Just get out of the way!

Posted on by Pete Cross

One of the early founders of modern management theory, in the 20th century, was Peter Drucker. A widely popular and respected academic who coined such terms as the “knowledge worker”, and explored in his books and articles, how humans are organized, across business, government and non-profit entities. He was the leading edge of the massive growth of whole schools of business managers and professed experts in the world of management.

There are of course drawbacks to what has become an obsessive need to create the “perfect” manager. But Drucker forseaw also saw a bit of the future when he wrote about misguided or “over controlling managers.” In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal another author points to the fact that, “workers are most often productive when their managers leave them alone”. It was entitled: “Bosses, get out of your Employees Way”. Both the Wall Street Journal and Drucker wrote about the characteristics of managers who are not working well; too much meddling, too many meetings, and “butt covering” reports.

In the world of politics, there are countless examples of how things go wrong when the politicos and the senior bureaucrats get together, often leading to massive and costly dysfunction. It is almost always the taxpayer and those workers that are at the lower echelon who bear the brunt of their decision making.

One should look no further than the recent ongoing saga of the Surrey Police Service and the Mounties; and in particular the influence of Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke.

In the Brenda Locke/NDP fiasco in Surrey, Mayor Locke fought what seemed to be an obvious policing outcome for 18 months and wreaked havoc on any possibility of a smooth and cost effective transition. She was the ultimate hypocrite, having voted in favour originally of a municipal force, but then deciding for pure political reasons, that she was going to fight it at every step of the way. She clearly demonstrated time after time, that she had no real grasp of the logistics and the day to day running of police operations.

Most Mounties, if being honest with themselves know that the RCMP have simply lost their way, maybe temporarily, but currently they are struggling on every level. They can no longer fulfill their mandate nor their Provincial contracts with any degree of certainty. They also know that the writing is on the wall, in that the Ottawa mandarins themselves want to go to a Federal police force; they no longer want the headache brought on by Provincial contracts. It will take years but that is clearly the direction they are going. They want to be the Canadian Bureau of Investigation.

Despite all of this, Brenda Locke was supported by the upper echelon of the Surrey RCMP Detachment and the managers of the National Police Federation union in her personal fight. The senior executives in that Detachment played silly bugger, in the faint hope that their puppet Locke would do their bidding. The Executives did not want to be pushed out of their biggest detachment and the union did not want to lose a significant number of their members. They fabricated their capabilities and they obfuscated the costing formulas in an effort to convince Locke that they and the Ottawa RCMP establishment behind them were the answer to Surrey’s policing issues. Somehow, they also convinced Locke that the Police Act did not trump her authority as mayor. In the end she had to do the dance of the damned. Millions of taxpayer dollars later, the Mounties are now getting ready to leave en masse, and the inevitable transition can begin. They have become the poster child for incompetence in police management.

However, there is a clearer example of when senior managers need to get out of the way and in this example the RCMP authored it themselves. It is the recent report on the James Smith Cree Nation killings in September 2022. It is what came of their internal review of those tragic killings. Interestingly, contrary to their normal practise they decided to release it to the public. (There is no need to comment at this time on the credibility of a report where the Mounties are judging their own actions). In their summations, true to form, nothing was done improperly, but in clear nouveau government speak said that “certain areas of growth were identified”. They said there were times where it was “unclear who was in charge”, and that it became confusing at times between their “three lead commanders”. That there aircrews were sometimes “flying with little purpose”. Let’s also put aside the oxymoron of “three lead commanders” and the fact that apparently the police were flying around with no goal in mind.

The response to the killings was for the most part handled properly. I believe the members on the ground did the job, like they did in Portapique . Although it may have been mayhem at the time, the job did get done, but with a large human cost.

