00:13:27.720Okay, and last point on this, if we just scroll down a little bit more, there's, you'll see a line that says concerns from Minister LeBlanc specifically, and what we'll be hearing from Minister LeBlanc early, later on today, but it says Minister LeBlanc has reached in to Minister Mendicino, noting MPs are concerned for their safety and amid reporting of demonstrators attending their residences. This is being taken into consideration as part of the above planning for deployment of resources.
00:13:56.380And I think that that is worth emphasizing as well, because in addition to the security that was provided to ministers and cabinet, there was a heightened security posture around the Hill and around being able to access Parliament.
00:14:10.800And indeed, one of my main concerns was that given, again, some of the stated objectives by some, including the potential to become violent, that that we were just returning from winter session.
00:14:26.580And the first day of the resumption of Parliament coincided with one of the early days in in the blockade and subsequent occupation right here in Ottawa.
00:14:39.880And I was worried about a significant number of people being able to both ingress and egress from the hill.
00:14:50.880And so there was a heightened security posture so that we could continue to host Parliament or to hold Parliament.
00:15:00.240It was a very important priority that Canadians see that the business of government continue, notwithstanding the blockade and the convoy.
00:15:09.060But there were challenges. And I had many conversations with parliamentarians, disproportionately women, I would point out, who were the recipient of harassment, intimidation, expressions of hate through the convoy.
00:15:24.960So that additional security was very much driven by the reality on the ground.
00:15:29.920Okay, that was actually my next question, whether these concerns were based on identified threats having been identified, I'm going to use that word twice, but by the intelligence services or by law enforcement, or whether these were based on what was being seen on social media, or based on essentially complaints or worries expressed by members of parliament and the individuals involved.
00:15:52.440All of the above. And so it was a combination of what we were seeing on the ground in the activities of the convoy and probably the most aggressive demonstration of their presence was the parking of ultimately hundreds of trucks on Wellington Street, which is one of the main arteries that runs through the parliamentary precinct.
00:16:15.500and again I'll just pause here I mean that that visual suggested to me that we were going to be
00:16:25.160in it for quite some time rather than just the weekend but I'll come back to that we were I'm
00:16:31.920sure that the RCMP were taking into account what they were seeing online what they were hearing
00:16:37.520from various parliamentarians regarding potential security threats and so for all of those reasons
00:16:43.380again, security was elevated, not only for cabinet, but for parliamentarians and for staff
00:16:48.100who were working in the parliamentary precinct. Okay, and we will get to the actual arrival of
00:16:53.260the convoy, but there's one more document I'd like to pull up before we get there. So,
00:16:57.880So, Mr. Clerk, that is SSM.nsc.can401809, and so this, Minister, may go to what you were
00:17:18.080just expressing about your heightened level of concern.
00:17:21.840This is Friday, January 28th at around noon, so this is as the convoy would be starting
00:17:27.640to roll in you send an email to mike jones can you tell us who mike jones is because his name
00:17:33.320will come up a few times i think this morning mike jones is my chief of staff and the email that you
00:17:38.840put up which is dated friday january 28th at about 5 38 pm reflects the questions that i
00:17:47.720intend to put to the table so looking at latest estimate on numbers both in terms of vehicles and
00:17:54.280people, trying to ascertain whether or not there was any intelligence of individuals who may be
00:18:01.480on a watch list regarding threats to national security. The third question that I put in the
00:18:11.780email there, which is written as latest on what-if scenarios, what I was really, I think,
00:18:19.500foreshadowing was a discussion around potential contingencies. Like, what if the convoy doesn't
00:18:29.740disengage? What if they don't leave? And from a very early point, as I had said earlier, had
00:18:38.460concerns that this was not just going to be a one or a two day event, that it was going to last much
00:18:43.980longer and so i wanted to extract from um the community the law enforcement community the
00:18:50.700intelligence community what do we do if that's the case how do we make sure that we keep public
00:18:56.620safety um and and what are the contingencies around that okay um so just a couple of things
00:19:03.100the first is is for the record and and for ease of understanding you'll see the the notation plus
00:19:09.420four zeros there. That means that the timestamp is in Greenwich Mean Time, so it's minus
00:19:14.420five hours. So that was around 1230. And as you say, you're asking, what if scenarios?
00:19:20.340What if they don't leave? What if it lasts beyond Monday? What if it turns violent? What
00:19:26.500if they come before parliamentary residences? And we know now at this point that what ended
00:19:34.080up happening as of i think january 28th was uh a group of ministers consisting of yourself
00:19:41.040i believe minister leblanc minister uh blair and minister al gabra were briefed daily by
00:19:48.000uh a variety of officials from pco and various agencies under public safety
00:19:54.080would that have been done in response to this request um i i think it was understood
00:19:59.920early on that we were going to need to take a whole of government approach responding to the
00:20:05.400convoy. So the initial group that you just highlighted of ministers was eventually expanded
00:20:11.360and then ultimately, as I'm sure we'll get into, the Prime Minister convened a meeting of the
00:20:16.400incident response group, which included a number of others. But I should highlight the two last
00:20:21.480points which are in the email to Mike Jones, which suggests that at the time I was also
00:20:29.400concerned about making sure that we were staying up on threat assessments as well to senators as
00:20:36.640well as the governor general in addition to elected parliamentarians and finally I wanted to get a
00:20:42.360sense of what outreach was being done to the organizers and my thinking there was let's try to
00:20:50.120allow for the space for a lawful protest keep it within the boundaries of the law because it is a
00:20:56.520hallmark of our democracy that people can take opposing different views um and and so i wanted
00:21:04.200to make sure that there were some lines of communication with the organizers of the of
00:21:08.340the convoy from the early days okay so we'll just skip a little bit ahead now uh so the convoy
00:21:14.420arrives it doesn't leave on sunday or monday as expected and then we're into the first week of
00:21:20.340the protest so i'll ask you a few questions about what that first week was like from your perspective
00:21:26.300And with the assistance right now of the following document, pb.can401870, please.
00:21:46.660Okay, so, Minister Mendocino, this is a text from Mike Jones, who's in the blue.
00:21:52.600well if there's no one there's no one else i think in the and it's not blue but there we go now it's
00:21:56.840blue um and the text is to brian clow can you tell us who brian clow is yes brian clow is the deputy
00:22:04.440chief of staff to the prime minister okay so just scrolling down a little bit please mr quick so we
00:22:08.920can see the text so this is sunday february 6th and and mr jones mike jones writes to mr clow so
00:22:16.920my boss that would be you yes is pretty amped up he's concerned that ops have lost jurisdiction
00:22:23.560as there's no control at all over what's happening on wellington also concerned for pm safety if he is
00:22:30.360returning to this this week what does that mean if he was returning this week just pausing there
00:22:37.160my recollection is that he was out of ottawa for some period of time and then would be returning
00:22:42.600to to ottawa and to ultimately the house of commons and and so i was i was outlining my
00:22:52.360concern about his ability to for him and his uh his staff and and and the rcmp that work with him
00:23:01.320to protect him to get into and out of parliament safely because by then and the date of this text
00:23:09.800is Sunday, February the 6th. So we're fully now, I think, about a week into the convoy. And this
00:23:17.060would have been after the first weekend. And the concerns that I was expressing was that
00:23:24.580by that first weekend, it was my opinion that it was virtually impossible to enforce the law
00:23:32.460on Wellington Street. Given the rampant behavior, not only the noise that was being made by
00:23:42.340the excessive honking of horns well into the evening, but some of the early reports,
00:23:49.140and again, bear in mind, this is Sunday, February 6th. By then, there were a number of press
00:23:56.920conferences that the Ottawa Police Service had held expressing serious concerns around
00:24:01.800the reports of intimidation, harassment, and violence, if memory serves. I think there was
00:24:07.540a press conference where the Ottawa Police Service had indicated that there were reports
00:24:13.520of firearms that had been brought into the nation's capital. And subsequently, again,
00:24:19.280I'm going from memory, but there was at least one arrest that was reported of somebody that
00:24:24.640was making their way potentially to the convoy where the firearm was seized. You know, there were
00:24:32.300efforts, I think, by law enforcement to try and get the situation under control, but they were
00:24:38.820overwhelmed. So there were a series of events leading up to the text that Mike Jones had sent
00:24:46.220to Brian Clough that had led to my concerns being elevated about our ability to restore public safety
00:24:57.900on Wellington Street in the nation's capital, which is the seat of the federal government.
00:25:03.860I would also just add that my concerns were not just about Ottawa, that by then there were already
00:25:08.960reports as well about borders being uh blockaded and i would just recall for you uh and and uh and
00:25:17.840for judge rouleau that in my job as minister of public safety i'm not just looking at the nation
00:25:24.880the nation's capital or the parliamentary precinct i'm looking at the entire country and so by then
00:25:30.560a number of critical infrastructure and borders had become either the target of or in fact
00:25:38.880blockades which had a significant impact on critical supply chains so there was a lot that
00:25:44.080was i think um i'm i'm interpreting and extracting a little bit exactly uh from the language but i
00:25:51.120think that's what mike jones was conveying to brian cloud okay so it just scroll down a little
00:25:55.600bit more mr clerk so the next part of the text says he wants to go out that would be you want to
00:26:01.200go out and say that ops needs to get control over the situation and if they need more from obp they
00:26:08.240should make that clear but they should get working on removals within the next 24 hours and if they're
00:26:14.000not if they aren't going to do it then we may need to look at other measures let me know if you want
00:26:18.400to discuss so this represents where your your thinking is as you say at the end of the first
00:26:24.720week so this is sunday february 6 and you've just told us why you've come to this this uh viewpoint
00:26:31.040can i ask what you meant by we need we may need to look at other measures at that point
00:26:36.400At that point, I think looking at offering additional resources to local police and, you know, there had been informal requests communicated to me and to my office for additional RCMP services, which we provided on a number of different occasions prior to the invocation of the act.
00:26:57.760So that was certainly one of the other potential measures
00:27:22.060And so that's what I believe I was foreshadowing at the time.
00:27:25.600okay uh well we're about to get into some of those resourcing discussions because the next topic
00:27:30.000we're going to cover is the tripartite meetings right we've come to know as the tripartites so
00:27:35.280um mr clerk if you can pull up while while i'm talking pb.nsc.can402335
00:27:45.440so you meant you mentioned minister manichino that at this point there'd been a number of
00:27:55.340requests made from uh from the ottawa police from various i think provinces at this point
00:28:01.100even there'd been an approach from alberta but we're not really getting into alberta right now
00:28:05.620but uh in any event around the 7th or 8th of february the 7th a decision was made that it
00:28:12.140be a good idea to convene the federal provincial and municipal governments to discuss the situation
00:28:18.540in ottawa and the way forward from there including the provision of resources as you mentioned
00:28:23.740uh there are a lot of issues to cover that come out of the tripartites we're going to focus on a
00:28:28.300few a few of those issues are the rcmp resources there's the lack of the ops plan and there's uh
00:28:34.620what seems to be expressed as a a lack of engagement from the province of ontario so
00:28:39.740I'm going to take you through a few extracts that focus on some of those topics. So the document in
00:28:46.460front of us now is a readout of the February 7th tripartite, and that was the first tripartite
00:28:52.300meeting. Is that right? Yes. Okay. Scrolling down, Mr. Clerk, when you see the initials,
00:28:59.100M-M. Okay, M-M. M-M is Marco Mendocino. That's you? Yes. Okay. Minister Mendocino or Marco
00:29:05.420managino one of the two so mm call last week with watson was productive it is stressful period for
00:29:13.100you and chief feels like things have turned around a bit today we have confirmed 250 mounties have
00:29:19.740been deputized supporting local law enforcement we have been timely and responsive in putting our
00:29:25.180response together minister jones will want to have a discussion with what they can contribute
00:29:31.740uh letter addressed to and scroll down yeah there we go both pm and premier we are going to be in
00:29:37.740touch okay so from your recollection minister who attended that first tripartite meeting
00:29:44.540um well from the federal level of government myself minister blair our officials some of
00:29:51.100our political staff mayor watson i believe his chief of staff and um i'm trying to recall
00:30:00.940whether or not uh there were any officials from the ontario government not elected um or not but
00:30:08.460but i mean the majority of the participants were um the political levels from the city of ottawa
00:30:15.180the federal government and supporting staff and officials okay and that's fair this isn't
00:30:19.100a memory test anyway but um so minister jones obviously did not attend because you were talking
00:30:23.580about getting her to attend in this in this uh exchange here okay um can we just scroll down
00:30:29.580again to page two please keep going a little bit please mr clerk there we go where it says watson
00:30:39.020on tripartite table so the discussion before this pertains to um rcmp numbers how many resources
00:30:47.340are being provided there's some frustration expressed throughout this by the mayor of
00:30:51.820ottawa mayor watson about how many rcmp boots are actually on the ground so that's being discussed
00:30:57.820and then we get to Watson on tripartite table has the province agreed to this and Minister Blair then
00:31:05.660says both of us have reached out mm that would be you and I she wasn't able to join today
00:31:11.100unfortunately we'll continue to engage to encourage them to join these talks and then
00:31:18.300Mayor Watson expresses an opinion that the province is reluctant to be a part of what's going on
00:31:23.260and then expresses some frustration about that.
00:31:27.000Would you agree with that characterization of Mayor Watson in that line?
00:31:31.460The province was reluctant to be part of what was going on.
00:31:36.460I would agree that at that particular point in time that there was a common desire to have Minister Jones
00:31:46.460or additional representation from Ontario at the tripartite meeting for the purposes of
00:31:53.140cooperating and coordinating the response to the convoy in Ottawa. Now, I would add that that's not
00:32:00.460to say that the province was not engaged at all. And I know, for instance, that Premier Ford had
00:32:07.440made a number of very strong statements about the state of the convoy, condemning it, saying,
00:32:13.360you know it was out of control it pronounced very definitively and declaratively that it was time for
00:32:19.840for people to go home if i recall correctly that would have been before this tripartite there were
00:32:25.760other conversations that i was having bilaterally around around the tripartite so i would say
00:32:33.200despite the fact that they were not at that table there were still conversations with ontario but
00:32:38.880yes we would like to have seen them at the tripartite there's no doubt about that
00:32:43.200okay um can we just scroll down again please mr clerk last point i think on this one page three
00:32:50.720please sorry there we go where it says mm again wellington so mm wellington has invoked a lot of
00:33:00.000images but the site of a crane trucks in front of pmo pco were particularly concerning uh need
00:33:06.560to know from the chief what the plan is and chief there is chief slowly what the plan is
00:33:11.440to have those vehicles removed with appropriate boundaries on operational independence how is the
00:33:17.280convoy being broken up and disengaged can i just ask you to speak at this point on what you meant
00:33:22.960there by appropriate boundaries on operational independence in this context well that's a very
00:33:29.520important uh question because um the principle of operational independence has to guide the
00:33:35.520relationship between police and the elected branch of government and again from my past professional
00:33:44.480experience as a prosecutor and as a practicing lawyer i would have been very familiar precisely
00:33:49.200because i had worked closely with police in a variety of different cases and the need to in
00:33:54.400respect that principle at all times so i wanted to be sure that even as though we were asking
00:34:02.400questions of police to provide some detail and some clarity around how they intended to restore
00:34:09.280public safety that at all times it was respectful of that principle at the same time i do think it
00:34:15.120bears emphasizing that police and the elected branch of government do not operate in two silos
00:34:21.040and nor should we that there needs to be a dialogue between both branches to be sure that
00:34:26.400police have the resources that they need which was one of my core responsibilities in the response
00:34:31.760to the blockade as well as potentially additional tools to respond to the unique and unprecedented
00:34:37.360nature of this convoy which is something that we ultimately came to so i know you may have
00:34:42.720more questions about operational independence but i wanted to flag really early on that that
00:34:47.680you know as we were asking questions we were mindful of that the other thing i would just
00:34:51.920stress if i could is that in ultimately forming the opinion that we needed to invoke the emergencies
00:34:58.640act one of my main concerns was the inability to enforce the law adjacent to critical infrastructure
00:35:06.240and that would have included parliament and the nature of the parliamentary precinct is such
00:35:11.840that wellington street falls within the jurisdiction of the ottawa police service
00:35:16.320so i was certainly trying to reconcile in my mind that these are federal democratic institutions
00:35:25.920But we did not have total jurisdiction over that space.
00:35:30.300In other words, it wasn't at the sole or exclusive discretion of the RCMP, which is the Federal Police Service, to go and assert itself on Wellington Street to bring the situation back into control.
00:35:44.940So we had to navigate different levels of government, including municipal and provincial, because Ottawa Police Service has that jurisdiction as of this moment.
