver its oversight services to help ensure that the military police perform their policing duties in accordance with the highest standards for the benefit of themselves, the Canadian Forces and, ultimately, for all Canadians.
Peter A. Tinsley
Chair
Management Representation Statement
I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2008–2009 Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) for the Military Police Complaints Commission.
This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide to the Preparation of Part III of the 2008–2009 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports:
- it adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat guidance;
- it is based on the Commission's strategic outcome and program activity that were approved by the Treasury Board;
- it presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
- it provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources and authorities entrusted to it; and
- it reports finances based on approved planned spending numbers from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat.
Peter A. Tinsley
Chair
Raison d'être
The Military Police Complaints Commission exists to provide greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police activities. A complaint may be lodged by any person about the conduct of a member of the military police. A member of the military police conducting or supervising an investigation is also able to complain about improper interference encountered in the conduct of an investigation. The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over complaints of interference. The Commission's oversight role is strengthened by being composed of persons who are not members of the Canadian Forces and the Commission itself, funded as a separate agency of government, is independent of the Department of National Defence. The Commission derives its mandate from Part IV of Canada's National Defence Act.
The Commission oversees the military police complaints process, ensuring that it is accessible, transparent and fair to all concerned. The Commission's review of the complaints process identifies opportunities for improvement - be it in the behaviour of individual military police members or in the system of policies and procedures that govern the behaviour of all - and makes recommendations for change. When implemented, these recommendations for change will support the military police in maintaining the highest standards of professional conduct and in assuring the integrity of military police investigations. The effective discharge of the oversight activity by the Commission will also provide assurance to members of the Canadian Forces, and ultimately to all Canadians, that they are being served by a military police service of the highest quality.
Organizational Information
The Commission is not a large agency; it conducts its business with a budget of approximately $3.4 million and 19 FTEs (see organization chart in Section IV). Despite its relatively small size, the Commission has established a rigorous governance structure as it relates to the complaints resolution activity. A brief description of this structure is set out below.
- Chairman
- as Deputy Head, the Chair is ultimately responsible for the successful delivery of the program; uses a daily coordination meeting with the General Counsel and the Chief of Staff to keep a running brief on operations.
- General Counsel
- responsible for the successful delivery of the complaints resolution program on a daily basis
- Executive Committee
- advisory committee to the Chair on all aspects of the Commission, focuses primarily on strategic issues, meets monthly; chaired by the Chair and includes the General Counsel, Chief of Staff and the Chief Financial Officer.
- Operations Group
- advisory working group to the Chair and the General Counsel on the complaints resolution program, meets weekly; chaired by the Chair and includes the General Counsel, Legal Staff, Registrar, and support staff. Briefings are given on the progress of individual files and direction is provided.
- Complaint File Team
- advisory working group to the Chair and the General Counsel on particular complaints; ad hoc meetings, as and when required, (expires when complaint file resolved); chaired by the Chair and includes the General Counsel, legal staff assigned to the file and the investigators working on the file. A briefing is given on the progress of the individual file and direction is provided.
| Vote or Statutory Item | Truncated Vote or Statutory Wording | 2008–2009 Main Estimates | 2007–2008 Main Estimates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | Program expenditure | 3.1 | 3.1 |
| (S) | Contributions to employee benefit plans | .3 | .3 |
| Total Department or Agency | 3.4 | 3.4 |
| Forecast Spending 2007–2008 | Planned Spending 2008–2009 | Planned Spending 2009–2010 | Planned Spending 2010–2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Providing complaints resolution services | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 |
| Total Main Estimates | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 |
| Adjustments | ||||
| Total Adjustments | - | - | - | - |
| Total Planned Spending | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 |
| Plus: Cost of services received without charge | .1 | .1 | .1 | .1 |
| Total Departmental Spending | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Full-time Equivalents | 18 | 19 | 19 | 19 |
Summary Information
| 2008–2009 | 2009–2010 | 2010–2011 |
|---|---|---|
| $3.4 | $3.4 | $3.4 |
| 2008–2009 | 2009–2010 | 2010–2011 |
|---|---|---|
| 19 | 19 | 19 |
| Name | Type |
|---|---|
|
1.
Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process |
Ongoing |
| 2. Improving governance | Ongoing |
| Expected Results | Planned Spending | Contributes to the following priority | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008–2009 | 2009–2010 | 2010–2011 | |||
| Strategic Outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. | |||||
|
Program Activity: Complaints Resolution To successfully resolve complaints about the conduct of military police members, as well as complaints of interference with military police investigations, by overseeing and reviewing all complaints received. This program is necessary to help the military police be as effective and as professional as possible in their policing duties and functions. |
70% of the recommendations resulting from investigations of conduct or interference complaints accepted by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. 70% of the investigations/ complaints resulting from investigations of conduct or interference complaints resolved within targeted timeframes as established by the Commission Chair. 70% of individual members received remedial measures and/or improvements were made to military police policies and practices pursuant to investigations of conduct or interference complaints. |
3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 | Priority No. 1 and 2 |
DEPARTMENTAL PLANS AND PRIORITIES
The Commission is a micro-sized agency of 19 FTEs. Situated in Ottawa, it provides independent civilian oversight of a military police service with more than 1,200 members stationed across Canada and with Canadian Forces around the world. The Commission delivers its program and services both to DND and to the Canadian public.
The Commission has one program activity - complaints resolution. Two priorities, both significant undertakings, continue to be the focus of the Commission over the planning period.
Priority 1 — Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process
This priority is ongoing. By continuing to address the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process, the Commission will be better able to resolve complaints in a fair and timely manner, and will increase the likelihood that recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. These recommendations will contribute to the quality of military policing not only in Canada but abroad. These efforts also support the achievement of the Government of Canada outcome of safe and secure communities.
Priority 2 — Improving governance
This priority is ongoing. There are several management issues to be addressed within this priority: establishing and maintaining the quality of the performance measurement framework; adhering to the legislative and policy requirements of the Commission and the central agencies (requirements in areas such as internal audit, human resource management and security); attracting and retaining a high-quality workforce; and reviewing and strengthening the control framework surrounding asset management, finance and information technology.
The relationship of the program activity, the priorities and the strategic outcome is illustrated in the diagram below.
Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution program
Improving governance
Commission Strategic Outcome
Conduct complaints against the military police and interference complaints by the military police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.
Complaints Resolution
The Commission has established a series of plans to achieve its priorities, but it is important to set out the operating environment, both external and internal, in which the Commission manages itself. These are the factors that impact on the priorities and plans and how the Commission delivers its services - the factors the Commission must manage well in order to be successful.
External Factors
Number and complexity of complaints and investigations
The MPCC does not control the number, the complexity or the timing of the complaints it receives. Nor can the Commission determine in advance whether or not the Chair may find it necessary to exercise his discretionary authority and determine the need for a public interest investigation or a public interest hearing, either of which could place a significant demand on the already scarce resources of the Commission. One of the ongoing challenges of the Commission is to manage the fluctuations in workload within its existing resource base and keep expenditures within budget and relatively constant from one year to the next.
Forecasting is not easy. Investigations can vary considerably in terms of complexity. For instance, while one investigation may involve interviewing two or three people in a single location, another could involve interviewing dozens of individuals who are deployed at several sites across the country and abroad. Similarly, while some relatively straightforward cases can be dealt with in a matter of weeks, other investigations can involve reviewing thousands of pages of documentary evidence, extensive interview notes, tape and video recordings, and may take several months to complete.
The effectiveness and efficiency of the complaints resolution process depends to a large extent on how well the Commission manages its workload and applies its limited resources to resolving the cases on hand.
Reports of public interest investigations, as well as summaries of complaints that have been investigated and reviewed by the Commission, are available on its website (in the process of being updated) at http://www.mpcc-cppm.gc.ca/300/300_e.aspx.