The senior executives of the RCMP however, seem to never learn the basic lesson that should be taken from an Nova Scotia inquiry and the report now written in Saskatchewan. That lesson is that Senior managers in policing when it comes to urgent, time-sensitive and drawn out operational circumstances need to get out of the way. I have written many times, that in these types of situations especially, one needs to flatten the organizational pyramid and get rid of these gatherings of senior executives in these “Command Centres”. Transfer the decision making to the folks on the ground. I should also point out that my thoughts on this would not be popular in the current management teachings now being constantly extolled.

There are a couple of reasons I believe this to be the case, and it may go some way in also explaining the obstinance of the senior managers to accept any change.

First, in a para-military structure, which all police departments are, decision making is predicated on the thought that the higher the rank, the greater wisdom and experience and with it comes power. Under the current system of promotion and advancement in the RCMP and all police agencies, it can be easily argued that this is now not always the case. For the last couple of decades the process of advancement has been deeply flawed. The best and the brightest are not necessarily rising to the top and experience on the job is not the highest priority. It has been replaced by executives now given more credit for the ability to speak the lingo of government, the speech of political correctness, inclusion and diversity. They spend multiple years getting to that top, constantly trained in the appropriate messaging, spending more time in boardrooms, with white boards and group-think, mission statements and community policing modelling. In many ways they have to be political, we insist on it, and we have allowed many police agencies to become organizations only reflecting their government pay masters.

Secondly, the route up the ladder in policing means you leave the front lines, you become administrators, you are involved in policies and guidelines. You are removed from the day to day issues and the speed of operations, sometimes these individuals are many years removed. It attracts a certain type of personality to these roles, it certainly doesn’t attract those that joined policing to be “operational”or work on the front lines. The organizations are now structured in such a way, that if you want to stay “operational”, you simply can not go up the ladder.

In exercising their senior manager power, they now seem to have only one solution. Their solution, seemingly like all government departments, is always the call for more resources, greater supervision and a larger bureaucratic machine. The policing world itself has undergone a massive transformation in the last 30 years; the operational pyramid has been completely turned upside down. What used to take one person, now takes three, four, or five.

It should therefore come as no surprise, that in the Saskatchewan report they have decided that in the future, in their Division Emergency Operations Centre based in Regina, that they will now add a Flight Co-ordinator, a criminal analyst, and a major crime investigator to their list of senior executives. More bodies, more needed lines of extra communication.

When you have unusual or atypical criminal circumstances, like a Portapique or James Smith Cree Nation situations, paradoxically–the police put in charge decision makers who usually have been removed from operational policing, have only a cursory knowledge of the geographic area, the police personnel involved, and the makeup of the people and resources in that community. They now come from a world where split second decision making is not of the essence. They have to be briefed, establish more communication lines, and then set up their “command structure”. It is time consuming, confusing and it is needless.

So my advice in the end remains the same. Give the people on the ground the resources that are needed. That should be your only role. Harder yet, relinquish the power, but most importantly— get the hell out of the way.

Photo courtesy of Flickr Commons by aaron_anderer -some rights Reserved

“Double dipping” for China?

Posted on by Pete Cross

There has been a new case surface in the last week or two, which caught the attention of these tired old eyes. It was when the RCMP made a grand national pronouncement that they had arrested and charged an ex-Mountie; William “Bill” Majcher , with two counts under Sections 22 and 23 of the little used Security of Information Act.

The story caught my attention on a number of fronts. First, I knew of Mr. Majcher, but only in passing; secondly, the investigation was done by the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team (INSET), and it was the INSET unit in Quebec, even though it very much sounded like the offences occurred in British Columbia. That seemed a little unusual and could only mean that there were others involved and there was a trust issue. For those that needed to be reminded, INSET is the RCMP agency which is the direct liaison with CSIS (Canada’s spy agency). Therefore one must always be aware that CSIS and thus INSET often work on “political targets”, and therefore their mandate is often at the direction of the government or with the approval of government. There is little to no police independence when talking about either of those entities. So we should also keep in mind that old adage that “one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.”

