Full Comment - October 31, 2022


The Emergencies Act inquiry exposes a broken system


Episode Stats

Length

34 minutes

Words per Minute

160.13046

Word Count

5,466

Sentence Count

234


Summary

The Public Order Emergency Commission continues to hear testimony on Parliament Hill as the hearings explore the Liberal government's invocation of the Emergency Act during the Chakras protest. Many witnesses have already heard from law enforcement, and the picture that is being painted so far is one of inconsistency, lack of communication, and no clear plan. So was this a failure in policing, political gamesmanship, or both? We re going to explore this with Professor Christian Leprette, who is a professor in the Leadership Department at the Political Science and Economics, also at Royal Military College, and an Eisenhower Fellow at the NATO Defence College in Rome.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Whether you own a bustling hair salon or a hot new bakery, you need business insurance that can
00:00:06.980 keep up with your evolving needs. With flexible coverage options from TD Insurance, you only pay
00:00:11.800 for what you need. TD, ready for you. Hello, I'm guest host Adrienne Batra. Thank you for joining
00:00:25.840 us for the latest edition of Full Comment. The Public Order Emergency Commission continues to
00:00:30.980 hear testimony on Parliament Hill as the hearings explore the Liberal government's invocation of the
00:00:36.520 Emergency Act during the Chakras protest. Many of the witnesses have already heard from
00:00:41.260 law enforcement and the picture that is being painted so far is one of inconsistency, lack of
00:00:48.220 communication and no clear plan. So was this a failure in policing, political gamesmanship or both?
00:00:55.840 Perhaps it is more complicated than that. We're going to explore this with Professor Christian
00:01:00.640 Leprette from Queen's University, who's a professor in the Leadership Department at Political Science
00:01:05.780 and Economics, also at Royal Military College and an Eisenhower Fellow at the NATO Defence College in Rome.
00:01:13.080 Professor Leprette, it's great to have you with us on Full Comment. I know that you are observing
00:01:19.120 the Commission as it is unfolding, but let's go back. Let's go back to all those months ago when we saw on
00:01:27.920 our TV screens the convoying descending upon Ottawa. They knew it was coming. There were opportunities to
00:01:36.160 plan. There were opportunities to get all law enforcement agencies to communicate with one another
00:01:43.280 and how to manage it. But everything that we've heard thus far from the Commission, from the testimony, from
00:01:50.400 many law enforcement agencies, from all levels of government was, they didn't know who was in charge. They
00:01:56.160 didn't know who was doing what. How have you perceived this thus far?
00:02:00.160 I mean, there's a lot of voices at the Commission. And I think one of the things that we're seeing is
00:02:04.320 that the government opted to give the Commission a very wide scope rather than focusing just strictly on
00:02:13.520 the invocation of the Emergency Measures Act per se. And so I guess that has the benefits that we're
00:02:20.320 getting a much broader context. It also means that we're focusing less narrowly on the actual matter
00:02:26.320 at stake, which is whether on the provisions of the Emergencies Act, the need to invoke it,
00:02:33.600 and what will hopefully come out of this, which is much better clarification on under what conditions
00:02:40.160 the Act warrants being invoked. Clearly, we see here a lot of finger pointing and we see very little
00:02:48.160 of anybody actually willing to take responsibility. And I think ultimately the responsibility
00:02:53.040 doesn't lie with the people in uniform. Yes, probably operation mistakes were made. People should have
00:02:58.800 coordinated better. What was missing throughout much of the convoy protest was the political leadership
00:03:06.160 and the clear direction as to what measures police need to be taking and making sure that politicians
00:03:12.560 provide the resources to be able to have an effective enforcement of a national protest. And the fact that
00:03:19.920 we have a protest of a few thousand ensconced people in Ottawa, in the national capital of a G7 country,
00:03:29.360 and it takes us three weeks to get a handle on that protest, I think is an indication of just how
00:03:34.720 homeopathic and dysfunctional our national security system is. And I think what we see here is that,
00:03:43.360 yes, Canadian police are very good at incident response. They're not good at sustainment. So when you
