Contract Policing Assessment: “What We Heard”

May 2024

Executive Summary

Overview

From March to December 2023, Public Safety Canada undertook engagement with provinces, territories and municipalities, Indigenous partners and other stakeholders to assess the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) contract policing program.

The goal of the assessment was to gather feedback from contract jurisdictions and partners on what works well and what needs improvement with contract policing, and to help develop a vision of what contract policing could look like after the expiry of the current contracts in 2032.

Public Safety Canada developed a discussion guide for partner engagement which focused on four themes: governance and accountability; program sustainability and cost; service delivery; and, long-term vision.

What We Heard

The purpose of this report is to summarize feedback received from partners. Contract jurisdictions shared a range of feedback across all four themes, but generally acknowledged the hard work, expertise, professionalism and dedication of local RCMP front-line officers who serve communities on a daily basis. Further, many jurisdictions expressed high levels of satisfaction with the quality of RCMP policing services delivered in their communities and their intention to continue with the RCMP as the local service provider. In particular, no province or territory indicated an intention to withdraw from the contract policing program at this time, but some noted that they would be reviewing options moving forward.

On governance and accountability, many partners expressed a desire for the national contract policing model to be more flexible to allow for greater local influence and control over the design and delivery of policing services to better meet the unique needs of communities across the country. Some partners referenced the establishment of local police commissions as an example of a robust accountability and oversight structure to ensure community views could be better represented in planning and operations.

Contract jurisdictions noted the importance of relationships with local RCMP leadership. Some indicated that strong partnerships are established and others highlighted the need for improvement. Many partners highlighted that they believe they have limited influence over the RCMP, indicating that internal RCMP approaches, guided by national policies and practices, can be barriers to addressing community priorities. Many said that they felt inadequately consulted on both local and national issues that impact the cost of local RCMP policing services, such as collective bargaining and the introduction of body-worn cameras, and felt financially challenged to pay these additional costs.

Discussions on program sustainability and cost focused on significant concerns from many provincial and municipal partners with persistent RCMP vacancies, and the RCMP's ability to recruit and train enough Regular Members to meet its contractual demands, including program growth. Most partners expressed concerns with the rising cost of policing in general and, in particular, for RCMP services. This is a significant issue for municipal partners as many noted that, unlike provincial and federal governments, they have limited budgetary flexibility and financial capacity.

A few smaller municipalities specifically voiced concerns over the increased costs associated with transitioning to Municipal Police Service Agreements (MPSAs) once they pass the threshold of 5,000 residents due to population growth^{Footnote 1}. Most municipalities echoed the concerns raised by provinces and territories (PTs) with respect to RCMP recruitment and training activities, and associated vacancy rates.

Territorial and Indigenous partners noted the need for the RCMP to continue to integrate itself more into communities, to learn community norms and establish lasting ties, and to focus on more proactive policing approaches that employ early intervention and de-escalation techniques. Several partners also highlighted the importance of RCMP officers receiving culturally relevant training, and for ongoing RCMP recruitment efforts to focus on hiring Indigenous police officers to police their own communities. Furthermore, many Indigenous partners noted that the RCMP should acknowledge and enforce local Band Council resolutions and community bylaws. It is important to note that participation amongst Indigenous partners was low.

Regarding service delivery, almost all jurisdictions expressed their gratitude for the hard work and dedication of front-line RCMP officers and satisfaction with local RCMP service delivery. Many partners, particularly municipalities, identified issues regarding access to necessary and timely RCMP business data and intelligence to support decision-making and reporting obligations. Police presence, visibility and response times were of particular significance to rural communities.

Some partners expressed concern with the RCMP's ability to establish alternative service delivery approaches, citing implementation barriers from RCMP Headquarters. As well, northern partners expressed the view that the current one-size-fits-all police agreements do not account for the unique nature of northern jurisdictions (i.e., geography, population, culture).

Some partners also articulated the need to evolve the service delivery model from an intervention/enforcement-based model to a community safety-oriented model in order to address root causes of crime and decrease criminal activity over the longer term (e.g., integration with health and social services, alternative response capability). They also noted that, in their view, RCMP personnel should be more connected to the communities they serve, a challenge which they attributed, in part, to RCMP transfer policies.

Many partners highlighted the importance of federal policing to their jurisdictions and advocated for a continued and, in some cases, expanded presence to better address serious criminal threats and improve the provision of specialized services. They also suggested that Public Safety Canada needs to be more active in managing the administration of the contracts and holding the RCMP, as a service provider, to account for police service obligations contained within the contracts, and ensuring appropriate compliance with the terms and conditions of the contracts.

In terms of a program vision beyond 2032, most partners noted their preference to maintain the RCMP as their contract policing service provider. Those that expressed the potential to explore transition from RCMP to independent police services cited increasing cost pressures and the need for more local control/influence as primary change drivers.

All contract partners are currently considering the future of the program and the renewal in 2032. They also noted the importance of clarity from the federal government on its future role in policing and expressed concern that the federal government could seek to exit contract policing prior to, or when the current contracts expire. All partners stressed the need to be informed well in advance (approximately 5 years) of 2032 should there be any decision by the federal government to reconsider or adjust the contract policing footprint.

Context

Policing is essential to keeping Canadians safe and secure, and is one of the Government of Canada's most important responsibilities. In Canada, policing is a shared responsibility between all levels of government. Under the Constitution, provinces are responsible for the administration of justice, including policing.

