Finally, an independent civilian inquiry into G20 security

Today (Tuesday), Mr. Alok Mukerjee, the Chairman of the civilian Toronto Police Services Board that oversees the Toronto Police force, put a motion forward recommending that the police undergo a review for the actions they took leading up to and during the summit weekend. This is a complete about-face on his comments way, way back on June 30th when he stated that he saw no need for an inquiry partially because Chief Bill Blair was undertaking an internal review of the Integrated Security Units operations with the Toronto Police Service Summit Management After Action Review Team (SMAART) (a rather self-serving acronym, don't you think?). I'm quite certain that the SMAART review will be entirely without bias seeing as Bill Blair, who led the ISU, stated in a news release after the summit:

"Considering the challenges of the G20 Summit, the Toronto Police Service and our policing partners with the RCMP, the OPP, the Canadian Forces and Peel Regional Police, worked together seamlessly. The effort, professionalism and restraint displayed by Summit police officers was outstanding."

It sounds like Chief Blair has already made up his mind how well his security forces performed.

When the independent civilian review is undertaken, there are a few questions that should be asked.

1.) Did the ISU deliberately abandon their vehicles to draw the attention of demonstrators? This video in particular certainly makes it look like the police were using their vehicles as a decoy. As the camera pans, you can see a large number of policemen (I count at least 30 security personnel) and at least 4 marked police cars. The police are very close to the car that ultimately sustains damage (less than 100 feet away) and backing up away from the intersection of Bay and King. One of the officers even has his or her yellow taser drawn. They are obviously standing in very close proximity to their cruiser while Black Bloc members jump on the roof and smash the windows with clubs. The officers appear to be well armed and wearing protective gear. Why did they not at least attempt to apprehend the offenders or at least try to scare them off?

2.) Did the security personnel have orders to prioritize protection of the $5 million perimeter fence and the leaders of the G20 over the best interests of civilians and their businesses? In this video you see the demonstrators smashing windows and a large group of armoured security personnel stand less than a block away, not interfering in any way.

3.) This CTV video shows people walking up Yonge Street as windows are smashed and general vandalism takes place with no security presence, other than an occasional private security guard, for a full 10 minutes. Where were the police/security personnel during that entire time (and I'm assuming longer)?

Apparently, the public will have the opportunity to "vent their spleens" at the civilian review ; at the very least, that should prove interesting if not entertaining. As a side benefit, maybe Canadian taxpayers will get a little glimpse into where some of the money was spent on the billion dollar boondoggle.

Don't leave home with hot sauce in your pocket!

Yesterday (Tuesday June 29th), it was with great pride that Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair called in Canada's mainstream media and their cameras to view the display that had been set up showing the weapons that had been seized over the weekend from G20 demonstrators. This was done in large part to justify the heavy-handed tactics used by the G20 security forces in their attempts to quell the destructive elements of the demonstrators.

While watching the staged photo op yesterday, a couple of items really drew my attention, probably because they stood out from the rest of the items which seemed to consist of a lot of knives, clubs and crude homemade weapons. I noticed an item that appeared to be chain mail body armour and a couple of shields emblazoned with clenched red fists which, in particular, seemed to fit well with the picture being painted of very angry anarchists. The first thought that went through my mind was "Man, that was a demonstrator that was really going to protect themselves from whatever violence was headed their way.". As I later found out while reading the Globe and Mail this morning, it turns out that the body armour belonged to 25 year old Brian Barrett who was headed to a role-playing fantasy game when he was stopped by police at Union Station and had his gear confiscated. Apparently police also confiscated some arrows that he had modified by replacing the tips with pool noodles and socks and plastic clubs covered with foam and plastic. Chief Blair singled out the arrows stating that they could have been soaked in a flammable liquid and set on fire before being shot. Apparently not in this particular case, according to the owner and I would guess that he should know. As well, police displayed the chainsaw and crossbow that were seized from a 53 year old man on Friday June 25th in a matter that even they admitted was completely unrelated to the G20 shortly after the owner's car was pulled over and the items seized. I guess they thought the items made for a better show and tell.

