Evidence of meeting #29 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
No, the question is whether you are moving a motion. Can he answer that? Are you moving a motion, David, yes or no? Come on.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Mr. Dewar, he has moved a motion, and I have ruled that it will come—
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
He is. It's out of order then, according to your own order. What's going on here? You said not to move a motion until after this was dealt with. Now you're saying he can move a motion. I'm just asking what's going on. This is by your own—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay, we're going to suspend for a minute.
Let me repeat what I said before: we are discussing the orders of the day, whether this committee will undertake a study. A motion has been moved, but we will discuss motion one and motion two. Mr. MacKenzie has the right to and is relating his remarks to the agenda that is before us.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I have not recognized you yet, Mr. Dewar. I realize that you probably have not been at this committee previously, but we respect the rules of the committee. We ask that you be recognized by the chair before you start talking. You're turning your microphone on. You're talking whenever you please. That's not how you conduct things in the House of Commons. Please respect the chair and wait for the chair to recognize you. Is that too much to ask?
Mr. Dewar.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Would it be too much to ask right now whether or not Mr. MacKenzie is continuing to speak to a motion that he has tabled, yes or no?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
He has indicated that he is relating his remarks to the topic we have at hand here.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, with due respect, he said--and it's in the record--that he was moving his motion. Mr. Del Mastro agreed with that, so I think there's some communication breakdown.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay. I've ruled on that. I think there's no point in going over this again.
Please finish your remarks, Mr. MacKenzie, and then we're going to go to Mr. Del Mastro, then Mr. Calandra, Mr. Holland, and Mr. Dechert.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Guidelines have been prepared to address situations where the Government of Canada considers payments to commercial businesses, non-profit organizations, and individuals to compensate for consequences as a result of extraordinary security measures implemented at international meetings such as the G-8 and G-20. The guidelines in place are fair and have been effective in the past. These are the same guidelines that were in place for the summit of the Americas in Quebec City and the Kananaskis summit before that.
As we all know, these summits attracted delegations from over 20 countries. In addition to the member nations, international agencies and outreach nations were in attendance. In total more than 10,000 delegates participated. Coverage of the summits also drew a media contingent of approximately 5,000 people.
Canada had an obligation to protect the heads of state who participated at these summits, as well as Canadians and international visitors. The RCMP led an integrated security unit, and its security partners spent a great deal of time planning for this complex security operation. As a result of these efforts, a comprehensive approach was developed to ensure a safe and secure environment for all involved.
Our government has been clear from the start: hosting two major international summits would generate significant security demands. Planning involved input from all security partners. What unfolded in Toronto serves as proof that our vigilance was warranted and our security planning justified. I am proud of how well our security partners conducted themselves under exceptionally difficult circumstances.
Final figures and evaluations are currently being compiled by the integrated security unit. An independent civilian review is being undertaken by the Toronto Police Services Board. Ontario's ombudsman has announced that he'll be looking into the role the province played. As I've already mentioned, the Auditor General will be conducting a review.
Are we saying no to this committee studying the matter, as some in the press have suggested? Absolutely not. As we have said from the start, we will remain open and transparent, but we will serve Canadians better by waiting until the integrated security unit has had a chance to complete its work. We on the government side believe we owe it to the victims of those thugs, hooligans, and anarchists to do this properly. This means waiting to study the issue once all the facts are available.
Mr. Chair, those would be my comments relative to the orders of the day that have been presented to this committee. This whole day here today is costing Canadians a lot of money needlessly. It's premature. There are other bodies looking into this that at this point are more appropriate.
This simply comes down to trying to justify to those people who went to Toronto to break the law, to disrupt everyday lives in Toronto, that it's okay. We're saying it's not okay. More importantly, we do believe there are other bodies in place that are currently looking at this situation. We need to wait until they've finished their work before we start on some sort of campaign here to demoralize the police and other people who did a great job for Canadians.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie.
I've had indications from four more members that they want to speak. I've added them to the list.
Mr. Del Mastro, you're next.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address this.
