Thank you.
I will try to keep to ten minutes, because I know there are probably a lot of questions and comments perhaps that need to be made.
Before starting with my official presentation I want to give a brief context of what I am going to present. I am the director of research at the G-8 and G-20 research groups at the Munk School. Our group's mission is to serve as the world's leading independent source of information, analysis, and research of the institutions, issues, and members of the G-8 and the G-20 summits respectively within both groups.
In this capacity I research trends related to both groups, both in terms of policy and in terms of the physical summits themselves. I have been on site at several G-8 and G-20 summits as well as at other ministerial meetings. I generally attend these meetings as part of the accredited media, whereby our groups conduct on-site analysis and interviews.
Today I am here to discuss issues surrounding security of the G-8 and the G-20 summits that were hosted in June. I am simply going to try to provide you with facts and evidence that the G-8 and G-20 research groups have gathered on this topic from past summits, as well as provide you with any insight and thoughts that I have from my personal experiences at these past summits.
I have no expertise in regard to policing or proper security protocol. I can offer examples of problematic cases that have come up at other summits or give you an idea of some of the security measures that have been enforced at other summits. But I have little knowledge to offer in regard to what instruments should or should not be used, how many personnel should or should not be required at each summit, or what is unlawful or inappropriate.
It is extremely difficult to predict what sort of events will transpire at a G-8 or G-20 summit. Protesting can be expected now, but how violent, in what numbers, where the protesters will gather, and what instruments they will use is impossible to know. There is also now a common fear of potential terrorist attacks that might take place at these summits.
It is also difficult to come up with a single figure for how much a G-8 or a G-20 summit will cost, including for security, particularly on a country-comparative basis, since there are many variables to take into consideration. When assessing overall summit costs, one needs to assess factors including already-available facilities at the summit sites, regular and overtime salaries, accommodation, travel expenses, meals, security, technology, infrastructure, communications, and service staff. There are also differences in when and how hosts report these costs, what they include as a special summit expense rather than part of their regular operation or capital budget, how much of the pre-summit preparatory and post-summit implementation period they include in these reports, the timing of their fiscal years, and exchange rates at the time of financial reporting and subsequently, as most costs become known.
Some hosts benefit from the use of large military and security facilities that are already in place, as was the case at the recent summit that I attended in Seoul. Or they'll use the summit as a trigger for major capital investment in a particular region. This was the case, for example, at the 2000 Okinawa summit in Japan.
In the lead-up to the summits this summer, it was estimated that the Canadian government was going to spend $1.1 billion on the events, including $930 million for security. This number has come down a bit since then. The last report I saw was about $858 million, lower than the predicted cost but still one of the highest in summit history, at least from the available evidence that we have gathered.
The G-20 summit was actually the most expensive, in terms of the costs for Toronto; however, when we take out the costs for the Muskoka summit, it was actually fourth. The 2000 summit and the 2008 summits, which were both hosted by the Japanese, came in as first and second, and the Russian summit in 2006 was actually the third most expensive.
It is not uncommon that the majority of the money for G-8 and G-20 summits is spent on security. This is in line with the majority of past summits. What stood out for the Canadian summits was the overall dollar figure that was actually spent. For example, British estimates from the 2005 summit in Gleneagles suggest that it cost £90.9 million, approximately $157 million U.S., the majority of which went to policing and security. The London G-20 summit was reported to have cost approximately $30 million.
It is estimated that the 2002 Kananaskis summit cost around $200 million to $300 million. Again, most of the money went to security. This was the first summit that was to take place after September 11, as well as the G-8 summit in Genoa 2001, where there were massive protests and the first civilian actually died on the sidelines of a G-8 event.
I would like to point out that it is not uncommon for Canada to spend more on security than other countries at summits because we don't have massive infrastructures in place for security, such as large military contingents, as was the case at the Seoul summit in November.
The high costs for the G-8 and the G-20 summits this summer were not unprecedented. The 2000 Okinawa summit is reported to have been the most costly. Media reports claim that this summit cost between $750 million and $780 million. While this is less than the $858 million reported for the Canadian meetings, it was only for one G-8 meeting. The Japanese government intentionally selected Okinawa as the G-8 summit location to usher money into this area.
There has also been much discussion over damage, security protocol, and the degree of force used by officers on duty at the G-8 and the G-20 summits. These challenges do not always accompany summits. For instance, at the first G-20 summit in Washington in 2008, there was very little in terms of this to report. However, on the whole, this is not uncommon.
For example, at the 2001 Genoa summit, arguably the most violent of all the summits, an estimated 200,000 demonstrators showed up, hundreds of people were injured, and one man was shot dead by an Italian officer. The officer was acquitted of any charges, as the judge determined he was acting in self-defence.
After the G-20 finance ministers meeting in Australia in 2006, 26 people were charged and arrested for reasons including damaging property, arson, and disorderly conduct. At the G-20 summit in London in April 2009, 86 protesters were arrested, and just a few days ago it was reported that the U.K. police officer who attacked Ian Tomlinson at the London summit will in fact be charged for inadvertently causing or contributing to his death. At a gross misconduct hearing the officer is being charged for using force that is considered not necessary, proportionate, or reasonable in these circumstances.
I have a variety of other facts and information available from summits past, as well as the Canadian summits, which I'd be happy to share. I look forward to your questions or comments later.