I noticed that the National Post covered the same story yesterday; here's a quote from their coverage:

"Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair displayed a shocking array of weapons and tools obtained from arrested G20 protesters this morning at police headquarters. The recovered items included body armor, sledgehammers, machetes, an electric drill, saws, crowbars, shields, aluminum bats, dog repellent, bamboo rods and bottles of hot sauce. Although the display of items took up half the lobby of the headquarters, officers on hand said more than five times the amount on display had been seized by police. Speaking to reporters, Mr. Blair said the items on display demonstrated the extent of the criminal conspiracy surrounding the violent G20 protests over the weekend. “No one should be so naïve as to think these people were there for the purpose of lawful protest,” he said, noting that the items were capable of “delivering deadly force.”

I'm hoping to see a correction in the National Post.

I would have to imagine that Mr. Harper would have been quite happy that his security chief during the G20 was putting on such a show. Maybe, at last, non-thinking voters would now agree that spending a billion dollars to protect G8 and G20 leaders along with a $5 million security fence could be justified. Maybe there really was a reason to be afraid now that we've been told that there was a criminal conspiracy afoot!

Perhaps the police did seize many more items, however, I would have to imagine that they put the attention-grabbing items on display for the media, leaving the more mundane items like vinegar-soaked bandanas in baggies in the back rooms. As well, even the mention of hot sauce reminds me of the RCMP being threatened by a stapler at the Vancouver International Airport. The way most of the front-line security personnel were outfitted in their storm trooper garb with full face shields, it is highly unlikely that most of the items seized would have had any impact on their well-being. As for criminal conspiracy, I think the Chief is giving way too much credit to a small group of thugs bent on breaking windows, spray painting buildings and hurling epithets and whatever else was handy at security forces.

If Chief Blair wants to re-establish the legitimacy of the actions of the security forces under his command during the G20 demonstrations this past weekend, this is hardly the way to do it. He has done nothing to create trust in the public over the past few days and his actions of yesterday reinforced the stereotypical police forces that Canadians trust less and less to look out after their rights and their freedoms.

Please Chief Blair, don't treat the public and media like fools. Please don't try to justify the actions of your security personnel by deliberately misleading the public who pay your salary. We're just a wee bit smarter than what you may think. Most importantly, please give us some credit for being able to ascertain what is the truth and what is not.

Five metres or Six metres: Is there a big difference?

Today we learned that the police standing guard outside the G8 and G20 summits have been granted special temporary powers by legislation that was passed by Ontario's cabinet on June 2nd, 2010 without debate. These powers will only last for the seven days around the time of the summit and are set to expire on June 28th. The laws require anyone that approaches within 5 metres of the security fence to supply security personnel with identification, submit to a search and explain why they are in the area. If they refuse to co-operate, they can be arrested and fined up to $500 and cold face up to 2 months in jail.

The regulation was passed under the province's Public Works Protection Act; the cabinet responded to an "extraordinary request" made by Toronto's Police Chief Bill Blair. The 5 metre buffer zone is being used to protect the fence itself since the police want to ensure that no one has an opportunity to pull down the fence that is being used to separate the world's VIPs from the unwashed masses of Canadian society. I'd like to know who came up with the seemingly random distance of 5 metres since it appears nowhere in the Act. What happens if you stand precisely 6 metres from the fence; are you in violation of the Act? The Act also refers constantly to "public works". If you live in a condo that you own within the secure zone but require access through a publicly owned street, does the law still apply in the same fashion since the condo is obviously privately owned? If I thought that the fence was actually there to protect the VIPs from terrorists, I would feel somewhat differently but I believe that it exists solely to keep the "small people" (us) away from the "important people (them).

From the Public Works Protection Act, here is the pertinent section about identifying yourself. Remember, don't leave home without it (your wallet that is)!

Powers of guard or peace officer

3.A guard or peace officer,

(a) may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise;

(b) may search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter a public work or a vehicle in the charge or under the control of any such person or which has recently been or is suspected of having been in the charge or under the control of any such person or in which any such person is a passenger; and

(c) may refuse permission to any person to enter a public work and use such force as is necessary to prevent any such person from so entering. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 3.

Here is the pertinent section about the penalties for disobeying your local security official:

Refusal to obey guard, etc.

