Evidence of meeting #35 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 elcock.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Special Advisor, Privy Council Office
Mr. Chairman, the minister is the Minister for Public Safety and he was referring to the kinds of advice I gave him, which was in respect to security matters.
As I've already said, the decision on whether it would be one site, two sites, or which site it would be is a decision for the government, not for a single minister. It was a decision by the government, and it depended upon a number of streams of advice, one of which was security. But security was not the sole or deciding factor.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I'm no security expert, but it would seem to me that one site is easier to secure than two.
Special Advisor, Privy Council Office
Mr. Chairman, that's a generalization that I'm not sure I'm quite ready to go to. The reality is usually that one site is better, but it can depend upon what you're confronted with--the nature of the site and so on. Reality has a way of intruding, Mr. Chairman.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Chief Superintendent MacNeil, I appreciate the difficulty, but as the head of the Integrated Security Unit.... My understanding is that there were up to 10 different entities brought together that were responsible for security, including a number of federal entities: the RCMP, CSIS, the Canadian Forces, among others.
Is that correct?
C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil
Each agency is responsible, and each person. It starts with the individual. Each individual is responsible for their own actions and behaviour.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I had two young students from Kelowna, B.C., who came to see me. They were sleeping in the gym at the University of Toronto, and they were awakened, along with 100 other people, at six in the morning by police bursting in with their guns drawn. They were kicked in the ribs. They were arrested. They said every one of them was under arrest for conspiracy to commit a criminal act.
That doesn't just happen by an officer who wakes up one morning and decides to arrest 100 people. Who would have been responsible for making a decision like that, to do a mass arrest of sleeping students at the University of Toronto?
C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil
We talked about the jurisdictional responsibilities earlier.
The Toronto Police Service retains jurisdictional responsibility for the city of Toronto. I coordinate the event. The RCMP is the lead to make sure that security is provided. I look at everyone's operational plans before the event. We go over the plans, and at the end of the day I will sign off and say I'm satisfied: we have adequate personnel, we—
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Sir, I respect your answer, but you're not answering the question. I'm just trying to find out who would have been responsible for making a call like that. You're a security person--
C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil
I'm trying to get to that so I can explain it. Just so you understand, I'm not trying to avoid your question; I'm trying to explain my role and my responsibility.
My role and responsibility are to bring all those people together. But Toronto Police Service, the OPP, Peel Regional Police maintain their jurisdictional responsibilities. If there were arrests, they would coordinate that.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt again; I only have five minutes. I understand, but you're not answering my question.
Who would be responsible for a decision like that?
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
But, sir, the whole summit occurred in Toronto. There were military; there was RCMP; there was CSIS. You're saying the Toronto police were responsible for all the decisions that were made?
C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil
Not every decision. It depends on what the decision was. As I stated earlier, if we are moving motorcades in the city....
It would take me a long time to explain, but I can. There are three specific areas of responsibility. One is what we called the controlled access zone; that means the area around the conference centre where the conference was actually held. That's the total jurisdiction of the RCMP during the event. Then there was the restricted access zone, a little bigger area that took in the hotels. You can draw another circle on a map around that. That, again, is RCMP jurisdiction. Outside that circle we now get into what's called an interdiction zone and then the rest of the city, and that's the Toronto Police Service.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
You mentioned civil liberties and the right of people to protest. This was the largest mass arrest in Canadian history. Nine hundred innocent Canadians were arrested and then let go. Not thugs and hooligans, but bystanders and people who were peacefully protesting, journalists, lawyers. Do you have anything to tell this committee about whether this was a success or a failure from a security point of view? I imagine public safety also includes the right of people to safely protest. What's your comment on that?
C/Supt Alphonse MacNeil
We went into the security operation with several goals, one being to protect the people of Toronto and to protect the internationally protected persons who came. Another goal was to ensure that the conference and the summits were able to continue.
From a security standpoint, the protection of the IPPs and the conference went off without a hitch. This doesn't always happen, and in parts of the world there are disturbances and roads blocked, people can't get to meetings. Nothing was delayed.
We set our fences where we did to secure a specific area of the city and we were successful in doing that. We were very successful.
The question you've asked about arrests, those things will have to be answered by someone else. I can tell you the operation was very successful. The decision on whether the arrests are justified is not for me to make.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you very much, Mr. MacNeil.
We'll now move to Mr. MacKenzie and Mr. Lobb.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I'll share the time with Mr. Lobb.
Mr. Elcock, I would like to give you a little quote from a newspaper to indicate that no less an authority agreed with you,or whoever made the decision about Huntsville...and maybe my friends opposite will appreciate the context. It says this is from the Hunstville Forester September 17, 2008:
We want to make it very clear to all the residents of this riding that when we are the government of Canada, the next G8 Summit will be held at Deerhurst Resort in Huntsville.... You heard it from me: the G8 Summit will be in this community when we form the next government.
That was Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
So you can see, folks, the choices were shared.
Mr. Lobb.
October 25th, 2010 / 5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Thank you very much for attending today. I can imagine how pleasant it is to answer questions from six Monday morning quarterbacks. We all know everybody is a lot smarter after the game on Sunday.
In the riding I represent there isn't one town over 10,000 people. This question is for Mr. Elcock.
For the benefit of the six people on the other side of the table here--
Bloc
Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to remind you that all members of this House and all those seated around this table have every right to ask questions.
I do not appreciate the term that was translated into French into my ears by the expression "gérant d'estrade". That expression does not apply to colleagues that we respect. We may not have the same opinions, but I find that kind of wording unacceptable.