Volume 21 (November 10, 2022)
Volume 21 has 389 pages of testimony. 27 people spoke before the Commission, including 2 witnesses.
Very important disclaimer: testimony from this site should not be taken as authoritative; check the relevant public hearing for verbatim quotes and consult the associated transcript for the original written text. For convenience, testimony includes links directly to the relevant page (where a speaker started a given intervention) in the original PDF transcripts.
The testimony below is converted from the PDF of the original transcript, prepared by Wendy Clements.
Speakers, by number of times they spoke:
- Mario Di Tommaso, Deputy Solicitor General (DSG) - Solicitor General / Government of Ontario (ON-SolGen) (spoke 1033 times)
- Marlin Degrand, Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) - Justice and Solicitor General / Government of Alberta (AB-JSG) (spoke 500 times)
- Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 436 times)
- Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 210 times)
- Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel - Government of Canada (GC) (spoke 184 times)
- Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel - Government of Canada (GC) (spoke 123 times)
- Paul Rouleau, Commissioner - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 116 times)
- Rebecca Jones, Counsel - Peter Sloly (spoke 97 times)
- Paul Champ, Counsel - Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses (spoke 89 times)
- Jennifer L. King, Counsel - City of Windsor (Win) (spoke 64 times)
- David Migicovsky, Counsel - Ottawa Police Service / City of Ottawa (Ott-OPS) (spoke 51 times)
- Ewa Krajewska, Counsel - Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) (spoke 48 times)
- Sujit Choudhry, Counsel - Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) (spoke 48 times)
- Brendan Miller, Counsel - Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers (spoke 45 times)
- Stephanie Bowes, Counsel - Government of Alberta (AB) (spoke 45 times)
- Alan Honner, Counsel - Democracy Fund / Citizens for Freedom / Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms Coalition (DF / CfF / JCCF) (spoke 44 times)
- Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel - City of Ottawa (Ott) (spoke 38 times)
- Michael J. Morris, Counsel - Government of Saskatchewan (SK) (spoke 30 times)
- Darrell Kloeze, Counsel - Government of Ontario (ON) (spoke 17 times)
- The Registrar - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 17 times)
- Thomas McRae, Counsel - Windsor Police Service / City of Windsor (Win-WPS) (spoke 11 times)
- The Clerk - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 10 times)
- Unidentified speaker (spoke 3 times)
- Tom Curry, Counsel - Peter Sloly (spoke 2 times)
- Colleen McKeown, Counsel - Criminal Lawyers’ Association / Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers (CLA/CCCDL) (spoke 1 time)
- Jen Del Riccio, Counsel - National Police Federation (spoke 1 time)
- Jinan Kubursi, Counsel - Ontario Provincial Police / Government of Ontario (ON-OPP) (spoke 1 time)
Upon commencing on Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 9:30 a.m.
The Registrar (POEC)
Order. À l’ordre. The Public Order Emergency Commission is now in session. La Commission sur l’état d’urgence est maintenant ouverte.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Good morning. Bonjour. Just before we start, I just want to give a bit of a message as to the events of yesterday. As many of you know, we had to interrupt the hearing yesterday because our senior counsel, Gabriel Poliquin, suddenly became indisposed. He was seen by medical professionals and his episode was likely nothing serious. So he’s expected to make a quick recovery after a few days of recuperation and will be back with the Commission next week. He wishes to thank all who have reached out to him with messages of support, and it’s very appreciated by him, and, of course, by the Commission. So with that brief introduction and reassurance, we can go on to the next witness.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Commissioner. Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Commission Counsel. Our first witness today is Marlin Degrand. (SHORT PAUSE)
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Good morning. Right up here.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you, sir.
The Registrar (POEC)
For the record, please state your full name and spell it out.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
My full name is Marlin Arman Degrand. M-a-r-l-i-n; A-r-m-a-n, and the surname is D-e-g-r-a- n-d.
ADM MARLIN ARMAN DEGRAND, Sworn
The Registrar (POEC)
Thank you.
EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MR. JEAN-SIMON SCHEONHOLZ
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mr. Degrand.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Good morning, sir. How are you?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good to see you again. So Mr. Degrand, you’ll recall that you met with Commission Counsel on August 30th for an interview.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I do.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Remember that? And we prepared a summary of the evidence that you provided during that interview; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I’ll just pull up WTS00000007. So this is your witness summary, which will come up on the screen. Do you have any corrections to that witness summary this morning?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I do not.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Great. And you can confirm this is the witness summary that you’ve seen; you’ve reviewed it?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. So I’ll have that entered into evidence. You also will recall that the Province of Alberta, the Government of Alberta has prepared an institutional report?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You’ve had the chance to review that as well?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I have.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I also understand that you’ve sworn an affidavit attaching and confirming the content of that institutional report?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I have.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so just for the record, the institutional report is ALB.IR.00000001, and then the affidavit is AFF.00000015.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So Mr. Degrand, I understand that you are Assistant Deputy Minister of the Public Security Division, and Director of Law Enforcement for Alberta Justice and Solicitor General; is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It’s correct at the time that we spoke. We’ve since had a ministerial change and our department is now sort of split to Justice on one side, and I’m with the newly created Ministry of Public Safety and Emergency Services.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The role stays the same.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you’re -- so you’re still Assistant Deputy Minister?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your -- can you maybe describe your responsibilities at the time.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
At the time of these events ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- I was the Assistant Deputy Minister and responsible for the coordination -- I have a number of duties as the Director of Law Enforcement. Primarily, at that time, was the coordination of law enforcement of the province. We also are responsible for oversight, research and statistical analysis, crime prevention and a number of other matters under Section 8 of our Police Act.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who did you report to at the time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The Associate Deputy Minister, now Deputy Minister for our department, Dennis Cooley.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Fantastic. And they reported to Minister Savage; is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, our Minister at the time was Minister Savage, Interim Minister.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And so my understanding is that you would -- one of your roles was to liaise with law enforcement on behalf of the government and the Solicitor General?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct. Liaise and coordinate with.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you maybe start by providing us with a brief summary of policing services in the province?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly. And very briefly, you have, of course, multiple levels of policing. The RCMP is the federal policing entity in the province, as it is anywhere in Canada. Within Alberta, we have a Police Act, which constitute -- which dictates the levels of responsibility for policing being for communities over the threshold of 5,000, they're required to have their own police force or a municipal service. They also have the option to contract with the RCMP in our province.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Mr. Degrand, if I could just ask that you slow down a bit because it's all being translated, so your -- especially when you know what -- the area you tend to talk a little fast, I think.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I probably do all the time, so thank you, I will.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So certainly, there are multiple levels, as I was saying. Municipal policing is responsible in communities of over 5,000. In seven of those instances, we have municipal police services that are independent and self administered. The number of instances, 48, I believe, the communities have chosen to contract the RCMP as their contracted police service. The RCMP is also our contracted police service for the provision of provincial policing in the remainder of the province including First Nations and Métis settlements, with the exception of three communities, which have self-administered First Nations services.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so my understanding is in communities under 5,000 though, then the policing would be provided by the RCMP?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, as the provincial police service.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so that would include, for example, Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that's -- I believe that's the K-Division of the RCMP?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
RCMP K-Division, the designation for all operations in Alberta.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. Thank you. Can you maybe describe as well, I understand the Sheriff Highway Patrol is also under your purview? Can you maybe explain their role?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly. The Sheriff's Branch is a branch under my division, and it entails a number of discreet units, one of which is the Sheriff's Highway Patrol. The Sheriff's Highway Patrol works closely with the RCMP in the delivery of traffic services and traffic safety across the province. In their -- their role insofar as the border dispute at Coutts was directly in support of the RCMP's operational response, and we provided a number of our officers to the RCMP to assist in any number of areas, including traffic control and checkpoint control, under their direction and within their operations. Ordinarily, the sheriffs work collaboratively and cooperatively with the RCMP, but independently from the RCMP as a peace officer organization. They are not police officers. They have a specific mandate and specific authorities, which are quite broad. But in the case where they were providing operational support at Coutts, they were working under the command structure of the RCMP, as part of that response that was the responsibility of the police force of jurisdiction.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So normally, they would have -- or in all cases, I guess, they would have the authority to enforce -- the Highway Traffic Act, for example, would be one of their key pieces ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of legislation that they enforce?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
A large -- yes, that certainly is, the Traffic Safety Act, and a large number of provincial and other legislation they actually have authorities for under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act and other pieces of legislation.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so maybe can you just explain a little bit more why in this case they were -- they would operate at the direction of the RCMP?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly. The event at the border specifically was obviously a policing event, and police are charged with the responsibility for administering -- or for overseeing and addressing public order events and cases of, you know, breaches of the law, et cetera. In that particular case, the police force of jurisdiction being the RCMP has overall command and control of the event, and it would be improper and problematic for an independent agency such as the sheriffs to operate in an operational manner in that, or an unfortunate matter in that event, outside of the command and control of the RCMP as you could conceivably come across purposes for some of the strategies that were attempting to be embarked upon, both from a negotiation perspective or an enforcement perspective, et cetera. So you need to be coordinated and there has to be one unifying command and one command and control apparatus for the response.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. You mentioned briefly there the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. Can you maybe explain for us what that is, what does that law do?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It is a piece of legislation, and I probably am the wrong person to give you a very detailed explanation on it, but it's -- in a sense, it allows for -- to -- allows for police in the province to have another tool in their toolbox when dealing with matters that provide intrusions to or affect the operation of critical infrastructure in the province. It's not akin to, say, the Emergency Act, which is why we're here today in the sense that there's no need for invocation. It's much like the Traffic Safety Act, the Criminal Code, or any other statute that's available as a tool to law enforcement every day, an Act that is in place in Alberta.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is your understanding that highways are a piece of critical infrastructure under that Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And who's able to enforce that Act? I think you already mentioned the sheriffs, both the sheriffs and the RCMP can enforce?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, any police service can in their area of jurisdiction.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Municipal. Yes, thank you. And so what kind of function -- you've already mentioned you liaise with police. Do you play some sort of oversight function as well?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
We do have an oversight function. We have policing standards that we developed in a collegial manner within the province with law enforcement and which we're charged with ensuring are met. We have audit programs that we are involved in and, of course, we are involved in policy development and giving advice to the government on legislative changes that may or may not be required.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I'd like to talk now about Coutts a little bit.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sure.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So my understanding is that the province was aware that a slow roll was headed towards Coutts and scheduled to arrive on January 29th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, we became aware of that through information that was provided to us through law enforcement and through our Provincial Security Intelligence Office.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Where would you typically get your situational information on an event like this?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
We have a reasonably well developed level of coordination between the law enforcement entities and the province, all police services, as well as our sheriffs, and our Provincial Security and Intelligence Office, which allows for the sharing of information in as near to real time as possible between those entities, so that we can -- and, of course, through the use of the Criminal Intelligence Service of Alberta within our law -- or combined forces law enforcement entity alert. Through those things, we receive information on a regular basis on any evolving situations that have an ability to impact any area of jurisdiction, or in this case, potentially multiple areas of jurisdiction across the province, and we ensure that it's shared not only broadly within the law enforcement community, but also provides insight for myself.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you would have received all those situational updates?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I received situational updates from my folks for sure, yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was the province aware of the threats of a blockade prior to the arrival of the convoy at the border or near the border?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The information we were receiving at the time through the RCMP was based on their conversations with organizers. Nothing that we saw indicated that -- or there’s always the potential for a blockade, but nothing we saw indicated that that was the intent of the slow roll convoy. There were a number of events being planned, including events at the Legislature and in Calgary. And those were all being monitored at the same time. The particular convoy that rolled from basically Lethbridge to the Coutts border was initially intended to be, from the information that was provided to us, a bunch of vehicles coming to the area, demonstrating through a slow roll, and leaving the area.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mayor Willett, I don’t know if you heard his testimony ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I did not.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- a few days ago? He testified that he advised the Premier and Minister Savage on September 27th of the risk of a blockade. Maybe we could pull up COU00000183.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sorry, September?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Oh, my apologies. Sorry. I wrote up my notes late last night.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I understand. Thank you.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry. January 27th, of course. So here you see Mayor Willet’s email: “I became aware of an organized effort planned to begin Saturday to totally block all north bound and south bound traffic here at the Coutts Border crossing as well as Carway and Del Bonita.” Were you ever made aware that this information had been provided to the Alberta Government?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can’t say that I’ve seen this. I’m not going to say for sure that it didn’t flow through the traffic, but I can’t say that I’ve seen this before.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
More generally, were you provided with any intelligence that there was a risk of a blockade?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, absolutely. There was always -- as I stated earlier, that’s certainly a risk, and it was a risk that I’m sure there’s chatter around that as well on the social media sites. But the organizers, as I understood them from the conversations that the RCMP were having, and I defer to them to speak in detail around that, were saying that wasn’t the intent. That stated, there’s always that risk.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you advised prior to the arrival that there may be a splinter group, potentially, that had an intention to blockade the border?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I don’t remember anybody mentioning splinter groups within any of the conversations I had at that time.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That became apparent on the day of the event though, ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
All right.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- that there was a group that splintered off from the thousand or so vehicles that were initially there. There was about 250 that sort of splintered off and stopped and blocked the road.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So Mayor Willett testified that he received a call the next day from someone he believes to be from Minister Savage’s office informing him that, you know, “Thank you for the information. The RCMP are on it.” You’re not aware of ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That phone call?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that discussion?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No. No, I’m not. Sorry.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you briefed on the RCMP’s plan for that event prior to the arrival on the 29th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I was.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether there was planning for the possibility of a blockade?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I want to defer probably to Deputy Zablocki, Deputy Commissioner Zablocki, on that, but the briefings I had were around the fact that there’s knowledge of the convoy, the fact -- the approximate size of what they anticipated was going to be coming, their plans to reach out to convoy organizers, distribute information, speak with individuals at checkpoints to make sure they understood the rules around -- sorry, slow down -- not blocking the highway in both areas, giving them, you know, direction on how to lawfully protest within the area. Those were all the plans that were articulated to myself, as well as at a gross level, or a high level, the number of police officers that would be, you know, brought to bear in terms of managing the event as it was unfolding.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall what that number was for the Coutts region?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, I don’t. I’m sorry.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You were satisfied, generally, with their plan, I take it?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I was.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And obviously we will speak to them about that as well, but it’s good to get your recollection. Have you formed an opinion since then on why the RCMP was not able to prevent the blockade from setting in on that date?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I was never on the ground at the site, so I rely heavily on the information from the police and some measure of personal experience, but from the long past. But the reality is that the blockade occurred spontaneously, as I understand it, in the sense that a number of vehicles were circuiting down to border point and back up and across in a bit of a demonstration circle, which was slowing traffic, but not blocking it, and that at some point, a number of vehicles just decided to stop and block the highway, which was, of course, contrary to the assurances of the organizers and contrary to the directions that were given by police. So at that point in time, the police on the ground were faced with a very difficult problem, in the sense that they had 250ish vehicles blocking a highway.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You understood that the blockade blocked traffic to and from the border; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Correct. On the Canadian side.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And that it also prevented access by Coutts residents to Milk River and vice versa?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I believe so. Yeah, there was some early conversations around the challenges that the community of Coutts was facing, and I know one of the things that the RCMP informed me they were working with, and they managed to gain support for, was creating access for the community to roadways out of the area in the first day or two of the event, or couple days of the event.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you understood -- I think what you’re telling me is you understood it was a key artery for Coutts to get to essential services and ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly. Yes, certainly. Although I’m not as familiar with Coutts to say if it was the only artery. But I believe it was certainly key.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. You spoke just now about the RCMP briefing you about creating an alternate route for residents. Can you maybe just tell me a little bit more what you know about that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I really don’t know a lot more about that, other than to -- what was relayed to me from the RCMP and the sense that they were looking to create access for the community and that it was resolved. And again I -- from memory, I can’t recall which day, but it was resolved early on in those first few days.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the first few days.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that they would have successfully created some alternative route when the highway was fully blockaded for residents to get out?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is your understanding that -- were you ever advised that that route was used for commercial vehicles as well?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
To cross the border.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well not to cross the border, but once -- you know, once they had crossed the border, to kind of get out?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
There was a number -- the RCMP relayed to me that there were a number of vehicles, truck drivers, sort of caught up in the matter that didn’t want to be there, ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
M’hm.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- but had no way of getting out. And I’m going from memory, and I can’t remember which day it was, but again, on those early days, there was some progress made in discussions by the RCMP with the protestors to allow those that did not want to be there to leave. And I believe 25/30 trucks were escorted out of the area. But beyond that, there was no real avenue for truck drivers to go through when all the lanes were blocked.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I think it’s important to note that throughout the duration of the event, which was a couple weeks, there were, you know, the majority of the time, there actually were one lane of travel open both north and south.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So fair to say, to your knowledge, there was no alternate route available for commercial vehicles? RCMP was relying on, essentially, the good faith of the protestors?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well, through Coutts- Sweet Grass border crossing, that would be accurate.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
There are other border crossings that, very early on, efforts were made to ensure that those remained open. While the primary border crossing to the United States from Alberta is, of course, at Coutts at Sweet Grass, the Del Bonita and Carway crossings are also available. They have more restricted hours, and efforts were made by our Transport Canada folks, as well as the RCM -- or, sorry; transportation folks in Alberta, not Transport Canada; my apologies -- Transport Alberta Ministry and the RCMP to work with CBSA and American officials to ensure that we could extend the hours and the services that were available on those border crossings to facilitate travel, to the extent that it could be done, outside of Coutts itself when it was closed.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I might have some more questions on that later but that’s ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sure.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that’s helpful. Thank you. So my understanding from the institutional report is that on January 31st, the RCMP was prepared to conduct some enforcement action but that some protesters left around that time, and there was attempts to negotiate with the remainder of the protesters, but that that was not ultimately successful. Is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s the information that was relayed to me from the RCMP, absolutely.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of why those negotiations were unsuccessful at that time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I actually couldn’t speak to that. I can tell you that with some of the protesters wanting to leave, and others indicating that they were interested in transitioning to a lawful protest, the RCMP made the tactical decision to proceed with negotiations, which seemed reasonable and sound to me. And they did so. Those were not -- those ultimately proved unfruitful at that time. But, again, I wasn’t on the ground having those conversations so it would be speculative for me to say why they didn’t work out.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you advised at this -- around this time, January 31st, that the protest leadership had -- was not quite clear yet?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No. I can tell you that I was advised as the matter progressed that it was difficult to negotiate because there were multiple areas -- or multiple individuals that would come forward and claim leadership, and in this case there was a group that there was the initial leadership of the convoy, and then there was the splinter group, and then there was a group at this point in time, January 31st, that came forward and identified themselves as leadership and were speaking with the RCMP. I think later on -- and I’m not sure that was the 31st; I think it was in the subsequent days to follow, other groups identified them -- or individuals identified themselves as leadership, and not being represented by the folks that had previously been speaking with the RCMP. And one of the difficulties that was expressed to me from the RCMP was that they were getting multiple groups and -- within the -- or factions, if you will, within the global protesters, they are individuals with a mixed group of, sort of, motivations within the protest event itself, and it was making it difficult to negotiate.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And is one of the reasons that enforcement wasn’t pursued at this time; again, January 31st, because some more moderate elements started coming forward and expressed an intent to become a more lawful protest? Had you been briefed on that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s what the RCMP actually indicated to me, and of course, their goal is always to resolve peacefully with the minimal use of force, so they took advantage of that.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you understand a more lawful protest to look like?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The flow of -- the information that the RCMP were stating is their goal was always certainly -- throughout the event but certainly at the start was to re-establish the flow of traffic through the Coutts border crossing.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did that succeed?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
As I indicated earlier, there were times when it was successful in a limited fashion, in the sense that one lane was left open, and there was varying degrees of flow of traffic, sometimes escorted; sometimes free- flowing at a smaller pace. At some points the border was processing up to 50 percent of its normal kind of volume of traffic through the area. And then it would be shut down for a period of time, reopen, and then shut down again. And then ultimately we shut down until it was resolved for, I think, two or three days at the end.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So around the 10th, 11th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Tenth (10th), yeah, somewhere in there.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it was resolved on the -- I think the 14th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And were -- is your understanding that during this time, commercial vehicles were still using the Coutts point of entry, maybe in limited numbers but some -- there was still activity at the Coutts port of entry?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
When the lanes were open, yes. There were -- as I stated, though, there were periods where they would be shut down. There was a period where there was a car accident that necessitated a shutdown. So it wasn’t a constant flow, and it was interrupted at times and then reopened, and then interrupted at times and reopened.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And maybe I just want to clarify; my understanding is that the blockade was -- I don’t have a sense of the distance but maybe a kilometre away from the actual ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- Customs point of entry, and so that’s why I’m kind of making a distinction between the two.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. It’s a -- yeah, you’re probably almost as familiar with the area as I am, having never actually travelled through that border point myself, but my understanding of it is the actual Customs office is just south of where the blockade took place, which is on the two highways that -- two sections of Highway 4 which travel down to it and there’s a bit of crossover, and come back up to it, and that’s where the blockade itself was, the primary blockade, and there was another one that actually sort of rose up, up the highway closer to the community of Milk River.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, yes. Okay. So you’ve already spoken about the contingency planning that was made with alternate point of entries. Do you have a sense of what the impact was of having to reroute some of that traffic to those other points of entry; can you speak to that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Some of the challenges were, as they were expressed to me -- and, of course, I wasn’t in personal conversation on many of these things, were that US officials receive certain type of goods -- types of goods only at certain checkpoints; live animal stock, foodstuffs, heavy transports versus automobile traffic, private vehicle traffic. And there was a lot of challenge in trying to extend not only hours of operation but also accommodate, at alternate points of contact for Customs clearance, the different types of commercial goods that travel through that border point. And I will not profess to be an expert in that area. It’s an area that I understood to be a challenge, and one that was worked on throughout the event with our folks from Transportation, Agriculture, as well as their US colleagues, and CBSA.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could pull up ALB00001573? I understand that on February 3rd, Deputy Commissioner Zablocki of the RMCP sent a letter to Minister Savage requesting the deployment of additional officers under the PPSA, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that’s the Provincial Police Service Agreement between the Province and the RCMP; is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Well, it’s between the Province and Canada.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right, yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
And the RCMP is the service provider, and that’s the article that allows for the RCMP to move policing resources across multiple business lines in order to self-support when their resources require that.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is the response from Minister Savage. And if we can just go down a little bit. So there’s a response the same day that approves the request; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And it says, if you go down to the fourth line: “This is in response to a current blockade near the Coutts land border crossing and intelligence suggesting further blockades planned throughout the province. In my opinion, this constitutes an emergency in the Province of Alberta, under the Provincial Police Service Agreement.” So why was additional deployment necessary according to the RCMP; what did they tell you about that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. My conversations with D/Comm. Zablocki, in those conversations he indicated that of course the resource draw to maintain order and safety at the blockade -- and, of course, manage other events that were and could be happening across the province -- was significant, and there are specialized resources that are used in those types of events, as well as general duty resources. And his intent, through invoking this article of the Provincial Police Services Agreement, was to reach out to other provinces for extra resources so as to give his team relief, in the sense that he could spell people off for a period of time, get them through a rest period and then put them back into their role.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he eventually obtained, I think, 40 officers from British Columbia; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you tell us about -- here it mentions, “...intelligence suggesting further blockades planned throughout the province”; what can you tell us about that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I might have mentioned it earlier, but during the events at Coutts, we also had events in Calgary; numbers of people protesting and walking, marching through the community. We had events at the Legislature in Edmonton. We had intelligence and actual action of rolling blockades in some parts of the province, I think Fort Macleod, and a few others, so -- I believe Taber police dealt with a minor event as well. And so there were -- they were also tracking on social media, at different times, calls from individuals to protest in other parts of the province and create other traffic snarls, slow downs, that sort of thing. So those would have been the events that, I believe, the Deputy Commissioner would’ve been referencing; although, of course, he’d be able to speak to that himself.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So at this time, and this is February 3rd, what was your understanding of why the RCMP had not yet been able to bring the blockade to an end?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
By February 3rd; at that point in time they were still working on negotiations with the protesters. If memory serves, they had a lane open by then, and there was north and south traffic flowing through there. They’d also, by then, encountered difficulties, if I -- if memory serves, with obtaining heavy tow capacity, should they have to move to an enforcement action. I don’t believe, at this point in time, they were looking to execute on an enforcement action. They were engaged in constructive dialogue that had been keeping the lanes open, mostly, for north/south traffic to some degree, and were hoping for a peaceful and, you know, a nonenforcement- oriented solution. But they also recognized they had challenges, logistically, should they go there.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And by that time the RCMP had begun to look for towing resources; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did they feel obtaining those resources would be necessary to any enforcement action?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, they did. You can remove the people but we would still have large numbers of large vehicles that were blocking the highway.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I take it you’re familiar with Alberta’s Emergency Management Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m familiar with it.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You mentioned it before, this is one that you actually need to invoke; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so, under that Act, the Government of Alberta can declare a State of Emergency throughout the province?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware that the use of that Act would’ve allowed Alberta to compel the use of towing resources, of operators; and, also, to prohibit access to certain areas?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I am aware of that provision, the Act, yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement you say that Alberta considered invoking this legislation, but that it was determined not to be necessary. Can you explain the basis for that assessment?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So as a public official, we of course provide advice to elected officials. Within that, we explored the realm of the possible, in the sense that we did identify the Emergency Act, its provisions, and the authorities that would come with its invocation. We also identified a number of statutes that provided law enforcement with effective arrests and charging tools, to deal with the actions that were taking place at Coutts. And to be fair, there are a number of authorities that exist sub or below the Emergency Act that would allow for police to arrest, detain, and remove people from that area. The determination was made by our government that, given the number of tools that were already available in statute to police, the addition of the Emergency Act would’ve changed nothing in terms of the authorities that the police required. And you mentioned compelling individuals to cooperate, that would certainly be something that could be attempted, but there’s also information that many of the individuals within the industry were fairly supportive of the protest or did not wish to be seen to be involved in taking action against the protest, for their own reasons, and I won’t speak to those ‘cause I don’t want to put myself in their head. But the reality is that a compulsion to somebody to provide support could conceivably, and probably, have been met just as easily with a refusal and then you are left with a choice of having to now deal with enforcement in relation to service providers and still not be any further ahead, in terms of where you’re trying to go. We ultimately thought there were more appropriate and better avenues to seek that support. One being Canadian Armed Forces’ support from CFB Edmonton, and the other is ultimately what we did do, which was resolve it ourselves through the purchase of equipment.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did you -- did -- what was the basis, I guess, for the assessment that some people may not comply even if compelled? Did you receive advice on that from RCMP, from intelligence, or was it just ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s -- I should make that clear, that’s a very personal assessment on my part. That was not advice that was provided to anybody, and I can’t speak to our government officials, our Minister and Premier, and where their head was at on that. So I should be very clear about that. And that basis is just experience, and the reaction -- and this wouldn’t have February 3rd; this would’ve been much closer to 8th or 9th -- that I was getting from my folks that were engaged in conversations with the industry when they were attempting to solicit support from -- for the RCMP to use their equipment. It was categorically dismissed, and the people were either not returning our calls, point blank, or telling us that they just refuse to cooperate.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the RCMP ever request that the -- this Act be invoked?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, they did not.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we can pull up COU00000016. These are text messages between Minister Sawhney, former Minister of Transport and Mayor Willett. And we can go to the second page, if we can go down a little bit? Okay. Here. So you'll see here on the right, Mayor Willett says -- he's talking about meeting with the protesters. "They need someone from government [to] get a straight answer from [...] If it comes up, are you still willing to take a trip to Coutts?" And she responds, "Of course! I [need] to get clearance from the Boss and RCMP." Were you consulted on whether the government should send an emissary of sorts to Coutts to meet with protesters?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
To be clear, I'm not seeing this until my preparation for the inquiry and this was provided to me. So I wasn't consulted. I know there were conversations at one point of MLAs independently meeting with protesters and having conversations with them, and that was -- I've not seen anything to substantiate whether that actually occurred or not. My information is that it wasn't something that the government was officially trying to do, but again, I can't speak to whether it happened or not. I do know that during those conversations, we met with our -- we -- not we, myself, but our department spoke with our Minister around that to make sure that we knew what may or may not be taking place and could convey that to the RCMP, of course, who are still charged with managing the event. The information that was conveyed to me was that there were no certainly official meetings taking place down there and that they would be guided by the RCMP, who, of course, had operational command and were engaged in negotiations, so as not to complicate any conversations that they might be involved in.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what the reason for, because my understanding is that Minister Sawhney did not end up going to Coutts. Do you know what the reason for that decision not to officially engage with the protesters was?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I don't. I can't put myself in the Minister's mind. I apologise for that. I don't believe we received any request from the RCMP though to engage at that level.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So I suspect that might have been the reason.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the Institutional Report, it says that the RCMP asked the Sheriff's Highway Patrol not to take enforcement action until February 7th. Do you remember that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I do.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know why that was the case?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Again, the RCMP, I believe, were asking that we make sure that our officers did not take unilateral enforcement actions outside of their operational plan. I can only surmise, and I will leave it to Deputy Zablocki to confirm, but that would have been to ensure that any actions that we took didn't interfere with any negotiations that might have been ongoing with individuals at the site.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what changed on the 7th? Because I know after the 7th, there was a number of violations were issued. Do you know what changed?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That would have been a -- at the time, there was a sort of a very moderate or a small enforcement, I guess you could term it enforcement initiative that the RCMP wanted to engage in, basically, starting with information, if memory serves correctly, moving into I think it was checkpoint 10 near Milk River to have conversations with people, provide them with information, start charging vehicles, etc. So it would have been a coordinated effort based on the RCMP's operational plan and under their direction that our officers would have been involved in.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know if any protesters left because of that limited enforcement action around that time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can't say that. I'm sorry. I'm sure the RCMP could tell you, but I just don't have that off the top of my head.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the Institutional Report, it states that the province made a alternative protest site available, and we heard this from other witnesses, at Milk River, and that that would have been on February 10th. Can you tell us how that came about?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Absolutely. The RCMP actually suggested that it would be useful to them in their conversations with protesters if we were to make available a site that they could protest on that would meet their visibility needs but not obstruct traffic. We engaged with Transportation and ourselves, but primarily Transportation, in developing a site near Milk River, which met the needs of the RCMP, on property that we owned already. And Transportation actually put in access in egress areas for protesters and set up I believe even WiFi access for protesters to be able to utilise in order to facilitate those that wanted to protest lawfully at the site. This was a tactic that the RCMP wished to engage in, to, you know, manage the negotiations, to migrate this to a lawful.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did the RCMP brief you on whether that was done because there was buy-in from protesters on something like that, or done in hopes that once it was set up, they could get by it; do you know?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
You know, they -- I don't recall knowing whether it was one or the other.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It was a request, and, of course, we do what we could to assist, so we did it.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The Institutional Report states that the Sheriffs Highway Patrol maintained certain checkpoints at other points of entry to prevent blockades.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Near other points of entry, yeah. Yes, that's correct. Del Bonita and Carway were the primary, the -- primarily the land points of entry that we were concerned about. And under the direction of the RCMP, our sheriffs set up checkpoints there to ensure that vehicles travelling down to those points of entry had legitimate business reasons to be doing so.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of whether any potential blockades were thwarted by those efforts or not?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I'm not -- I couldn't speak to what could have been, so, yes. It's possible, but I'm not aware of any -- anybody showing up and being turned away in -- en mass ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- if you will.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah. I understand that on February 9th, I believe, a charge under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act was laid against Pastor Artur Pawlowski?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that the only charge that was laid under the -- that Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I don't want to misspeak here. Something tells me it was used twice, but I -- certainly, that's the only one that comes to mind.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you understood that the Act could apply to the situation?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, absolutely, yeah, and certainly, Commissioner Zablocki and the RCMP would have a lot more fulsome detail on the charges they laid.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the RCMP ever explain to you why it wasn't utilised more?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Why that particular Act was not utilised more? No. I know that enforcement was a strategy that was being looked at on a case-by-case basis, moment to moment, situation to situation. And they would use it in a manner that worked for them in terms of managing the overall event. But they never provided me with, you know, detailed explanations around why this charge against this person, why not this charge against these people. That's an operational level of detail that's candidly not something I would normally ask about.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that was within their discretion to decide under what Act to charge an individual?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
A hundred percent.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the Alberta Government ever take any steps to kind of attempt to have the Act used more fulsomely during this period or anything like that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, I mean, in the sense that we were very careful throughout the entire event to ensure that we were not directing police in their operational response. We were asking questions of them around planning, what they had done, if -- to the extent that they could share, what they would share in terms of their intentions, and things that we could do to facilitate the resolution of the event, but we were very careful not to direct them.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Your understanding is that law enforcement action in the early morning of February 14th is what led to the end of the blockade?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly, that was the beginning of events that ultimately led to the event. I would hesitate to say that that was the single event that was causal in that sense. There was a lot of work that was done by the RCMP and others in the days leading up to that to develop relationships, et cetera. So I -- to what extent was this a -- that crystallising event the sole reason and how much of that was facilitated by the outreach that was done in the past and the, you know, communications that was done by the government around the impacts of this, I think there are a constellation of factors that could have played a part in those decisions. But certainly, those enforcement actions were a catalysing event, for sure.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever hear from RCMP that one of those factors may have been the rumours that the Emergencies Act would be invoked?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. So when did you hear that they would -- sorry, let me back up. The evidence we've heard is that protestors met in the morning of February 14th and decided they would be leaving the next morning. Were you advised on the 14th that they had made that decision?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I was.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall around what time you were advised?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It was very early in the morning that I was advised of the enforcement action, 7 -- well, very early for me, sorry, 7, 7:30. Now I'm struggling now to recall if it was at that particular conversation, or one of the conversations I had in the morning that I was advised that it looked like the protestors were now dismantling. And I want to think it was kind of a little bit later on, but that would be speculative on my part. It was all within the morning, certainly, of the 14th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So within the morning, you understood they were leaving -- would be leaving the next morning?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Or and beginning preparation that day actually and there was ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- already events taking -- people taking down tents and structures and leaving on the 14th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was it -- I forget his name -- Deputy Commissioner Zablocki ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- is he the one who would have been briefing you on that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct. Deputy Commissioner Curtis Zablocki.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And your understanding is that the next morning they were all gone by early morning?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
For all intents and purposes, operations were resumed on the 15th at the border point. I think there were still -- there may have been individuals still packing up, et cetera, in the area, and I'm not sure if Milk River had fully transitioned to the lawful protest site. It would have been the 15th, 16th, but I believe operations at the border resumed on the 15th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding with respect to Milk River is that throughout that day at some point, the protestors at the Milk River checkpoint would have moved to the legal protest site, or at least some of them?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, the -- yeah, they moved or left.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. Majority actually left, if my memory serves me, from the conversations I had with the Deputy.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
This may be too on the ground from your vantage point, but are you aware of any protestors moving from Coutts to that legal protest site?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I wouldn't have that knowledge, sorry.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so your understanding is no -- other than the raid early that morning, no enforcement action had to be taken to clear that -- to clear the blockade in Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
There were a couple of arrests and some vehicle seizures associated to an event prior to the search warrants and the further charges there. So and there were, of course, the earlier charges that ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- took place later on, but, yeah ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Oh ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- outside of that ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in the actual clearing of the blockade?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, there were no further arrests beyond -- I think there were 13 individuals that were arrested in those initial hours.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding is none of the powers under the Emergencies Act were used at that ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, yeah, no.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- to clear the blockade?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The Federal Emergencies Act? No.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What about other protests in Alberta at that time, what was their status, if you can recall?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
We continued to have protests in Calgary for quite some time after that, as well as in Edmonton, around the legislature. And both the Edmonton Police, the Calgary Police and the RCMP and our sheriffs were involved in those. We had protests at the Calgary Remand Centre involving individuals supportive of Mr. Paslowski (ph) -- Pawlowski. I apologise if I'm saying the name wrong. It's not intentional. Yeah, around that individual. And we had a number of events that recurred for some time.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in your witness statement, you state that there was always a possibility that protesters would attempt another blockade, but to your knowledge, there was no intelligence suggesting that might occur. So is your evidence then that there was no credible threats of a blockade forming after the 14th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
My recollection of the intelligence briefings that I was getting was there were individual chatter, like individuals that would chatter about we need to go back, regroup and re-establish, but there was no update being shown on the open source information that we were receiving, and no information that was indicating that this was anything other than aspirational chatter from isolated individuals. And so I think it'd be fair to characterise that there was no intelligence surfaced that would indicate that was a real threat for that to evolve, but that's not to say that the police didn't take serious the possibility. I believe the RCMP remained, you know, present in some numbers in Milk River and in the area for some time afterwards, just to ensure that that didn't take place.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you ever briefed on any factors that would have led to there being no uptake of those kind of threats?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. Okay. Let's talk a bit more about towing capacity. So I understand that fairly early on, I believe February 1st, the Province began to make requests for towing resources; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That sounds right, yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And those requests were always for both tow trucks and tow operators?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So when I -- I'll refer to tow resources but ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Capacity, yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- I mean both.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was -- and I think you've already told us that those -- that capacity was critical and necessary if any enforcement action was to be taken?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
In the event of mass enforcement action. I guess I should clarify that, if ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- we were going to go and remove all of the protesters and remove the blockage, if the RCMP were to do that, that would absolutely have to be in place.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you tell us a little bit about the challenges the provinces faced in obtaining tow capacity?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
To begin with, the RCMP, as the police force of jurisdiction, made their efforts and they had some limited success very early on, very, very, very early on, first days, that that support dissolved from industry quite quickly. They went afield -- and that was local support. They went afield and garnered some limited support which also quite quickly dissolved. And then they were struggling after that to find any support anywhere, both within the province and commercially outside of the province, B.C., Saskatchewan. I believe they might even have looked to commercial entities in the south, but I'm not a hundred percent certain of that. I'll let them speak to that. They approached us to indicate the challenges they were facing, and they indicated that they were going through their channels to seek support from the Canadian government for the use of heavy lift capacity that exists at the Canadian Forces Base in Edmonton, and were looking for anything that we could do to assist in terms of just generally trying to work through that. We initially, when tasked with trying to support them, supported their call for Canadian Forces logistical support, and we also embarked on a process, sort of an evolving process of attempting to secure that lift capacity for them. The first was through revisiting the commercial entities that they contacted as the government to try and secure support for them. We were unable to gain any support that way. We looked afield to the City of Edmonton, City of Lethbridge, City of Calgary, industry, ATCO, those sorts of things, CNCP, colleagues to the south of the U.S. border, to try and look for any capacity that we could get there. We had some very limited success, in the sense that we had one city that was able to provide us with a heavy tow truck. And that’s a minor -- sort of like a loader type, and small crane support from another city. But not the equipment that the RCMP required. So in support of our ask to the Canadian Forces, we had the RMCP actually set out exactly what they needed for equipment, should they have to go to that type of enforcement action. And that was what constituted sort of our list of two trucks and capacity that we sought out for them. Eventually, we determined that there was not going to be a commercial avenue there, and it was becoming apparent that we weren’t going to get access to the tow capacity of CFB Edmonton. And we were able to, through a multiple number of sort of, you know, online sites, identify five vendors who had lift capacity, used two trucks, if you will, for sale. The commercial providers of those entities, it was a long waiting list to get anything from the actual manufacturers. We’d explored that already. We did manage to secure a small number on the weekend of I think it would have been the 12th. We had them in place down in Lethbridge and turned over to the RCMP, and by the 14th, had identified and were closing the deal on the remainder of the list, save two items, which were all, I believe, in place on the 15th, in the south, for the RCMP at their disposal.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could pull up ALB00000153? So I’ll have just a couple more specific questions on this topic, but you’ve provided great overviews. Thank you for that. So my understanding, and I think you’ve mentioned it, is that the RCMP had already made a request of Public Safety Canada for assistance from Canadian Armed Forces; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that they had declined to become involved? Is that your understanding?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can’t say that they declined to the RCMP to become involved. I can tell you that the RCMP indicated they weren’t seeing the support. Whether they had an answer or not, I really would have to defer to them, because I don’t recall them ever telling me whether they’d been formally told no.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know whether any other options were being explored other than the Canadian Armed Forces within the Federal Government for these kinds of resources?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can’t speak to specifically what options were being explored, whether they were looking at Transport Canada or other entities for their capacity. I did have conversations at various times with the Assistant Deputy Minister of Transport Canada, Kevin Brousseau, around our needs and around efforts that we were making. Along with what I’d described earlier, I’d also reached out to industry contacts within Alberta, as had our Transportation Department, to try and encourage them to help us in finding support. So I did ask Transport Canada’s ADM if he could reach into his contacts within industry and see if they could garner any support from us. Whether that materialized into any efforts or not, I would have to defer to Transport Canada on.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Let’s go to ALB0000097. So this is the February 5th letter from Minister McIver to Ministers Mendicino and Blair. Can you explain what the purpose of that letter was while it comes up?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’ll just have a quick peek. Oh, I believe this was the formal request for -- there had been informal conversations, as I’ve given to understand, before this. But this was a formal request from our Minister to the Federal Ministers for the deployment of those heavy lift capacity resources that the Canadian Forces possess in Alberta to assist us in removal of any equipment, should the RCMP go to an enforcement action. This was a formal request for that support.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And it says, we can see at the bottom of that first paragraph, at the end of the third to last line: “…the Royal Canadian Mounted Police […] have exhausted all local and regional options to alleviate the week-long service disruptions at this important international border.” So what was meant by that? That the RCMP had exhausted all options?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
As I described earlier, that’s their efforts to try and secure commercial or other, you know, industry or City support to provide those kinds of supports that they needed.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So that was only referring to towing capacity ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- is your understanding?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. Yeah, this letter was about towing capacity.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then if we can go to the second last paragraph? So you see there: “To support this approach, I[‘m] requesting federal assistance that includes the provision of equipment and personnel to move approximately 70 semi- tractor trailers and approximately 75 personal and recreational vehicles from the area.” So that was the request that was ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it was structured that way, as opposed to the way that the RCMP structured their request to us in the sense that -- or we have formal military personnel and indicate that you don’t actually ask for the equipment, you ask for the capacity and they determine the equipment.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And here it doesn’t specifically indicate that this was a request for Canadian Armed Forces resources, but was your understanding was that was what you were looking for?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly that was what we were looking for, although any capacity that could do that, whether it came from the CAF or some other branch of the Canadian Government would have been welcome.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you weren’t necessarily specifically aware of other sources?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I could think of no other source.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Certainly in-province.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that there was a conversation between Minister McIver and Minister Blair on February 7th, so two days later, following up on this request. And do you know what the response from Minister Blair was at that time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I -- off the top of my head now I can’t recall, but I think the response was something to the effect -- it might be in the Institutional ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I think your Institutional Report indicates ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that he raised some doubts about the use of ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- the CAF ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. Yeah. That’s where I was thinking he was indicating that they were having conversations with the Chief of Defence, but they weren’t -- it wasn’t positive.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
At that time, it wasn’t clear ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- either way?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it wasn’t looking like -- there was hesitation.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to ALB00001868? So these are the text messages between Ministers McIver and Blair.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
M’hm.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we go to page 2? If we could just go down? So February 8th, Minister Blair says: “Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I spoke to our Minister of Defence and conveyed the importance and urgency of an answer…” If you could keep going down? “… from CAF. She is speaking to the Chief of Defence Staff this morning and will advise.” You were advised that that had taken place; that they were in communications?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I was advised of that. I’d not, of course, seen the texts themselves until my preparation for the Inquiry, but I was advised that those conversations were taking place.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in parallel to this, as you’ve already described, the Province was undertaking its own steps to obtain these resources; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. To whatever ability we could, we were looking for anything we could find. (SHORT PAUSE)
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We’ll come back to this, but if we can go to ALB00001328? This is an email chain from February 12th; we can start at the bottom. So who is Rae-Ann Lajeunesse?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
At the time she was the Deputy Minister, if I’m mot mistaken, of Transport -- Transportation in the Government of Alberta.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so she writes to you that she’s communicating with Transport Canada, and that they’ve struck a working group, and that it would be a good idea to loop you into that conversation. And if we go up to the second email, you advise, and the federal government, as you see, is copied on this exchange; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
M’hm.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Transport Canada specifically, Mr. Keenan. You say: “[We’re] actually posed to make several purchases today as a matter of fact,...[the] number of vehicles identified for followup [sic].” So you were aware that you had communicated with the federal government that that was taking place at the same time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, yeah. And my apologies for the typo in there. It was, I believe, intended to say, “Poised” but it was also Saturday afternoon there.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sounds good. And you say: “Our biggest challenge appears to be obtaining operators at this time though we might be faster on equipment acquisition[s] if we can combine efforts.” And so were you -- were you of the view that you were making progress on the equipment, but the operators were still the largest issue?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. We were making progress. By then we’d acquired some of the list and we’re working on leads, some of which later fall through but others that ultimately proved fruitful on the 13th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that was one of the things you had asked the federal government for.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. It was my hope that we were searching out with our team for commercial capacity that we could purchase, and thought that perhaps the federal government could do the same and...