00:03:47.680 have these longer campaigns that require significant experience, significant resources, we simply don't
00:03:54.080 have the effective capacity to respond and the citizens of Ottawa and in many ways of the country
00:03:59.600 suffered as a result. As the commission unfolds and we hear more and more testimony,
00:04:04.320 the very law enforcement agencies themselves that it was suggested they were asking for these powers that
00:04:10.640 are given in the Emergencies Act, they themselves have said, no, we didn't need it. We've recently heard
00:04:15.920 from the commissioner of the RCMP telling the Trudeau government that they hadn't exhausted all the
00:04:22.880 powers that the Ontario Act, when that was implemented, that that had given them. So it's going to make it
00:04:29.840 very, you know, the commission is going to answer the question is, was the Liberal government justified
00:04:34.880 in the invocation of the Act? The very law enforcement agencies that they claim needed the Act to remove the
00:04:41.440 convoy to remove the protesters is painting a very different picture. And, and Professor LaPrette, we
00:04:47.280 even, we even see from, from the information and the documents being provided, you know, the daily
00:04:53.520 CSIS reports, the daily intelligence reports, the consistent theme is that there were no concerns.
00:05:00.320 It was not violent, that there, that, that allegation that they were carrying guns was not true.
00:05:06.880 And that there's currently no known time of certain demonstrations, but the majority of the events
00:05:13.920 have been peaceful. So, at the beginning, we heard from the former, now former Ottawa police chief,
00:05:21.120 slowly, that, you know, he had just sort of given up. He'd thrown his hands up in the air.
00:05:27.360 And then I think everything negative that happened trickled from thereafter. How do you perceive it?
00:05:32.240 Yeah, so the OPS was never postured to police a national protest. I mean, a force of 1200 people
00:05:39.200 with 900 officers, basically operational, the, that have to police the city, and at the same time,
00:05:46.640 police a well-organized, well-funded, ensconced national protest. There was no path for success for
00:05:55.120 the Ottawa police service on this. And that would have required, I think, much earlier coordination.
00:06:01.280 We now have a different model in Ontario that's been adopted since the convoy, the hub model in
00:06:06.560 terms of public order units. So, there's some learning here. I think the broader question is
00:06:11.520 that, you know, who decided that the Emergencies Act was needed? And I mean, we've seen the federal
00:06:16.800 government before blame civil servants for decisions that ultimately turns out the government itself
00:06:22.800 had made and decided on. And I think this is what we're seeing here, that contrary to what we had
00:06:28.000 heard, that this is sort of the advice that was provided, that ultimately these were measures that
00:06:34.080 were perhaps not needed. And I think at the beginning of the protest, the federal government
00:06:38.640 made a calculated decision that it didn't want to be seen as heavy-handed. It didn't want to be seen
00:06:43.280 as replicating the reputation of the current prime minister's father in the October crisis. And then it
00:06:50.320 realized that the protest was becoming a political liability. And so, at that point, the federal government
00:06:55.600 decided it wanted to show, I think it wanted to show leadership, that would serve as how I would
00:07:01.200 interpret it. And invoking the Emergencies Act was a clear signal to show that leadership. Now,
00:07:08.240 it did send a message to police, because one of the things that police look for is,
00:07:13.360 even though they have operational independence, they'll always look for political signals on these
00:07:18.960 types of political protests and events. And the signals that came initially were really not very
00:07:26.080 existent. There was no clear direction, I think, on should we clear out the protest, or should we just
00:07:32.160 let the protest go on? So, if there's no top cover, police are unlikely to take heavy-handed measures. And so,
00:07:39.440 with the Emergencies Act, that was also a signal to police that there is now top cover for police to
00:07:46.480 take more aggressive enforcement action against the protest. The protest was a considerable
00:07:53.360 inconvenience for many citizens in Ottawa. It was illegal, and there was some lawlessness,
00:08:00.160 but as you point out, there was no criminality. And it doesn't appear that, based on the open access,
00:08:05.520 open source information that we have, that there was an immediate risk of a January 6th type insurrection.
