--so that when the eventuality of them winning the cup happens, we won't have to worry about anybody congregating down there. I mean, for goodness' sake, this is ridiculous.
The bottom line is that in Ontario, under the Police Services Act of Ontario, given individuals are empowered to oversee this. In Toronto, it's the Police Services Board. So that members are aware, how is a police services board put together? Half of the board is nominated by the municipality, half by the province. That's the way it is in Peterborough. And this board is an independent, civilian oversight body of the police. They've indicated they're going to look into this. That is their job. It's not the job of the public safety committee of the House of Commons to determine if these allegations have merit or not. It is their job, the Toronto Police Services Board. That's what they're empowered for.
The Ontario ombudsman has indicated that he has received some complaints, or some applications that he is going to review. That is their job. I just wonder why it is that members of this committee feel that they need to get out in advance.
Paul, I do understand... Mr. Dewar, since you're speaking, I do understand a thing or two about federal jurisdiction, and in this case, policing in the province of Ontario is not a federal jurisdiction, but that's what you want to review.
I think that primarily what this committee should be doing, if you want to be responsible, if you want Canadians to respect the committee process in this Parliament--because I see a constant shift toward committees being nothing but gong shows to try to push out a partisan political wedge, which is nonsense... If you want this process to be respected, then you allow the bodies that are empowered in the province of Ontario to undertake their reviews and to report. And if there are issues with that report, then you can undertake to review that, to see if in the future maybe we should change how we approach something, how we plan something if we're having a major international event.
We hosted the Olympics in Vancouver. There were protesters at that as well. I would argue that in some ways, the big difference was that they didn't get all the attention.
I agree with somebody on the other side--and I can't remember who it was, Mr. Chairman--who indicated that legitimate protesters... There were tens of thousands of people who attended rallies in Toronto. The overwhelming majority of them went, they had their rally, and then they went home. And the police were there. They protected their safety. They enabled those individuals to go there, to make whatever their point was. There were various groups and they had different points of interest. But then they went home.
There were some who went with an entirely different intent, Mr. Chairman. That is our point. And we will allow these bodies to undertake their reviews. That is the government approach to it. You don't just decide that this committee's the only appropriate place, apparently, to review this. That's nonsense. That's why we put people in these positions in the first place. You either have confidence in the people who are in these positions and you trust them or you don't.
For the Liberal Party, several of you have indicated that you support Chief Bill Blair, that you support the Toronto police, that you support the motion Mr. MacKenzie proposed, which is not yet for a vote.
If that is the case, then you'll allow the process to take place. Then, if there is an issue and it is befitting of this committee to undertake a study on this issue, that's when you do it. You don't do it before the groups charged with this responsibility actually have the opportunity to do their work. That's nonsense.
The fact that we're here... Madam Mourani indicated she'd like to have the hearings in the fall. What in the world are we here for? What are we here for?
Mr. Chairman, I implore all members of the opposition to allow the individuals charged with the responsibility of oversight in issues related to the G-20 to do their job. Let them do that.
This is not a good issue. Frankly, this is very thinly veiled, Mr. Chairman. This is purely partisan politics playing out on an issue where there are responsible individuals who will deal with this. If there is a reason, a cause, that members would like to have the opportunity to undertake a review, once those reports are completed, once all the facts are known, then I think that would be a responsible thing for the committee to do. It is certainly not responsible right now.
Thank you.