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could just go up to the top? So again there, third paragraph down, Transport Canada was coordinating a working group to support local police, provincial authorities, in securing truck and tractor removal capacity. So you were -- what was your understanding of those efforts; if you can describe that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I don’t -- I actually don’t have a lot of information around the efforts that were being made at the federal level. We did have a follow-up conversation the next day with ADM Brosseau and EWGSC representative prior to us actually completing the purchase of the last group of equipment, but I’m not sure what efforts they were actually undertaking at the federal level; it was unclear to me.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If you go to ALB00001468? So that same day you had communications with Kevin Brosseau. Who is he?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
He’s the Assistant Deputy -- at the time, he was Assistant Deputy Minister for Transport Canada.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And if we can go down, what were you providing him with here on February 12th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
This was on the 12th, so this was the remaining items from the list that the RCMP had provided us, which we had yet to acquire. So, of course, those were the items we were still looking to get, although I -- again, we had a deal pending later that day that ultimately fell through on much of this, and then we ended up acquiring it all on -- save for the top two items, we acquired the rest of those on the 13th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
On the 13th.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Well, they were in our possession, I think, the 14th, 15th, something like that.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The deal started on the 13th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we -- if we can -- so you provide him with the list. And then if we go up, oh, sorry; go down to the bottom, actually. I understand you guys had a phone call that day. What do you recall being discussed?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I think that was just a touch base -- and I’m going from vague recollection here so please, you know, know that this might not be 100 percent correct, but from my memory the conversation was fairly generic in the sense that we were touching base, talking about the fact that we needed to combine resources, and talking about what we had acquired, and what we were trying to acquire, and that was the trigger for my following email to him, giving him the list of what was outstanding. And, again, I’m going from memory, so I apologize if that’s not 100 percent accurate.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And your understanding at that time was that they were still working on the request?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
They’re working on ways to support us, that’s correct, yes. And in terms of the Canadian Forces request, yes.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did the Alberta government ever received a formal response to the February 5th request?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Not that I’m aware of.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we could go to PB.CAN.NSC00000690? So my understanding, and we’ll see this when the document comes up, is that this is a draft response to that request. If we go down a little bit, you’ll see, second paragraph: “Below is [a] current draft of RFA request response...” If we go down -- we’ll go down a little bit further. Sorry; down more. Okay. Oh, I’m sorry. Okay, so: “My colleagues and I have given your request serious consideration and we have consulted key partners to assess our ability to assist you. Given the lack of commercial resources, the Canadian Armed Forces...would be the only Federal asset that might potentially meet this request. Unfortunately, discussions have made clear that the CAF [sic] have neither the type of assets required, nor the expertise to do this without significant possible risk.” Was that sentiment ever communicated to you verbally, or in writing some other way?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Not like that, no. No. I know there’s -- from personal experience I know there’s hesitance on the part of the Canadian Armed Forces to be involved in any police-type actions domestically, and I understand that’s an issue of concern to them, and the Government of Canada, of course. I’ve obviously not received this.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It’s a draft, so I don’t think it was sent. We have former significantly high ranking Canadian Armed Forces officers who are now within the Government of Alberta, including lieutenant-colonels, colonels, brigadier- generals, major-generals, and a lieutenant-general who have experience in command of Canadian Armed Forces based in Alberta. I’m surprised to read that they thought that the assets -- they don’t have the assets required to move those vehicles, given that, you know, the Armed Forces based in, from my personal knowledge, in Alberta, has the assets to move tanks, Leopard tanks being very large. So they can recover, lift, load and move tanks. I would have thought they would have capacity for this, but I’m not with the Canadian Armed Forces. In terms of risk, one of the things that we made clear in our conversations internally in the RCMP -- I’ll let them speak to it but I’m hoping to make clear as well, is there would be no use of any Canadian Armed Forces personnel in an enforcement capacity. They wouldn't be meeting protesters on the ground. The RCMP would be responsible for clearing and making safe the area, and any heavy equipment movement would take place after that had taken place, and the CAF would have been there dealing with equipment, not people. So I'm not sure where the significant risk part comes from, but again, I can't speak to the CAF's response or the Government of Canada's response, so I'll let them explain their thinking on that.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I just want to look at this paragraph that starts with further. It says, "...I understand that Alberta has the required legal authorities necessary to enforce compliance, as a highway is considered essential infrastructure, and it is unlawful to wilfully obstruct, interrupt or interfere with the obstruction, maintenance use or operation of any essential infrastructure in a manner that renders the essential infrastructure dangerous, useless, inoperative, or ineffective as per the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act of Alberta. There are a number of contraventions or other applicable legislation that may also be enforced by Alberta and its police forces. I encourage you to look at the actions taken in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Ontario who have used new or existing authorities to safeguard critical infrastructure." Had this type of sentiment been communicated to you in your discussions with Federal Government that Alberta ought to be making better use of the enforcement authority at its disposal?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It had not been communicated to me, but candidly, it's a little off point to the request in the sense that the request was not for assistance in bringing laws to bear that would enable our officers to conduct enforcement actions. We had, as I indicated earlier, considered all of the legislative authority that was available in the toolbox for law enforcement to deal with this and felt that there was sufficient -- I would agree with the statement that there are sufficient legislative authorities within existence at the time to give the police the authority to act. The challenge was that to support their actions in that manner and to ultimately remove those vehicles, we required a logistical capacity that the police lacked, not a legislative authority, but a logistical capacity, and we were looking to the Government of Canada and the Canadian Armed Forces to help augment that logistical capacity gap. Candidly, the police already knew about these -- this legislation.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the police didn't request any additional enforcement authorities?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to PB.CAN.00001514. So this is a call -- notes or -- yeah, notes from a call on February 13th between Assistant Deputy Minister Dalkalbab and Brousseau. I believe you participated in this call and there was ADMs from Manitoba, Ontario, Alberta. You recall this?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I recall the conversation with Talal and ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can just go down, there's a bullet marked "Alberta" in bold and I'd like to look at the second bullet under that, "[Alberta requests CAF support --] Alberta requests for CAF support have been denied, but they are surprised that their request to access Reservists with operational skills needed to drive towing trucks was not accepted (this part of the request is news to us and we committed to follow up on this specific point)." I should clarify, these are notes taken on the I believe Transport Canada side. Was your understanding from this call that the request for the towing trucks denied?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct. There was also -- and I think, for clarity around the Reservist piece, there was another proposal that was being communicated and I can't tell you through what channel, but it was to -- for the Canadian Armed Forces and the Government of Canada to consider the use of some of the Reservists that might have operator skills to operate heavy lift equipment, should we acquire it. We had some that were identified, but we could use a few more. And if there were Reservists within the Canadian Armed Forces who by virtue of their experience in their trades might have that skillset, we'd proffered up the idea that perhaps we could use them, either on a -- you know, as a hired capacity to us or through whatever mechanism might make sense to the CAF, on their own time to support us. And the response that I was made aware of was that that would not be considered.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That -- sorry, that the ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Use of those Reservists would not be considered.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Would not be considered. And was your understanding from this call that Transport Canada had not considered the part of the request with respect to operators?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that Reservist portion. That was actually ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Only the Reservist portion.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- something that neither Dalal or Transport -- the ADM from Public Safety Canada or his colleague from TC had indicated they were aware of, but they were going to look into that.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can -- Mr. Clerk, I don't know if you still have that text message exchange available that I said I would come back to.
The Clerk (POEC)
Were those the texts with -- from Coutts?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No, Minister Blair and Minister McIver.
The Clerk (POEC)
It would take me a moment, but it may be quicker if you can provide the ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, I'm just ---
The Clerk (POEC)
Yeah. Sorry.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- looking for it here.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Maybe it's ALB1868 maybe?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, sounds like there's a consensus. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. I know I'm coming up on my time here. I have I'd say maybe five minutes left, if that's okay.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could go to page 3? If we could go down? So there was a follow-up on February 10th and February 21st, and your understanding is there was no answer from the Minister before the invocation of the Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, based on the text exchange that I see here, yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you had ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in the call on the 13th, you were aware through Transport Canada they would not be providing the tow truck resources?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
They had not been able to provide that, and I was aware from other conversations that the CAF were not ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- looking to assist.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so I'll just look at the response here from Minister Blair on February 21st, "You may be aware that we invoked the Emergenc[ies] Act on February 15, which addressed the tow truck issue quite effectively. Happy to answer any questions you may have although..." And we can continue, "...I am sure the RCMP can advise you on how it works. A letter will be forthcoming." You can keep going. "I understand [...] Prime Minister spoke to Premier Kenney about the Emergenc[ies] Act, but I..." You can keep going. "...will ensure correspondence follows to you." And then Minister McIver responds, "We received no help until after Coutts issue was resolved and you know thaat [sic] Disappointed to hear you say otherwise." Keep going to the next page. "As I was disappointed to learn of your reaction to our efforts to respond to the threat to critical infrastructure and the integrity of our International borders posed by these illegal blockades. Fortunately the CACP, the OACP, [and] RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police have been clear and unequivocal that these measures have been essential to their efforts to [...]solve the criminal blockades and occupations. We are all grateful that the RCMP was able to resolve the very dangerous situation at Coutts safely.” Keep going to the next page. “What is true is that Coutts was resolved on the 14th. And we got our own tow trucks after you could no [not] help.” I guess. Continue. “Your letter speaks for itself.” “As does your lack of response until too late…” Getting to the end. “To be clear. Is your point that we should have invoked the Emergenc[ies] Act earlier?” “No. You were too late and did the wrong thing. My point is saying nothing now would have been better than not telling the truth.” I wanted to ask you about this last text from Minister McIver that you were too late and did the wrong thing. What is that in reference to? If you have an understanding ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it’s ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of what that could be in reference to?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it’s very difficult for me to put my head directly into the mind of Minister McIver. Candidly, though, my understanding and interest from this, based on our global conversations within the GOA, were that we didn’t require a legislative authority of the Emergency Act to resolve our issue. We required logistical help that was available in-province. And it was denied to us. So we found a different way to address it. That is, bought the tow trucks ourselves.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s, again, in the absence of being able to have spoken to him directly on this, that’s my sense of it.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Understood. Thank you. Just a last topic here that won’t take me very long, my understanding is that a First Minister’s meeting was held on February 14th, where the Federal government consulted with the Premiers of the provinces on the potential use of the Emergencies Act. You’re generally aware of that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m aware that that took place, yes. That there was a meeting of the First Ministers on the 14th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge of whether Premier Kenney was provided with advanced notice of that First Minister’s meeting?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, I personally was not involved in the conversations, but I’m aware and have viewed information from our Premier’s office and his Chief of Staff that outlines the fact that the Premier was not provided with advanced notice. There’s normally a process for engaging in the setting of First Minister’s meetings, which will often be a week or more in advance, with agendas and topics. The information provided from our Premier’s office is that there was no advance notice and there was no advance notice of topic, there was no time to gather information or brief the Premier on the Emergencies Act because it was unclear. We didn’t have notice of that being the ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- meeting on the 14th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much, Mr. Degrand. Those are all my questions.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Well I think we can take the morning break at this point. So we’ll take 15 minutes and come back to proceed with the primary examination and cross- examination. So 15-minute break.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you so much.
The Registrar (POEC)
The Commission is in recess for 15 minutes. La Commission est levée for 15 minutes.
Upon recessing at 11:09 a.m.
Upon resuming at 11:24 a.m.
The Registrar (POEC)
Order. À l’ordre. The Commission is reconvened. La Commission reprend.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
You’re okay?
ADM MARLIN DEGRAND, Resumed
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, sir.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. First I’d like to call on the Government of Canada, please.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRENDAN van NIEJENHUIS
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Mr. Degrand, I’m Mr. Brendan van Niejenhuis. I’m one of the lawyers for the government of Canada in this matter.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Good morning.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Sir, in response to the series of questions you were just asked about whether Premier Kenney was consulted about the setting of the First Minister’s meeting, I believe you said that this was the information available to you from the Premier’s office? Is that right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And that is not information that we have seen under oath or affirmation? Is that fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I could -- I will assume that’s the case. I’ve not bee following all the proceedings. My apologies.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You’re not aware of that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m not aware of that, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And you, yourself, were not, I take it, present at the First Minister’s meeting?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And likewise, you were not personally present for Premier Kenney’s telephone conversations with the Minister of Public Safety, for example?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Or the Prime Minister; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And there’s nothing you’re aware of that disables former Premier Kenney from swearing his own affidavit about these matters?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m not familiar enough with the proceeding to even comment on that, but no.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You’re not aware of anything that disables him from testifying before this Commission, should he had wished to do so?
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
This is Stephanie Bowes. Counsel for Alberta. I think we’re getting into asking this witness a legal question about whether or not there’s anything that prevents the former Premier from swearing an affidavit.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
I’m not sure it’s a legal question. I’m wondering if the witness is aware of anything that disables the former Premier from doing so.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Well and actually, with all due respect, actually I would suggest that I’m not a lawyer and I wouldn’t actually probably be qualified for that. I’m not aware of that, but there could very well be things there that I’m not aware of.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. Fair enough. Let’s turn to you, sir. You were an Assistant Commissioner of the RCMP until 2018? Is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And so you understand while here what Deputy Commissioner Zablocki and the other RCMP officers involved in the Coutts blockade went through; yes?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I have a sense of it. I was obviously not on the ground, but -- and I was not operational at the time, but I have previous experiences that would certainly inform on that.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And you respect Deputy Commission Zablocki and his service in the discharge of his duties in respect of Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Absolutely, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And everywhere K Division of the RCMP policed the Province of Alberta during these events; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, so I have a great deal of respect for Commissioner Zablocki and his command team.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You became an Assistant Deputy Minister with Alberta Justice in 2018, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s actually not quite correct. I started as an executive -- my apologies; you would have no way of knowing this, sir, so I started as an Executive Director. So as sort of -- I reported to the Assistant Deputy Minister at the time, Bill Sweeney, and I became the ADM in 2021. Sorry; I just want to be factually accurate.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
No, no, I appreciate that. Just going with ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. No, of course you would have no way to know that, so...
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You swore the Province’s Institutional report in this proceeding as well, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I did, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And we’ll come back to that. Now, in the Province of Alberta this situation, if I can call it that, began really on January the 29th; is that accurate?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, from memory, that’s ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
In terms of the beginnings of the ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it was ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- blockade.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- the slow roll, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if we go to ALB00001010, at page 2. Just pull up the initial report about it to you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sure, thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If you go down to page 2, please. You see that -- I take it it’s Peter Tewfik, I think, reporting to you about the blockage of the roads north and south to the Coutts border, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. That would be now- Chief Superintendent -- I’m not sure if he was at the time -- Peter Tewfik with the RCMP.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay, okay. And it says in the second-last -- subsequent paragraph there: “The organizers...have made calls to [the] participants to move their vehicles but the message has been ignored.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And strategies are being worked on to get those who are participating in the stoppage to get roadways moving again, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. If we go up to the first page, you see a report; moving just a little further up the page, there’s a report on the officers who are deployed. Just to the top, please. There we go. And you see the report from Jason Delaney to Rick Gardner, is that from the Alberta Sheriffs; you’ve got 12 members deployed at Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s correct. Yeah, that’s on the 29th.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And three of them had been reassigned from Coaldale, two reassigned from Redcliff and two are sent in from Lethbridge on overtime, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Three from Coaldale, two from Coutts on the first day shift, and then the evening, yeah, three from Coutts, two reassigned from Redcliff and two from overtime, yeah, that’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And the RCMP’s supplying 25, CBSA a dozen, and the Canadian Pacific Railway Police and an off -- a single officer.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s what it says. Yes, correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Can we go to ALB00001312, page 2. If we just go to page 2, please. This will be a Tweet from the Premier issued on -- or Tweeted on January the 30th, it says: “The blockade of the Coutts border crossing violates the Alberta Traffic Safety Act. [It’s] causing significant inconvenience for lawful motorists and can dangerously impede movement of emergency service vehicles. This blockade must end.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if you’d flip over to page 3, you’ll see that he issues a longer statement which is to the -- which is really to the same effect, yes?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And this had no effect on the Coutts process -- this had no immediate effect on the Coutts protest, did it?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I -- it would be difficult for me to say what individualized effect it had, but, ultimately, we still had a blockade.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You still had a blockade. Okay. Can we go to ALB00001257, please? And this is a report which comes to you. If you could just move down the page, please? A bit further down, there we go. And you see it’s being reported to you now Tuesday the 1st of February, that you’re receiving information about new blockades on the highway by Fort Macleod, on Highway 3 by Pincher Creek, and calls to block Highway 43 West of Grand Prairie, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And did you interpret those as being a blockade sympathetic in spirit to the blockades at Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If they in fact were accurate, that would’ve been the assumption that was being made. But we just were making sure that that information was passed on to the RCMP, who were also hearing that. And I believe the -- at least two of the three might’ve had some activity, but it was resolved reasonably quickly.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go to ALB1263, please; ALB00001263. This is a February 1st intelligence assessment provided to you, sir.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And just want to make a few highlights here of what is brought to your attention, as well as that of some of your colleagues, from PSIO; that’s the Provincial Security Office?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it’s the Provincial Security Intelligence Office.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Thank you. So the first point is that there doesn’t appear to be centralized leadership at this blockade, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
It emerged from the so-called Freedom Convoy Movement, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Emerged from in the sense that it’s inspired by and in support of, that’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if we go to item b: “There [doesn’t] appear to be any overt direction being given between the Coutts blockade and Ottawa ‘Freedom Convoy’ organizers.” Although this is possible, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Anything’s possible, but there was no information or intelligence to support that. Although that, of course, was one of the things that our -- the law enforcement agencies was lucky to determine.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. It refers, in the last sentence, under b there to be: “...one of the spin-off support events for the Ottawa convoy that gained its own momentum and now appears to be self-supporting.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yeah. “Individuals outside of the blockade location appear to be acting as entrepreneurs in organizing support and logistics.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You were seeing that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s what the information intelligence as being reported to me was; of course I relied on that.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. If you go further down the page, you see already that there are: “Individuals on pro-blockade social media groups...organizing phone campaigns to threaten tow companies with financial repercussions, and to set up boycotts of companies they believe have acted in support of [the] police.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Is that a serious concern to you at that point already?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It was because it was, of course, one of those factors that was limiting the cooperation that the RCMP were able to gain from that industry.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go down the page further then to spin-off actions, there’s: “Social media comments [calling on] blockade supporters to block in police to prevent them from removing vehicles from the...site.” Correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, those are individual comments that were out there, that’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And you’re also hearing from your: “Law enforcement partners...that support convoys have bypassed (or...broken through) police blockades to deliver [supplies].” Yeah?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s correct. There was even reports of vehicles, such as farm implements and tractors, coming across country over -- instead of on road to get to the site. It’s a very open area and it’s very difficult to contain and secure.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
The PSIO was reporting that social media messages are: “...promoting a decentralized blockade of highways throughout Alberta.” Yes?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, there were individuals out there calling for spontaneous action around the province in support of the blockade. Very little materialized other than the main concerns that emerged in Edmonton and Calgary, although as I indicated earlier, there were some small ones; I think you saw them, at Fort Macleod, in Taber, like I mentioned earlier, and a few others.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go just to the very bottom of the page now and see the last section here. “Intelligence Gaps”; do you see that section?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I do, sir. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And the to -- this refers to areas where there just isn’t visibility, from an intelligence perspective, as to the identity of the leaders and their level of influence at the blockade site, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, yeah. It was very difficult to find true, defined leadership.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And you’ve got an intelligence gap about how much support is likely to manifest in the real world from the calls for decentralized blockade action.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Exactly, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Got it. Let’s go now, please, to ALB00001620. This is a February 1st report concerning what’s referred to as a brawl near the blockade.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Are you familiar with that ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I think know which one you’re referencing but I’ll...
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Did you happen to observe the testimony of Mr. Van Huigenbos?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, I did not actually, sir. Sorry.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. If you go down the page, it says that you’re reporting here that you assume others are well aware of this, but if you go down the page, we’ll just see what’s reported out to you. Here we go. And this is a report about how the - - if you look at the third sentence: “The crowd had [became] increasingly hostile at [and] made threats against...members [that is law enforcement members] at the checkpoint, to the point where they surrounded the members.” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And the protesters pushed through the vehicles with their vehicles and collided with vehicles travelling northbound on Highway 14?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that's -- it is my understanding of it is the officers at this -- at the checkpoint moved their vehicles to avoid any collision and then vehicles from the checkpoint began to traverse southward. At least one was in the northbound lane and collided with another vehicle that was northbound in the northbound lane, and that is when -- the reference to the brawl is there was a confrontation that ensued between the participants in the collision, that the RCMP and sheriffs on scene had to break up.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yes, and I know you didn't have a chance to observe it, but when we were here with Mr. Van Huigenbos, I believe we watched a video of that incident taken by the driver.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh. Oh, okay. Interesting. Yeah, sorry, I haven't seen that.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Well, you can go back and watch ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I will. Thank you, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go now please to ALB00001313? This will be a February 2nd report, sir, on the social media intelligence work ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- being done by PSIO.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
In this case, you'll see that you're being informed that from a web and social media perspective, the term bear hug is a rising search query. Do you see that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct. I think that was information from other Ministries. Deputy Ministers were receiving intelligence that over various social media platforms, I think Facebook and others, that people were calling for a bear hug, which was a call to sort of obstruct traffic throughout the province.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go to ALB00001611, this is still on the 2nd of February and it's reporting on events in Calgary also associated with this phrase bear hug.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Just go down the page. There we go. So this is a report coming in about -- with respect to an, ""Operation Bear Hug" calling for truckers to block major highways in Alberta..." And at the top there's an Operation Bear Hug in Calgary intended to support the convoy on the 5th of February, which is the upcoming weekend; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, yeah. I guess it's important to ensure that it's -- this is characterised as aspirational intelligence. These are people that are trying to develop these things. I don't think we ever developed significant intelligence in this area, but certainly there were some sporadic and small-scale events.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You'll see in that second paragraph that there's a, whatever you want to call it, forward-looking intelligence that there's a plan to gather near the Minister's house?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if you go down the page a bit, just to scan through it, you'll see that there's events being reported on -- in the Southern Region, North Central, Fort McMurray Regions and Peace Region; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, the -- if you're looking at the North Central Region, those are unconfirmed reports, and then Peace Region, again, unconfirmed reports of activity around there, or plans, a planned activity.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Calls to block every road?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. Those were calls, yeah. That's correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
This term "bear hug", are you familiar with that term as having been promoted by an outfit called Canada Unity and a gentleman by the names James Bauder?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I'm not actually, no, I'm sorry. I'm at a bit of a disadvantage here, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
That's fair enough. At any rate, it's clear by February the 2nd when you're receiving these reports that there's the potential for police resources becoming somewhat stretched in the province; is that fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, absolutely, depending on how things manifest themselves and evolve, but that's certainly the point of the intelligence was to make police aware.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And the RCMP is police of jurisdiction under contract with the Province of Alberta are responsible to police the whole of the province and not just Coutts; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, although there are, as I indicated earlier, municipal forces in Lacombe, for instance, in Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, et cetera.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Absolutely. Fair enough. Aside from the municipal police services.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, and the First Nation Services. That's correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go to ALB -- go back to ALB00000543, please? This will be the letter from Deputy Commissioner ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, okay. Yeah, the ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- Zablocki ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- Article 9, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
The invocation of 9.1.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay. Yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. So if we just move down the page, and the end of the first paragraph, do you see -- well, you told us that you greatly respect Deputy Commissioner Zablocki's judgment as a police officer; fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, sir, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And you see that Deputy Commissioner Zablocki indicates in the last sentence of the first paragraph that, "This situation does, in my opinion, constitute an emergency in the province of Alberta."
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I see that, yes, correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And do you consider that a reasonable assessment on his part?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Insofar as it's pertaining to the Provincial Police Services Agreement, yes. And I guess there's some context there, sir, in the sense that the Provincial Police Services Agreement under Article 9 envisions situations which would require the movement of resources to support major events, emergencies, et cetera, as defined -- as they pertain to that Act -- or that agreement, that contract, if you will. It's a little different than, say, perhaps our provincial Emergency Act or perhaps the Federal Act, but I'm ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Got you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- just not sure.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Got you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I just don't want to conflate the two different definitions.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
No, that's fair enough. If you look at the second paragraph, he refers to this urgent and critical situation being what warrants him requesting the extraordinary application of the emergency provisions in the agreements; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, yeah, you betcha.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And that is going to involve bringing in -- or transferring in more RCMP officers from places other than Alberta; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Not only that, but also movement of officers within Alberta from different business lines to -- because there are provincial policing business lines. There are also municipal business lines and federal lines. And it would allow him to dip into those resources as well as resources external to the province, to augment his provincial police service and give them the resources they need to manage the event.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to ALB00001177? And if you bring them in from other provinces particularly though, what it means is you've got less police available in those provinces to police those jurisdictions; fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct. When we receive such requests for our officers as well, one of the first questions we ask is, of course, what is the impact on core policing and it's up to the commanding officer of that division that's sending them to determine whether those can be sent in a manner that's safe.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And here you're reporting about the information you've received from provincial colleague in British Columbia about the planned events there; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Those were the intelligence pieces that they were hearing, that's correct. And they were hearing aspirational information as well around Saskatchewan and Manitoba, I believe, in that conversation I had with my colleague.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And all three of those are provinces which also rely upon the RCMP as a primary police of jurisdiction outside of those municipalities large enough to have their own service?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And so those protests could likewise draw exceptionally on local resources in order to maintain order if that had to be done by the RCMP; fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If they materialise to certain levels, I'm sure they could, but I'm not sure whether they did or not.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to ALB00000528, please? The bottom of the page, please. I might have the wrong reference, so never mind. You became aware that there were protests planned for Edmonton the weekend of February 4th and 5th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that sounds right, sir. Yeah, it does, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And a considerable number of vehicles, I think several thousand showed up according to the Institutional Report?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct, yeah, there's multiple points of origin and they converged in Edmonton there and the Edmonton Police, the sheriffs working with assistance from the RCMP were tasked with managing that event.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
February 4th is the Friday heading into this weekend, I think?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's -- yeah, from memory, that sounds right.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Now did you have an opportunity to hear Mayor Willett testify yesterday?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I did not, sir. I've been kind of careful to avoid too much just because I didn't want to colour my own opportunity here and ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
I'm sure you have other things to do as well, so let's go -- we heard from Mayor Willett -- if we could call up COU00000016. We heard Mayor Willett testify yesterday about his perspective on the ground really, from the ground level at Coutts.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And this will be a text exchange with Minister Sawhney that he tendered ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- into evidence yesterday ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- through Commission Counsel. Could we go to page 7, please? Here we see an indication from him on February 4th that an Artur Pawlowski had showed up and fired everyone up at the Coutts protest site to convince them to stay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
M'hm.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Are you aware of that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I actually am aware of that event, yes, from the RCMP's reporting, not from this conversation.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to PB.CAN.00001835? This is the multimedia file that we had yesterday. And I'm going to ask to play this from --- (VIDEO PLAYBACK)
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- the 2:07 mark until 4:18. (VIDEO PLAYBACK)
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Thank you. Have you seen that speech before by Artur Pawlowski?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, I haven't actually.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Do you hear that he is singling out Premier Kenney as the source of the problem and I believe he referred to Kenney's mafia?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that's what I heard, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And he said, "This is our Alamo," referring I take it to a -- the standoff at the Alamo in Texas?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's what I assume the reference.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And he points to the international attention that has been gathered and says, "That's power"; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to COU00000016? This similarly we heard from Mayor Willett about, and it is the same series of text exchanges, and I just want to address one other factual issue that was circulating.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Page 9. Okay. You see he refers here in this instant message, again, with Minister Sawhney, to a gentleman named Paul Brandt; do you see that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I do, sir, thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And he's referring to a Rebel News story and saying that, "In my opinion Paul Brandt should post a clarification on the Rebel news story that he helicoptered in aid." Familiar with that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I'm familiar with the -- this story, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Or the rumour about that, yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, you bet.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go down the page? And you see that Mayor Willett indicates that that's not in fact true, that this photograph that was circulating of Paul Brandt was five years old; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Correct. That's what it says there.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Paul Brandt is a -- just for the benefit of whoever doesn't know, is a well-known internationally successful country musician from Alberta; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And there was a rumour in fact that he was going to come and perform a concert in support of the Coutts blockaders; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That was one of the two rumours that we heard involving Mr. Brandt.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if we go to page 13, you see Minister Sawhney still on the next day, February the 6th, she's asking, "Was food dropped off to the protesters by helicopter?" Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yeah, and that's the character of the rumour that was going on about Paul Brandt, that he had dropped off food by helicopter; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Well, I don't see his name on this text, but certainly that was one of the rumours. Whether there was other rumours that the Minister was hearing about other helicopter drops, there -- and I'm not even sure, I think by this point, the NOTAM or the Notice to Airmen restricting air space might have been in place as well, so that might have been -- I don't want to put myself in the mind of the Minister as to what she was ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Sure. According to Mayor Willett at least, he says, "Rebel rented a chopper and made a video."
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
It's what circulated. Is that accord with your recollection of what happened there?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
See, I'm not familiar with any information around Rebel News renting a chopper, but certainly that's the post from the -- that was from the mayor.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we can go to ALB00001444? And I just want to suggest at any rate that what - - this notion about Paul Brandt renting a helicopter, coming to drop off food, putting on a concert, that was disinformation; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I believe it was. We actually conveyed that to the RCMP, and they had conversations with Mr. Brandt's personnel, and they claimed they -- they indicated that they have no intention of providing a concert there and did not violate the NOTAM.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And if you go to the bottom of this page, this is a report to you from your PSIO Director; yes?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that's correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
On February 6th, and at that point, at 3:27 in the afternoon, he is saying that there's no credible public information confirming this Brandt helicopter story, but it appears plausible based on the aircraft itself. I'm sorry ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, we share the same speed of talking, sir. Sorry. Yes, I do read that. There's -- that's based on the photograph that was received. What I was hearing from Mr. McAuley was that there's nothing to state that this actually happened. The helicopter in the picture appears consistent with that used by Mr. Brandt, but there's nothing to indicate, you know, whether he did what was being rumoured to have been done, that is resupply. And even if that was the case, it would appear that it would have taken place prior to any Notice to Airmen restrictions on the airspace being in place.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yes, okay. And that's the NOTAM that's referred to there, the Notice to Airmen?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, that's correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to ALB00001626? This is a report to you raised for your attention, I think again on February the 7th now, so the Monday.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Or the Tuesday.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
February 7th. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Monday. Monday it is. If you go down to the bottom indication that's being forwarded up to you, "A regional stakeholder raised the following concern: there is the risk [that] many of the protesters [referring to Coutts] are armed with firearms kept in their tractor trailers and trucks. Violence is possible." Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, that's what came to me from -- ultimately, through the -- through Mr. Buffin.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And that if -- and that proved to be the case, ultimately; did it not?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I'm not sure where the firearms were found, if there were any found in trucks, in cabs, but certainly, ultimately, firearms were found and seized there. This was early information that I, of course, immediately passed along to the RCMP who were managing the event.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. We'll hear from Deputy Commissioner Zablocki about that when he testifies - --
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, absolutely.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
This in any event, if true, as it proved to be, made it a very dangerous situation and raised serious officer safety and public safety risks?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, if -- yeah, absolutely. The presence of firearms at any dispute of this nature could potentially be dangerous, and as any event that the police deal with.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
On February the 7th, are you aware that Artur Pawlowski was arrested and charged with offences including mischief over $5,000 and interrupting the operation of critical infrastructure?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I am aware, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to ALB00001087? This is February the 9th. It's being reported up to you that sheriffs, Alberta sheriffs sprayed two protesters with, that’s pepper spray.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And that that’s because two protesters reportedly moved towards the sheriff’s sergeants and refused warnings to stop; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. I do have a bit more information that was developed since that initial sort of heads-up, if you will. It did appear that the individuals -- I’d better be careful because I don’t want to conflate two incidents.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So we’ll leave it at that.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Maybe not -- really just the raw fact that this was reported to you, is all I’m asking.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
In terms of your state of mind at the moment.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. I apologize, yeah, that’s probably the best. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And go to ALB00001307. Can we go to the bottom email, please? This is an email reporting in on protests occurring that Friday night and over the weekend at the Calgary Remand Centre.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Sorry; the very bottom, please, page 4. Okay. Scheduled protest at the Calgary Remand Centre; are you aware of those protests in sympathy with Artur Pawlowski?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I was, that it was in relation to Mr. Pawlowski.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And they ended up continuing for seven straight days.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That sounds right. I don’t have that specific number in my memory.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Can we go to the Institutional Report, ALB.IR.00000001? And to page 18, please? Okay. This is indicating -- first of all, go down the page. I think we’re looking for the weekend of February 12 and 13. Maybe just keep going, I may have the page wrong. Yeah, please continue. There we go, right between 12 and 13. The City of Edmonton obtained an injunction for the weekend of February 12 and 13 as a result of the prior weekend’s events; yes?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m not sure what their motivation was, but certainly in anticipation of the events that they were seeing being planned from there, they obtained an injunction for that weekend, that’s for sure.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Can you go to paragraph 80 on this page? You’ll see there’s a report of about 840 vehicles in Edmonton, down from 3,000 the weekend before. But what I’m concerned about here is at the end of the paragraph: “...200 protestors from the ‘Liberty’ march moved towards the counter- protesters in an apparent attempt to remove them...” Right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, there was a counter- protest that evolved that was going to confront the protesters and stop them from doing -- demonstrating and doing their drive- through. There was going to be a confrontation, and the Edmonton Police Service reports that they intervened and separated the parties and allowed for the protest to carry on.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And the risk of violence dramatically escalates when you’re dealing with a counter-protest situation; is that fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If allowed to come to physical contact with each other it’s much more difficult to keep it peaceful.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Can we go to COU0000002? This would be one of the last exchanges I want to go to with respect to Mayor Willett, who testified yesterday.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sure.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And this is an exchange with Bill Graveland. And it’ll be page 3, please.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And it is dated as of February 12th, so two days before the Emergencies Act. And move down the page. All right. You see there, Mayor Willett says: “Good morning, Bill.” And he refers to, you know: “...need to find someone in a protected position to call these guys what they are, Domestic Terrorists.” Do you see that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I do see that, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And Mr. Graveland says: “Honestly, I had a number of run in’s several years ago with the Freemen on the land. After an unpleasant exchange with some of them at the saloon, I realized that’s likely what they are. Sorry you’re going through this.” Do you see that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I see that. That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And do you know what “Freemen on the land” refers to?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I’m familiar with the term.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
It’s been found, and I think by Associate Chief Justice Rooke, and described as an organized method of disrupting court operations and frustrating the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, the tactic is organized, that’s for sure. Yeah, Justice Rooke’s deliberation ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
--- is very accurate.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yeah, he has a very well-known decision that you may be familiar with from 2012 on that point.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Meads and Meads, I believe.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’ll take your work for it, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
That’s fine, you can take my word for that.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I believe you, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Could we go to PB.CAN.00001834? (SHORT PAUSE)
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And, sir, I’ll ask if we can go to -- well, this is a decision issued one week ago today ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- by Associate Chief Justice Rooke, and if we can go to the last page, page 16 at paragraph 69 and 70.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
I just want to point out to you for your reaction that the view of Associate Chief Justice Rooke expressed last week, in paragraph 70 is that the litigation abuse he’s describing here, “...is part of a broader pattern.” In that: “The law in Alberta is not adequate to control abusive litigants.” Do you see that? Paragraph 70 in the middle.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Seven zero?
