Government Operations Committee on Nov. 4th, 2010

[Chief William Blair]

I'm aware of, and have studied very extensively the outcome of, various G-8 events in which protesters have been seriously injured and killed. Although this event was certainly a challenging security issue for us, I'm proud of the fact that there was no serious injury. There were a couple of relatively minor injuries, which are being investigated, but there was no serious injury. We had literally thousands of cameras pointed at us 24 hours a day and at every step we took, but I've not yet seen any video or photographic evidence of any police officers using excessive force or exceeding their authority. I think that is a testament to both their training and their personal professionalism.

I'm very proud of my police officers and my service, and of the effort we all made collectively to ensure that our people knew the limits of their authority. They were well supervised, and I believe well led, and they did their job to the very best of their ability. It was a very difficult and challenging situation, but the police did not lose control. They maintained their discipline, they followed their training, and they kept the city safe.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Chief, I hear the number of $1.3 billion bandied about for security. In fact, that was not the case; it was $930 million. While that's not a small amount of money, particularly when we're dealing with taxpayers' money, it's rather interesting not only that the Parliamentary Budget Officer acknowledged that the Government of Canada had been transparent with regard to the security costs at the G-20, but also that a number of sources felt that the costs associated with it were reasonable.

We've heard references back and forth that this was a three-day summit. It was unprecedented that we had to bring forces from across Canada, and it was unlike other G-8 and G-20 summits across the world. Relatively small countries can draw from other forces with a train ride or a car ride, but in our case, our security forces were drawn from right across this country. Logistically it was quite significant, including training and all.

From your perspective, was this a three-day summit?

[Chief William Blair]

No, not at all. In fact, I had 90 people working in preparation for this summit for nearly nine months prior to its commencement.

We had people involved in planning and intelligence gathering and criminal investigations. We were working full out. We had 90 people dedicated full time to that. Additionally, quite a number of my additional personnel were preparing for training. Every single one of our officers and every visiting officer from across the country was given extra training so that they would understand the limits of their authorities and the policies and procedures that would be followed in policing this summit event. We were deploying our people in various parts of the city commencing about June 18, which was a ten-day period.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Chief, you know, it's interesting. My NDP colleague acknowledged quite properly that we are not the experts, and I would agree, but it's rather interesting that we feel we're the experts when it comes to determining whether the number of detainees we had in place or the number of folks who were arrested or detained was somehow generous, as the case might be, for that purpose.

I've heard concern about inmates; I'm concerned about the 10 police officers who were injured or had to be hospitalized. I'm concerned about folks who felt they were put under threat.

My quick question to you is this: do you feel the amount of force used was necessary to contain the risk as you assessed it?

[Chief William Blair]

I believe it was. I also believe that police services must be held to a very high level of account, and that's one of the reasons that all public complaints are being properly investigated by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director in Ontario. Investigations involving any injury are being dealt with by the SIU in Ontario. We also have my own “after action” report. I'm looking at our operations and deployment decisions. My police services board is conducting a different review, and the Province of Ontario is conducting two reviews on certain legislative matters with respect to the G-20.

There's an expectation that the police will always be held to a high level of account, and we embrace that accountability because it is how we maintain the public's trust.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Holder. Thank you, Chief.

I'm going to take the next round. My Liberal colleagues are generous.

Chief, the central image of the summit, unfortunately, was the burning police car. Which taxpayer paid for that police car?

[Chief William Blair]

The Toronto Police Service paid. We self-insure our vehicles, so that cost will be borne by me--excuse me, by my taxpayers. I just work for them.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

It will be the Toronto taxpayers.

[Chief William Blair]

I should be really careful about that. I work for them.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I noticed about a week ago that the taxpayers of Toronto had expressed some sensitivities.

What about the windows that were smashed and the damage to business? Who pays for that?

[Chief William Blair]

I believe those costs are still under negotiation. Some of them, I'm hoping, are going to be covered by insurance.

But I can tell you that we estimate the damage caused on our streets that day to be approximately $2 million, and some of those affected were small business people who could ill afford the cost.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Are any of those things in this budget you've submitted to the committee?

[Chief William Blair]

No, unfortunately, I'm not authorized to compensate for those damages.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

What about the anticipated lawsuits that will come out of this event? Will the Toronto Police Service be engaged in lawsuits?

[Chief William Blair]

I'm named already in several lawsuits, as is my service.

There has never been a summit site where there haven't been a great number of public complaints against the police. Civil suits launched against the police, human rights complaints, calls for public inquiries, calls for the resignation of the chief of police--these are pretty commonly anticipated. We have insurance for those civil suits.

But I can tell you that my service, on an ongoing basis, is very engaged in preparing disclosure for a number of different reviews that are taking place, for civil suits, and preparing to defend ourselves. We have criminal prosecutions that we're also responsible for. So we have quite an ongoing commitment.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

But are any of those things in this budget you've submitted?

[Chief William Blair]

No, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

None. I see.

So the costs may actually be well beyond the budget you've submitted, because we don't ultimately know the costs.

[Chief William Blair]

Let me clarify that. There are some “after action” costs that are budgeted in this, primarily for archiving and preparing documents for disclosure for various events, and they are included in this budget.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Now, when you submit your budget of $124 million to the Government of Canada, are you submitting it through the RCMP or is it in addition to the RCMP?

[Chief William Blair]

It's in addition, I believe, sir.

I'm not submitting my bills to the RCMP, but rather to Public Safety Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

The Parliamentary Budget Officer has produced a budget here of the $929 million, and I don't see the Toronto Police Service in it.

So would the $124 million be in addition to that?

[Chief William Blair]

I couldn't answer that question, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Okay. Thank you.

I believe my Liberal colleagues may well want to finish off the questioning.

Thank you for that, Chief.

You have about two minutes.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Great. Thank you very much.

I just want to follow up on an earlier question by Mr. Martin on something we've been talking about here. Would it have been better, from both a security and cost perspective, if we had held this meeting in a contained area, and I'll use Kananaskis or some other location as an example? Were you involved in any discussion about that?