With this in mind, China and its alleged political interference in recent Canadian elections has been a dominant story and pre-occupation for the last few months in Canada’s mainstream media. The Liberals have been under a great deal of political fire for their handling of the information surrounding the election interference, and their lack of investigation of it. So it seemed slightly more than coincidental that this case against Majcher was brought to the forefront in terms of its timing, and the obvious question as to whether it was being done to ease the pressure on the Liberals. Adding to the suspicion, is that these cases were historical, in that they occurred sometime during the years from 2014-2019. They also had said that this particular investigation had nothing to do with the alleged election interference. INSET says that their investigation surfaced as a result of a “complaint” in 2021, and now in 2023 they were bringing forth charges.

The accused, Mr. Majcher, was a Mountie from 1985 to 2007, some twenty-two years, and “retired” from the Inspector rank from the now defunct Integrated Market and Enforcement Team (IMET); an investigative group which had been mandated to investigate criminal activity in the Vancouver stock exchange and other financial markets. I met Mr. Majcher when he was the Inspector in charge, and we met out of necessity as he was the overseeing officer for an internal investigation that I completed on a Vancouver Police Department matter. He didn’t really pay much attention to the details of my report and signed off the investigation with little to no question. My first impressions of Mr. Majcher stand out now– and have been echoed by many people who knew him during his career. He began by showing me around his rather sumptuous office down on the Vancouver harbour front, and it was impressive from any government employee perspective, with its two storey high windows and its unhindered view of the moneyed yachts. It all turned out to be part of his pitch to me to come to their section, as they were looking for an experienced team leader/primary file investigator at the time.

He was a pretty impressive salesman about the job, but he was an obvious salesman, in that stock broker, car salesman kind of way. I later found out that before joining the RCMP he had in fact been a Eurobond trader. (Eurobonds by the way were one of the first tools developed and marketed to aid in the hiding of funds offshore) He was also clearly intelligent, but his flaw may have been in believing that he was always the smartest person in the room. He was always talking, but not overly concerned with listening. I considered the job at the time because of my interest in economic crime (much cleaner than homicide), but then turned it down after researching it a bit, and learning that the section was having trouble getting their feet off the ground, due to a variety of reasons and legal complications.

As it turned out, Mr. Majcher later got himself in some hot water while with IMET, and he became the subject of an internal investigation in 2005. I was told at the time, that it had something to do with his continuing involvement in the stock market, but I never heard the full story. In the end, presumably rather than face further investigation he “retired”– the always tried and true option the Mounties go to when handling troublesome employees. The public material says that Mr. Majcher in 2006, had already moved to Hong Kong– clearly never one to let the grass grow under his feet.

Like every ex-Mountie who is looking for a double-dipping job, and populate LinkedIn, Mr. Majcher talked up his previous investigational work experience and touted himself as an extraordinary undercover officer who continually risked life and limb in pursuit of the bad guy. His resumé was clearly bloated, but Mr. Majcher in fact did do a good job as an undercover operator on a couple of investigations. In the roles he played he was always portraying “the money guy” — always the salesman. His most famous case was that of the case against Vancouver lawyer Martin Chambers in the late 1990’s. Mr. Chambers during his hey-day was a prominent Vancouver lawyer who was suspected of large scale money laundering for the Russians and the Hells Angels. During a staged video-taped meeting in Florida with Mr. Majcher playing his role of financial underworld figure, Mr. Chambers took possession of $700,000 cash, and provided offers to handle millions of dollars. Mr. Majcher was the primary undercover officer and had led Chambers to believe that he monies were coming from the Columbian cartels at the time. It was a joint FBI-RCMP sting, and it was successful, and Mr. Chambers was sentenced to 15 years and 8 months which he served in an Arkansas jail.

