Volume 22 (November 14, 2022)

(jump to testimony)

Volume 22 has 292 pages of testimony. 28 people spoke before the Commission, including 4 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 Mitchell Kersys.

Speakers, by number of times they spoke:

  1. Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister - Public Safety / Government of Canada (GC-PS) (spoke 523 times)
  2. Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 247 times)
  3. Cindy Termorhuizen, Associate Deputy Minister (AssocDM) - Global Affairs / Government of Canada (GC-GAC) (spoke 119 times)
  4. Dominic Rochon, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) - Public Safety / Government of Canada (GC-PS) (spoke 91 times)
  5. Brendan Miller, Counsel - Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers (spoke 78 times)
  6. Paul Rouleau, Commissioner - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 61 times)
  7. Anne Tardif, Counsel - City of Ottawa (Ott) (spoke 47 times)
  8. Jessica Barrow, Counsel - Ottawa Police Service / City of Ottawa (Ott-OPS) (spoke 46 times)
  9. Tom Curry, Counsel - Peter Sloly (spoke 46 times)
  10. Joe Comartin, Consul General - Global Affairs / Government of Canada (GC-GAC) (spoke 41 times)
  11. Brendan van Niejenhuis, Counsel - Government of Canada (GC) (spoke 40 times)
  12. Christopher Diana, Counsel - Ontario Provincial Police / Government of Ontario (ON-OPP) (spoke 38 times)
  13. P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel - Government of Saskatchewan (SK) (spoke 30 times)
  14. Emilie Taman, Counsel - Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses (spoke 27 times)
  15. Rob Kittredge, Counsel - Democracy Fund / Citizens for Freedom / Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms Coalition (DF / CfF / JCCF) (spoke 26 times)
  16. Robert MacKinnon, Counsel - Government of Canada (GC) (spoke 24 times)
  17. Stephanie Bowes, Counsel - Government of Alberta (AB) (spoke 24 times)
  18. Dahlia Shuhaibar, Counsel - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 23 times)
  19. Jennifer L. King, Counsel - City of Windsor (Win) (spoke 22 times)
  20. Hatim Kheir, Counsel - Democracy Fund / Citizens for Freedom / Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms Coalition (DF / CfF / JCCF) (spoke 21 times)
  21. Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel - Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) (spoke 21 times)
  22. Cara Zwibel, Counsel - Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) (spoke 20 times)
  23. The Registrar - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 20 times)
  24. Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel - Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) (spoke 11 times)
  25. Colleen McKeown, Counsel - Criminal Lawyers’ Association / Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers (CLA/CCCDL) (spoke 8 times)
  26. Nusra Khan, Counsel - Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) (spoke 4 times)
  27. Thomas McRae, Counsel - Windsor Police Service / City of Windsor (Win-WPS) (spoke 2 times)
  28. Nini Jones, Counsel - National Police Federation (spoke 1 time)

Upon commencing on Monday, November 14, 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.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 8 22-008-03

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Good morning. Bonjour. J’espère que tout le monde a eu une bonne fine de semaine. I hope everyone enjoyed the weekend. So I understand this morning we have a presentation of an overview report. Is that...

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 8 22-008-07

SUBMISSIONS BY MS. NUSRA KHAN

Nusra Khan, Counsel (POEC)