Collaboration
For the Commission to be successful, the Commission requires the co-operation of others. Short of calling a public hearing, the Commission must rely on voluntary cooperation to obtain documents and other evidence. Furthermore, the Chair cannot issue a final report in a given case until the appropriate authority within the military or defence hierarchy has provided a response to the Chairperson's interim report. In addition, the recommendations for improvements issued by the Commission in its interim and final reports are not binding on the Canadian Forces or DND. How well the Commission manages its relationship with the Chief of the Defence Staff, the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal and other stakeholders will have a significant impact on the overall success of the MPCC.
Awareness
The Commission is still a relatively young organization. It is less than 10 years old, having been established December 1, 1999. The military police branch force is a dynamic organization and like any organization, its members move and change over time. Unless the various stakeholders are made aware of the Commission's mandate, mission, and how it operates, the likelihood that complaints will be identified, brought forward and successfully resolved is not high.
Standards in police oversight
The standards in police oversight are not static; over time, they evolve and improve. The challenge is to ensure that the standards in effect and applied meet the expectations of Canadians for policing and police oversight.
Internal Factors
Quality of information for decision-making
The Commission must continue to refine its complaints resolution process to ensure it is as efficient and economical as it can be. Improving the quality of information for decision-making is critical to this refinement.
Operational capacity
Operational capacity is a concern. The complexity and volume of work is not under the control of the Commission. The Commission as a micro-agency does not have any excess capacity to deal with a sudden influx of complex complaints. Nor does it have the flexibility of a larger organization to reallocate resources as circumstances change. The effective management of workload and scarce resources is essential to the success of the Commission.
Workforce
A knowledgeable and stable workforce is key to the success of the MPCC. This is a significant challenge for the Commission because, like most small agencies, the Commission is a flat organization. The majority of positions are the "one and only" responsible for an entire function. Employee departure and knowledge retention are constant concerns. Human resource planning must be successful for the Commission to be able to continuously deliver quality services.
Government-wide priorities
There are a significant number of government initiatives that have or will impact on the Commission, such as renewal by Treasury Board of the policy suite including internal audit and evaluation, introduction and implementation of the MRRS (management resources and results structure), and adherence to the amended Public Service Employment Act, PSC policies and delegation instrument, and assessment under the Management Accountability Framework. The challenge is for the Commission to continue to be able to discharge its mandate with relatively stable resources while meeting growing central agency requirements.
Plans and Priorities
The priorities, both ongoing and the plans that support them, are aimed at improving the Commission's ability to resolve conduct complaints against the military police and interference complaints by the military police in a fair and timely manner and at having its recommendations implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. By addressing these priorities and plans, the Commission will provide for greater public accountability by the military police and the chain of command in relation to military police investigations.
Priority 1: Improving the effectiveness and the efficiency of the complaints resolution process
Refine standards, practices and performance measures
A little over a year ago, the Commission implemented a new service standard and a new approach to investigations aimed at improving the quality of investigations and at reducing 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 past year, the Commission monitored its timeframes and the quality of its reports, and made the adjustments necessary to meet the tighter time and quality standards that were developed. The Commission will continue to examine its processes and make whatever refinements are necessary to improve the quality of its investigations, to reduce the time and cost required to complete an investigation and issue its reports, and to improve on the effectiveness of its reports in encouraging implementation of corrective action.
Increase transparency of Commission operations
To ensure that the complaints resolution system operates as it should, the Commission must ensure that its mandate and mission are well known among its stakeholders: the military police, the Canadian Forces and Canadians in general. The Commission must also ensure that its stakeholders are aware of how the complaints resolution process works and the fairness that the Commission brings to the overall process. The Commission intends, over the planning period, to maintain its outreach program (at least 5 base visits each year), and to increase the quantity and quality of information gathered during the base visits. The Commission will expand the information on its website and will monitor it for traffic and usage patterns to determine if changes need to be made to the Commission's information packages. In addition, the Commission will undertake, as part of its planned review of the communications program, a series of stakeholder consultations, in order to assess the quality, accessibility and usefulness of its information.