00:35:54.620And if they did not have the resources to respond to the occupation at that point, including the ability to remove hundreds of large vehicles on Wellington Street, including the ability to remove a crane, which had been parked right adjacent to the Prime Minister's office and the Privy Council office, including the ability to simply enforce the law,
00:36:21.660then they could then next go to they then statutorily under the Ontario Police Services
00:36:28.040Act could go to the Ontario government to ask for the Ontario Provincial Police Service
00:36:32.560to backstop any gaps there but I would point out that there is no statutory link beyond that
00:36:39.440to go from the Ontario Police Service Act to the Emergencies Act and I know that's something we're
00:36:44.280going to come to. Okay there's a lot you've said there and we'll unpack that slowly but surely
00:36:49.760But for the purposes of the discussion we're having right now about the tripartites,
00:36:55.100would it be fair to say that part of the idea in holding the tripartites
00:36:59.180would be to sort out the jurisdictional issue?
00:37:02.320It was really to make sure that all of the key players at all three levels of government
00:37:08.500were able to navigate around the jurisdictional challenges and complexities.
00:37:15.120But beyond that, the situation on the ground, which, you know, by then, as you pointed out in an earlier exhibit and text, it was on the brink of being completely ungovernable, if not already by then.
00:37:33.440Okay. We'll go now to the next tripartite, which is the following day, February 8th.
00:38:29.520it's only been a day stay focused on the task at hand received your letter and the mayor then says
00:38:35.380why no soljan attendance soljan is is minister jones that's correct okay and you say no word
00:38:42.180back so you're conveying there that you you attempted to call or attempted to contact minister
00:38:47.340jones and and had not heard back at that yes that's right okay and then uh the mayor says
00:38:53.260he's speaking to the premier tomorrow and he will ask that his minister be at the table he goes on
00:38:59.820to talk about a call that he'd had with the prime minister which we we went through in some detail
00:39:04.540a few weeks ago um and then minister blair chimes in on ontario involvement and says i know marco's
00:39:12.860been having good conversations with ontario they are worried about being visible and then being
00:39:18.700asked about what the province is doing. Now, I appreciate that these are Minister Blair's words,
00:39:24.140not yours, but do you know, do you recall what he was talking about when he said they were worried
00:39:28.540about being visible? Well, again, as you pointed out, these are my colleague Minister Blair's words
00:39:36.620that are being captured in a summary of a readout. I believe he was referring to the fact that at the
00:39:45.240point in time that we were having these trilateral conversations that there was a lot of attention
00:39:50.440that was being placed on both the city of Ottawa as well as the federal government and you know I
00:39:56.880believe he was conveying a perception that that Ontario wasn't at the table at the time and so
00:40:03.780again what we really were driving at here and as I think the summary communicates was an effort to
00:40:11.640bring Ontario to the table. And I had reached out to Minister Jones, had not heard back at that
00:40:18.560point, I believe, if memory serves, I was able to get in touch with her shortly after that
00:40:23.820time. But it was it was really a full court press to try and have everybody at the trilateral table
00:40:31.940because as we've discussed, there were operational complexities and jurisdictional complexities. And
00:40:38.180to the extent that we could be all aligned, then that would help to restore public safety.
00:40:44.700Okay. And we'll get back to that topic. I'm going to scroll down and take you to something else I
00:40:49.980want to ask you about here. This is, sorry, scroll down a little bit, Mr. Clerk, until you see page
00:40:57.800three slowly for every action should be a little bit down from there there we go so just scroll
00:41:08.680down there we go thank you slowly so there's a chief slowly speaking and you're asking what
00:41:16.440does the trend look like for removal is it going slow slowly going down or is it stop and start
00:41:21.960and she slowly says for every action we do there is a counter reaction then that can exceed our
00:41:28.800resources we saw that in coventry so he's discussing there the the give and take or the
00:41:34.160the reactions and counter reactions in ottawa specifically but then he then says our public
00:41:40.600request for more uh for 1800 more people resulted in the activity in windsor plus a national call
00:41:48.840for protesters to drive to Ottawa so they can outnumber even increased police presence. Their
00:41:54.440national implications and local implications here, they are very well organized and able to
00:41:59.560mobilize people. So can you tell us, expand a little bit on what you were hearing about that
00:42:04.920at that time, the level of organization and to the extent that you were hearing this and
00:42:12.280the interconnectedness or not of what was going on across the country?
00:42:16.520That is a critically important intervention by Chief Slowly at the time for a couple of reasons.
00:42:24.480First, he's flagging as a very serious concern that locally they are outnumbered.
00:42:34.620And he says that it is exceeding their, or he suggests that it is very close to exceeding their current resources,
00:42:43.920which is why they had asked for some additional help, including from the RCMP, which by then we would have responded to.
00:42:51.060There were a couple of installations prior to the invocation of the act that I think numbered in the hundreds,
00:42:59.540somewhere between, you know, 200 at the outset and then eventually getting up to about 500 all told.
00:43:05.960There were questions about exactly how those resources were being deployed by the RCMP in conjunction with Ottawa Police Service.
00:43:13.140But the real important point is he's saying, we're outnumbered and we need help.
00:43:18.960That's what I took from that intervention.
00:43:21.960The other thing that he mentioned in that intervention is Coventry.
00:43:30.460And through a number of briefings in the lead up to the invocation of the Emergencies Act,
00:43:38.020there was a discussion of two different groups that were at play in the blockades.
00:43:42.440There was a large group, again, of Canadians who were exercising their lawful right to protest against certain policies by the government.
00:43:50.740But then there was another group that had other more extreme objectives that was much more sophisticated and organized.
00:44:00.460And it's my recollection that that latter group was interspersed in a number of different locations very tactically,
00:44:07.160but that there was a concentration of that latter group at Coventry Road that was made up potentially of individuals who had previously served in either the military or in law enforcement.
00:44:18.800And that, to me, raised a concern, a very serious concern, about some of the counter operations that could be run by that group to overwhelm legitimate law enforcement.
00:44:32.680And that, I think, is exactly what Chief Slowly is getting at when, you know, if numbers are being reported publicly about how many additional reinforcements are being sent in, then the word could go out to call for more protesters to descend into the nation's capital or, you know, again, quite frankly, to deploy across the country.
00:44:56.820And again, I would hasten to add, this was not just about Ottawa.
00:45:01.280This was about the entire country, where we would see the levels of protest go up and go down.
00:45:07.920And the time that I thought was most dangerous were typically the weekends.
00:45:13.600And that's when there was a surge of people who came and descended into the parliamentary precinct.
00:45:22.740And that, if I read Chief Slowly Wright, was in part a tactical decision that was being informed by some within the group who had the skills and the experience to overwhelm whatever police resources were available at the time.
00:45:41.100Okay, so going back to a few things you said, the first one you mentioned that there were some questions about boots on the ground and how many RCMP officers were being provided.
00:45:50.320And we've heard about that, but from your perspective as Minister of Public Safety, what was your understanding of what was going on there and why?
00:45:58.960Well, my understanding was that Ottawa Police Service did not have the resources to respond at the time.
00:46:07.760And therefore, they were putting out a request for assistance from different levels of government and different levels of law enforcement, including the RCMP.
00:46:16.940and that is one of and so my response as minister of public safety is let's get you what you need
00:46:22.340let's get you the additional boots on the ground and in dialogue with commissioner the commissioner
00:46:28.340of the RCMP we were responsive to that request on more than one occasion deploying additional RCMP
00:46:35.620members to to assist to restore public safety here in the nation's capital there was also
00:46:43.800other requests including in alberta but we can come back to that well i was uh before we get to
00:46:48.280alberta when you say let's get you what you need do you mean let's let's get you what you need from
00:46:52.600the rcmp or let's get what you what you need from the opp and then only then from the rcmp i wouldn't
00:46:59.560say that there was necessarily that strict sequencing my my job as minister of public safety
00:47:06.360was to be responsive to the requests that were coming in from the city of ottawa
00:47:13.480vis-a-vis the ottawa police service and so we facilitated those requests they were not you know
00:47:22.040they were not necessarily subject to the ontario provincial police responding at the time i wanted
00:47:27.880to be as supportive as i could i was very much sympathetic to the plight of the residents in
00:47:35.560Ottawa. I was very concerned for their safety and their security. We were beginning to see
00:47:40.440counter-protests manifesting because I think at that time residents felt that they had to
00:47:44.840take matters into their own hands. That was extremely concerning to me because I thought
00:47:48.920that it represented a significant risk of more serious violence as a result of frustration and
00:47:55.400fatigue and we were seeing an abundance of expressions of that in reporting and on social
00:48:01.160media so i wanted to be as supportive as i could to the city of ottawa and to the ottawa police
00:48:06.200service and chief slowly i think rightfully was was flagging his concerns about resource capacity
00:48:13.720and potential counter operations that were being run by um the blockade and the occupation so
00:48:19.240getting back to that last concern about the uh the counter operations the action the reaction
00:48:26.200Were you concerned then that this could spiral into something where police resources would actually be overwhelmed and stretched beyond capacity across the country?
00:48:38.340Was that the nature of your concern, or was it in specific areas there wouldn't be enough available locally?
00:48:44.880Or was it a broader concern than that, or was it just the specific instances?
00:48:49.980It was a broader concern that was national in scale.
00:48:53.320At the end of the day, in my opinion, this was an illegal protest that was national in scale, that occurred at critical infrastructure, including a number of borders and ports of entry, including at legislative assemblies, including here at the seat of the federal government.
00:49:15.220and the initial responses of law enforcement to get the situation back under control
00:49:22.980were clearly overwhelmed and as a result of that the consequences were devastating to people to
00:49:30.900the economy to our international relations and so at all times I was assessing not any one of
00:49:39.840these events in isolation, but rather the situation in its totality. And when looking at
00:49:46.800the timing of it and the concurrence of all of these events in the same short critical period
00:49:52.840of time, the types of targets where the individuals were showing up for the express purposes of
00:50:00.620creating a disruption and undermining public safety, and the type of tactics that were being
00:50:06.740used which was through sheer size and force of people of vehicles and behavior that this was a
00:50:14.660very singular and unprecedented event so being able to assess all of that in its totality
00:50:21.060was very much part of my job to restore public safety and to maintain it did you have any actual
00:50:27.700evidence of what chief slowly is referring to here that interconnectedness or was this this
00:50:32.740more you saw correlation or chief slowly is here but you agreed with it that one one action then
00:50:39.860seems to have a counter reaction or provoke a response amongst protesters nationwide but did
00:50:45.700that come from evidence or did that come from essentially observation it it came from observation
00:50:50.540uh what what i was seeing with my own eyes on the ground uh was that when police tried to enforce
00:50:57.840the law they were overwhelmed they were swarmed there were reports about there being threats made
00:51:03.920to them as they tried to do their job and they were clearly identifiable in uniform you know
00:51:09.760indicating that it was time to go home and these were not just interactions i mean they ultimately
00:51:15.440did lead to hundreds of criminal charges being laid including assault peace officer which is a
00:51:21.440very serious offense to be charged with this was all a counter reaction to the reaction of law
00:51:28.000enforcement to try and restore public safety on the ground and it wasn't just in ottawa it was at
00:51:34.320ports of entry in uh at the pacific highway in surrey in british columbia where again there
00:51:41.040were very clear statements by canada border service agents as well as local law enforcement
00:51:46.080there through the RCMP, that it was time to go home. And in the face of those instructions,
00:51:52.020not only did members, participants double down, I mean, there's a very notorious incident
00:52:00.060involving a large vehicle that was painted with military fatigues that tried to crash
00:52:05.020a barrier. To me, that poses a serious threat of violence. And I think we'll come to Coutts,
00:52:13.160Alberta which was again a very and arguably the most egregious risk that coincided with the
00:52:19.880blockade but I was at all times both using the observations that I was making for myself as well
00:52:26.700as the advice and the intelligence that I was receiving in my capacity as Minister of Public
00:52:31.280Safety. Okay and we will come there but first I'm going to take you three now to sort of close the
00:52:37.940loop. Sorry, you can take this one down, please, Mr. Clare. So, can you just pull up quickly
00:52:49.360SSM.CAN.NS C402676. This is the third and last tripartite, and there's just a couple
00:53:00.320of things i want to highlight here minister i'll ask you about which is sorry here we go
00:53:08.240let's just scroll down a little bit more thanks latest from rcmp okay
00:53:16.400so towards the middle of that paragraph you say phase has moved beyond inconvenience or
00:53:23.280disruption so this is now february 10th they have moved to disrupting the economy we are having
00:53:29.360very intentional conversations with the province about how confident they are around enforcement,
00:53:35.120the ability to take appropriate action quickly and decisively, whether in Ottawa, Windsor, Sarnia,
00:53:40.480etc., spoke to Minister Jones. It was a focused conversation, and I'm looking forward to hearing
00:53:46.240back from her on what OPP can do to assist you. Okay, so I'll take it from that, and we'll get
00:53:51.440back to the conversation with Minister Jones, but Minister Jones was not at the third and last
00:53:57.360tripartite here is that correct that's correct okay um so thank you mr clerk so i'm just going
00:54:04.800to try and put together the chronology of what happened here and i'll take you back to february
00:54:33.200this is a text exchange between you and minister david lametti
00:54:38.320um just scroll down a little bit please mr clerk not sure what you're referring to you say uh you
00:54:44.240were perfect today thanks so were you buddy then should i so the blue is a little collegial
00:54:49.600support at a very stressful time slash bromance okay um i think he might he might resent that
00:54:56.320suggestion so were you buddy should i call downy you've spoken to sylvia downy there would be a
00:55:02.320a reference to Doug Downey? That's correct. Okay. Can you tell us who, just for the record,
00:55:09.220can you tell us who Doug Downey is and why Minister Lametti might be calling him?
00:55:12.400He's the Attorney General of Ontario. He's Minister Lametti's provincial counterpart.
00:55:16.620Okay. And so you have spoken to Sylvia, he says, and you say, I have spoken with Sylvia. You should
00:55:23.020call Downey. We need them in the right space to respond to any RFA for OPP assistance. And then
00:55:29.560And Minister Lamedi replies, spoke to Doug Downey, needs slowly to be quick, quick, quick.
00:55:36.880Can you tell us why would Minister Lamedi be calling Doug Downey about this?
00:55:41.160So you're speaking to your counterpart, he's speaking to his, and what capacity would that be?
00:55:46.360Well, again, I mean, you're asking me to interpret or infer why Minister Lamedi has reached out to Doug Downey.
00:55:55.980The best answer that I can offer is I believe he is reaching out to a provincial counterpart to understand what Ontario's response is to the situation, not only in Ottawa, but elsewhere, including in Windsor at the Ambassador Bridge.
00:56:11.780And by then, the blockade was causing significant interruption to the economy.
00:56:17.200Again, thousands of people were temporarily laid off.
00:56:20.520Businesses were impacted in the auto manufacturing sector.
00:56:23.440So I think he's trying to gain some understanding from the Attorney General of Ontario about perhaps what advice he is offering to the Ontario government.
00:56:34.260Again, I'm drawing some inferences here, but I think it's a combination of that.
00:56:39.640But I think more broadly, just to keep lines of communication strong between the federal government and the government of Ontario.
00:56:45.520Okay, so you actually asked him to call Downey. So do you have a recollection of why or is it essentially what you just told us?
00:56:53.440Um, yeah, no, actually, there it is right there. Yes. So I would say that was my thinking at the
00:57:00.080time was to, to try and keep lines of communication open, and to be sure that, that we had some
00:57:07.840understanding about, you know, what advice may be provided to the Ontario government.
00:57:13.100Okay, thank you, Mr. Clerk. Next document is ONT401141. So, so I understand that there was a call
00:57:21.480that took place between you and Minister Jones on the 7th.
00:57:47.780So do you remember a conversation prior to the 5th?
00:57:51.480um in the context of the blockades uh i not off the top of my head okay this moment well we know
00:57:58.920that one happened on the 7th and uh this this document is minister jones's notation of that call
00:58:05.800and she says uh so she's talking to you marco medicino jim watson wants an interlocutor i think
00:58:13.400that may have mean interlocutor but i'm not sure um wellington will be uh fast and jurisdiction
00:58:21.960fpt ftp table to support the city 1500 obp 38 kitchener um can you tell so so the interlocutor
00:58:31.640that is that a reference to an interlocutor was that part of the discussion you were having um
00:58:37.800you know again if if if we could have the document just scroll back up to the top
00:58:41.960i just want to february the 7th jim watson watson i i agree with you i think that
00:58:49.560the word there may be misspelled and is referring to an interlocutor
00:58:56.680and you know beyond that i i i couldn't say much more about that particular uh note but i did have
00:59:05.000a conversation with uh minister jones yes you did and uh around that around that time or shortly
00:59:12.520thereafter okay and we're gonna get to a report of what was said in that conversation as well
00:59:18.520but before we get there i want to just go through a little bit um the call you subsequently had with
00:59:25.080uh minister minister with premier ford because at this point so can you take us through that
00:59:30.360minister jones doesn't you have a conversation on the seventh actually why don't we go there now
00:59:35.000So that conversation is reported in a text exchange.