00:08:11.920 And so, somebody essentially made a political call. And I think the fact that,
00:08:17.200 you know, if the government felt confidence in the call that it made, I think it would have called
00:08:20.720 the Emergencies Act inquiry rather expeditiously, after the operation had ended. The fact that the
00:08:25.840 government waited basically until the last conceivable day to even call the inquiry and let the inquiry run,
00:08:33.200 I think suggests to me that they're trying to put as much distance between the event themselves and the
00:08:39.840 ultimate verdict that is rendered here on this particular point, because it will ultimately be,
00:08:51.600 I think, I mean, anytime you invoke legislation, it's a political decision. A political decision was made. We live in a democracy.
00:08:58.080 The public ultimately needs to judge that decision. And what we're hearing here before the inquiry
00:09:06.240 will hopefully provide the information for the public to make an informed judgment
00:09:10.080 as to whether an astute political decision was made or not.
00:09:12.080 I want to tie this in to these big, you know, I think it's an important point that the civilian
00:09:20.960 side, meaning the politicians aren't able to direct the police.
00:09:24.800 There very much is an understanding that there is going to be political direction. There is that
00:09:31.840 separation. We all understand that in terms of how they operate and the operational aspect to this.
00:09:38.000 One of the things that is so obvious to all Canadians was they saw that the protesters, you know, they
00:09:46.640 put the hot tubs up and the bouncy castles. And I mean, that was all, you know, a lot of show there,
00:09:53.040 a lot of theater. But when the border was starting to be blocked and we couldn't have goods and services
00:09:59.760 traveling across, you know, that's when there were some serious concern. But it was all being cleared
00:10:08.880 up prior to the invocation of the act. The act was implemented on February 14th. Just prior to that,
00:10:16.320 again, the RCMP commissioner said, hey, we haven't used all of our resources, our powers yet.
00:10:22.160 Hang on a moment. So I agree with you. I think that Canadians are going to have to judge and decide
00:10:27.760 ultimately whether the Liberal government was justified in their actions. And I still reiterate
00:10:34.000 that thus far, it doesn't seem to be that way from the mouths of the law enforcement agencies
00:10:40.160 themselves that were on the ground. But this is not necessarily going to be the first time this
00:10:50.080 happens in our country. There are going to be issues that arise again. And you've written extensively
00:10:57.280 about the makeup of our law enforcement in this country. And it's in one of your books,
00:11:04.160 The Public Securities and Federal Polities. You noted that our federal policing, for example,
00:11:09.760 is so unique in the world. And the manner by which we fund our land enforcement agencies is so unique in the world.
00:11:16.080 How does that play into sort of what we saw unfold during the trucks or convoy?
00:11:25.520 Yeah, I think that's an important question, because this is really, I think, what the
00:11:31.120 problem is, the public always wants to kind of examine the past, right? Who knew what, where, when,
00:11:35.920 who decided what. We're really, whether it's the inquiry here or it's the Mass Casualty Commission in Nova Scotia,
00:11:44.000 this really needs to be about the future. What do we need to change? How do we make the system more sustainable?
00:11:49.280 And what we saw in Ottawa is really a much broader symptom of, I think, the broader failure to be
00:11:57.360 postured in Canada effectively for the 21st century. So here's one example. So I think we live in an era of
00:12:03.040 mass protest. As you rightly point out, we're going to have to contend with other types of mass protest.