5.(1)Every person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction made under this Act by a guard or peace officer, and every person found upon a public work or any approach thereto without lawful authority, the proof whereof lies on him or her, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $500 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than two months, or to both.

Arrest

(2)A guard or peace officer may arrest, without warrant, any person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction of a guard or peace officer, or who is found upon or attempting to enter a public work without lawful authority. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.55, s. 5.

What I found interesting was flipping through the pages of comments posted by online readers following the articles in the online versions of the major Canadian newspapers (Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, National Post). It seemed that there was about a 50;50 split between those that thought the law was a good idea to maintain control over the "protesting hoodlum element" and those that thought that the law was a very bad idea and that it infringed on the rights of people to pass freely through the society. I also took into account the "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" that other readers use to rank comments made. I had actually expected a far stronger anti-legislation movement than there appeared to be. I'm not certain whether readers responses in favour of the use of this legislation reflects the movement of Canadian society to the right, people's frustration with the hooligan element who actually negate the power of protests by legitimate interest groups or that it just reflects the nature of Canadians that take the time to post their feelings online.

On a personal note, I'm totally against the use of this legislation in this particular case, unfortunately, the powers that we have elected "democratically" seem helpless in the face of a few thugs who may cause problems for the rest of society. It's kind of like being back in junior high when the teacher threatened detentions for the entire class for the misdeeds of one or two students. We are all being tarred with the same brush whether we are guilty or not. One thing I do think; the implementation of this legislation for the duration of these summits should have been made public long before today. That is the least that our elected officials could have done for those who voted them into positions of power. We deserve to know exactly what you are doing on our behalf.

G8 Security Show and Tell - Oopsy Daisy

I found this little gem while trying to find detailed expenditures for the G8/G20 summits on various Government of Canada websites (which are very well hidden except for this item about expenditures in Tony Clement's . In light of Wednesday's "fertilizer farce" that was propelled to front page news by INSET (the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team), this article sheds some pretty interesting light on the functioning of Canada's security for the leaders of the G8 and G20. The website where I found the story, Cottage Country Now, is an online newspaper for the Muskoka, Parry Sound and Huntsville communities.

Here are a few excerpts from the cottagecountrynow.ca website article as they appeared online on June 9th, 2010. I wish I could give credit to the author of the article but unfortunately, no name appears as either author or editor.

"There were toys – tanks, helicopters and gadgets. The Integrated Security Unit put on a show on Sunday at the Canada Summit Centre (in Huntsville).

The national media was out in full force and everyone from young families to senior citizens were cruising the parking lot adjacent to the centre to check out the security hardware that will be on the streets of Huntsville, in the air and on guard in case of emergencies during the G8 Summit.

The Integrated Security Unit, comprised of the Ontario Provincial Police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Forces, put on the show for the people of Huntsville, and the people of Canada via the television cameras that caught the act...

This was meant to be a choreographed introduction to leaders from each arm of the Intergrated Security Unit and a “what to expect during the G8” session. And while it was informative for the crowd in the arena stands, it was less than smooth...

The crowd was then treated to a motorcade demonstration; motorcycles, their lights flashing led in a succession of vehicles.

“We know this has been an area of concern for local residents,” said Chamberland as he introduced the demonstration of how roadside checkpoints will work. OPP officers set up their checkpoints and waited.

And waited. Delays continued throughout the demonstration which in the end amounted to little more than officers poking their heads toward the driver of the car, asking a question and waving them on.

“If travelling with proper accreditation (you will) first be met by a member of the OPP or RCMP who will ask a few questions. A couple of minutes and you will be on your way,” said Chamberland (OPP Sgt. Pierre Chamberland).

If you are travelling without proper accreditation you will be asked more questions and if a valid reason is provided you will be able to proceed through, he said. But, you will be escorted.

The closer you get to more secure areas the more checkpoints there will be, there will be more dogs and you will be engaged by officers in a more robust search of your vehicle.

This was going to be demonstrated, but the plan seemed to fall apart and it just didn’t happen...

Next came guys in space suits. Or suits meant to be worn to protect the security personnel inside the suit from things like chemical, biological and radioactive fallout. Worst-case scenario stuff.