The Chambers case would be the case that Mr. Majcher seems to have used as his plank to build a spring-board into a position in Hong Kong. He described himself as a “risk assessment officer” for the investment banking community, and that he had moved there to “establish an international banking platform on behalf of Hong Kong merchant bank, representing a number of Chinese state owned and non-state owned enterprise clients engaged in overseas capital world activities”. Not only would he bring to the table his extensive investigational expertise, but they would be able to employ “military grade cyber technology” in the pursuit for their clients.

He later formed the company EMIDR in 2016, a “Hong Kong based cyber-security company”. In a video he described himself as “a hired gun to help either large corporations or governments to get back what is rightfully theirs”.

Now most of us can see the salesman oozing out of these marketing pronouncements. But, despite the clear aggrandizement of his capabilities and the obvious exaggeration as to what they could bring to the world of money laundering, nevertheless, Mr. Majcher was indeed tapping into or at the very least trying to tap into a potential gold mine.

And this is where it all gets rather complicated.

It gets complicated in terms of the story line, and it gets complicated in the list of characters who may be playing in the game. First and foremost, this story is about money laundering, at least on the surface. But it is also about the many layers and degrees of inherent corruption. It is a fact that mainland China has had numerous individuals remove monies from their country, contrary to their own laws, as well as ill gotten gains that were taken out of the country from illegal activities. By any measure it is estimated that they have lost billions of dollars over the last number of years. And as you guessed, there have been a few select countries which these suspect individuals have turned to in order to facilitate the laundering of those funds. One of course, high on the list, is Canada, and specifically Vancouver. (do you remember the Cullen Commission?) Another area was along the “Gold coast” of Australia and the city of Melbourne. Their were other locations of interest to these monies seeking a home and the luxury of anonymity such as New York and Chicago. Hong Kong which was a city designated as a special administrative region of China, was heavily involved in the movement of those monies wanting to escape from China, due to its geographic proximity and the lack of foreign exchange controls.

The people who have orchestrated these money movements are now considered by the Chinese government to be criminals. As a result China started two projects; Sky Net in 2015 and Project Dragon in 2019, to track down and try and get back those monies. The latter project focused on the gold coast of Australia and those funds that were being used to purchase real estate. China of course, as Majcher himself stated in an interview, needs to “walk a very fine line”, as to the perception of anyone working for a foreign government. So China smartly formed public/ private partnerships with various firms, who would assist them in tracking down individuals and finding the monies. As expected they went to those with knowledge of the host countries who advertised themselves as having “expertise” in that country along with their “investigative resources”. Enter Majcher and other similar firms, especially those firms staffed by ex-police officers. Mr. Majcher openly said during a television interview that “I have a commercial relationship with entities that are in themselves associated in some form or another with policing authorities in China”.

Of course, most of these ex police officers who have entered this private field, have little or minimal hands on experience, they are primarily being hired because of their “contacts” in policing. Mr. Majcher is not a cyber expert, smashing the keyboard, hacking the demographic data sites to find someone; he is likely just picking up the phone and calling persons in the policing world who do have that information at their finger tips, and are willing to assist them in finding people. Mr. Majcher worked for the most part in British Columbia, ergo his contacts will be in British Columbia and in particular Vancouver, this hot bed for Chinese money laundering in Canada.

Two ex-Aussi police officers, Jason McFetridge and Austin Whittaker, in the Melbourne Australia area who had a similar firm to Mr. Majcher were interviewed about how the plan to recover the funds would come about and how it would be executed. Both maintain that it was a completely legitimate pursuit to get their client’s money back. It was a simple plan, but one that bordered on extortion. They would identify the people with the apparent illicit funds, confront them, tell them they are on to them, and that they needed to sign over their properties to the ex-police officer company. They in turn would then sell the company and send the monies back to China for a fat commission. The obvious inference, should the accused not “voluntarily” sign over the money, was that there would be repercussions for their families back in China, or telling them they face jail time if they ever return to China etc.