Good morning, Mr. Commissioner. Nusra Khan, Commission counsel. I’ll just wait for the PowerPoint to be pulled up on the screen there. Okay, perfect. So I’ll be presenting the overview report titled “Federal Government Entities Involved in the Decision to Invoke the Emergencies Act”. This overview report is now available to the parties om the party database and will be posted on the Commission’s web site for the public very shortly. The document ID for this report is COM.OR00000008. Next slide, please. By way of introduction, this presentation focuses on the mandates of three key federal entities, that is, the Federal Executive, the Prime Minister, Cabinet and the Governor in Council, the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister’s Office. Of course, there were many other departments and agencies implicated in the decision to declare a Public Order emergency, and the Commissioner will hear from evidence -- will hear evidence from these witnesses in the coming two weeks. The purpose of this overview report is to contextualize and frame the anticipate evidence for the benefit of the parties, the public and, of course, the Commissioner. Next slide, please. So we’ll begin with the definition. Section 17(1) of the Emergencies Act designs the formal authority to declare the existence of a Public Order emergency to the Governor in Council. The term “Governor in Council” refers to the Governor-General of Canada acting on the advice of the King’s Privy Council for Canada. The King’s Privy Council, in turn, is a technical term that describes the full group of people who have the authority to advise the sovereign or the Governor-General acting as the representative of the sovereign. In practical terms, however, references to the King’s Privy Council are references to the Federal Cabinet. The Federal Cabinet is a committee of the Privy Council and is effectively its only operative branch. And by constitutional convention, the Governor- General is required to follow the advice given by Cabinet. This is, of course, a fundamental part of our system of responsible government. Next slide, please. So here we have an organizational chart depicting the structure of the Federal Executive Branch. You’ll see that while the formal authority to govern is vested in the Governor- General, that authority is exercised on the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. In turn, Prime Minister and Cabinet are supported by two central offices: the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister’s Office. So to put it into context, the four Orders in Council that were issued by the Governor in Council in the context of the Public Order emergency were issued on the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Next slide. Thanks. The Federal Cabinet is a political decision- making body that consists of all Federal Ministers as well as the Prime Minister. The Cabinet is sometimes referred to as the Federal Ministry. Cabinet is the forum wherein the government of the day sets its priorities and decides how to advance these priorities. The Prime Minister sets the agenda and will lead Ministers to agreement in making Cabinet decisions, but the final and ultimate decision-making authority rests with the Prime Minister. Cabinet members are governed by two related conventions, Cabinet solidarity and Cabinet confidentiality. Cabinet solidarity requires that Ministers as a group be held accountable to Parliament for their government’s actions. Cabinet confidentiality requires that Ministers not disclose the substance of their Cabinet discussions to the public. The two principles are, of course, intertwined because Cabinet confidentiality allows Ministers to frankly and vigorously discuss their views with their colleagues in private while remaining united in their decisions to the public. Ministers are also individually responsible for the federal departments they oversee. The powers and duties in respect of their departments are set out in their departmental statutes. In practice, however, the day-to-day operations of a federal department or agency are carried out by the Deputy Minister and civil servants. A Deputy Minister is the senior-most member of the professional non-partisan public service. Finally, every Minister is supported by a Ministerial Office consisting of a political staff in carrying out their duties as members of Parliament. Political staff are sometimes referred to as exempt staff because they are not bound by the strict impartiality rules that apply to the public service and are, instead, temporary political appointees. So there’s a clear separation between political staff and the public servants who work with in federal departments in that political staff do not have the authority to give direction or instruction to public servants. Next slide, please. So here we have another organizational chart that depicts the work of Cabinet and Cabinet committees. The work of the government is also carried out by several Cabinet committees. The protests and the government’s response to the protests were discussed by two Cabinet committees in particular. The first was the Cabinet Committee on Safety, Security and Emergencies, or SSE, which was chaired by the Minister of Emergency Preparedness. The SSE met on February 3rd, 6th and 8th. The second Cabinet committee was the Incident Response Group, or IRG. The IRG took over the management of the issue after February 8th and was chaired by the Prime Minister and, therefore, had decision-making authority. The IRG met on February 10th, 12th and 13th, and then daily thereafter between February 16th and February 23rd. I will also add that there were two full Cabinet meetings at which the protests and the invocation of the Emergencies Act was discussed. These meetings took place on February 3rd and February 15th. Turning now to the Prime Minister’s Office, the PMO is a central political agency supporting the Prime Minister in his three roles as the head of government, the leader of a political party and a Member of Parliament. PMO staff advise the Prime Minister on policy issues, communications and Parliamentary affairs, and PMP is led by a Chief of Staff who reports directly to the Prime Minister and is also appointed by the Prime Minister. Like the staff at Ministerial offices, all staff at the PMO are exempt staff in that they are temporary political appointees. The PMO operates as a critical link between the partisan interests and agenda of the Prime Minister and the general workings of government. For instance, PMO maintains close relationships with political staff at Ministers’ offices as well as with officials at the Privy Council Office, and PMO officials often attend Cabinet meetings. The Privy Council Office, or PCO, is the central coordinating agency within the federal government. And in contrast to PMO, the PCO provides non-partisan advice to the Prime Minister and Cabinet and ensures that the government’s agenda is implemented across all federal departments and agencies. And for this reason, PCO is sometimes referred to as the Prime Minister’s Department. PCO is led by the clerk of the Privy Council. The clerk holds the additional titles of the Deputy Minister to the Prime Minister, the Secretary to Cabinet and the Head of the Public Service. And as a Secretary to Cabinet, the clerk is responsible for the smooth operation of Cabinet business, including the preparation of Cabinet memoranda and the keeping of Cabinet confidences. In addition to its primary role as the central coordinating agency, PCO also serves as the department for some Ministers. This includes the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, who is supported by the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, as well as the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, who is supported the Emergency Preparedness and COVID-19 Recovery Secretariat. Another important PCO actor is the National Security and Intelligence Advisor, or the NSIA. The NSIA holds the title of Deputy Secretary to Cabinet and provides national security advice and intelligence briefings to the Prime Minister, as well as to Cabinet. The Office of the NSIA plays a coordinating and convening function amongst national security agencies and the Office of the NSIA itself consists of four secretariats and is responsible for convening two standing committees of senior civil servants. The NSIA also acts as the Secretary to the Incident Response Group. So this chart depicts the relationship between the Privy Council Office, federal departments and agencies, and the various secretariats within PCO. It should be noted that there is no legislation governing the role of the NSAI or PCO, as these entities are meant to play only an advisory, secretarial, and coordination function to Cabinet. The NSAI chairs the Deputy Minister’s Operations and Coordination Committee, or DMOCC, and the Assistant Secretary to Cabinet Security and Intelligence cochairs the Assistant Deputy Minister’s Committee on National Security and Operations, or ADMNSOPs. Both the ADMNSOPs and DMOCC met frequently, in fact almost daily, in late January and throughout February 2022 to discuss the government’s response to the protests. Finally, the departments and agencies listed on this slide were also involved in the Federal Government’s response to the protests and blockades and the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act. And as I mentioned earlier, witnesses from each of these departments are expected to testify in the coming weeks, and I would invite the parties to consult the Institutional Reports prepared by each department for a fuller explanation of the Department’s mandate and involvement. So that concludes the presentation on this overview report. But before I go, I would also like to enter three additional overview reports prepared by Commission Counsel and that I understand the parties have had the chance to review. First, Commission Counsel are entering a ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 8 22-008-13

