Declaration of Emergency Committee on Oct. 6th, 2022

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Ultimately, though, sir, the plan didn't work, right? They doubled down on the occupation. With coordination with the city, they occupied a staging area at Coventry. They were bringing in diesel. We know through past threat assessments that design threats are a major issue. That's coming out of the Toronto 18, which I'm sure you're familiar with. Our former member Vern White also referenced this in previous testimony.

The plan actually didn't work, leading up to that, yet upon your resignation it was your assertion that they were better prepared to take on the threat.

[Peter Sloly]

The plan worked, sir. There was a safe and successful end to the occupation of the national security crisis. It was based on the plan that was updated and that continuously evolved through every day in office. My statement on my last day in office affirmed that—that we had a plan, were now receiving significant new levels of resources, and could foresee a safe, successful and lawful end to the events here and nationally. That is what happened within the week.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you very much, Mr. Green. Your time is up.

Mr. Green, can I ask you to do the time now? I'm up next.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

I would be happy to do that.

Senator Boniface, the floor is yours.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sloly, thank you for your service, both domestically and internationally.

I want to step back a bit to the early days. I believe you said or made reference to some negotiations that took place with the protesters—I'm somewhat familiar with how that would take place—as they came across the country and then into the city of Ottawa.

Would you conclude, at least with those early days in those early discussions, that you felt you had an agreement with them on how they would conduct themselves within the duration of what you expected the protest to be?

[Peter Sloly]

Thank you, Senator Boniface.

Again, your own experience will play this out. In many occasions, there is a singular organizing body or a significant influencer within a protest group. This was not the case. There were significant efforts by multiple jurisdictions and multiple agencies at all three levels of policing to seek negotiated agreements, reasonable understandings and commitments, but there was never a unified “other” with which any police agency could come to any substantive understanding as to whether what was agreed to would actually happen on the day of.

In fact, on the day of, we were joined by thousands of other individuals and groups with whom we had never had a chance to communicate, never mind negotiate. Therefore, at no time during my period in office, up until February 15, could I ever say to you or this body that we had an understanding with “the” protesters, “the” occupiers, “the” convoy leaders.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you very much.

What is your professional opinion on the point at which the protest went from a lawful demonstration to an illegal occupation?

[Peter Sloly]

The very second that any law was broken—whether it be a bylaw, provincial offences statute, or Criminal Code offence, or whether or not anybody who had stated their intent to come to Ottawa and protest had failed to secure a permit—at that point it was unlawful.

Again, though, as you know, there are many unlawful demonstrations that the police will provide supports to in order to facilitate, to the greatest degree, the intent of what I believe is our Charter of Rights. We will manage through those unlawful elements, even when there are elements that are violent, in order to facilitate as best as possible.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you very much.

Perhaps I can clarify this, because I want to make sure I've got it correctly. You'd had experience in other incidents where it would often be that you would actually have a point person to deal with. Probably, given that you worked in the city of Toronto, you went through a number of those where those would be just regular occurrences and you would work with a point person.

Just to be clear, what you're saying here is that it was very difficult to identify who those point people were.

[Peter Sloly]

I would say it was impossible.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

At some protests, many protests in fact, they would actually have people earmarked for security, to make sure the protest was held lawfully. Is that correct?

[Peter Sloly]

That's correct.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Would it be clear to also say it was likely, in this case, that this sort of structure was not in place?

[Peter Sloly]

There were elements of it, but nothing that you could in any way suggest was going to work across the theatre that we had here in Ottawa. Again, this was not just a local event. It was a local event that coordinated other events across the country, so whatever we might negotiate here might have no bearing elsewhere and vice versa.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Okay.

Can you describe to me how the incident command system was working during your time, in terms of the unified...? I think a lot of the public doesn't understand how policing works in that regard.

[Peter Sloly]

Thank you.

I may not have time to fully answer that question within this, but the incident command system is relatively standard across the country at this stage, thanks in large part to previous Ottawa Police Service executive members, including Sue O’Sullivan. She started the Intersect component of our incident command system some 15 to 17 years ago, which brings the major national capital region police agencies and other stakeholders, including the City of Ottawa and NCR personnel, into joint planning, information sharing and, in many cases, intelligence sharing.

There is a significant line of sight to operational plans, contingencies and resource contributions from across that group of Intersect partners, all of which started up well before the convoys arrived and continued to my last day in office. It is my understanding that it continues to this day.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you very much.

I think I'll leave it there, because I have only about 10 seconds left.

Mr. Green, I'll take the chair back. Thank you.

We'll move to Senator Carignan.

[Claude Carignan, Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Sloly, on February 12, the Ottawa Police Service website said there was a plan to clear Wellington Street. Was that plan devised by your organization?

[Peter Sloly]

Yes, and the plan was not just for Wellington Street. It was for the entire set of events happening within the city.

[Claude Carignan]

Right, thank you.

We have started to receive memos, some of which are not redacted. The much discussed group or committee composed of the Prime Minister and certain members of Cabinet was receiving reports on the events. I am going to quote what the Minister of Public Safety said at a meeting with the Prime Minister on February 12.

In Ottawa, the commissioner of the RCMP reported having a meeting with the OPS chief and OPP commissioner. There were approximately 350 protesters on Parliament Hill and 400 on Wellington Street.

The Minister of Public Safety has been quoted as indicating, “There appears to be a lack of a plan in Ottawa, with the Chief of Ottawa Police Service having yet to approve the plan developed with the RCMP and OPP.” During the discussion, “confirmation was obtained that the OPS chief of police accepted the plan”, and the commissioner of the RCMP agreed to be able to provide additional details of the plan in the next call.

That suggests that you did not have a plan and that the plan you ultimately accepted was the one presented by the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police. That surprised me.

That committee meeting, where the Prime Minister was present, took place on February 12. On that date, you had already announced on the OPS website that you had a plan to clear the area. Was this your plan, the RCMP's plan, or a combination of the two?

[Peter Sloly]

If I understand the question, sir, the Ottawa Police Service is the police of jurisdiction for the city of Ottawa. We had continuous operational lead of the incident command system. Up until my last day in office, I was continuously accountable for all police operations in the city. That included the operational plans for the events that related to the city.

At no time did I cede control of that or lose accountability for it. What we did from the beginning, as I said to Senator Boniface, was make sure that our partners were as integrated as possible and intersected as one of the examples, if not the best example, of multi-agency coordination. At no point on February 12, February 11 or February 13 were we not in control of that plan or not leading that plan. At no point did we not have the support of our partners, including the RCMP and the OPP.

They were very much involved in all of the planning phases from before and during—I can't speak about after—and it was the Ottawa Police Service plan that was in existence on February 12 and on my last day in office, on February 15. It was used, ultimately, to safely and successfully end events here, and it contributed to ending the events across the country.

[Claude Carignan]

So, the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police were very involved in the plan, they agreed on the plan, and they had every reason to believe that it was going to work, without a special law having to be applied, since you didn't know, at that time, that the Emergency Measures Act was going to be used.

[Peter Sloly]

Just to be clear, I can't and won't speak for members of the OPP and the RCMP.

[Claude Carignan]

But for you...?

[Peter Sloly]

As far as I was concerned as the chief of police, the briefings I received from my incident command team, which included senior leaders from the OPP and the RCMP.... We had a significant plan in place, with a significant greater level of integration and resources that would be acquired, hence my statement at the end of my last day in office that we were in a significantly better place in order to successfully end the events in Ottawa.