The federal government also has a role in policing, which is primarily exercised through the RCMP through three operational mandates: federal policing, the provision of specialized policing services, including national policing services, and contract and Indigenous policing. Federal policing^{Footnote 2} addresses the highest-level threats in the areas of national security, serious and organized crime, financial crime, cyber-crime and border enforcement. National policing services provides specialized police support services (e.g., forensic lab services, Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre) to all police agencies in Canada. The RCMP is also contracted by all provinces and territories – except Ontario and Quebec – and over 150 municipalities across Canada to provide front-line policing services through the contract policing program. The current contracts expire on March 31, 2032, and Canada remains committed to fulfilling its contract obligations.

The December 2021 mandate letter to the Minister of Public Safety included a commitment to “conduct an assessment of contract policing in consultation with provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners and stakeholders.”

The purpose of this engagement exercise was to gather important feedback from partners and stakeholders on the contract policing program, and their vision for policing in their jurisdictions. Specifically, Public Safety Canada wanted to hear more about what works and what needs improvement under the program. The assessment was also an opportunity for Public Safety Canada to learn more about how to better support the evolving needs and interests of partners and the broader population in order to work towards a more sustainable and accountable program model.

This assessment is taking place at a time when there is significant public discussion around broader policing reform in Canada. This includes discussions around RCMP challenges, and the organizations future role in the Canadian policing landscape. These discussions are being driven by the release of significant reports including, the Mass Casualty Commission final report, The Public Order Emergency Commission report and the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians special report on RCMP federal policing.

Engagement Approach

In fall 2022, Public Safety Canada, supported by the RCMP, sought the views of Federal, Provincial and Territorial Ministers of Justice and Public Safety, Contract Management Committee Assistant Deputy Ministers and municipal representatives on its engagement strategy and approach. The feedback shared at each of these groups helped shape the final approach, which involved bilateral, in-person conversations with provincial and territorial officials, as well as virtual discussions with municipal contract jurisdictions, Indigenous communities that receive policing services from the RCMP, and other policing stakeholders (Annex A).

In March 2023, a discussion guide (Annex B) was shared with contract jurisdictions through the Contract Management Committee, which oversees the administration of the Police Service Agreements and functions as an information sharing forum. The document was intended to guide the discussion, but not constrain the opportunity for additional feedback. The guide identified four themes: governance and accountability; program sustainability and cost; service delivery; and, long-term vision (2032 and beyond).

Discussions were led by Public Safety Canada and included participation of RCMP representatives. All partners were also invited to provide written feedback if they desired. Discussions with officials from provinces and territories began in March of 2023 (Alberta and Manitoba), continued in April (Saskatchewan), May (New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland) and June (British Columbia, Northwest Territories, and Yukon), and concluded in July (Nova Scotia).

Municipal partners were present in meetings with Alberta, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Additional virtual discussions with municipalities and municipal associations from British Columbia and Alberta took place in June and July, and with municipalities and municipal associations from New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in August. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities was virtually consulted in March and provided written feedback in July. Other policing stakeholders engaged in the process included the Canadian Association of Police Governance in April, the Management Advisory Board of the RCMP in August, and the National Police Federation in September and October. Conversations with additional unions representing RCMP employees occurred in November.

Indigenous representatives participated in discussions with the Provinces of Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, and Manitoba. In addition, Public Safety Canada undertook dedicated engagement with Indigenous partners through a concurrent process, with some sessions facilitated by an external contractor. These discussions built upon the previous discussions held by Public Safety Canada regarding the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program and the co-development of First Nations police services legislation. A guide was shared with partners in advance to support these discussions (Annex C).

Virtual sessions were held with First Nations on a regional basis from September to October 2023. A broad range of participants were invited to the engagement sessions, which generally had smaller representation. An additional two national sharing circles were also held in October to hear from additional participants. Further, separate discussions were held with Indigenous partners from the territories in October, including with several Yukon First Nations.

In addition to these sessions, Public Safety Canada has also reviewed input provided during engagement with Indigenous partners regarding the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program, and the co-development of First Nations police services legislation, to determine where contract policing was mentioned. This information is incorporated into this report.

Recognizing the importance of Indigenous partner views on policing, work related to First Nation, Métis, and Inuit partners on the development of the federal Indigenous Justice Strategy and the associated implementation, and the co-development of First Nations police services legislation will inform future work on contract policing.

It is recognized that the views shared by Indigenous participants may not reflect the full breadth of unique perspectives, circumstances and considerations from Indigenous groups across the country. While the assessment of contract policing is now complete, it represents a first step in the discussion and engagement with contract partners towards the federal vision for contract policing beyond 2032.

What We Heard

Public Safety Canada values the feedback from all partners participating in the assessment. While some elements were consistent among all partners and stakeholders, others were unique to respective jurisdictions, regions or communities. This report attempts to strike the appropriate balance in representing the inputs and feedback shared across all elements during the assessment process. Although most jurisdictions identified issues and challenges with contract policing, many expressed high levels of satisfaction with the quality of RCMP policing services delivered in their communities, strong partnerships between the RCMP and jurisdictions, and their intention to continue with the RCMP as the local service provider.

Governance and Accountability

Public expectations are changing regarding the governance of police services and police accountability. In this context, governance can be defined as the local and national decision-making, management, administration, and accountability structures and practices of the contract policing program. This theme sought views on the current contract policing model and identified opportunities for improvement. Engagement discussions revealed that contract partners have and maintain strong working relationships with RCMP leadership and Regular Members in their respective jurisdictions.