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Can you slow down for the interpreters, please?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 15 22-015-10

Nusra Khan, Counsel (POEC)

Commission Counsel are entering a report summarizing the proceedings commenced in response to the protests in January and February 2022, including judicial review proceedings commenced to challenge the invocation of the Emergencies Act. The document ID for this report is COM.OR00000001. The second report that Commission Counsel are entering is a report summarizing the protests that occurred at six international ports of entry in January and February 2022. The document ID for this report is COM.OR0000006. And the final overview report that Commission Counsel are entering is a report summarizing the oversight responsibilities of Parliament and the Parliamentary Review Committee under the Emergencies Act. The document ID for this report is COM.OR00000007. And with that, that concludes my comments. Thank you.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 15 22-015-12

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Thank you. And the parties will find that document, the overview report, useful for determining who they should be questioning, as we go through the various departments, because for obvious reasons, the amount of time for cross-examination is limited for each of the parties. So you should be, as much as possible, targeting the departments and witnesses who are likely to have the answers to the questions you may pose. So with that brief introduction, I call on the next witness. I think it’s a panel, as I understand it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-01

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. My name is Shantona Chaudhury, co-lead Commission Counsel. I’d like to call Mr. Rob Stewart and Mr. Dominic Rochon to the stand.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-11

The Registrar (POEC)

Mr. Stewart, will you swear on a religious document or do you wish to affirm?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-15

The Registrar (POEC)

For the record, please state your full name and spell it out.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Robert Neil Affleck Stewart. Spell it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

R-O-B-E-R-T N-E-I-L A-F-F-L- E-C-K S-T-E-W-A-R-T.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-23

DM ROBERT STEWART, Affirmed

The Registrar (POEC)