00:12:10.240 They might not hopefully be violent or insurrectionist, but they might be quite ensconced,
00:12:16.240 then they might be quite determined. And so if we're having trouble dealing with a few thousand
00:12:22.000 protesters in downtown Ottawa over the course of three weeks, that suggests to me that the system
00:12:28.400 is simply not postured well for the 21st century. And I think that ultimately comes down to issues
00:12:34.800 of the way police in Canada are led. It comes down to, and I think, you know, we have enough evidence
00:12:41.280 of leadership challenges across this country. I think there's currently a dozen forces in Ontario
00:12:47.600 alone that are looking for police chiefs. So it suggests that the talent that we're looking for
00:12:52.240 for the complexity of policing in the 21st century is not being generated, at least not in the quantity
00:12:59.760 and the quality that most boards themselves are looking for. Toronto took two years to search
00:13:06.720 for a new chief. We know how long it took to appoint the current commissioner.
00:13:11.280 To the RCMP. So there's leadership issues. There's broader ways that police are being managed
00:13:18.160 that again, I think are not fit for purpose. And then there's the institutional culture issues.
00:13:23.360 And ironically, the people who are often the most unhappy with their own police service are the
00:13:29.040 very uniform members that are serving in those services. And so if the public is unhappy, if the members
00:13:35.760 who are serving are unhappy, if often the senior command is not a particularly functional, cohesive group,
00:13:42.640 and if politicians aren't able to get the quality or the quantity of this sort of response that I think
00:13:50.800 we might expect in a rule of law, constitutional democracy, then we need to ask ourselves much
00:13:58.720 broader questions about why is it that we're, for instance, having simple communication issues and
00:14:04.880 intelligence issues in the chain of command among police services that are responding to this protest.
00:14:11.200 It's a function of these broader symptoms. And I hope that the, you know, we see this in Alberta,
00:14:17.200 that is debating perhaps adopting a provincial police force and having much broader conversations about
00:14:22.000 police reform. And I think this is where the critics of policing in the country have it right,
00:14:26.560 that I think, I'm not sure that the types of criticisms they have are always directed at the right
00:14:34.080 parts of the problem within the system, but I think they have it right, that the system is not ultimately
00:14:40.640 serving the expectations and needs that we have. And if you want to sum that up, the Ontario Police
00:14:46.400 Services Act and those of all the other provinces, the basic standard for policing is that police services
00:14:53.360 need to provide adequate and effective policing. What does that mean? Does policing needs meet the values,
00:14:59.600 needs and expectations of the local community? And I think we can look at what happened during the
00:15:05.120 Ottawa Convoy. And I think the current inquiry really needs to ask itself the question, did or did not
00:15:10.560 the policing and the response that we saw in Ottawa meet the needs, values and expectations of both
00:15:16.960 citizens of Ottawa and citizens of Canada? And if it did not, what are the underlying structural issues
00:15:23.760 and symptoms that we need to have, that we need to debate and we may need to reform?
00:15:31.360 Did you lock the front door?
00:15:32.400 Check.
00:15:33.040 Closed the garage door?
00:15:34.240 Yep.
00:15:34.720 Installed window sensors, smoke sensors and HD cameras with night vision?
00:15:38.160 No.
00:15:39.040 And you set up credit card transaction alerts, a secure VPN for a private connection,
00:15:42.400 and continuous monitoring for our personal info on the dark web?
00:15:45.520 Uh, I'm looking into it.
00:15:48.000 Stress less about security.
00:15:49.760 Choose security solutions from TELUS for peace of mind at home and online.
00:15:53.760 Visit telus.com slash total security to learn more. Conditions apply.
00:15:59.600 Wait, I didn't get charged for my donut.
00:16:02.640 It was free with this Tim's Rewards points.
00:16:04.720 I think I just stole it.
00:16:06.080 I'm a donut stealer.
00:16:08.240 Oof.
00:16:08.720 Earn points so fast, it'll seem too good to be true.
00:16:11.600 Plus, join Tim's Rewards today and get enough points for a free donut, drink or Timbits.
00:16:16.480 With 800 points after registration, activation and first purchase of a dollar or more.
00:16:20.480 See the Tim's app for details at participating restaurants in Canada for a limited time.