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yeah.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I see that, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And that’s a -- well, I won’t ask you to comment on your agreement with the Court. Could we go, now, to February the 14th. You understand that on February 14th, the arrests occurred at Coutts, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Approximately at 2:00 p.m. that day, Mountain Time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I thought it was 2:00 a.m., sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So, like, into the evening of the 13th and -- sorry.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
At approximately 7:00 a.m. Mountain Time, Premier Kenney attended the First Ministers meeting, which you referred to earlier.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Can we go to SAS00000120? These are the notes produced by the Government of Saskatchewan with respect to the statements made at that meeting. We’ve got only what is rehearsed into the Institutional Report from Alberta. So I just want to -- thank you. If we go down to the bottom of this page where there’s notes with respect to Premier Kenney’s statements, you see the last few lines there, this is Jason Kenney speaking from about ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I see his name.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
You see that section?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
So just looking at the last comments that are attributed in here: “See it as very serious provocation. Could prove a net negative. PJs can compel...tow drivers. Please stop the trucker vaccine mandate. Language provocation. Don’t quibble if necessary.” Do you have any awareness of what was -- what ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If I could just have one moment?
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Can I quickly read through this? (SHORT PAUSE)
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay. Go ahead, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if we can then go to SSM.NSC.CAN00002941? And I’ll... Yes, Commissioner, I know I’m right at the edge. I’ll probably be about two or three minutes, if that’s acceptable?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Yeah, I don’t think you’re done.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Oh.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
So -- on my count, but ---
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay, then I’ll keep ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
But I do appreciate your honesty with this.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
I’ll keep my mouth shut in the future when I guess wrong.
The Clerk (POEC)
Apologies, counsel; could you please repeat that doc ID?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I have you having another five minutes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Just so you know.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
All right. And so it’s SSM.CAN ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Another -- well, let’s see. No, another four minutes; sorry.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
SSM.NSC.CAN.00002941. And this is another set of notes produced in -- from the Mr. Klau (phonetic), ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- who will testify in front of this Commission. (SHORT PAUSE)
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
If we go to page 22, and I’m sorry these are sideways. It’s a limitation of the ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
--- product, I think. And can you scroll down the page? There were go.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Doi you see on the right-hand side of Mr. Klau’s (phonetic) notes, with respect to Mr. Kenney’s statements during the First Minister’s meeting; do you want to just take a look at that for a moment?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Since I have the luxury of four minutes.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. No, I understand, yeah.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Go ahead. (SHORT PAUSE)
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay. Thank you.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And so you see that others have it here, again this word “quibble”. Mr. Klau has written, attributed to Mr. Kenney, “I don’t quibble with the use of the Act, but other ways to reduce tensions.” Do you see that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I see that, yes.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And in fairness to you, you’re not able to speak to whether or not that’s an accurate reflection of what Premier Kenney said because you weren’t present; fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s very fair.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And this meeting occurs approximately -- well, some hours after the RCMP arrests are made at Coutts; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And it occurs in a context where -- and I’ll just ask you if you’re aware of this - - approximately 2,000 firearms were missing, having been stolen in a trailer in Peterborough, Ontario, which had not been recovered for some days.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m not aware of that, actually.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Fair enough.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sorry, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Fair enough. We’ll deal with it in other evidence. At any rate, the Act is invoked at approximately 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Now, just coming back briefly to some of the content of the institutional report, if we could pull that up for just a couple of last questions, ALB.IR.0000001, to page 7. Paragraph 34. I think there’s a disjoint in the numbering. You can’t speak to and were not present for Premier Kenney’s calls with Minister Mendicino; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if you look at page 8, paragraph 38, you likewise, I take it, were not present for Minister McIver’s call with Minister Blair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. I’m relying on the information that we provided with the Institutional Report on both cases.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Yes. And again, that information is provided -- is not provided under oath other than to the extent that your affidavit says you have heard it.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And page 9, then, please. Again, it’s paragraph 43. And I take it I’ll get the same answer, but you were not present for this further call between Premier Kenney and Minister Mendicino?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And if we go to page 3, finally, paragraphs 2 and 3, you see there it is stated or asserted that in the end of paragraph 2 Alberta received “virtually no consultation from Canada in its decision to invoke the Emergencies Act as applicable to Alberta and the entirety of the country.” Fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s fair, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
And that’s really a matter of -- that’s characterization.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I’m sorry?
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Is that your characterization or is that the province’s position?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That would be the province’s position, and certainly from my personal experience, I received no consultation.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Well, we’ve heard areas where you were engaged with other colleagues.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. Post. That’s correct, sir.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Paragraph 3, you say -- at the end of that paragraph: “...Canada failed to provide any assistance upon Alberta’s request to simply borrow equipment from them.” And is that how you would encapsulate the dialogue that you were engaged in with Transport Canada and others?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, sir. I’m not sure that it would be fair to say they didn’t try. I would suggest, though, that we received no assistance.
Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel (GC)
Okay. Well, we’ll hear from the others about that. Thank you, sir. Those are my questions.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you very much, sir.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next I’d like to call on the Convoy Organizers.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRENDAN MILLER
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Good morning, sir.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Good morning, or good afternoon. How are you?
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Oh, good afternoon. Right.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I had to check. Sorry, sir.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
My name’s Brendan Miller. I’m counsel for Freedom Corp, which represents the protestors that were in Ottawa only, nobody at Coutts, between January and February ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Pleased to meet you.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
--- of 2022. So I just want to dive right in. So -- and I don’t want to ask for anything subject to Criminal Code sealing orders or things and just based on what I know from the public record about this group that ended up being arrested at the border in Coutts area with respect to the conspiracy to commit murder and all of that. It’s my understanding that the RCMP undercover agents -- and this is based on the public record -- were involved with those -- that group from a very early point. Is that fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I think that -- I wouldn’t have that kind of tactical level of information, so I honestly don’t have knowledge of that. You would probably be better ask that of the Deputy Commissioner. And I’m not trying to avoid. I just sincerely was not briefed at that level of detail.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay. Was it your understanding that that group, their plot was to have two females smuggle in in a hockey bag a whole bunch of guns into the protest? Is that what your understanding was?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I have actually no understanding of the undercover operations or the intelligence- gathering operations of the RCMP. The level of detail that I was briefed at was really of the existence of threats within the group that were potentially more violent and that they had intelligence to indicate that they were armed and planning to do violence in relation to the police should any enforcement action take place.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. But are you, after the fact, aware that the two females that they were intending to have smuggle in these firearms were actually two undercover RCMP officers?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I apologize. I just have no detail in terms of the actual criminal file or the investigation itself. Quite carefully avoided that level of interaction with the police and kept it at a higher level.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
To your knowledge, before the invocation of the Emergencies Act, was this investigation and this operation with respect to these gentlemen who were arrested at Coutts for conspiracy to commit murder -- was it ever relayed to the federal executive political branch, that is, Cabinet? Are you aware if that was, before the invocation?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Was that information, that this group was there, relayed to the federal executive?
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Yeah, the federal executive branch in the sense of the political branch of government with respect to elected Ministers.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I wouldn’t have any knowledge of that. That would be a conversation probably at the federal level of the RCMP, and certainly not one I was privy to or was briefed on.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Thank you. And it’s fair to say that with Coutts, of course, none of the provisions under the Emergencies Act that were invoked and the subsequent Orders in Council -- none of them were used in respect to Coutts, were they?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And to your knowledge, none of the protestors at Coutts had any of their accounts frozen or anything like that under the orders.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I don’t have any knowledge of that. I can’t say that it didn’t happen. I just don’t know.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. Now, to your knowledge, were you aware of when the RCMP finally mobilized their national Public Enforcement Units to go to Ottawa? They actually brought in other officers from B.C. and other folks. Were you apprised of when that happened?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
There was a -- similar to the Article 9 provisions that we spoke to earlier, there was another request for support to the national response to the situation in Ottawa. And that came right after the weekend, so I want to say 15th, 16th, somewhere in that range. And I was aware that the RCMP, along with the Calgary Police and the Edmonton Police, were providing officers to support the Ottawa Police Service in their efforts.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And you agree with me that that request, it doesn’t require the Emergencies Act to be invoked. This is a thing that ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
--- can be done. And it could have been done at any time between when the protests started in Ottawa to when it was asked; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, yeah.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It’s used at any time.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And for whatever reason, the RCMP in Ottawa never asked for all of these units, which could have easily been made available and sent to Ottawa to assist with resources -- they never asked for them before the 15th, did they?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I was not aware of any requests at all before that.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And you’ve watched some of this hearing. The biggest issue in Ottawa was resources. And it was some of the evidence from poor Chief Sloly, who had this thrown on him, that he was asking the RCMP for resources and Commission Lucki said that, “You’ve got what you’ve got”. But all times, is it fair that Commissioner Lucki could have asked -- made a request like that was made on the 15th and asked for these officers to come to Ottawa to assist.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The provisions of the Police Services Agreement remain in place to this day and have been since 2012 when we signed the agreement, so they could have been asked for. I won’t speculate as to what our response would have been.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Yeah. Thank you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Next is the JCCF, and yes.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ALAN HONNER
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Good morning, sir. My name is Alan Honner. I am a lawyer from the Democracy Fund.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Good morning. Pleased to meet you.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And pardon me. It's good afternoon, as ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
--- just pointed out. Can we please pull up ALB.0000383.0001? Just while we're waiting for that to come up, you were asked about former Premier Jason Kennedy -- or Kenney earlier today. And when the document comes up, I think what it'll show is a letter dated February 15th, 2022 from the prime minister to then Premier Jason Kenney. Have you seen this document before?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If I could scroll through it a tiny bit more, maybe reduce the ---
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Yes. Please, just direct the Registrar.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, sorry. If we could maybe just -- sorry, thank you. Yeah, I believe I've examined this document.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Thank you. So if we can just look at the ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I have.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
If we can just look at the first paragraph on the second page -- it's before us right now - - we see the prime minister saying that: "We are facing significant economic disruptions with the breakdown of supply chains. This is costing Canadians their jobs and undermining our economic and national security with potential significant impacts on the health and safety of Canadians." Did Premier -- former Premier Jason Kenney or anyone else ever tell you -- anyone else from the government -- ever explain to you what the prime minister meant by this reference to potential significant impacts on the health and safety of Canadians?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I'm not familiar with any explanation of the prime minister's thoughts behind that from anyone.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, thank you. Can we please pull up ALB00001517.0001? And excuse me for just a moment, please. My sincere apologies. I just had a slight domestic emergency here. There we go.
The Registrar (POEC)
We have the audio now, sir? Go ahead.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, thank you. So earlier, you told us that Alberta had formally requested assistance from the federal government, but did not receive any formal response, and eventually -- this is in respect to tow trucks -- and eventually, Alberta just obtained its own equipment?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
We're looking at an email here from Peter Lemieux to you and others about equipment Alberta procured to support the RCMP operation at Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And who is Peter Lemieux?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Peter Lemieux is the Acting Executive Director of the Provincial Security and Intelligence Office. And during this time, he was the individual who I tasked as the lead in the procurement of that equipment.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay. And this equipment was procured on February 13th, 2022?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It was procured over a couple of days, and I think ultimately, all of it was in place by the 14th or 15th -- I think 14th.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Well, if you just scroll down a little bit, it says here ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
--- "On February 13th, 2022, Government of Alberta procured the following equipment."
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. I saw that in the note from Peter earlier. I think a better term for "on" February 13th would have been "by" February 13th. We had actually acquired a small amount of that equipment earlier than that, and the last of it was procured, and then it was all in place, I believe, on the 14th, down south. Yeah, it was ready for deployment.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Is this list of equipment reflective of the equipment that the RCMP needed?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Save two specialty vehicles, this was the exact equipment that we were told by the RCMP that they required if they were to have to execute an enforcement plan and tow all the vehicles at the border crossing.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And what were those other two vehicles that are not listed here?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
There are some other documents that speak to them, but one is a tire service truck and a number of tires, and the other is a heavy-duty mechanic's truck with tools.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, thank you. And if we can just pull up PB.CAN.00001514? We saw this document earlier today. Just while we're waiting for it to be pulled up, it is an email to Rob Stewart.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay, thank you.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
You recall seeing this email, correct? If we can just scroll down a little bit?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I've seen this earlier today. That’s correct.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And if we can just scroll down a little bit more to where it says, "Alberta". So under the heading "Alberta", it says that the biggest operational challenge to date is procuring towing/wrecking equipment and skilled workers to operate the equipment.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
By this point, you had most of that equipment, at least?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Could we scroll to the top again so I could confirm the date?
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Yeah, of course.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
If I remember correctly, this is a review of a conversation that we had had earlier on in the day on the 13th, that being a conversation with myself, ADM Dakalbab Talal, and the public works -- government services representative. I can't recall who was there on that call. And at that point in time, we were in the process of procuring the equipment that we ultimately later on, by the 13th, by the end of the day, we had actually procured. So when you see the reference from Peter Lemieux to by the 13th we had it, the information that Talal in this message was referencing came from a point in time prior to us having finalized the purchase of the last of the equipment, so we were still looking for trucks when he and I had a conversation, and his reference to our conversation contained in this email to Rob Stewart is based on that sort of hind-dated information that we were still looking for it.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Right. So that explains why the information in the document we're looking at isn't completely current?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. They're temporal in terms of the course of the day. They're relying on information that was provided at the start of the day, whereas the Peter Lemieux document references what we had by the end.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And by that point on February 13th, you had no idea that the federal government was about to invoke the Emergencies Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Thank you. If we can just pull up Document ALB.00001376.0001? And what we're looking at here is an email from Daniel Laville or Laville, I'm not sure how to pronounce his name. I'm sorry about that. But it's to you and some other people?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, it is, thank you.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And I think it's actually -- it's being forwarded to you, and it's dated February 15th, 2022?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct. Dan Laville is -- was the Communications Director for our ministry at the time and was forwarding to me a copy of an Alberta RCMP news release.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And that RCMP news release said that there are four people charged with conspiracy to commit murder, and they're listed here, right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s what it says.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And I appreciate you have limited information about this, and I appreciate that these are allegations, but can you tell us or do you have any idea who these people were allegedly conspiring to murder?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can't speak with certainty, because of course, I wasn’t part of the investigation, but it was my understanding it was police. But that is -- that would be third-party or speculative on my part, and I would want that to come out in evidence in court.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, thank you. Well, I'm not going to ask you to speculate. If we look a little bit -- if we look down this list, we see that there are nine other people. They are charged with mischief and possession of weapons for a dangerous person - - for a dangerous purpose.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay. So 13 people were charged in total. Can you -- yes, and can we look at ALB.IR.00000001? This is the Alberta Institutional Report.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Okay, thank you.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And if we just go to page 8, paragraph 25. Okay, thank you very much. So this paragraph describes how the RCMP executed a warrant on three trailers, leading to the arrest of 13 individuals.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And those are clearly the same 13 individuals we just discussed?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, that’s the reference, yes. That’s correct, sir.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
And it says here that the warrant was executed before dawn.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Do you happen to know if it was executed before the first ministers’ meeting which took place on February the 14th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Now, I have to be careful and caveat my response in the sense that my understanding of the first ministers’ meeting is that is was, as articulated by counsel for the Government of Canada, somewhere around 7:00 or 7:30 in the morning. I was not party to that event. If the timing was as indicated by counsel, then it would have been before because my conversation with the deputy commissioner indicated it was in early morning hours, 2:30 or so in the morning, that the arrests took place.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Oh, I see. Okay, thank you. And earlier in you mentioned the hour of 7:30 a.m. That’s when you found out about the warrant being executed; right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, as I said, that was me having a conversation with the deputy commissioner.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Got it. Okay, thank you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
And then -- and 7:30 is a rough estimate. I probably could go back on my phone and try and find the call but it was before normal business hours.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
It’s okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood. If we look down to paragraph 27 of the Institutional Report, it also says that the Emergencies Act was announced on the afternoon of February 14th and, based on your evidence and on the report, that was well after the RCMP successfully completed the seizure and arrests of these three -- 13 people and the offence-related property?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay. And you didn’t have any other information about threats at the time?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
At the time, just the intelligence I was receiving from the deputy commissioner around the fact that there was a volatile presence within the group that they were examining, and that they proved a threat or a risk. It was very generic at that high level, the types of conversations that I had with the deputy commissioner.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
The Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP, of course?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, Deputy Commissioner Zablocki.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
So nothing specific?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I think you’ve gone over your time, just -- so if you could wrap up pretty soon, I think you’re out of time.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
If I can have 30 more seconds, Commissioner?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Absolutely
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Thank you. So just one last point. You were shown a video of Arthur Pavlovsky. And am I correct in understanding or can you confirm that he was arrested for giving that speech when he was arrested on February 8th, 2022?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
He was arrested by the RCMP, and I know it was tied to his actions down at the blockade. I would probably want to defer to them as to the rationale, specifically around what led -- or what evidence they have that led them to cause them to arrest him and charge him.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, fair enough. But he was arrested on February the 8th, and he was held for bail, and he was denied for bail. He was denied bail on February 16th, 2022, but a judge from the Provincial Court of Justice; would you agree with that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I can’t disagree with it. It sounds right. I just don’t have the dates in front of me. So yeah, that sounds right.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Okay, thank you very much. Those are my questions.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay, next, if we could call on the Ottawa Coalition of the Residents and Businesses.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
No questions, thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay, next on the -- Windsor Police Service.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
So I apologize, no questions for Tom McRae for Windsor Police Service.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay, next is the Government of Saskatchewan.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MIKE MORRIS
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Good morning, sir. It’s Mike Morris, counsel for the Government of Saskatchewan. I’m saying good morning because it’s still morning here and I think your internal clock’s probably still set to Alberta.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, good morning. Pleased to meet you.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
I just have a few questions for you. Sir, I understand that in February of this year, you represented Alberta on the FPT Crime Prevention and Policing Committee; is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
At the ADM level, that’s correct, sir.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Okay. And that would be a committee which is composed of officials from the federal, provincial, and territorial government; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And, as such, that committee would include representatives from the Government of Saskatchewan, then; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That is correct, sir.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
My understanding is that the committee met several times before the Public Order Emergency was proclaimed on February 14th; is that correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And my review of the material indicates that the committee met on February 1st, February 7th, and February 11th; does that accord with your understanding?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s sounds very correct, sir, thank you.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And did you attend the meetings on the 1st, 7th, and 11th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I did, although I believe on the 7th there was deputy minister presence as well, and Associate Deputy Minister Dennis Cooley was there with me.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
At any of those meetings, did federal officials indicate that the government was considering invoking the Emergencies Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
In your view, would the committee have been an appropriate forum to discuss whether it was advisable for the Federal Emergencies Act to be invoked?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I think it would have been a very good initial forum to have initial conversations. Certainly, consultation, as I understand it to be envisioned, would be required at a much higher but, certainly, that would have been a very good starting point for that.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
But in the end, you never had the opportunity to have those consultations, then; correct?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, that’s correct, sir.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And just a couple more. In your experience with these FPT meetings, can they be convened on very short notice?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, they can, when required.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And would that even include on weekends?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
In point of fact, it did later, but yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Thank you very much, sir. Those are my questions for you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. And next, I’ll call on the Government of Alberta.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. STEPHANIE BOWES
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Good afternoon, Mr. Degrand. Good afternoon, Commissioner. My friends have covered quite a lot of ground with you. There’s just a few areas I want to cover off. And one of those areas deals with the timing of the execution of search warrants and arrests in Coutts, Alberta. I’ll ask if the clerk can please turn to ALB00001522.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And this is an email dated early in the morning, 6:36 in the morning of February 14th from John Ferguson to Dwayne Lakusta and to you. Do you know who John Ferguson is?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, John Ferguson and was at that time the Assistant Commissioner in charge of contract operations for the Province of Alberta with the RCMP.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And as far as you’re aware, he was involved in the law enforcement of the protest in Coutts?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, very much so, yeah.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. And if we look at this email, we’ll see some events noted: " At approximately 23:50, pursuant to the above activity…" -- which is described in the paragraph above -- "…two suspects who are a part of the core protesters group and have been identified as part of the security cell were arrested." (As read) Now, I take this to be on February 13th; do you understand that to be the case as well?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I believe the 23:57 would have been on the 13th and then subsequent arrests after that -- after midnight were on the 14th.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And so then looking at the timing of those arrests, if we go down to the next paragraph: "On Monday, February 14th at approximately 01:00 hours, other key protesters within the security cell were also arrested." (As read). And then: "A search warrant was already executed at the saloon, the main meeting place for the security cell, was negative for weapons." (As read). And then again, a further paragraph down: "At approximately 03:00 hours, search warrants were executed at the residence in Coutts and the associated trailer." (As read). So all of these events involving the arrests and execution of search warrants at Coutts were occurring late on February 13th, very early on the morning of the 14th?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
is that right?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Basically right at midnight and the early-morning hours to the 14th.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Thank you. Now I'd also like to turn back to record ALB -- I believe it's 00001573. And this is the letter from Deputy Commissioner Zablocki on February 3rd to Acting Minister Sonya Savage for the -- or, my apologies, it's from Minister Savage to Deputy Commissioner Zablocki.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's correct.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Now the last sentence of that first paragraph reads, "In my opinion, this constitutes an emergency in the Province of Alberta under the Provincial Police Service Agreement." Now the Provincial Police Service Agreement is included as a document referenced in Alberta's Institutional Report before this Commission. I take it you're quite familiar ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Could you ---
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
--- with that reference?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- if you could try and - --
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
My apologies.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- slow down a bit for the translators, please?
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
For sure. I'll take it you're quite familiar with that agreement?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I am, yeah.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Is there a definition of the word emergency in that agreement?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I actually have a copy of it with me, but I don't have it readily available, and I can't recall.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
You can't recall. Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. It is in our Institutional Report as well.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Right. I take it that your understanding is that the definition of the word emergency, as contemplated under the ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
--- Provincial Police Service Agreement ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
--- is different from the word emergency under either the Federal Emergencies Act or Provincial Emergency Management Act?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, absolutely, and the contemplation under the Provincial Police Services Agreement is around resources and the ability to marshal sufficient resources to manage extraordinary situations, whether they be, in this case, protests, but it could be fires, floods, or major events, such as a G8 or a G20 and the security events that come around that. So it is very different than an emergency as would be entailed under, say, the Alberta Emergency Act or the Federal Emergency Act.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And you used that word extraordinary, which is a word that was also used in the letter from Deputy Commissioner Zablocki to Minister Savage asking for the deployment of RCMP officers under Section 9.1. To the best of your knowledge, was this the first time Article 9.1 had been used in Alberta for the deployment of RCMP officers?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No. No, not at all.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
What other types of circumstances has that occurred before?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I believe we had that invoked during the fire response in Fort McMurray. We brought in officers from Newfoundland, B.C., Saskatchewan to support the provincial operations. I believe it's been used in the past for jail strikes and other natural disasters as well. It's been used for G8, G20 deployments across the country, Olympics, et cetera.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. Thank you. And also in Alberta's Institutional Report, there's mention of other protest activity that occurred in other parts of Alberta during January and February 2022. And you've discussed that to some length with my friends already. What was Alberta's role with respect to other protest activity that was happening in the province?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So with the exception of protests around the legislature itself, operational response is solely with the police services of jurisdiction and we provide support through our sheriff's branch when requested and as needed. Our role is around coordination and intelligence sharing, in monitoring, providing advice to government, and ensuring that, to the best of our ability, every law enforcement agency is connected with each other and with ourselves and not caught at unawares with any intelligence that might exist in any one of the law enforcement entities in the province.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And you mentioned with exception to protest activity was taking ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The legislature.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
--- place around the legislature. Why is that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The Sheriff's Branch of my division is a specific task around security on the legislative precinct in the province and work very closely with the Edmonton Police Service on that, but they are charged with sort of the direct security on the leg itself. And so any protests involving activity, whether they be dismounted or foot activity on the legislature and on the roadways within the precinct are primarily managed through the Sheriff's Branch, until such point in time as it becomes clear that the protest is going to be non- peaceful or unlawful, and then the Edmonton Police comes in and assumes responsibility while our officers continue to work with them, but we do have a much more robust participation in manners on the legislative precinct.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Did you become aware of any incident involving these protests at the legislature grounds in January and February that the Sheriff's Branch was not able to handle?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Not that the Sheriff's Branch with the assistance of the EPS could not handle. They were all managed quite, I think, appropriately.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. And one final record to take you to, that's ALB00000 -- or, sorry, 00002402.
The Clerk (POEC)
Is that a multimedia file, Counsel?
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
I don't believe so, no. No, it shouldn't be.
The Clerk (POEC)
ALB ends in 2402?
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
2042.
The Clerk (POEC)
Ah, thank you. This is an executive notification. Developing situation. The Alberta Legislature Freedom Convoy February 26th, 2022. Now February 26, 2022 was after the Declaration of a Public Order Emergency under the Emergencies Act was revoked. Were you aware that, at this time, there were further protests that were occurring in and around Alberta?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, absolutely. Yeah, there were continued protests in Calgary specifically and Edmonton.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Did any police agency express to Alberta that they required anything beyond their standard policing powers to deal with any of these protest post Emergencies Act revocation?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Degrand. Those are all my questions today.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Any re- examination?
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Two very brief points. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Jean-Simon Schoenholz for the Commission.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. JEAN-SIMON SCHOENHOLZ
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
First, I just want to make sure the record is clear on a point raised by my friends for the Convoy Organizers. If we could pull up the Institutional Report ALB.IR.00000001 and go to page 30 at paragraph 138? You'll recall my friend was asking you about the provision of provincial RCMP resources to the response in Ottawa. You remember that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I do, sir, thank you.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I think you mentioned it was on the 16th. You weren't terribly sure about the date. If you -- the first sentence here of ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- paragraph 138 says, "On February 18th..."
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
18th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
"...Commissioner Brenda Lucki of the RCMP requested that Alberta provide 42 officers to support efforts in Ottawa." Is that the request you were referring to?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That's the request. I think I might have even said 15th in my earlier evidence, and I apologise. It's the 18th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. The only thing I -- other thing I wanted to ask you, my friend I believe for the JCCF was talking to you about that list of resources that you had acquired on February 13th. You remember that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, I do, by the end of February 13th.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the point I wanted to make sure that we understood, I believe you had a meeting with the federal officials on the 13th. Are you aware whether or not the fact that those vehicles had been obtained on the 13th was made known to federal officials?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
So and I was probably clumsy in my earlier explanation, so I'll try to clarify that. At the time of my earlier conversation with the federal officials, ADM Brosseau and others -- Russell and others, we had not yet acquired the bulk of the equipment. We had a small number that we had acquired and already shipped down. We were in midstream of acquiring some and it fell apart the day before, and we were in midstream that day of acquiring some, but we still hadn't secured them yet. So at the time of my conversation with ADM Brosseau, and they -- or ADM Talal Dakalbab. And I apologize, Talal; I know him but hope I’m not wrecking his name. But at the time of that conversation, we hadn’t yet acquired them. The reference in Peter Lemieux’s document was sometime down the road, stating that by the end -- by the 18th we had acquired -- or the 13th we had acquired them, because later on that afternoon, or later on that day, he -- his team was able to secure the purchase of the remainder of the vehicles. So that’s why, at the time of our conversation with the federal officials, we hadn’t secured them yet, and we were still seeking them. Later that day, we acquired them and post that day, the indication from Mr. Lemieux is by the 13th we’d acquired them, because by the end of that day, we had.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether and when the federal officials would have been advised that that list ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It’s been ---
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of resources had been acquired?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, I don’t know. I honestly from memory I don’t recall when we had that conversation. I apologize. Should have that off the top of my head, and I don’t.
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Those are all my questions.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Just on that, I have a couple of questions.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Sure.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Just on those -- the equipment you acquired, and I may have missed it in my notes. Did you -- had you arranged or secured the operators for all that equipment? I didn’t get that note.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And I know it was a concern.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, we’d actually -- sir, we’d actually acquired a number of operators that could move vehicles around. We’d acquired a number of operators, like, a small number that could actually operate tow trucks and heavy lift equipment. So we had a small component of folks that could do that. We also had made connection with a private sector individual who was going to provide us with not -- with limited operators, but also training for any staff that we might have, to operate those vehicles, the lift part of the vehicles. We had a number of operators that could drive them and work them, but to actually operating the tow capacity itself was something we needed some training on. So we had that started, but we were still looking for more to augment that. To -- that would’ve facilitated a much better operational response, rather than the limited number that we had at the time.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
So that was a bit still a work in progress ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Absolutely.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- but you had ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Had plans.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
You had started and working it out.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
That’s correct, sir.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. And another question, I’m just going back to the 9.1 request that was made on February 3rd, for -- that’s the request to move additional officers to Alberta; and that was granted, and we saw that letter.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes, it was, sir.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
When was that terminated? Or how does it -- when did it end; do you know?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
The officers in question, that came from British Columbia were 40 in number and they, as I recall, returned to British Columbia; at the end of that weekend of the 13th, 14th, they were released back to British Columbia. There would have still been officers within Alberta, primarily from municipal and perhaps federal business lines that would’ve still been augmenting. And I would actually have to defer to the Deputy Commissioner on when he was able to release them back to their business lines and just rely exclusively on the provincial officers. I just don’t know when that was. But there is no formal rescinding of that letter.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
So it was not formally rescinded, but your understanding is they went back about 13th or 14th. Would that be after the operation in Coutts; would that make sense to you?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It would make sense to me, but I would want to defer it to Deputy Zablocki for the specifics around when they were released.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. And then you were taken to the request by Ottawa, or to move officers to Ottawa.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yes.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Would it be fair to say that when you were requesting officers from British Columbia, you would hesitate to send officers to Ottawa, or is -- those two separate, totally distinct, or would you weigh that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Well, at the time of that request, on the 18th we actually did release -- sorry; if that’s what you’re asking?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
No, I’m asking if before the 14th ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh. Oh, my apologies.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- in other words, you were asked is there any reason you wouldn’t have sent officers ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- earlier and, I’m just asking and it ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- I may be wrong, but ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- it seems common sense to me.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah. No, it’s a very much a common-sense question. And what would happen is what did happen on the 18th, it would’ve happened on the 14th, I would’ve looked to Deputy Zablocki to ask him, “What is the nature of the request?” In this case it wasn’t for just general numbers, it was for speciality officers, what we call a specialist STO officers, Special Tactics Operation officers, certain special units. I would’ve asked the question, “Could you realistically release those, given what you’re dealing with in the province?” And I would be guided by his advice on that. I would’ve been surprised had he said he could but there are other provinces in the Maritimes, et cetera, that he could’ve -- they could’ve pulled from.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. And then you talked about the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, and I’m trying to understanding a bit. That’s a pretty -- gives it a lot of broad power, as I understand it; is that fair?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, it’s a broad application in the sense that if certain activity takes place on any piece of critical infrastructure, as defined under the Act, it allows for enforcement by police with specific penalties that are quite substantial.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And it doesn’t have to be invoked; it just ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
No, it’s -- yeah, just standing legislation.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And then -- this may be the last one. I’m just going through my notes, I apologize.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Oh, that’s ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
That you mentioned something about -- and I think it was maybe February 13th, but I’m not sure, a request for Reservists to be used, I think, to operate equipment. Did you ever get an answer on that?
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, and the February 13th reference was the conversation I had with Talal Dakalbab, the ADM, and Public Safety Canada and other federal officials, where I raised to them my surprise that we did have an answer back that was indicating that -- and it’s an earlier request from earlier in the week, where the Canadian Forces indicated that they would not allow their Reservists to participate in support of our operations in the manner that we’d asked. So we’d already had that answer and I was expressing to the ADMs my surprise that at least that level of support couldn’t be approved.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And maybe I’ve got it wrong, but I thought in that note there was a suggestion that he would look into it.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah, so all ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
That was my question; whether after looking into it, anything further came.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
My apologies. Yeah. He did indicate that he was not aware of the request, he would look in it, and I did not hear back from him.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
It was a busy time for him, though, I understand.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Because it was the looking into it that I ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- didn’t know whether ---
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
We received no feedback after that, sir.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Okay. Well, those are my questions. Thank you very much for attending, and I understand you’re going back to the cold.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Right.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
But not much we can do about that.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
I am indeed. Thank you, sir. It’s been a pleasure.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. You’re free to go. So we will have a long lunch today, an hour and three minutes. So we’ll be back at 2 o’clock and continue with yesterday’s witness. Thank you.
Marlin Degrand, ADM (AB-JSG)
Thank you, sir.
The Registrar (POEC)
The Commission is in recess until 2 o’clock. La Commission est levée jusqu'à 1400 heures.
Upon recessing at 12:56 p.m.
Upon resuming at 2:00 p.m.
The Registrar (POEC)
Order. A l’ordre. The Commission has reconvened. La Commission reprend.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thanks.
DSG MARIO Di TOMMASO, Resumed
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good afternoon, Commissioner. Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Commission Counsel. And the Commissioner -- the Commission would like to call again Mr. Di Tommaso.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay.
EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MS. NATALIA RODRIGUEZ
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Welcome back, Mr. Di Tommasso.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You've been sworn in, so I don’t believe you'll have to do that again. You're under oath as you were yesterday.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm Natalia Rodriguez, as I said. I'm taking over from my colleague, Mr. Poliquin, who was examining you yesterday. And I'm going to continue where he left off. So he took you to your notes, and I will take you to your notes as well. ONT.00005153, and it's at page 2. And you'll recall, these were your notes from a call that you had with Deputy Minister of Public Safety, Rob Stewart on February 3rd. Do you recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And yesterday, my colleague took you to some text messages with Commissioner Carrique in which you kind of agreed that the tenor of those text messages was essentially that things seemed to be under control. Do you recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So now, looking at these notes, again, this is a call with Deputy Minister Rob Stewart and these are the notes you took from your discussion. You wrote, "Three hundred (300)--- "
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Five hundred (500).
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, 500? Okay. Excuse me -- "500 CMV in Ottawa," and that is commercial motor vehicles?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"Three thousand (3,000) people, noise," in all caps there, "verbally assault -- " does that say RCMP or people?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
People.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
People. "No outbreaks of violence. Political are very exposed, stalemate. Nobody really in charge. Some who claim to be. Far right extremism." And if we go down, "Not going to be able to move once they are there," or "they are here," rather. "How do they leave? Change in policy or de-escalation? Create incentives for them to leave. City has stated to -- has started to enforce bylaws. Get right on it as soon as they get here." Did that accord with the tenor of the types of information and the discussion that you were having with Commissioner Carrique in terms of the public safety issues or what was happening on the ground?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It did.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did you feel that you were getting similar messaging from both Commissioner Carrique and from the deputy minister in this case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
After speaking to Deputy Minister Stewart, did you have any public safety concerns about the situation in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not at that time. I was getting consistent messaging from Commissioner Carrique and from Deputy Minister Stewart that there were not any overriding public safety concerns; in other words, from my perspective, what we did not see is any serious violence taking place at that point in time, so no murders, shootings, robberies, stabbings, aggravated assaults, nothing of that sort. So from my perspective, no overriding public safety concerns at that point in time ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- in terms of physical violence.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So public safety can mean more than physical violence, you'd agree?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Exactly right, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were there other public safety concerns aside from, as you say, Criminal Code violations, murders, assaults, that type of thing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, absolutely. This protest was having significant impact on Ottawa residents, and we've heard it described before by various witnesses that it was having a significant impact on the mental health and wellbeing of the community. And I completely accept that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did it rise to the level of a public safety concern?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did the tenor of your briefings from Commissioner Carrique change over the course of the protest? Did at some point, did it become different in tone in terms of the public safety risk and the issues that were arising?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not so much in terms of public safety risks, but the longer that this protest went on, the greater the concern was. It needed to be brought to an end, and so everybody certainly recognised the urgency of the situation.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Now on February 2nd, I understand from Chief Sloly's witness summary that you spoke to him, and he then requested to speak to the Solicitor General; do you recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And now in his witness statement, he said that you were looking for verification on a report that ambulances were being denied access to Ottawa hospitals; do you recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do. There was a concern with regards to emergency routes that provided access to various hospitals, and that was communicated to me, and I just wanted to confirm with Chief Sloly whether or not that was true, and it if it was, what was being done about it.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And he told you that that was not the case; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would that have been a public safety concern if in fact ambulances were not able to get to hospitals?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why were you looking specifically for that information? Why was that important to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I had had a meeting earlier on in the morning, I believe, with the Secretary of Cabinet and under Deputy Ministers unrelated to this issue and the matter came up from the Deputy Minister of Health. And so I committed to looking into the matter.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so independent from that, would that have been a concern for you in terms of your role with respect to public safety in Ontario if that had not been raised to you by the Minister -- or Deputy Minister of Health?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In his summary, Chief Sloly also said that in that call with you, he asked you if you were aware of the public safety implications that the Freedom Convoy situation in Ottawa posed to the rest of Ontario. Do you recall him saying that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'd have to check my notes. I'm sorry.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you recall him telling you that there were some public safety implications to the rest of Ontario with respect to what was happening in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Once again, I'd have to check my notes, but I was certainly alive to the issue.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was this the only call you had with former Chief Sloly during these events, like, a one-on-one discussion with him?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, there were other calls.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now it looks like during this call, he indicated that he wanted to speak to the Solicitor General, and it looks like he did manage to speak with her on February 2nd. Were you on that call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not, but I arranged that call.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you prepare the Solicitor General for that call? Did you brief her ahead of time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The only information I provided to Minister Jones was that Chief Sloly was interested in speaking to her with regards to the Freedom Convoy.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of what was discussed on this call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not debriefed, no.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now on February 2nd, former Chief Sloly said that there may not be a policing solution to this demonstration. Do you recall hearing that at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the reaction within the Government of Ontario to this statement, if any? Was there any concerns or questions raised as a result of this statement?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not have conversations about this issue with any of my superiors, with Minister Jones or the Secretary or the Premier. But I certainly felt that there was, in fact, a policing solution to the problem. It was a policing matter and I thought that the Police Services within this province would be in a position to address the convoy.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in your view, did this statement affect the provincial response in any way?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I was very confident that Commissioner Carrique was providing all resources that were requested by Ottawa on an ongoing basis.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So I want to take you now to your notes again, ONT00005153. And if you can go to page 5? This is a call you had with Commissioner Carrique on February 3rd, and it's at 17:10. Yeah, there it is. So Commissioner Carrique says, "No POU." What did you take that to mean?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That there were insufficient POU resources available.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then if we look down it says, "Chief very concerned about Sloly as is RCMP. Still haven't pulled together his plan. [Federal government] expressing his concerns about his ability to lead" So you're hearing at this -- in this call that there are some concerns with respect to Chief Sloly's ability to lead, as indicated in these notes; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
This is what was being communicated to me.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, and who was -- and Commissioner Carrique was communicating that to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were hearing that there were concerns at the RCMP level and with respect to Commissioner Carrique about Chief Sloly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you relay this discussion to the Solicitor General, let her know that the OPP and the RCMP have concerns?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
To the best of my knowledge, I did, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what her response to that was?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now what is available to you, what can you do if, you know, the two Commissioners of Ontario and the OPP and the RCMP have lost confidence as -- is what it seems like, in one of their -- a local Chief of Police? Is there anything in your toolbox to be able to respond to that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, not really. And what I mean by that is that the entity that is best placed to deal with the performance of a Chief of Police is the Police Service Board of jurisdiction. That is the best entity. If, for example, there was a concern that a Police Service Board was not providing adequate and effective police services, there is a provision in the Act for the Solicitor General to act and ask OCPC, the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, to start an investigation under Section 25 of the Police Services Act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your knowledge, was that ever considered in this case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It was not a viable option.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Why?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From my experience, the Solicitor General would have to write to OCPC at a point in time where she is satisfied that adequate and effective police services were not being provided by the Board, and then the OCPC would have discretion to either accept or not the request of the Solicitor General. And from my experience, OCPC would take an extraordinarily long period of time to act. And I say that because Minister Jones has written to OCPC in the past on three separate occasions during my tenure to ask OCPC to step in. And in each of those cases, OCPC took a long time, in my view, to act, because of their legislative obligations and duties. And so this was an urgent situation, and from my perspective, the entity that was best placed to deal with the performance of Chief Sloly was the local Police Service Board of jurisdiction.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if the local Police Service Board of jurisdiction does not take steps, and it appears that perhaps adequate policing is not being effectively carried out in an area, why wouldn't the Solicitor General then exercise whatever authority he or she can, in this case she, to do something when it looks like other entities are not acting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But something was being done. The Ottawa Police Service was supporting -- was being supported by the very capable leadership of the RCMP and the OPP and the provision of policing resources. I certainly had not lost confidence in the Ottawa Police Service. They were being supported ably and capably by that leadership. They were being given the resources that they requested.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so if the Commissioner of the OPP and the Commissioner of the RCMP have lost confidence in the Chief, are they not best positioned to make that determination?