Enhanced Control and Flexibility

All partners agreed that the contract policing model needs greater flexibility to allow for more local decisions by contract jurisdictions and the RCMP Commanding Officer of the Division. Some partners cited the RCMP's need to adhere to federal legislation, national policies, standards and processes as a key challenge (e.g., procurement, access to information) and as a barrier to establishing alternative service delivery models. For example, provinces noted that the RCMP was initially unable to participate in provincial domestic violence legislation, called Clare's Laws, as the federal Privacy Act prohibited the RCMP from disclosing a person's prior intimate partner violence information to current and former partners, among others.

Partners are seeking greater local control and influence over the setting of priorities and policing approaches in order to tailor RCMP front-line services to the unique needs of individual communities. Some partners also indicated that local RCMP, in some instances, point to barriers and decisions from Headquarters, and rigidity of federal policies and national standards, as the reason it is unable to implement community requests. Some Indigenous participants noted that they were not involved in setting RCMP community policing priorities, and that they should be involved in that process. Territorial representatives indicated they were generally satisfied with the extent to which divisional policing priorities reflected community objectives.

Some municipal contract partners indicated that jurisdictions with independent police services have more direct control over policing policies and approaches. For example, a representative from Halifax Regional Municipality, which has two police agencies of jurisdiction, noted that in their view local representatives were able to exert greater influence with the Halifax Regional Municipality Police, than with the RCMP. This included noting an ability to impact operational policies, such as the continued practice of street checks and the use of lie detectors as part of the police recruitment process. Some partners expressed a desire for greater flexibility to adapt their Police Service Agreements to respond to local needs.

Several partners underscored unilateral federal decisions, which may not factor-in jurisdictional needs or are misaligned with provincial and municipal policy direction, or which have disproportionate financial impacts on jurisdictions, such as the federal decision to implement body-worn cameras. A few partners identified the need for decentralized officer training options that are more responsive to local needs and context.

Local Commissions

Some jurisdictions indicated that the establishment of police commissions could support a more robust accountability and oversight structure to better reflect local views and ensure that policing services are better monitored and measured. It was also heard that the establishment of commissions could help with the advancement of local initiatives and priority-setting. Some partners highlighted that many current advisory boards/commissions do not have the same level of influence and authority as police boards for independent municipal police services. However, a few participants noted that the current advisory boards are sufficient, and expressed concerns that new oversight structures may lack sufficient capacity to be effective.

Strong Local Relationships

While the majority of contract partners indicated a strong working relationship with RCMP senior leadership and local detachments, they noted that service outcomes were sometimes contingent on individual relationships with senior RCMP leadership. They also suggested this dependence on relationships should be diminished. With regards to Indigenous communities, some noted that they did not always have a direct relationship with the local detachment, while others noted strong working relationships. 

Many jurisdictions stressed the importance of having a greater say on setting policing priorities and objectives, staffing of RCMP leadership positions (e.g., Detachment Commander), and the policing model itself. Some noted that their input on priorities were not being actioned and that they did not have sufficient influence over the selection of local RCMP leadership. Similarly, jurisdictions that have played an active role in the hiring process report positive experiences. For example, one Indigenous partner conveyed that their community found it valuable to be involved in the hiring of a Corporal. They recommended continuing this process, and suggested implementing community performance reviews of officers.

Structural Renewal

Some contract partners suggested they believe there is a need to change the Contract Management Committee (CMC) structure, focus, responsibilities and authorities. They were of the view that the CMC had become an information sharing forum and needs to become more strategic in focus. In addition, it was noted that there is a need for a revised CMC structure, and indicated a renewed focus on bilateral meetings at senior official levels may more effectively meet contract partner needs.

Many municipal partners, in particular, requested that Public Safety Canada involve them directly in decision-making on issues pertaining to labour negotiations and implementation of nationwide policies that would impact program delivery and increase costs. Municipalities also noted dissatisfaction with their inability to negotiate the terms of their individual MPSAs under the existing structure.

Some partners felt that the RCMP could be more sensitive to the particular needs of jurisdictions. Northern jurisdictions asked the federal government to consider that their unique geographic and demographic circumstances require different treatment and approaches rather than the one-size-fits-all standard that is currently employed under the terms of the contract agreements.

Program Sustainability and Costs

Policing costs are rising across Canada and all partners have an interest in ensuring the contract policing program is affordable and sustainable. This theme sought to take-stock of the current funding and resourcing model, and explore opportunities for change.

Cost of Policing

Several jurisdictions expressed concern with the rising cost of policing, with some noting that they cannot sustain rising costs associated with RCMP policing services.

Some jurisdictions, notably smaller municipalities, articulated that the RCMP contract policing costs would eventually become prohibitive. Municipalities, in particular, noted that they face challenges in managing in-year budgetary adjustments as they are unable to run deficits like governments at the federal, provincial and territorial level.

Some stakeholders raised concerns that the national pay rate, which is part of the RCMP's standardized policing model, has a disproportionate financial impact on small and rural communities.

Representatives from the territories, as well as Indigenous communities and some provinces, noted particular challenges faced in northern and remote communities regarding a lack of housing for RCMP officers and inadequate policing infrastructure to suit modern policing needs.

Partners noted a desire to see improvements to RCMP asset management, budgeting and planning, which, at times, results in significant cost and unforeseen increases to replace asset and equipment purchases (e.g., pistols). Partners stated that complete and accurate information is necessary to appropriately plan and budget for assets and equipment required by the RCMP. They noted this requires annual and forward-looking RCMP cost projections in advance of billing. Some jurisdictions indicated the desire to have authority to approve or deny decisions on issues that impact service costs, such as equipment purchases.