00:59:40.180Can you pull up, Mr. Clerk, ssm.nsc.can403127?
00:59:50.380So while that's getting pulled up, this is a text exchange on February 11th between Samantha Coyle, who you've told us is a PMO staffer, Mike Jones, your chief of staff, and Seda Astrovis.
01:00:01.720and uh so smith says thanks guys long day okay so writing here is mike jones your chief of staff
01:00:10.800and oh no i'm sorry this is i this is sam kalil i think writing here she says
01:00:17.460hey so on trilateral meeting got it wrong again it's zeta writing so ms astro says hey so on
01:00:24.740trilateral meeting sam i don't know what you think but i really think we need jones at the table
01:00:29.460perhaps your boss can push again your boss there so mike jones he's talking about you
01:00:35.700he says by jones i assume you mean ontario and can have my boss reach out again but the last
01:00:42.080call got pretty frosty at the end when he was saying we need the province to get back to us0.94
01:00:47.440with their plan quote unquote i don't take edicts from you you're not my fucking boss uh scroll down0.94
01:00:54.380again. Yes, obviously not you. She said that. Does that accord with your recollection of the0.95
01:01:01.080conversation you had with Minister Jones? There was definitely some colorful vernacular
01:01:06.580towards the end of that call. I'm happy to say that both Minister and Jones and I still enjoy
01:01:13.920a very productive and positive rapport. But the real thrust of the call was to engage Minister
01:01:25.160Jones to understand exactly where her thinking and where the Government of Ontario's thinking
01:01:31.500was at in responding to the requests of Ottawa Police Service to get additional resources,
01:01:37.280And more broadly speaking, to restore public safety on the ground.
01:01:42.880And, you know, I think certainly by the end of the call, it was quite clear that the inability
01:01:53.140of law enforcement using existing authorities to restore public safety on the ground was
01:02:00.940of increasing concern to me in my capacity as the Minister of Public Safety, as well as
01:02:07.720the federal government. And we wanted to be sure that Ontario was exercising all of its capacity
01:02:15.580to support not only Ottawa, but other communities as well in this province, including Windsor. So
01:02:23.120it was an important engagement. It was obviously a very stressful time. And, you know, I
01:02:30.180I think that we could all be forgiven for some rather blunt language.
01:02:35.620I'm sure, you know, we've all heard it in various interactions.
01:02:39.820But having those lines of communications open was critically important at that time.
01:02:45.120Okay. So regardless of the language, it's fair to say you were encountering some resistance
01:02:49.820in obviously coming to the tripartite table, and it was described as a call that didn't go well.
01:02:55.600And we know that on the 9th, you spoke directly with Premier Ford.
01:02:59.960So we can take that document down, please, and we'll pull up the readout of your call from Premier Ford, which is ssm.can.nsc402832.
01:03:11.720How did that call arise? Did you call Premier Ford? Did he call you? Tell us how that happened.
01:03:17.240The Premier called me. And by then, again, it's important to place the timing and the
01:03:26.240chronology of this call into the broader context. This would have been February 9th, so we're now
01:03:32.120beyond a week into the occupation here in the nation's capital and with significant interruptions
01:03:41.220at critical infrastructure and borders, including at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, at the
01:03:47.540Windsor-Detroit border, which quite clearly is in the province of Ontario.
01:03:53.100The Premier called me to, I think, express a few things, and the readout is there on
01:03:58.500the screen, but one, I think he was calling to keep lines of communication open with the
01:04:04.500Two, he was indicating to me that his chief public health officer was going to be going
01:04:10.800out in the very short term to communicate the end of vaccine passports and the end of mandates.
01:04:18.920But he also was very supportive and said that he was prepared to stand with the Prime Minister,
01:04:26.300which I took as a, again, as a very constructive suggestion to show unity across different levels
01:04:33.040of government responding to what was then a very urgent state of crisis and emergency,
01:04:38.880and having that demonstration of solidarity I thought would reassure Ontarians and Canadians.
01:04:46.040I also did say to him that I would relay what I interpreted to be a bit of a nudge
01:04:54.280by Premier Ford around the federal government's posture around pandemic policy to the Prime
01:05:01.140Minister, more broadly just the fact that the call had occurred. And I did take the opportunity to
01:05:08.160expressed two really important things. First, I was really concerned about restoring public safety
01:05:17.540at critical infrastructure, including the Ambassador Bridge. And I also said that I was
01:05:23.960concerned that even if there was an announcement around a change in pandemic policy, that they may
01:05:28.720not leave. I think in the end, that proved to be true. And then finally, I said that we needed
01:05:36.240sylvia and there i'm referring to minister jones at the table and i'm referring to the tripart table
01:05:41.200and i ask that the premier instructor to be there okay um so i think you've taken us through pretty
01:05:47.600much all of that um on the point of stand with the pm we'll just pull up another document um which is
01:05:56.560ssm.nsc.can402952 so this is a a text while it's being pulled up to katie telford who's
01:06:10.960the prime minister chief of staff you send her a text sort of reporting on this call with premier
01:06:16.000ford and uh did i get the wrong document number it appears that i did
01:06:26.560um okay you know what i'll just i'll read it to you we can we can look for the document number
01:06:33.560in a second it it says just got called from ford they're pivoting he will announce they're lifting
01:06:42.020passports possibly more measures said he would stand with the p.m said i and then he said said
01:06:50.080i would relay i said the situation at ambassador bridge is serious it's hurting working families
01:06:55.720killing jobs. So by stand with the PM, you said, I didn't quite catch what you said you thought
01:07:02.280that meant. Stand beside the PM and... My interpretation from Premier Ford saying that
01:07:10.720to me directly was that he wanted to show solidarity with the federal government in
01:07:16.500responding to this emergency. And I thought that that was a constructive suggestion because it
01:07:23.480would reassure Ontarians and Canadians more broadly that different levels of government
01:07:28.320were working together to restore public safety, to keep people safe, which was my job.
01:07:34.040And my request to him to have Minister Jones attend the tripartite was an effort to show
01:07:41.500that alignment at all levels of government, not only from Premier to the Prime Minister,
01:07:45.920but equally from at the ministerial level in the portfolio of public safety, because
01:07:51.260by being at the same table at the same time, we could really troubleshoot issues together,
01:07:56.620including, again, some of the operational challenges that police were having, again,
01:08:01.180not only in Ottawa, but right across the province, and equally, some of the jurisdictional complexities,
01:08:07.620and whether or not there were any other measures or tools that we could offer
01:08:10.840from the elected side of the government to police if it were necessary.
01:08:14.960Okay. For the record, Mr. Clerk, the document number is ssm.nsc.can402952. So what I wanted to ask you, Minister Mendicino, was did you sense that that, or was your interpretation that standing with the PM was any way tied to what you described, I think, as a gentle nudge to ease public health measures?
01:08:37.100No, it wasn't. And again, I think we saw subsequently in the lead up to the invocation of the Emergencies Act that following the first minister's meeting that the Prime Minister and Premier Ford were very much on the same page about the necessity of having to invoke the Emergencies Act.
01:08:55.740And at that point, the government had not yet taken a final decision with regards to pandemic policy and in specific regards to vaccines.
01:09:05.460Okay. The last point I want to ask you about on all of this is to get your reaction to something we heard from Mr. Mario Di Tommaso when he testified, which was, and I'll paraphrase what he was saying, but essentially part of his thinking or his explanation of why Ontario was reluctant to participate in the tripartites is that, insofar as these were a forum to discuss policing resources,
01:09:33.900Ontario, governmental officials shouldn't be participating in that because that's a law enforcement matter.
01:09:39.720The question of deploying police resources is something for law enforcement, not for governmental officials.
01:09:46.840What's your take on that in the context of what we'd raised earlier about the lines of operational dependence of the police?
01:09:55.440Yeah, here again, this is a very important question.
01:09:58.360First, I can't speak for the Deputy Minister of Public Safety or the Solicitor General in Ontario,
01:10:05.760but from where I sat, the Premier of Ontario actually showed very important leadership in the early days of the blockade,
01:10:16.840going out publicly, saying that this no longer was a lawful protest and that people needed to go home.
01:10:26.200And that was a signal, I think, to any fair-minded individual who abides by the law that the situation was no longer safe.
01:10:36.280I would also point out that, you know, in the context of the discussion around operational independence, and I've obviously given this a fair bit of reflection since the occupation, and I did touch on it a little bit earlier, that there are important boundaries that should not be crossed by elected officials.
01:10:58.140and for good reason. We do want to safeguard against the politicization or making partisan
01:11:08.280important and independent decisions which are made by law enforcement and the prosecution
01:11:17.540services around the country so that we can preserve the integrity of the administration
01:11:24.060of justice. And at all times, we adhere to that principle in the federal government.
01:11:31.260That having been said, there does need to be a dialogue and there is a dialogue between police
01:11:38.460and the elected branch of government when it comes to providing additional resources and tools. And
01:11:46.080I can offer a number of, you know, very concrete examples, not only in the general, but in the
01:11:52.220specific context of our response to the blockade. So if I could, when I received a call at the
01:11:59.420beginning of February from the Premier of Alberta, the then Premier of Alberta, Jason Kenney,
01:12:06.120one of the concerns that he'd expressed is that he and Alberta did not possess either the resources
01:12:11.880or the tools to clear the blockade at Coutts, which had mobilized pretty much since the end
01:12:18.040of January or beginning of February. And as part of the federal government's response to that
01:12:25.020situation, I authorized under Article 9.3 of the existing police services agreement between Canada
01:12:32.660and Albert, the deployment of additional police resources. That is a very concrete example of how
01:12:39.660we have customized through convention the relationship between the elected government
01:12:45.700and the authorities that are exercised through this office, the Minister of Public Safety,
01:12:50.200in response to the operational decisions that are taken by police to restore public safety.
01:12:57.520I would say, more broadly, there are other important examples where elected representatives
01:13:04.360that occupy this office are responsive to the needs of police around tools,
01:13:10.620You know, be it in, you know, responding to either this situation or others.
01:13:17.280And obviously there are the priorities around the foreign deployment of RCMP in different countries, for example, in Ukraine, which are priorities which can be set by the elected branch of government where conventional police forces are deployed.
01:13:33.560So I guess my broader point is that both in the specific context of the blockade, but even beyond in the general, there does need to be a dialogue.
01:13:44.540And there was a dialogue between the elected branch of government and the police who were exercising operational independence at every time to ensure that we could get them the additional resources that they need in the parts of the country where they needed it.
01:13:59.700And again, I emphasize and stress this was not just an isolated incident, that these events were occurring across the country so that we could restore public safety.
01:14:11.520When the RCMP officials testified last week, so Deputy Commissioner Duhame and Commissioner Brenda Leckie testified, there's a few things that came out of their evidence that I want your reaction on.
01:14:24.620One of them is that I believe Commissioner Luckey said that there were times, or I think it was Deputy Commissioner Duhaime,
01:14:35.180said that there were times where it may have felt to him like officials may have stepped a little over that line, that line between church and state.
01:14:43.940Now, I think they did say specifically, I remember, I recall Commissioner Luckey saying that she never felt pressured by her ministers, you and Minister Blair.
01:14:52.620She did say that at some point you sort of had to educate or educate it.
01:15:00.060And she didn't point to any sort of instance where it was necessary,
01:15:03.220but she said you educated and it fell to you essentially to educate the rest of Cabinet, I think.
01:15:08.880It was the February 10th IRG on where that line was and the importance of operational dependence.
01:15:16.380I do. And I wanted to be sure that as colleagues around the cabinet table were expressing the same concerns that I had, that others had about the ineffectiveness of existing authorities and resources to restore public safety up to that point, and we are approaching now two weeks into the blockade, that nevertheless, we should not violate the principle of operational independence.
01:15:41.680Because, again, just situate yourself in our shoes for just a moment.
01:15:47.960Our paramount concern is restoring public safety.
01:15:52.040And by then, there were countless reports of the very dire consequences that had been visited upon Canadians.
01:16:00.100But that could never be a license for assuming the roles and the responsibilities of police
01:16:08.680when it came to making the tactical and operational decisions around how to restore public safety.
01:16:14.640So it was important to strike a balance between respecting that principle,
01:16:20.640but also fulfilling my role specifically in holding the RCMP accountable
01:16:27.760for their role in restoring public safety,
01:16:31.800and more broadly, the government's role in understanding why it was
01:16:37.900that despite existing authorities and resources, we could not achieve the goal of getting a law
01:16:46.960and order back on the ground. And when I look back now, and I ask myself why it was in the
01:16:54.640perception of the commissioner that she felt that some, not all, were coming up to the line,
01:17:00.780it is because of the unique and singular nature of this public order emergency.
01:17:08.700It was the fact that the scale of this was national.
01:17:12.420It was the fact that what sparked this movement in the opinion of the government
01:17:16.440was an expressly stated political objective that at times was expressed in violent terms
01:17:24.320that led to the entrenchment of a significant number of individuals to ignore the direction
01:17:32.720of law enforcement at the risk and at the peril of Canadians. It was the challenges that we had
01:17:39.520in government around having the appropriate intelligence tools to understand how those
01:17:46.420initially stated objectives could pull in people from many different walks of life with different
01:17:52.220backgrounds and different grievances and coalesce them around something that so significantly and
01:17:59.380persistently caused significant interruption to public safety, to the economy, to our international
01:18:05.780relations. And all of that was, I think, part of the reason why people were really trying to probe
01:18:13.460and understand that despite the fact that you had a criminal code, you couldn't use it. Despite the
01:18:19.480fact that you had provincial statutes around the Highway Traffic Act, they couldn't be effectively
01:18:24.300used, despite the fact that we had tow trucks, you had many tow trucks, that they could not be
01:18:29.960deployed to clear the blockades. And all of that was leading to an escalation of the risk and the
01:18:38.980threat of serious violence as time went on. And that is why I think that the commissioner both
01:18:44.560signaled her concern, but also appreciated my intervention, that we still had to be respectful
01:18:50.220of that principle of operational independence. Okay. So just to go back on that a little bit,
01:18:55.440I mean, what we've heard over the weeks that we've been here at the commission,
01:19:01.320there's what could be described as, quote unquote, pressure all over the record. So there's a real
01:19:05.720sense of urgency from politicians and from officials. We need to do something about this
01:19:11.160now we need to do this quick quick quick we need to do this has to end etc etc and how does that
01:19:18.040not constitute can you explain how that does not constitute pressure on law enforcement to do
01:19:23.800something to clear up this protest in whatever way they can well to be clear there was pressure
01:19:29.080on all of us i mean this was an extremely tense situation uh so i mean i think that is just a
01:19:35.160natural reaction to all of the events that were occurring but the reason why i'm confident and
01:19:40.600the reason why i believe commissioner lucky testified that we didn't violate the principle
01:19:45.400of operational independence is because at no time um were we instructing police on how to do their
01:19:52.120job on the ground so at no time were we were we saying you must arrest uh people under the
01:19:58.680following provisions of the law you must prosecute these people um you know in it to the fullest
01:20:06.680extent you must um you know to the granularity of detail deploy you know five people here and
01:20:14.440100 people there and to prioritize all these operations we at all times steered clear of
01:20:21.000that zone which would have been a violation of the principle of operational independence
01:20:26.360and that's why i think i'm you know very confident that uh that that we didn't cross that boundary
01:20:33.720okay so the line is politicians and the government has a role to play in in expressing a desire let's
01:20:41.560say to or the need to solve a situation but not in telling the police how to do it that's right
01:20:47.320you don't want me as an elected official putting on a badge or a uniform uh and going out there
01:20:52.920and uh and doing the job that that police are there to do that's not my role that's not my
01:20:58.120responsibility however it is my responsibility as minister of public safety to be accountable
01:21:04.440to Canadians when it comes to equipping police with the tools and the resources that they need
01:21:12.200to restore public safety and by then on February 10th we did not have public safety in the nation's
01:21:19.320capital and at other critical infrastructure across the country and so because of that we
01:21:24.520really wanted to understand why existing authorities were ineffective at that point and
01:21:31.160that was the balance that we struck another issue that we we've heard a lot about over the last few
01:21:37.880weeks is the idea the notion of um one could put it as negotiating or we put it as engaging with
01:21:46.840demonstrators or protesters um so we've heard that that was an issue that was discussed is there a
01:21:53.880way to sort of to to end this or to ameliorate this um by engaging directly with demonstrators
01:22:02.440there's reference in the in sylvia jones's notes of the february 7th call to having an
01:22:07.480interlocutor um engage with the protesters and we've heard a lot about uh an effort by your
01:22:15.000deputy minister deputy minister rob stewart uh around the 10th 11th of of um february to create
01:22:24.840what's become known as the engagement proposal so can you tell us a little bit from your perspective
01:22:32.040how those engagement efforts if i can put it that way and eventually the engagement proposal
01:22:37.640uh came to be and uh and evolved engagement was always an option and i had articulated
01:22:46.600on a number of occasions that law enforcement should be the last resort um and and you saw
01:22:53.240from one of the exhibits that you had put to me a little bit earlier in my testimony this morning
01:22:57.640that i had turned my mind right at the very beginning of the briefings that it was important
01:23:04.360for uh there to be some engagement with uh those who were participating in uh the convoy and the
01:23:11.800blockade and wanted to be briefed on that by law enforcement who i thought was the most appropriate
01:23:17.080actor in this um in this context uh to be engaging with um given that you know in my estimation that
01:23:25.560it was operational and tactical that didn't mean that um that i wasn't still having conversations
01:23:31.080with individuals outside of law enforcement about an engagement proposal,
01:23:36.480but there was early contemplation and reflection about having an engagement strategy.