00:16:23.840 I think that that's such a critical part to the conversation, because in part,
00:16:33.280 there may be some answer to that as you pose it, because we have seen the recruitment and
00:16:39.040 the retention in various levels of law enforcement has diminished significantly.
00:16:44.560 Police officers at the local level, for example, are burnt out.
00:16:49.280 They don't feel, because of a certain political climate, particularly in the last few years,
00:16:56.640 you saw defund police movements, you saw such adversary actions towards police officers,
00:17:01.840 law enforcement agencies at any level.
00:17:04.320 I think that those are very real on the ground issues that every agency is facing.
00:17:13.120 I don't think that we want to necessarily unpack all of that, but I think it's part of what you're
00:17:18.240 talking about, that structural reality that is happening on the ground with each agency.
00:17:24.240 And so there comes to a point when very serious issues are facing our country or our community.
00:17:31.520 There doesn't seem to be the appreciation or understanding of each of them communicating
00:17:36.960 with each other, each of them taking a leadership role.
00:17:40.320 And it ends up in scenarios like this where before a commission and every law enforcement agency is
00:17:47.280 saying, I don't know what the other guy was doing.
00:17:49.280 So I think there's two fundamental issues at stake here. One is that in a democracy, we need a
00:17:54.800 functional police force because the application of the rule of law, that is to say, the premise of
00:18:01.920 predictability and the equal application of the rule of law ultimately hinges on the ability to enforce
00:18:07.680 the rules that our elected representatives, federally and provincially and locally, enact.
00:18:14.880 And so we need both a functionally effective organization and we need an organization that has
00:18:21.440 the legitimacy to be able to enforce those rules. And in democracies, we've chosen that that
00:18:27.280 legitimacy hinges ultimately on what is known as low policing. So Jean-Paul Bordeaux, the late famous
00:18:34.640 Canadian criminologist, distinguishes between high policing. That's what we see in places such as
00:18:39.600 Russia, where policing is in the interest of elites versus low policing, which is what community
00:18:44.000 policing about, which is, of course, where the acronym COPS ultimately comes from. So democracy
00:18:50.080 hinges on making sure that we resolve the credibility issues that are arising and of which the issues that
00:18:58.000 are being discussed with regards to the Ottawa convoy are just one more example in a growing list of
00:19:05.200 issues in Canada. My other challenge here is, with the way you've framed that question,
00:19:10.160 is the application of the rule of law in Canada. Because I'm increasingly concerned about the
00:19:16.240 inequitable application of the rule of law, in particular when it comes to protests. Because
00:19:21.840 you can see that in some cases, when you get protests, there are politicians that are quite
00:19:28.320 sympathetic with the protesters, and then quite critical of police when police try to enforce the rule of
00:19:34.320 law. In other cases, when police try to enforce the rule of law, they get pushback from politicians about
00:19:41.120 the measures or so forth that they are facing. And so I think when policing is seen to be
00:19:47.360 instrumentalized for political, particular ideological views, rather than for the best ability to apply the
00:19:56.160 rule of law fairly and effectively, then it is going to call our entire, not just rule of law system into
00:20:04.880 disrepute, it is going to call the forces that are meant to apply that rule of law into disrepute.
00:20:12.160 And we just saw a week ago, for instance, the apparent interference by the commissioner with regards
00:20:18.240 to in the mass casualty. So what the mass casualty commission revealed about gun legislation and
00:20:24.640 trying to get a particular narrative out when it came to the to the Portapic mass shooting.
00:20:30.880 And so these sort of incidents, I think we see more frequently. And that, to me, is deeply troubling,
00:20:36.640 because I think that's ultimately what we mean by operational independence. Yes, there needs to be
00:20:42.480 opportunity to critique police actions, police strategy. We saw that police make mistakes, often
00:20:49.200 major mistakes of the G7 and G20. But it's usually because the political authorities weren't
00:20:55.840 sufficiently involved in the front end in providing appropriate direction. And as much as we're talking
00:21:01.200 about the failures of policing in Ottawa, really, this was a failure of governance. Look, the Ottawa Police
00:21:06.880 Services Board, that is ultimately the democratic mechanism that is supposed to govern the police,
00:21:11.360 melts down during the most serious national security crisis that this country has had in decades.