Enhance working relationships with stakeholders
The Commission requires the cooperation of others to be successful. As mentioned earlier, a final report can not be issued until the military or defence hierarchy has provided a response to the Chairperson's interim report. As well, recommendations for improvements issued by the Commission in its interim and final reports are not binding on the Canadian Forces or DND. Quality working relationships with the Canadian Forces and DND enhance the likelihood that investigations will go smoothly and recommendations will be accepted and implemented.
Improve operational capacities
This planning element remains unchanged from the previous year. Because the Commission does not control the number, the complexity or the timing of the complaints it receives, it must be able to increase its operational capacities with very little advance notice and without losing control over the costs of investigations. To enable it to address both concerns, the Commission outsources its investigations. It has established billing practices and a fee structure to minimize costs and prevent downtime. Outsourcing ensures availability and enables a better match between investigation requirements and investigator skill sets. This year, the Commission is looking at establishing a National Individual Standing Offer (NISO) to increase its inventory of skilled investigators and give the Commission greater flexibility in investigator selection and cost management.
The Commission receives a variety of corporate services from external suppliers. During the next year, the Commission will review its working arrangements with these suppliers to ensure that efficiencies and costs savings are being achieved.
Assist the government in ensuring that the statutory framework meets Canadian expectations for current standards in police oversight
Police oversight is not stationary; it is constantly evolving and moving forward. In the same manner, the expectations of Canadians are evolving and moving forward. The status quo is not the goal. The Commission remains ready to provide its expertise and experience to ensure that standards evolve and best practices are followed.
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.
Refine standards, practices and performance measures |
|
|
2.
Increasetransparency of the Commission's operations |
|
|
3.
Enhance working relationships with stakeholders |
|
|
4.
Improve operational capacities |
|
|
5.
Assist the government in ensuring that the statutory framework meets Canadian expectations for current standards in police oversight |
|
Priority 2: Improving governance
The Commission needs to find ways to work more efficiently, in compliance with the requirements of both the Commission and the central agencies while ensuring that its scarce resources are applied in a manner to achieve the best results.
Attract and maintain a high quality workforce
The Commission's ability to successfully discharge its mandate will depend to a great extent on the professionalism and stability of its workforce. The planning for human resource needs, in both the short and long term, is critical to ensure that the quality of services currently being provided can be maintained. With the increased emphasis on human resource planning, recruiting will become more proactive. The Commission recognizes that turnover is inevitable in a micro-agency where, because most positions are "one-of", there is limited opportunity for advancement within the organization. As a result, the Commission is focusing on developing an environment that is both challenging and rewarding, an environment that will help to attract quality employees. Retention is important so emphasis will be placed on further developing an awards and recognition program. The knowledge and skills of the individual employees will be addressed by preparing learning plans for all employees and ensuring the employees already in place have the necessary skills - an effort to develop a culture of continuous learning.
The Commission will continue to use service partners. As in prior periods, 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.
Adhere to the legislative and policy requirements of the Commission and the central agencies
The focus on compliance with the requirements of the Commission and the central agencies will continue. Efforts will continue in the areas of human resource management, finance, procurement and contracting, information management, and information technology to identify specific compliance requirements. The level of review will be determined based on the corporate risk profile that is in the process of being updated.
As well, the Commission will update its internal audit policy and plans based on further consultation with the Office of the Comptroller General in order to achieve compliance with the policy in advance of the 2009 deadline. Clarification will be sought regarding the evaluation policy and its applicability to the Commission.
Improve management practices and update policy suites
The Commission is in the process of reviewing the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) in order to help identify management issues and priorities. The MAF defines management and sets out the expectations for sound management. Although not yet complete, the MAF review will identify specific areas that are well managed and those that require improvement and attention.
The Commission's performance can be enhanced by better processes and tools for measuring performance. This will require a continuance of the collaboration with Treasury Board for the development of the Commission's performance measurement framework.
The Commission will formalize its asset management framework over the planning period. Capital equipment, including informatics assets, will be managed according to the Commission's evergreen program. A charge-out system will be formalized and updated for assets in use outside the office. An asset management policy will be documented.