01:23:43.980I would say beyond that, there were conversations between the Prime Minister and myself
01:23:49.060about searching for a suitable mediator or interlocutor,
01:23:54.320someone who would have had the experience to de-escalate and resolve situations that are
01:24:01.720complex. And beyond that, by the time we got to the ERG, there was a report that was given by
01:24:10.240Deputy Minister Stewart about information that he had gleaned from conversations that he was having
01:24:16.880with the Ontario government and the OPP around the intelligence of what the group was constituted of
01:24:23.960in terms of adherence to, you know, ideology, the desire to, you know, double down and hold
01:24:30.240the line and et cetera, and all that versus everybody else who might have just been there
01:24:35.380to express another point of view. And so as a result of that report that he offered at the ERG,
01:24:42.540there were taskings that were listed by the clerk of the Privy Council at the end of that meeting,
01:24:48.800one of which was to continue to develop a potential engagement strategy.
01:24:53.760And so that's what the deputy minister set about to do.
01:24:57.580And I know that there was some additional work on that front.
01:25:01.340Okay, so you knew that this was, you were aware that this was being worked on by your deputy minister?
01:28:00.560How can we be sure that if we do engage in it, that we can maintain public safety?
01:28:05.440Because the situation was extremely volatile and very tense.
01:28:10.520And among the concerns were whether or not there was actually any cohesive structure to the occupation at that moment in time.
01:28:22.020And so understanding who we were sitting down with was critically important.
01:28:26.760and so I just was I wanted to be sure that that that Ms. Telford was aware of that because
01:28:35.260ultimately when we go back to cabinet I am responsible and accountable for my department
01:28:40.980including the deputy minister and wanted to be sure that I was equipped to answer any questions
01:28:47.040from colleagues about what this engagement proposal would look like so you know I say
01:28:51.880again in fairness to everybody this was an exceedingly difficult and challenging time and
01:28:57.420I know that that Deputy Minister Stewart was doing his level best to fulfill a task that had been
01:29:04.140assigned to him after the ERG and was I think trying to action it and and get some traction
01:29:11.200at the Ontario level of government and we did have a good conversation about that and you know
01:29:16.860Subsequently, I think as we saw on February 14th, that despite the efforts of the City of Ottawa to engage some of the members of the occupation here in Ottawa,
01:29:29.480that it ultimately unraveled, I think, for many of the reasons and concerns I previously articulated.
01:29:34.800Okay, so your concern, if I understand it then, is not with the engagement proposal itself, with the work that was being done, it's the information flow?
01:29:44.740and the fact specifically that it had been uh socialized as you put it with the ontario government
01:29:51.380without you knowing about it at that at that particular moment in time and just wanted to be
01:29:55.700sure that i had a line of sight and understood it and also that it was part of a broader effort
01:30:02.020by both me and others from within the government to explore engagement and as i pointed out
01:30:06.660seeking and briefings and information from police right from the beginning about how we were engaging
01:30:14.180with members of the occupation equally the conversations that i had with the prime minister
01:30:19.460around finding potentially a mediator to de-escalate so we could avoid law enforcement
01:30:26.820as much as possible and you know ultimately this engagement proposal as well it was
01:30:31.780all a suite of things that we were doing together uh to to really try to restore public safety as
01:30:38.660quickly as we could i believe deputy minister stewart's evidence was that he he hadn't
01:30:45.140socialized it with uh mr de tomaso but with commissioner korea so would that change your
01:30:51.940view at all as to as to whether that engagement was appropriate um i i'm not sure i i i think
01:31:02.180the the the broader concern was just making sure that i could stay up to speed
01:31:06.660um and recognizing again the pressures on everybody to go about and complete these taskings
01:31:13.860um i just wanted to be sure um both me and and my staff had an opportunity to contribute
01:31:20.580uh to the idea before it got um um before it was shared with other not only other branches
01:31:28.260of government but as you pointed out other branches of law enforcement and i wanted to
01:31:32.900be sure we were really um you know staying on the same page but it was it was an exceedingly
01:31:39.780difficult time in fairness to uh to the deputy minister everything was happening very quickly
01:31:44.900there's no doubt about that um the other the reason i asked you whether you were concerned
01:31:50.900about the the proposal itself is because one of the one of the bits of evidence we've heard
01:31:56.180is that commissioner lucky and the rcmp may have had some concerns about it or uh about the proposal
01:32:01.620in the sense that it may cross the line between church and state.
01:32:05.860So again, we're back to this issue of police independence, operational independence.
01:32:10.840And I'd like you to speak for a moment, if you could, about how the idea of where does political negotiation fall into that piece?
01:32:19.160And just for a little to situate you in background, what we know now is that there were different lines of potential engagement going on almost simultaneously.
01:32:30.000There was an attempt at engagement in Windsor, there was an attempt on the part of Mayor Watson to corral trucks up onto Wellington Street and get them off the residential streets where they were disturbing the residents on those streets.
01:32:47.100and then there was the federal government's engagement proposal so we have these different
01:32:51.580lines going at the same time um and that could arguably at least be put as something that makes
01:32:57.900it difficult for law enforcement to do their job um what's your reaction to that yeah i i would
01:33:03.180agree with you i i think it was extremely difficult for law enforcement to figure out how to engage
01:33:12.140in a constructive way with the occupation and the blockades not only here in ottawa but across the
01:33:18.220country i know from the early days that members of police liaison units these are individuals
01:33:26.140within law enforcement who have very specific expertise in engaging with people who protest
01:33:35.020to sort of set the boundaries of what just just to be sure that everybody can be safe
01:33:42.060um so here's here's what we can all sort of agree to and i think that there as you've heard
01:33:48.060previously there was some effort to do that certainly at the local level here in ottawa
01:33:53.500but to come back to what i think that like the core of your question is you are absolutely right
01:33:59.820that it becomes a lot trickier and more complex once elected officials start to penetrate into
01:34:09.600the terms and the conditions by which you negotiate a disengagement of the blockades
01:34:16.520and the occupation if it involves let's say you know the moving of vehicles the moving of people
01:34:23.380the moving of police officers, all of that I would submit is much more within the operational domain
01:34:31.260and by extension independence of police, which was one of the concerns that I had in navigating this
01:34:40.160appropriately. So that was, I think, part of what I was getting at in my text to Ms. Telford was just
01:34:45.460I wanted to be able to think that through with everybody, and especially if we were going to be
01:34:51.840sharing it with other levels of law enforcement so that we were respectful of those principles
01:36:11.440this is an email the time stamp on it is it's just shortly before eight o'clock once you do
01:36:16.480the greenwich mean time adjustment this is your chief of staff mike jones sending this to you
01:36:21.840and copy to deputy minister stewart evening minister responses from the commissioner below
01:36:28.400uh and this is we've seen this already in the inquiry so i won't go through it at length but
01:36:32.880there's a sort of a wish list or these are these are tools that could be effective and then at the
01:36:38.640very bottom of the email there commissioner lucky says this said i am of the view that we have not
01:36:47.680yet exhausted all available tools that are already available through the existing legislation
01:36:53.760there are instances where charges could be laid under existing authorities for various criminal
01:36:58.560code offenses occurring right now in the context of the protest the ontario provincial emergencies
01:37:04.800act just enacted we skipped that in the narrative but we know that happened february 11th will also
01:37:10.480help in providing additional deterrent tools to our existing toolbox so my first question mr
01:37:16.000mendicino is did you see this before the cabinet meeting i don't recall exactly when i would have
01:37:22.960seen it um this as you pointed out was sent just prior to the commencement of of the cabinet
01:37:30.160meeting i will say to you importantly that a couple things first the commissioner did not
01:37:36.800express that opinion to me at any time directly and um and i actually spoke to the commissioner
01:37:43.520earlier that day on February 13th. And while she did not at all address that last point that you
01:37:53.000raised in the email, she did call me and only me, this was a conversation between just her and I,
01:38:00.200to be clear, to express her very grave concerns about the situation in Coutts. And she underlined
01:38:09.060for me that the situation in Coutts involved a hardened cell of individuals who were armed to
01:38:18.260the teeth with lethal firearms, who possessed a willingness to go down with the cause.
01:38:27.720And the reason why this was such a sensitive conversation was that we had RCMP
01:38:33.280undercover personnel deployed in the field and she was justifiably concerned that there not be
01:38:41.140any leak of this information because lives literally hung in the balance and for me this
01:38:45.800represented far and away the most serious and urgent moment in the in the blockade to this
01:38:54.740point in time and so it also spoke volumes to me about the commissioner's state of mind which was
01:39:01.780that we were potentially seeing an escalation of serious violence with the situation in Coutts.
01:39:10.200And it certainly, I think, was in the broader context of the preponderance of the advice that
01:39:18.680we were getting from the commissioner at that time as a result of conversations not only in
01:39:23.820the ergs about where there were gaps in authorities, in existing authorities to return public safety
01:39:32.560to the ground, could not have drawn any other inference that she was supportive, as she later
01:39:40.760expressed that she was, of the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act. This was a singular moment
01:39:46.720for me in my mind. And it was so urgent that I said to her, well, look, I can't just keep this
01:39:55.260information to myself at a minimum. I have to be able to share it with the prime minister,
01:39:59.280which I then subsequently took steps to do. Shortly thereafter, I reached out to Ms.
01:40:05.440Helford. Sorry, just to be clear, which information are you talking about?
01:40:09.000About Coutts and about the potential for gun violence and for the loss of life and the fact
01:40:15.660that there were RCMP personnel that were in the field, and all of this occurring literally within
01:40:21.660hours, not even days, of the invocation to the Emergencies Act, I was extremely concerned that
01:40:28.200this had reached a new height of both urgency and emergency, and so I felt I had a responsibility
01:40:33.400to let, at a minimum, the Prime Minister know and his staff know, while respecting the operational
01:40:41.220sensitivity at the most delicate levels to protect the people on the ground. And so I did that. I
01:40:48.660spoke to Ms. Telford afterwards, where I conveyed to her both the best information that I had at
01:40:55.300the time around COOTS, and asked her to keep this, to respect, in effect, the Commissioner's
01:41:03.820request that we treat this information with the utmost sensitivity, so that we could ensure that
01:41:10.640we were keeping people safe but this was this was a threshold moment for me there's no doubt about
01:41:16.520it and that was on you had that conversation on the afternoon of the 13th that was the same day
01:41:21.640yes okay so just to recap a little bit you didn't see this email from commissioner lucky before the
01:41:28.380cabinet meeting again i i i i'm trying very much to reconstruct the the sequence of events things
01:41:36.680moved very very quickly it literally came in inside of a half hour of the commencement so
01:41:41.960i don't want to say definitively i didn't see it i was much more preoccupied with the actual
01:41:47.560direct conversation that i had with commissioner lucky earlier that day where she had imparted to me
01:41:54.360perhaps the most um urgent information to date with regards to uh the the occupation and the
01:42:01.160blockades and that was a threshold moment okay fair enough so if you did see it it didn't register
01:42:07.720as much as what she said about coots put it that way in your recollection was that information put
01:42:13.240before cabinet so we know that that commissioner lucky wasn't called on to speak um do you recall
01:42:19.080this being expressed to cabinet that evening no okay um and you certainly obviously and i wasn't
01:42:27.400permitted to share or i was asked not to share the information about coots with anyone else except
01:42:33.800for the prime minister which um which i did okay if you had known this information and i appreciate
01:42:41.960you're not entirely sure on whether you saw this information or didn't would it have changed your
01:42:47.000mind at all i i don't think so at that point um my interactions directly with the commissioner
01:42:52.440were actually going in the opposite direction, and certainly the fact that we were on the
01:42:59.540precipice of engaging in an operation in Coutts where people were armed with a significant
01:43:09.680number of lethal firearms where they possessed body armor, where there was intelligence or
01:43:15.520information that they had ideologically extremist views and symbolism that was attached to the
01:43:21.060group that they were prepared to go down with the cause was a very strong signal to me that
01:43:26.200the commissioner was of a heightened concern around the state of affairs. And again, it was
01:43:31.280consistent with the advice that we were getting contemporaneous to the decision of the invocation
01:43:37.080of the Emergencies Act around tools to address the gaps that existed. So, you know, the need to
01:43:44.720deploy RCMP officers, the need to procure essential services, importantly the need to declare
01:43:51.400no-go zones or prohibition of assemblies. Let me just say on that last point that I wasn't just
01:43:57.900hearing about that from the RCMP. The CBSA had briefed cabinet on at least one occasion for sure
01:44:06.580if not more about their explicit concerns about the lack of their authority and jurisdiction to
01:44:13.080clear roads on the way to the border. And so, you know, all of those powers were subsequently
01:44:22.360included in the declaration and the regulations under the Emergencies Act.
01:44:27.820Okay, well, let's actually stop there for a moment. I'm going to go back to what we
01:44:31.360were talking about. But PB.CAN 1864, please, Mr. Clerk.
01:44:43.080So, this is a text from John Ossofsky, president of the CBSA, the evening of February 13th.
01:44:59.300And he says, the gap, well, you asked, is it possible to direct CBSA officials to take
01:45:07.560a harder line or the heightened sense of vigilance as far as it goes?
01:45:11.400And he writes back, the gap is the fact that there is not an inadmissibility in IRPA,
01:45:18.440Immigration, Refugee, and Protection Act, for coming to a protest. We have directed back 29
01:45:24.120so far for other reasons as part of our enhanced vigilance. And you say, right, okay, so nothing
01:45:29.560we can do to strengthen our position there. I think our position broadly is that it's an illegal
01:45:34.440blockade and it goes on so that is sorry go on um so i scroll down a little bit please
01:45:43.400if you're blocking a border hurting canadians it would warrant a tougher position and then you ask
01:45:47.720the 29 were sent back because it was believed they had violent intentions or on what grounds
01:45:52.680were they sent away we don't have the text after that but first of all is this a is this a text
01:45:56.760conversation that was happening during the the cabinet meeting that evening um well i'd have to
01:46:02.360go back and take a look at the time stamps uh about 9 23 pm i think could could very well have
01:46:08.600been uh i assume it was this is february 13th right that's right yes so i uh would have been
01:46:15.720trying to really get a clarity of understanding about what the gaps were and what the then
01:46:23.640president of the cbsa is expressing to me is that they need something that they don't have
01:46:28.520and what they don't have at this moment in time is any existing authority to turn away foreign
01:46:35.780nationals who are attempting to enter into Canada where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that
01:46:42.160they may want to support what at this point is an illegal blockade and so that is again a cry
01:46:51.180an obvious request for some assistance here as a result of a gap in an authority and there is a
01:46:59.020direct line between that gap and the subsequent powers which were included under the emergencies
01:47:06.380act there is no other way for me to interpret the information that i'm getting from john azowski
01:47:12.300is certainly not to do anything about it and subsequently we did provide that authority and
01:47:18.220And there were, as my understanding recollects, at least, I think, one or two individuals who were turned away on February 19th by CVSA on the strength of the Emergencies Act authorities that were provided to them.
01:47:31.260I think we know it was two. And the answer to the question here is that the 29 were sent back because under enhanced vigilance, because generally speaking, I think because they weren't they didn't meet the vaccination requirements.
01:47:45.260requirements i think your interpretation is right and i think mr zowski is is he's communicating to
01:47:52.460me that we're we're working with what we got but it's not it's not enough and we're concerned that
01:47:57.980we don't have the authority that we need and this was in addition to what i think is one of the other
01:48:03.980significant concerns that cbsa expressed to me and to other cabinet colleagues which is that
01:48:09.740they did not have the authority or the jurisdiction to clear the roads leading to the border
01:48:15.260And certainly that limited their capacity to keep the border open and by extension, critical supply chains, food, fuel, health supplies, all the like.
01:48:25.780The people in the border communities, and I'm certainly familiar with the community in Windsor as a result of some family relationships, but people got to go about their daily lives.
01:48:36.560And this was completely impossible at that time.
01:48:40.920And so, you know, I think he's expressing two very legitimate gaps.
01:48:46.920And and so, again, the only interpretation for me is that we need some help here.
01:48:51.920And so we endeavored to provide that help to them through the Emergencies Act.