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Commissioner? Rebecca Jones for Chief Sloly. That was not the evidence of the Commissioner. The Commissioner very clearly indicated he had not lost confidence in the Chief of Police, and that is not what the note says as well. So we do object to the line of questioning involving an interpretation of a note which is not consistent with the evidence.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So to rephrase the question, if it were the case that the OPP and the RCMP had lost confidence in a Chief of Police, would it be appropriate then for the Solicitor General to recommend to the OCPC to step in?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The entire issue is the provision of adequate and effective police services, not a loss of confidence. That’s the issue. And from my perspective, the entity best placed to deal with that issue is the local police service board of jurisdiction. Within the Police Services Act, there are only two entities that are tasked and required to provide adequate and effective police services. The first one is the municipality, with regards to funding. The second entity is the local police service board of jurisdiction.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So there was no -- so if I understand what you’re saying, there’s no role here for the Solicitor General if adequate and effective policing is not being carried out?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There is a role, but only after it’s been proven that adequate and effective police services are not being provided. And from my perspective, Ottawa Police Service, with the support of the RCMP, with the support of the OPP, with the provision of all resources that were being given to it, with all that support, I had confidence in the Ottawa Police Service.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go a little bit down in the notes, where the star is, “Windsor in Ambassador Bridge”, is this with respect to a possible blockade at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were hearing that there was a possible issue at the Ambassador Bridge?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 6, at the bottom of the page -- keep going down. Yeah. Where it says: “CONTAINMENT NEGOTIATION PRESERVE LIFE/PUBLIC SAFETY PROTECT CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE” Were these -- now, I’m trying to understand whether this was still within the context of your discussion with Commissioner Carrique and whether these were priorities of the OPP that were communicated to you, or whether this was your notes to yourself indicating what you thought the priorities were?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Priorities of the OPP, as communicated to me by Commissioner Carrique.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And then at the bottom, it says “FLASHPOINT”. Can you explain that notation there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can’t. I’m sorry. I don’t remember what that reference was all about.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. so I’ll take you now to ONT00004063. And I understand on February 3rd, the Ottawa Police Service requested assistance from the Ministry of the Solicitor General regarding the urgent appointment of members of the RCMP as special constables. Were you aware of this at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. And under section 53 of the Police Services Act, the only role that the Solicitor General has is to simply approve the request of a local police service board or the OPP Commissioner, depending on the situation. That authority has been delegated down to the Public Safety Division, and in particular, to the director at the External Relations Branch. I was aware of the request, and I certainly communicated to my people in that section that we would move heaven and earth to make sure that Ottawa got all of the resources they needed with regards to expediting the approval.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is this approval kind of administrative done on paper type thing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So is it fair to say it’s a bit of a formality? You sign a paper and then it’s done?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I could take you now to ONT00005252? And these are text messages you exchanged with Commissioner Carrique. And this is February 4th, I believe. And it says there -- and I believe Commissioner Carrique is in the white and you’re in the green? Is that correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so in the white there, it says: “I spoke with Commissioner Lucki, Chief Sloly and Chief Ramer last night.” And that’s the former Chief of the Toronto Police Service? Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He’s still the Chief.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Oh, I thought somebody else had been appointed. My mistake. Okay. So it says there: “All have access to the necessary OPP resources.” So what did you understand to be the status of the provincial resources in Ottawa on February 4th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That all requests for resources were being maintained and addressed by the OPP.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the implication here is that the OPS had all of the OPP officers that it needs, or that it has requested; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. We can take that down. Now, on February 4th, there were also protests in Toronto, specifically around Queen’s Park. You were aware of those; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that those protests wrapped up fairly quickly? Is that your understanding as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So maybe you can shed some light, at least from your perspective, of what was done -- what worked in Toronto, what was done right in Toronto that wasn’t done in Ottawa? What was the difference here?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I think Toronto certainly learned some valuable lessons from the experience that the Ottawa Police Service had just gone through the previous weekend. And so what -- from my understanding, what Toronto did was they set up a hard perimeter around the critical infrastructure that the protestors were most interested in.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Can you try and slow down a bit again? I’m sorry to interrupt, but it’s the interpreters.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I apologize, sir. So what Toronto did was they set up a hard perimeter around the critical infrastructure that the protestors were most interested in, namely Queen’s Park. They requested resources from other police services to help them do that. At the end of the day, they denied access to Queen’s Park, Queen’s Park Circle, hospital access roads, University Avenue, down to Hospital Row. So all of that was denied to the convoys that were coming to Toronto. So the trucks. Vehicles were not permitted into that area. They certainly facilitated the ability to exercise one’s fundamental rights to lawful protest, truckers were available to come to Queen’s Park and protest on foot, because as we know, the right to protest belongs to people and not to trucks.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so do you know who is -- who would you credit with the appropriate response here in the Toronto protest? Was it the police? Was it the politicians? The Mayor? How did this end up getting wrapped up?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would give credit to the Toronto Police Service being supported by other services that provided those resources. So credit goes to all of the police services that participated in that protest. But I have to say Toronto learned lessons from the Ottawa experience the previous weekend.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of the purpose of the protest in Toronto? What were the protestors protesting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So my recollection was that that particular protest was in support of the main protest happening in Ottawa. And my recollection of what was happening in Ottawa was that there was a major element of that protest that was protesting in regards to the January 15th imposition of vaccine mandates on international truckers by the Federal Government.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there an element as well, or at least from the Province’s perspective, that this was about provincial measures in addition to federal measures?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t recall turning my mind to that. My understanding was that this was a protest in regards to the federal mandate to impose vaccination criteria on international truckers. But having said that, I think that there were many other elements that attended both Toronto and Windsor that had other agendas.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But in your view, it didn’t include protesting provincial mandates?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I want to take you to OPP00004580. And this is -- I’ll take you to page 56. These are more text messages between you and Commissioner Carrique. And if we go to page 56, this is now February 5th, Saturday. If we go down? Down some more. So there, -- and just maybe you can clarify. The green, I believe, is you, and the blue, I believe, is Commissioner Carrique. Do you know if that’s -- are you able to clarify that? If we go down, that might help. Keep going to the next page.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not helpful.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, if we can go up, maybe I’ll just ask the question, and it may not make much of a difference. So it says there at 10:11: "Info on OPSB is clear to share." And that would be the Ottawa Police Service Board; is that correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down, there’s a link shared, the Ottawa Police Service Board calls a special meeting. And if we go down to page 57: "Live link PSB meeting." So I just wanted to ask -- there seems to be some texts exchanged about the OPSB meeting on February 5th and my question is, were you monitoring what the board was doing or were you -- did you take an interest in the board’s meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did take in an interest. To the best of my recollection, there was a both a public board meeting and an in-camera meeting.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why were you taking an interest in the board’s meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, because at the end of the day, it’s the board that has accountability and oversight over the Ottawa Police Service. And so there was a major issue happening in Ottawa and I was interested in what steps Ottawa Police Service Board would be taking.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I understand that the Ministry of the Solicitor General has a representative that goes to the meetings and advises the boards on various issues; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes,
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you may or may nor know this but I understand that in Ottawa, it was Lindsey Gray; do you know that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
After reviewing some material, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what is that representative’s role?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So under Section 3 of the Police Services Act, the Solicitor General has responsibility to advise police services and boards. And the way in which that duty is discharged of by way of having police service board advisors. And so that advisor is there to provide advice on the Police Services Act upon request.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And does that representative report back the activities of the board to the Solicitor General’s office?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There’s a report to the Inspector General of Policing.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But the Solicitor General’s office does not receive any information back from that representative?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And is there a reason for that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So -- well, it’s a reporting tree, if you will, so that information goes to the Assistant Deputy Minister, the Acting Inspector General of Policing. That individual, Ken Weatherhill, reports to me and then it’s my job to advise the Solicitor General.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And to what extent were you briefed on the ongoings of the board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I wouldn’t say that I was briefed in any great detail but I was aware of the general discussions that were happening.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was through whom, just from watching the board meeting that were public or was there another source of information?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
A combination of both, watching the public board meeting on TV and the advisor that was present in the in-camera session as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this would be Lindsey Gray?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you had discussions with her about?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not have discussions with Lindsey Gray. It was being reported through Ken Weatherhill to me.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Understood, thank you. I want to take you now to -- we’re moving on to February 6th to a summary of a call. It’s ONT00000311. And this is a call with the City of Ottawa. There are representatives from the federal government that were there as well. You were present. I believe on behalf of the Ontario Government, it was you and the Deputy Minister of Transportation, Laurie LeBlanc, who were the two attendees for the province; is that correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe that’s the case, and there were other deputy ministers from Ontario there as well, if I -- my recollection is correct, including Deputy Minister Kate Manson-Smith from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. I believe she was there as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know who took these notes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you -- but you’ve seen them before?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I have.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you saw them at the time; they were sent to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
These notes, the first time I saw them, I believe, was some time after the convoy in Ottawa was resolved.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see, okay. Thank you. My understanding is that Deputy Minister Rob Stewart convened this meeting; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would agree.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And before attending this meeting, did you have any instructions from the Solicitor General or from the Premier on what your role was to be or what you were to contribute to this meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But I certainly prepared for this meeting.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did you prepare for this meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, one of the things that I did -- and I’d have to check my notes for this date, but one of the things I did was I quickly reviewed the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act and its provisions.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the purpose of doing that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, in the event that the discussion turned to the EMCPA, I would be prepared.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you see as your role in this meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
My role was to receive a situational update and then discuss what the art of the possible is with regards to resolving the convoy in Ottawa.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you see as the province’s role in trying to bring these protests to a peaceful resolution at this time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So the province’s role was, certainly, through the OPP, a division of the Ministry of the Solicitor General, to provide all the resources that were being requested.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was there anything else?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Certainly trying to come up with strategies to encourage the truckers to leave, coming up with potential negotiation/mediation solutions, exploring various other incentives to compel the truckers to leave.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down on this page, the second bullet point: "Steve Kanellakos, City Manager from Ottawa, provided an update from the City’s perspective. Steve Kanellakos is concerned about the posture of local councillors who are pointing the finger at the province and federal government to provide assistant to resolve the matter." So were you aware at this point, then, that some leaders within the municipal community were pointing fingers, well, both at Ontario and the federal government?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
This was the first time I heard that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says in bold: "Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is going to declare a local emergency in the City of Ottawa at 4:30 p.m. The expressed intent of this declaration is to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve this." Were you aware that the mayor intended to put pressure on the Ontario government by declaring a municipal state of emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
This was the first I’ve heard of it and I thought that that was rather an odd statement as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, and why is that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Because when you look at Section 4 of the EMCPA, the intent to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers is not one of the authorized reasons for declaring an municipal emergency.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so what did you understand the exercise of provincial to resolve this to be in this case? What did you understand the municipality to be looking to the province to do?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Additional resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you -- you understood this to be additional resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. And that’s articulated in the next bullet point because City of Ottawa will also be looking for what the province and federal governments can do to provide additional assistance.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Although, it says “will also be looking”, so it seems like this is something separate from the bullet point above; you could agree with that interpretation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you see the Declaration of a State of Emergency at the time that it was declared?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I’ve seen it in the disclosure material that I’ve reviewed.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were not aware, then, at the time, that the declaration stated that the demonstrations were a threat to the security of the residents?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not see that declaration, no.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that was not reported to you through your chain of reporting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not see the declaration.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. At this point, given the local emergency that’s about to be declared and some of the other information that you've received, did you have public safety concerns about the situation in Ottawa by February 6th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. I was still not seeing any significant serious violent crime concerns at all. At no time did Chief Sloly or Commissioner Carrique communicate to me that there were significant public safety concern from a violence perspective. And I knew that the Ottawa Police Service was being well supported by the RCMP and by the OPP as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I think you can agree that public safety encompasses more than just violent crime, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were you aware at the time that there were open fires in barrels on the streets and fireworks going off and open fuel that wasn’t properly stored and diesel fumes that were entering people's homes? Were you aware of all of those circumstances on the ground?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in your view, that did not pose a public safety concern?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From a violent crime perspective with regards to the Criminal Code, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But from another perspective, it did, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in your interview summary, you indicated that you were of the view that the protest in Ottawa was a "significant inconvenience" -- and that’s a quote -- but that it did not present an overriding public safety risk. Now, Commissioner Carrique was asked about this and in his evidence -- I'm not sure if you watched his evidence -- but he indicated that it wasn’t really about one being a safety risk and the other one not being a safety risk, but it was about prioritizing resources, and that the Hendon Reports made clear that there was a security risk in Ottawa. You would agree with me that he was closer to the ground in order to assess the situation in Ottawa than you were, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you still stand by that statement today, that it was an inconvenience but not a public safety risk?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, it was much more than an inconvenience, and I accept that. There was a significant impact on the residents of Ottawa. I can't imagine what they were going through. I'm very sympathetic and empathetic to all that they went through and all the suffering that they went through. It was more than an inconvenience, much more.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, after this meeting, did you brief the solicitor general on the fact that the City was going to declare a municipal emergency and that the stated intent was to put pressure on the province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t have any notes that I briefed the solicitor general, but my practice would be something this important, I likely did.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know if the premier was aware of that stated intent as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not speak to the premier.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did you speak to the premier at all throughout the course of these events?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the declaration, in fact, put pressure on the province to act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The province was acting.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, for example, the provincial state of emergency came on the 11th. Was there any pressure from this local state of emergency to do that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not sure that pressure is the right word. I think the province was actively surveilling and looking at the environment in terms of what was going on province wide, and when the concern was such that the protest was spreading to other parts of the province, as we saw in Windsor, in Toronto, in Cornwall, in Sarnia, at the Peace Bridge, that’s when the premier decided to act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say though that this may have provided a signal to the province that the City of Ottawa was in need of more assistance?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would agree with that, but we were also hearing loud and clear that the City of Ottawa was requesting additional resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we'll get to that request in a second. So with respect to the stated intent, Mayor Watson, when he testified, stated that the City did not consider that the province was engaged enough at this time, February 6th, in finding a solution to the situation in Ottawa. So I just wanted to give you a chance to respond to that.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm sorry, where is that in this ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That was in his testimony. I can bring up the transcript, but he did say in his evidence when he testified here at the Commission that by February 6th, he did not feel that the province was engaged enough in finding a solution.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t accept that at all. I think that the province was very engaged in providing support to the City of Ottawa through a variety of means, including support for injunctions, including providing advice to the Police Service Board, including the provision of policing resources, including the provision of MTO resources. So I don’t accept that at all.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you mention the injunction, what was the province's role with respect to the City's injunction?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I might be conflating the two injunctions, the one in Windsor and the one in Ottawa, but my understanding is that the attorney general supported one of the two injunctions. I can't recall which one of the two. I'm sorry.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I believe that was Windsor. So I'll take you to page 2 or the bottom of page 1, rather. And you see: "Ottawa City Council is likely going to ask the premier and prime minister to intervene directly. The mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson, is feeling the pressure and want this issue to be pivoted back to Ontario and Canada." So it's fair to say that in this meeting, it was communicated or it was expressed that Ontario or that Ottawa felt that it needed additional help, both from the province and from the federal government, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And on page 2, if we go to the third bullet point, Mario Di Tommaso -- that’s you -- Deputy Solicitor General, noted that the province expedited the approval of 249 special constables from the RCMP to assist Ottawa Police Service. So this is what we had looked at earlier where there was an approval of RCMP officers to be sworn in as special constables?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so at this point, what else had Ontario done at this point, by February 6th, other than what you've indicated there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Provided significant resources to the Ottawa Police Service from the OPP, significant number of resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that was -- so the OPP provided resources, and was there anything else?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, I believe MTO was involved in providing their resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we to page 5 ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And I believe there was continuing advice to the Ottawa Police Service Board from the advisors. And I'd have to check my notes, but the province was heavily engaged at this point in time.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But you can agree that Ottawa doesn’t seem to think so. They're expressing that they don’t think there is enough engagement, right, whether or not that’s accurate, that’s their sense that they're conveying?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at page 5, if we go the first black bullet at the bottom -- keep going -- yes. Question from Mario Di Tommaso, Deputy Solicitor General: "Has Ottawa Police Service been working with the Ministry of the Attorney General to explore your options and in relation to position of the Crown for summary offences?" What were you suggesting here?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I'm not sure that summary offences is accurate. What I was suggesting was, is there anything else that the Ministry of the Attorney General can do with regards to any offences that are charged. So what I was thinking about was, is there an ability to increase set fines? Is there an opportunity to explore bail provisions for those people that are arrested? Is there anything that the attorney general can do to better support the Ottawa Police Service?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 9, Jody Thomas, National Security Advisor in the sub-point, the black sub-point: "Would the province be looking to the federal government if this protest was happening outside of the City of Ottawa ([for example] happening in other places like Kingston)?” What did you understand this comment to be in reference to?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So this comment was certainly not aligned with the comment that Deputy Minister Stewart made previous, where he was suggesting that the Federal Government did have a role, in particular with regards to finding interlocutors. So from my perspective, this question was all about, from my perception, the Federal Government wanting to wash its hands of this entire thing. I didn’t think that was appropriate at all. I thought that the Federal Government did have a role. At the end of the day, these protestors were in Ottawa to protest, mainly, the imposition of a vaccine mandate on January 15 on international truckers. They were on Parliament’s doorstep. They were in the National Capital Region. The Federal Government, Public Safety Canada does have a Memorandum of Understanding with Ottawa Police Service with regards to the provision of policing resources in and around Capital Hill. The OPP is not a signatory to that MOU. So from my perspective, the Federal Government did have a role to play, just like Ontario had a role to play in the provision of resources. And so I made that known to Jody Thomas. I felt that some of the options that were available to the Federal Government included a possibility of meeting with and listening to the protestors, the possibility of amending their vaccine mandate, the possibility of providing additional resources to the Ottawa Police Service. So there was a range of options available to the Federal Government. And it was my position that the Federal Government certainly had a role to play in this.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And as you said, the Provincial Government did as well. So it was really the responsibility of both levels of government to come together and work together to find a solution?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. Yes, that’s absolutely correct. But I would also like to add, at the end of the day, this was a policing matter, and my view was that both the Federal Government and the Provincial Government had a role to play in terms of supporting the police response.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mentioned finding an interlocutor. Can you maybe expand on what the idea was there and what steps, if any, were taken?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So there were some names that were provided by Chief Sloly at that meeting. I don’t remember the -- Murray Sinclair, Bob Rae, and others. And the idea was to get a very high-profile individual to meet with the interested parties to see if there’s a resolution that could be had.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what steps were taken beyond that -- the discussion of the names? Was anything done?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not with regards to those names that were provided, but at the end of the day, there was a request later on from the Provincial Liaison Team that was communicated to me through Commissioner Carrique with regards to the potential to have Ministers of the Federal Government and Ministers of the Provincial Government to intervene to provide a forum to listen to the protestors to see if those protests could be deescalated. But that happened later on, certainly not at this meeting.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. Okay. And that was through Commissioner Carrique, you said?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. He made a direct request to me, which I communicated to Minister Jones.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was Minister’s Jones’ response to that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, at the end of the day, she did write a letter directed to Commissioner Carrique, where she would certainly make herself available to -- and this was in relation to Windsor. To make herself available to meet with the protestors if they left the protest and if they denounced this protest activity. So I’d have to refer to the actual letter. But the intent was to give the protestors an ear of the provincial and federal Ministers so that they could be heard in an attempt to de-escalate. I remember communicating with Deputy Minister Stewart that that was the request of the PLT, and I asked him to see what he could do to make federal Ministers available as well. And through various phone calls and discussions, Deputy Minister Stewart was not able to obtain the services of federal Ministers. I was able to get the Service Minister Jones to do that in Windsor. She was also willing to do that with regards to Ottawa.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why that didn’t happen with respect to Ottawa if she was willing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
She was willing.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So why didn’t it happen, I guess is my question. Why wasn’t there a similar letter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Because from my understanding, the letter did not have the desired effect in Ottawa, and from my understanding was that the protestors were interested in listening to or being heard by federal Ministers. So Minister Jones was certainly interested in making herself available to the Ottawa protestors, but the Federal Government needed to be there as well, because that would give the best chance of success.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say the PLT brought this forward, was that the OPP PLT or the OPS PLT? Do you know?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
To the best of my recollection, it was the OPP PLT.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was, from what I understand, with respect to Windsor. Was there ever an approach from OPS in Ottawa or the OPP in Ottawa to say the demonstrators in Ottawa would like to meet or would like to have communication with the Provincial Government?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So two things. I continued to urge Rob Stewart to bring federal Ministers to the table, and I did that on my own, knowing that there was a potential resolution that could possibly be achieved, because if there was an interest in Windsor to do that, certainly there would be an interest in Ottawa. So I did that on my own. And the second thing I wanted to raise about that was that Deputy Minister Stewart certainly had direct conversations with Insp. Marcel Beaudin of the OPP PLT to see what the art of the possible was. So that was something that I was continuing to explore with Deputy Minister Stewart.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And we asked Mayor Watson whether he was aware of any such overtures from the Solicitor General were made to Ottawa, and he said no. And there was a time when the Ottawa protestors approached the City of Ottawa because they wanted to have a meeting with the Mayor. So I’m just wondering why that wouldn’t have signaled to the province that if they’re willing to meet with the Mayor and they’re willing to negotiate something in return, why they wouldn’t be willing to do that with the Province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So in my communications were not with the local city or the mayor. My communications were with Deputy Minister Stewart. And we were just trying to find whatever options were available to try to deescalate this thing.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did you ever specifically indicate that the province would be willing to meet with Ottawa protestors?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
To Deputy Minister Stewart? Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was his response to that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That he would endeavour to make that happen, but it did not come to fruition.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. and you don’t know why?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t. That would be a question for Deputy Minister Stewart.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, you mentioned that the Province -- or from your perspective, you thought the Federal Government had a role to play for various reasons, one of them being that the protestors were protesting federal vaccine mandates; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so I’m just wondering, why does the substance matter of the protest affect who should be the entity that responds to that? Or the level of government that responds to that protest?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It shouldn’t be. I think both governments had a role to play, and certainly Ontario had a role to play. An I’m certainly aware that the protest was not exclusively about the federal mandate. There were other groups that had other agendas. And I recognize that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in terms of the Parliamentary Precinct, Wellington Street is a municipal road, it is the jurisdiction of the Ottawa Police Service. So in terms of any kind of federal jurisdiction over that street, you agree there is no federal jurisdiction over Wellington Street in terms of policing Wellington Street?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree. But there is, to my understanding, an MOU between Public Safety Canada and the Ottawa Police Service with regards to provision of policing resources in and around Parliament Hill, which includes Wellington Street.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was it ever communicated to you that the local police service, in this case the Ottawa Police Service, or through the Mayor, because the request did come through the Mayor and the Chair of the Board, that it had to be done through the Province and couldn’t go directly to the RCMP in terms of requesting resources? Was that ever something that was communicated to you by anyone in the Federal Government?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Are you talking about the concept that all requests need to go to the Province first and then to the Federal Government?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yeah, that’s -- from my understanding, that’s more of a policy through the Emergency Management process. And I think there’s a section in the federal Emergency Management Act that speaks to that. Basically, the idea is when there is a declared emergency that the province needs to exhaust its resources first it can go to the federal government for an ask. And likewise, that the municipal authorities need to exhaust their resources first before they can go to the provincial government.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in this case, the letter from the Mayor and the Chair of the Board requesting 1,800 officers went to both the Solicitor-General and Premier Ford and also to the Minister of Public Safety and the Prime Minister. And so my question is whether you are aware if the fact that there was a request made to the provincial government directly from the Mayor and the Chair of the Board and not through the province, whether that delayed RCMP resources. Are you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I’m not aware that it delayed RCMP resources. No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether it was an issue in terms of the federal government being able to deploy those resources given that it could have been seen as circumventing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So it’s not a matter for the provincial government or the federal government to deploy policing resources. That is the exclusive jurisdiction, from my understanding, of both Commissioners. They are the ones that have exclusive jurisdiction in deploying their resources, not the governments.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So my question is whether anyone within the federal government communicated to you that the request being made directly to the federal government was a problem because it wasn’t being made through the province.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, nobody communicated that to me.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, at the end of this call -- this was a lengthy call among various people at different levels. Did you have any concerns at the end of this call? Were you satisfied that OPS and the Chief were taking the right approach? What was -- what were your takeaways from this call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
My takeaways were that Ottawa Police Service needed additional resources, and those resources were, in fact, being provided, to my understanding, by Commissioner Carrique and Commissioner Lucki. The main obstacle at this point in time was that there was not a plan by the Ottawa Police Service to dismantle the actual occupation. That was the critical problem.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that something that was discussed in this meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’d have to check the entire note.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But by this time, February 6, you were aware of that ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that there was a lack of a plan.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I want to be very careful about that because there was a plan with regards to the deployment of officers in Ottawa for maintenance purposes to deal with the influx of officers, to deal with radio calls, public safety issues that may or may not have been occurring. There was a plan to do that. What was not in place was a plan to dismantle the entire occupation. That was the barrier. And that plan, from my perspective, included a plan to deploy Public Order Units, a towing plan, an exit plan, a traffic plan, all of that. So when we say that Ottawa did not have a plan, I am specifically referring to what I was told was a plan to dismantle the entire occupation. That was the issue.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So there was a plan for maintenance of the status quo, but not to end the situation, essentially.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you were getting this information from Commissioner Carrique and Commissioner Lucki?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not speak to Commissioner Lucki.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it was exclusively from Commissioner Carrique in terms of the readiness of this plan that we’re speaking about.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. But I also received information from Chief Framer, I believe, earlier on and his view that Ottawa did not have that plan as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know how he formed that opinion?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do not. That would be a question for him.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I’ll take you to ONT00001912. And if we go down to the bottom, five bullets from the bottom, there it is. So the -- this is some public remarks that were made, and I believe this was made by the Solicitor-General: “To be clear, since the beginning of the protest, more than 1,500 Ontario Provincial Police personnel have been deployed to the City of Ottawa, providing a range of support to the Ottawa Police Service.” This was a press release, I believe. Are you able to confirm that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you or your office participate in drafting this press release?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I’ll take you now to ONT00005345. So if we go down. Right. It’s Fuad Abdi to you, subject line, “OPP deployment number Ottawa”. And it looks like he is providing you with some OPP Ottawa deployment numbers. My understanding is that these numbers were requested by the Solicitor-General’s office from the OPP. Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why was this request made from the OPP in terms of the number of officers?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, the OPP has an obligation to keep track of the number of resources deployed to Ottawa in the event that there is a charge back to the municipality, so that’s why those numbers were being tracked.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then it says at the end of that paragraph: “I have noted for the OPP we will not -- and only bottom line numbers being used to confirm support being provided to Ottawa and having a sense of what the feds need to bring to that table.” So a few questions. With respect to that in particular, was this chart being used to confirm the number of OPP officers that have been provided to be able to then say, “Well, now, this is what the federal government needs to contribute”?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I don’t believe the case. I think there was a request from the Minister’s office of the OPP wanting to know what resources have been provided to date, and that was provided.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in terms of the comment that having a sense of what the feds need to bring to the table, are you aware of what that’s referencing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand from Commissioner Carrique’s evidence that the 1,500 officers, OPP officers, was an administrative number and that, in fact, referred to shifts and not to actual 1,500 individual OPP officers. Is that your understanding as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, that’s not my understanding. My understanding is that that 1,500 number referred to a period of time, 10 days, I believe, total officers being provided to the Ottawa Police Service.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But were these 1,500 different individuals, if I can put it that way, or were these, you know, 100 officers on one shift and then potentially similar number of officers on another shift and ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- you’re reusing some of the same officers at different times; correct? It’s not 1,500 officers ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
At any one time? No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And were you aware that there was confusion at the municipal and the federal level with respect to the number of individual OPP officers deployed?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do understand that there was confusion.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there ever a discussion with Chief Sloly to clarify that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. I received a call from Chief Sloly.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when was that? Do you recall?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe it was shortly after -- shortly after these numbers were released by the Minister’s office.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what was explained to him in that call, then?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Chief Sloly was very concerned about the release of these numbers. He asked me to correct the narrative that had gone out to correct the press release. I informed Chief Sloly that these numbers were a compilation of numbers over a 10-day period and that they were cumulative in nature and not intended to represent 1500 officers on any given day.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he accepted that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be a question for him.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you get the sense that he accepted that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He was not happy.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why wasn't he happy?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From -- well, he wasn't happy that these numbers were released.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that because there was an -- there was a sense that giving numbers of officers was an issue in terms of giving away police tactics or it could have some sort of detrimental affect on the police operations, or was it because he felt that the number was not being accurately portrayed?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe that he was not happy because it put more pressure on him and that these numbers would be misinterpreted.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. So if the public thinks he has 1500 officers to work with, they're saying why isn't he doing anything with them?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And these officers were mainly, as you said, being used for maintenance, to rotate tired police officers out and bring other police officers in?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, no, not just that. Not just that. There were frontline police officers, there were intelligence officers, PLT officers, dispatchers. There's a whole range of officers that were being provided over that period.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But what I mean is they were not being used to ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Dismantle?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- dismantle the protest.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Correct? Okay. Was there any concern that revealing the number of officers deployed could be harmful to operations?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From who?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
From Chief Sloly.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't remember him talking to me about that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have that concern?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If so, why were the numbers made public then in the press release?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not make those numbers public.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you would have been against doing that; is that what I'm understanding? If you had been asked, you would have said no?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think it's not wise for anyone to make numbers of deployed officers publicly available.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you weren't consulted on it, and so you weren't able to give that advice; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can turn to ONT00003843? And this is now February 7th. And if we -- there it is. So you have a call. You say, "Briefing this AM" And then it says, "Call with OPC CC."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That should be OPP. I'm sorry.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that's OP -- okay, so this would be Commissioner Carrique?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "Briefing this AM Would be asking for twice the number of officers he requires." Can you explain this notation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, my understanding was that Commissioner Carrique was communicating to me that at a briefing that had occurred that day, Chief Sloly would be asking for twice the resources that he required.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did he give you any more context other than that? Why or what the purpose of that would be, whether he agreed with it, whether he had concerns about that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Whether Commissioner Carrique had concerns?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, both he and I had concerns. I had concerns about why that would be done, but I was not privy to that briefing or that conversation. But as explained to me by Commissioner Carrique, at the end of the day, that issue was irrelevant, because there would be a planning team that would test whatever numbers were being asked for by the Ottawa Police Service, and that planning team would be staffed with subject matter experts, so they would test whatever plan. So given that Commissioner Carrique had communicated that very fact to me, I had a sense of comfort in knowing that this is just -- looking for the right word -- this is just noise. I was comforted in knowing that whatever the Ottawa Police Service would ask for would be tested by the planning team.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You put a star there though and underlined it twice.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It seems like perhaps you were expressing in your notes some concern?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, I was concerned that, if accurate, that Chief Sloly would take that approach, but I was also comforted by the comments of Commissioner Carrique that whatever numbers were asked for would be validated and tested.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at this point, the -- Chief Sloly had made known the number of officers he required. Were you made known by this time, February 7th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe the request was for 1700 uniform police officers and 100 civilians.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to 17:15, a little bit further down on this same document? And can you just, for the record, indicate who the individuals in this meeting are?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So Premier's office, Cabinet office, Sol Gen, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs, and there was a meeting with regards to Ottawa. And this was because Mayor Watson and the Chair of the Board had written that letter formalising the request to the Premier and the Minister. And given the fact that the letter had gone to the Premier, there was a meeting called to discuss, okay, what do we do with it. And my advice was that we give it to the OPP Commissioner, because it's his exclusive jurisdiction, to determine whether or not to deploy resources, for how long, and what numbers. And so the discussion was that we would refer this letter to the OPP Commissioner for his assessment. We were not in a position to direct the Commissioner to say, you know, we better request for 1700 and 100, please supply these resources. We don't have the ability to direct the Commissioner. That's his exclusive jurisdiction. And so we referred it to the OPP Commissioner for assessment only.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you now to ONT00001141? So these, I believe, are the Solicitor General's notes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that's fine. We'll go to OTT0000 -- or 000, rather, 29488.