Does China have a right to pursue criminals and money launderers? It would seem legally justifiable, but what becomes questionable is of course how they go about it. Do they have the right to have hired personnel threaten people and insinuate sinister repercussions–that strains legality. It would have to be at the very least an inference and not a direct threat. The Skynet project apparently identified over 3,000 people that the Chinese government felt had broken their laws.

It would be easy to say the Chinese are wrong, and this is a step gone too far. And of course, what if the people they are pursuing are not criminals?

Historically Canada, and in particular Vancouver, has a very murky bordering on sinister relationship with communist China.

In 2015 China tried to sign agreements with the CBSA and the RCMP to assist them in pursuing their people of interest. In the late 1990’s Lai Changxing was considered “China’s most wanted fugitive”, a man who had been implicated in several corruption scandals in China involving a large smuggling ring. He evaded arrest and settled in Vancouver, where he was arrested by Canadian authorities, went through a long extradition battle but eventually was sent back to China in 2011, where he was given a life sentence. So at one time, the Canadian government was participating in the very same thing.

There is the Meng Wanzhou matter where a high ranking member of the Chinese establishment and the Chief Financial officer for Huawei was arrested in Vancouver, on behalf of the Americans and was facing extradition. China retaliated by arresting two innocent Canadians as “spies”, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. Meng eventually reached a “deferred prosecution agreement” with the Americans, the charges were dropped, and she was returned to China after having been under house arrest for close to three years. During this time she was given VIP protection to and from court by the Lions Gate Risk Management group, a group also filled with many ex-police officers who also advertise their specialities in “Money laundering and Asset tracing”. Mr. Majcher during this time admits to also being contacted by China looking for some help and monitoring of the case against Meng.

And let us not forget the matter of the ex-Mountie, Ben Chang, who during the Wanzhou hearings refused to testify about his role in the arrest of Meng Wanzhou while an RCMP officer. Since the arrest time, Mr. Chang had turned his old foreign liaison posting with the RCMP in Hong Kong into a retirement job as a senior security officer in the resort casino Galaxy Macau. His last minute refusal cast doubt on the credibility of the government lawyers who maintained that the RCMP did not share any information on Ms. Weng’s computers and mobile phones. Somewhat mysteriously, the prosecutors did not subpoena Mr. Chang. The Galaxy group as it turned out is owned by Lui Che Woo, a Hong Kong businessman who served on the standing committee of an advisory group to Bejing. Mr. Majcher it has been reported to have been at one time Mr. Chang’s supervisor.

INSET has hinted that they are looking at other officers involved in Mr. Majcher’s case. One of the names surfacing is Ken “Kim” Marsh, another ex-RCMP officer, who has written a book about his exploits entitled “Cunning Edge”. Mr. Marsh who has been named as a co-conspirator with Mr. Majcher, but not yet charged, once cooperated with Majcher on cases; and Marsh identifies himself as his “Mountie friend”. In his book Marsh talks about being “hooked up” with Russian millionaire Vladimir Antonov for a “due diligence report” that he charged Antonov $500,000 to prepare. Antonov would later be charged with embezzling “hundreds of millions of dollars from a bank in Lithuania”. Marsh is now seemingly perplexed by his naming in this most recent Majcher investigation. As he says in the introduction to his book, “he gave decades of his life to his work, all in the pursuit of bringing bad guys to justice…for his clients…and society at large”. He doesn’t mention that it was also primarily to make money.

So what are the charges specifically? Section 22 is labelled “preparatory acts” and states in essence that anyone who enters Canada,… or retains or gains access to any information… for the benefit of a foreign entity, a terrorist group, or an economic entity… and then communicates that information to them is guilty of an offence. This section refers back to Section 16, 17, 19 and 20 which get more specific as to whether the information is designed to “harm Canadian interests…or is reckless with that information”. Section 20 deals with using the information in association with a “foreign entity” to “induce, by threat, accusation, menace or violence, any person to do anything or cause anything to be done”. Section 23 is just the “conspiracy” section saying that one can not conspire to do any of the above.