01:48:57.920Mr. Commissioner, I just wanted to just clarify, because I think the impression was left inadvertently or otherwise, that these are the ministers, Texas, opposed to the chief of staff.
02:11:37.060The application, if you want to do it, you've been advised it's to be done in writing, not in the middle of the presentation.
02:11:44.900Sir, we filed two motions in writing at your direction that you've refused to rule on with respect to the redaction of documents from the government of Canada.
02:14:07.820I want to take you back to something you touched on before the break, and I'd like to get your reaction on.
02:14:14.820I asked you whether if you had seen and absorbed, let's put it that way,
02:14:19.820Lucky's statement that they had not yet exhausted all available tools. Law enforcement still had
02:14:26.240tools available. I asked you whether that would have changed your mind as to the necessity of
02:14:30.860the Emergencies Act, and you answered no, and you explained that you're concerned about COOTS.
02:14:35.620How do you reconcile that position with the notion that the Emergencies Act is a measure of a last
02:14:41.960resort well first i would say that the absence of having a direct conversation with commissioner
02:14:52.360lucky and i pointed out the call that we had earlier today but that wasn't the only one
02:14:57.080there were other meetings at ergs and daily briefings um really uh was an impediment at
02:15:04.040that point to have the kind of back and forth exploration of that advice uh which she had
02:15:09.560included in an email to to my chief of staff mike jones i think the other thing the other reason why
02:15:17.880i don't believe it would have substantially changed my views at that point are twofold one
02:15:23.960it didn't really expand at all on how she had come to that point of view so when she talked about a
02:15:36.080plan um there was no elaboration on it and i would point out that for the better part of the
02:15:44.480two weeks leading up to the uh to february 13th that there were times where the commissioner and
02:15:51.280others uh at those daily calls that we were having were expressing concerns about the absence of
02:15:56.480a plan with existing authorities so um at that particular moment in time it
02:16:04.000It seemed to me as a conclusory statement that was not substantiated with any kind of particular detail.
02:16:13.240And the second reason why I don't believe it would have changed where my thinking was at that particular moment in time was predominantly because of the call earlier that day, which was top of mind.
02:16:26.840And as I explained before the morning break, I beg your pardon, it just spoke volumes about what her state of mind was, which was that this was potentially an escalation of violence that could result in there being gun violence and potentially serious injuries or even fatalities to members of law enforcement and Canadians.
02:16:53.300One thing I didn't mention was that my worry, my real fear, was that had that operation not gone down peacefully, that it might have sparked other gun violence across the country.
02:17:13.400And I recall early reports from the Ottawa Police Service that guns had been brought into the National Capital Region and potentially into the parliamentary precinct.
02:17:30.100And there wasn't a lot of detail around that, I want to be clear, but we were operating with the best information that we had available to us.
02:17:39.160So that elevated my concerns. And so that was where my state of mind was, as opposed to the one bullet point that she had sent to my chief of staff shortly before the cabinet meeting on February 13th.
02:17:54.460So you're expressing here a concern that what was going on in Cootes might be going on in other places. Not evidence of that, but you were nevertheless concerned about it.
02:18:05.100on the basis of both previous information and reports publicly available from Ottawa Police Service
02:18:14.460that firearms had made their way into the Capitol, and as well, again, a report about an arrest
02:18:22.220involving someone who was participating in the convoy here that ultimately resulted in the seizure
02:18:29.940of a firearm. So I was worried about the potential chain reaction, that if the operation
02:18:42.100did not go flawlessly, that it might actually escalate in more violence. And that's why
02:18:48.940I think she communicated that, you know, very clearly, and rightfully so. I want to be clear
02:18:54.100that Commissioner Luckey was entirely appropriate and justified in signaling that this was a,
02:19:00.460you know, potentially much higher level of concern around the state of affairs.
02:19:05.420Okay, so I'll put this to you and you can tell me right or wrong, but are you sort of saying
02:19:10.360your concern was okay, but what if it gets worse?
02:19:14.180my my concern was um that this was that this information was highly sensitive it involved
02:19:26.020a hardened cell it involved guns it involved ideological symbolism potentially and
02:19:33.960that if that operation to arrest those individuals did not go efficiently and smoothly and peacefully
02:19:43.380that it may have created a chain reaction elsewhere across the country,
02:19:47.800because there were past reports about the presence of guns.
02:19:51.500Okay, so I should have put my question more clearly, maybe,
02:19:54.720but with respect to the availability of tools and whether law enforcement had what it needed,
02:19:59.640are you saying, and you may not be, so I'm asking you,
02:20:02.820but are you saying that regardless of whether there may have been tools available,
02:20:08.060there was a concern that the situation would get worse?
02:20:11.840Yes. And again, the urgency with which we had that conversation, the confidentiality around it, the operational sensitivity about it, the jeopardy of having lives at stake, the potential chain reaction of other gun violence across the country on the basis of reports, and the concurrent advice that we were getting about tools that could only be granted in the Emergencies Act because resources were ineffective at restoring public safety.
02:20:40.500and there were gaps around deploying RCMP efficiently.
02:20:45.940I mean, you'll recall the swearing provisions, the no-go zones, the procuring of tow trucks.
02:20:52.200All of that was where my state of mind was.
02:21:08.260so we have heard evidence about gaps that have been identified that were identified we also heard
02:21:13.620um from a number of officials and we saw in documentation a lot of hesitancy around the idea
02:21:19.300of using the emergency fact and the possibility that it may inflame tensions that may make things
02:21:25.060worse uh there was a lot of if i could put it this way doubt around that um in light of that
02:21:33.780and in light also of a lot of discussion that we've had here in the commission
02:21:37.820about whether the threshold itself was met under the Emergencies Act.
02:21:43.940Can you go there at this point and explain to us your understanding
02:21:47.580of why the threshold was met and why it was necessary
02:21:51.620in light of the hesitancy that had been expressed about the need to invoke it?
02:21:57.560Well, you've touched on a few important points in your question,
02:22:00.020So I'm going to try and unpack the questions that you put to me.
02:22:05.780Just first on hesitancy, I would be more inclined to describe it as reluctance.
02:22:12.180And I think that that instinct was the right one, that this was a statute that was created
02:22:19.160coming out of the aftermath of the October 1970 crisis and there being real concerns
02:22:25.900about using, resorting to the War Measures Act and using the military to restore public order,
02:22:32.600which is not the mandate or the expertise of the military, a very blunt instrument.
02:22:39.920And the creation of the Emergencies Act, which very consciously and deliberately
02:22:47.140does not make any reference to military powers, but nevertheless affords the government
02:22:54.160broad scope to respond to public order emergencies.
02:22:59.560And just by virtue of its title, you know, if you're into an emergency,
02:23:06.320this is obviously a very serious situation.
02:23:08.440So you don't want to have to use it unless it's necessary.
02:23:11.540So that is the right posture, I think, of every government,
02:23:15.340that this is not a piece of legislation that we should be using
02:23:20.320in a way that is anything reserved but for the most serious situations.
02:23:27.580So that's my answer in regards to the reluctance around it.
02:23:33.340You also mentioned in your question that this business about there being the concern
02:23:40.420that if we invoke the Emergencies Act, that it might actually lead to more violence
02:23:43.820or radicalization, as I believe you heard from Mr. Vigneault and CESIS.
02:23:48.900I was very mindful of that, but I also and colleagues at the cabinet table also had to weigh the risks of not invoking the Emergencies Act because there were the materialization of counter protests from individuals, specifically in Ottawa, because they were so frustrated at their inability to go to their jobs, take their kids to daycare,
02:24:18.100get access to emergency medical services, their prescriptions and the like, I mean, it was utter
02:24:22.780and total mayhem. I mean, let's call a spade a spade. And so that frustration was boiling over.
02:24:29.540And my concern in my capacity as the Minister for Public Safety is that if we don't equip police
02:24:36.400with the additional tools and the authorities that they need to specifically address the gaps
02:24:41.840that they had been consistently briefing us on, then that might lead to more violence.
02:24:46.420And so we also had to weigh the risks of not taking the decision to invoke.
02:24:53.100And so we weighed in the potential concerns around radicalization, but ultimately we came down on the side of invoking.
02:25:03.960Okay. On this point then, Mr. Clerk, can you pull up ssm.nsc.can50290?
02:25:34.880So this is a readout of minutes of the guns and gangs.
02:25:41.720Can you situate us actually, Mr. Menachino, and tell us, guns and gangs, what does that
02:25:45.800refer to that meeting um sorry this is a document published by it's a it's a reading or minutes of
02:25:54.800a meeting that was held date alex okay the date of it isn't clear actually but we know that it's
02:26:01.820post invocation because it refers to the invocation of the emergencies act um and it says schedule
02:26:08.800was changed guns and gangs instead it's it's a guns and gangs meeting and there's a report from
02:26:15.740you. M3, I think, refers to you. That's a notation that's often used to describe you. MMM3. Why M3?
02:26:23.540Minister Marco Mendicino. I should have been able to answer that. Okay.
02:26:28.280Bullet number three here. You're discussing, okay, well, let's go from the bullet number one.
02:26:33.380Update on current state of affairs. The blockades that started a month ago aiming critical
02:26:37.980infrastructure had a very significant and negative impact on our security, sovereignty,
02:26:42.760and integrity at the borders. We worked very closely with FPT to get a grasp of the risks to
02:26:48.440public safety and international security. The important one, which I'll slow down on, is the
02:26:54.380third one. We took unprecedented decision to invoke Emergencies Act on the advice we received
02:27:02.280from many branches of enforcement on every level. What I want to ask you about here is
02:27:08.900the advice you received from branches of enforcement, was that advice to invoke the
02:27:15.820Emergencies Act specifically? The advice that we received was around tools that could only be
02:27:24.240granted through the Emergencies Act. And the reason why I say that is that there's an express
02:27:32.700element of the test that says that you don't get to the threshold unless you've exhausted
02:27:38.680authorities or if you unless unless it can be established that existing authorities are
02:27:45.100ineffective at restoring public safety and for me that is the operative word because there were
02:27:51.620authorities that were on the books but the fact is that on the basis of what I was seeing
02:27:56.840and what I was hearing that those existing authorities were not sufficiently effective
02:28:03.120to restore public safety and that is consistent with the advice that we were getting from various
02:28:08.360partners within the public safety community, including law enforcement, including CBSA
02:28:14.100and other officials, as you've heard. Okay, so just to recap then, the advice you're talking
02:28:22.080about is the advice that's identifying gaps in tools, not specifically advice to invoke the
02:28:29.560Emergencies Act, but advice that goes to identifying gaps or tools. And tools, as you
02:28:36.360actually saw in the email from Commissioner Luckey on February 13th that would be invoked
02:28:42.820in the Emergencies Act. She used that language in her email to me. Okay.
02:28:50.460Then the very last question, I think I actually am now out of time. So the last question I want
02:28:56.300to ask you, Minister Medellino, and your legal background shows and how you unpacked my triple
02:29:02.280barreled question last time around so this is the last barrel the third barrel that we that you
02:29:06.520didn't get to in your answer which is the threshold for for invoking uh a public order
02:29:12.760emergency as you know depends on identifying a threat to the security of canada with reference
02:29:18.280to the cesus act we've heard a lot of discussion at the commission about how that threshold
02:29:23.880may or may not have been met and we know that there was no specific threat to the security of
02:29:28.760of Canada, assessed by CSIS. Nevertheless, the government concluded that the threshold was
02:29:36.880met, presumably, because the Act was invoked. How, in your view, was that threshold met?
02:29:42.820Well, first, let me address the piece about CSIS's conclusion, and I know you've heard some
02:29:48.080evidence about that. But I do think it is important to emphasize that they are assessing
02:29:53.000through their mandate, which is conventionally confined to espionage and foreign interference
02:29:59.620and potential threats to cybersecurity for the purposes of establishing a legal threshold under
02:30:06.560that statute, which then leads to potentially obtaining warrants judicially authorized so that
02:30:13.720we can mitigate against those potential security threats. This was very different. This was not
02:30:20.520about isolating a lone wolf or a small group. Rather, it was about looking at a protest
02:30:29.100which became illegal at a national scale. And completing that exercise also had to take a look
02:30:39.560at the broader objective and scope of the Emergencies Act, which means looking at Section
02:30:45.620two of that statute where it talks about the presence of a serious threat or a threat of
02:30:54.520serious violence so as to exceed the capacity of any province to respond on the basis of authorities
02:30:59.820that exist. And so in my judgment, you need to kind of look at both. And that was precisely
02:31:06.640the skill set that I was applying in my role as Minister of Public Safety, drawing on my
02:31:14.780understanding of the law and the principles as they were being applied to the facts that existed
02:31:21.280on the ground at the time. And so looking at everything in its totality, we had a situation
02:31:28.800where for two weeks we had a protest that was national in scale that overwhelmed the resources
02:31:37.580of police and other border officials very deliberately for a protracted period of time
02:31:43.940were despite the existence of statutes and resources, and in my view, as informed by
02:31:52.000counter operational tactics that were specifically deployed to stop people from restoring public
02:32:01.800safety, the extraordinary jeopardy that it placed our economy and the thousands of Canadians who
02:32:08.280had their jobs interrupted, the fact that businesses were shuttered, that sectors were compromised,
02:32:12.920that are the literal and figurative engine of our economy.
02:32:16.380The fact that all of this was tied to a politically stated objective
02:32:23.120to overthrow the government if it refused to reverse course on pandemic policy
02:32:28.360and the challenges that were presented to the security and intelligence community
02:32:33.340and the broader law enforcement community in understanding what the nature of this protest was
02:32:38.600and why it was so difficult and challenging to restore public safety,
02:32:42.040all drew me to the conclusion that we met the threshold.
02:32:46.940And ultimately, for me, at the end of the day, it worked.
02:32:50.960I'm not saying that the Emergencies Act is a perfect instrument,
02:32:54.120and my sincere hope to the Commission is that there will be some reflection about that.
02:33:00.040But it was a measure that was successfully deployed by law enforcement
02:33:05.400to restore public safety without significant injury or any fatalities at all.
02:33:10.320And the fact that that as part of the invocation of this act, that we now have an opportunity to go over the circumstances that led to that decision in great forensic detail with witnesses testifying is, I think, an important pillar of our democratic process, which, of course, was one of the things that we were very much concerned with preserving throughout.
02:33:33.700so i mean that that's that that is my answer with regards to the threshold and
02:33:38.340um why i think it's important that i'm here today mr questioner those are my questions i'll pass the
02:33:44.740baton okay so now uh cross-examination start with the convoy organizers please
02:33:52.020good morning good morning sir my name is keith wilson council for the convoy organizers
02:34:02.200I apologize for my voice. I'm recovering from a cold.
02:38:38.380All right. So if you could help situate us as to kind of context here, this appears to be a text with someone, I believe you're on the left and somebody else is on the right.
02:38:48.520If you could scroll down a little bit so that the witness has a chance to review it.
02:38:52.440Do you know who this text exchange was with?
02:40:06.480So I'm interested in the text that says, and I'll read it, following the declaration, we should go to Ambassador and inspect the bridge reopening and thank law enforcement and RCMP, assuming things go according to plan.
02:40:20.260So I'd like to follow up on what, and this is you texting Mike Jones, correct?
02:40:36.300And in fact, there had not even been consultation with the provinces at this point, correct?
02:40:40.660That's, well, to be clear, the first minister's meeting had not yet occurred, which occurred the next morning.
02:40:47.960There were conversations with provincial and territorial counterparts, but it was before the first minister's meeting.
02:40:53.520Right. But I think and I'm not going to go to the document for lack of time, but I think it was made very clear by the prime minister and others that that his mind hadn't been made up yet, that the consultation was essentially being done in good faith.
02:41:05.340Yes. Correct. Yes. And I wasn't communicating that the decision had been finally taken, but rather the assumption that it it may have been.
02:41:12.520Not may have been following the declaration. It sounds to me like you're pretty convinced that it was going to be made regardless of what happened at the consultation.
02:41:19.240I won't dispute we were definitely trending very much in that direction. Yes.
02:41:23.520Okay. Assuming things go according to plan. And so what plan are you referring to here?
02:41:30.040Restoring public safety. And Ambassador Bridge was one of the real flashpoints, as you'll recall, because not only of the impact domestically in Windsor, but Ambassador Bridge was one of the reasons why I was engaged by my American counterpart, Secretary Mayorkas, who had reached out and was very concerned that it was going to have an impact on two-way trade.
02:41:53.560And you will be familiar with this by now, I assume, but at Ambassador Bridge, we do the most significant amount of our day-to-day land trade.
02:42:01.420So there was a lot at stake in restoring public safety at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Detroit.
02:42:07.420Right. So a cynic might suggest, and we're both lawyers and there are a number of us in that category, a cynic might suggest that it appears here, you're talking about setting up a photo op in Windsor, even before the Emergencies Act is invoked.