Some provinces indicated that the RCMP has not established a mechanism to recover costs incurred under the Provincial Police Service Agreements for specialized federal policing services extended to non-RCMP jurisdictions. Similarly, some municipal partners also voiced concern that MPSA officers are frequently diverted to support operations in neighbouring rural areas and communities covered by Provincial Police Service Agreements and that they are unable to recover these costs or fill the gaps in service that these calls create. Many jurisdictions referenced the need to consider tiered policing approaches as a means of managing escalating costs.

Several municipalities identified that a formal mechanism is lacking in order for them to provide input into financial decision-making and there is a perceived lack of federal transparency. Many noted that they are required to absorb costs imposed by the federal government when they did not authorize expenditures, such as retroactive salary payments following labour negotiations associated with the collective agreement for Regular Members, and the purchase of body-worn cameras.

Some smaller municipal partners also voiced concern with increased costs associated with transitioning to MPSAs due to population growth. They indicated they would prefer a system under which they could work up to their increased financial responsibility over time to avoid imposing sharp increases to property taxes, as this creates unnecessary hardship on residents in their communities. Several municipal partners also expressed preference for a system that spreads the costs of asset purchases over the lifetime of the asset to avoid large upfront financial impacts and that the RCMP implement enhancements to national purchasing for equipment/asset management, which would allow for local, and in some cases, potentially less expensive procurement opportunities.

Vacancies and Staffing

Many jurisdictions across the country indicated that vacancies and staffing are a significant challenge facing communities, citing a range of vacancy rates over time. At the high end of this, a few indicated vacancy rates in excess of 50%, and some highlighted vacancies in important community leadership positions (i.e., Detachment Commander). This was noted as being particularly challenging in communities with high crime severity indexes, notably some First Nation and rural communities. One jurisdiction indicated that Regular Members were taking leave in one detachment area and working overtime in other detachments, and there were service barriers in large detachments due to officers frequently being diverted to other areas.

A few jurisdictions noted the closure of rural detachments, which they believe is due to a lack of officers. Others also noted that they do not receive 24/7 coverage which is a concern for them. Some PTs have implemented supplemental/secondary policing services (e.g., Saskatchewan Marshal Service, Use of Conservation Officers to assist on policing calls) in order to fill gaps. Many partners articulated that they view high vacancy rates as having an impact on community safety. Some municipal partners noted a perceived lack of officer presence and increased police response times, as well as their belief that this may be linked with elevated stress and diminished officer wellness. Several partners also noted the rising overtime costs as unsustainable for their communities and attributed this in part to vacancy and staffing challenges.

It was reported that numerous First Nations communities are in crisis and have no dedicated RCMP Regular Members. As a result, many First Nations communities must employ individuals to undertake “secondary policing” functions and, while they are operating like special band constables, they do not have proper law enforcement authorities (e.g., stop, search, seizure, arrest) or access to RCMP detention facilities. Some community partners in the Yukon highlighted the need for increased funding and resources for the RCMP to ensure better service to address core policing needs expressing concerns around understaffing and insufficient core resources.

Jurisdictions with large Indigenous populations signaled that they would like to have greater Indigenous RCMP representation in their communities. They noted that the lack of Indigenous RCMP Regular Members was viewed as a challenge that could, in part, be attributed to structural entry and participation barriers, as well as broader reluctance to join the RCMP considering its historical legacy with Indigenous peoples. Indigenous partners emphasized the broad diversity of Indigenous peoples, stressing the importance of recruits having local knowledge of the communities they police, and that recruiters should acknowledge that not all Indigenous groups are the same. They also stressed the importance of cultural competencies and local language skills for recruits.

Some municipalities also reported that support staff shortages are placing further workload pressures on police officers, including many non-core policing duties, and are impacting critical support services and systems, such as 911 call centers, which are experiencing long wait times.

Service Delivery

The environment in which police operate is in constant change. Criminal threats are evolving, and police must continue to adapt to the changing demands and needs of the communities they serve. This theme explored issues around the delivery and administration of policing services by the RCMP, and the overall management of the Police Service Agreements by Public Safety Canada and the RCMP.

Satisfaction With Front Line Service Delivery

Many jurisdictions expressed satisfaction with the quality of RCMP policing services. Many contract jurisdictions expressed gratitude for the hard work and dedication of front-line RCMP officers, who in their view, risk their lives on a day-to-day basis in order to keep their communities safe. Jurisdictions wanted to ensure that any criticisms they had of the model and how it is implemented were not taken as being directed at front-line officers.

The Model of Policing and Alternative Service Delivery

One of the main themes emerging from partners was the need to reform and adapt the delivery of policing, and the policing model, to changing societal expectations. Jurisdictions and stakeholders highlighted that the existing policing model needs to have a heightened focus on crime prevention and community safety as opposed to a primarily enforcement/intervention-based approach. Some noted that this may require increased police visibility and presence in communities, which some jurisdictions highlighted as an issue and some partners noting that police are only seen after an incident occurs.

Jurisdictions and stakeholders advocated for a ‘tiered policing' model using alternative service delivery, such as better integration of police with health and social service workers, and conversion of some officer positions to civilian positions, such as the creation of Community Safety and Traffic Officers. Current models of policing with best practices were cited in Vancouver and Saskatoon. A few communities cited challenges in establishing alternative service delivery approaches, citing centralized RCMP decision making around operational policies sometimes acting as a barrier. Northern partners expressed the view that they require policing approaches that better reflect the geographic and population uniqueness of their communities.