So there is three elements to these offences that need to be proven. Was Majcher working for a foreign entity? Did they obtain information that was being guarded by the government, and finally did they threaten anybody or coerce anybody to take some action on behalf of the foreign entity? In terms of the press briefing by Inspector David Beaudoin they say that the charges surround “preparatory acts for the benefit of a foreign entity and conspiracy”. As stated previously, they began their investigation in the fall of 2021, and it was for the time period of 2014-2019. There are going to be some significant legal hurdles. Does the government of China have the right to pursue persons they consider thieves and money launderers? Are private investigators, indirectly working for the foreign government allowed to make inquiries as to money laundering and attempt to find those persons? America, Britain, Australia and even Canada using various investigational instruments make inquiries constantly for this same purpose. The RCMP and Canada have directly participated in doing the very same thing, but of course they will argue that they and only they are the safe-guarders of that information.

If one is interested in this kind of thing and would like a full view of the extent of the problem, I recommend the book “Moneyland” which the Economist magazine called the “book of the year”, written by British journalist Oliver Bullough. It is a deep dive into money laundering and the people behind it, including the lawyers, bankers and governments that both front face the problem and are part of the problem. The city of Vancouver is featured as a sought after refuge for the kleptocrats from China, Russia, and south Asia and he outlines the number of groups trying to track them down, often frustrated by the lack of government action on the issue. It is such a broad and expansive problem that he argues that it is under cutting the pillars of western democracy.

There is one other aspect of this story that is intriguing. That is the media coverage of this story led by journalists like Sam Cooper changes the motivation behind China. Cooper who is never shy in trumpeting his investigative journalism skills on the subject of money laundering in Vancouver. As it turns out he has admittedly conferred in the past with Kim Marsh on stories such as the Cameron Ortis story; and it would be a pretty easy assumption that he has RCMP sources feeding him information. The interesting part is that his take, and therefore the apparent take of the RCMP is that China is “not interested in getting back their money…only interested in controlling the people in the country”. In other words it is all part of a conspiracy to control the Canadian government through spies and agents.

It is an interesting postulation, but there is little to no evidence to support it. There is no doubt that China has for decades searched out persons and politicians who would speak positively about China and possibly try to influence legislation. While in Security Service in the 1980’s and early 1990’s we were already watching the Chinese operatives in Canada trying to influence politicians. The problem is one of definition. In the U.S. for example, they simply call them “lobbyists”. Here, in this country there is not even a foreign registry set up, so how concerned or worried about it is the Canadian government? In Mr. Majcher’s case, there is much more evidence that China is going after the money, they have always been aggressive industrialists, and there is an abundance of evidence that there that there is a treasure trove of ex- Mounties who are willing to set their flexible ethics aside and give them a hand.

There is politics wrapped around politics in this investigation, and the timing is highly suspicious and of major interest will be who initiated the original complaint. In this new age of ingrained disinformation and when our media seems to have an agenda, it is increasingly necessary to question sources. But, when it comes to unravelling the mysteries of China and its cultural layers, one needs to be very careful indeed. The only aspect of this story that seems to bear out consistently, is that there are apparently plenty of of ex-cops willing to help– for a fee of course.

Photo courtesy of Images Money via Flickr Commons – Some rights reserved

Harassment Complaints and officers searching for gold…

Posted on by Pete Cross

It would be easy to speak to the nonsense that continues in Surrey and the shenanigans of Mayor Locke, or the fact that our Prime Minister has revealed himself to be a “Swiftie”, and is apparently devastated by the fact that Taylor isn’t scheduled to appear in Canada this year– but those topics are too easy. They are the types of subjects that are repeatedly proving themselves too easy to poke fun at and there is no challenge in it. And It’s summer, so one’s thoughts should be filled with images of sand, sun and warm rays. Nevertheless the ridiculousness continues to keep washing over us, as much as we try to not watch the news or listen, we are being inundated by the blarney.