00:21:17.280 So the mechanism that is supposed to ask the hard question, that is supposed to provide
00:21:21.360 strategic direction, is unavailable because it is too dysfunctional to actually be able to act.
00:21:27.360 Why is it, in part, unable to act? Because provincial policies, like, for instance, the major events
00:21:33.360 policy, provincially is hopelessly out of date. So that meant the Ottawa policy is out of date. So that
00:21:37.840 meant, so if the doctrine that you would need to respond isn't there. But I think we have a real challenge
00:21:42.720 when it comes to the governance and accountability mechanisms in this country that are supposed to
00:21:48.960 provide the sort of strategic direction that we need to safeguard the equitable and fair application of the
00:21:56.800 rule of law through our law enforcement mechanisms.
00:21:59.200 I think that's such an important point because the tone that is set from the political side of
00:22:07.520 the aisle is really instructive on how a protest or a, you know, a big issue is managed. And I know that a
00:22:19.520 lot of critics about this or talk about, well, look at how those that go and protest on our rail lines,
00:22:26.880 uh, they're from a certain particular community that may, the government of the day may feel sympathetic
00:22:33.120 to that, that community. So nothing, no action is taken when the obvious actions that should be taken is
00:22:41.760 removal, arrests, etc. So that, that inconsistency, I think Canadians see that. And, um, it, it bears itself
00:22:52.160 out when we see things like the trucker convoy and those protests that if you are perceived as sympathetic
00:23:00.320 to one side of a political argument, shall we say, you're going to be treated differently. And, and I put
00:23:07.920 that in the context of sort of what we expect. So, so you brought up the mass casualty commission
00:23:14.800 of the incidents that happened in, in Nova Scotia. There are reports, there's studies, there's
00:23:21.680 observations. Overlay that with where we are right now. Do you see any recommendations, any, anything
00:23:29.840 practical, realistic coming out of that type of commission, moving into this one where actual
00:23:36.960 tangible change can happen in the law enforcement piece? Well, I mean, it's, it's unfortunate for the
00:23:43.760 the mass casualty commission. I mean, the, the full transcript of the commissioner's conversation
00:23:48.640 with the team in Nova Scotia, um, and superintendent, uh, Campbell out there, uh, comes out after the
00:23:56.080 commission has effectively finished its work. Uh, so part of my question is, do we actually have full
00:24:01.440 disclosure of all the documents and everything that the emergencies act inquiry actually needs in order
00:24:07.040 to be able to, um, uh, to arrive at a sensible judgment? Because ultimately this is about domain
00:24:14.400 awareness. You kind of, you can only make a judgment based on the information available. Um, and, um,
00:24:21.280 there's, I think some concern that there are obviously political interests when you have a unique
00:24:26.080 event, such as the emergency act, uh, being invoked of shaping, uh, of shaping the narrative. Um,
00:24:33.920 um, so what is it that we can learn? I mean, certainly I think one of the things we can learn
00:24:38.960 is we need a legislative posture that's fit for the 21st century. The, um, financial measures that
00:24:46.400 the government did enact through the emergencies act that would allow banks to freeze accounts of
00:24:53.120 questionable, um, of, of, with, with questionable sort of transactions. Um, other advanced democracies,
00:25:00.800 um, already have these, um, already have these as part of routine response of their, um, uh, money
00:25:07.840 laundering, terrorist financing and proceeds of crime, uh, legislation. Um, and so it's, I think just
00:25:15.040 one example of the extent to which, um, governments in this country are simply not prepared to innovate
00:25:21.680 in terms of legislation. That means law enforcement and intelligence often don't have adequate tools
00:25:27.200 available to them to deal with the challenges that they have, which means that we need to resort to,
00:25:33.840 or politicians feel they need to resort in this case to extraordinary measures. I mean,
00:25:38.720 we see protests of tens of thousands of people in May Day, for instance, in France or in Germany,
00:25:43.840 uh, France labor protests, some of which sometimes can get, um, uh, can get somewhat violent, uh,
00:25:50.320 where police are well prepared to respond to protests much larger than we saw in Ottawa.