Many Indigenous partners expressed the desire to incorporate holistic justice, policing, and crime prevention practices as part of a broader approach to community safety and well-being. They noted the importance of the community taking more direct accountability and responsibility for community safety. They emphasized that police should be partners in building community safety, but that they are one piece of a broader picture and the community should not be dependent on them.

Some partners raised linkages between policing and the issues-management approaches taken by the broader justice system in their respective jurisdictions, such as crime severity, bail reform and ability to charge. In particular, they noted that policies to release repeat offenders, which often re-engage in criminal behaviour upon release, is having a disproportionate effect on police resources and, as a result, impacts effective policing in communities.

Consultation, Engagement and Business Intelligence

Jurisdictions highlighted challenges with the level of consultation and engagement at the local and national levels (i.e., Public Safety Canada and RCMP) on issues that impact their respective policing services. Jurisdictions highlighted the Treasury Board Secretariat-led collective bargaining process, as well as budget planning and decision-making on operational matters, such as asset management and procurement of equipment, training and security clearances, as examples of situations where they have not received information, but are expected to absorb costs.

Jurisdictions noted they expect to have visibility on pending decisions, and to receive timely, transparent, complete and accurate information in-line with their budget and planning cycles (e.g., Multi-Year Financial Planning) to justify cost increases. Some jurisdictions indicated the need for the RCMP to have better business and strategic practices that account for a holistic approach to new cost items and how they fit within existing items and RCMP's broader programming, including a governance structure to permit the approval and/or denial of requests. Several jurisdictions noted that they are regularly billed for officers that are not present in the community. Many jurisdictions, however, reported improved consultation with the RCMP on priorities and planning.

Some partners signaled challenges in obtaining financial and human resources information from the RCMP to make informed decisions. They suggested that the RCMP needs to take a more client centered business approach to financial and human resource planning and information sharing. Some jurisdictions indicated that the RCMP needs to be better equipped with business intelligence tools, and have greater capacity to provide this information in support of effective and transparent decision-making. Some municipalities also hold the view that the RCMP does not appear to utilize information produced by partners, such as footage and data from security and speed cameras. Further, a few noted that in cases where the RCMP and independent police services were integrated, independent services appear to be more responsive in the provision of business intelligence and supporting data.

The National Model and Community Ties

Partners expressed concerns that Regular Members do not always have strong ties to the communities they serve as a result of frequent rotations required by the national model and current transfer policies. Partners noted Regular Members may elect to live outside the boundaries of the communities they serve. Some partners recognized the challenges that Regular Members often face when relocating families to contract jurisdictions because their particular needs (i.e., family composition and size) require them to live wherever appropriate accommodation and/or schools are located. Partners believe this has resulted in less community integration and may impact trust-building. Concerns were also raised by some partners regarding the model of hiring officers from elsewhere in Canada and transferring them to areas that have different cultures and geography.

Some partners, particularly remote and Indigenous communities, indicated that the rotational officer model is not working optimally within communities, and that the RCMP should implement strategies aimed at attracting and retaining officers in rural and remote jurisdictions. Indigenous and territorial partners, in particular, noted a need for increased integration of RCMP officers into the community, such as through participation in cultural events. They stressed the importance of RCMP officers learning about community norms, and acknowledging and enforcing community-established laws. Some partners signaled the need for more administrative support staff to improve communication and relationships. Some partners also expressed the view that more work is needed with the RCMP to implement reforms to address discrimination and systemic racism in policing.

Federal Policing

Many partners, particularly the territories, articulated that they view federal policing as important to drug and organized crime investigations in their communities. They noted concerns around diminishing federal policing capacity and resource management challenges.

Jurisdictions also articulated concerns with changes occurring within the RCMP's federal policing program to realign resources to the highest-level national threats and reporting relationships to the Deputy Commissioner of Federal Policing. Jurisdictions sought assurances from the federal government that federal resources would not be redirected to other areas of the country as part of restructuring. In particular, they expressed concern around the potential for federal policing responsibilities and activities to be downloaded to provinces and territories. 

Relationship with the Government of Canada

Notwithstanding generally good relations with the RCMP as the service provider, some contract jurisdictions voiced frustration with the federal relationship and suggested more regular bilateral discussions regarding the contract policing program to mitigate this issue. Several contract partners said that they would like Public Safety Canada to play more of a leadership role in the administration of the contracts, including oversight on whether the RCMP is meeting its contractual obligations and management of service requests.

Some partners articulated concerns with Public Safety Canada's ability to track and monitor RCMP compliance with agreement terms and conditions, hold the RCMP accountable to meet its obligations, and ensure a high standard of performance, including the provision of timely and accurate information relating to resource management and billing data.

Long-Term Vision: 2032 and Beyond

The Government of Canada recognizes that provinces and territories are best placed to determine policing needs and models in their jurisdictions. This theme explored long-term visions for policing across jurisdictions looking to 2032 and beyond.

Future Model of Policing

The majority of partners expressed a desire to continue contracting RCMP services in the future. These jurisdictions cited the historic attachment to the RCMP and the hard work of their local RCMP officers as reasons to continue receiving RCMP services. No province or territory indicated that they intended to withdraw from the contract policing program at this time, however, some noted that they continue to review their options moving forward.