Just to expand a little bit on Mr. MacKenzie's point initially, I do think the order of things is really out of whack here. We have a number of independent bodies that have indicated they are going to be addressing this situation. I'm left drawing the conclusion that this is frankly a partisan or politically motivated emergency meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Safety, and as Mr. MacKenzie indicated, we should allow these independent bodies to complete their reporting of the facts before this committee undertakes any study at all in this regard.
Mr. Chairman, my own impression is that Canadians were very proud to host the G-8 and G-20 meetings and to have those international leaders here. There were a lot of successes at these meetings, and Canadians are proud of those successes.
We know that under the leadership of the Prime Minister, the G-8 discussed a wide range of global challenges, including nuclear proliferation, issues with Iran, governance, stability in the Middle East, and climate change, just to name a few.
The Muskoka initiative was also a great example of leadership shown by Canada. Over $7 billion was committed for new spending on maternal, newborn, and child health. The summit was a great success due to the leadership shown by Canada.
Mr. Chairman, in Toronto the leaders of the G-20 met for the first time since it took on its new primary role as the forum for international economic collaboration and cooperation. It happened at a critical juncture in the global economic recovery, and Canada and the other G-20 countries reaffirmed our collective resolve to safeguard and strengthen recovery and to foster strong sustainable and balanced growth.
In my constituency, Mr. Chairman, the main concern I hear about from everyday people is the economy. In this global economy, we must continue to work with our international partners to ensure a coordinated approach in light of the global recession we are just emerging from. But that's not what today's meeting is about. The opposition has decided to call a meeting to examine all issues surrounding security at the G-8 and G-20 summits. We all know that there are elements within our society that want to disrupt these important meetings. Mr. MacKenzie has rightly referred to them as thugs, hooligans, and anarchists. The simple fact is that increased security has become a necessity in order to ensure the safety of leaders, delegates, and the public. That's the world we live in, Mr. Chair.
In this regard, the security operations, in my view, were a resounding success. The meetings were not interrupted, and the injuries were minor.
In Canada we uphold freedom of expression. We are a democracy. Free expression is not merely tolerated, it is a constitutional right. That being said, no one has the right to break the law, inflict violence, or commit vandalism. And frankly, Mr. Chairman, I grew up respecting public institutions, and I look at the police as an extension of society. I saw an awful lot of public disrespect of police officers, which saddened me greatly.
What I saw transpire on the streets of Toronto was disappointing. The way individuals acted and anarchist movements flouted the law and attempted to bring mayhem to Toronto was disgraceful, Mr. Chairman. It's unfortunate that these groups attempted to disrupt the important discussions being held by world leaders.
Today, Mr. Chair, we see that the opposition coalition is alive and well, and that's why we're here today. This is another example of the opposition playing partisan politics at this committee. This time they're giving credence to the complaints of these anarchist groups. To recall this committee on an emergency basis is nothing more than a cheap political stunt designed for maximum political benefit.
As my colleague Mr. MacKenzie has already stated, independent processes are under way to determine if these allegations are unfounded or if they are legitimate. Unlike the coalition led by the NDP, we stand for our front-line police officers and for the safety of Canadians. We do not stand for the thugs who sought to threaten public safety at the G-20 summit in Toronto.
If the opposition is serious about doing a thorough and complete study instead of merely advancing a political agenda, then they'll stop this political charade and agree to wait for the final review before studying any of this at this committee. That would be the prudent and responsible thing to do.
I think it's important to clarify that law enforcement officials are responsible for making decisions on security. The government does not interfere in law enforcement determinations. There has been no political interference and no allegations of political interference.
Now, I might add, Mr. Chair, that this is in stark contrast to the international summits held when the Liberals were in power. We all remember the Prime Minister's Office trying to influence security decisions at the APEC summit in Vancouver in 1997. We all remember what happened...when you don't have security, Mr. Chairman.
Our security partners were able to protect the safety of Canadians, delegates, and visitors in the city of Toronto and the town of Huntsville, working in what were exceptionally difficult circumstances. In light of this, I do not agree with the NDP coalition's cause for even pulling this committee together today. I definitely don't agree with the NDP motions that we're going to hear later, and I don't agree with the NDP in the fact that it seems to be lining itself up with anarchist groups that went to Toronto and caused damage.