The Clerk (POEC)
Sorry, Counsel, could you repeat that document ID, please?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
OTT00029488. Okay. Is there anything further down? Okay. Okay. If we can keep going down? Yeah, keep going down. I believe it's coming up. Yeah, keep going. Yeah, we'll keep going down. Yeah, keep going down. Okay, yes. So there it is. If we can just go up a little bit more? So it's dated February 10, and if we go down just to the signature line, so this is a letter that was sent by the Solicitor General to the Mayor and to the Chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board. This is a response to the request that was made for those officers. Were you involved in drafting that response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And have -- did you read this letter at the time? Were you aware of this response at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not entirely sure I was aware of this letter at the time. I knew that the request was -- for additional resources was going to be referred to the OPP Commissioner.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding from the content of this letter is that the Solicitor General is saying that she will forward the request to the OPP Commissioner, as we saw in those notes, in the meeting that was held earlier?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, and she's also highlighting that an operational plan proposed by the Ottawa Police Service, so it's both the resources that are being asked and also highlighting that an operational plan would be a good idea.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so is your understanding that the resources were contingent on a plan in some respects?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The resources to dismantle ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- were contingent on a plan, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this time, there was not one?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Mayor Watson testified ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And when I say that -- I’m sorry. And once again, the exclusive responsibility to deploy those resources were not of the government, were not of the minister. They rested with the OPP Commissioner.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But the government can help to bring that request forward and to encourage the OPP Commissioner to deploy those resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. The OPP are not to be directed. They are independent. They have discretion. And independence and discretion is not to be trifled with. So the government cannot direct, cannot influence. It is his jurisdiction to see the way in which he deploys his resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you did not believe you had the ability or the authority to recommend or to talk about the needs in Ottawa and to make any suggestions to the OPP Commissioner?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
We were not in a position to make any suggestions. I was comforted in knowing that the OPP Commissioner was alive to this request and that he was more than willing to provide the requested resources contingent on the plan for the dismantling and removal of the protest, being - - being there, being validated by the subject-matter experts. That was the impediment.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, on February 9 at 3:30, there was a call between Mayor Watson, Premier Ford, and Minister Jones. Were you on that call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m sorry?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
There was a call on February 9 with the Mayor of Ottawa, the City Manager, Mr. Kanellakos, and Solicitor General Jones. Were you aware of that call or were you on that call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not aware and not on it.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in that meeting, Mr. Kanellakos indicated about that meeting when he testified that Minister Jones expressed the view that the request was a law-enforcement issue that needed to be dealt with between the Chief and Commissioner Carrique, and that accords with what you just said right now; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So fair to say that she did not see a role in helping to pass on that request to Commissioner Carrique other than saying, you know, “Here’s the request”; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be a question for her, but it’s certainly consistent with what happened. There is not an ability to influence the OPP. There’s not ability to guide the OPP with regards to the deployment of resources. That is, under the Police Services Act, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commissioner.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Mr. Kanellakos testified that on this call, the City asked what other actions the province could take in terms of regulation or legislation to put pressure on the protesters to leave, and he reported that Minister Jones said that this was a law-enforcement issue and so therefore it should be dealt with law enforcement. Do you share that view that there was not a regulatory or legislative action that could have been taken by the province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There was a legislative action that was taken, and that was with regards to the --- the declaration of a provincial emergency and emergency orders were issued as a result of that declaration.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So aside from the declaration of the emergency, was there anything else that the province could have done at this point?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Are you referring to legislation ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- or resources? So legislation, no, I’m not aware of any other legislation that could have been invoked. I think it’s also important to understand that, at this period in time, the existing authorities available to police were perceived to be sufficient by both Chief Sloly, by Commissioner Carrique, and certainly by me.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to OPP00004580. And these are some text messages with Commissioner Carrique, and I’ll take you to page 70, the bottom of page 70. And if we go up a little bit. So it looks like you’re in blue because there it says: "Thanks, Deputy, much appreciated." That would be you, right, when -- the green, when -- when the person says, “Thanks, Deputy,” they’re referring to you; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m blue, commissioner’s green.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That’s right. Okay, perfect, that’s what I meant. Okay, so if we go up -- if we can go up a little bit more: "Deputy, on the call OPS and CACP. Any word if the requestion for operational resources to the premier and SolGen will be referred to OPP?" So that would be Commissioner Carrique saying that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then if we go down, in response to that question, you say: "Confident it will be referred, not certain." Why would it not be certain that the referral, anyway, would be made?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Because the letter was addressed to the Premier and to the Minister and I’m not in a position to speak for them, but we did have a meeting subsequently after that with -- and I’ve already testified to that -- with the Premier’s Officer, Cabinet Office, Secretary of Cabinet, et cetera, and it was determined at that meeting that absolutely it would be referred to the commissioner for assessment.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this was because you hadn’t had that discussion yet ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- to make the determination.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would there be a scenario in which that referral wouldn’t happen?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If I can take you to ONT00005154, and we’re moving ahead to February 8. When it says, “Call with OPP,” is that likely Commissioner Carrique?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to page 4 -- "Noon, meeting with feds and City of Ottawa."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
We down, we see all of the participants at that meeting. If we go down -- and this is a staff-level meeting, is my understanding, with provincial representation, federal representation, and also municipal representation; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we go to the bottom of the page, so it says: "Blair and Mendicino both want three- way with Mayor and SolGen and this is desire." Can you explain that notation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, it was communicated to me that the federal government, Ministers Blair and Mendicino wanted to meet with the Solicitor General and the Mayor of Windsor.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did that meeting take place?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I know that their were either two or three meetings that occurred at the minister level.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, so this would be what we’ve been calling the “tripartite meetings”; are you aware of that terminology that we’ve been using in the hearings here?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, but there were two level of meetings ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- and I attended either three or four at the officials level. This notation is with respect to the ministerial level, or the political level.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this time, at this meeting, did you have a sense of whether this was something that was possible and that could happen? Did you give a response to that request?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, my response was that I would communicate the request to Minister Jones.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you did that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you recommend that she attend, or did you give any recommendation with respect to attendance?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I passed on the request to Minister Jones.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you make any recommendation about attendance?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, ultimately, she did not attend, is my understanding; is that your understanding as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There were, to the best of my recollection, three meetings. I don’t know whether she attended one or not, but certainly two of the three, she did not attend.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding, too, is that they were looking for some provincial representation, if not the Solicitor General, then the Premier, and he also did not attend. Were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I'll turn now to Document SSM.NSC.CAN00003019. So if we -- these are some text messages. This is involving Mike Jones, who's the Chief of Staff of Minister Mendicino. And if we go down, we go down a little bit more, okay. And so essentially, if we go up a little bit -- so it looks like Mike Jones is saying: "On Ontario, we haven't had much from Jones, so we've asked the premier's office if there's someone else they'd like us to play with." And then if we go down, "How was that?" "Fine. He didn’t say no and promised an answer by end of day." So my understanding is that they were looking for some representation but ultimately, there was no provincial representation. Do you know why that was the case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If we go to SSM.NSC.CAN00002052, and this is a readout from the February 8 tripartite. And if we go down to where Minister Blair is speaking, we go down: "Ontario involvement, I know Marco has been having good conversations with Ontario. They are worried about being visible and then being asked about what the province is doing." Do you understand what this is in reference to?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
When he says, "They are worried about being visible", do you know who he would be having discussions with at the provincial level to make that assessment?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not part of this meeting, and perhaps that question can be asked of Minister Mendicino.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Is it accurate that the province was concerned about being visible and that was why it was not attending the meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't understand, the province was concerned about being visible. We were visible. The province was providing all sorts of support and resources to Ottawa, so I don't understand the substance of the question.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, it wasn’t visible in those meetings because it wasn’t attending, so was that a concern that if it came to the meeting, it would be asked about what it was doing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't have any information on that. I'm sorry.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you so SSM.CAN.NSC00002837. And this is a readout of a call between Mayor Watson and the prime minister on February 8. And if we go down -- keep going -- keep going -- yeah, keep going down -- all right. So we see the prime minister at the bottom says: "I know we are looking very carefully at what we can do more. Brenda Lucki is looking at that. One of the challenges is that it goes in steps. The first step is to go to the OPP, then RCMP. It's difficult for us to say what we need to do directly until we have a better idea of what the province is doing. That’s why this table is so important, but we are there to give more support as needed." So were you aware that the purpose of these ministerial meetings was to sort out who's providing what resources and in what order, essentially?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was being done at the officials' level. That was being done between commissioners and chiefs of police as well. I was not aware of this call. I was not aware of the contents of this call.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But in terms of the notion that having the three levels of government present at a meeting where resources can be discussed, official numbers can be clarified, the prime minister is indicating that that would be helpful, and I'm asking whether you would agree that that would be helpful?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, it would not be helpful because politicians ought not to interfere with the deployment of policing resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So here it looks like the politicians are, in fact, discussing resources, how many have been deployed, how many are required. We saw the mayor of Ottawa send a letter for resources. Is it your position that those actions were improper?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It is my position that the only people that are authorized in law to deploy resources are the commissioner of the RCMP and the commissioner of the OPP. They have sole jurisdiction. It's enshrined in the legislation. I don't know what the prime minister was thinking with regards to influencing and having either the RCMP and the OPP provide additional resources. That is not their role.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So short of deployment, I don't think anybody's arguing that the prime minister should be deploying resources, but in terms of passing along resource requests in terms of sorting out the numbers that have been provided and what's needed and what the order of operation should be, should the province be providing all OPP officers first and then the federal government and then the RCMP? It's unclear, and so my question is whether there is a role, short of deployment, that the politicians can play?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The resource requests were made. They were made public, they were made to the OPP commissioner for assessment, they were given to the RCMP commissioner. So those resources were being acted upon.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is there a role for politicians in assisting with these -- with the resource matters?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
How?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, my question is to you, sir.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t see a role for politicians to be involved with regards to deploying resources. Those resources requests were quite clear, the RCMP and the OPP understood what those resource requests were, and they were best placed in law to provide those resources.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So that said, you would not have considered it important for a provincial representative to be at these meetings, if I take what you're saying then?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I didn’t say that. I just said that politicians do not have a role in asking police services to deploy resources. That is not an appropriate role.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is there a role in helping to coordinate?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The OPP commissioner, the RCMP commissioner, Chief Sloly were, in fact, coordinating. And that’s where the coordination belongs. This was a policing matter. It was a police response.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So then if these meetings are in order to try to coordinate a solution and to come up with solutions, would you agree then, aside from the resource requests -- which I understand your position, I take your position on that -- was there -- there is a role though outside of the resources that the politicians can play, and these meetings could be a helpful venue for all three levels of government to be speaking to each other about those other measures that could be ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
About the other measures, the other solutions, what the art of the possible is, absolutely.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. The mayor testified that had the province participated in the trilateral meetings, there likely would have been less of a delay in receiving resources. Do you agree with that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Completely disagree.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we go to the bottom of page 2, yeah, and the prime minister, in the middle of that paragraph says: "But Doug Ford has been hiding from his responsibility on it for political reasons, as you highlighted, and important that we don’t let him get away from that, and we intend to support you on that." What is your response to those comments?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't have a response. Those are the comments of the prime minister and any questions about those comments ought to be referred to him.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any political reasons that Premier Ford would have had or the Ontario government would have had for avoiding these meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, my understanding is that there was a commitment by the Solicitor General to participate in these tripartite meetings. And, in fact, in a call with Premier Ford and Minister Mendocino, Ford appears to have committed to asking Jones to participate, but then later kind of withdrew that. Do you know what caused this change in posture?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I have no knowledge.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now Mayor Watson also testified that when he spoke to Premier Ford about attending these meetings, that Ford was adamant that he did not feel it would be useful to have three levels of politicians sitting around the table. And from the Mayor's view, he thought the Premier felt that it would be a waste of time, and he indicated that it wouldn't accomplish anything. Do you agree that it would have been helpful to have three levels of government at these tripartite meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Perhaps. Perhaps it would have been helpful to have discussions to see what the art of the possible is with regards to other solutions.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about to help kind of coordinate the flow of information and align positions, would it help for that as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Potentially.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now the Commission may hear evidence that the perception was that Ontario did not want to participate because they wanted the City of Ottawa to lead the response, and basically that it was a municipal response and that it should be limited to the City, and because Ontario viewed this as a federal problem. Are either of these reasons accurate, to your knowledge? Are you aware of these?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There's a lot to unpack there. Ottawa Police Service is the police service of jurisdiction, not the OPP, not the RCMP. And so we did not have the ability to impose the OPP on Ottawa without a direct request, without an invitation. So given the fact that they are the police service of jurisdiction, the OPP was in a position to provide the requested resources to deal with the problem.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was there more to unpack there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, could you -- I'm sorry, could you ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, the question ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- repeat the question?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, the question was whether these two reasons, whether to your knowledge, those were reasons for not participating. One, that the City of Ottawa should lead the response to these protests, and two, because this was a federal problem.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm sorry, I just don't know how to answer that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you to SSM.NSC.CAN.00003104. And, again, my understanding is this is Chief of Staff to Minister Mendocino and somebody from the Prime Minister's office. If we go down, Samantha Khalil, I believe. Keep going. Keep going down. Okay. So, "From [Chief of Staff] mayor about the mayor minister Jones call. It did not go well. She told him she had no interest in being part of a political round table." (As read) Were you aware that that was Minister Jones' position?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But I have to say, Minister Jones was, in fact, engaging in conversations at the political level with Minister Blair, with Minister Mendocino, with Mayor Watson. Those calls were, in fact, taking place.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you have discussions with her about participating in these calls?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Were you ever present on calls between Minister Mendocino and Minister Jones?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to SSM.CAN.00006068? And this is a read out of a call between Premier Ford and the Prime Minister on February 9. And if we go down, keep going, can you keep going. So they exchange some pleasantry there. And then PDF is Premier Doug Ford. And he says, "I understand and we all agree with peaceful protest but I'll start off with Ottawa [versus] Toronto. I'll say that the police chief and Ottawa Mayor totally mismanaged this. The Toronto [Police Department] and Toronto Mayor did a great job. They've entrenched themselves in Ottawa." You had -- you said you did not have discussions with the Premier during this time; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that includes phone calls but also correspondence?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he would be getting his kind of briefing from Solicitor General; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm assuming.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have an understanding for the basis of the Premier's view that the Ottawa Police Chief and the Mayor totally mismanaged it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you share that view?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Which view?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The view that the Ottawa Police Chief and the Mayor totally mismanaged it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I had no conversations with Premier Ford.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, I'm asking whether you shared the view, not with him, but in your own mind, whether you had that same view as he is expressing here.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I did not share that view with anyone at all.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, sorry, I mean, did you have -- did you hold that view? I should probably use that better. Did you hold the same view?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I wouldn't say that Ottawa Police Service mismanaged. I think that this was an unprecedented protest of significant magnitude and scope. And I think that the Ottawa Police Service did its best based on the information that it had. It was incredibly trying circumstances, and I certainly didn't envy the position that the Ottawa Police Service was put in.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about with respect to his comments regarding the Mayor? Did you have any view about the Mayor's actions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then Premier Ford says, "The bigger one for us and the country is the ambassador bridge and the state ground there." Would you agree that the provincial government's priority at this time was the Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think that Commissioner Carrique prioritised the deployment of resources to the Ambassador Bridge. He communicated that to me, for a whole host of reasons, with which I agree.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether politically the Ontario Government also viewed Windsor as a political priority?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not aware of that, but I have to say that the issue of the Ambassador Bridge was being well reported by mainstream media. Everybody that had a TV was certainly aware of how important that crossing was to Canada and to the province.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we keep going on his comments, keep going down the next page? So he says, I've asked -- second line, "...I've asked our AG to look at legal ways to give police more tools and exhaust legal remedies because the police are a little shy and I can't direct them. So that's one area we can focus on. We [can] take their polar licenses, we checked that. We can shut down their fuel consumption and cordon off highways. That's where we're at." What was your understanding at this time, and this is February 9, of the tools that the police needed, aside from boots on the ground, as they say, just resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I was not made aware by Chief Sloly, by Commissioner Lucki, or the OPP Commissioner of any additional tools at this point in time. And you said this is 9 February?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's correct.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not made aware of any additional tools that law enforcement required to and either the occupation in Windsor, the blockade in Windsor, or the occupation in Ottawa.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever have a discussion with the Solicitor General about what tools or legal remedies the Province could provide to the police?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any sense for what the Premier is suggesting here?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Can you refer me to a specific sentence, please?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. The last two sentences of the first paragraph.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
With regards to -- I don’t know what “polar licenses” are, quite frankly.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That could be a typo.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
“We can shut down their fuel consumption and cordon off highways.” I don’t know what he’s referring to when he’s talking about fuel consumption. With regards to cordon off highways, that’s quite evident. The ability to block and close highways using existing authorities in the Highway Traffic Act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And then on - - we’re now on the second page. The Prime Minister says, on the second line: “You shouldn’t need more tools - legal tools - they are barricading the OB economy and doing millions of damage a day and harming people’s lives.” Were you of the view at this time that there were no other legal tools that were required, that the tools required were available to the police at this time? Not resources, but legal tools.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not in receipt of any request from our policing leaders for any additional resources, whether that was Windsor, Ottawa, Commissioner Lucki, Commissioner Carrique, Chief Ramer. At no time did anyone ask me for any additional legislative authorities.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you felt that the police had the authority that they needed in order to bring these protests to an end?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
At that point of time, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in that same paragraph, in the middle of the paragraph, the Prime Minister says: “The bridges and tunnels act means the federal government has responsibility over the bridge and border, so there is a role for us to play and we’re happy to play it. But nobody can get on the bridge because they’re on municipal land being blocked.” And then further down, so just stick a pin in that, I’ll ask you something about that in a second. Further down, he says: “has Windsor asked […] anything of the OPP?” I think we’ll have to keep going down for that. Okay. There it is. “Has Windsor asked […] anything of the OPP? Have they made a formal request to make a […] request to support them” And the Premier says: “they’ve put that request in through the solicitor general. I spoke to the Mayor and that was the plan. [Solicitor General] was in touch as well and I understand the request is going forward” So at this time, it sounds like the Windsor request has gone through. Had the Ottawa request gone through at this time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on page 3, if we keep going down, yeah. The Prime minister says: “what are the next steps? You said the OPP are going in. are they keeping you apprised and do they understand the urgency? They can’t talk this out for 3 weeks, they need to act immediately” And then the Premier says: “they’ll act, but without directing them, it’s hard to describe their game plan. They’ll have a plan unlike Ottawa [where they] didn’t have a plan. I’ll get briefed tomorrow from the solicitor general and we’ll keep you updated. This is critical, I hear you. I’ll be up their ass with a wire brush.” And then the Prime Minister says: “We’re there with resources. Bill Blair will coordinate on our side, but you can reach out to Leblanc or me. You and I need to work together on this. People will be reassured by the two of us working together and we need to demonstrate this is not a place of lawlessness” And the Premier says: “agreed. You’ll get an update tomorrow” And then the Prime Minister says: “On Ottawa - it’ll go through stages of OPP to RCMP and we’ll have a plan. City of Ottawa has been struggling but as soon as OPP leans in a bit more, we’ll have more clarity on things. The federal government has no jurisdiction over Wellington street so it’s an area we need to [go through --] work through together. If the Ottawa residents have to go through another weekend like the past few weeks, it won’t go well” So in this discussion, there’s been some jurisdictional issues that have been identified. For example, the Federal Government doesn’t have jurisdiction over Wellington Street, the RCMP doesn’t have jurisdiction over Wellington Street, the Federal Government has some responsibility over bridges and tunnels, but policing is a provincial matter under the Police Services Act. So I just wanted to get your views on some of the jurisdictional challenges or issues that have been brought to light as we can see in this discussion, and how you see the different levels of government working together to come to a resolution to specially the events in Ottawa, which brought together many of those jurisdictional issues?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So from my perspective, both the municipal road that leads to the Ambassador Bridge, provincial -- I’m sorry, municipal jurisdiction. And so the police service jurisdiction there is the Windsor Police Service. And in Ottawa, on Wellington Street and the surrounding area, obviously Ottawa Police Service is the Police Service of jurisdiction and they are the two entities that are responsible for resolving both those issues. Do they need support? Absolutely. Is there a role for the Federal and the Provincial Government to play with perhaps identifying interlocutors, with providing opportunities for mediation, for sitting down with protestors to negotiate? Absolutely. But it’s ultimately a policing matter to resolve, and the police services of jurisdiction have that responsibility.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And once it becomes beyond the abilities of the local police service, how then do the other two levels of government work together to try to come to a solution, specifically with respect to Ottawa, which has those issues that we’ve identified?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well those discussions were in fact happening. They were perhaps not happening on a political level at a tripartite table, but they were happening between Minister Jones, the Premier, the Mayors of both Windsor and Ottawa, and certainly Ministers Mendicino and Blair. So those discussions were in fact happening.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so do you see the Provincial Government’s role in a city like Ottawa to be different than, for example, as somebody raised in one of the meetings, a city like Kingston that is not the National Capital Region and that is not the Capital City?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So both Kingston and Ottawa have their own police services. Both police services are the police service of jurisdiction. The Province is there to provide the necessary support upon request.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So those would be treated the same from the provincial standpoint?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, when the local police service is -- has gone beyond its capacity, is -- do you agree that the Province has primary responsibility to respond to those requests for services through the OPP?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Are you talking about generally or specifically with regards to Ottawa?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I thought you just told me it was -- my understanding from what you said is that it didn’t matter whether it was Ottawa or Kingston. So in any city in Ontario.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Unless there’s a distinction.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So certainly the Province does have a role to provide additional resources. And that’s done through the Commissioner of the OPP.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so to the extent that the OPP has exhausted its resources, it would then turn to the RCMP to require additional resources from the RCMP? Is that the kind of logical ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not necessarily. We still have other municipal police services as well that are able to assist. The policing meters in this province work collaboratively. They are all members of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police. Those calls were in fact happening on a regular basis. And so it is not just the OPP going to the RCMP for assistance. The OPP would have the ability to ask for resources from municipal police chiefs. A municipal police chief has the ability to reach out to other police chiefs to ask for resources as well. So certainly the Province has a role to play through the OPP, but so do municipal police chiefs as well. NA
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And in your view, the RCMP has a role to play as well; is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it’s really a coordinated response among all three levels of government?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, depending on the situation. And we heard that Ottawa was an unprecedented situation requiring all three orders of government to participate.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, at any point, did Commissioner Carrique, who I understand was mainly who was briefing you throughout this process, make any suggestion or ask about a provincial state of emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any discussions -- did you ask him whether he thought any of the measures under a provincial state of emergency would be helpful for him?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not, but I was certainly thinking about the EMCPA on or about that point in time. What was saw was an escalation in terms of protests. We saw protests in both Sarnia -- I’m sorry, in Sarnia, Windsor, the Peace Bridge in Toronto, and Cornwall, so I had a growing concern about the escalation of protests specifically designed to thin out police lines to prevent police from responding in Ottawa.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did there come a point where you considered that a provincial state of emergency would be helpful as you see these resources being spread out thin?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was certainly thinking about it, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of declaring a provincial state of emergency, that’s within the purview of the Premier; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Abd Cabinet.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Cabinet. And does the Solicitor General have a role in briefing or advising the Premier with respect to that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what’s that role?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Solicitor General is certainly free to provide that advice.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But it’s not at the Solicitor General’s recommendation that the Premier would do that; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Solicitor General certainly has the ability to provide a recommendation to the Premier.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of whether that recommendation was made by the Solicitor General?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m not aware of any discussions between the Minister and the Premier.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you have the ability to also make a recommendation to the Solicitor General with respect to declaring a state of emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you do that in this case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. Quite frankly, the Premier beat me to it. He signalled on the 10th of February that it was his intention to declare a provincial emergency. And given that signal, that intent on the 10th, several ministries started working together to permit the declaration to happen. And the essence of emergency declarations are for emergency orders to flow from that, so we were examining what emergency orders were required to support the emergency declaration. And one of the key people that we relied upon was Commissioner Carrique. So communicating to Commissioner Carrique, “There will be a provincial emergency declaration. What tools do you need to more effectively resolve the situation in both Ottawa and at the Ambassador Bridge.” And so that communication was ongoing between various legal departments, between my ministry, the Ministry of the Attorney General, Cabinet Office, Premier’s Office, and Commissioner Carrique.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it your understanding that the decision to declare a state of emergency was made before the measures were determined, what the measures would be that would fall under that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I know that the signal for an emergency declaration was made and then we started consulting with Commissioner Carrique with regards to what tools he required.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge what was the turning point or the tipping point for declaring an -- for wanting to declare an emergency as of the 10th of February?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know what the Premier was thinking but I was certainly in a position to have that decision on or around -- or that recommendation on or around the 10th simply because the matter was escalating. The number of protests were escalating. We saw repeated blockades and attempts in Sarnia, the Blue Water Bridge, Highway 402, Nipigon, Cornwall, the Peace Bridge, Windsor, Toronto, so certainly things were escalating, and I was certainly in a position to make that recommendation, and I would have had the Premier not beaten me to the punch.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And I’ll you to ONT00005149, and this is the briefing note that the Solicitor General sent to Cabinet regarding the declaration of the emergency of February 12th. Did you advise the Solicitor General on this briefing note?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So it’s cabinet office that prepares this briefing note.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And it’s not my ministry.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so you saw it when it came out, essentially; you didn’t have any input into it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
My ministry certainly had input into developing this note.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are aware of whether the drafting of the emergency measures had started by the time that the declaration was made on the 11th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was your understanding of the objective of the declaration and the emergency orders that accompanied it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The objective was to -- well, there were a number of objectives. The objectives were to provide law enforcement with the tools that they needed to effectively deal with the Ambassador Bridge, Ottawa, and any other protests that could develop in the future. So the emergency orders were designed, in my view, to both deal with the existing occupations and protests, but also to prevent, and reduce, and mitigate the harm in the future. So it was both reactionary and future-looking as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And if we can go down on this document. And so I just want to look at a little bit about -- look a little bit at the measures and what it -- what they prohibit. And so the first -- A(i) says: "Preventing someone from travelling to or from critical infrastructure as defined in 2(f)." So if we can go down to 2(f) -- yes, there it is. And so we see there from (i) to (x), or 1 to 10, the different elements under what is defined as “critical infrastructure”. It’s interesting to note that the Parliamentary Precinct is not included under “critical infrastructure”. Do you know why that was excluded from the definition of “critical infrastructure”?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Emergencies Management Civil Protection Act has a limitation in it, and that limitation is that all emergency orders need to be as minimally intrusive as possible. Given the fact that lawful protest is a Charter right, there was a concern that if we included the Parliamentary Precinct that people that are protesting some other issue would be impacted by that, and so we did not want to be over-broad with regards to including the Parliamentary Precinct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go back up to the beginning of that -- those measures -- keep going up. So if we go, then, to -- so, as you mentioned, then the Parliamentary Precinct would not be part of the definition of “critical infrastructure”, however, if we see in number 5, A(5), that the measures also prevent individuals from: "Preventing someone travelling to or from walkways, bridges, or highways, other than 400-series highways, which are already captured as “critical infrastructure”, if doing so would:" And there’s three conditions. Can you explain that particular measure and maybe explain what the purpose of that was.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So that particular measure was specifically designed to deal with the situation in Ottawa. We see that it refers and references “highways”. The definition of “highways” is taken from the Highway Traffic Act. And according to that definition, that certainly includes all the residential streets, including Wellington, in Ottawa. So this measure was specifically designed for Ottawa. And when we look at number 3: "If doing so would seriously interfere with the safety, the health, or wellbeing of member of the public." So specifically designed for Ottawa.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as you mentioned, highway in this case means essentially any road?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any concern that this might be over broad, if it captures any road anywhere in Ontario?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, because there's a caveat to it that the interference would have to either 1, 2, or 3: Seriously interfere with the safety, health, or wellbeing of members of the public, as an example. So this was not over broad.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And conversely, given that there are three requirements or three possible requirements -- one of the three would have to be triggered -- was there a concern that potentially, it wouldn't be able to apply to Wellington unless one of those three was met?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, there was not that concern.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were confident that these measures were targeted to the situation in Ottawa, but would not be over broad so as to impede peaceful protests in the Parliamentary precinct; is that a fair assessment?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to ONT00005152?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Can I just interrupt for a moment?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I just want to check on the witness. Do you want a break? This is going to be, I'm afraid, long, so the question is, do you want a break? You could have two breaks or we can keep going until you signal.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
We could keep going, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. You've got endurance. That’s good.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So it was ONT00005152. And this is now February 14, and these were amendments that were proposed to the Emergency orders. Were you aware of these at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you consulted on the amendments?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the solicitor general consult with you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Did she consult with me?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the consultation with the solicitor general?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what can you tell us about the purpose of the additional measures?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Can you scroll up for me, please?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So it's articulated right here. Confirm that provincial offences officers can, in fact, remove objects, including vehicles themselves, as well as causing others to remove them. In B), give provincial offences officers who remove objects or cause them to be removed, the power to detain and store those objects.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. Sorry, maybe I'll just clarify.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Sure.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What was the intended purpose of these amendments?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What are they targeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So with regards to the -- I'm sorry, we were receiving additional information from Commissioner Carrique with regards to what additional powers he required. So when you look at B, for example, there was a concern that if a vehicle was seized, sent to the pound, a person could certainly pay the fine or the storage fee, get the car back, and then certainly join up again with the protest. So this particular emergency order gave the police the ability to store that vehicle for as long as the emergency order was in effect. Also, there was the issue, as articulated by ADM Freeman yesterday with regards to CVORs and ensuring that the police made reasonable efforts to notify those individuals that had CVORs and where the vehicles were being detained and stored. There was also the requirement to ensure that tow truck operators' storage yards were, effectively, compensated, and so there was a provision here that referenced the Storage Liens Act, I believe it was, that made it clear that any monies owing could be enforced through that particular Act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to the second page in the first paragraph under "Why does Ontario need these changes?" We'll keep going. Right. Here we are. It says: "Following the declaration of emergency on February 11, 2022, action by police services have addressed the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor. However, as the bridge has just begun to reopen to regular traffic, there remains a threat of impeded access to or egress from the use of it and other critical transportation infrastructure, including essential trade corridors." What was your understanding of the continued threat of impeded access to or egress from the Ambassador Bridge at this time? This is February 14.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So there was information of various convoys coming to the Ambassador Bridge from -- potentially from Ottawa, potentially from other parts of Ontario. I know that the commissioner informed me that there was a call by protestors to come to Ontario to assist. And so that concern was real. And so that’s one of the reasons why this emergency order was declared and put into force. There was a concern that there would be continued attempts to block Highway 402, the Blue Water Bridge, the Ambassador Bridge, the Peace Bridge, Toronto, Nipigon, Cornwall, et cetera.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any coordination with the federal government on the tools that might be needed in the measures, in the provincial measures, to end the situation in Ottawa? Was there ever a discussion with federal counterparts about the measures?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not to my knowledge. I did not discuss this with Deputy Minister Stewart. I don't know whether Commissioner Carrique had that discussion with Commissioner Lucki.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So to your understanding and to your knowledge, neither did the solicitor general and neither did the premier, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. In your view, was the provincial declaration of emergency helpful in resolving the situation in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how so?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, it certainly provided the ability to tow vehicles and other objects that were blocking the roadway. And it certainly provided the ability to immediately suspend drivers' licences, permits, and CVOR registrations. It gave the police the ability to remove vehicles themselves and the provincial offences officers themselves if necessary. It certainly gave police the ability to store seized vehicles for a long term so that they could not be reused in a protest. And it certainly imposed significant fines on individuals. As an example, violating one of these emergency orders, to my knowledge, the maximum penalty for an individual was $100,000; for a director of a corporation, $500,000; and for a corporation, I believe it was $10 million.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So these measures were significant?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your knowledge, was any other level of government consulted on this provincial declaration or any of the emergency measures under it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I certainly had discussions with Deputy Minister Stewart after the declaration of the emergency, and we did discuss some of these provisions. Deputy Minister Stewart informed me that at one point in time, after the federal government --I'm sorry -- or while the federal government was discussing the Emergencies Act, that the provincial declaration of emergency certainly had more teeth than the provisions in the Emergencies Act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mentioned that you also spoke to Commissioner Carrique about what measures would be helpful?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any similar discussions with Commissioner Lucki?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was -- did anyone ask the province, anyone meaning within the federal government, the municipal government, OPP, or RCMP, was anybody requesting that the province declare a state of emergency, to your knowledge?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Were the elements there prior to February 10 for declaring a provincial state of emergency? Could it have been declared sooner?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There's a two-part test in the EMCPA that has to be met, so I think an analysis would have to be done to see when that two-part test could have been met.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you doing that analysis in your mind as time went on?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was thinking about it, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when -- at what point did you conclude that that was -- that that had been met?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
On or about the 10th when the Premier signalled that he had the intention to declare.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So prior to that, it was your assessment that the conditions were not there; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And that was primarily based -- well, I wouldn't say that the conditions were not there. That was primarily based on not receiving any direct request from any of our law enforcement leaders.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
For the declaration?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So had that request been made, you would have considered it sooner?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now it's my understanding that the provincial state of emergency closely coincided with Ontario relieving some of those provincial mandates. Is that your understanding as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not clear on provincial mandates.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, Commissioner, I'm about to move on. This might be an appropriate time for a break. I'm sure my friends would appreciate that as well.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Well, certainly the interpreters do. So I will -- we'll take a 15-minute break and then we can come back.
The Registrar (POEC)
The Commission is in recess for 15 minutes. La commission est levée pour 15 minutes.
Upon recessing at 4:17 p.m.
Upon resuming at 4:34 p.m.
The Registrar (POEC)
Order. À l'ordre. The Commission is reconvened. La commission reprend.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Give the Commissioner a minute.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Go ahead.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
DSG MARIO Di TOMMASO, Resumed
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. NATALIA RODRIGUEZ (Cont'd)
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Di Tommaso, I want to take you to ONT00005157. And this is now a call you had with Deputy Minister Stewart on February 13. Do you recall speaking with him about the Federal Emergencies Act at that time? If we can go to page 10?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the third point, "Also Federal Emergencies Act is being discussed s on the table but great reluctance to invoke. Primarily because Provincial penalties under EOs are much greater than what is available under [Federal] Emergencies Act. Advise both [Minister] Jones and SoC of above." So what did you understand Deputy Minister Stewart to be telling you about the relationship between the provincial and the federal measures?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, we didn't discuss the difference between the two measures in any great detail. The discussion was about the fact that the federal government was considering the invocation of the Federal Emergencies Act.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were informed of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you understand him to be saying that the provincial emergency measures were greater than the federal emergency measures, based on those notes that you made there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The penalties, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The penalties. And did he give you a sense for why it was being considered, if that was the case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you to ONT00003847. And these again are your notes. This is now February 14. And this is -- you make some notes in relation with -- to a call with Deputy Minister Stewart. At 8:55, "I inquire as to whether Federal Emergencies Act will be invoked today. Silence!" What was your interest in inquiring about the Federal Emergencies Act.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, he had signalled to me the day before that the Federal Government was considering the invocation of the Act. And in this call here, I wanted to know whether or not that was in fact happening. He did not answer my question.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you take that to mean that that was the affirmative; in not wanting to answer one way or the other?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the Province expecting this to happen, or was this just you asking, or were you asking on behalf of others?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
This was me asking.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know whether the Solicitor General or the Premier were expecting the government to invoke the Emergencies Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when Deputy Minister Stewart indicated that to you, that it was being considered, is that something you passed on to the Solicitor General?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so. Yes, I believe so.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, the Federal Emergency Act measures were put in place to help solve what you’ve indicated was a policing matter, so a law enforcement issue. Did you see any concern about using federal measures to deal with what is substantially a provincial matter, which is policing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, because the Emergencies Act invocation from my view was national in scope. And so, not knowing what the Federal Government concerns were Canada-wide, I wasn’t really in a position to have those concerns.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And there was a First Minister’s meeting on the morning of February 14; were you aware of it at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I found out later.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you know whether Premier Ford was given advance notice of this meeting and what the topic of the meeting was?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No idea.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether he was briefed on the Emergencies Act prior to that meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Solicitor General seek your input or advice on the Emergencies Act prior to that meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was it your view that the Federal Emergencies Act could help the police resolve the situation in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, if that’s the case then, were you of the view that the Ontario measures were not enough to bring those protests to an end?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, it was not your view?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct. I thought that the Provincial Emergency Declaration and the Orders that flowed from them were sufficient to assist the police in resolving both Ottawa and Windsor. Having said that, the Emergency Orders that flowed from the Federal Emergency Declaration were certainly helpful and I know that they were used by law enforcement.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So, if it was your view that the Provincial measures were enough to bring these protests, at least in Ottawa and Windsor to an end, why did the Government support then, the invocation of the Emergencies Act by the Federal Government?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be a question for Premier Ford and Minister Jones.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in your view, did you support the use of the Emergencies Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I never turned my mind as to whether I supported the Act. I can tell you that the authorities granted by the Federal Emergencies Act were helpful and they were used by law enforcement.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And just to clarify, your views were not canvassed with respect to whether or not the Province should be supportive of the use of the Emergencies Act, was it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we’ve heard testimony earlier this week about the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge, we’ve spoken a bit about that briefly as well. Is it your understanding that the request for resources that came from Windsor were, in some way prioritized by the OPP?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Comm. Carrique informed me that he was prioritizing the resources for deployment to the Windsor Bridge for a number of reasons.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you understand, or do you have any knowledge of whether the Solicitor General directed Comm. Carrique to prioritize Windsor resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Knowing both the Minister and Comm. Carrique, the Minister would absolutely not direct the Commissioner, nor would the Commissioner receive that direction well. He would refuse it.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay and why would that be?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Because there is -- that’s an operational matter, and Government, Ministers, myself are simply not permitted to direct the OPP with regards to -- an operational matter and deployment of officers is considered an operational matter.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So, the prioritization of resources, you would say, is an operational matter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Provincial Police Resources, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, but you would agree with me that the Solicitor General can issue directions to the OPP Commissioner that are not related to operational matters.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
With regards to policy matters, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what is your understanding of the scope of that authority; that the Solicitor General has to direct the OPP Commissioner on non-operational matters?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well that authorities continue within the Police Services Act. That the OPP Commissioner is subject to the Solicitor General’s direction, but my understanding from Ministry legal and Case law is that direction is only to apply with regards to human resources, budget, policy, and certainly nothing in regards to operations and certainly nothing in regards to any emergency provisions.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but as you mentioned human resources would fall under that. So, prioritizing human resources in one area over another; would that fall into ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of whether the Solicitor General did in fact issue any directions to the OPP Commissioner throughout these events?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m not aware and I believe, had she done that, the Commissioner would have informed me.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we see in the Institutional Report that filed on behalf of the Government of Ontario, that the Business sector became quite activated with respect to the Windsor blockade. And I think you mentioned something along those lines as well, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did that play a role in the decision to prioritize Windsor as an issue that had to be resolved?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So, it was Comm. Carrique that prioritized the deployment of resources to the Windsor blockade over Ottawa and, as he communicated to me, one of his considerations for doing so, one of many considerations, was the economic impact.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now witnesses have testified before the Commission that the City of Ottawa attended to make a deal or did make a deal with protesters to move trucks out of residential areas; you’re aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was informed by Deputy Minister Stewart at one point in time, on a phone call.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you know that it was Dean French who was the person representing, or negotiating on behalf of the protesters?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Deputy Minister Stewart informed me of that.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you didn’t -- you weren’t aware of that prior to his telling you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know how Mr. French got involved and became the representative of some of the organizers in this?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any contact with Mr. French during any of the time of these protests?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether Premier Ford or his staff had any contact with Mr. French?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether Mr. French was acting under the instructions of the Government, the Ontario government, to broker this deal, to find a resolution?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we know the Emergency Management Ontario and the Provincial Emergency Operation Centre were both engaged in the Windsor situation. They were not engaged with respect to Ottawa; do you have a sense for why that is?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There were engaged in Ottawa. There was a field officer from Emergency Management Ontario that was embedded in the Ottawa Emergency Operations Centre.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about the Provincial Emergency Operation Centre?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Provincial Emergency Operation Centre was in full activation mode on the 11th of February.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Provincial Emergency Operation Centre is located in Toronto.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, but I mean it was activated with respect to the events in Ottawa on February 11th. Is that what your ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- what your evidence is? Okay. But not prior to that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So there are three levels of activation with regards to the Provincial Emergency Operation Centre. There is routine monitoring, there is enhanced monitoring, and then there is full activation. And the PEOC went into full activation on the 11th of February. Before that, it was in enhanced monitoring mode.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you able to tell us when it went into enhanced mode?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Eleven (11) -- oh, I'm sorry. I am not.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Can I take you to PB.NSC.CAN.00007378? This is a letter from Commissioner Carrique on February 22nd to you. And if we go to the second page, you recall receiving this letter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If we go to page 2, the last paragraph, Commissioner Carrique says, "While this situation is unprecedented, the OPP worked with Legal and determined that because we are engaging companies under the provisions of the Emergencies Act, not as procurement, contract or agreement, that we should work within the reasonable compensation provisions consistent with the terms of the Regulations." (As read) Now my understanding is that the tow truck operators were indemnified under the Emergencies Act. Are you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you involved in discussions around what indemnification could be provided to tow truck operators?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that the OPP was delegated power under the Emergencies Act to compel tow truck operators; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that done, were tow truck operators compelled under the Emergencies Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be a question for Commissioner Carrique.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In the evidence we received from Commissioner Carrique, it seems that the trucks had been lined up and ready to go before the letters were sent out, but that he had concerns about them backing out at the last minute. Do you recall this? Were you aware of this at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, Commissioner Carrique did make me aware of that concern.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now just to go back to a point regarding the day-to-day enforcement operations, which as you have testified, the Solicitor General can't direct, in your view, was the OPS providing adequate police services at the time when the convoy became entrenched?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would say, yes, with the support of the OPP, yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so then you understood that to mean that there was public order in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now the Police Services Act provides that if the Ontario Civilian Police Commission finds that a municipal force is not providing adequate and effective police services, it can communicate that finding to the Board of the municipality and direct the Board to take the measures that the Commission considers necessary. Do you have any views on whether the Solicitor General's office should be able to recommend to the Commission to take such a step? I understand that right now that's not contemplated in the Act. I'm asking whether something like that would be helpful.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So the Solicitor General does have the ability to write the OCPC to ask it to investigate the provision of adequate and effective police services.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And -- right. So that's a different provision. It's my understanding that the Commission may, at the request of the Solicitor General, investigate, inquire into and report on the conduct or the performance of duties of a municipal Police Chief. Did the Solicitor General, to your knowledge, consider making such a request from the Commission?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are there any other mechanisms that can be used for the Solicitor General or the Commission, in this case the Oversight Commission, to remove a Chief of Police or have a Chief of Police step aside if it has concerns about its performance?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So the OCPC has the ability to suspend and/or remove a Chief of Police. A Police Service Board of jurisdiction has the ability to suspend a Chief of Police. And in my view, in this particular circumstance, the entity that was best placed to deal with any performance issues that it perceived would be the Police Service Board of jurisdiction.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So my question is, should there be a mechanism, doesn't exist in the Police Services Act, but should there be a mechanism by which the Solicitor General can take steps to ensure adequate and effective police services if it is of the view that there are circumstances that warrant it where perhaps the Board is not able to act, or is not acting, it's receiving inadequate information, where there's a deficiency of some kind, which then does not allow for the Board, who as you say, would be the entity that would normally be the one to do that, would it be helpful to have some -- that kind of a mechanism in place?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think that that is a discussion that needs to take place with Legal Services. We are currently in the process of drafting regulations in regards to the Community Safety and Policing Act, which we hope, with Cabinet approval and legislative approval, to be brought into force some time in late 2023 or early 2024. So discussions certainly need to happen. But you're asking me a question about whether it's appropriate for the Solicitor General to have that authority? Perhaps. Perhaps it would be appropriate for the Commissioner of the OPP to have that authority, given the fact that he had responsibilities across the entire province and perhaps that authority would be better suited for the Commissioner to have the ability to step in and take over a particular operation if there was reasonable grounds to believe that adequate and effective services were not being delivered.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But in this situation, once again, I believe that the Police Services Board was best placed to deal with that issue.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on that point, if I can take you to OPB00001647? So these are the meeting minutes of a meeting of the Ottawa Police Services Board on February 5th, and this is the one I believe you and Commissioner Carrique had been texting about on February 5th about a meeting at the Board. This is the in-camera portion of that meeting. And if I can take you down to I believe it's page 2 or 3, if we can just go to the second page? Okay. If we keep going down. Just scroll down. Okay. So in the middle of that paragraph, it says, "The Chief reassured the Board that there was a comprehensive plan. However, he could not provide all the details of what the Service was doing operationally." (As read) So here's an example where the Board has been told by the Chief that on February 5th there's a comprehensive plan. My understanding from your testimony is that there was not a comprehensive plan to end the demonstration on February 5th. Were you aware that the Board was being given then information that there was a comprehensive plan on February 5th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. And with regards to this particular section here, I think that the Police Service Board is entitled to receive operational information in-camera. The Morden Report states that. Now, the Morden Report does not have the force of law, but one of the recommendations certainly says that a Board is entitled to receive that operational information. Now, had the Board not been satisfied with either the performance of the Chief or the provision of that operational plan, it had options.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. What were the options?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It certainly could have invited the OPP and the RCMP to come in and brief it as to whether or not there was an operational plan to dismantle. It could have informed itself better. The Board had the ability, according to the Morden Report, to make recommendations to the Chief of Police, and the Chief of Police certainly had the ability to either accept those recommendations or not. The Board could not infringe on operations, could not direct the Chief on operations, but it certainly had the ability to make those recommendations. Had the Chief declined to accept those recommendations, that would have informed the Board as to what its next steps ought to have been. And one of the options was for the Board to make a request under section 9 of the PSA to the Commissioner of the OPP to step in and take over that particular operation. That was an option that was available to the Board.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So were you aware that the Board was informed on February 5th that there was a comprehensive plan?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to OPP -- and I’m almost done, Commissioner. I just need a couple more minutes, if you will. OPP00004580. And if I can take you to -- these are text messages again. If I could take you to page 128? And this is between you and Commissioner Carrique. And at 3:59, if we can find that, so we -- again, we said the blue is you and the green is Commissioner Carrique; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you say to Commissioner Carrique: “In a confidential board meeting I’m hearing Sloly tendered his resignation and external chief will be hired. Still confidential as meeting is going on.” And he says: “Interesting - this will be very important to confirm.” How did you learn about what was happening in the confidential board meeting as it was happening?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So there was a Police Service Board Advisor from the Ministry in that confidential meeting.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Lindsey Gray?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how were you receiving information about what was happening at the Board meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Through Ken Weatherill.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that through text messages?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t remember. May have been phone calls, text messages. Don’t remember.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And sorry, what was the name of the person you indicated?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Ken Weatherill.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who is Ken Weatherill?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He is the current Acting Assistant deputy Minister in charge of the Inspectorate of Policing Division.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how was Ken Weatherill aware of what was happening at the board meeting? Was he in attendance at the board meeting at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He was communicating with his Police Service Board Advisor.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that would be Lindsey Gray?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if I understand it, Lindsey Gray is in the meeting, she’s communicating with Ken Weatherill, and he’s communicating to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that normal protocol in a confidential board meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, in his evidence, Commissioner Carrique indicated he was concerned about the hire of an external chief in Ottawa. Were you aware of Commissioner Carrique’s concerns?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’d have to check the text messages and my notes. I’m not aware of him communicating his concern with regards to an external chief. I stand to be corrected. I just don’t remember.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any concerns about an external chief being hired?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. What I was most concerned about was that the impending decision for positive action not be interfered with. That was my main concern. We were going into the third weekend. There was a decision for positive action, the resources were in place, and my main concern was that if there was a new chief, that chief would have to be briefed up, would have to review whatever plan there was, and that would slow things down.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you to my last document, OPP00004583? And I’ll take you to page 52. Now, these are text messages between Commissioner Carrique and Commissioner Lucki. So you were not on these messages. The second blue bubble on page 52. Let’s keep going down. Okay. So sorry, in the green. And I understand that green is Commissioner Lucki and blue is Commissioner Carrique. “With respect to your comments yesterday, I agree, we need to ensure OPS leaves Steve in play until we have done what we need to do. Introducing a new external player in the short term will set us back.” And again, this is February 16 at, it looks like, 12:36 or so. Were you aware that Commissioner Carrique was passing on the information that you had relayed to him to Commissioner Lucki?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not aware of these discussions between the two Commissioners.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And were you aware that commissioner Lucki asked Deputy Minister Stewart to reach out to Steve Kanellakos about this?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go down? So for context, we’ll keep reading. So Commissioner Carrique says: “I will see what I can do to get them to delay bringing in an interim Chief, if you think that will help” And Commissioner Lucki says: “If you have some influence, I think it would be helpful. Our Ministry Police Advisor is going to suggest the same.”