02:42:22.060i i agree with you a cynic may suggest that but that was not my um my my intent um the the point
02:42:29.980was this was a very stressful uh time and um i wanted to be in a position to reassure canadians
02:42:38.180that we were storing a public safety uh right across the country including in windsor detroit
02:42:44.060and and that was an idea that i had uh proposed at the time to my chief of staff okay so let's
02:42:50.820read the rest of it. Your chief of staff says, okay, do you know when that will be? Presumably
02:42:55.520being the invocation of the act, correct? Yes. Your response, I'm hearing it's late as tomorrow
02:43:00.960morning. I think it's a powerful visual. Otherwise, it's just tweets. So basically what you're saying
02:43:06.820is I should go there, get some pictures, get some video because it sends a better image than just
02:43:12.160tweeting about it. Fair? Well, I think what I'm getting at is that people are anxious and are
02:43:19.120concerned and want to be confident that we are restoring public safety. I mean, I would point
02:43:25.920out that that is not the end of the matter. And there's some additional back and forth between
02:43:30.360my chief of staff and law enforcement. Ultimately, I chose not to go on sober reflection.
02:43:36.260All right. So let's go to that then. The OPP was not impressed with this idea. Is that fair to say?
02:43:42.560I didn't speak directly with the OPP, but it was expressed to me that law enforcement had concerns
02:43:48.220about me or any other elected official going all right if we can take up the document id opp4582
02:43:56.540and i'm going to be taking you to text message messages between commissioner kareek and deputy
02:44:01.100commissioner chris harkins on february 14th and once that's up if we can go to page 71
02:44:18.220all right so you can see the top it says dana called and that would be a reference to dana
02:44:26.020early as you know and this is from chris harkins dana called she is not happy the rcmp called and
02:44:31.960the federal public safety minister and that would be you correct yes is coming tomorrow for a photo
02:44:37.760op tour the command post etc not appropriate optics are terrible can we stop it commissioner
02:44:44.880Karik responds a little while later saying visit is being postponed so you could see here that
02:44:50.720obviously the OPP was not happy with the idea and described it as a photo op. Yeah their advice
02:44:54.920changed my mind. Part of the reason that they were concerned of course and I think you heard
02:45:05.920this from the RCMP as well was the potential that it could further inflame the situation if you
02:45:10.960actually showed up and took pictures. Fair? And I had to balance that against what my initial
02:45:15.940thought or objective was, which was to assure, to be accessible and to assure people that we had
02:45:22.060restored public safety. So in the end, I took that very much into consideration and was actually
02:45:28.280quite deferential and respectful to the advice that we got back from police and chose not to go.
02:45:32.980Okay. Can we go back to the other document, which is pb.can.1849? And this is back to your
02:45:39.660text exchange with Mike Jones. And page 32. Here it says RCMP and this is I believe Mike Jones
02:45:56.880saying RCMP Commissioner also strongly advising against a trip to Windsor concern that is still
02:46:02.400quite volatile and things have been inflamed by today's announcement. Someone drove at an officer
02:46:07.280again i want the visual as well but with two levels of forces asking us not to my two cents
02:46:13.280is that it's not worth the risk of going and something happening in response delaying gives
02:46:18.080us more time to plan etc scroll down okay i hear you let's discuss so essentially it was your chief
02:46:25.520of staff that was saying look we've heard from two police services let's not do this yeah solid
02:46:30.560advice and i took it in retrospect and i raise this because you know i think you would agree
02:46:36.400that sometimes having politicians attend these kinds of sites can have perhaps unintended
02:46:41.360consequences fair absolutely yes and that in retrospect you would agree that it probably
02:46:46.880wasn't a good idea to have gone yes that's why we didn't go yes
02:46:55.520and in my last minute i'm going to ask you about consultation and i've put these questions to other
02:47:01.360witnesses but i'm just simply going to ask you or put to you the proposition about consultation
02:47:06.240with law enforcement and the suggestion that i'll put to you is that it's a good idea that
02:47:13.200when there is consultation with law enforcement on tools that that be done in writing for purposes
02:47:18.720of accountability so we can go back and check exactly who said what to whom right would you
02:47:23.360agree that's a good idea totally and and you would have heard my um my evidence a little bit earlier
02:47:29.120this morning where i talked about navigating the principle of operational independence i referred
02:47:33.600to Article 9.3 under police service agreements, which we reach with provinces, which actually do
02:47:39.580set out a mechanism and a protocol by which additional resources are requested from the
02:47:45.780Office of the Federal Minister of Public Safety, as well as the Office of the Provincial Ministers
02:47:53.340of Public Safety. One thing I didn't mention, but I do think is really relevant, is that in those
02:47:59.280police service agreements, it is expressly contemplated under either 9.1 or 9.2 of those
02:48:05.080agreements that prior to the deployment of intra-provincial RCMP resources, it is the elected
02:48:13.400provincial minister of public safety who has to form the opinion that there is a state of emergency
02:48:20.800before they can be deployed. And it is only if existing RCMP resources within the province
02:48:28.820are overwhelmed or insufficient to deal with that emergency, that you then take the next step of
02:48:36.120requesting for the deployment of RCMP resources outside of the province to deal with the situation,
02:48:42.580which is Article 9.3. And that is a request that comes to this office. My point is, I agree with
02:48:49.400you that there is a protocol there. The Emergencies Act, unfortunately, does not prescribe that
02:48:56.900process. So what we did instead was we did the best that we could having various meetings daily,
02:49:05.340ultimately in the ERG and the cabinet meetings where we were soliciting inputs, including as
02:49:10.800you saw in the email that I received from Commissioner Lucky the day before, where she
02:49:16.340very specifically and thoughtfully prescribes tools that could only be granted under the
02:49:22.420Emergencies Act. But I agree that maybe some additional thought ought to be given to this
02:49:26.420protocol. Right. And I am out of time. So as I'm leaving, I'm just going to say that we've heard
02:49:29.900evidence that some ambiguous evidence spoke conversations within the RCMP, perhaps with
02:49:34.660others that haven't been written down. And I think you would agree that it'd be helpful to have
02:49:38.060everything clear and ambiguous. So there's no room for doubt. Yes. Thank you, Minister. Thank
02:49:43.120you. Okay, next call on the Ottawa Police Service, please.
02:49:56.420Good afternoon, Minister. My name is Jessica Barrow, and I'm one of the counsel to Ottawa Police Service.
02:50:06.120Prior to the arrival of the convoy, would you agree with me that there was conflicting information about how many protesters may participate in Ottawa, as well as how long they may stay?
02:50:16.500I do agree. And by the way, the range was very broad. I mean, I'd heard something in the low thousands and then it quickly escalated as we got closer to the weekend, upwards of seven or eight thousand. So, yes.
02:50:27.780And so that was a real difficulty from a planning perspective at all levels of government and law enforcement. Is that fair?
03:01:51.520And this is an email exchange between yourself and Mr. Stewart amongst various other people.
03:01:57.920this reflect the concern that you're referencing in relation to whether there would be a risk to
03:02:02.600the person engaging with this proposal? Sorry, can we just go back up to the top of that document
03:02:07.680from Rob to, right, sorry, scroll down a bit, and again.
03:02:15.400so the way i i recall this is that the deputy minister stewart is responding to concerns that
03:02:31.960i had raised with him about the engagement proposal right so if we scroll then to the
03:02:36.280back up to the first page of the document it looks like we have the answers to those questions
03:02:41.880um and if we look at the last or the second bullet we see uh the risk to the signatory
03:02:50.280and government rep at a later date meeting is low assuming the meeting is virtual so again
03:02:56.580would you agree that the concern that you've raised has been addressed as a result of a
03:03:01.880conversation between uh deputy minister stewart and his opp expert i would say it begun to address
03:03:09.340the concerns. I don't think I was wholly satisfied by the answers that I had gotten at that stage.
03:03:15.180In particular, I would have explored the assessment that the risk to the signatory and to the
03:03:24.640government rep was low because I needed to understand exactly where the setup was going
03:03:29.500to be, how it was going to be undertaken. And bearing in mind at the time, the situation on
03:03:34.300the ground was volatile and at times extremely chaotic and certainly with a very compromised
03:03:40.320ability to enforce the law. I really wanted to be satisfied that those answers, that those
03:03:48.180questions would be answered because if I went back to cabinet and was asked about the engagement
03:03:53.580proposal that was being worked up by my deputy minister, I had to be accountable and I had to
03:03:58.280be in a position to answer them. So if begun to answer some of those questions, I would say
03:04:02.400not completely so you you said i would have as though it were hypothetical did you ultimately
03:04:08.120continue that conversation or was the decision made at this point to kind of stop the process
03:04:14.560no there was no decision to stop the process um and there were um some ongoing conversations
03:04:20.920uh about about engagement and you know ultimately i mean this is february 12 12 25 um the following
03:04:29.800day we have an erg and then a cabinet meeting and then the 14th is the day in which it's about a
03:04:37.580about a day and a half after this email exchange we saw that the efforts of the city of ottawa
03:04:42.740were not successful in the engagement proposal and by then we were into the invocation of the
03:04:48.000emergencies act so you would say sort of events overtook and and and the proposal fell by the
03:04:52.460wayside i would say there was a lot of work that was going on and i know that the deputy minister
03:04:56.880at the time was working very hard to fulfill this task around the engagement proposal but we were
03:05:01.840also you know meeting with enforcement officials meeting with cabinet meeting with and engaging
03:05:08.320with provincial and territorial colleagues and then yes the the sequence of events that had to
03:05:14.240be fulfilled prior to taking a decision on the invocation emergencies act was was pressing okay
03:05:21.200thank you those are my questions thank you thank you uh next uh council for former chief slowly please
03:05:39.520thank you minister tom curry for the former chief good afternoon um just on the point that was
03:05:48.240last raise did you were you briefed on the outcome of the effort to try to engage protesters in
03:05:57.200windsor by minister jones or by the opp and the letter from minister jones i recall some information
03:06:04.880coming to me about that engagement and it being similarly unsuccessful i recall there being a
03:06:13.760report about a letter being circulated to individuals who were part of the blockade
03:06:21.600in Windsor and that my recollection is that it did it did not gain any traction with them
03:06:29.120and so likewise here in Ottawa a lot of the concerns around the cohesive structure
03:06:35.680of the blockade and the occupation raised legitimate concerns about whether or not even if
03:06:41.360If a negotiated settlement had been reached, whether or not it would have been successful in disengaging and clearing the block in the occupation.
03:06:50.900Thank you. The issue about whether a negotiated resolution was possible, was that taken eventually to cabinet and discussed?
03:07:04.920It was discussed at definitely one of the ERGs where, as I said earlier today, my deputy at the time had briefed the members of the ERG on the constitution of the individuals that made up the occupation here in Ottawa and the degree to which they were entrenched and dug in and how we might shake in or loosen that through engagement.
03:07:33.200And similarly, did you become aware that the mayor of Ottawa had negotiated successfully for the relocation of some of the vehicles away from residential neighborhoods and that that was thought to represent a possible breakthrough?
03:07:51.120I do recall there being discussions between Mayor Watson and I think there was an appointed
03:08:00.480mediator that he had managed to secure. But I also remember being very concerned that the vehicles
03:08:08.720that were clearing out of neighborhoods were actually coming back downtown into the parliamentary
03:08:14.320precinct, and that that created a surge of vehicles that were, again, entrenching at the
03:08:23.900seat of the federal government. And my concern was that it was actually growing the scale of
03:08:30.460the occupation here, and that would have made it even potentially more difficult and challenging
03:08:37.020to clear. A couple of things, if I could, just about the resources. The information that you
03:08:42.900received about resources came principally from Commissioner Luckey. That's correct. Yes. And
03:08:49.140did you become aware that the information that you were receiving from the commissioner
03:08:55.940did not accord with the provision of resources to the OPS? Yes. In trilateral meetings with
03:09:05.040Mayor Watson and in discussions with some of his officials, I think he articulated a concern that
03:09:11.920perhaps there was a need to look more carefully at the number of, one, the number of RCMP
03:09:19.060that were actually deployed, and two, what their taskings were. And I know that he
03:09:24.920sort of underlined that latter part on a couple of occasions, that it wasn't just the numbers,
03:09:30.460it was what were the RCMP going to be dispatched to do. And in fairness, those were questions that
03:09:35.300we did put to Commissioner Lucky at the time, and I think she did her best to answer them.
03:09:40.140Right. Understood. And you you relied in making you made very I won't take you to them in the time I have, but you made various public statements in response to questions from the from the media about what you were doing, what the federal government was doing to help the Ottawa Police Service.
03:09:54.600And in reliance on the information you had from Commissioner Luckey, you made those statements, including naming the numbers of officers, I think at one time, 250 or 275.
03:10:04.680In that range. Yeah. The reason why we were trying to we were trying to get the message out was that there were, I think, increasing questions and concerns from the city that they didn't have enough personnel.
03:10:18.900And I wanted to communicate that on behalf of the federal government, that we were acting quickly and decisively to respond to those concerns by dispatching RCMP personnel.
03:10:28.120And the idea that all you can do in your position, I presume, is rely on those, in this case, the commissioner, to provide you with information to the best of her ability, and then you can rely on that and convey it.
03:10:44.840As it turns out, in this case, you learned that the information that you had and conveyed was not accurate.
03:10:53.260One, when the commissioner is briefing me, I take that information, you know, specifically around operations very much into account as we're making decisions about what additional resources we can offer.
03:11:08.480I was nevertheless interested to know whether or not we needed to do more to coordinate because the mayor and certain officials were saying it wasn't just about numbers, it was about tasking.
03:11:22.320So there was a free flowing dialogue there. The numbers was the number, the issue of whether or not to be public about the numbers was also a concern because the commissioner said that she was concerned that if we posted numbers or we published numbers, that that might actually lead to a surge. And so we had to try to find a balance.
03:11:45.820Right. And just for the, I'm not going to take it up, but in one of the statements that you made, it's captured at OPS 8365 at page five.
03:11:58.280That's just for the record. I don't need it, Mr. Registrar.
03:12:01.520You described, again, based on information that you had from the commissioner, that the RCMP had added 275 Mounties in the Ottawa deployment.
03:12:09.700And as you pointed out, we learned later, and the commissioner and the deputy commissioner, I think, described it essentially as a mix-up about the numbers, that it wasn't actually that many Mounties.
03:12:21.740It was a way of accounting for them that added up shifts and the like.
03:12:26.540Did you subsequently become aware that that's how the numbers became, as they said, mixed up?
03:12:31.220I was aware that there was an ongoing conversation between the RCMP and the OPS about exactly how many RCMP had been deployed to respond to the occupation and the blockade.
03:12:44.960I will say, you know, ultimately, in the lead up to the invocation, my recollection is we did dispatch about a thousand RCMP officers.
03:12:53.420Yeah. In the end, it was a massive deployment, which gets to the point you've already touched on.
03:12:58.180And Chief Slowly has described this as unprecedented and representing a paradigm shift in the way we think about policing public protests.
03:13:08.060And in terms of the circumstances in which every one of you found yourselves in, all of the participants,
03:13:13.960and I include the convoy organizers who seem not also to have appreciated how many people were going to attend and maybe the nature of their sense of protest.
03:13:23.060this this resulted in great frustration at all levels as you've expressed you were you were
03:13:30.740frustrated about the pace at which this was being resolved fair i i was concerned about the fact
03:13:36.300that for two weeks we could not enforce the law and maintain public safety in the capital and at
03:13:42.720border communities across the country yes in your communications in the communications of
03:13:48.040some of your ministerial colleagues um do you agree that in hindsight some of the language that
03:13:54.660was used even internally was unhelpful to the to the cause because it added uh concerns and doubt
03:14:02.540about the if the effectiveness of for example the ottawa police service or the chief in being able
03:14:09.060to deal with the problem that had overwhelmed their service i think with the benefit of reflection
03:14:14.420And, you know, you always look back and, you know, ask yourself, could you have expressed a sentiment with more diplomacy?
03:14:22.780I mean, we've heard earlier today that there were some rather, you know, tense and terse exchanges.
03:14:27.760I think it is completely understandable in the moment.
03:14:32.220And it wasn't just government and police who were concerned and frustrated.
03:14:36.360The people that I was most worried about were Canadians.
03:14:38.840And the materialization of counter-protests and just the ability to be able to go about daily lives was my paramount concern.
03:14:49.200And the only way we could get life back to normal is if we could uphold the law.
03:14:53.360Right. And although you were expressing and Minister Blair expressed, I think, yesterday, and no doubt this has appeared in media because it was found in some of the documents, that he expressed his embarrassment about his former profession of law enforcement because of these circumstances.
03:15:11.320We should not take any of those comments as reflecting on the hard work that was done by the OPS or Chief Slowly at the time.
03:15:19.600No. And I know how much regard Minister Blair holds for law enforcement. I mean, he was a member of that community for decades. So, you know, look, this is a really tough moment for the country. It was a tough moment for the people who were impacted by the occupation. And at times, yes, emotions were definitely running high and it was challenging. But, you know, ultimately, we got the right players at the table to restore public safety.
