Government Operations Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[Supt Tim Charlebois]

No, they have not. Going back to having heard some of the testimony at some of the previous meetings, we are still in the process of obtaining all the costs that we incurred through vendors, contracts, other police forces, and various ministries.

We are still collating all those costs to date to ensure that those costs came in within budgetary expenditures--an auditing process. Up until this week we've processed approximately 5,000 invoices over the last few months. We're still collating that. We hope to have those to the federal government within the timelines that were agreed upon. It should be within the next month.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Charlebois.

Mr. Vincent, you have five minutes.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Boisvert, you said earlier that the threat level was low in terms of terrorists but medium in terms of citizens. Surely, you must have known that there might be some arrests during the G8 and G20 summits. Did you initially anticipate a certain number of arrests?

[Ray Boisvert]

I could explain the service's mandate, but as for an estimate, we are not—

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

No, no. Let me give you an example. On June 27, 2010, you arrested 105 people, including 90 Quebeckers. Police officers woke those people up in the morning, and they ended up spending 60 hours in jail, in conditions that were inhumane. Up to 40 people were crammed into each cage, which had a single toilet without a door and a concrete floor. Given the scope of your security plans, the number of police officers who were called upon, the $130 million spent on security and the $55 million spent on a police village, I would think that you were not there simply for show. You anticipated that you would be arresting people, that something would happen during the G8 and G20 summits. Am I mistaken?

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

I can answer that. There's no question that when the Toronto Police Service built the prisoner processing centre they built it with the intention that they would likely have to use it at some point, because we were aware that large groups of people were coming and if there were a necessity for arrest they would have to use that centre. So I would agree, yes, that there was some anticipation that arrests might happen in Toronto or in Huntsville during the summits.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Did you estimate an overall number of arrests, in order to determine where people would be sent and whether there would be enough room for everyone, in the event of mass arrests? Did you have a plan in place? If so, how much money did you spend on it? You had protection plans in place, but did you have a budget for arrests? Did you have a planned location, and did you make certain that it would be accessible and safe for everyone? Did you have a plan to ensure the well-being of the people in custody, or was your only concern the safety of the twenty G20 leaders and eight G8 leaders?

Those events are still costing taxpayers money, because there are still court cases pending. Those costs may not be clear today, but they certainly will be at some point in the future.

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

Thank you.

I can't answer that question myself because I wasn't involved directly in the planning of the prisoner processing centre in Toronto. I think that question would be best placed with the people who designed and built that centre and eventually managed it during the event.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Fine. That answers my question.

I will focus my questions on areas that you are more familiar with.

Let's talk about the $334,000 spent on outdoor kits containing sunscreen, insect repellant and hand sanitizer. I also want to talk about the $60,000 spent on binoculars. Why did $334,000 go to the purchase of outdoor kits?

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

I can comment on the bug spray to explain how that works. We made personal kits for each of the security people in Huntsville and Toronto.

For the Huntsville kit, we had the contractor company provide a high-end bug spray. As you can imagine, if you're standing for 12 hours in the bush in June, you're going to be in bad shape. We had to get the best bug spray we could. We had to have a high-quality sunblock. We had to have wet wipes, the ones you tear out. The whole package, with the bag it came in and everything, was approximately $40 per person. There was also a medication in there. In case you were bitten by the bugs, you could apply it to reduce the swelling and the itch.

In the Toronto kit, we eliminated the bug spray and the itch medication.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Forgive me for interrupting, but I understand the rationale. I want to know how many police officers and people from National Defence were stationed in Huntsville. I believe the documents talk about 5,000 RCMP officers and 3,000 members of the Canadian Forces.

I understand that people stationed in the woods may need a kit, but I do not think the conditions were the same in Toronto. I can understand that a $40 kit might be a great thing, but to spend $100,000 a day—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Monsieur Vincent, c'est terminé.

Unfortunately, Mr. MacNeil, Mr. Vincent has left you with no time to answer that question.

Mr. Holder.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank our guests for attending today.

I think you've heard from a couple of references here that your job was admirable. You served with distinction and I think you all served Canada proud. Whatever way we define it--and I'm going to go back to what my colleague from the NDP said--from a security point of view, the security was a success. I think all of us around this table would concur and thank you for your commitment to ensuring that it happened.

It's rather interesting when you get to speak at this point in the process, because you've heard comments from both sides. I think about the kits. Personally I believe that $40 a kit is good value. I can't imagine that any member opposite, or on any side of this table, would want to take bug spray out of a member's kit when he has to serve in the woods. That would be absurd. I hope that's the last time we're ever going to hear about this, in the House or at this table. I think it's really bizarre that we would pursue that.

I want to ask a question from a budget standpoint, which is really within your area of expertise. Perhaps I could ask Superintendents MacNeil and Charlebois and anyone else who wants to respond. I think this is a key question for this panel. Was there any political influence from the government in terms of your operation and security planning, any type of meddling or involvement or telling you how to run your security?

Superintendent MacNeil, on the issue of interference, I'd appreciate any comment you would have on that.

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

The way it worked for us was that the summit management office would communicate to us planning assumptions. We've referred to them; in other words, where the meetings were going to be held, what day people were arriving, and what day they were leaving. They were things of that nature that we needed to know to plan security. That would be it. After that--

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

From a technical standpoint?

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

Yes, from a technical standpoint. After that, as I described earlier, we would send people out to the sites and plan the security around the site.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

So at that point, sir, it was your show?

[C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil]

It was our show, including where we put the fences, where we put our police officers, and how many cars we used. Whatever we have talked about already was our responsibility.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Superintendent Charlebois, would you agree?

[Supt Tim Charlebois]

Yes, I would. I can only speak for the Province of Ontario and state that the OPP has a reporting relationship to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services on a regular basis. However, there was no decision-making process in there at all as far as policing operations were concerned. It was a matter of our daily business reporting relationships and our financial relationships through the Ontario Ministry of Finance and the provincial treasury board.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Séguin, you indicated that for the additional security firm that was required, you had actually provided an RFP with almost a month's notification, and that some weeks afterwards it was awarded. Do you feel that was sufficient time for you to be able to adequately assess the needs of adding a security firm for that purpose?

[Alain Séguin]

Thank you.

I guess for part of the rationale, I think Chief Superintendent MacNeil can speak to that, to why we went to a private security firm. It was a question of capacity there. As we were going forward and planning for the summits—I won't steal the show here—there was a question of capacity or just the number of police officers available across the country.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

So then may I ask you, Mr. Séguin, or Chief Superintendent MacNeil, was that firm qualified? Did you hire them on the basis of their ability to perform their tasks?

[Alain Séguin]

Oh, absolutely. We also had in the process a fairness monitor who reviewed the process.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I want to come back to a comment. I've heard some quotes from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. I'd like to put them into the record to be clear that all information, according to the record, is there, and that our Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, did report from his standpoint that “The Government of Canada has been relatively transparent” about the price tag, as he said, “when compared to other countries” and their silence in revealing their total costs. He also said further, “Hosting these international summits has typically been a very costly undertaking”.

I say that because this is about disclosure, and it really comes back now, if I might say, to the budgeting items. We have certainly heard in the House and as a government generally a lot of negatives that as a government we have been irresponsible in some fashion for not knowing precisely all the costs in place at this time. I heard Superintendent Charlebois say that all of his costs were not yet in. I'm not sure about the RCMP or other forces, but if the government is being attacked somehow for not having these costs in, I am not sure whether the forces, who are not in a position to provide that information, are in fact then being castigated or blamed somewhat. I would hope not.