I’m sorry to interrupt, Commissioner and Commission Counsel. I think it’s the inverse. The green is Commissioner Carrique and the blue is Commissioner Lucki.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you.
Seems to make sense now that we’ve read ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
--- further.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much. So then with the new colour coding, Commissioner Lucki says: “I will see what I can do to get them to delay bringing in an interim Chief, if you think that will help” And Commissioner Carrique says: “If you have some influence, I think it would be helpful. Our Ministry Policing Advisor is going to suggest the same.” And then if we keep going down? “10-4” And again, this is, Commissioner Lucki said: “Had DM Stewart reach into Steve K (Ottawa City Manager. He assures that they are very sensitive to this, keen for the ICC plan to proceed and don’t want Bell to be displaced. Rob got the sense that there’s a lot of political infighting going on.” To what extent were you aware of these discussions that were being had with respect to the Chief of Police in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not aware at all. And what my position was with regards to the selection of the next chief, that was the exclusive jurisdiction of the Police Services Board and I certainly didn’t want my advisor to interfere with that at all.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the discussions that are being had here, would you agree that this is impermissible, kind of political interference in something that is in the exclusive purview of the Board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know whether anyone followed up with these actions at all, but I made it clear to both Ken Weatherill and the Advisor that they were not to interfere with the exclusive jurisdiction of the Board and it was the Board’s sole responsibility to select the next chief, full stop.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if these actions had been taken, is it your view that this would have been improper?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any communications between the Province and the City with respect to this issue?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the response to -- the Ontario Government’s response to the events in Ottawa and Windsor adequate in your view?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m sorry, could you repeat that question?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The Ontario Government’s response to the situation in Ottawa and Windsor, is it your view that that was an adequate response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there more the province could have done?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think that the province did all it could have done. I think it did.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In your view, was the federal response adequate, in this case, to Ottawa and Windsor, from your vantage point, of course?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From my vantage point, the emergency orders that flowed from the Federal Emergency Declaration were helpful. As an example, it provided indemnification to tow truck drivers. That is something that the provincial EMCPA does not permit. For example, the Federal Emergency Orders permitted the tow trick drivers, as an example, to be compelled. That is not something that the provincial EMCPA permits. The only thing that the provincial EMCPA permits is protection from liability, whereas the federal orders certainly go further. So they were very helpful in resolving the Ottawa situation.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And from your vantage point, was there more that the federal government could or should have done, or done earlier?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And same question with respect to the municipal, again from your vantage point.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
In terms of the Emergency Declaration?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In terms of what could or should have been done differently in order to respond to the events in Ottawa.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
From a municipal perspective?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So, yes, I think one of the things that the Municipal Emergency Declaration -- you know, when you look at Section 4 of the EMCPA, it is exceptionally broad. And so, in addition to declaring the Municipal Emergency Declaration, it was open to the head of council to issue emergency orders, and that did not happen. Options available at the municipal level included increasing maximum fine for bylaw offences. Now, I know that they requested the regional senior judge increase the out-of-court settlements. That was done -- great -- but certainly not the maximum offences permitted. They could have done that. They could have permitted -- they could have issued an order preventing all sorts of activities. They could have leveraged Section 444 of the Municipal Act. They could have issued orders to stay out of a certain area. They could have issued an order prohibiting all sorts of activities within a defined area. So there were all sorts of tools that could have been provided by the municipality. Whether or not those additional authorities could have been enforced by the police service of the jurisdiction was up to the discretion of local police. And we’ve heard Chief Sloly talk about some of the impediments and challenges about enforcement and that they would be swarmed, that there was an aggressiveness to the protesters, but I think that equipping police in the earlier stages additional tools could have potentially been helpful.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, it’s just more toll in the toolbox.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would you agree with me that the situation that went on for 25 days in Ottawa, it was unacceptable that it lasted that long; would you agree with that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Had there been a possibility to resolve that situation earlier, I would completely in favour of that. I have been around through a number of other situations where blockades lasted that long, and I reference the 2020 blockade of the CN rail in Tyendinaga. That took about three weeks to resolve. I reference the Caledonia issue, and that took several weeks to resolve, three to four weeks. And so, from my perspective, the operation in Ottawa to dismantle the blockade from a policing perspective was in fact a success. Let’s not forget, there was no loss of life. Nobody got hurt. Tear gas was not used. We did not have those ugly scenes of people with bloodied heads. And so from that perspective, the police operation to dismantle was a success. I’d rather be hear testifying at this Commission before this Commissioner than at several inquests in regards to deaths. I’d much prefer to be here today than at an inquest. So I think the operation to dismantle was a success and full compliments and kudos to the police officers that served so ably, and many compliments to the policing leadership that was present then. It was a difficult task for all concerned, including the residents, but including the police officers that served and the policing leaders as well.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Di Tommaso. Those are my questions for you. Thank you, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay, thank you. First, I’d like to call on the Government of Canada, please.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANDREA GONSALVES
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Thank you, Commissioner. Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. I’m Andrea Gonsalves, one of the lawyers for the Government of Canada in this inquiry. Now, as I understand your evidence, one of your roles in connection with these events, and more generally, is to brief the Solicitor General, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And in particular, on information received from the OPP Commissioner that is of interest or concern to the political level?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And either directly or through the Solicitor General or the Secretary of Cabinet, you would also be involved in briefing Cabinet itself?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not brief Cabinet.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
I’m speaking more generally. Outside of these matters, is that something you do from time to time either through the Solicitor General or through the Secretary?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
If called upon to brief Cabinet, I would be there to brief Cabinet.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
So is it fair to say that your role is as a conduit from the police to the political level?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s one of my roles.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And Commissioner Carrique gave you regular updates on the picture across the province throughout these events, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
He’s a highly experienced and highly respected police commissioner?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
He’s an advisor to you and the Government of Ontario in respect of these matters?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you accept his advice and his guidance on matters pertaining to his mandate, his field of responsibility; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It depends on what that advice is. It depends on what that -- the circumstances are.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And in respect of the circumstances that we’re talking about here today, these events, you trusted the advice that he was giving to you and the government, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Now, there were a number of protest activities across a vast geographic area in Ontario; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you’ve listed a few. It was not only Ottawa, Windsor, but also Sarnia, Toronto, the Cornwall area, Nipigon out in the Niagara Region; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And I gather you shared a concern with Commissioner Carrique about spreading police resources thin across these many areas so vastly spread out, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And was it one of your concerns that there may have been a deliberate plan on the part of protest organizers to stretch police resources beyond their capacity?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
It appeared that the protest activities were coordinated?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And I gather you were aware that among the organizers were former military and police officers, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I learned that at some point time, not entirely sure when.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
At what stage, okay. And police officer -- former policer officers and perhaps also former military would have a unique understanding of the logistical and resource challenges that police would face, especially the OPP because of the large geographic area it covers, in responding to simultaneous protests and blockades, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
They would have better understanding than most.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Right. And I want to -- let’s go to ONT00005153. This is one of your notes. It’s dated February 3rd. And we’ll scroll down to below the black, keep going. Okay, if you could just -- sorry, next page, keep going. Okay, stop there. And this is the call with Toronto Police Chief Ramer that you had that day; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And down at the bottom of the page there, there's three lines, coordinated, tactically trained, dispersed POU assets. You recall Chief Ramer talking to you about that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Fair to say that one of his observations as well is that these protests were being influenced or part of the tactical planning were those with training in tactical operations?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was my understanding, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And there's another note, ONT00005155. We'll start at page 14, please. This is the 10th of February. If we could keep scrolling down -- page number -- I can't tell if my writing your handwriting or my page number is wrong. Apologies, it's page 3. Yeah, and just under the line that says "Intel" there, if we keep scrolling. You see the third bullet point speaks of former police officers as well as one intel officer. So at least by February 10th, you had that information?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And with former military and police embedded with this group, you would expect they know that police are not necessarily built for a long-lasting occupation, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would agree.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And I understand, Mr. Di Tommaso, that you were a Toronto Police Service officer for many years?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And so given your own policing background, this would have been front and centre in your mind?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
If we go down -- I think it's page 20 -- got my reference right -- I'm not seeing it. I'm going to come back to that. Now, because these protest activities were connected, I take it another concern you had is that activities at one location could have effects in other areas across the province, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And if the police and government authorities didn’t get it right in their response at one location, that could have an impact throughout Ontario, yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And indeed, in other parts of Canada?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And are you aware, sir, that the OPP had, in fact, identified the potential that there was a deliberate plan to stretch law enforcement among the protest organizers?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was a discussion I had with Commissioner Carrique, and that was a concern of his that he communicated to me, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Was that information that you passed on to the political level?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't remember.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. Now, you've given some evidence of a call that you attended between officials from Ottawa and Canada on February 6. Do you recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And we're going to pull up the notes ONT00000311. And in participating in this call, you understood that both Ottawa and the federal government were eager to have the province come to the table to talk about the protest in Ottawa, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
You were provided with important updates about the situation in Ottawa on this call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you would agree that things were volatile and evolving rather quickly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
They were volatile.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And I take it you briefed -- and I apologize if you said this in response to questions from Commission counsel -- but you briefed Minister Jones on the information that was conveyed to you in this call?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did talk to her about this call. To what extent, I don’t remember, and so I wouldn't -- I would not want you to think that I briefed her completely on the contents of this six-page report.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. But you likely would have passed on to her at least the information that stood out to you as being important for her to know?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And Commission counsel took you to the comments of NSIA Jody Thomas at the end of the document. I'd like to go there as well. It's on the very last page. And again, she had put to you or she asked you would the province be looking to the federal government if this protest was happening outside of the City of Ottawa, for example, in Kingston. You took from this question that certainly, NSIA Thomas thought that the province was looking to the federal government to respond to what was going on in Ottawa.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
My response was that the federal government had a role to play in this.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah, sorry, but before we get to your response, I'm asking about what you understood from her question. Did you understand from her question that she thought the province was looking to the federal government to respond?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I understood from her question that the federal government was trying to wash its hands of this entire thing. That’s what I took from it.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And yet, you understood that the federal government was trying to get Ontario to a tripartite table with Ottawa as well as itself, the federal government, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Ontario was at a tripartite table at the officials' level.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Right. But Canada was trying to get that done at the minister's level. You understood that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yes. You've also told us that Canada, in particular, through the RCMP, was providing appropriate support and resources to OPS, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And when you testified about this statement in response to questions from Commission counsel, you also -- you said that you felt it was not aligned with Deputy Minister Stewart's comments about the federal government having a role in finding interlocutors. You remember giving that evidence?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. Yes. Deputy Minister Stewart certainly acknowledged that the federal government had a role, and that’s why I said that the comments of Jody Thomas were not aligned with that. I felt that she was communicating to me that she thought the federal government did not have a role.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And did I take your evidence correctly that you understood that Deputy Minister Stewart had made that comment in the context of the names that we see higher up on the page there, Murray Sinclair, Bob Rae, Louse Arbour.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, I know for a fact that it's in this document where he talks about the role of the federal government with regards to mediation and interlocutors.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. So -- and could we just scroll down a little bit more please? Yeah, just -- and so you're not talking about the comment there that came from Chief Peter Sloly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. Keep on going. The other way. Right here. Question from Rob Stewart. "Can there be a core group of negotiators from Ontario, Canada, OPS, to support the diffusion of this protest in order to satisfy the political objectives of the federal government?" I took that to mean that he believed that the federal government had a role to play with regards to developing a core group of negotiators. So there's confirmation, from my understanding, there's confirmation by Rob Stewart that the federal government had a role to play.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And he also lists Ontario there, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. Yes, he does.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And in your response to the NSIA -- if we could go back to the end on page 9, please, your response was to refer to the protest and encampment being a movement against the federal mandate on trucks and that they came to Ottawa from across the country for that purpose. In making that comment, Mr. Di Tommaso, were you speaking on your own behalf, or was that Ontario's position at the time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was speaking on my own behalf.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
So that was not Ontario's position?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was speaking on my own behalf. I did not consult with the Premier or the Minister. This was a free-flowing open discussion, and so I did not have an opportunity to discuss what Ontario's position was.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you referred in both your interview summary and your evidence earlier today to an MOU between the City of Ottawa and the Federal Government with respect to policing the streets adjacent to the Parliamentary Precinct.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
I'm somewhat confused as to what that MOU is. You've also testified to your clear understanding that OPS is the police of jurisdiction on Wellington Street and other city streets around the Parliamentary Precinct; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Are you by any chance thinking of the Nation's Capital Extraordinary Policing Costs Program?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know what it's called. I had been informed that there is an MOU between Public Safety Canada and the Ottawa Police Service with regards to provision of policing resources in and around Parliament Hill. That is the extent of my knowledge. I don't know what the name of the document is, and I don't know what the contents are.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
So if this memorandum is in existence, it's not something you've ever seen before?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Now you also gave a few reasons why -- and this is in your interview summary, but I believe they were echoed in your evidence earlier today, you say that there were -- it was open to the Federal Government to take a number of possible responses to the protest. You recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
So one of the possible responses you raised there was meeting with protesters; yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you referred to not only Deputy Minister Stewart's interest in that, but also OPP Inspector Marcel Beaudin?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah. Have you seen, have you listened to or read Inspector Beaudin's testimony at this inquiry?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Well, he certainly has given evidence that there were a variety of challenges to PLT engagement in the Ottawa protest, and I take it that wouldn't surprise you given everything you know in your own policing background?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It would not surprise me.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Right. For instance, extremely fractured and disorganized leadership?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Objectives that were unrealistic, undemocratic, unconstitutional; yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
The crowd was constantly shifting with new convoys coming and going over the course of the weeks?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you accept those would all be challenges to engaging in a meaningful -- in a way that would meaningfully reduce the size of the protest; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
They would be challenges, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
If we go to your notes at ONT00005155? Page 10, please. Down towards the bottom half of the page. Keep going. Pause there. So the second bullet point, as I read it, "What can Feds do from federal government perspective?" And then below that, "Recommend to identify people to sit down with protesters, six groups. PLT to go to six groups. Condition to leave and..." (As read) What does it say after that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Denounce.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
"...then meeting." So you understood there were at least six distinct groups that would need to be negotiated with in Ottawa; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Now we understand from your evidence and others that on February 11th, the Solicitor General provided a letter to Commissioner Carrique that was intended to be distributed to the protesters in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And that letter offered a meeting with protest leaders if the protest was dispersed, they went home and denounced the protest; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you understood that that letter was unsuccessful, it had no impact on the protest in Windsor; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was my understanding. I did try to get Deputy Minister Stewart to sign onto the very same letter. I thought that having Ministers from the two orders of government could have potentially been more successful. I tried to get Deputy Minister Stewart to provide the services of the federal Ministers. He was unsuccessful.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
You're aware that the protest group in Windsor also had fractured, disorganised leadership?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know to what extent.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. You would defer to the Critical Incident Commander and her evidence on that point?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah. Aware that they similarly had unrealistic or at times different and confusing demands?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would defer to Inspector Beaudin, a leader of the PLT. I would refer to the Critical Incident Commander. I did not have a direct line of sight on those protesters.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And certainly, on February 11th when the Province's offer was rejected, the Critical Incident Commander in Windsor considered that any further efforts at negotiation were no longer an option?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not aware of what her testimony was, and I did not have any direct contact with her.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. But again, you would certainly defer to her assessment of the situation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
If that was her assessment, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And then there was the February 13th exchange of letters between Mayor Watson and Ms. Tamara Lich, where there was an offer by the Mayor to meet with protesters provided that trucks were moved out of the residential streets in Ottawa to Wellington Street or elsewhere. You're aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm generally aware. I'm not aware -- I have not read the letter. I'm not aware of the details, but generally aware.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you're aware that that exchange of letters did not bring any sort of an end to the protest in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And are you aware that as of February 14th, the OPP's own assessment was that there was really no longer any path to clearing the protest in Ottawa through negotiation or any way to do it with the protesters leaving voluntarily?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
If you could show me that assessment, I'd appreciate it.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Sure. It's OPP00003732. February 14th, Operational Intelligence Report. Have you seen these kinds of reports, Mr. Di Tommaso?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. Go down to page 38, please. Keep scrolling. There's the assessment heading there. And if you start to read, I will start to read from the third line down, "Owing to the scope, nature of the conflict and duration of the Ottawa Freedom Convoy occupation, there is no clear pathway toward reaching a satisfactory resolution that would see the protest group voluntarily end their action and depart the Ottawa area." (As read) You see that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you would accept that assessment by the OPP?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
So the second reason that you gave, or the second response that you suggested that the federal government could have taken to deal with the protest is to modify the federal vaccine mandates. You remember saying that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you also understand that at least some of the protesters were demanding that all vaccine mandates be dropped; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And that would include mandates outside the jurisdiction of the federal government, that are in provincial areas of jurisdiction; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
There was nothing the federal government could do about those?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And the Government of Ontario would not find it acceptable to capitulate and change its policies because a group of protestors chose to occupy a city; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not have that discussion with the Minister or the Premier and I’m not in a position to define what Ontario’s position is on that issue.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
I would put to you, sir, that Ontario would find that sort of thing undemocratic and unacceptable?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That is the likely position. I can’t speak for the Ontario Government on that particular issue.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And it may well encourage and embolden this kind of behaviour whenever groups disagree with government policy?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Likely, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Right. The third reason you gave is that -- or the third, sorry, proposed response that you suggested the Federal Government could have taken was to provide the necessary resources for a police response; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And I think we can agree that based on your earlier testimony, you accept that the RCMP did that? It provided the resources that were requested and required; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
I understand ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
All of those replies were in reference to Jody Thomas, in my interpretation of her comments that the Federal Government did not have a role. And those are the things that were going through my mind in terms of the possible options that the Federal Government could have considered.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Understood, sir. So I’d like to go, please, to ONT00005152. Okay I’ve got the wrong notes. Let me try that again. Sorry, it’s 5154. You attended a meeting at the officials level with the City of Ottawa and the Federal Government on February 8th? Remember that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
These are your notes of that meeting. If we scroll down? Starting on page 2. Sorry, keep going. It’s page 4. And I take it, sir, you understood from this meeting in particular that Ministers Blair and Mendicino wanted a three-way discussion with Ottawa and the Solicitor General?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah. If we go to the top of the next page, please? You were advised that the Federal Ministers were very focused on three levels of government coming together?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. I was also aware that the Federal Ministers were not focused on negotiation, just a show of collaboration.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
That’s show or share?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Show.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Show. Okay. Thank you. And if we move down to the next page, please. This is an update being provided to the attendees at the meeting by Peter Sloly. And under the heading “Media in next hour”: “Minor children embedded in red zone…” (As read)
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
“…ability to attack is predicated on safety of women and children.” (As read) Right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And so that would be information that’s troubling to you from a public safety perspective?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That there were children in ---
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
The Federal Government did convene tripartite calls among Ottawa, Ontario, and Canada on February 7th, 8th, and 10th, you’re aware?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you’ve testified that Ontario, and specifically Minister Jones, was invited to attend and didn’t do so; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Minister Jones was invited. She did not intend. But she was having bilateral discussions on a frequent basis with Mayor Watson, Minister Mendicino, Minister Bill Blair.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
If we could pull up SSM.CAN.00000086? Scroll down, please. And the fourth bullet there: “commitment by ON to have Minister Jones participate in the tripartite meetings, starting today…” You’re aware that such a commitment was given?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. And from my perspective evidence, we’ve seen in some of the evidence here, Premier Ford was in contact with the Prime Minister, Minister Jones was in contact with various federal ministers as well.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Are you aware, sir, that Premier Ford himself told Minister Mendicino on February 9th that he, Premier Ford, would tell Minister Jones to participate in the tripartite table?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I had no discussions with Premier Ford.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. We don’t need to pull it up, but my document reference for that is SSM.NSC.CAN00002832. Now, you referred to the discussion between the Prime Minister and Mr. -- sorry, Premier Ford on February 9th. You said you did not participate in that call, you did not listen in?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
But you understand that in that call, both leaders agreed to -- that there was a need to work together in resolving these protests; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you testified about the State of Emergency that was declared by Ontario on February 11th.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And the Ontario definition -- or the definition of emergency in the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act in Ontario, an emergency means a situation or an impending situation that constitutes a danger of major proportions that could result in serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property. And it goes on from there. And it was your assessment that that definition was met by February 10th; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And let’s pull up WIN00002249. Are you familiar with this report on Ontario’s declared provincial emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And if we scroll down to the bottom, please? I think it’s all the way on page 4. Yeah. There’s a section there on why the Emergency Order was necessary and essential. And I take it you agree with and endorse what’s written there; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
May I read it, please?
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yes, sure.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, I agree.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And Ontario’s State of Emergency continued all the way through until February 23rd; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And you ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But the Emergency Orders continued for some period of time.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Some period of time beyond the 23rd?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And do I have it right that this -- that the continued operation of the Orders and the continued State of Emergency were because of that continued threat that you testified that blockades would reappear, the bridge would be blocked again, et cetera?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So to be clear, the Emergency ended on the 23rd of February in Ontario, the provincial one. The Emergency Orders continued because there was a fear, yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. Let’s go to OPP00004580. (SHORT PAUSE)
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
These are Comm. Carrique’s texts to you. And, again, we’ve established that Comm. Carrique is on the right and you are on the left; yes?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It would appear from this that Comm. Carrique is green.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Right. He’s green because these are his texts. And it was primarily by text that he was providing you with these regular updates on the situation, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yeah, with regards to regular updates, situational updates primarily by text, but many frequent phone calls as well.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. And if we go to page 98, please.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
How are you doing for time?
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
How am I doing for time? Another five minutes, if you don’t mind, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Not more.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah. And this is the end-of-day status report that he’s giving to you on February the 12th, right? This is after Ontario declared its State of Emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m sorry; is it the 12th of February?
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yeah, let’s scroll down, just so we can see the date.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And these time stamps, as have been covered earlier, are five hours ahead of Eastern time because of the UTC; you understand that?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
So it would actually be the 11th.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Oh, a.m., that’s right. Late night on the 11th.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Late on the 11th.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Yes, thank you, Commissioner. And so this the day that Ontario declares its State of Emergency, and if we scroll up, there’s protest activity in Windsor, Bluewater Bridge on the Highway 402, obviously Ottawa, Toronto, Niagara, there's activity in Northwest Region, if we scroll down, and there's other. And that’s among the information that you were considering when you said things are escalating, State of Emergency is appropriate, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And then if we go to page 121, we have the update. Again, scrolling down, this is 2:39 a.m. UTC. So late night on the 13th. And I won’t go through it all, but you understood from this very detailed report that there was widespread protest activity, not only in Ontario but also nationally, which we see if we scroll down. Correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
And Mr. Di Tommaso, you testified that you did not attend the First Ministers meeting that the Prime Minister convened with the provincial and territorial leaders on February 14th, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
But we have notes indicating that at that meeting, Ford stated that he supported the Prime Minister with respect to invocation of the Federal Emergencies Act 100 percent, okay?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m sorry; your question?
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
My question is that wouldn’t surprise you, that the Premier expressed his full and complete support for the invocation of the Emergencies Act on that meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It would not.
Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)
Okay. I think I’ll step down there. Thank you, Commissioner, for the extra time. Thank you, Mr. Di Tommaso.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Next is the Ottawa Coalition of Residents. (SHORT PAUSE)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. PAUL CHAMP
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Good day, Mr. Di Tommaso. My name is Paul Champ; I’m the lawyer for the Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Hello.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I just want to start by asking some questions about civilian direction of police. Now, I gather it’s fair to say that you’re very familiar with the Police Services Act.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And getting into -- you’ve told us a number of times that you thought the entity that was most responsible for managing or dealing with the Chief of Ottawa Police would have been the Police Services Board, is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And we’d also heard evidence, and I believe you’ve given us evidence as well, that part of the challenge, or one of the problems in the Ottawa Police Response to the protest was the absence of an operational plan; that that was a barrier to deployment of additional resources, is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, I just want to clarify that. The operational plan to dismantle the ---
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- entire operation?
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yes. And Comm. Carrique testified the same thing, that that was -- that they weren’t sending all the resources that Chief Sloly was asking for or demanding because they didn’t feel that he had a full operational plan to dismantle.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And so if -- you had that information, and you reported that up to the Solicitor General; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
That there were concerns; there were a number of concerns being raised by other Chiefs of Police, that there wasn’t a proper operational plan, and the Chief of Police of Ottawa wasn’t doing a great job?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now, the Chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board, Ms. Deans, testified that this information, that there was not a proper plan and that this was leading to a delay in the deployment of resources, was never communicated to her or the Board. Would you agree that it would have been important to have that information conveyed to the Police Services Board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Who should have communicated that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Chief Sloly.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Well, no. But the issue here as I understand it, Mr. Di Tommaso, is that Chief Sloly wasn’t doing a good job; that he didn’t have a proper operational plan in place. And based on all the evidence we understand he will say or has been -- he did testify he thought they did have a plan, but everyone else thought that he didn’t. So if there’s a concern about the performance of the Police Chief, he’s not going to say that to the Board. Whose responsibility would it be to communicate that to the Police Services Board so they can take the effective action under section 9 of the Police Services Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So with regards to the performance of the Chief?
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Police Services Board, and from what I remember of Chair Deans testifying to, was that she was not getting the information that she required from Chief Sloly; it was all high level, and she used other adjectives to describe it. I think that would have been an opportunity for her and the Board to further inform themselves, because she had a concern that she was not getting the information that she required with regards to operations.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I’m glad to hear you were following the testimony, sir, because if you were following the testimony what was going on was that the Chair of the Board -- and the Board was trying to find out information. The Chair of the Board testified that she even spoke with Deputy Chief Bell to say, “Is there any problems here that I need to know about? Would you be doing anything differently?” And Deputy Chief Bell, you know, perhaps because he’s reporting to Chief Sloly, says, “No, I wouldn’t have been doing anything differently.” That was his testimony.
Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
That was his testimony but that was after Chief Sloly was ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Yeah, I think there’s a context here. So don’t mix the timelines, so...
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I don’t think I am. I’m not sure if I understand the objection.
Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
The objection was, that is not the timeline. That statement was made to Deputy Chief Bell on the eve of Chief Sloly’s departure.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
No, that’s contrary to the evidence. The evidence was that it was one week before his resignation. I’d asked for extra time for that, that’s inaccurate. Both Ms. Deans and Deputy Chief Bell testified it was one week before the resignation. In any event, sir, we’d also heard evidence from the Mayor of Ottawa that he was hearing this from the Solicitor General Jones. Presumably you briefed the Solicitor General and she was saying this to the Mayor, that there were concerns that the Chief of Ottawa didn’t have a good plan. And because of whatever municipal politics, interpersonal conflicts, the Mayor did not communicate that to the Chair of the Police Services Board. So I’d ask you again, sir, is there any other meaningful way to try to get that information to a Police Services Board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think the Mayor has a duty to provide that information to the Chair, simply because ---
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Objection.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Objection. Chair Deans testified that she (indiscernible). On cross-examination, I put her witness summary to her. Sorry; I put -- Chair Deans initially testified that she was unaware that there was no operational plan. On cross-examination, I put her witness summary to her. She states in the witness summary that -- and it was her that suggested that one of the reasons that the resources weren’t coming is because the Chief lacks an operational plan. So I think this whole discussion about municipal politics and the Mayor lacks foundation in the evidence, and I don't want to mislead the witness.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I don't have the transcripts in front of me, so I'll move on. You would agree with me the Police Services Board acts independently from the Solicitor General; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And interference or direction from the Solicitor General to a Police Services Board would generally be inappropriate? The Solicitor General would have to go through the Ontario Civilian Police Commission if they had concerns about the Police Services Board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, but Section 3 also gives the Solicitor General the ability to provide advice to Police Service Boards writ large.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
From time -- just for time, I'm going to leave that issue. I want to ask you some questions, sir, about what the convoy protesters in Ottawa were protesting about. Now you've testified that you understood that they were testifying [sic] just about the mandates for truckers having vaccined [sic] across the border. That's what it was all about anyways, to your understanding; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was one of many issues, yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Well, it was my understanding from your testimony earlier today that it -- I think you said something, "I didn't know the protests involved provincial mandates."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But there were many other issues, as communicated to me by Commissioner Carrique. There were many other groups that had infiltrated the trucker's convoy and there were many other agendas at play.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
There was many other agendas, but let's stick to the ones that have to do with COVID-19 and public health measures related to COVID-19. Now does the federal government have responsibility over mask mandates in shops and stores and restaurants and cities?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, not in that -- from that perspective, no.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
That's right. Those are provincial mandates. Our masks ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
--- the masks in stores, that was the province. Now we've heard from a few convoy organizers who were very upset about mask mandates that they planned and organized protests in Ottawa once they arrived here by sending large numbers of unmasked people into stores. Now that wouldn't have to do with a federal government mandate; would it, sir?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, that would be a provincial mandate.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And I presume, are you familiar with the Rideau Centre in Ottawa, sir?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not very well.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So it's the largest mall in Ottawa. It has, we've heard evidence, approximately $3 million a day in sales and revenues. And it was shut down on the first day of the protest because large numbers of the convoy protesters were going in there unmasked, and there was unfortunate interactions with staff and so forth. Were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
At some point in time, I was.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So but is it fair to say that you're hearing a bit more now and you're learning a little bit more now that individuals protesting in Ottawa were protesting about more than just the trucker mandates. They were protesting about provincial government mandates as well; is that fair to say?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That's fair to say.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And is it also fair to say, however, that during the time of the protest in February, your understanding was a little bit more limited. You thought the protests in Ottawa were all about the federal government mandates.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not just all about. As I've testified to, there were other concerns that the protesters were trying to communicate, so there were other agendas at play.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
But not provincial government mandates. That wasn't what your understanding was at the time.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
At the very beginning, no.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Very early in the protest, one very well-known Ottawa resident was trying to inform the protesters that they were protesting their own thing that, "these mandates are provincial, not federal. The mandates, if you're mad about wearing a mask or getting a vaccine, go talk to Premier -- go talk to Doug Ford. The Prime Minister has nothing to do with that. Don't you know anything about civics?" Would you agree that if the protesters were angry about mask mandates, they should have been protesting in Queen's Park?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The provincial mask mandates were one of the issues that the protesters were angry about, but they were also angry about the federal vaccine mandate imposed on January 15 for international truckers.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now I want to ask you some questions about what you understood about the situation on the ground in Ottawa. You've told us that you understood that the protests in Ottawa were an inconvenience to the people of Ottawa, but it was not a public safety risk; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I clarified that and I testified that it was much more than an inconvenience. And Chief Sloly concurred with that assessment in his conversations with Mayor Watson and Ministers Blair and Mendocino. There's a document out there that I read, and he concurred with that assessment.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
That it was just an inconvenience?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That it was an eyesore and that there was not any public safety concern.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I think you're talking about your meeting with him ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, not my meeting. He's having a meeting with Minister Blair ---
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Or a call ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He's having a meeting with Minister Blair, Minister Mendocino and Mayor Watson and that is his assessment.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now, sir, you were aware that Ottawa was having difficulty enforcing bylaws because when bylaw officers went out to try to give tickets, they would be sworn by hundreds of protesters; were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
That's a public safety issues; is it not?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
You were also aware, I gather, sir, that -- Commission Counsel's already asked you a bit about this, about fireworks going off, but did you understand that fireworks were binging off residential buildings downtown?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not understand that.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yeah, around where we had propane tanks and jerry cans.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that. That's not my understanding.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
That's a serious public safety risk; would you agree?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now we've also heard that by the Monday, January 31st, right after the first weekend, the position of the Ottawa Police was that this was an occupation, and they did not have the capacity or resources to bring that protest to an end. Would you understand that, that it was that early that the Ottawa Police felt they didn't have full control of the situation, all they could do was maintain the peace at best?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was their position, yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Okay. That was their position, but you didn't agree that was the case?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So what was needed to end the occupation was a fully developed operational plan to dismantle. That was the obstacle.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. But they -- I take your point earlier, sir, and I fully agree that we're all very fortunate that there was no serious incidents, no blood shed and the police -- all police who were responding deserve a great deal of credit for that. But you would agree with me that in that first week or two weeks, when the Ottawa Police did not simply have the numbers there, if that situation for some reason had become -- had led to violence or there'd been riots or something like that, the Ottawa Police simply did not have the Public Order Units to control that situation if that had occurred; would you agree with me?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Had that occurred, yes, correct, but the Ottawa Police Service was also asking for resources from the OPP and the RCMP, and it is my understanding that the OPP provided each and every -- or provided resources to address each and every ask that Ottawa Police Service made.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Okay. Well, let's get into that. Now the Mayor of Ottawa put out a Declaration of State of Emergency on February 6th. You recall that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And but you didn't review it at the time. My understanding is you just reviewed it in preparation for this inquiry; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The actual declaration?
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
You didn't -- because you didn't view the situation as that serious at the time; is that fair to say?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, that is not fair to say. It was an exceptionally serious situation. When I talked about public safety risk, as I testified to earlier, I was talking about serious violent crime in accordance with the Criminal Code. That's what I was referring to. But it was exceptionally serious.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Well, sir, is that perhaps why you didn't review the Declaration of Emergency is at the time you thought Ottawa officials were exaggerating the problem that they had?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I didn't think that at all.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now we know on February the 6th, the Solicitor General put out a statement about Ottawa saying that we're done everything we can. We've given 1500 OPP officers. You're aware of that; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Over a period of time, from the beginning, yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Well, we've seen the chart, and we know how that number was arrived at, but that's not what the Solicitor General put out. On the day, she put out, "We've provided them with 1500 officers." Correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, sir. She put out from the very beginning, and I'd like to highlight that phrase, from the very beginning.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
You did not agree with that number being put out there; is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Commissioner Carrique also testified he didn't think it was a good idea for that number to be put out there.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
He communicated that to you I gather?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
You and he both thought it was a bad idea for operational members of officers to be communicated publicly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Did -- but neither you nor Commissioner Carrique were consulted on that information being made public? Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Did you tell that to the Solicitor General afterwards?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t believe I did.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So again ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But ---
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
But?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
But after Chief Sloly contacted me, I did have a discussion with the Minister’s office about clarifying what that 1,500 number was, what it actually meant.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. Because you’re emphasising to us about from the very beginning, but Chief Sloly, and quite frankly the people of Ottawa, were misinterpreting that that it was being suggested there was 1,500 officers on the ground?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, people were misinterpreting what was said by the Minister.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. Getting back to my previous question, so have you communicated that -- you never communicated to the Solicitor General that you thought it was a bad idea and perhaps operationally to communicate that kind of information?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I guess she’s learning about your views on that issue now from your testimony?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And if it wasn’t for operational reasons that number was made public, is it fair to say that that number was made public by the Solicitor General for political considerations?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
A tit for tat for the Mayor putting out a Declaration of Emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Let’s take a look at those letters. Now, you know about the letter on February 7th of the Mayor and the Chair of the Police Services Board asking the Province for 1,800 OPP officers; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Seventeen hundred (1,700), plus 100 civilians, yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Yes. And incidentally, in that letter, they say that: “The protest is against public health policies that democratically elected governments at the provincial and the federal levels have enacted to protect us from the deadly COVID-19 pandemic.” (As read) So the Mayor -- in case some of you in Toronto weren’t aware, the Mayor and the Chair were trying to flag to Toronto that these protests were about provincial mandates as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Okay. Did you review that letter when it came in?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t remember. I was aware that the Chair and the Mayor had made a specific request for 1,700 plus 100. I don’t remember if I reviewed that letter or not. But I have reviewed it for testimony today.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. And in that letter on February the 7th, the Mayor and the Chair were saying that the protest was threatening the safety of the Ottawa community; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And they said: “People are living in fear and are terrified, and they’ve now been subjected to the non-stop honking of large trucks for nine days, which is tantamount to psychological warfare.” (As read)
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Were you aware that that’s how serious it was at the time, the honking of the horns?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And they say: “We need a dramatic and immediate injection of additional officers.” (As read) And then they get into: “The following resources are required on an urgent basis.” (As read) So that was sent on the 7th. I gather the Solicitor General would have consulted you on that letter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t remember consulting with her, or her and I having a discussion about that. Suffice to say that that request went directly to the Commissioner of the OPP to make an assessment on the appropriateness of that number and whether or not to deploy the resources.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So I’ll get into that issue in a moment, but I’m just wanting to understand first about whether you were consulted by the Solicitor General on that issue in the letter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not. My recollection is that her position was that the request for resources were with the Commissioner of the OPP.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. And she wrote to the Mayor and the Chair about that on February the 10th, three days later. Do you know why there was such a delay?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And there’s nothing in the letter about, you know, the honking or the risk to safety of Ottawa residents, just saying: “Please note that I have shared your correspondence with Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Thomas Carrique. Thank you again for taking the time to write.” (As read) Why did it take the Solicitor General three days just to say she’s passed on the letter to the Commissioner? Do you know?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know, but I also wanted to flag what’s in that letter is her focus that the request was passed on to the Commissioner, and she references the operational plan as well.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. So okay. Let’s turn to that then. Now, you’ve told us that in your view, it’s the exclusive jurisdiction of the OPP Commissioner on how to deploy resources? Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
You’re going to have to wrap up. Your time is up. So ---
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
With all due respect, Commissioner, I don’t think so. I think I have 20 minutes? Unless I’m mistaken?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
You have 20 minutes, yeah, and you started 20 minutes go.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
May I request five more minutes given that we don’t have the Premier or the Solicitor General here to answer questions?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Well I’m not sure the absence of people, but I will give you a couple of minutes. Go ahead.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Commissioner, I just note that was -- anyways.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Go ahead.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
I just note that was right on the dot, perhaps, of 20 minutes.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
It was, and I’m giving you a little more time. So go ahead. It’s just there are a lot of people, so I’m trying to make it work. I’m sorry, but that’s the way it goes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Thank you, Commissioner. Now, sir, you’ve said it was exclusive jurisdiction. You’re familiar with the Morden Report; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Now, in the Morden Report, it tells us that policing and operational decisions about the what of how they, you know, -- or pardon me, the how they execute an operation is responsibility of the police, but the what of the operation is the responsibility of civilian oversight; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
And so would you agree with me - - or wouldn’t you agree with me that the decision about whether to deploy resources as a priority to Windsor versus Ottawa, that’s a higher-level type of what decision? Would you not agree?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. I believe that the deployment of OPP officers resides exclusively with the Commissioner of the OPP.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So, sir, in the Morden Report, one of the examples that they use is that if there’s a major event and in the planning for it, the Civilian Police Services Board, which in this case I gather would be the equivalent to the Solicitor General, could direct a police service, for example the Toronto Police Service, to prioritize certain policing and ask for other resources for other issues? So they could direct the police about how they prioritize their resources. Isn’t that the same sort of thing? What’s the difference between the how versus the what in this context?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So first of all, the Morden Report was with regards to large planned events. This was certainly an urgent situation, it was an emergent situation, and the ability for the OPP to prioritize where to deploy his resources resides with him. That is an operational decision.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
You’ve told us that Commissioner Carrique communicated his decision to you based on his view of the economic impact. Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
One of the many factors was the economic impact.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Okay. I didn’t hear you say about the other factors. And we’ll get -- I’ll leave that, because I don’t have time. But do you know how the Minister assessed the economic impact?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t, but it was all over the media at the time. The media was reporting on the significant impact on the economy and the security of both Ontario and Canada. That was all over the news at the time.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So you’re assuming that the Commissioner would have drawn that from the media?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. That would be one of the sources, yes.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
We’ve heard evidence in this Commission about the economic impact of Ottawa, that it was approximately $200 million at least for just the first couple of weeks. Do you have a sense of what the economic impact was of the Ambassador Bridge being closed?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’ve heard all sorts of numbers. Anywhere between $350 million a day, up to $700 million a day. But I think the Commissioner also testified that one of the main considerations that he took into account for prioritizing the deployment of his resources to Windsor was the fact that Ottawa was not yet ready for positive action because there was not a fully developed operational plan to dismantle. Windsor was ready. Ottawa was not. That was a key consideration.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
So I’ll just close, sir, with this. You’re telling us then that it’s solely up to the Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police to prioritize the economic impact at the Ambassador Bridge versus the public safety of the residents of downtown Ottawa? Is that what you’re telling us?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, sir.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Well that’s what you just said.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
What I’m testifying to is that the deployment of OPP officers resides with the OPP Commissioner.
Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)
Right. So he’s the one that makes the decision whether he protects the bridge or protects downtown residents in Ottawa.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I think that he’s answered that, and that’s not a fair representation of what he said. So next I’d like to call on counsel for former Chief Sloly.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. REBECCA JONES
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Good evening, Deputy.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Good evening.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
You worked with Chief Sloly at the Toronto Police Service for many years; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And in fact, you reported to him for a couple years while you were the staff superintendent and he was deputy chief of field command?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you enjoyed a relationship of trust and confidence with him?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you knew him to be both a proponent and expert in community policing initiatives and also a national police leader?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And when he became chief in Ottawa, you celebrated him assuming this role, saying you were glad to see his return to policing; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And you’ve also testified that you were satisfied that the OPS was under able leadership?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And I think you’ve testified that you watched Commissioner Carrique’s evidence before this Inquiry?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Some of it.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Some of it. Okay. And I just want to confirm your agreement with Commissioner Carrique on a couple of things. The Commissioner testified that the OPS did not have the resources they needed to end the events in their city on their own; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And he also testified that ultimately they needed over 2,000 officers to successfully dismantle the occupation; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you’re aware that the OPS didn’t get those resources at that level until February 17th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
On or about. I knew that there was a significant build up of resources into Ottawa Police Service right about the Ambassador Bridge issue was resolved. And so those -- I can’t say whether it was the 17th of February or not, but there was a significant increase leading up to the positive action on February the 18th.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And I agree with you on that. After the Ambassador Bridge was cleared, resources were diverted back over to Ottawa; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And over the next few days, the resources accumulated in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. The positive action actually started on the 18th. Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
That’s right. Okay. Now, you’ve testified that Commissioner Carrique was your main source of information about the convoys.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And just one thing. You testified that your understanding from him was that the OPS’ plan going into the first weekend involved keeping the trucks out of the city?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s what Commissioner Carrique told me, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And were you aware of the evidence that’s now been before the Inquiry that Supt. Abrams of the OPP knew as of, at the very latest, January 27th, that the plan was going to be to stage trucks within the city?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m not entirely aware of Supt. Abrams’ testimony.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Fair enough. And you were relying though on the evidence -- or not the evidence, but the information of Commissioner Carrique?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And I take it you can’t assist with any broken telephone that took place between members of the OPP in that regard?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I cannot.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And I think it’s also fair to say that regardless, you would not have gotten involved in the operational plan for that first weekend going into Ottawa, based on ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. No.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. If we could pull up OPP4580, page 29, please? This is a text between you and Commissioner Carrique on January 29th, as of 3:00 p.m. So just to orient you, this is the Saturday of the first weekend. If we scroll down?
The Clerk (POEC)
Sorry, counsel, what was the page number?
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Twenty-nine (29). Thank you. And if we look at the green update from Commissioner Carrique, he’s referring to the fact that there’s some: “…aggressive and threatening behaviour […] No incidents of violence…” And you’ll see the second from the bottom: “Indications are that a number of demonstrators are planning to remain until [January 31st].” And that would have been the Monday; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And so your understanding from Commissioner Carrique at this point would have been that there could be some people staying until Monday?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. But this was not the first time that I heard of that possibility.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right. Okay. But you weren’t getting information at this point that this was going to be a long-term occupation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I had some of that information earlier.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Earlier?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. That there was a concern through intelligence sources that some elements of the trucker convoy were intending on staying much longer than the weekend. I actually saw a Tweet myself to that effect, monitoring social media, that the intention of some of these truckers, don’t know how many, were to stay the course.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Yes. And that is absolutely correct. There were indications in the intelligence reports. There were indications in social media. But of course, what an intelligence group has to do is take all of the information and come up with an overall assessment; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree with that.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Now, you have also given evidence that after the first weekend, you recognized that what the City of Ottawa was now facing had turned into an occupation; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you spoke to Chief Sloly and Solicitor General Jones spoke to Chief Sloly on February 2nd?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And these weren’t detailed conversations about the merits of operational plans or anything like that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. But by the following day, February 3rd, you started hearing from Commissioner Carrique that there were people expressing some concerns about Chief Sloly; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And I have to say that all of the concerns that Commissioner Carrique was expressing to me about Chief Sloly, there was also the mitigation as well, that he was taking action to either confirm the reports or to talk to Chief Sloly. So I was getting a sense of comfort that there was significant dialogue going on between two exceptional leaders.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. I got it. And one of these concerns that there started to be grumbling about around February 3rd was this perception of a lack of a plan?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you’ve given very careful evidence about what the Commissioner should understand about this issue, that this is not an issue of a lack of a plan, there was always an operational plan. This is an issue about whether the dismantling of the occupation plan was ready to go; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And that is a very different plan; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. So when people didn’t leave on the 31st, when you and police leaders and everyone realized that this was an occupation, the OPS had to pivot; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And they now were facing an occupation involving a large number of people?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
In an urban environment?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Hundreds of heavy vehicles?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Many of which housed children?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
This -- dismantling an occupation of this nature would be incredibly complicated?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you mentioned it involves multiple subplans, POU, traffic, towing, et cetera; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And it’s not only complicated, dismantling an occupation of this nature is high stakes and high risk?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you don’t want an operational plan like that to be rushed?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And it is a huge job to figure out how to dismantle an occupation of that nature?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
So you as a senior police officer and a senior police leader yourself, would have understood what is involved in pivoting an operational plan like that; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
But many members of the public and politicians would have no idea? Is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And they would look out their windows and see bouncy castles, and fires, and say to the police, “Why aren’t you doing anything?”
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And that becomes a very significant confidence issue for the police and for the Police Chief?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, if that perception is out there. I agree, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Yeah. And that perception was out there; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
The pressures on Chief Sloly and the Ottawa Police Service at this time were immense; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And the time pressure was immense as well; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And if we compare this, I don’t know if you had any involvement in G20 in Toronto, that may have been after your time there, but if we compare -- you did have involvement? Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
So one of the things we learned after G20 was that the four-and-a-half months that the Police Service in Toronto had to prepare was not enough; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That's one thing we learned, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
For a planned event, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And what we're seeing in terms of rumblings here is three days after the Police Service had to pivot their operational plan to deal with an occupation; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not sure about your reference to three days.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
So if we look at January 31st ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
--- and we say, okay, at this point, what was expected, you know, some people might remain until Monday, and then we realize on the 31st, no, they're sticking around longer; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And so at this point, you've agreed with me, the Police Service has to pivot.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And in fairness, I think that the OPP was providing incredible number of resources, subject matter experts as well, to assist the Ottawa Police Service, including the Integrated Planning Team, so that if the planning for such a major event was outside of the capacity and capability of the Ottawa Police Service, subject matter experts were in fact being provided to Ottawa Police Service to help them out.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Absolutely. And the Integrated Planning Team arrived February 8th, for example; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't recall. I will accept your word.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. So I just want to go back to where we are in time here. We're pivoting as of January 31st, and by February 3rd, there's grumbling about the lack of an operational plan to dismantle the entire occupation; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And you as a senior police leader know that that's not fair; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I think developing an operational plan to dismantle, one of that magnitude, is incredibly difficult and complex, and one requires time, and one requires subject matter expertise.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Thank you. Now over the next few days, the Commissioner Carrique was updating you on what he was hearing on the ground, and he passed along other complaints or concerns that were being expressed about Chief Sloly; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And things like there's too many changes in the incident command?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, my understanding that was -- that there were changes to four incident commanders, so certainly that was a concern. I did not have the level of detail as to why that was happening.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So without that detail, did I have a concern about that? I did, but I didn't have the level of understanding to know why that was occurring either.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Exactly, or to understand if that was a Chief Sloly issue.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
At the end of the day, the Chief is ultimately responsible for the Police Service, so I think the buck stops with him with regards to that.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Absolutely. But for example, you wouldn't have known that one of the changes, for example, that was made to incident command was because of a very difficult interaction between the deputy -- one of the Deputy Chiefs and the Incident Commander and that she asked that that be done.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I didn't have that information.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And when these complaints were passed along to you, you understood that they were third or fourth hand; right? Commissioner Carrique wasn't there in the room?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I understood that Commissioner Carrique was getting his information from senior OPP officers and other very reliable sources. I don't believe Commissioner Carrique was in the room and I certainly recognize that, you know, that was hearsay, the information that was coming to me.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right. Okay. And but you were -- in fulfilling your responsibilities, you were briefing Solicitor General Jones?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And in fulfilling her responsibilities, she was briefing the Premier?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And we also know that the Premier was expressing his views all the way up to the Prime Minister; right? We saw that in the read out.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And I don't want to go in any detail. You've given a lot of evidence about the 1500 and the statement about the 1500. That, just to be very clear, it was the statement -- I've looked at it again and you're absolutely right, it says "from the beginning." But those still aren't 1500 independent officers; right? So if I am the officer and I work for 10 days, I count as 10. Did you understand that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And so -- and you've given evidence that you appreciate why that created pressure on Chief Sloly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
When he was already under incredible pressure; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And because of that, you went to the Solicitor General and asked about making a correction.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And can you tell us why a correction wasn't made?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It was made. So the correction was that the Communications officer and the Minister's office clarified in much greater detail the following day in response to media questions that that number was cumulative. So there was an attempt to dispel the misinterpretation by having the Communications officers tell the media and anybody that was asking, that that was a cumulative number and not an indication of 1500 officers in the OPS on any given day.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
But just to be fair, the OPS first corrected it; correct? And then the government got questions about the correction and then they provided the further clarification; is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know what the order was about OPS ---
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- correcting it. I'm sorry.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Now there's also the issue of the doubling of resources, and you've given some evidence about that. You didn't speak to Chief Sloly about this suggestion that he made a comment about doubling resources; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not, and quite frankly, I was not overly concerned about that issue simply because I knew that the plan to dismantle, that would be tested and validated by the Planning Team.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right. Okay. But it did get passed on to the Solicitor General; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And you said -- in your evidence you said if that was accurate, and then you said it made no difference to the province; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct. It wouldn't -- the province would continue to support the Ottawa Police Service.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right. And when you say if that is accurate, it's a recognition of the fact that you're hearing it through multiple layers; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And, you know, we've heard evidence, for example, that other members, Deputy Chief Bell who was on the call doesn't recall it, no contemporaneous notes of that. That -- were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not aware of Chief Bell's testimony.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. But is it fair to say it became part of the picture that people had about Chief Sloly's leadership?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can't say that.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Okay. Now Commissioner Carrique has testified that any suggestion or concern at the time that this was a random doubling of needed resources was completely incorrect; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know what Commissioner Carrique testified to on that issue. I'm sorry.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Well, okay. That's fair enough. But you also accept that we needed -- the City of Ottawa needed 2,000 officers, so any suggestion that 1800 was some sort of random doubling would not be fair; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. You talked about the impact of the fact that the operational plan to dismantle the occupation wasn't ready yet, and that that had an impact on the passing along of resources to Ottawa; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And but you've also testified that it made good sense from your perspective that this is the kind of plan that would take time to do properly; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And I suggest that the bigger impact in terms of the availability of resources to Ottawa was the fact that those resources were needed at the Ambassador Bridge?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not entirely sure of that. From my perspective, two things. If there was a fully developed operational plan to dismantle and had all of those other demonstrations and occupations not happened elsewhere in the province, I think that Ottawa could have been ready for positive action much sooner.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
If the other protests weren't happening.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. But given that we know that the other protests were happening, the resources -- and regardless of whose priority it was, whether it was the government's priority or the OPP's priority, the priority was Windsor; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
With regards to the deployment of OPP officers and Public Order Unit to the Ambassador Bridge, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Right. And you've stated in your interview summary that the police could not clear Ambassador Bridge and clear the occupation in Ottawa at the same time; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And were you -- did you watch any of Supt. Earley from the Windsor Police's evidence?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Because what Supt. Earley testified was that the resources were dispatched to Windsor even before she had a formal operational plan to dismantle that blockade. Were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I knew that there were OPP resources being provided to Windsor. For what purpose, I'm not aware. Likely, it was for maintenance purposes to make sure that public safety was maintained. I don't know when the Public Order Units were provided to Windsor with regards to dismantling the entire blockade.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. But if I suggest to you that the Public Order Units were provided for dismantling the blockade even before a plan was finalized, that would be inconsistent with the position that you need that plan finalized before the Public Order Units are dispatched, right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. I don’t think so, because the footprint in Windsor was much smaller. The number of protesters was much smaller, so an operational plan could have been developed to dismantle the blockade in Windsor in a much more timely fashion because it was not as complicated as it was in Ottawa, so the provision of POU officers in Windsor before a fully-developed plan to dismantle Windsor was completely appropriate.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. And I'm out of time, so I'll just -- I'll end it with this. It took -- from the time that Chief Sloly asked on February 6th for the 1,800 officers to sufficient officers being available in the City of Ottawa to dismantle the operation took from February 6 to February 17, okay?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Okay.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
That’s fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
And is it fair that one of the things that the Commissioner can consider in doing his work is how resources might be deployed more quickly -- and understanding that there were a lot of competing interests here -- more quickly while the very complicated planning exercise is taking place?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be one of the considerations that the OPP commissioner could think about, yes.
Rebecca Jones, Counsel (Peter Sloly)
Okay. Thank you very much.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next, the Convoy Organizers.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRENDAN MILLER
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Good evening, Deputy Minister.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Good evening.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
My name's Brendan Miller and I am counsel for Freedom Corp. and I'm part of the -- that which is a entity that represents the protesters that were in Ottawa in January and February of 2022. Sir, I want to start off with something you had mentioned in your chief with respect to Mayor Watson stating that he invoked the state of emergency to put pressure on the province. And you said that that seemed to be political. Can -- you didn’t get much of a chance to elaborate on that, and I just wanted to give you an opportunity.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I didn’t say it was political. What I said was that section 4 of the EMCPA does not allow for a municipal declaration of emergency for the purpose of putting pressure on another order of government.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay. And so that purpose, in your view then, if it was the true purpose, based on the call transcript with respect to Mayor Watson, that was not a proper purpose to declare that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
If that was the exclusive reason for declaring a municipal emergency, it would not have been proper.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay. Now, I understand in just dealing with this, the background, you're familiar with Mayor Watson's background; is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
What do you mean?
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
His history and work in provincial politics and in the municipal politics. Are you familiar?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I've never met Mayor Watson. The only thing that I've learned about Mayor Watson was that he was at one point in time, a provincial minister. I don't know what portfolio he held.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
But you're familiar, of course, with Minister Blair? You used to work with him when he was at the Toronto Police Service, I take it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, sir.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And that was -- you were a superintendent there at the time he was chief?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, sir.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And is it fair to say -- and there's a history between Minister Blair and Premier Ford? They have a very, very not good relationship; let's say that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can't speak to that, sir.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
When you were at the Toronto Police Service, were you aware of the conflict that both Minister Blair and Premier Ford had with one another?
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Commissioner, Darrell Kloeze for the Province of Ontario. I'm not sure of the relevance of this line of questioning.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Based on the records that aren't yet in evidence that I've reviewed over the last few days of this.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I'm not sure what the relevance is as between the -- whether they're -- he got along or didn’t get along. I'm not ---
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Well, it appears from the records, sir, that part of it was that the minister was trying to, at times in text messages, sir -- I don’t want to get into it just too far yet -- but the relationship between himself and Mr. Ford is referenced in various text messages not yet in evidence from Minister Blair, sir. I want to establish what that relationship was like. If you'd like me to deal with it directly with Minister Blair, I can hold off.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I think that’s probably where it's appropriate, given this witness is not familiar with the ---
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
It was simply he was the superintendent during the conflict that arose, and it was during the time that now Minister Blair was the chief of the Toronto Police Service when he had a conflict with then Chief Blair when he was a councillor under the tutelage of his brother who was the mayor at the time. But I can move on, sir, if you -- I just thought this witness, of course, having been a superintendent at the time, would have that information. I can move on from it.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Well, if -- you can ask him the question whether he knows what either of them were thinking. I'll let that, but go ahead.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Yes. So sir, you're aware that going back to their days as Minister Blair when he was the chief and Doug Ford when he was City Councillor, both Minister Blair and Doug Ford had a conflict with one another at that time, and you were aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can't speak to that.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay, thank you. So with respect to -- you discussed mediation and the use of politicians in that regard with respect to a protest and respect to a blockade, and said that that’s how sometimes politicians can be used. Do you want to give some examples of when that has happened that you've seen in your experience as both a police officer as well as in your current position?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So two examples come to mind. Minister Jones made herself available to the protesters in Windsor. Another example was when Federal Minister Marc Miller made himself available to the blockade, the CN Rail blockade in January of 2020 in an attempt to mediate and negotiate.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And I take it that a lot of that happens in coordination with the relevant police service of the jurisdiction. They actually make a request that some of the political executive branch come and attend and help assist them quell the issue; is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s the way it ought to happen. It did not happen that way in January of 2020.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
What, in January of 2020 or 2022?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
In January of 2020 when Minister ---
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- Marc Miller made himself available to negotiate the CN blockade.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay. And so that was outside of -- he did that outside of police advice; is that what you're saying?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm saying that he did that without consulting the OPP.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Oh, okay. So in this case, I take it, now, we've heard in evidence that OPP Inspector Beaudin, who is essentially doing all the PLT work, he was putting forth a plan of PLT that would involve either someone from the federal government, provincial government. I don't think he really cared who it was as long as it was effective. If the inspector had asked your government for assistance based on your knowledge, would one of the executive branch, the political executive branch and its elected members, being ministers, would they have participated in that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And from your understanding, despite Inspector Beaudin's request of the federal elected executive, do you have any knowledge of the political branch of the federal executive, despite -- or upon his request from Inspector Beaudin agreeing to do the same?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. I had discussions with Deputy Minister Stewart about getting federal ministers to the table, and Minister -- I'm sorry, Deputy Minister Stewart was not successful.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Okay. But your government was willing and able to do that if it was asked?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I know for a fact that Minister Jones was, yes.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And I just want to deal with a little -- spend my last point in time and to clarify both for the public. And I know that you’ve, I think, been the first witness here to make this very clear, and I think it’s worth emphasizing. When it comes to policing in this entire country, police are supposed to be 100 percent independent of the political branch? Is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
When it comes to investigations, deployment, operations, yes.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. And so just because a mayor, just because a prime minister, just because the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, or a premier wants them to do something, that’s not supposed to have an effect on their decisions? They have to assess them themselves, and they don’t follow, essentially, directions from elected government? They are independent?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct, with regards to operations, and deployment, and investigations, yes.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And one of the reasons that’s the case is that you don’t want police, who have probably the most power out of any officials in the country domestically, you don’t want them to do things for political reasons; right? reasons; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Right. In your opinion, in looking at the facts as you know it as a Deputy Minister, as a former police officer, in your view, was this situation politicalized?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I know that there were many politicians that were involved in discussions, that it was an urgent situation. And so many politicians expressed their views publicly.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
And did that undermine police enforcement, and police tactic, and police decisions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I don’t think so. I think the Commissioner and I, certainly the Commissioner, were focused on providing the resources that Ottawa needed to dismantle the entire occupation. So from my perspective, all of that was noise. The Commissioner was focused on providing those resources, subject toa fully developed operational plan to dismantle the entire occupation.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Did any of the conduct of the federal political branch, that is the elected ministers and Prime Minister, did any of their statements in the media and to the public at large create any issues for the police dealing with the situation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be a question for the police that were dealing with the issue. I’m sorry.
Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)
Thank you.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Next, if I could call on the CCLA?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY EWA KRAJEWSKA
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. My name is Ewa Krajewska. I’m counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Hello.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Let me pick up from a point that my friend was just speaking to you about. Civilian oversight of the police. I understand from your testimony, Mr. Di Tommaso, that you’re familiar of the Morden Report arising after the G20?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And that’s built upon the Ipperwash Inquiry and previously from the McDonald Commission?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I wasn’t aware that it was built upon Ipperwash.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Sorry, two other reports that are relevant to the issue of civilian oversight are the report after the Ipperwash Inquiry and the McDonald Commission?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Okay.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
I’ll stick to the Morden Report then. And, sir, as my friend told you, the independence of the police is quintessential with respect to criminal investigation; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Because we do not want -- it would be an infringement of the rule of law to have politicians direct criminal investigation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
But with respect to operational decisions, I’d suggest to you that civilian oversight is a little bit more nuanced from the Morden Report? And on the first point, that there is a role for civilian oversight with respect to the receipt of information with respect to operational decisions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And Commissioner Carrique was discharging that duty by supplying you with information with respect to his operational decisions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And similarly, it is possible and it is possible for civilian oversight to provide opinions and make suggestions with respect to operational decisions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That is a specific recommendation in the Morden Report, yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And that is the Morden Report’s qualification to section 31(4) of the Police Act; correct? That’s its interpretation of that section?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I won’t fight you on that.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
All right. And that it’s especially important to provide those suggestions or opinions on operational plans to ensure that they’re consistent with legal requirements and community norms and values?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And board policies, and board objectives, yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Thank you, sir. Now, sir, we’ve reviewed a number of your handwritten notes that arise out of the facts that we’re reviewing with this Commission, and I just want to get a sense of your note taking practice. Do you essentially take notes of all of your telephone calls and meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. So this is a selection of notes that you had arising from these events?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. This was a major event and I reverted to my past practice as a police officer in taking as many notes contemporaneously as I possibly could. There are -- certainly there are gaps. I did not record each and every discussion that I had. I simply didn’t have that capacity.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. Thank you. And so if you had been providing reports to the Solicitor General, there may not be notes of those reports, even if you -- there may not be notes of those, even though you provided those reports?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And was -- what was your practice with reporting to the Solicitor General with respect to these events? Would you have been -- at the beginning of these events, would you have -- was she asking you to report to her daily on the events?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So the practice was with regards to the daily situational reports that were coming in to me from Commissioner Carrique, I would do a copy and paste, and send the same text message to the Minister.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
By text message?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And would she schedule calls with you if she had follows up or questions with Commissioner Carrique’s reports?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And you would also have meetings with her in person and I assume by telephone?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
But you would not necessarily take notes of those discussions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And if I understand your evidence, at the beginning of these events, your view -- your characterization of them was that this was a police issue that required the correct deployment of police resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And you did not see this as necessarily a political issue?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be fair. However, there was a role for Ministers and politicians to play with regards to exploring possible solutions.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
The art of the possible, as you ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
As you stated. Okay. And would it be fair -- now, you had a number of discussions with Deputy Minister Stewart at the federal level; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And those were kind of at the bureaucracy level of discussions?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And is it fair to say that you got the sense from him that the federal political level was frustrated that there was not more engagement from the Ontario Provincial level?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And in my review of the documents, it appears that the political engagement from Ontario appeared to shift around February 9th? Would that be fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. I know that Minister Jones and the Premier were certainly engaged in many bilateral conversations throughout this entire period.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
So when do you feel like the Provincial Government became more involved at a political level? At what point in time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can’t determine that, because I was not privy to those conversations. I knew that both Premier Ford and Minister Jones were having many bilateral conversations with a whole host of people.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. Would you -- you may not be aware, but would you be aware that, for example, Minister Alghabra on Transportation was not able to book telephone calls with Minister Mulroney?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not aware of that.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And the reason that I suggest that February 9th may be a pivot point is that that is when Premier Ford has a telephone call with Minister Mendicino, where Premier Ford suggests that he may -- he’s spoken to the Chief Medical Officer of Health and he may take down vaccine passports. Were you aware of that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. And you’d agree with me that at least by February 10th, the Solicitor General had informed you that there was consideration of invoking the Ontario Emergencies Act, the EMPCA.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Premier Ford signaled his intention to declare a provincial emergency on or about the 10th.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And would it be fair to say that the political level in Ontario became more engaged when the Windsor bridge, the Ambassador Bridge was blocked, and it was causing significant economic repercussions with respect to manufacturing and trade?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would not be fair, no.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And so with respect to the emergencies orders, if I can ask the Registrar to please pull up doc ID ONT00005155? So that's the last page of this document. So these are your notes from February 10th, 2022. And on the last page of these, which is page -- sorry, page 19, not 20, sorry, there's a star and, "Solicitor General is lead department on this issue. Emergency at our borders. Line waiting for direction. Thinking about EO. List of seven. Not doing anything until more direction." (As read) What does list of seven -- is that list of seven or am I misreading that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know what that reference is. I'm sorry.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. But would it be fair that as at February 10th, your Ministry was being tasked with considering what potential orders you think should be made under the EMPCA?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. And so you're familiar with the legal requirements to invoke the EMPCA?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And you'd agree that any orders that are made under the EMPCA must be necessary and essential in the circumstances?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And they have to be tailored to be Charter compliant as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And so they have to be the least restrictive possible in terms of the -- in terms of their impact on Charter rights of Ontarians?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And that was something that you considered, and your Ministry considered in drafting the EMPCA orders that were enacted?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And, sir, just going back, in January of 2022, if we go back, there were significant provincial mandates under the Reopening Ontario Act that were in place in January 2022 as a result of the Omicron wave. You remember that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And Ontario had been placed back into kind of stage two of the Reopening Act at that time?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm sorry, I'm not prepared to speak on that. I have not reviewed any notes or any material, so I'm not prepared to speak on that. I'm sorry.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. Let me make it simple, under the Reopening Act, there were three stages of opening that were available for the Cabinet to place the various health units in, depending on the severity of the pandemic in that health unit.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I can't help you there. I'm sorry, I'm not prepared.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Okay. If I can just ask you, under the Reopening Ontario Act, some of the measures that were put in place included vaccine passports?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Mask mandates?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Capacity limits?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
School closures?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
And you -- I understand from your evidence that despite what the note says from February 6th in response to Ms. Jody Thomas and the -- at the NSIA, that you understood that some of the protests that were happening in both Ottawa and Windsor related not just to the federal vaccine mandate but to public health measures much more generally?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That was my evidence, yes.
Ewa Krajewska, Counsel (CCLA)
Thank you, sir. Those are all my questions.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Next if I could call on the CCF, please?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. SUJIT CHOUDHRY
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. My name is Sujit Choudhry. I am counsel for the Canadian Constitution Foundation. I'd like to pick up on a line of questions that my friend, Ms. Rodriguez led, regarding intergovernmental processes for coordinating federal, provincial and municipal responses to the convoy. And I want to put it to you that the reason why she spent so much time on that theme and why I'd like to go back to that theme is that that issue goes to the very heart of this Commission's mandate. And so, sir, do you know that the Emergencies Act is a last resort?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That's my general understanding, yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And that the last resort requirement is actually a legal condition for the Federal Cabinet to declare a Public Order Emergency?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I'm not an expert on the Emergency Act, but that's my general understanding.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And so -- and isn't it true then if the Act is meant to be a last resort, municipal, provincial and federal legal tools have to somehow fall short?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So that's a legal question. I'm not prepared to answer that. I'm sorry.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
But are you prepared to answer this question, that sometimes for tools in the hands of one government to be effective, those governments must cooperate to use their tools together?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not sure how to answer that, sir.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Well, let's talk about this convoy. And so what we're trying to understand here in this Commission is whether these intergovernmental processes to get governments to work together, to use the different tools they have worked or didn't work, and that's why we want to learn about these meetings and these conversations that you had. So it's true that you had many conversations with representatives of different levels of government; isn't it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And it's true that you participated in a February 6th meeting?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And other meetings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And so and is it true that your role in these meetings, and I'm quoting them here, was to receive information ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
--- and to put forward possible solutions to the blockade in Windsor and the occupation in Ottawa that could be achieved or facilitated by Ontario?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
So you were on those calls and at those meetings to see how Ontario could help?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And so -- and would you also agree that one of the fundamental purposes of those calls and those meetings was that every level of government had different information, and the purpose of conversation and communication was that no one government had the complete picture, but only by discussing with each other and exchanging information could the complete picture come into focus.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would agree with that.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And so -- and then with the complete picture in hand, governments could connect the dots between problems and issues on the one hand and solutions on the other.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree with that.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Including solutions that could be achieved or facilitated by the province of Ontario.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right, but those discussions were in fact happening. They may not have been at the formal tripartite tables at the federal level with politicians, but they were happening bilaterally, so there was an exchange of information going on.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Well, let's talk about the tripartite meetings because that's where I'm going to. So we've -- there've been a number of questions put to you about the tripartite meetings at the most senior political levels, although there were deputy level civil servants there ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
--- that took place on February 7th, 8th, and 10th. And I'd like to call up, if Mr. Registrar, if you would SSM.NSC.CAN.00002052_REL.001, or that -- those are the -- that's the read out from the February 8th tripartite call. So, sir, so you’ve been asked questions about these notes before. I’d like to take you to two parts of the notes for this call, the read out. So Chief Sloly participated in this call. And so if we could go, please, Mr. Registrar, to the bottom of page 2? Stop there. And so, sir, do you see there a question posed by MM, that’s Minister Mendicino, saying: “Do you see wellington redzone being tackled within 2-3 days?” And then Chief Slowly responds. And so there’s a reference there to a Wellington red zone. So I’d put it to you that that is a no-go zone on Wellington Street that Chief Sloly was proposing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
A no-go zone? I don’t know what Chief Sloly was proposing.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Okay. But what do you think the term red zone means on Wellington in the context of the protests that were taking place in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know what Chief Sloly ---
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- means by red zone, sir.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Sure. But if you had been at the meeting, you might have known to ask; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not invited to the meeting.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
But Minister Jones ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And I cannot ---
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
--- was invited to the meeting. If she had been at the meeting, she would have known to ask; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not invited to the meeting, and so I did not attend.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Let’s go down to the next page. So three quarters of the way down, if you could go down a little bit more, there’s in bold there, under the long paragraph from Chief Sloly, a reference to an impound zone. Now, sir, what do you think an impound zone refers to?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It appears that Chief Sloly is talking about a zone where vehicles can be impounded and towed from.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Good. So now in your -- you said that prior to the February 6th call, you familiarized yourself with the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And so you said in your interview summary that the City of Ottawa did not make a formal request for Premier Ford to declare a Provincial State of Emergency? Is that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
But isn’t it true that no such request by a mayor is required, as a matter of law, under the EMCPA for the Premier to declare a State of Emergency in any city in this province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
So are you aware that under the EMCPA, the Provincial Cabinet, once a State of Emergency has been declared, can regulate or prohibit travel or movement to, from or within, any specified area?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And that’s what they did.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And are you aware they -- the Provincial Cabinet can evacuate individuals and remove personal property from any specified area?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right, but that was not an applicable section for this particular emergency.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And why is that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Can you put up the EMCP Act for me, please?
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Sure. So it’s -- so, Mr. Registrar, it’s CCF00000038. And it’s page 7. Mr. Di Tommaso, I believe you’re referring to point three at the top of the page there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, I am.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And could you please elaborate on your answer?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Sure. So with regards to evacuating individuals and animals and removing personal property, from any specified area, evacuating individuals, from my understanding, pertains to invoking that authority when there is a large natural disaster impacting the health and safety of people. And so taking and making arrangements for the adequate care and protection of individuals and property, that does not apply to the current situation ---
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Interesting.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
--- in Ottawa.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
So you don’t think it would extend to removing individuals and their personal effects of an area?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well evacuating, in my view, has a very specific meaning. I don’t think it is applicable at all.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Well ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And I can tell you, sir that in drafting these emergency orders, legal departments from the Ministry of the Attorney General, SOLGEN, Cabinet Office, Premier’s office, the Ministry of Transportation, were all engaged, and had that been a section that could have been leveraged, it would have been. The opinion of the legal department from all of those ministries was that that particular section was not applicable to this situation.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Mr. Di Tommaso, would you agree that when the Provincial Cabinet exercises its powers under this provision of the EMCPA, it’s not trenching on the authority of the OPP or the OPS over policing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And would you agree that the Provincial Cabinet could have used these powers to create a red zone on Wellington?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
What do you mean by a red zone?
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
A zone in which there could be no vehicles illegally parked and which all vehicles would be cleared, and where no persons could go?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well that in fact was done by the Emergency Order, sir.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
But what -- do you agree that it could have been done by the Provincial Cabinet?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It was done by the Provincial Cabinet, sir.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
The red zone, sir, was created by the Emergency Measures Regulation under the Emergencies Act.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, sir. The prohibition to block any roadway or walkway and the ingress and egress was something that was specifically done in the Provincial Emergency Order. So blocking, impeding egress and ingress into any highway and walkway was something that was done by the Emergency Order in the Province of Ontario.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Well let’s -- we’ll return to that. Would you agree that the Provincial Cabinet could have used these powers to create an impound zone?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I think that point would have been moot. And I say that because the problem was already there. It was already defined. The problem was these large heavy trucks in a defined area. And what the Provincial Cabinet did was give substantial authority to remove those trucks, to impound, and seize those trucks, and hold them until the Emergency Orders were no longer in place.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
So Mr. Di Tommaso, Minister Jones was not on the call on February 8th when the Wellington red zone and the impound zone were presented for discussion at this intergovernmental table; was she?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
She was not.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And had she been on that call on February 8th, isn’t it reasonable to conclude that she would have connected the dots between the red zone and the impound zone and the powers that the Provincial Cabinet would have if it had declared a State of Emergency under provincial law?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Province did declare a State of Emergency under provincial law.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
That wasn’t my question. Had she been on that call on February 8th, would she have connected the dots between the problem that was at hand and the tools in the -- within the jurisdiction of the Province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think Minister Jones was well aware of what the problem was without attending that call. She was well aware of what the problem was.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
And Mr. Di Tommaso, there were deputies on that call.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
If you had been asked to attend that call and you had been there to receive Chief Sloly’s ideas, and would you have connected the dots between what he was proposing in terms of a red zone and an impound zone, and the potential to use the Province’s emergency powers to implement those proposals?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Provincial Emergency Orders dealt with the red zone and the impound zone. They did - - they provided prohibitions against ingress and egress and blocking highways and walkways, and they provided police with the ability to seize vehicles within that zone there. So in effect, it did create both.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
I was asking about you, sir. Did you ever make that recommendation to Minister Jones to create those zones yourself? Yes or no?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
They were created.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
But did you ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The issue ---
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
--- recommend ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The issue, sir, the issue, sir, was addressed in the Emergency Orders. The issue was addressed.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Mr. Commissioner, I think we're done here.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay.
Sujit Choudhry, Counsel (CCF)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next is the Ottawa Police Service.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DAVID MIGICOVSKY
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Good evening.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
My name is David Migicovsky. I'm the lawyer for the Ottawa Police Service. I understand that you have some oversight of the OPP that falls within your sphere of responsibility?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And in that regard, you received regular reports from Commissioner Carrique?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And another person who reported to you was Chris Letang, the provincial security advisor ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
--- with the Ministry of the Solicitor General?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And I assume he has -- in that position, he obviously has access to intelligence information from the OPP and others?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And it's important that he get you reliable information and timely information?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And in fact, he did satisfy you in that regard in terms of the information he provided to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
He was providing me with the information that he was in receipt of.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Right. And you were satisfied with the quality of the information he was providing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Generally speaking, yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And so if we could please call up OPP00005099?
The Registrar (POEC)
Could you confirm that document ID, please?
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
OPP00005099.
The Registrar (POEC)
I'm having difficulty locating that one. Could you tell me what sort of document that is?
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
It is a report from Chris Letang, the provincial security advisor of January 21st or 22nd, I believe.
The Registrar (POEC)
Would it be possible to spell his last name?
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
L-e-t-a-n-g. I'll move on, and in the meantime, if I could ask you instead to call up ONT00005126?
The Registrar (POEC)
Thank you very much.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
That’s a -- one of the reports that Mr. Letang was providing to you, and those were being provided on a regular basis?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And so if we could just scroll down to the bottom of page 1, please? You'll see that the report is -- the assessment is currently, "there is no specific identified threat and monitoring remains attuned." And then just below that, you'll see, "Freedom Convoy". If you could just turn to next page, please? And so you'll see that there is reference in those paragraphs to the protest disrupting the movement of vehicular traffic, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And the disruption of vehicular traffic is not, in itself, a basis to stop a protest, is it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And some vehicular disruption is obviously going to be expected and tolerated, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if we could look at the third page, please? Page 3, please. Thank you. The second paragraph, at this point, the -- and this is January 25th, just so you're aware -- the second paragraph says that the convoy organizers have repeatedly stated the intention to conduct a lawful protest, and there's a Code of Conduct. Do you see that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And then we see in the next paragraph that the number -- and it's bolded -- that the number of participants and supporters who may participate is unknown at this point?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And there's no indication in this report that overall, the convoy will engage in assaultive behaviour or widespread anti-social behaviour or bylaw offences, nothing like that, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I haven't read this entire report, but I accept your word.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Okay. And similarly, I didn’t see any indication that the protesters would become a long-term occupation. If we could please go to the next one, which is OPP00005127?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
My guess is it must be ONT5127.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
I'm sorry. Did I not say that?
The Registrar (POEC)
Is it a strategic update?