So lets talk about sexual harassment and harassment complaints in the RCMP. Nothing like a good debate on sexual harassment to kill the beach boys vibe. It is a serious issue to be sure, but one which the RCMP, or more specifically the Liberal government has managed to turn into another three ring victim compassion circle. As is often the case, my interest and then my incredulity, was spiked by a recent CBC article. By the way, should you ever wish to get riled up, the CBC is usually the best place to start, as they are continually searching the world over, for the next victim, the next devastated community, the next world crisis which is forcing us to the brink of extinction. In terms of the story in question, one has to suspect that when they ran this sexual harassment story, they were clearly having a slow day, or were maybe more concerned with the current campaign by the Liberals to try and get Facebook to pay them for putting their television news clippings on their website.

The CBC story begins with the usual flabbergasted proclamation in the headline, that the Independent Centre for Harassment Resolution is, god help us all, backlogged. Justice is not being done, justice is on hold, victims, and their lawyers are forced to wait long lines, bureaucratic stalemates are everywhere. The CBC voiced their outrage, and then they needed to go find a couple of prattling victims to outline and demonstrate these nefarious examples of injustice.

First, one needs to remember that the RCMP has already paid out $125 million to 2,304 female officers who made claims of being sexually harassed or abused over the last thirty or so years; this averages out to $54,253.47 paid out per complainant. That was in 2016. Then, a few years later they then paid out another $100 million to female employees who were in “non-policing roles” with the RCMP. But that was clearly not enough for the liberal gods of outrage.

On June 30th, 2021 the government and the RCMP then created the Independent Centre for Harassment Resolution. This was another bureaucratic group that was going to act as an “investigative” body to deal with the apparent and rampant ongoing harassment that was taking place daily in the misogynistic RCMP. They have proven to be too popular. Since opening their doors, they say they are now dealing with “hundreds of sexual assault and harassment complaints”. This has led to “long delays”, and now having to apologize due to the fact that in their initial mandate they were claiming that the time line for any complaint was going to be a maximum of 12 months.

In their current reporting the ICHR says that in the two years of their existence, they have now received 940 notices/complaints– 165 in this year alone. They have completed 325 investigations to date, and at least 71 are still awaiting the assignment of an “investigator”. Of course because of this deluge of discontent, they are now not able to stick to their 12 month timeline.

These numbers seem high. Is it possible that this has become another place where the ever sniffing Mounties have picked up the scent of gold. Has this become another Veterans Disability pot of shiny substance, where certain members, who are willing to abuse the system, are now also lurking in great numbers? I realize some people may take offence at this proclamation, that this will be seen as a damning indictment which aims at the honesty and credibility of the officers involved. I will apologize in advance, to those with legitimate claims. However there is a great deal of anecdotal evidence, a great deal of smoke, of this simply being the latest pot at the end of the rainbow. This has excited the less than scrupulous officers, who we all know are out there.

Of course, we are not allowed to look in, all of the files are guarded by Privacy “concerns”, so we will never know the true extent of fraudulent claims, unless someone on the inside speaks out. But, no worries, the CBC is an expert in seeking out the victims and have enticed some to come forward to at the very least, provide the nature of their complaint.

The example provided by the CBC concerns the case of officer Nicole Patapoff, who speaks through her lawyer, Sherry Shir. Ms. Patapoff is an eight year member, who was just coming off maternity leave, so has probably six or seven years active service, and she was thus required to attend firearms qualifications at her local range to “re-qualify”. Ms. Patapoff was having troubles on the firing range, with the strength in her “trigger finger”. Now, for those that don’t know, this is a common problem, as it requires some strength to pull the trigger and hold it while maintaining breathing and control. Every time I was at the range doing the same thing, there was inevitably someone who was having problems with their trigger finger not being strong enough, or they had small hands, which made it more difficult for consistent trigger pull. Often the instructor will encourage the person to actually do finger exercises, in their off-time, to try and get it right.