03:15:47.020Can I just ask one last thing, get your help with this, please, Minister. The issue that you've been asked about in terms of the difference between setting priorities in your role as Minister of Public Safety and interfering with operations.
03:16:02.400Do you agree with me that describing for the commissioner the importance of, for example, the circumstances that the country found itself in with border blockades, having that discussion with the commissioner doesn't interfere with operational autonomy?
03:16:20.340No, I don't think so. And I think, again, this is an area that is really important to this inquiry, which is to understand where those boundaries are within the context of an emergency.
03:16:32.580So it is important that in my job as the Minister of Public Safety that I am holding the RCMP and other line agencies in the public safety portfolio accountable for doing the job of finding ways to restore public safety, exhausting every effort, using statutory authorities which exist, using authorities and resources that exist, and failing that to look and scan at what's left.
03:17:02.580And so that is what took us to the Emergencies Act.
03:17:05.880But throughout finding that, you know, that right balance of ensuring accountability without crossing the boundary is an extremely important part of this exercise.
03:17:17.800At the level both of the federal and provincial ministry, because both of the commissioner has seen expressions of of priorities by the provincial and federal government as to, for example, the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge.
03:17:34.580And, you know, I do think that there are some existing conventions that we can look to to have like an important conversation about what those principles are.
03:17:44.960And I mentioned one under the police services agreement where there is the relationship between the elected branch of government and police when it comes to forming the opinion that an emergency exists and then the elected government responding to requests from police to deploy resources and additional tools which may not exist in any other statute.
03:18:08.380Right. Including the commissioner might think about recommendations for how those priorities can be set so that, for instance, if this occurs again, the an entity or a police service like the Ottawa Police Service isn't caught between the federal and provincial government deciding which which is the first port of call, for example.
03:18:29.420I think that's a very important question, because right now the linkages between municipal to provincial police services is clear through provincial statute, through the respective provincial police services acts.
03:18:44.860But there is no direct link following that to federal law enforcement resources.
03:18:51.660And that was something that we did have to navigate, given the unique circumstances that we found ourselves in.
03:18:58.280And I do agree with the suggestion that was put to me earlier from a council for the Ontario Provincial Police that it may be appropriate to look at developing some protocols around that.
03:19:10.140Final thing, in your dealings with Chief Slowly, do you agree that, to your observation, he performed his duties in good faith to the best of his abilities?
03:19:19.120I think Chief Slowly did the best that he could in those circumstances, yes.
03:21:07.940And here you'll see in blue, Mr. Jones writes, maybe not for a public avail, but heard about an incident that's pretty angering. And Mr. Luloff says the small woman moved from blocking traffic. And then Mr. Jones writes from one of my staff, I won't be coming into the office while Convoy is there. However, my friend was directly threatened of rape yesterday because she was wearing her mask.
03:21:36.280and that is super triggering for me as a survivor of sexual assault i know yasser sharing how
03:21:42.200residents feel i gather just that's probably mr knack the mp for downtown ottawa but i would be
03:21:48.040remiss if i didn't share that i don't even feel safe dropping my son off at daycare downtown and
03:21:54.680kids have not been outside because of fear the educators will be yelled at for wearing a mask
03:21:59.480understood uh were you hearing those kinds of stories uh minister i was and as i said i was
03:22:05.960hearing them frequently and i was very concerned about the safety of the people that were working
03:22:13.240on the hill i mean i think i testified earlier that i had expressed the view that we may want
03:22:20.360to consider going completely virtual in parliament because i was worried about the concentration of
03:22:28.120people um the fact that some of the expressions that you uh have pointed out today were were
03:22:34.680were being targeted again disproportionately at women i was hearing from a lot of of of staff and
03:22:41.400and from people on my team along the lines of of these types of incidents and that that really
03:22:47.160preoccupied me and as you may recall i mean there was one day on which we did actually have to shut
03:22:53.800down parliament i mean that is only the second time in the history of this country where that
03:22:59.160has had to occur and that was uh entirely because of security concerns so this was very serious it
03:23:05.080was uh if you just scroll to the next page uh mr you see understood and then uh mr jones says
03:23:13.400when she reported to police they told her quote well maybe take your mask out when you're walking
03:23:18.600outside so reduce any intention to you and um mr law says the city councilor of ottawa says yes
03:23:25.400i've heard of these incidents too um so the um were you hearing about that as well that ottawa
03:23:32.360police sometimes weren't following up on uh complaints uh from ottawa residents well i i can't
03:23:39.160i i i don't know why but i do know that at the time that law enforcement was overwhelmed yeah
03:23:46.200And so my interpretation of that was just by the sheer number of incidents, and I think at one point they numbered in the thousands, that it was difficult to investigate or take any kind of appropriate action to hold those who are responsible to account.
03:24:05.720But there were hundreds of criminal investigations and charges that were subsequently laid.
03:24:11.180Yeah, and indeed, Minister, we've heard a lot of witnesses in this proceeding, including many Ottawa police witnesses, and the thrust of the evidence, as I heard it, is just simply capacity. They were just so overwhelmed. They didn't have an opportunity.
03:24:24.860Okay, thank you. Just the second issue I wanted to speak to you about, thank you for that, is, of course, as Minister of Public Safety, the RCMP and CSIS both report to you, is that right?
03:24:39.440And, Minister, you were receiving a range of information about the risks and threats from those agencies that were being posed by the Ottawa occupation?
03:24:52.260And we understand, we've heard other evidence, there were former military and law enforcement members who were participating in and assisting the convoy.
03:25:04.240And I gather that was a concern for public safety because those types of individuals would have certain skills and expertise that could, you know, present some logistical or greater threats.
04:40:21.400Can I just clarify, though, that you said Zita Estraves,
04:40:24.240i note at the top of that text chain that the initials are mj and sk and previously we've read
04:40:31.760email or sorry text exchanges uh where sk was sam khalil so i just thought i would
04:40:38.080offer that clarification i'm not sure if if that makes any sense to you it makes sense um and i
04:40:44.480actually i should have clarified at the beginning myself i believe it's a group chat in which all
04:40:48.640three of them were present and so um it the uh indication with the document is that this is taken
04:40:54.080from mrs stravis's phone um and then it indicates at the top of her screen the other two individuals
04:40:59.040that she's texting with okay does that help clarify yes okay thank you and so uh would you
04:41:06.800understand the reference here uh to uh deputy minister stewart what do you understand here um
04:41:14.240in terms of what that means of the reference to deputy minister stewart having said that
04:41:18.320your ministry was likely to decline the request for assistance because of optics um well i'm not
04:41:25.360privy to this exchange um but uh it seems on the on the text that what's being indicated is that
04:41:35.280your dm and so i agree with you i i infer that that is dm stewart said the following and a heads
04:41:42.000up that dm stewart has spoken to as i interpret it his alberta counterpart and flagged that we
04:41:50.080as in the federal government are likely to decline the request for assistance for calf equipment
04:41:56.960and optics and precedent and provincial authorities not fully explored reasons of all of those
04:42:04.640of all those itemized reasons the one that i have the least insight to is the optics
04:42:08.880And to be clear, following my conversation with Premier Kenney, I really did delegate that task to Minister Blair and his office.
04:42:23.420And just so that we are clear on the dates here, though, this text does predate that conversation with Premier Kenney, would that be correct?
04:42:32.680This is Sunday, February 6th, the day after the request for assistance was sent.
04:42:36.920I have to, again, try to jig my memory.
04:42:43.460There may have been a conversation with Premier Kenney before the 6th.
04:42:48.320It was certainly at the very beginning of February.
04:42:52.180In any case, it actually seems to me to make sense that,
04:42:56.660given the sequence of events as we've been discussing them this morning,
04:43:26.120And so you don't have any insight then is what you're saying into why Deputy Minister Stewart would have communicated to Alberta that a reason for declining the request was optics.
04:43:36.900On the optics part, no, I was not privy to that exchange or that conversation at the time.
04:43:43.620And did you have a concern about optics?
04:43:45.300I had a concern about clearing Coutts, and I know that Premier Kenney was expressing the impasse that he found himself in and was, I think, engaging me to encourage both Ministers Blair and Anand to strongly consider a request for assistance which would provide him with military assets.
04:44:08.220In the context of conversations that I had with Premier Kenney, he'd suggested that his provincial RCMP were saying to him that they had the appropriate equipment to remove the large commercial vehicles that had blockaded Coutts since the beginning of February.
04:44:28.120So I think in essence what he was conveying to me is, look, I need help, and one of the ways in which you can help me is by looking very carefully at military assets which could help to clear the blockade in Coutts.
04:44:46.280And he said he had a really hard time getting access to tow trucks that were large enough to accomplish that job.
04:44:54.580And in terms of the next reason that's given for declining the request, do you have any insight into why Deputy Minister Stewart might have said it was due to precedent?
04:45:07.940Again, I'm extrapolating a little bit here, but I assume one of the concerns was that was being weighed in the mix was that if the request for assistance was granted.
04:45:19.660in the case of Alberta that potentially others would. And, you know, again, I'm inferring a bit
04:45:28.880here, but the use of military assets is something that is done on a very exceptional basis. So I
04:45:38.940think there was a concern about potentially opening up the door to other requests to insert
04:45:47.540the military and and as you've heard you know there was a lot of reluctance and restraint around
04:45:55.140resorting to military um resources and authorities in the context of the blockade and the convoy
04:46:02.580okay thank you um and as noted previously the text is sent voter of request was february 5th
04:46:09.140this uh text is sent uh on february the 6th indicating that there was a conversation
04:46:15.060at some point between the fifth and the sixth between Deputy Minister Stewart and someone
04:46:19.620from Alberta would it be fair I also note that nowhere on the list of reasons does it say
04:46:26.740that the request for assistance would be denied because CAF equipment wasn't suitable or they
04:46:32.820didn't have suitable equipment would it be fair to say that the communication by Deputy Minister
04:46:38.820Stewart was made before the possible CAF equipment options were fully explored?
04:46:45.620I'm afraid I couldn't answer that. I don't know at that point exactly what Deputy Minister
04:46:50.420Stewart has said or not said to the province of Alberta. And again, owing to machinery,
04:46:58.340he would have been reporting the RFA to Minister Blair in conjunction with any dialogue that was
04:47:04.420going on to minister anand okay thank you had you discussed the suitability of caf equipment
04:47:11.540with mr anand before the evening of february the 6th i know we had an exchange i know i flagged for
04:47:17.460her that premier kenny had engaged me to uh to to get some assistance and that i anticipated that
04:47:27.220there would be an rfa a request for assistance that was submitted to us and i anticipated that
04:47:32.980it would uh that it would engage uh her and her authorities so i just wanted to give her a heads
04:47:39.300up but as to precisely what equipment was used what was suitable to remove or clear the blockade
04:47:46.340in coots um i would have deferred appropriately to uh to her and the calf's assessment about that
04:47:54.340in conjunction with minister blair's responsibilities and roles around processing
04:47:58.340requests for assistance that related to CAF. Okay thank you very much.
04:48:07.220Okay your time is up so if you can try and wrap up please. Okay certainly.
04:48:16.900I just wanted to confirm very quickly on one quick point. You're familiar with the
04:48:24.260report of the houses of parliament um the emergencies act consultations table february 16th
04:48:30.020is that right yes so i'd like to pull up ssm dot can dot five zeros one two four and take you to
04:48:39.860page three please and if we could scroll down to the bottom of that page um yep right there
04:48:58.900so we can see that there's a discussion of engagement uh and under the first sub-bullet
04:49:04.660point the Minister of Public Safety engaged with the Premier of Alberta on February 2nd and 9th
04:49:09.860and then with the Premier and the Acting Minister of Justice and Solicitor General on February the 7th.
04:49:16.160You also engaged with the Acting Minister of Justice and Solicitor General on February 1st, 5th, and 9th.
04:49:22.300Can I confirm with you that in none of those conversations,
04:49:26.860did you discuss the potential invocation of the Federal Emergencies Act with either Premier Kenney or Acting Minister Savage?
04:49:35.260certainly with uh premier kenny i i can confirm that i would also note that it does confirm what
04:49:43.580i had mentioned earlier which is that he and i had had a conversation on february the 2nd as i
04:49:48.940recalled it which was prior to the february 6th exchange that you had pulled up earlier so i do
04:49:54.620think that that does uh sit more neatly with the chronology and the sequencing of events as we
04:50:00.220described um i i would say that my engagements with um the then minister of justice and solicitor
04:50:09.020general uh sonia savage um very likely did not in in include any of any express references to
04:50:19.500uh the emergencies act but i believe there would have been general references to whether or not
04:50:24.940existing tools and authorities beyond physical assets were going to be sufficient to restore
04:50:33.180public safety and it would have been in the very general nature so minister savage's evidence has
04:50:39.900summarized in our institutional report is that you did not discuss the pedro emergencies act
04:50:44.860would that be something that you would agree with or would you yes no i i agree with that yes
04:50:50.540okay thank you um and i i know i'm out of time and so perhaps i don't have time
04:50:54.780to take you to this um but there are emails um and text exchanges confirming that it was the
04:51:00.700conversation on february the 7th um there's a readout um and text exchanges with uh yourself
04:51:07.020and minister blair um that it was on that date that you had had the conversation with premier
04:51:11.340kenny about the tow trucks with the agreement to relay it uh to minister blair and minister anand
04:51:17.580would that uh you know uh jog perhaps your recollection on the chronology of when that
04:51:23.260conversation might have taken place that sounds right okay thank you very much those are my
04:51:28.460questions okay thanks next if i could call on the union of british columbia indian chiefs please
04:51:38.860good afternoon minister my name is cheyenne arnold cunningham and i'm counsel for the union of bc
04:51:44.780indian chiefs we've heard a lot today already on the topic of consultation so we'd like to ask did
04:51:52.460you consult or cooperate with local First Nations or Indigenous groups during the Freedom Convoy
04:51:59.020situation and or the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act? I would say that I've had
04:52:06.460broad and ongoing conversations with representatives and leadership within
04:52:12.060First Nations and Indigenous communities in my role and in my capacity as Minister of Public
04:52:18.140safety i know that um you know in in the lead up to the invocation that a number of colleagues
04:52:27.500that sit at the table including ministers miller and haidu are in routine and constant engagement
04:52:34.940with first nations and indigenous peoples and the communities so there's a broad range of ongoing
04:52:42.300dialogue that uh that that that is undertaken by representatives of the cabinet okay thank you um
04:52:50.700from a public safety viewpoint do you think that it's important during a public order emergency
04:52:56.780event for public safety canada and police services to engage with first nations in the local
04:53:03.180territory i do uh so in your um mandate letter dated december 2021 you were directed um to
04:53:13.660implement the united nations declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples which is also known
04:53:17.980as undrip um are you familiar with bill c15 which came into force as federal legislation
04:53:25.260in june 2021 to adopt and implement under it yes and i would just add to that that we are
04:53:33.180leveraging UNDRIP to advance important reforms within the RCMP around First Nations and
04:53:40.940Indigenous policing. And so, for example, over the last number of weeks and months in my capacity
04:53:47.620as Minister of Public Safety, I have been deeply engaged with First Nations and Indigenous and
04:53:55.100Inuit communities for the purposes of ensuring that there are more Indigenous-led public safety
04:54:02.960initiatives including the creation of indigenous led police services which are independently
04:54:08.880created we have also are in the process of co-developing legislation that expressly0.99
04:54:16.480recognizes that indigenous policing is an essential service so that we can move away
04:54:22.320from the current first nations and indigenous policing program based approach to one that is
04:54:27.840more structured and enduring and uses UNDRIP and the principles of reconciliation as the anchor for
04:54:35.920a relationship between the federal government and First Nations and Indigenous policing. And then
04:54:40.900the last thing I would point out is that we are currently debating Bill C-20, which is before
04:54:48.180Parliament, which is an act that would create a new Public Complaints and Review Commission,
04:54:53.940what we are referring to as the pcrc and we are again very engaged with first nations and
04:55:00.260indigenous communities to to ensure that there is representation on that commission so that there
04:55:05.540can be appropriate civilian review and accountability in the way that uh in the way that we police and
04:55:11.780uphold the law in indigenous communities great thank you so much um i'll actually i'll jump off
04:55:18.260um the last um few points that you made there so um speaking of lc20 and the work that that
04:55:25.620you're doing there would you agree then that ensuring indigenous participation and presence
04:55:31.540on oversight bodies of the rcmp as either decision makers or complaints investigators
04:55:38.500would assist in that acceleration of rcmp reform moving forward i agree it's essential and that's
04:55:45.380one of the things that um we talk about in our engagements and it's one of the reasons why we are
04:55:51.220um co-developing the legislation around uh recognize the recognition that indigenous
04:55:57.220policing is an essential service and in order to uh to to uh give life and and breath to that
04:56:04.980principle um it means being at the table together uh starting from the premise that there needs to
04:56:10.980be a recognition of the inherent right of indigenous peoples to chart out their own courses
04:56:15.940to implement their own priorities as it relates to public safety including and leading up to
04:56:21.300indigenous police services which are self-governed so both in that co-development
04:56:27.300exercise as well as in bill c20 we are very much engaged with first nations and indigenous
04:56:33.620people so that so that they are reflected in our institutions including when it comes to public
04:56:38.660safety uh what about this the cesus act um are there any plans to ensure modernization of this
04:56:46.420legislation in alignment with under it um well the reforms that i'm carrying out in my capacity
04:56:53.860as minister of public safety has as part of the overarching mandate given to me by the prime
04:57:00.580minister the need to adhere to the principles of reconciliation and part of that is addressing
04:57:06.660long, enduring, systemic, structural challenges in the relationship between the federal government
04:57:17.560and Indigenous peoples that go back to the origins of colonialism. And that would apply
04:57:26.640not only to RCMP and CBSA, but right across all of my line agencies, including CSIS. So
04:57:33.280So we are really trying to get at some of those inherent biases, which have led to the overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples interacting with the justice system and using UNDRIP as well to make sure that we reduce and ultimately eliminate those barriers.