Some municipal partners indicated that they are exploring the establishment of independent police services, citing the need to respond to report recommendations on policing reform, persistent vacancies, rising RCMP costs and value for money, and a lack of influence on the RCMP national model as drivers. A few municipal jurisdictions pointed to lack of capacity and increased cost as barriers to establishing their own independent services.

Territorial partners indicated a desire to see the intersections between contract policing, federal policing and the FNIPP reflected in a more holistic model of policing moving forward. They also noted that the self-governing status of First Nations should be reflected in the Agreements.

Indigenous partners noted an expectation that more communities will choose self-administered policing models in the future. Further, they indicated a desire to be involved in contract policing discussions on renewal in 2032, noting their desire to be included as parties to the Territorial Police Services Agreements.

Clarity on the Federal Position on Contract Policing

Many jurisdictions expressed concern that Canada is considering withdrawing from contract policing and requested clarity on a formal position. Jurisdictions indicated that the uncertainty creates challenges at the local level and requested sufficient notice should a decision be made to exit the program. They noted that transitions are complex, take time, and require careful consideration and planning.

Annex A: List Of Participants

Officials from Provinces and Territories:

• Alberta
• British Columbia
• Manitoba
• New Brunswick
• Newfoundland and Labrador
• Northwest Territories
• Nova Scotia
• Nunavut
• Prince Edward Island
• Saskatchewan
• Yukon

Representatives from Municipalities:

Alberta

• Blackfalds
• Bonnyville
• Brooks
• Canmore
• Coaldale
• Cold Lake
• Devon
• Edson
• Fort Saskatchewan
• Grande Prairie
• Innisfail
• Lloydminster
• Morinville
• Olds
• Okotoks
• Peace River
• Redcliffe
• Red Deer
• Rockyview
• Sprucegrove
• St. Paul
• Strathmore
• Sylvan Lake
• Vegreville
• Westlock
• Wetaskiwin
• Whitecourt
• Wood Buffalo

British Columbia

• Burnaby
• Fraser-Fort George
• Kamloops
• Mission
• Prince George
• Richmond
• Smithers
• Sparwood
• West Kelowna

Manitoba

• Selkirk
• Sifton
• Thompson

New Brunswick

• Alnwick/Miramichi
• Bathurst
• Beaurivage
• Belledune
• Butternut Valley
• Central York
• Champdoré
• Dieppe
• Eastern Charlotte
• Five Rivers
• Fredericton Junction
• Fundy Albert
• Fundy-St. Martins
• Grand Bay-Westfield
• Grand Falls
• Grand Lake
• Grand Manan
• Hampton
• Hanwell
• Harvey
• Heron Bay
• Lakeland Ridges
• Maple Hills
• McAdam
• Nackawic-Millville
• Nashwaak
• New Maryland
• Oromocto
• Riverview
• Rothesay
• Salisbury
• Shediac
• Southern Victoria
• St. Andrews
• St. Stephen
• Strait Shores
• Sussex
• Tantramar
• Valley Waters
• Woodstock

Nova Scotia

• Cape Breton
• Cumberland
• East Hants
• Halifax
• Kentville
• Kings
• New Glasgow
• Queen's
• St. Mary's
• Truro
• Victoria
• Yarmouth

Prince Edward Island

• Borden-Carleton
• Cornwall
• Souris
• Stratford

Saskatchewan

• Central
• Humboldt
• Meadow Lake
• Melfort
• North Battleford
• Outlook/North
• Southeast
• Swift Current
• Weyburn
• Yorkton

Yukon

• Village of Mayo
• Whitehorse
• Watson Lake

Municipal Associations

• Association francophone des municipalités du Nouveau-Brunswick
• Association of Manitoba Municipalities
• Association of Municipal Administrators of New Brunswick
• Association of Municipal Administrators Nova Scotia
• Cities of New Brunswick Association
• Federation of Canadian Municipalities
• Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities
• Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
• Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association
• Union of British Columbia Municipalities
• Union of the Municipalities of New Brunswick

Indigenous Partners

• Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation
• Alexander First Nation
• BC First Nations Justice Council
• Bigstone Cree Nation
• Buffalo River Dene Nation
• Champagne and Aishihik First Nations
• Conayt Friendship Society
• Elsipogtog First Nation
• Fisher River Cree Nation
• Gitxsan Territory
• Kluane First Nation
• Kwanlin Dun First Nation
• Lac La Ronge Indian Band
• Liard First Nation
• Little Black Bear Band
• Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak
• Mi'kmaq Rights Initiative
• Montreal Lake Cree Nation
• Native Council of PEI
• One Arrow First Nation
• Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation
• Saddle Lake Cree Nation
• Saskatoon Tribal Council
• Skwah First Nation
• Southern Chiefs Organization
• Takla First Nation
• Taku River Tlingit First Nation
• Tataskweyak Cree Nation
• Tobique First Nation
• Tr'ondek Hwech'in First Nation
• Tsleil-Waututh First Nation
• Wetsuweten First Nation
• Xatsull First Nation

Other Stakeholders

• Canadian Association of Police Governance
• Contract Management Committee
• Management Advisory Board for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
• National Police Federation
• Public Service Alliance of Canada
• Union of Justice and Safety Employees

Annex B: Discussion Guide For Contract Policing Engagement (For Provinces, Territories, Municipalities And Stakeholders)

Context

Policing is an essential service. Keeping Canadians safe and secure is one of the Government of Canada's most important responsibilities. In Canada, policing is a shared responsibility between all levels of government. Under the Constitution, provinces are responsible for the administration of justice, including policing. The RCMP is contracted by all provinces and territories, except Ontario and Quebec, and 155 municipalities across Canada to provide front-line policing services through the contract policing program. The current contracts expire on March 31, 2032, and the Government of Canada is committed to continuing to fulfill its contract obligations.