The offence according to Ms. Patapoff, was that the instructor told her to go home, clean the bathroom with windex or something similar to help strengthen that trigger finger. One could only assume that he meant that by using the spray device would help build up strength, but of course that is not how Ms. Patapoff took it. She was angered, and said that the statement was “misogynistic, belittling, offensive, disrespectful, and demeaning”.

An 18 month harassment investigation ensued.

The eventual but short lived good news is that her complaint was dismissed, as not meeting the criteria under the Canada Labour Code.

Had sanity finally prevailed?

But wait, as you guessed, the madness of it all continues. There is no administrative appeal process. So, lawyer Sherry Shir took the case to Federal court and argued that the complaint was “dismissed improperly”, and launched an appeal on behalf of Ms. Patapoff.

Court documents now reveal that the original investigator has now been removed from the approved list of ICHR investigators; and earlier this month the RCMP have now agreed to assign another investigator to this case. Would anyone like to guess what the new outcome will be?

They are also complaining that it is all taking too long. Amanda Nemer the Executive Director of the ICHR blames the delays on the “lack of market availability for external investigators”. One would think that you would only have to go to LinkedIn because they seem to have lists of people who advertise themselves as “investigators”. But, I will accept her explanation, as who in their right mind would want to head up this massive investigation. One must also keep in mind it took the first investigator 18 months for an investigation that would boil down to two questions. Did you say it? Is this contrary to the Canadian Labour Code?

Marco Mendocino, the Minister responsible, and quickly trying to overtake Bill Blair as the most incompetent Minister in the Liberal government, is heartened by “the rise in complaints”, that it is a “positive sign as it demonstrates the confidence that the RCMP members and employees have in this system”. So one could assume if every singe person in the RCMP made a complaint, Mr. Mendocino would interpret this to mean that everything was good because they had faith in the process.

The second case, albeit briefly mentioned by the CBC is the one involving RCMP officer Todd Gray. You will remember him; he is the member complaining of harassment, and one of his complaints is that he had to ride in the horse trailer while assigned and on the Musical ride. (by the way, I am told that that was a common practise when the Ride was travelling with the horses).

If these two examples are the best cases for the argument against sexual harassment and bullying, then the RCMP and this government is in some serious trouble in terms of their credibility.

The problem with all of this seems to be that the Mounties are just one group, that has come to the realization that when it comes to suing the Federal government, there are certain cases you will always win– regardless of the evidence or lack of evidence. Any suit you can bring that deals with harassment, sexual harassment, disabilities, or indigenous rights will in effect be settled– the government and the RCMP will never go to court. When anyone brings forward a case that can involve these topics, it seems to chum the waters for the circling lawyer sharks. The lawyers and their clients know that virtually all of these types of cases end with the conversation “What will it cost to make this go away?” It is now well established that the Liberal government will never be forced into a headline where they are appearing to be insensitive to these issues. Money is no object, when one needs to be seen and are being directed so as to be on the right side of good.

Unfortunately, there are certain officers who can convince themselves that any infraction or misstatement should result in compensation. I know of many cases of officers abusing the Veterans Affairs disability system, and I know many cases of officers benefitting from the sexual harassment settlements where the evidence was dubious or weak at best. It’s all anecdotal, although many officers can’t help themselves and brag about their winnings, because no one is allowed to know, and therein lies the beauty of the fraud. There is no punishment or redress for making a vexatious complaint, you simply give it a try and see if it works.

So, I am sorry Ms. Patapoff, your complaint from the outside looking in, appears ridiculous, you are wasting the resources of government. But, I also suspect that in a year or two, if you hang in there, you will get a settlement and that it will be paid out, just to have you go away. It may not amount to much in the end, once your lawyer takes their 30% however. And if you continue your policing career, prepare to get much more offended by what people say to you– it will be more offensive than someone telling you to squeeze a Windex applicator.

Photo courtesy of Paul Scott Via Flickr Commons — Some Rights Reserved