Thank you. Mr. Rochon, will you swear on a religious document or do you wish to affirm?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 16 22-016-26

The Registrar (POEC)

For the record, please state your full name and spell it out.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-02

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Dominic James Rochon. D-O- M-I-N-I-C R-O-C-H-O-N.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-04

ADM DOMINIC ROCHON, Affirmed

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Go ahead.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-08

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SHANTONA CHAUDHURY

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Good morning, Mr. Stewart. Good morning, Mr. Rochon. Nice to see you again. I’ll just start by introducing your witness summary. So you’ll recall sitting for an interview with Commission Counsel on September 1st, 2022? Mr. Clerk, I’ll ask you to pull up WTS.0000066. Okay. So Mr. Stewart and Mr. Rochon, you’ll recall that some of your colleagues were not with us today, were not called to testify, also sat for that interview, namely Mr. Talal Dakalbab. I’m not sure I’m pronouncing that right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Dakalbab.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Dakalbab.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Dakalbab. Thank you. Mr. Deryck Treheame also participated in that interview. I’ll just ask you to confirm that you’ve reviewed the summary of the interview, and if you have no changes to make, confirm that insofar as it contains your information, you adopt it, and insofar -- and it’s accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief insofar as it contains the information of your colleagues, and you believe them to have accepted it as accurate.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 17 22-017-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I accept it. I believe it’s accurate.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Mr. Stewart, at the time of the Freedom Convoy events in January and February, you were the Deputy Minister of Public Safety? Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And you’ve since moved on to become the Deputy Minister of International Trade?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-15

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And when was that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Just recently. The 17th of October.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

The 17th of October? Okay. Mr. Rochon, at the time of the events, you were the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Public Safety’s National and Cyber Security Branch? Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-19

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And you’ve also since left Public Safety to take another position? Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Associate Deputy Minister of Transport?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 18 22-018-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And when was that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-03

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

October 31st was my first day.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So also very recent. The next thing I’ll just ask you to introduce the Public Safety’s Institutional Report, despite the fact that neither of you are currently with Public Safety. Mr. Clerk, that’s DOJIR0000008. Okay. So, Mr. Stewart, you’ll recall that Public Safety Canada prepared and filed with the Commission this Institutional Report. Have you reviewed it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And is it accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And can you confirm that it’s been filed with the Commission as part of Public Safety’s evidence?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe it has.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-22

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Okay. With those introductions out of the way, I’ll just ask you to start by giving an overview of the structure of Public Safety. It’s a slightly complicated department. As we know, it’s the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. So Mr. Stewart, can you walk us through Public Safety writ large?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 19 22-019-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

By all means. Public Safety is a relatively small department that covers all matters associated with security of Canada. It has three main branches, which deal with National and Cyber Security, that’s one branch, Crime Prevention, that’s another, and Emergency Management, that’s the third. It has other branches which do more coordinating or corporate work.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. But the three that you mentioned are the ones that were most implicated in the events of the convoy? Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Those are the policy branches.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And Mr. Rochon, I understand the National and Cyber Security Branch manages five directorates. Can you tell us about that? And if you’d like to have the reference for your notes, it’s DOJIR at page 8, paragraphs 25 and 26. So we can just pull that up.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-16

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I think if you just move up the page just slightly, but I can speak to them, yes. So the National Cyber Security Branch has five divisions. Primarily it is responsible for national security policy matters, national security operations matters, critical infrastructure, cyber security and over the last three years, there was a special task force regarding economic security.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And if we can just scroll down a little bit, Mr. Clerk. Under Critical Infrastructure and Strategic Coordination, it says: “This Directorate supports the Ministers in leading the national effort to enhance the resilience of critical infrastructure against a variety of hazards.” Do those hazards include protest?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 20 22-020-28

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

They could. Essentially, that particular Directorate oversees the critical infrastructure strategy that has been in place since 2010. We have been, over the last couple of years, in the midst of refreshing that strategy. We -- that particular Directorate engages with the 10 critical infrastructure sectors. There are private sector leads and public sector leads for each of those sectors and they deal with matters of -- we provide risk assessments when there are threats. They could be cyber-related threats, but any threats to any critical infrastructure across those 10 critical infrastructure sectors.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 21 22-021-10