05:08:32.940I can't speak to them, sir, about where they, how they generated it.
05:08:35.660Okay. I don't recognize this document.
05:08:37.480Okay. Well, then, then look, let's, let's soldier on. So if you look under regular members,
05:08:44.920federal RCMP, yes, Mr. Registrar, thank you. It sort of says at the end of this line that 167
05:08:53.120officers were deployed. And so that, I mean, were you aware of that figure on that day?
05:09:01.860Well, setting aside the exact time frame, I am familiar with the initial figure of about 150
05:09:07.960in that range. And again, you've heard previously that there was some ongoing back and forth on
05:09:15.820exactly how many and when, but that was one figure that had came to me early on in that range.
05:09:20.900In that range. And so, I mean, you'd agree that on his face, it does appear that these numbers
05:09:25.480are lower than the 250 that are in the agreement I showed you.
05:09:29.180Well, I agree that on the face of this document, that that is lower than $250,000, but again, without knowing more about the authorship or the origins of this document, it is very difficult for me to testify as to its accuracy.
05:09:42.500And you're not able to say, and I think I know the answer, sir, but I have to do it for the record, you're not able to say of that $167,000, how many were at Rideau Cottage and on the parliamentary precinct?
05:15:57.820And I think on the fourth page, fifth bullet from the bottom, it mandates you to continue working with the Minister of Health and the Minister of Transport to protect the health and safety of Canadians through safe, responsible, and compassionate management of the border with the United States and other ports of entry into Canada.
05:16:14.800Do you recall that portion of your mandate?
05:16:17.200And so I take it that the Minister of Health, the Minister of Transport, you work closely together, and that would be Minister Duclos and Minister Al-Gabrak. Is that correct?
05:16:26.400And is it also your understanding that Minister Duclos is an economist by formal educational training?
05:16:32.740Yes, with an academic background, yes.
05:16:34.980And then you're obviously a lawyer by background and former Crown prosecutor.
05:16:38.920So with respect to the Freedom Convoy and the protest, would it be fair to say that, you know, a trucker protest, protesting about health mandates with concerns about public safety and border concerns, that this group between the three of you as part of your mandate, you were the key ministers involved in dealing with some of the concerns raised by the convoy.
05:17:06.020I would say there were a number of ministries that were engaged by the convoy and the blockade, not only my colleague Ministers Al-Gabra and Haidu, but equally, as you heard previously, Minister Blair under emergency preparedness, Minister Leblanc under intergovernmental affairs, and many others.
05:17:28.580Minister. Sorry, just got limited time here. Yes and no answers where we can and where we need to
05:17:33.460elaborate just as concisely as possible, please. If we could pull up a document ID, pb.can.00001868.
05:17:44.700And this is from the emails that were received last night.
05:17:50.000Do you recall hearing Jason Kenney's position that the trucker vax policy is obviously just
05:17:57.800dumb political theater was that ever brought to your attention um well i'll wait to see what the
05:18:02.840document um says to refresh my memory and sorry who who is uh this text exchange with or between
05:18:22.920uh if we could scroll down so it should be the third attachment in the sixth email that was
05:18:30.920received from mr brousseau last night there it is the trucker vax policy is obviously just dumb
05:18:38.320political theater calling them nazis hasn't exactly helped do you do you recall being
05:18:43.420informed of miss uh of premier kenny's position on this i i recall seeing that that was uh minister
05:18:49.780LeBlanc's looks like a cut and paste of what Premier Kenney had relayed to him. Okay, and I
05:18:56.800take it you disagree with Premier Kenney's position? Yes. But is it true, though, that the
05:19:02.600Liberal platform in September of 2021 dealt with a mandatory vaccination policy across the entire
05:19:09.320federal service and on federally regulated transportation? Yes, we put that to the electorate
05:19:15.820in the 21 election and i believe you had 33 roughly of the popular vote there is that correct
05:19:22.620well to the best of my recollection yes your your number's right on that okay and so would you say
05:19:27.100then that that in part this this mandate or this must do activity uh is rooted at least in part in
05:19:33.340a political or ideological purpose well it was part of i think two important things first the
05:19:40.220best available medicine evidence and science that we got and it was our belief then and it continues
05:19:45.500used to be now, that vaccines were the best way out of the pandemic. And secondly, in the lead up
05:19:51.260to the 21 election, there was a very, I think, robust debate among all Canadians. I'm trying
05:19:59.380to figure out what specific knowledge you had in dealing with the Minister of Health here. So
05:20:04.800would it be fair to say that under the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Act,
05:20:10.160You are given the responsibility of exercising leadership at a national level relating to public safety and that the Department of Health has has a similar aspect in terms of promotion and preservation of health.
05:20:22.480So what I'm trying to get at here is the separation of powers a little bit, because we did have an unprecedented emergency situation with the pandemic in Canada where some of these vaccines were pushed through very quickly.
05:20:32.080And so, you know, perhaps by way of analogy, you know, if there's a new peanut that's coming on the market that may have been genetically modified, it would clearly be within the purview of the Ministry of Health to assess the safety of that.
05:20:44.840But was there ever a consideration where, let's say, you're now implementing a mandate that results in 90% of Canadians ingesting this product?
05:20:53.440Does that concern your mandate under public safety at all?
05:20:56.820Well, first, there was a lot of thoughtful deliberation and research done prior to the decision of launching and implementing a national vaccine strategy.
05:21:08.840But while there is a common objective between the public safety ministry and health in protecting the health and safety of Canadians,
05:21:20.020public safety has a different mandate which includes um the law and there are agencies
05:21:27.520under my portfolio that are responsible for upholding the law i understood so so minister
05:21:32.300so so there is a little bit of overlap and and this is some of this overlap could have been
05:21:36.760discussed through your mandate working with the minister of health and transport is that is that
05:21:40.980fair to say well there were again very robust uh communications within uh government throughout
05:21:46.820the pandemic and throughout the convoy and um that includes with uh minister leblanc minister
05:21:51.940al gabra understood if we could pull up mr registrar jcf0000183
05:22:05.780so this here is the regulatory decision summary published by health canada on september 16th of
05:22:10.4202021 i believe this was the second uh that the purpose of this document was to transition the
05:22:15.620approval of some of these vaccines from being authorized under an interim order to being
05:22:21.140authorized under i believe it is schedule division eight of the foods and drugs act
05:22:25.460so if we could go to page six at the first paragraph there
05:22:32.500it states that an important limitation of the data is the lack of information on the
05:22:36.900long-term safety and effectiveness of this of the vaccine were you were you made aware of this this
05:22:41.620concern? I recall being privy to conversations where there were discussions about the efficacy
05:22:52.300of vaccinations and also how there were other considerations around the administration of them
05:23:01.640as part of an overarching health policy to deal with the pandemic. Right. And would you also agree
05:23:06.440with me that because of the time constraints, because of the emergency situation that this
05:23:11.060rollout had to occur within that that it did not go through the the regular rigorous testing that
05:23:16.120it otherwise would have and if we could scroll to the last sentence of sorry just before you go on
05:23:21.600i i just want to be clear i actually don't agree uh with that which part the last part that you
05:23:27.260said in your question where you asked me if i agree that it was that it was sped up and rushed
05:23:31.440and you linked it i think to um the events of the blockade and the convoy and i disagree with that
05:23:37.520There was a lot of work that was done in the lead up to the rollout of the national vaccination strategy that predated the convoy.
05:23:45.040So if we could look at page four of eight, was ever brought to your attention that in terms of the safety of evaluation for adolescents, only 660 adolescents, that's aged between 12 to 15, only 660 adolescents that have been followed for two months formed the basis of Health Canada's conclusion that this was safe or effective for this particular age group?
05:24:09.360And were you aware that this is one of the concerns that was being brought by the convoy?
05:24:13.540I know that in my conversations with Minister Duclos and other colleagues who participated both at the COVID committee as well as broader cabinet, that those conversations were informed by the best available science and data in the lead up to the national vaccination strategy.
05:24:29.520okay and and if we can one more document here quickly jcf00008187
05:24:37.600were you aware that at least our united our counterparts in the united states
05:24:43.280that when they approved the pfizer biontech vaccine they stated that they determined that
05:24:49.040an analysis analysis of spontaneous post-marketing adverse events reported under the fdca would not
05:24:55.600be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an
05:25:01.140unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis and that in fact they ordered a battery of tests
05:25:06.260requiring Pfizer to study adverse effects until at least May 31st of 2027. The question I'm trying
05:25:12.220to get at, well were you aware of that first of all? I've not seen this document before. Okay and
05:25:17.660so so my question to you is if you're exercising leadership within the realm of public safety and
05:25:23.660and you have the statutory power to establish strategic priorities and exercise powers to
05:25:29.420initiate recommend coordinate implement or promote policy programs or projects relating to public
05:25:34.060safety was there ever any consideration of uh of initiating a review perhaps to of some of these
05:25:44.620safety concerns because i understand that other countries had limited the use of some of these
05:25:49.420vaccines for a under age 18 or under age 30 and that perhaps by exercising some of those powers
05:25:54.940leading up to the entrenchment of the convoy or even you know as late as bring it to a question
05:26:00.700please the 13th did you ever consider ordering or initiating additional tests to satisfy the
05:26:07.020concerns of some of these protesters that that would not have been within my mandate my my mandate
05:26:12.780was to make sure that we protected um public safety through the enforcement of the law and
05:26:17.900this is a commission inquiry about the circumstances that led to it i'm not saying
05:26:22.540your question is irrelevant i'm saying that would be a question that would be best put to the
05:26:25.660minister of health and and was there any discussion between you and the minister of health about
05:26:29.740perhaps engaging proactively in some of these additional studies to alleviate some concerns
05:26:34.460of canadians well throughout the circumstances of the blockade and occupation i was in touch with
05:26:40.940all of my colleagues in cabinet including minister duclos okay and i understand i'm running out of
05:26:45.580time here but just quickly a couple you have run out of time so you're gonna have to focus here
05:26:50.300understood uh can we pull up document win 0002295 i believe these are text messages between you and
05:26:57.500mayor drew dilkins first like to take a look at page four and this question was put to uh mayor
05:27:04.860dilkins earlier with respect to opp resources so just waiting for mr registrar here
05:27:23.340page four so is it is it your unders it appears that it's your understanding on february 9th at
05:27:28.6207 35 p.m that chief mizuno had not requested any additional police officers from the opp
05:27:34.860uh was that your understanding and if so where did you attain that understanding
05:27:40.220um this exchange is about trying to clear up what i think is um a miscommunication or
05:27:47.820a misunderstanding between uh different levels of enforcement and um the city of windsor and so
05:27:54.220what i'm really trying to get to the bottom of there is whether or not additional help had been
05:27:59.500turned down by the city of windsor but it says apparently your police chief just told so i'm
05:28:05.340the question is where did you ascertain that that belief for that understanding i am trying to
05:28:13.100recall whether or not that was information that i got um either directly from uh commissioner
05:28:19.340lucky or from other sources off the top of my head i can't say okay and lastly just on page
05:28:26.30020 here last question here mr commissioner so on february 14th at 11 57 a.m says that to the extent
05:28:35.260you so here being mr dilkins you can be supportive of any additional authorities that gets windsor
05:28:40.940the resources you need to keep the bridge open people safe that would be great uh is it your
05:28:45.980understanding that drew dilkins mayor drew dilkins invoked the city-wide emergency before or after
05:28:51.740this text message um off again off the top of my head can't recall um but i i know first that the
05:28:58.860ontario government had declared a state of emergency on the friday uh before which would have been um
05:29:06.780i'm just doing so i think on the 14th the city of windsor declared an emergency by
05:29:10.780by word yeah that sounds that sounds about right but recall but yeah the ontario the ontario
05:29:16.620government had declared the friday before okay and last one here where you reference resources
05:29:22.540do these resources include money um he he and i and other uh representatives of of the government
05:29:29.420have had a conversation around uh potential compensation for losses suffered to businesses
05:29:34.540and residents arising out of the blockade yes understood okay and i'm out of time so thank
05:29:38.780you for the indulgence uh those are my questions thank you next uh the uh ccla please
05:29:46.620Good afternoon, Mr. Mendicino, Minister Mendicino, my name is Kara Zwiebel, I am counsel for
05:30:15.480the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Good afternoon. I want to ask you about an area that
05:30:22.340we haven't really talked about, and I'm going to ask for a document to be pulled up, and I have to
05:30:26.200apologize. I didn't ask for this document in advance, but I don't think it'll be controversial.
05:30:30.360it's just the emergency measures regulation it's com 50s 854
05:30:41.560um and i just i think um you've probably given um some of the clearest testimony we've heard about
05:30:49.160um this issue of the the separation of church and state the relationship between law enforcement
05:30:55.720and government um and i think what you've said is that um you know there needs to be good lines of
05:31:02.520communication open uh but that uh it's not government's role to direct the police and what
05:31:08.120to do in an operational sense is that accurate yes okay um now in in the case of the um of the
05:31:16.040emergencies act and the the enactment of these emergency measures regulations um would you agree
05:31:21.640with me that ultimately um what these regulations do is empower law enforcement give law enforcement
05:31:31.480more tools in which to exercise their authorities and discretion i would agree and just add tools
05:31:37.720that otherwise don't exist in any other law right and um in the case of we won't pull them up but
05:31:44.760But the other, the economic, the other side of this, the economic measures that were enacted,
05:31:51.880in that case, it empowered both law enforcement and financial institutions with new powers.
05:36:56.740It is, but, you know, we count on law enforcement to interpret the law correctly.
05:37:01.960And as part of the rolling out of these regulations and these circumscribed powers, it would have been part of the plan to implement that there is a respect for the right to lawful assembly.
05:37:16.340In any event, by the time these regs had come into force, certainly it was clear to those who were still there that law enforcement had directed,
05:37:28.560government officials had directed that this was no longer lawful because it was no longer safe.
05:37:33.640Understood. So I'm not so concerned about whether there was a question that this applied to, for example, Wellington Street.
05:37:42.000I'm concerned about whether there was a question about where else this might have applied
05:37:45.920and the potential that it might have applied to a range of other places.
05:37:50.780Would you agree with me that there's nothing in these orders that geographically restricts their scope?
05:37:55.400There's nothing that says they're confined to Ontario or they're confined to border crossings?
05:38:01.620I think by inference, you could say that certainly under sub 2.1 and the subparagraph A,
05:38:10.440that there is some geographic circumscription there
05:38:16.900and that there are a limited number of places
05:38:18.940where you can seriously disrupt the movement of persons or goods
05:38:23.460or the serious interference with trade.
05:39:36.820The morning of the 14th, I think you would have learned that the Ambassador Bridge blockade had been cleared
05:39:44.760and that arrests had been made and that the police had executed a safe operation in Coutts leading to arrests.
05:39:52.160That was true, but I would add that there were reports of flare-ups.
05:39:55.920There was an exchange between the mayor and I. There were also public reports following that and some information that we had received in subsequent briefings about the threat of the blockade coming back to the Ambassador Bridge.
05:40:10.420I would point out that it was a recurring theme over those two weeks that progress was not linear, that it was very much a whack-a-mole kind of dynamic.
05:40:18.800And the idea was not only to restore public safety, but to maintain it.
05:40:24.080And the objective of invoking the Emergencies Act was to maintain law and order to stop the whack-a-mole.1.00
05:40:31.680Understood. I know you said in your testimony to Commission Council that one of the concerns about Coutts was that it could lead to a chain reaction.
05:40:40.680But would you agree with me that that didn't happen?
05:40:43.680that when the arrests were made in coots, actually many of the other protesters decided to leave
05:40:49.380because they actually weren't comfortable being associated with that level of violence.