This committee meeting needs to have a thoughtful and balanced reflection on security matters. This can only happen once the ISU, the Toronto police, and appropriate bodies have had the chance to review and report on their findings. They have the expertise, and we should trust them to make their findings. Then we will be in a position to examine the issue properly.
This meeting, at this time, is not only premature but also completely unwarranted, Mr. Chairman. I don't see the public clamouring to uphold the violent and destructive actions of these thugs. In fact, I hear people commending the work of our police forces.
I'd just refer briefly, Mr. Chairman, if I could, to a poll done in Peterborough just last week by The Peterborough Examiner. The question was with regard to the Toronto summit: “Do you think the police at the G-20 summit used force reasonably to quell the protests?” Seventy-five percent of respondents indicated that they approved of the actions of police. If that's the public clamouring for this committee getting out ahead of the appropriate bodies, I'm not seeing that in my community.
This committee should be clearly condemning the actions of the anarchists, not giving them a public forum to defend their criminal deeds, and I believe the motion that Mr. MacKenzie has discussed in fact does do this. This is not only the view of the members on this side of the table; it's also the view of the overwhelming majority of Canadians.
Mr. Chair, I agree with what my colleague said. I urge this committee, and in particular the opposition, to put aside political motivations and instead stand with our police, stand with the appropriate bodies already examining this issue, condemn the violence by these thugs and hooligans, and agree to hold these meetings when all the facts can be properly presented.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you, Mr. Del Mastro.
I'll just remind the committee of the speaking order here, as some of you have been asking me: Mr. Calandra, Mr. Holland, Mr. Dechert, Mr. Kania, Mr. McColeman, Mr. Dewar, and Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Ms. Mourani, are you indicating that you want to be on the speaking order?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay. I'll add Ms. Mourani to that order.
Mr. Calandra, please.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, let me just start by saying how disappointing it is to be here to actually seemingly promote the agenda of the thugs and hooligans who sought to disrupt the G-20 protests, or the good work of the G-20. Some people seem to think that freedom of expression and the right to protest is somehow also a licence for destruction. It's shameful that this is what we're here for and that we're not here to discuss the extraordinary work done by the Prime Minister and the other G-20 leaders to help improve our global economic recovery, and in fact the extraordinary work done by the people of Toronto in welcoming world leaders from 20 of the most populous nations in the world, and the extraordinary work done by all of the police forces that were on hand.
Mr. Chair, I would also like to remind members that not only did Canada have a moral obligation to protect the visiting heads of state who were in attendance at the G-8 and G-20 summits, but we were also obligated, under a United Nations convention that was adopted in 1973, to protect internationally protected persons, which include the participants of these summits. The 30–plus world leaders and their delegations that came to Canada for the summits were all covered under this convention. Their security was critical to the success of the summits, which advanced several significant global initiatives and will ultimately have an impact on the citizens of all nations. As The Globe and Mail stated in its editorial of June 27, 2010, and I quote, “...G-20 security accomplished its most critical task. Summit work was conducted without disruption of the participants.”
I add that this was done despite the best efforts of a band of hooligans and thugs, whose only task was to somehow disrupt this very valuable work.
Mr. Chair, if I may, what was accomplished? I think it's best we consider the summary declaration of the G-20.
Number one, the G-20 leaders met in Toronto under its new role as the premier forum for international economic cooperation at a critical juncture in the global economic recovery. We reaffirmed our collective resolve to safeguard and strengthen recovery, and foster strong, sustainable, and balanced growth.
Number two, our decisive actions over the past two years have helped protect our citizens from the global recession and have fuelled economic growth, yet the global economic recovery, Mr. Chair, remains fragile, and the unbalanced nature of the expansion now poses risks to that growth.
We agreed to the urgency to sustain and strengthen the global recovery, and will use the framework for strong, sustainable, and balanced growth as a key to our economic cooperation going forward.
We agreed to complete our planned fiscal stimulus, and that advanced members will at least halve their deficit by 2013 and stabilize government debt-to-GDP ratios, or put them on a downward path by 2016, Mr. Chair.
