This is a truly sad and tragic matter.
Like my colleague to my right, I'm very happy that you've come to testify before the committee. The light you've shed through your testimony is extremely important to us. We are all the more certain of the need for Canada to hold an independent and objective inquiry before tasers can continue to be used as easily. We have started this inquiry ourselves, but inquiries undertaken by parliamentarians have limits. The procedure is extremely complex and the time in which we can question witnesses is very short. Some professional organizations appearing before us are well aware of those limits and know how to get around them. In any case, we need to get scientific and technical opinions from completely neutral and objective individuals. That's what I've been asking for right from the start.
When we went to Vancouver, I was shocked to see the minute-by-minute, and sometimes second-by-second, playback of the video recordings from various cameras. You could follow Mr. Dziekanski, except for a few moments. However, what those tapes reveal is a bit different from what Mr. Kosteckyj noted, that only 10 seconds passed between the time that the policemen arrived in front of Mr. Dziekanski and the time they fired the taser; there were 57 seconds between the time when the first officer entered the building and the time that the taser was fired. So, they came into the building and they had to go through it. At one point, they jumped over a small wall and came face to face with Mr. Dziekanski. They jumped over this small wall 47 seconds after entering the building, and 10 seconds later, they used the taser. As you correctly noted in the letter you sent to us, Mr. Kosteckyj, this clearly contradicts the first statements made by the RCMP.
For my part, I was impressed by the cooperation from staff at the Vancouver Airport Authority. However, I was extremely disappointed by the lack of cooperation from the RCMP. When they came to testify before us, we had to interrupt them after half an hour because they were giving a detailed presentation on the RCMP presence in British Columbia, at the airport, and on their various activities including drug seizures and so on. Yet they knew full well, as the people from the Vancouver Airport Authority had understood, that if our committee had travelled there, it was to hear them tell us what had happened to Mr. Dziekanski, and specifically to obtain an explanation on how the taser had been used in relation to their protocol requirements. In fact, they continue to remind us that they have to follow this protocol before using the taser. They also told us that this matter was under investigation and that until the investigation was completed, they could tell us nothing more.
I have come to exactly the same conclusion as Ms. Gillman. Frankly, I greatly appreciate the rigour of your reasoning, all the more so because this was a very dramatic situation for your brother. Under the circumstances, I too have concluded that Canada must undertake an objective and independent inquiry on tasers before allowing them to be used as they are now.
When I was Quebec's Public Safety Minister, we were given a presentation on the taser which made the same point as the one made by Ms. Bagnell, meaning that it would replace the firearm. I realize that this is not true, for all kinds of reasons. Those people could tell us that other methods learned and used by police officers, such as the bear hug or other means to immobilize an individual on the ground, have been fatal—it's happened at least in Quebec—and that this has gotten a lot of media attention. They could tell us that, under such circumstances, those deaths could have been avoided if the taser had been used.
Do you agree that if the inquiry goes forward—and you want it to, as do we —it should also address other means that the police use to immobilize individuals, so that people can make the best possible determination of which circumstances each of those methods should be used in. The dangers associated with each method, the training that has to be provided to police officers prior to use, and intervention protocols needing to be applied will all need to be specified.