“And the rest of my speech is missing….” said Chamberland at this point.

The crowd chuckled along with the hapless act of the security team leader. Nothing was going as planned."

Believe me, your time will be well spent reading the article.

I found it most interesting to see that the Canadian Forces personnel are involved in security. I seem to recall that Public Safety Minister Vic Toews telling Craig Oliver on Question Period two weeks ago that soldiers would not be used because Canadians (and his Liberal counterparts in the House) are most uncomfortable seeing armed soldiers roaming the streets of Canadian cities and towns. It is the the use of RCMP and other police forces who will be paid overtime, rather than Canadian Forces personnel, that is being credited for the increased security tab for the event. Apparently though, we're ever so much more comfortable being surrounded by 3 metre high prison fences that cost $5.5 million to erect in Toronto and $3.9 million to erect in Huntsville than we are being surveilled by soldiers.

You know, sometimes the best stories are hidden in local newspapers and sometimes the best things happen in small town Canada.

Really.

Oh yeah, I still say the very idea of a security team called INSET has the ring of a new CBC weekly one hour docudrama. You heard it here first.

Where is the Fertilizer?

In the past two days, there's been some chatter in the mainstream media about a "person of interest" who managed to purchase 65, 25 kilogram bags of ammonium nitrate fertilizer from Vineland Grower's Co-operative in Lincoln, Ontario, near St. Catharines way back on May 26th. Apparently, the 1625 kilograms of fertilizer is enough to make quite a bang should the "suspect" use it for nefarious purposes. Back in April 1995, the late Timothy McVeigh packed a truck with 1000 kilograms of ammonium nitrate and detonated it in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people.

In this case, it appears that the person in question skipped showing his identification, as required by law, since he gave staff the impression that he buying the fertilizer on behalf of a regular customer. This affiliation was later proven to be false. Apparently, there are surveillance cameras on site but it is unknown whether there is any useable video of the purchaser, although my suspicion is that there isn't much of use since the police have released three different composite sketches. There has also been no confirmation from Inspector Gord Sneddon, a Toronto police officer who is heading up the RCMP's Integrated National Security Enforcement Team (INSET) for the upcoming Summit in Toronto, whether a credit card or cash was used for the purchase. He also told reporters that the quantity purchased was not out of the ordinary for agricultural usage. In fact, he even suggested that it could be used for a grow-op.

Here is the Media Advisory from the Niagara Regional Police Service website:

MEDIA ADVISORY – TORONTO PRESS CONFERENCE – UPDATE - Police Seek Public Assistance in Locating Male Party

On Wednesday May 26th, 2010 at approximately 2:00 pm a lone male attended Vineland Growers, located at 4150 Jordan Road in Lincoln. The male purchased a quantity of ammonium nitrate fertilizer which was then loaded onto a manufactured single axle flatbed trailer. Upon paying for the product the male left the area. At the time, the male gave staff the impression he was a regular customer, however, upon further review this was determined not to be the case. Investigators have received information that the male may be a local farmer. The male is described as having a short, stocky build, approximately 40 - 50 years old, possibly of Portuguese decent, walked with a slight limp and was missing fingers on his right hand. He was driving an older model, maroon or red coloured mini-van. ****UPDATE - PRESS CONFERENCE IN TORONTO**** At this time, INSET (Integrated National Security Enforcement Team), has taken the lead on this investigation. INSETs are made up of representatives from various agencies, including the RCMP, who oversee them. The nature of the material purchased in this incident necessitated that the RCMP be advised and they have been investigating this incident in conjunction with the Niagara Regional Police Service. INSET is now the lead investigator in this matter. A press conference is scheduled for Wednesday, June 9th, 2010 at 4 pm. The press conference will take place at Toronto Police Service Headquarters located at 40 College Street.

Here are the three sketches:

None of them really look like the same person to me.

Is this much ado about nothing? While it is prudent to be cautious about this incident, it is quite possible that paranoia has already set in at the headquarters of the summit security gurus. It seems coincidental that, in the same week that there has been so much criticism of the government's estimated expenditure of $1 billion on security for the G8/G20 Summits, that we already have our first "red alert". Why are the details of this purchase that took place nearly 2 weeks ago just hitting the public consciousness now? Seems a bit off.