00:25:55.280 So just imagine if we actually had a much larger protest, uh, in this country, uh, would we actually
00:26:01.200 be prepared to engage and, uh, and to deal with that? And I think the, the challenge when we're not
00:26:07.360 adequately postured, led, managed within the organizations themselves, and we don't have an adequate
00:26:14.800 fit for purpose legislative framework means that it requires more political, uh, direction or it
00:26:22.320 affords also more latitude for political direction, which then often leaves police sort of holding the
00:26:27.520 bag in terms of having to, um, do their best with inadequate tools and with too much latitude for
00:26:35.280 politicians either to provide directions or to leave police hanging by not providing any strategic
00:26:41.520 direction. And I think so what's hopefully will come out of the inquiry is that we need a much
00:26:47.120 clearer framework, um, for the invocation of when our extraordinary, uh, quasi extra constitutional
00:26:55.040 measures, um, uh, justified, um, and to be able to, uh, I think set ourselves up for a path of
00:27:03.840 sustainability that ultimately we should be asking questions. We never want to find ourselves in this
00:27:08.800 situation where all the shortcomings that, that we identified here to make sure that we're not just
00:27:14.800 preparing for the last battle, but we're actually preparing adequately for the mass protests of the
00:27:20.560 21st century. Uh, and we can be postured, um, adequately for that. And I mean, everything from,
00:27:27.760 um, the legislative piece to RCMP reform needs to be part of that conversation. One of the
00:27:34.480 the justifications for having the RCMP, this national police force of 17,000 members had always
00:27:39.280 been in a surge capacity in the case, in case of sort of extraordinary events. Well, where was that
00:27:45.600 surge capacity when we needed it in Ottawa? Where was it when municipal forces across the province said,
00:27:51.200 we can't spare any people to send to Ottawa because the protesters are showing up in our own times.
00:27:56.720 Where was it when the OPP, when it effectively became clear that we needed a national incident command
00:28:02.480 center, um, and that, uh, both, uh, local and arguably provincial police were out of their
00:28:08.560 depth? Where were the water cannons that are 15 minute drive from Parliament Hill? Where were the
00:28:13.920 dozens of horses that the Mounties keep, um, within again, a 15 minute drive off Parliament Hill? Where
00:28:20.320 was our national police force when we had national protest? And as this commission draws on,
00:28:26.800 Professor LaPrette, Canadians should have those answers. We should have some sort of conclusion to
00:28:35.680 what sounds, what our expectation is. You know, one of the fundamental roles of government is to keep
00:28:42.080 citizens safe. Uh, that's, that's their job. And so much, uh, has happened in the course of this, uh, last year,
00:28:52.320 the course of the pandemic that has really shifted our, uh, shall we say priorities on things.
00:29:00.000 And such a significant dearth of leadership at the federal level really came to the fore during this
00:29:07.920 entire convoy. And I'm just wondering if you can conclude with, uh, just a final thought on as this
00:29:17.440 wraps up, as the commission finishes its job, do you feel that there is sufficient information, uh,
00:29:26.560 now that, and, and after all these commissions, after all these reports, after all the studies,
00:29:31.760 that's not just going to sit on a shelf and real change can happen, can be implemented.