Emerging market members will strengthen social safety nets, enhance corporate governance reform, deepen financial markets, raise infrastructure spending, and increase exchange rate flexibility, and all members will pursue structural reforms to increase our individual and collective growth prospects.
We welcome the actions taken and commitments made by a number of G-20 countries to boost demand and rebalance and strengthen our public finances and make our financial systems stronger and more transparent.
These measures represent substantial contributions to our collective well-being, build on previous actions, and represent a down payment on the next phase of our mutual assessment process, which will be conducted at the country level.
A strong financial system is critical to achieving sustainable global economic recovery, and we have already made considerable progress. However, more work remains. We agreed that the amount and quality of capital will be significantly higher. We also agreed that higher standards must complement strengthened supervision.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, can we please remain on topic here? We are all really engrossed with the talking points of the government, but we're really hearing about economic forecasting, as opposed to the issue of security at the G-20.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
I'll go back a bit.
We also agreed that higher standards must be complemented with strength and supervision.
We committed to ensure that we have all the powers and tools to resolve all types of financial institutions in crisis and have adopted principles to guide implementation.
We committed to principles of financial sector responsibility to protect taxpayers from the cost of crises where they occur.
We accelerated the schedule of the implementation of measures to improve supervision and the transparency of hedge funds, credit rating agencies, and OTC derivative markets.
In addressing the development imbalances and helping those most vulnerable bear the brunt of economic crisis, we launched the SME finance challenge.
We also increased the capacity of international financial institutions to help those most vulnerable by doubling the lending capacity of the regional development banks.
We completed the voice and representation reforms of the World Bank and agreed to accelerate our work to complete the IMF quota reform by the Seoul summit.
We stand united with Haiti, and we are providing much needed construction assistance, including the full cancellation of all of Haiti's debt.
Recognizing that global trade is a driver for global growth, we extended our standstill agreement to resist protectionism for an additional three years, and we will continue our efforts in support of a conclusion to the WTO Doha Round of negotiations.
We will meet again in Seoul in November and then annually thereafter, beginning with France in 2011 and Mexico in 2012.
The perpetrators of the violence we all witnessed are thugs. They are hooligans and anarchists; they are not social activists.
I agree with my colleagues that free speech is at the very heart of our democracy. But freedom of expression is not a right to destruction. And let's be clear: the violent and destructive acts of those thugs and hooligans did not contribute to democracy. The anarchists who set fire to the police cars and attacked storefronts and shop employees do not represent democratic action, peaceful protest, or freedom of expression.
Mr. Chair, freedom of expression gives no one the right to destroy and intimidate. There is no excuse for resorting to violence to express political dissent. But clearly violence was the only thing these thugs, hooligans, and anarchists had in mind. It is an unfortunate reality that when world leaders come together to address the challenges we collectively share, those with nothing to contribute use it as an excuse to go on a destructive rampage.
The responsibility that came with hosting events of this magnitude and the corresponding risks cannot simply be dismissed. Our security partners were able to protect the safety of Canadians, delegates, and visitors to the city of Toronto and the town of Huntsville, working in what were exceptionally difficult circumstances.
Mr. Chair, security is not a negotiable endeavour. The government's approach to security prevented what would have undoubtedly been a much larger cost to Canadians and to world partners. I can say that I was extraordinarily proud of the men and women of the York Region police force who also participated in helping secure the G-20 site and the G-8, and I remain extraordinarily proud, not only of them but of the Toronto police services and all of the police forces who came here to protect us. If there's one thing we've shown in both Vancouver and now at the G-8 and the G-20, it's that Canada is a world-class country capable of handling world-class events. We have world-class cities with world-class police, and we shouldn't be ashamed of showing that off to the rest of the world, and we should never be ashamed of showing leadership when leadership is required.
With that, Mr. Chair, I will conclude my remarks.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you very much, Mr. Calandra.
I want to remind the committee of the motion that was brought forward to me to call this meeting. I will read it to you again. I was listening very carefully to see if the remarks pertained to the issue, and they did.
I will read the motion again so that you know: that this standing committee be convened in order to examine all issues surrounding security at the G-8 and G-20 summits, including but not limited to the conduct of security personnel.
Mr. Holland.