The Minister of Public Safety's mandate letter includes a commitment to “conduct an assessment of contract policing in consultation with provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners and stakeholders”. The purpose of this engagement is to gather important feedback from partners and stakeholders on the contract policing program and your vision for policing in your jurisdiction.

We want to hear more about what works and what needs improvement across the following key themes:

• governance and accountability;
• program sustainability and cost;
• service delivery; and,
• long-term vision – 2032 and beyond.

This is also an opportunity for the Government of Canada to learn more about how to better support the needs and interests of partners and the broader population in order to work towards a more sustainable and accountable model for all.

The engagement process will include virtual and in-person discussions with contract jurisdictions and Indigenous partners. Written comments/submissions will be welcomed and may be sent to contractpolicingassessment-evaluationdelapolicecontractuelle@ps-sp.gc.ca.

Questions

Governance and Accountability: Public expectations are changing regarding the governance of police services and police accountability. In this context, governance can be defined as local and national decision-making, management, administration, and accountability structures and practices of the contract policing program. This theme seeks to take stock of the current contract policing model and identify opportunities for improvement.

1. What works well with the current governance and accountability provisions in the contract policing model, and what are the challenges?
2. What changes could be explored to better support effective governance, oversight, transparency and accountability?

Program Sustainability and Cost: Policing costs are rising across Canada and all partners have an interest in ensuring the contract policing program is affordable and sustainable. This theme seeks to take stock of the current funding and resourcing model and explore opportunities for change.

1. What are key considerations and challenges regarding program costs, resourcing, affordability, and sustainability?
2. What principles should guide future discussions around how and which costs are shared between contract jurisdictions and the federal government?
3. What recommendations do you have to improve the overall sustainability of the program?

Service Delivery: The environment in which police operate is continually changing. Criminal threats are evolving, and police must continually adapt to the changing demands and needs of the communities they serve. This theme seeks to explore issues around the delivery and administration of policing services by the RCMP and the overall management of the Police Service Agreements by Public Safety Canada.

1. With respect to service delivery, what works well with the current program and what areas could be improved?
2. Is there a need to consider police service models that are more responsive to the needs of communities through different models, including better support integration of RCMP and community social services?
3. How could the contract policing program evolve to better meet the needs of the communities it serves?
4. What recommendations do you have for improving how the program and agreements are administered?

Long-term vision – 2032 and beyond: The Government of Canada recognizes that provinces and territories are best placed to determine policing needs and models in their jurisdictions. This theme seeks to explore long-term visions for policing across jurisdictions looking to 2032 and beyond.

1. What is the vision for policing in your jurisdiction in the medium to long-term looking to 2032 and beyond?
2. What key factors could influence decisions regarding future policing needs and models within your jurisdiction?
3. What would the Government of Canada's role be in supporting jurisdictions considering alternative policing models, including transitions to independent policing services?

Annex C: Discussion Guide For Contract Policing Engagement (For Indigenous Partners)

Context

Policing is an important and essential public service. Keeping communities safe is one of the Government of Canada's most important responsibilities. In Canada, policing is a shared responsibility between all levels of government. Under the Constitution, provinces are responsible for the administration of justice, including policing^{Footnote 3}. The RCMP is contracted to provide front-line policing services to assist all provinces and territories (except Ontario and Quebec), and 155 municipalities across Canada in the exercise of their responsibility for policing.

These contract services include the provisions of policing services to 538 First Nation communities. First Nations receiving policing services from the RCMP receive these services through either the Provincial, Territorial or Municipal Police Service Agreements. First Nations communities may also receive additional, dedicated policing services through the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program (FNIPP). (See Annex A for an explanation of the difference between FNIPP and Contract Policing.)

The current contracts expire on March 31, 2032, and the Government of Canada is committed to continuing to fulfill its contract obligations. The Minister of Public Safety's mandate letter includes a commitment to “conduct an assessment of contract policing in consultation with provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners and stakeholders.”

The goal of this engagement is to gather your important feedback on the RCMP contract policing program and your vision for policing in your community. We want to hear more about what works and what needs improvement across the following key themes:

• governance and accountability;
• program sustainability;
• service delivery; and,
• long-term vision – 2032 and beyond.

This is also an opportunity for the Government of Canada to learn more about how to better support the needs and interests of partners and the broader population and work towards a more sustainable and accountable model for all.

The engagement process will include virtual sessions with Indigenous partners coupled with the opportunity to provide written comments/submissions to contractpolicingassessment-evaluationdelapolicecontractuelle@ps-sp.gc.ca.

Public Safety Canada has previously undertaken engagements related to co-development of First Nations police services legislation. In recognition of the overlap in themes and that many partners may have participated in this co-development engagement process, the feedback related to contract policing in that context will be reflected. These discussions are not meant to duplicate engagement on either the co-development of First Nations police services legislation or the FNIPP, but rather seek views in the context of the contract policing program. That said, this document is intended to be a guide for discussion and should not be perceived as limiting views that anyone may wish to share.

Questions

The following is a list of questions that are intended to guide discussions, that we are looking to validate with you through our pre-briefings. We would appreciate hearing from you whether there are more relevant questions under each theme.

Governance and Accountability: Public expectations are changing regarding the governance of police services and police accountability. In this context, governance can be defined as local and national decision-making, management, administration, and accountability structures and practices of the contract policing program.