00:29:38.400 Adrian, you said that one of the jobs of government is to keep people safe. I would say that is job one
00:29:44.240 of government, because if people aren't safe and if the country is not secure, then we are not going
00:29:50.640 to be able to enjoy prosperity. And we are certainly not going to be able to enjoy democracy, the rule
00:29:56.720 of law, the values that we all cherish. And so we all need to ask ourselves very hard questions when
00:30:03.280 citizens feel unsafe, that government is ultimately failing in the fund in providing the most fundamental
00:30:10.960 good that citizens anywhere need to be able to expect of their state. And if you ask immigrants
00:30:16.720 to this country, what is the primary reason that you came to Canada? And what do you really appreciate
00:30:23.040 about Canada? They will tell you, it is the fact that I feel safe and secure in this country. And
00:30:29.120 ultimately, I think we failed to make people feel safe and secure when it came to the Ottawa convoy.
00:30:36.000 That doesn't mean that there were the convoy was was was that there were legal elements,
00:30:41.520 but clearly, you know, legal forms of protest. But clearly, there was a lot of illegality.
00:30:47.520 And it stuns me to this day that nobody had the wherewithal that when 400 trucks are rolling into
00:30:54.400 town to tell them, well, you can't actually pull off the highway and drive downtown. That's going to be a bad
00:31:00.320 idea. Like we made rookie mistakes in this when it when it came to when it came to the protest.
00:31:06.240 And it appears that we also made rookie mistakes in the way that we were spent responded to the protest.
00:31:11.520 Where was at the beginning of that protest, the joint unified picture of Mayor Jim Watson,
00:31:18.240 the Premier Doug Ford and the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau standing shoulder to shoulder with
00:31:25.840 their senior law enforcement officers behind them and giving a clear message to the protesters that
00:31:31.360 lawlessness will not be tolerated. And I think that's sort of you know, we're trying to push this off on
00:31:37.520 police. And we're trying to say, well, the police sort of failed and sort of their coordination. Yes.
00:31:43.760 But ultimately, I think we need to ask much harder, much broader questions about about the the entire
00:31:52.400 system in which the protest was able to unfold, the inability to contain it, and the inability to
00:31:59.520 provide a sustained response. No surprise that we couldn't provide a sustained response because
00:32:05.520 there was, by police's own admission, no plan B, right? We went in on day one, plan didn't work. We went
00:32:12.400 in on day two, plan didn't work. By day three, we needed a capacity to have a new plan, to have an
00:32:17.520 integrated intelligence function, to have an operational capacity to actually work out this
00:32:22.320 plan, to surge resources. That entire capacity did not exist within the OPS. And it took us the
00:32:29.600 better part of a couple of weeks to actually build it up. And I think that for Canadians should be a real
00:32:34.800 concern about how is it that politicians have so under-resourced our law enforcement and intelligence
00:32:41.520 capabilities, that we're simply not able to respond in expeditious fashion to the most egregious
00:32:47.840 challenge to the rule of law in this country in multiple decades. And to that effect, I think
00:32:53.920 the questions here need to be broader than simply about the invocation of the Emergencies Act. It needs
00:32:58.960 to be, how come we were so hopelessly unprepared? And that's ultimately not so much on police, that is
00:33:05.440 ultimately on the politicians that make the rules, that provide the resources, and that need to give
00:33:11.120 the appropriate strategic direction. And it helps give us a blueprint for how Canadians can hold
00:33:18.000 the politicians accountable. Professor Lepret, I really want to thank you for joining me on Full
00:33:22.800 Comment today and making sense of this weighty issue. It's been a real pleasure. Thanks for the
00:33:28.960 opportunity to talk about this. Full Comment is a post media podcast. I'm guest host Adrienne
00:33:34.560 Batra. This episode was produced by Andre Pru with theme music by Bryce Hall. Kevin Libin is the
00:33:40.160 executive producer. You can subscribe to Full Comment on Apple Podcasts, Google, Spotify, and Amazon
00:33:46.240 Music. You can also listen through the app or your Alexa-enabled devices. And you can help us by
00:33:52.160 giving us a rating or leaving a review. And of course, telling your friends about us.