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Yes. I apologize for that. Thank you for catching that. And so that’s another report on January 26, and you'll see on page 1, if we just scroll down, the first paragraph. Again, there's no specific identified threat, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if you look at the first bullet under "National Convoy" ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
--- you'll see that an accurate estimate was complicated by the number of non-convoy vehicles in the area, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if you go to page 2 and you go to the first bullet on page 2, you'll see the last sentence, "The organizers have repeatedly continued to urge for a peaceful demonstration"?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm sorry, where is that, sir?
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
The last sentence in the first bullet.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if we go to page 3 under the assessment, if you could just scroll up, please? Oh, sorry, assessment starts on page 2 and then if you go to page 3, the third paragraph, again, no identified threat with regard to the Freedom Convoy protest, and there's no reference at this point to the convoy staying long term and becoming an occupation, is it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I'm -- no, you're correct. I believe the first indication in these reports that there would be a longer-term stay was on the 27th.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Right. And so the 27th is, in fact, the day before they arrived, correct? That’s on the Thursday ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
--- and the convoy is arriving on the Friday, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
The Registrar (POEC)
Counsel, sorry to interrupt. I have your first document that I couldn't find.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
That’s okay. I'll move on. And you're aware that many of the convoy were travelling on 400 series highways policed by the OPP?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And there was, you're aware, no direction given or any discussion with the OPP about whether to divert them or stop them from coming into Ottawa, based on the information that was available at the time, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There were no grounds to stop or divert, no.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if we go to ONT00005126, which is Mr. Letang's report that we previously looked at of January 25th, on page 2, third bullet, you'll see that reports from RCMP in Manitoba indicate the convoy participants were upset as a result of having been directed to weigh scales and having been issued HTA infractions, and some online messaging suggested those were an intentional tactic by police to disrupt the protest. And so OPP information is that the weigh scales in Ontario will be closed, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And so Ontario wasn’t trying to disrupt the convoy's arrival, and in fact, the OPP actually ushered them into Ottawa, did they not?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I wouldn't say the word "ushered". They certainly facilitated the right to peaceful protest, and my understanding was that the OPP did not have any grounds to stop or divert, generally speaking. There may have been reason to do that on an individual basis, but generally speaking, there was not a right to do that.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And if we could please go to ONT00005303? That is a series of text messages from Commissioner Carrique to you. And I'm just giving you that page to see that it's January 29th, so that would be on the Saturday?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And then if you scroll down to the bottom of that page and then go up to the -- you'll see the -- then go to the next one, which is ONT5304. I simply gave you that so you would see the date. So please go to ONT00005304. And if you go to the fifth bullet? And so this is the report you're getting on the 29th from Commissioner Carrique, and he's now telling you that a number of demonstrators are planning to remain until the 31st of January, so that’s the Monday, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And so you agree with me that the information you're getting from the provincial security advisor does not forecast what turned out to become an occupation for three weeks in Ottawa with the kind of behaviour that we ultimately saw, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I would not say that. I know that there was a report from the provincial security advisor on the 27th that indicated that some elements of the convoy were going to be staying longer than the weekend. There was information on the 27th from the provincial security advisor that one of the reasons why the truckers were there was to get rid of the federal trucking -- I'm sorry, federal vaccine mandate on truckers, and that they would not be leaving until that demand was met.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Well, let's go and look at that assessment on the 27th, please. It's ONT00005128. And if you go to the assessment section on page 3? So what we see is - - and this is, bear in mind the 27th, so it's the Thursday -- so what we see is, the second sentence: "Once in Ottawa, some convoy organizers have stated an intent to remain at Parliament Hill until the federal government concedes to repeal all COVID health restrictions and mandates." Correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
So we don’t see any indication of the number, how many, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And we also don’t see any indication that they're going to engage in the kind of behaviour that they ultimately did engage in, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Can you give me a second to read this, please? So there's talk about disruptions that may gridlock areas around Parliament Buildings and other parts of Ottawa, so that part of it is in there in the assessment.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Okay.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There is no expressed departure date for participants or a clear timing of when actions may end, and that’s in there.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Of an unknown number of people, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct, but there's also information here that some supporters may attempt to disrupt businesses of government by holding events at or near City Hall's provincial government facilities, et cetera. So that did, in fact, happen.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Well, you're aware, sir, that Parliament continued to sit. The municipal government continued to operate throughout that period, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
And there was significant disruption to business. Yes, I'm aware of that.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Another office in the provincial government that monitored both Ottawa, Toronto, Windsor, was the Emergency Management Office?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And I understand from January 28th to February 21st, they produced multiple briefing notes every day and sometimes multiple times a day?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And the flow, the information that the provincial -- I'm sure the Emergency Management Office had was primarily from municipal sources.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
I think you're out of your time, so you can wrap up.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
I think I've got two more minutes.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
You would agree with me, I take it, Mr. Di Tommaso, that if trucks -- if the convoy was coming in or if there we're trucks on the 400 series of highways in which there was information that the OPP had that there were bombs and that those bombs were going to be detonated in Ottawa, you would expect that the OPP would do something to stop those convoys from coming into the city, correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not aware of any information indicating that there were bombs on these trucks.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
I appreciate that. I'm giving you a hypothetical. If you had such information, presumably, as the person who has oversight, who has some oversight, you'd be concerned if the OPP allowed those vehicles to come into the city?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Certainly, there would be a concern if the OPP knew a particular truck had a bomb and permitted it into the city, yes, that would be a concern.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And similarly, you would expect that if the OPP had knowledge that the convoy was going to engage in the kind of disruptive and anti-social behaviour they did engage in, you would have expected that they would not have allowed in, to come into Ottawa, fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I think the OPP was also duty bound to respect the Charter of Rights and Freedom, which gives protesters the right to protest and assemble.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
And so you would not have expected that they would stop the convoy?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)
Thank you very much. I have no additional questions.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Next, the Ontario Provincial Police.
Jinan Kubursi, Counsel (ON-OPP)
It's Jinan Kubursi for the OPP. No questions, Commissioner, thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
The Windsor Police Service?
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
I'm here, Commissioner. I'm just having trouble starting my video. Thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. THOMAS McRAE
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. Could I please -- my name is Tom McRae and I am acting for the Windsor Police Service. Could I please ask, Mr. Clerk, that you go to Mr. Di Tommaso's witness statement which is 00000041? If you could go to page 7 please, I'd be grateful. As I -- and I'm starting right here after "Request for Assistance and Policing Jurisdiction".
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm sorry, where are you at? Where are you at?
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
I'm sorry. There's a heading on -- oh, please scroll down, Mr. Clerk. We can't see it. There it is, there it is. Sorry. "Request for Assistance and Policing Jurisdiction." "Mr. Di Tommaso explained that the Police Services Act sets out how municipal police services are to make requests for assistance pursuant to section 9 --- "
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Can you slow down a bit for the interpreters, please?
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Pardonnez-moi. "--- which applies when the chief of police is of the opinion that an emergency exists in the municipality." Mr. Clerk, could you please go now to Commission Document 00000819? This should be, if I got my number right, the Police Services Act. If you could scroll down to section 9, which is, I think, about seven pages in? Okay. Sorry, I'm wrong. Down some more, please. A little more. Okay. We're getting there. Yes. Could you go down to -- go down, scroll down a little more, please? If I can draw your attention, Mr. Di Tommaso, to subparagraph 6 of that Section 9 of the Police Services Act, is that the subsection of Section 9 that you were referring to in the first sentence of the paragraph in your witness we just went to?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Is it correct that there is no requirement in the Police Services Act that this request must be given in writing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
And if I can take your attention to the next subsection, it says, "A chief of police who makes a request under subsection (6) shall advise the chair of the board of the fact as soon as possible."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Is it, sir, that this subsection contemplates an emergency which is so vital that the Chief of Police would speak to the Commissioner before he speaks to the Chair of the Board?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
And, in fact, in those circumstances, it would be unreasonable or unnecessary for the initial request to be put into writing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Thank you. We've heard evidence within this Commission hearing about requests that had been made to the OPP just by speaking with them on the phone, and the OPP has responded with PLT service or other frontline officers. Is that the ordinary course of conduct for the OPP?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Well, I can't speak for the OPP in terms of the way in which they receive requests, but I would generally agree with you.
Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)
Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next I'd like to call on the City of Windsor. Still okay?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JENNIFER KING
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Good evening.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
My name is Jennifer King. I am Counsel to the City of Windsor.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Hello.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Hello. Mayor Dilkens of the City of Windsor testified on Monday that he had at least one conversation with the Solicitor General during the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge. Were you present during these calls?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Were you aware of these calls?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Generally speaking.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. What did the Solicitor General or her office do in response to her call or calls with Mayor Dilkens?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
You'd have to tell me what the nature of the conversation was before I can respond.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Well, were you aware of the nature of the conversation?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. I'll just move on. You testified that you consulted with Commissioner Carrique on the Emergency Declaration and measures; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Did you consult with Windsor or the Windsor Police Service to determine what tools they may need to more effectively resolve issues in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not to my knowledge.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. You agree that the blockade of the bridge, the Ambassador Bridge, impacted people's livelihoods not only in Windsor-Essex Region but also throughout the province of Ontario?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
You acknowledge in your testimony today that the impact of the Ambassador Bridge blockade on the economy of Canada and Ontario was apparent; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Could you go a little slower again, please?
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Yes. And it was apparent how important the crossing is to Canada and Ontario?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
It was all over mainstream media, yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
So you would agree with me then that the provincial, federal, and of course, Windsor's efforts and resources expended to clear the blockade and protect the bridge from the return of a blockade benefitted the entire province?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Earlier this evening you talked about the importance of a coordinated response at all levels of government; right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
I'm not going to bring up the letter in the interest of time and the time of day, but there is a letter from Mayor Dilkens of Windsor to the Solicitor General, Minister Mendocino and Minister Blair. Are you aware of that letter from March?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Well, then I will ask the Clerk to bring it up. It's WIN00002240. So as I said, this is a letter in March that is to the Solicitor General and others, and I take it you were not aware of the letter?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
It was not raised to your attention?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. And if you could just go to the second page, please? You'll see here, the second full paragraph, last sentence, Mayor Dilken writes that it is apparent for, "...the need for broader collaboration and support from Provincial and Federal governments to bolster the safety and security of our borders appears obvious." Would you agree with Mayor Dilkens?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Mayor Dilkens goes on to request a meeting to debrief emergency regulatory obligations regarding the Ambassador Bridge. Did you discuss the Mayor's request for a meeting at the time with the Solicitor General?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I was not aware of this letter.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. The Mayor has testified that he did not receive a response to this letter. Can you tell me now, is the Minister of the Solicitor General willing to meet with Windsor, other Ministries at the provincial level and federal representatives to discuss long-term needs and planning to protect Windsor's international crossings?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I have not spoken to the current Minister about this issue.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. As of February 2022, emergency management was your responsibility as part of the Public Safety Division of Community Safety ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Sorry, as of what date?
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
February of this year.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And you were the Commissioner of Emergency Management?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And you'll agree that Ontario, like all jurisdictions in Canada, uses a bottom-up approach to emergency management; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Used a what approach?
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Bottom-up approach.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know what that means.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. This means that municipalities are generally responsible for managing most emergencies; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Local authorities are the front lines of emergency response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
The EMCPA requires that each municipality prepare and adopt its own emergency response plan; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And in your experience, I take it, the province does not typically critique or override these plans?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Emergency Management of Ontario is in receipt of these emergency plans from every municipality. They are reviewed. So I don't know to what extent any advice or critique is presented back to the municipality.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
But it is the municipality that adopts those plans; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And by Order in Council, you're aware that Ontario has assigned a number of Ministries and their Minister's responsibility for preparing emergency management plans and programs for specific types of emergencies?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Are you aware, is there an emergency plan or program at the provincial level targeted at the prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery of emergencies related to critical infrastructure like the Ambassador Bridge?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I know that every Ministry is required by the EMCA to have an emergency management plan.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Are you aware if any of those plans address threats to critical infrastructure like at the Ambassador Bridge?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I am aware that there is current legislation on the books, Keeping Ontario Open for Business Act, that does just that.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. Which Ministry would be responsible for such a plan?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Minister, to my understanding, that is responsible currently for the Keeping Ontario Open for Business Act, which addresses critical infrastructure, is Treasury Board.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. And the Minister of the Solicitor General is responsible to coordinate the overall provincial emergency response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Not currently.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
That's been transferred to the Treasury Board as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
As of February 2022, it was your Ministry's responsibility?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Are you aware, has the Order in Council assigning responsibility been updated?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I am not aware.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
So turning briefly back to municipal emergencies, will you agree with me that the PEOC does not send someone to manage municipal emergencies alongside the municipality?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Are you talking about PEOC?
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Yes.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
They do send field advisors to provide support and I know that that was done with regards to Windsor.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
So this is a field officer who liaises with the community; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
With the Community Emergency Management Coordinator, yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Correct. And but the management of the emergency is left to the emergency management experts and trained emergency responders in the municipality?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct, and there is support and advice provided by the field officer from EMO.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And it's your understanding that advice was provided by the field officer of EMO to Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Those are the duties of the field officer that was deployed.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
It is my understanding that the Chief Laforet, the CEMC for the Municipality of Windsor, provided information to the field officers throughout this protest?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I accept that.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. All right. So we've heard about the -- at the municipal level, the roles of municipal emergency management in these protests earlier in the hearing. At the provincial level, you'll agree with me that the Solicitor General was the lead Ministry for Ontario's response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And will you agree with me that the Solicitor General's office did not communicate to municipalities that the Solicitor General was the lead Ministry?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know that.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. We've heard that other Ministries had a role in the emergency response, including MTO?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And MMAH?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
To what extent MMAH had a role I'm not entirely sure. I know that they managed two disaster recovery funds with regards to people, individuals and businesses.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Well, it was the Solicitor General's office's role to coordinate the Ministry's response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. Did your Ministry circulate to municipalities through EMO or PEOC or otherwise, the roles and responsibilities of the different Ministries engaged in the emergency response?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know the answer to that.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Other than collecting and sharing these daily consolidated situation reports that we've been referring to, did Emergency Management Ontario or PEOC have any other role during the protest in February?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. So they played an advisory role should municipalities have any need for advice from the provincial experts that were made available to them.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Are you aware that any municipalities asked for advice from these provincial experts?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not sure that there would be a requirement to ask first. The duties of field officers are to be present and to provide that advice upon request, and if they see that something is not going according to plan, they are certainly free to provide that advice.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. Did you have any conversations with the field officers yourself who were assigned to Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I did not.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. Thank you. You had told the Commissioner that as of February 11th, the PEOC was put in full activation mode; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Is it possible that prior to February 11th, the PEOC was in enhanced monitoring mode but for COVID-19 and not the protests?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, I wouldn't say that. They were in enhanced monitoring mode for both.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. And are you aware that there have been amendments to the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And they received royal assent in April this year?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I'm not sure of the date. I'll accept your word.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Were you consulted on these amendments?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And are you aware, was there any consultation with municipalities in preparing the amendments to the EMCPA?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don't know the answer to that.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. There's a number of new sections to the Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Yes, and one of them requires the Solicitor General to develop a written framework for accountability and governance during emergencies?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
And that written framework has to be made available to the public?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
No such framework was prepared or publicised prior to the protests earlier this year?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There was not a requirement to publish a framework prior to April of this year.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Understood, but there wasn't a framework that was available publicly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There was a provincial emergency management plan that was available online.
Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)
Okay. I am aware of that document. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next I'd like to call on the City of Ottawa.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ALYSSA TOMKINS
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. My name is Alyssa Tomkins. I am one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Hello.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Now you testified earlier that the Police Board of jurisdiction is in the best position to determine whether adequate and effective police services are being provided; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
You also testified that the Board has the exclusive responsibility for the oversight of the Chief and ensuring adequate and effective police services are being provided in the municipality; do I have that right?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
And what I want to follow up on initially is how this relates to Section 3(2) of the Police Services Act, and I think you addressed it with one of my friends, but that section, of course, provides that, "The Solicitor General shall, [...] monitor police forces to ensure that adequate and effective police services are provided at the municipal and provincial levels." Correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
May I ask that you put that section up, please?
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Sure. So the Police Services Act is at document COM00000, I think that's 5 0s 819. And page 7, Mr. Clerk. So if we just scroll down, right there. So 3(2), right under duties and powers of Solicitor General. We start right away with, "The Solicitor General shall, [...] monitor police forces to ensure that adequate and effective police services are provided at the municipal and provincial levels."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, that's one of her -- one of the duties, yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
And I put to you that the Supreme Court of Canada has said that the Solicitor General has a duty to ensure that the Board provides adequate and effective services in a municipality.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I'm not aware of that Supreme Court case but I will take your word for it.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, we'll deal with that in submission. Okay. But you don't have any reason to contradict that understanding?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now one of the ways that the Solicitor General fulfills this duty, as I understand your evidence, is through a Police Services Advisor; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That's one of the ways. The other way she fulfills this duty is by speaking to Chiefs of Police and receiving public complaints with regards to adequate and effective police services. So if the Solicitor General is aware of public complaints that the Service is not delivering adequate and effective police services, Solicitor General can take action.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And we'll come to that, of course. But I want to focus right now on the Police Services Advisor. So we looked earlier at the February 5th meeting of the Ottawa Police Services Board, and it was the one you were texting with Commissioner Carrique about. So if we could bring up the document ONT, and I think it's 00001115. If you can just scroll down, I'm going to focus on the first four bullets -- oh, if we can actually go to the top first. So this is -- we've discussed earlier, you discussed, I should say, that Lindsay Gray was the solicitor, and we see that this is a Board meeting summary note for the Inspector General of Policing and that was the gentleman that you said reported to you?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now if we -- so this is her report. So if we can scroll down, the first -- the four bullets. So we have, "Chair Deans commented that the city is under siege and this is a threat to democracy, a nation-wide insurrection; the current situation is "madness" and stated that there needs to be a concrete plan to end this now And this gets important here. " Chair Deans stated that the meeting was called to ask the chief one question – in accordance with the mandate for the delivery of adequate and effective policing, she asked the chief if he [still] believes he is [...] able to provide, given the fluid nature of the occupation, adequate and effective policing to the city of Ottawa. If not, the Chair asked what legal authorities, what resources from the board or what assistance the board can provide at this time." And the Chief starts answering, and he says, "The Chief committed to lay out where the service is at and what their plan is. He did comment that there is nothing in the definition of adequate and effective policing that could resolve a city under siege, a threatened democracy, a nation-wide insurrection. He further commented that a police service is not created/contemplated to deal with a city under siege and as such, there is not necessarily a concrete plan for such a scenario as described." Now I don't think we have time to read the whole document, but you'll agree the Chief does not say yes. He does not say, "I'm able to provide adequate and effective police services."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I wasn't there at that meeting and I've only read this particular report in preparation for this testimony.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, so what I want to understand though is that this report was provided to your subordinate. And I’m wondering, did alarm bells not start ringing at the Ministry?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I was relying on the information provided to me by Ken Weatherill.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And at the same time, by this point, you were aware that by February 2nd, former Chief Sloly has stated that he doesn’t believe there’s a policing solution.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
So your department is getting this report at the same time he’s saying that. And I ask again, are alarm bells not ringing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, because Ottawa Police Service was getting sufficient and significant support and resources from the OPP.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Sir, you testified that the Police Service Board is in the best place to assess whether there’s adequate or effective police services being provided.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And those services were being provided by Ottawa Police Service and the OPP.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
We see here that the Chief was asked on point if he could, and he didn’t answer yes. And we can go to an internal OPB document. Let’s bring that up. Chair Deans’ speaking notes from this meeting. OPB0000655.
The Clerk (POEC)
Sorry, is that OPB or OP ---
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, OPB, as in bravo, 00000655. And these are Chair Deans’ speaking notes from that. And if we scroll down, ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m sorry, whose speaking notes are these?
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Chair Diane Deans.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’ve never seen this before.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. But these are from the minutes. So I’m just going to scroll down further. And the Chair says: “I called the meeting to ask the Chief if he was still able to provide adequate and effective policing to residents of this city. The Chief confirmed that he could not. Which was very troubling to hear. The Board requested what additional resources he needed to restore calm and protest residents.” So that was what was stated by her, and what your staff member reported. And she didn’t say no, but she did not say yes. You’ll agree?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So that information was not communicated to me. Any concerns about the provision of adequate and effective police services were mitigated by the fact that the OPP was providing significant resources to assist the Ottawa Police Service.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Sir, you testified earlier that those resources were contingent on the existence of an operational plan.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s not what I testified to. The resources for the provision of Public Order Units to dismantle the occupation were contingent on a fully developed plan to dismantle the occupation. The OPP was providing significant and sufficient resources to address any of those concerns.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Sir, I put to you that what the Chief described was that with the state of the occupation, he called it a near siege, a threat to democracy, that with the occupation in place, that he was unable to provide adequate and effective policing. And that’s noted in the report that went to your subordinate.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And any risks, as I’ve -- I’m sorry, any concerns were mitigated by the fact that the Commissioner of the OPP was working hand in hand with Chief Sloly and providing significant resources to address those concerns.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
They were contingent on the provision of a plan though?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No. No. Please do not put words in my mouth. The resources to dismantle the occupation were contingent on the operational plan that dealt with that issue. The OPP was providing resources with regards to maintenance and public safety without that plan.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
And we looked at text messages earlier that by February 6th, you acknowledged -- or it was in the text to you, that there was a lack of a plan to dismantle the operation by Chief Sloly; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now one thing I want to look at, because I’m running out of time, is questions, because we see the Board is floundering. The Board is asking we need -- “We don’t know what authorities we have in the event there’s not adequate and effective policing.” So ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
There is a Morden Report that speaks to that.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
And what I’m going to put to you though is that there’s a provision of the Act, and it’s section 9, and I’m going to suggest to you that that section is what deals with a situation where a Police Board or a Chief determines that he’s unable to provide adequate and effective policing. You’ll agree?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, section 9 deals with that issue.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now what I want to understand, so the Board was asking lots of questions of your subordinates. And if we go first to ONT00001111. And if we scroll down a bit? I just wanted to draw this to your attention, that it goes to Kenneth Weatherill. And if I’m not mistaken, that’s the gentleman that’s the Inspector General ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
--- of Policing? And I just wanted to show you that he notes that these are very good questions. And if we scroll down, we see that they’re from the Ottawa Police Services Board looking for guidance from the Solicitor General.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. And that guidance was provided, because it clearly states in that email that the Morden Report was referenced. Chair Deans had the knowledge, as you indicated just now, that the Ottawa Police Service, according to Chief Sloly, was not providing those services. So then section 9 would apply. Under that situation, my testimony is that the Chair, upon a resolution of the entire Board, had the ability to ask the OPP Commissioner to come in and give assistance.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
I agree with you, but let’s go to the answer to these questions. So if we can go to the response ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
You’re going to have to make it quick, because ---
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
I will. I’m ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- you’re out of time.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
If I could just have a bit more time? I think this is an important point.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Yes, but -- sure. Make it ---
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- to the point.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
ONT00001118. And this is the response that was provided. And I’m going to put to you that nowhere in this document is section 9 mentioned.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t know what this document is. I’m sorry.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
This is the response, if you look at the top, and you are going to have to take my word, but it says “Q&A to support Ottawa PSB meeting re: board rules and responsibilities”. And if we look at the list of questions that Mr. Weatherill said were good questions, these are the questions, and these appear to be the responses. They’re produced from your department. So if we scroll through, and I am short on time, I’m cognizant, but what we see is that section 9 is never suggested. And I want to understand, why was that never suggested?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So that would be a question for the Police Service Board Advisor. Having said that, it is my expectation that Police Service Board Chairs and all members be intimately familiar with their duties and responsibilities in the Police Services Act. They have access to independent legal counsel, they have access to Executive Directors as well. The Advisor cannot be the only source of information that they rely upon.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
We started this examination by talking about the duty on the Solicitor General to ensure that the Board is providing adequate and effective policing. It was very clear from these questions that the Board was having trouble understanding what to do in what we’ve all described as an unprecedented situation. Why was section 9 not suggested to the Board as an option in light of the fact that the Chief could not confirm -- as Lindsey Gray stated in her note, the Chief did not confirm that he was able to provide adequate and effective services?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So that’s a question for Lindsey Gray.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
So I put to you that it was never mentioned because Ontario didn’t want it to happen?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I reject that assertion completely.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
And I put to you that Ontario didn’t want the Province to publicly take responsibility for the situation in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I reject that assertion completely.
Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)
Those are my questions. Thank you.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Next is the Government of Saskatchewan.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MICHAEL MORRIS
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Good evening, sir. My name is Mike Morris. I’m counsel for the Government of Saskatchewan. I only want to talk about one phone call with you tonight. So it should hopefully be pretty straightforward. It’s a phone call you had with Deputy Minister Stewart of Public Safety Canada at about 8:55 a.m. on February 14th. And like any good police officer, I think you made good contemporaneous notes, so that’s going to help us out quite a bit. I just ask that the following be pulled up by the Registrar. ONT00003847. Do you recognize your notes, sir?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Dated February 14th, 2022. Time recorded as 8:55. I take it that’s a.m.; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
This is a call with Deputy Minister Stewart. Did you initiate that call or did he? Do you recall?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I don’t recall.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Okay. Your notes state: “I inquire as to whether Federal emergencies Act will be invoked today.” And the next note is “Silence” with an exclamation point; correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
So you asked the question. You were met with silence then?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Can we go to the next page of the PDF? I think this is a continuation of your notes from that same call. I’m just going to ask you to confirm that for me though.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
So if I read this correctly, you then have written down: “I am informed PM made a decision that FM meeting called, followed by press conference. Cabinet meeting held last night.” Did I read that correctly?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
You did.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
PM would mean Prime Minister?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
FM meeting would be First Ministers meeting then?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
So was this Deputy Minister Stewart advising you then that a Cabinet meeting had occurred last night, that the Prime Minister had made a decision, and that a First Ministers meeting was to occur and to be followed by a press conference that day? Is that fair?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That would be fair.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And then your next note is: “I advise from my perspective that sounds like federal [government] invoking Emergencies Act.” Correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And your final note of this phone call, if I understand it correctly, is: “Silence from Rob Stewart.” Is that correct?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes. I think some context is important as well. The reason why I’m having this discussion and asking these questions is because Deputy Minister Stewart referenced the previous day, I believe, on the 13th, that the Federal Government was considering an emergency declaration, but they were exceptionally reluctant to do so because the provincial emergencies regulations had more teeth in terms of financial penalties. So that’s why this discussion was happening.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And this was a very important discussion from your perspective, I take it?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And did you report this information after you received it to anyone?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Who did you report it to, sir?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Minister Jones.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
And was it your understanding then that the First Ministers meeting was going to occur after this phone call that you’d had with Deputy Minister Stewart?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I’m not entirely sure on the timing.
Michael J. Morris, Counsel (SK)
Okay. We can clarify the timing with a different witness, likely from the Federal Government. Thank you, sir. Those are my questions for you.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next I’d like to call on the Government of Alberta.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. STEPHANIE BOWES
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Good evening. My name is Stephanie Bowes. I’m here as counsel for the Province of Alberta. Just one area to ask you a couple of questions on. Was it your understanding regarding tow trucks and Ottawa that there were providers that were hesitant to provide towing services because they were concerned about being provided with an indemnity?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And was it your understanding that the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act does not grant the power to compel tow truck operators to provide towing services?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s exactly right.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
But is it also your understanding that pursuant to that same Act, an order could be made in respect of procuring necessary goods, services, and resources?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Permitting the procurement, yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And that could include towing services?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And also under that Act, an order could be made authorizing but not requiring any person to render services of a type that person is reasonably qualified to provide?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And again ---
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
The Act does not provide the ability to compel.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Correct. And that again could be towing services?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Correct.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Do you also understand that the Act makes it an offence to interfere with or obstruct any person in the exercise of a power or performance of a duty conferred by an order under that Act?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
You’d have to put that section up. I’m sorry.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. Well we can do that very quickly. It’s document CCF00000038. And, Mr. Clerk, if you could please go to page 10. And scroll. There we see the “offences” section, 7.0.11.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And you’ll see there that it does make it an offence to interfere or obstruct a person exercising a power under that -- under an order?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And then scrolling down again to page 13, we’ll look at section 11(1). And this section protects anyone acting under an order made under the earlier section that deals with an order authorizing services to be provided, protects them from liability, as long as they’re acting in good faith pursuant to that order. You see that there?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I agree.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And then down to page 14, section 13.1. And subsection 3 there is compensation for loss of property. There’s a mechanism within this Act for someone to be compensated for any loss of personal property the person suffered as a result of an order made under the Act? Do you see that?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
So do you agree that certainly there are ways under this Act, although not to compel tow truck drivers to act, but to at least ameliorate some of their concerns with respect to financial liability for providing towing services with respect to the protest in Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
To some extent. One thing that 13.1(3) does not do is provide for compensation for any loss to property from a future perspective. So if the tow truck companies were concerned about being reimbursed for an arson, for example, at their warehouse, that would not be provided for, in my view, in regards to this particular section.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
And just to be clear, you’re talking about the theoretical possibility of the tow truck operator towing that vehicle to their own warehouse, as opposed to a government lot?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No, not necessarily. Even participating in the program and having their building burnt down at some point in time in the future.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
I’m sorry, I missed that answer.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So I’m talking about the theoretical possibility of a tow truck company having their building burnt down for participating in the removal of tow trucks.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
So you’re talking about an act of arson?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)
Okay. Thank you. Those are my only questions today.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Thank you. Next, the Democracy Fund.
Alan Honner, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)
Good evening, Commissioner. Alan Honner for the Democracy Fund. We do not have any questions for this witness.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Next, the CLA/CCDL.
Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)
Good evening. It’s Colleen McKeown. Our questions have been asked. Thank you very much.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
The National Police Federation?
Jen Del Riccio, Counsel (National Police Federation)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. This is Jen Del Riccio for the NPF. Our questions for this witness have been asked and answered. We have nothing further. Thank you.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
The Ontario representative?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARRELL KLOEZE
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Thank you, Commissioner. My name is Darrell Kloeze. I’m counsel for the Province of Ontario. Good evening, Mr. Di Tommaso. I only have a few questions for you, and honestly these are just for purpose of clarifying the record, given that we’re not a party to this proceeding and we will not be attending at the evidence of the Federal Representatives. The one point I wanted to raise, Mr. Di Tommaso, you were asked questions, both by Commission Counsel and by counsel for Canada, about the tripartite meetings taken at the Ministers level. So these were the meetings that the Solicitor General was invited to. And I think Commission Counsel did put it to you that, at some point, there were calls between Federal Minister Mendocino and the Premier, and the Premier had expressed that he would send the Solicitor General to these meetings, but then later said that he would not send the Solicitor General. Do you remember those questions from the Commission Counsel?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Counsel for Canada put a reference to you, a document reference, and I believe it was SSM.CAN.NSC.00002832, and that's the document reference where the -- I think it was the Chief of Staff of the Minister Mendocino confirmed that the Premier said he would have Minister Jones attend. We don't need to bring it up, but I just want to put on the record the second document reference that wasn't put to you by Counsel for Canada, and if we can put that up, SSM.NSC.CAN.00001148. And obviously, Deputy, you weren't at any of these meetings -- you weren't on any of these calls, so you won't have any knowledge about them. I just wanted to put that document up so we can see. And if we can just scroll down a bit, Mike Jones, I understand, is the Chief of Staff for Minister Mendocino. On Wednesday, February 9th in the afternoon, the first paragraph, "My boss spoke with Premier Ford just before today's avail." I understand that to mean press availability. "My boss said [he] needed the province at the table on policing efforts and that the current blockades are harming the economy and costing jobs. Ford responded that he understood." And if we go down to the second paragraph, "Immediately following the media avail, Ford called my boss again to say that he wouldn't be sending Minister Jones to the tripartite conversations..." Again, I understand you weren't part of this -- these calls, but that seems to confirm to me that the Premier is not going to send the Minister.
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Thank you.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And did you have any discussions with the Minister about either of these conversations?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
No.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
The second point -- actually the second point I think has been covered in other questions. One final point actually I do want to raise with you, and this came up at the very beginning of your evidence today, Commission Counsel asked you about whether the province participated IN injunctions -- injunction hearings. And I think it was agreed that the province did intervene at the request for an injunction in Windsor?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes, and the province also had an application to freeze the assets with regards to the GoFundMe as well.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And that was on or around the same time as the injunction in Windsor, on or around February 11th?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I believe so.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And that injunction -- or that freezing order was made by the Court?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
There was a question as to whether the province intervened in the injunction brought in Ottawa. I understand there were two injunctions in Ottawa, one by a private citizen, but there was a second injunction, are you aware, by the City of Ottawa?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
To -- in respect of bylaw enforcement?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And are you aware that the province actually did intervene in that injunction as well?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I am aware.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And one final matter, you've mentioned a number of times in your evidence, and I just want to make this legislative reference if I can, you've mentioned that under the Federal Emergency Declaration, tow truck drivers were compelled under that order to provide services if requested by police?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Under the Provincial Act, the EMCPA, you've said it does not give the province that authority to compel that type of service?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right. It authorises but does not require.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Okay. And if we can just turn up the Act, so we can see what it says on that? And we've had the reference before a number of times. I believe it's CCF00000038. Thank you, Mr. Registrar. And if you could turn to page 7? And just turn to the top of the previous -- or the bottom of the previous page. So emergency orders; you see that, sir?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
"In accordance with subsection (2) [...], the Lieutenant Governor in Council may make orders in respect of the following:" And so these are the types of orders that can be made if an Emergency Declaration is made by the -- either the Premier or the Cabinet?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And if you turn to paragraph 12 of that, just down, and is that what you're referring to when you say that there is no ability of the province to compel a service?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Right.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
And it reads, "Authorizing, but not requiring, any person, or [...] class of persons, to render services of a type that that person [...] is reasonably qualified to provide."
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Yes.
Darrell Kloeze, Counsel (ON)
Thank you, sir. Those are my questions. Thank you, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Any re-examination?
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, no re-examination from the Commission. I just wonder if one of the parties may have been skipped, the National Police Federation? No? They had no questions?
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
No, I believe I asked ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
--- the National Police Federation ---
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Perfect. Well, that ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Unless I fell asleep on that one.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, it's been a ---
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Wouldn't be the first time. I've missed people before, but usually they speak up so.
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I think it was me who was sleeping this time. It's been a long day. Thank you, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. If you have the strength, there's just a couple of questions I'd like to ask you. As you know, I'm -- this Commission is concerned with the Declaration of the Emergency and but also can make recommendations on the Emergency Act and presumably dealing with public order emergencies. And I guess I'm interested in views you may have as to knowing as you do what happened in Ottawa, what happened in Windsor, whether you might have some comments or suggestions, and in particular, on how or whether there should be more coordination on -- in areas where there is clear overlap, such as border crossings, where the impact, if you like, is much broader than Ontario, it's a federal, or Ottawa where, as we know, the impact certainly was greater on the federal government than the Parliamentary Precinct. And leaving aside whether it was properly declared an emergency, which is something I have to deal with, are there things in -- do you view aspects of coordination in particular or other aspects of the Act that might be reviewed?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Certainly. I think there is an opportunity for greater coordination amongst governments and police services and intelligence agencies. I think Chief Sloly referred to that very thing, especially in regards to intelligence sharing. And I would certainly endorse that suggestion, recommendation by Chief Sloly. I've also had the opportunity to briefly review the recommendations made by Commissioner Carrique, and I certainly support and endorse those recommendations that he's made. Over and above that, I would also suggest, this is my own personal opinion, that a task force of some type be put together to study the issue of the right to protest. And it's enshrined in the Constitution, but what are the limits, because my understanding is that people have an understanding that protests can occur at any time, in any location, for any length of time. So are there reasonable limits that ought to be imposed? I don't know what the answer to that is. That's something that this Commission could certainly suggest that that matter be studied in regards to lawful protest. There are limits that can be prescribed. I'm not in a position to determine what those limits ought to be. But certainly, I think that the public needs to be reminded that when you exercise your rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that you also have responsibility to your fellow citizens as well, and that those rights are certainly not absolute. Those are my comments, Commissioner.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. If I could push you a little bit on the -- an aspect that I'm interested in, which is the coordination, and we've heard about the coordination in Windsor that was very effective, police, and messaging from the City, from all of the parties. And that messaging -- or the coordination in Ottawa does not seem to have been as fluid at the police level. I think we’ve heard evidence about that, nor at the political level. And I think we’ve heard about that. Is there something -- should there be a process or a protocol for such events that involve the different orders of government in such events? A protocol, or a best practices, or something?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
That’s certainly something that this Commission could make recommendations on. I think there is opportunity, there are opportunities for greater collaboration. I think one of the key differences between the police operations in Windsor in comparison to Ottawa was that the OPP provided key leadership in terms of command and control. They made it clear to the Ottawa -- I’m sorry, to the Windsor Police Service, that they were in charge. There was a very rapidly developed, unified command. Very rapidly. And the scope and scale of the Windsor blockade was certainly much smaller, but it was that coordination where Windsor Police Service accepted unified command and the lead by the OPP very quickly. I think that was a critical point for Windsor to have done that resulted in the dismantling of the blockade that much more quickly.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And do you have views on whether any recommendations regarding unified command and, if you like, drawing on expertise, which I think is what was described in Windsor, should be made by this Commission?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do. I do. I think that in those rare occasions when police services do not have the capacity and the capability to deal with urgent events, prolonged events of the size, and scale, and scope that we saw in Ottawa, that there be some way to compel the police service to accept the services, the leadership, the subject matter expertise, of those police services that do have that capacity.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
And just pursuing that a bit, with the Police Services Board, I seem to recall from your testimony, there’s something being looked at in terms of the Police Services Act or a committee. And I’m just wondering, given the cross-examination you had, but also the evidence here of, let’s just say the issues with respect to the information the Police Services Board had, is there -- do you think there’s room for reform on that or in that area?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
I do. And I can assure you, Commissioner, that this province right now is in the process of implementing the brand new Community Safety and Policing Act. And we are in the process of consulting with many stakeholders with regards to the regulations to support that Act. And I can I assure you, Commissioner, that we are listening with ears wide open with regards to what is happening here in this Commission and the evidence that has been presented. I cannot speak to what regulations can be implemented, but this is certainly a concern that I will be taking back and sharing with the Minister.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
That was going to be my next question. Are there findings from this Commission in respect to what happened? Because obviously there’s dispute at this point, which is going to have to be sorted out. That is something that can be -- could be useful to the work the Ministry is doing?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
Absolutely. I believe that the recommendations made by this Commission with regards to policing will certainly inform decisions made by the Minister and by Cabinet.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. And one last question, and that deals with the Emergency Acts as such. Is there room for, or should there be room for coordination between Emergency Acts, because we hear about what Ontario’s Emergency Act can do, what the federal could do, what triggers one, what doesn’t trigger the other, and obviously in this case, the Emergency Act of Canada, I guess, is 40 years old, or 30 some years old. So is there room for coordination or is that something that you don’t think should be pursued or looked into?
Mario Di Tommaso, DSG (ON-SolGen)
So in practical terms, Commissioner, the Provincial Emergency Management Civil Protection Act in the last four years has been -- Emergency Declarations have been made four times. With regards to the Federal Emergencies Act, as you’ve indicated, once in 40 years. So I’m not sure that the reality is such that both Acts ought to be coordinated. I think the Provincial Act is certainly invoked more often to deal with all sorts of emergencies and the Federal Act, obviously, less frequently.
Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)
Okay. Well thank you very much. And thank you for your patience, your staying late, and for coming back after yesterday’s failure to complete your examination. So you’re free to go. We’re now not early, but we’re finished for the day, and we’ll adjourn until Monday morning at 9:30. And I expect next week will be longer days. Again, the same sort of days we’re having this week. So prepare yourselves accordingly.
The Registrar (POEC)
The Commission is adjourned. La Commission est ajournée.
Upon adjourning at 8:34 p.m. Ottawa, Ontario