Procurement and contract management is presently being externally reviewed. Implementing the recommendations resulting from this review will ensure sound management of the procurement and contracting operations.
The Commission, over the planning period, will be reviewing its policy suite (the Commission's policy suite is a combination of those policies developed by the Commission, as well as those policies that are used unchanged as issued by Treasury Board). The intent is to ensure that the policies are clear and that the coverage is complete. Implementation plans will be developed to ensure that the Commission meets the requirements of these policies. A compliance framework will be developed to identify instances of non-compliance and implemented to correct these deficiencies.
The following table outlines the Commission's key plans and related performance indicators regarding improving management accountability.
| Plans | Performance Indicators |
|---|---|
|
1.
Attract and maintain a high-quality workforce |
|
|
2.
Adhere to the legislative and policy requirements of the Commission and central agencies |
|
|
3.
Improve management practices and update policy suites |
|
SECTION II — ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITY BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITY BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Strategic Outcome
The Commission has one strategic outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces.
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: to successfully resolve complaints about the conduct of military police members, as well as complaints of interference with military police investigations, by overseeing and reviewing all complaints received. This program is necessary to help the military police to be as effective and as professional as possible in their policing duties and functions.
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.
The Military Police Complaints Process
To appreciate the performance, it is necessary to understand the process. The Commission is mandated to monitor the investigation and disposition of complaints about military police conduct by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, to independently investigate such complaints, as appropriate, and to investigate allegations of interference in military police investigations. An overview of each complaint process is set out below.
The Canadian Forces Provost Marshal (CFPM), the chief of military police, has primary responsibility for the investigation of complaints about the conduct of military police. The Commission has the authority to monitor the investigation and disposition of the complaints by the CFPM, and to independently investigate complaints as appropriate, such as upon request of the complainant.
The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction for the investigation of complaints of interference in a military police investigation.
When the Chair determines it is in the public interest, the Commission can exercise its power to assume immediate responsibility for the investigation of a conduct complaint and, if warranted, to hold a public hearing.
Complaints About Police Conduct
Conduct Complaint Filed
Anyone, including civilians, may file a complaint about military police conduct.
Informal resolution is encouraged
Provost Marshal Investigates Complaint
The Commission monitors process, and may, in the public interest, assume responsibility for investigation or call a public hearing.
Request For Review
If not satisfied with the results of the Provost Marshal's investigation, a complainant can ask the Commission to review the complaint.
Commission Reviews Complaint
At a minimum, this process involves a review of documentation related to the Provost Marshal's investigation. It can also include interviews with the complainant, the subject of the complaint, and witnesses, as well as review of relevant legislation, and police policies and procedures.
Commission Releases Interim Report
Depending on the nature of the complaint, this report is sent to one or more of a number of senior officials in the Canadian Forces and/or the Defence Department.
Notice of Action
The Notice of Action, the official response to the Interim Report, outlines what action, if any, has been or will be taken in response to the Commission's recommendations.
Commission Releases Final Report
After considering the Notice of Action, the Commission issues a Final Report of finding and recommendations. Copies of the Final Report are provided to the complainant and the subject(s) of the complaint, among others.
Interference Complaints
Interference Complaint Filed
Members of the military police who conduct or supervise investigations may complain about interference in their investigations.
Commission Investigates
The Commission has sole jurisdiction over the investigation of interference complaints.
Commission Releases Interim Report
The Interim Report includes a summary of the Commission's Investigation, as well as its findings and recommendations. This report goes to the appropriate senior officials in the Canadian Forces and the Department of National Defence.
Notice Of Action
This official response to the Interim Report indicates the actions, if any, that have been or will be taken to implement the Commission's recommendations.
Commission Releases Final Report
Taking into account the response in the Notice of Action, the Commission prepares a Final Report of its findings and recommendations in the case. Both the complainant and the subject of the complaint are among those who receive copies of the report.