Inspector Sneddon noted that the amount of ammonium nitrate purchased was not out of the ordinary for farm usage. It is planting season in rural Canada right now (even for outdoor grow-ops), maybe that's why the man in question purchased that quantity of fertilizer (as a very rough guide, 150 pounds of ammonium nitrate will fertilize approximately one acre of land depending on the crop.). Apparently, the "suspect" loaded the 65 bags on a flatbed trailer, most likely in clear view of anyone who passed by. It may be just me, but if I were up to no good with ammonium nitrate, I'd probably think long and hard about transporting it in a cube van or something similar so it wouldn't be quite so obvious to the general public.

If only Canada was like the United Kingdom where they have over 4 million closed circuit television cameras (20% of the world's total) watching their citizens' every move up to 300 times each day. The Canadian version of Big Brother would then certainly be able to tell us exactly who it was that purchased the ammonium nitrate, where they lived and what time they had supper on May 26th. As a bonus, the British have only spent just over a billion dollars in the past decade setting up their CCTV system, exactly what Canadians are going to spend for G8/G20 security in 72 hours! What a deal!

In case you happen to notice someone driving an older model maroon or red minivan towing a flatbed trailer that's sitting really low on its springs, the man in question is Caucasian and speaks with a Portuguese accent, is between 40 and 50 years old, walks with a slight limp and is missing two fingers on his right hand (possibly from a farming accident - my addition) call Niagara Regional Police Service at (905) 688-4111. Police just want to ask him where he stashed the goods.

I guess that we shouldn't make light of this story, at least now we're getting something for our $1 billion!

UPDATE:

The missing fertilizer has been found! The gentleman in question contacted the police and the missing ammonium nitrate has been located in Toronto.

Here's the story.

Toronto and Muskoka - The Best That Canada Has to Offer?

During today's Question Period, the Opposition spent plenty of time picking on the government's expenditure of $1 billion on security for the G8/G20 Summits.

It came to light that $1.9 million was being spent on an artificial lake inside the Direct Energy media centre at the CNE which will feature a fake dock and a huge television screen showing off images of the Muskoka area and that $20 million was being spent on "dancers, singers, fiddlers and flowers" among other wasteful expenditures like a $1.8 million upgrade to sidewalks in Parry Sound, Ontario, 100 kilometres from the G8 site (coincidentally Industry Minister Tony Clement's riding). Back to the fake lake for a minute; since Canada only has 60% of the world's freshwater lakes, I suppose it really is necessary to spend the money to build a fake one so those affiliated with the G8/G20 don't have to worry about all those nasty mosquitoes and black flies like the teaming, sweaty Canadian masses.

In searching the web tonight, I found this little gem on the Industry Canada website:

"The projects, which together represent nearly $1.3 million in new investments in the heart of Parry Sound, are part of the G8 Infrastructure Fund. The projects include:

• Upgrades to Seguin Street, including sidewalk and tree replacement, at a cost of $1.1 million; and
• Market Square Park enhancements, including a large welcome granite stone for Bowes Street, new lighting for the concert stage and improvements to the downtown banner displays, at a cost of $194,000."

For those of you that aren't familiar with Ontario geography, Parry Sound is located 70 kilometres from Huntsville where the G8 summit is to be held. This means that it is extremely unlikely that any summit attendee or media personnel will ever see the upgrades to Parry Sound. What is most interesting about this expenditure is that they took place in Industry Minister Tony Clement's riding. Coincidental? I think not.

Since the Prime Minister was out of the House today, it fell to John "Stephen" Baird to answer for the government and defend their position on the expenditures. He repeatedly noted (to the point that I threw up in my mouth listening to such obvious talking points) that 3000 media from around the world will be in Canada, giving our government the opportunity to:

“...showcase the very best that this country has to offer, whether it is in the great region of Muskoka or whether it is in a world-class city like Toronto. We are proud of that. We are excited about that. We look forward to welcoming the world to this great country.”

