Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Through you, Mr. Chair, I'd like to thank the witness for appearing today.
For me there's a bit of déjà vu in a lot of what you've had to say. The reason I say déjà vu is that I've been with police forces who've gone through some similar things, but one of the things you didn't say, and that we used to not say, was this: What does the customer think about all this? In other words, what do the people you respond to think about all this?
I think you'll agree with me that in the police community we look at solve rates and we look at the number of charges in accident zones. We think that if we solve more crime, the average person who's receiving the service is happy. But that's not always the case.
I'm mentioning this because one of the things we like to do is to have efficiencies. You say, well, we won't respond to some calls, but I'll give you a little example of how customers are not happy—and they pay the freight, right? When somebody wakes up in the morning and sees that their car is not there, sees that their car has been stolen, they will call the police. This particular police force asked, “Why are we sending a police officer to report a stolen car out of somebody's driveway? Why would we send a police officer to a residence to verify that indeed there is no car in the driveway, that it's gone?” But this is what we found out. The person says, “I have never called the police for service before. I pay $3,000 a year in property taxes, and the very day I need to have a police officer come, you don't send somebody to my door.”
This is just a small example.
How do you square that circle, make the customer happy, and then keep them satisfied that your police service is actually doing what it should do?
In other words, I'm looking at community policing. I didn't hear you mention, through any of the questioning, how you relate to your community or your community policing model, which most police forces in Canada, at least eight or nine years ago, were completely devoted to.