1. Does your community have influence and input into the management, priorities, goals, and objectives of its policing services, and is it sufficient? Are you aware of the processes to provide input?
2. What works well and what needs improvement?

Program Sustainability: This theme has been identified to explore issues related to the rising cost of policing, how it is funded, and challenges such as human resource sustainability. Labour market shortages are impacting the ability of many police services from coast to coast to coast to recruit and train enough qualified police officers to meet demands from all partners.

1. What are the key considerations and challenges regarding human resources for your community?
2. How could we make contract policing more sustainable for your communities?

Service Delivery: This theme considers issues around the delivery of policing services by the RCMP to your community. This includes issues such as culturally sensitive policing, addressing systemic racism, service response times, policing models that integrate community health and social services, and any other issue you feel needs to be addressed related to service delivery.

1. In what ways are contract policing services meeting the needs and expectations of your communities?
2. In what ways can service delivery issues in your communities be addressed and why?

Program Vision Beyond 2032: The Government of Canada recognizes that jurisdictions are best placed to determine policing needs and models in their jurisdictions. This theme seeks to explore long-term visions for policing across jurisdictions looking to 2032 and beyond. This includes transition to independent services or alternative service delivery within the existing model.

1. What is your future vision of policing in your community beyond 2032?
2. How should the contract policing program evolve to better meet the needs of the communities it serves?

Annex D: Difference Between the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Contract Policing and the First Nation and Inuit Policing Program

This annex is intended to provide information to participants regarding differences between these two federal government policing programs. It is not intended to limit participant feedback.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Contract Policing

The delivery of policing services to communities in Canada, including First Nations, is largely determined by the Canadian Constitution. Generally^{Footnote 4}, the provinces and territories have legislative responsibility over the administration of justice, including policing services. Provinces and territories can establish their own police service as is the case in Quebec, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador. They also have the option of contracting with the federal government for policing services from the RCMP through the Contract Policing Program. In the case of contract policing, RCMP services provided to provinces and territories are cost shared at a rate of 70% for provinces, territories, and smaller municipalities (between 5,000 and 15,000 people) and 30% federal, or 90% for large municipalities (above 15,000 people) and 10% federal.

Today, the RCMP provides provincial, territorial, and municipal policing services under contract to 155 municipalities, and all provinces and territories of Canada, except Ontario, Quebec, and municipalities that have decided to create their own independent police services. These contract policing agreements cover 75% of the geography of Canada, including many Indigenous communities, much of rural Canada, all of the Canadian North, and many towns and large urban areas in contract provinces.

Contract policing resources provide core, day-to-day policing services in provinces, territories, and municipalities that receive services from the RCMP. These services include general duty policing, traffic safety, investigations, and specialized resources including police canine teams, integrated units, and emergency response teams. While these services can be accessed in each province and territory where the RCMP acts as the contracted police service, not all will be present in every local detachment.

First Nations and Inuit Policing Program (FNIPP)

The FNIPP is a contribution program that provides funding to First Nation and Inuit partners for the delivery of policing services.

There are two main types of policing agreements under the FNIPP:

1. Self-administered Police Service Agreements (SA), where a First Nation or Inuit community manages its own police service under provincial policing legislation and regulations; and,
2. Community Tripartite Agreements (CTA), where a dedicated group of officers from the RCMP provides culturally responsive policing services to a First Nation or Inuit community. These services were designed to be supplemental to core policing in communities.

From a SA perspective, there are currently 35 First Nations police services across Canada and one Inuit police service, serving 155 First Nations and Inuit communities. They are located mainly in Ontario and Quebec, with a smaller presence across all western Canadian provinces. There are 135 CTAs in place which deliver RCMP policing services to 280 communities. These communities are found predominantly in western Canada, with the majority in British Columbia and Alberta.

Both SA and CTA communities receive financial support through the FNIPP, a discretionary contribution program created in 1991 that provides federal funding to support professional, dedicated and culturally responsive policing services in eligible First Nations and Inuit communities. Under the FNIPP, eligible costs are shared with provinces and territories in accordance with a 52% federal and 48% provincial/territorial cost-share ratio. These arrangements are signed by three parties: First Nation(s) or Inuit communities, the relevant province or territory, and the federal government.

How do First Nation and Inuit Policing Program and contract policing services interact?

In provinces and territories policed by the RCMP, CTA resources provide a supplemental policing capacity above and beyond Provincial and Territorial Police Service Agreement policing resources in First Nation communities. The degree to which these services are integrated and layered varies by province or territory.

What are the different policing engagements that have been completed or are currently being undertaken by the Government of Canada?

There are two distinct, but complementary, police engagement processes currently being led by Public Safety Canada. These processes are:

1. Assessment of contract policing - This process is just beginning and the purpose of this engagement is to gather feedback about what is working/not working with the contract policing program and the vision for policing in communities.
2. Co-development of First Nations police services legislation – The facilitated engagement process is complete. The purpose of this exercise is to co-develop legislation that recognizes First Nations police services as essential services.

Discussions on contract policing are separate from the other process and seeks to be responsive to partners' current situations. Work continues on the co-development of First Nations police services legislation in parallel to these discussions.

What if I have already provided input? Do I need to provide it again?

While these discussions are separate, input provided by First Nations through the co-development of legislation discussions will be leveraged to inform the contract policing assessment and discussions. That said, all feedback, related to contract policing, even if previously shared, is welcome.

Date modified:

2024-05-27