I know that the comments that follow may not be popular with my readers in the Toronto/Muskoka area and for that I apologize. That said, I'd still like to suggest that Mr. Baird needs to step outside Ontario once in a while; he might be surprised to find that there are many parts of Canada that are equally as beautiful as (and maybe even more beautiful than) downtown Toronto. Come on John, we're really not that scary out here in Canada's hinterland. Okay, maybe a bit scary but nothing that a pit bull like you can't handle with a few well-chosen and loudly spoken words.

...and despite his protestations about the value of the G8/G20 summits to our country, Canadians are still aghast at the idea that security for any 72 hour summit could possibly cost $1 billion. My bet is that when all of the bills for all of the expenditures on these summits are tallied in the end, the $1 billion spent on security is going to look relatively small.

G8, G What?

According to news reports on May 26th, the security price tag for the G8 and G20 joint summits to be held in Toronto and Huntsville Ontario from June 25th to 27th is now estimated to be close to $930 million, up from the original estimate of $179 million set aside in the March 2010 budget. Ms. Christine Csversko, a spokeswoman for Public Safety Minister Vi Toews acknowledged that the costs were based on a "medium security threat" and did caution Canadians that the final tally for the security costs will not be known until after the completion of the dual summits. She also claims that the unprecidented combination of having the two summits at the same time is adding to the security cost.

Two words - holy crap! Five more words - that's a lot of pepper spray!

For those of you poor at math, the new estimate works out to $12.9 million per hour of the 72 hour combined summit, $116.3 million for each of the G8 leaders and $46.5 million for each of the G20 leaders if divided evenly. What exactly are we protecting these so-called VIPs from? Generally, protests at these summits are fairly tame events with a less than a few thousand young anti-globalization, pro-human rights demonstrators hurling epithets and rocks followed by a wrestling match with police after they take a face-full of RCMP Staff Sgt. Hugh Stewart's famous 1997 vintage spicy pepper mix. Sure, bad things can happen at any time but we can't cover all bases. For instance, earthquakes do happen in Southern Ontario from time to time as do tornados but we certainly can't protect G8 leaders and their entourages from either nor should we be expected to.

What Canada should have done was to have set the G20 meeting in a location other than downtown Toronto where there are hundreds of high rise office towers and condominiums with hundreds of thousands of windows that require securing. It would most likely have been cheaper to hold the G20 meeting in another part of the country where security would have been a simpler matter and then moved the cast of characters involved in the G8 meeting to Huntsville.

Looking through the population statistics for the G8 (Italy, Germany, U.K., Russia, Japan, Canada, United States and France), Canada has, by a wide margin, the smallest population. This means that on a per capita basis, individual Canadians are footing a very large bill. Sure, when you break it down it's only $27 and change donated to this very worthy cause for each of us and that doesn't seem so bad. It's when you look at the size of the number for security alone and that fact that this is still an early estimate that the magnitude of this expenditure becomes alarming. Our government is running a deficit in the $40 to $50 billion range this year; I'd much rather have seen the billion dollars spent on something that will benefit real Canadians, not elected so-called VIPs. As well, there are other costs to hosting this event; food, accommodation, transportation, upgrades to local facilities that were estimated to be at least $50 million for the 3000 to 5000 attendees. While there are short term economic benefits to the hosting communities, long term economic benefits are unquantifiable despite glowing estimates made by the Canadian government (the same Canadian government that "misunderestimated" the cost of the G8 security!). As an aside, should you wish to check in the future the expenditures of our elected officials at this or any other summit, here's the website where you can get all of the details.

Generally, G8 summits accomplish very little of lasting value. Since leaders of all G8 countries change from time to time as their respective voters show them the door, the agenda of each country changes. I can't imagine that the U.K.'s new Prime Minister David Cameron has the same agenda as Gordon Brown; in the year since the G8 last held a summit in July 2009, all bets on what the U.K. wanted to accomplish within the G8 are off.

If the G8 and G20 leaders are really sincere about helping out the world, why don't they skip the staged, self-serving photo ops and meet by video conference like the rest of the world and let Canada spend the billion dollars where it will actually benefit Canadians not just a few of the world's elite. But, I guess this just shows us that our government finds it easy to spend money they haven't earned.