The Commission's involvement in investigating complaints about police conduct or interference complaints results in the Chair preparing reports (interim and final) of findings and recommendations. The interim report requires a response from a senior designated National Defence or Canadian Forces official regarding the action taken or planned for each of the recommendations. Such recommendations, and the responses to them, strengthen the professionalism of Canada's military policing and help to guarantee the integrity and independence of the military police.
Following the release of the investigation reports, the Commission expects the following results:
- the timely implementation of corrective action by DND to improve the quality of military policing and increased awareness, on behalf of the military police, the Canadian Forces and the public, of military policing issues, as well as an overall improvement in military policing practices; and
- confirmation of the correctness of military police conduct and the quality of police systems.
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.
SECTION III — SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
| Strategic Outcome: Conduct complaints against the Military Police and interference complaints by the Military Police are resolved in a fair and timely manner and recommendations made are implemented by the Department of National Defence and/or the Canadian Forces. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expected Results | Planned Spending ($ millions) |
Alignment to Government of Canada Outcome Area | |||
| 2008–2009 | 2009–2010 | 2010–2011 | |||
| Program Activity: Complaints Resolution |
timely implementation of corrective action by DND to improve on the quality of military policing confirmation of the correctness of military police conduct and the quality of police systems |
3.4 | 3.4 | 3.4 | maintaining safe and secure communities in Canada and abroad |
The following tables are available electronically on the Secretariats's website at http://tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20082009/p3a_e.asp
- Green Procurement
- Internal Audits
- Services Received Without Charge
- Summary of Capital Spending by Program Activity
SECTION IV — OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION — HOW TO REACH THE COMMISSION
- Call our information line:
- 613-947-5625 or toll-free at 1-800-632-0566 to speak to an intake officer
- Send us a fax:
- 613-947-5713 or toll-free at 1-877-947-5713
- Send us a letter:
- Military Police Complaints Commission
270 Albert Street, 10th floor
Ottawa, ON
K1P 5G8 - Visit us at the above address for a private consultation - appointments are recommended
- Military Police Complaints Commission
- E-mail us:
- commission@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca
Note: Please do not send confidential information via e-mail; we cannot guarantee the security of electronic communications at this time
- commission@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca
- Visit our website:
- Media inquiries:
- 613-947-5668 or e-mail media@mpcc-cppm.gc.ca
Table 1: Green Procurement
| 1. How is your department planning to meet the objectives of the Policy on Green Procurement? |
|---|
| The Commission plans to meet the objectives of the policy by reducing waste and supporting reuse and recycling. Environmental performance considerations will be incorporated into the requirements definition phase of all goods procurement in excess of $3,000. In addition, office stationary and supplies will be green procurement to the greatest extent possible. As well, all disposal practices will consider green and the Commission will recycle or reuse whenever it is practical to do so. |
| 2. Has your department established green procurement targets? |
| No |
| 3. Describe the green procurement targets that have been set by your department and indicate the associated benefits anticipated. |
| N/A see 2 above |
Table 2: Internal Audits *
| 1. Name of Internal Audit | 2. Internal Audit Type | 3. Status | 4. Expected Completion Date | 5. Electronic Link to Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Informatics Audit | Planned | 4th Quarter 2008–2009 |
N/A - in the planning stage |
* It should be noted that as a small agency, internal audit is provided by the Office of the Comptroller General (OCG). Until the internal audit coverage of the OCG is known, the Commission limits its planning period to one year.
Table 3: Services Received Without Charge
| ($ millions) | 2008–2009 |
|---|---|
| Contributions covering the employer's share of employees' insurance premiums and expenditures paid by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (excluding revolving funds) | 0.128 |
| Total services received without charge | 0.128 |
Table 4: Summary of Capital Spending by Program Activity
| ($ millions) | Forecast Spending 2007–2008 |
Planned Spending 2008–2009 |
Planned Spending 2009–2010 |
Planned Spending 2010–2011 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complaints Resolution | 0.021 | 0.023 | 0.021 | 0.030 |
| Total | 0.021 | 0.023 | 0.021 | 0.030 |