Evidence of meeting #44 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 summits.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to just explore quickly the concept of preventative arrests, Mr. Adams. A lot of people, it seems, were arrested by police not for what they'd done--not even for any evidentiary basis--but as a preventative measure for what a mere suspicion was that they might do. Do you have any comment to this committee about that practice by police? Is it something your officers endorse?
Superintendent, Peel Regional Police
Are we talking about the breach of peace, if that's the term that we're using?
Superintendent, Peel Regional Police
If we're talking about the breach of the peace--
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Would you agree with me that there would have to be an evidentiary basis before such an arrest would be made?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Davies.
We'll now proceed to the government side. Mr. MacKenzie.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the panel for being here.
Superintendent, my friend asked about breach of the peace. It's the reasonable, probable grounds to believe it's about to occur.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
So it's a little bit different.
The other thing my friend said, and it's something we rarely hear around here--and I thank him for it, because I think it is important.... He said something about someone with something on their person--the rights and freedoms and so on--but he also said something about responsibilities. Somehow we never hear anybody talk about the responsibilities that people have for this. It's always the responsibility of the state for everything else. But sometimes I think the average citizen out there wonders what kinds of responsibilities--
There's nothing in the charter that talks about responsibilities that I know of. Do you know of anything in it?
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Brigadier General Collins, there have been different costs associated with the summits. One of the things mentioned was glow sticks. Some people made fun of the glow sticks. My understanding was that it was the military who used the glow sticks.
Chief of Staff, Canada Command, Department of National Defence
It was the military that used glow sticks, yes.
I will preface my remarks by re-emphasizing that we were very cautious with the moneys we spent, and we came in well under budget, partly because of the cautious approach, the frugal approach, if you will, that we took.
Specifically on glow sticks, they are a non-electric, low-level light source. We all know what glow sticks are; a lot of kids use them at Halloween, etc. That's clearly not what we use them for.
The fact that they are non-electric means they can be used in any environment, including close to flammable materials and explosives, and the fact that they are non-electric means they are more reliable. Batteries don't run out. Flashlights don't break.
We use glow sticks primarily for safety reasons. They mark fence lines. They mark trenches, if we are in combat operations. They'll mark wires. They'll mark all sorts of hazards. They'll mark trails for us in night operations.
In domestic operations you can appreciate that all of that becomes even more important, because we are in and among the community. Even though we may be in a wooded area that's dark, the chances of a community member coming into that area is quite high. We did not want them to be walking into fence lines or tripping over wires, or walking into our tents—or, even worse, driving into our tents. Therefore, we used glow sticks for safety, for illumination purposes at nighttime.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Ms. Guebert, I appreciate your studies worldwide. Have you done any studies where G-8 and G-20 summits were held back to back in any country?
Director of Research, G-8 and G-20 Groups, University of Toronto, Munk School of Global Affairs
No, this was the first time that's happened, and it doesn't seem like it's going to happen again. The French, who are the next to host both summits, will be holding separate summits. The G-8 will happen in the summer, and the following G-20 summit will be in November.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
So there is some cost involved in running two summits, back to back. Fair enough?
Director of Research, G-8 and G-20 Groups, University of Toronto, Munk School of Global Affairs
Yes.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
When you talk about other locations—and we've seen different numbers—there's certainly a sense that the other numbers don't compare with ours, for a variety of reasons.
Is it fair to say that the police department in London, England, is several thousand times larger, in terms of numbers of personnel, than any municipal police department in Canada?
Director of Research, G-8 and G-20 Groups, University of Toronto, Munk School of Global Affairs
Yes, to my knowledge.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Is it fair to say that London has been a centre that has faced numerous protests, some violent and some not so violent, and that it's a community that has actually been hardened in many respects? They have more video equipment and thicker glass in the stores, all of those things that Canada is not used to having.
Director of Research, G-8 and G-20 Groups, University of Toronto, Munk School of Global Affairs
I can't answer that 100%. I would guess they have spent more money on those types of measures, just because of past experiences, such as terrorist attacks in London.
December 1st, 2010 / 5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
We've seen and heard of some other communities from the press that have spent only a few million dollars on their summits. Is it accurate to say those are the total costs, or are they the costs of some smaller parts of summit security?
Director of Research, G-8 and G-20 Groups, University of Toronto, Munk School of Global Affairs
What we see varies from country to country, For example, there were figures that the Pittsburgh summit cost around $18 million. That was largely for additional services that were needed. If you tallied up all of the security services needed for that summit, for example, those were probably around $90 million. That would be the total summit costs in terms of security.
Certainly there's a reason I alluded to that earlier, and why Canada has to spend more money on security. In terms of these summits being an outlier, the question was why the figure was so much higher and whether it needed to be. From the studies we've done, the costs seemed higher than other summits hosted by countries that are more comparable with Canada. But certainly there's a reason for the numbers being significantly lower in particular countries.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I think you indicated that Japan may have had the most expensive summit.