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

And then the next not bullet there, but the next line in the chart, the Task Force on Economic Security, tell us a little bit about the work of that task force and whether or not it played into the convoy at all.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 21 22-021-22

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

It did not. That task force was stood up over the last three years, as I pointed out, in order to look at the broader framework that is economic security. Economic security is a term that can mean a lot of things. From a national security perspective, that task force was looking into -- through various lenses potential threats to Canada’s economy stemming from threat actors, potentially hostile state actors. Those threats can emanate from -- and indeed, we have an elaborate control system across Canada. We have export controls, we have the Investment Canada Act. We have a series of tools, but the Economic Security Task Force was looking at whether or not those tools were fit to purpose and, indeed, whether that tool set was adequate in order to protect ourselves against the threats of today. And so most of that work looked at and is moving towards an economic security strategy that would introduce research security to protect intellectual property, for example, things of that nature. So specifically that task force did not have a role to play with regard to the -- this particular situation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 21 22-021-26

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Now, getting to your own individual roles and responsibilities, Mr. Stewart, can you tell us, first of all, a little bit about your general role as a Deputy Minister of Public Safety and then describe at a very high level your role with respect to the events of the convoy.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 22 22-022-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

By all means, I -- as a Deputy, I’m responsible for the administration of the department and providing policy advice to the Minister on matters associated with public safety and overseeing program delivery. The department runs a number of contribution programs that provide funding for various activities. And I also work with deputy heads of organizations that are in the portfolio. And by the portfolio, I mean these are organizations who are responsible to the Minister. In the public safety portfolio, there are five main organizations, RCMP, CBSA, Canadian Border Service Agency, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Correctional Service of Canada and the Parole Board. Thank you. And they all are independently accountable to the Minister, but we work together as a group and provide advice and, if necessary, the department will do legislation or regulation on their behalf.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 22 22-022-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Sorry, go on.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 23 22-023-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In the context of the protest, I was working with a subset of that group who were involved in daily calls and briefings. That would be the RCMP and CBSA primarily and, to a degree, CSIS.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 23 22-023-18

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

I think we’re going to hear a lot more about that shortly, and thank you for speaking without acronyms. It’s appreciated. On the first day of federal government evidence, we’re still getting used to all the acronyms. I think CSIS we can handle, and probably CBSA, but when it gets deeper than that it’s going to be a struggle. Okay. Mr. Rochon, can you tell us at a high level, first of all, your role at the time and your role in the convoy?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 23 22-023-22

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would describe my role specifically having gone through the five Directorates in my branch. The one Directorate in particular, the National Security Operations Directorate, through that Directorate I have a responsibility -- and I’ll refer to the presentation that was given to us this morning where we highlighted the Privy Council Office and its role. With the Privy Council Office, they have a Security and Intelligence Secretariat. The assistant secretary responsible for that secretariat and I have a responsibility of convening the security and intelligence community, which is some 16 departments and agencies, on a regular basis to discuss ongoing operational national security matters for situational awareness and, indeed, to be able to make sure that we’re coordinating with community to be able to respond to potential threats to national security. So that particular committee is called the Assistant Deputy Minister National Security Operations Committee, ADMNSOPs, if you don’t mind me that acronym. I’ll probably refer to that a lot. So ADMNSOPs meets every week, once a week. During the convoy situation, I would say that the regular meeting on Tuesday, January 25th we discussed the convoy, but after that date, we decided to have ad hoc meetings, so every day, daily meetings of that committee pretty much throughout the rest of the operational situation, if I could put it that way. So I guess my role primarily was to convene along with my PCO colleague, the Privy Council Office colleague, all the various representatives of these departments and agencies in the security and intelligence community. And I’m happy to walk you through who they might be. But we would get together and discuss whether or not this issue was an issue of national security and whether or not it could lead to threats to national security.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 24 22-024-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. I certainly do want you to elaborate on that. First of all, who was your PCO colleague?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 25 22-025-10

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Mike MacDonald is the Assistant Secretary to the Secretariat for Security and Intelligence.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 25 22-025-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Well, you’ve anticipated essentially my next question because the first sort of broad topic that I think we’re going to cover here is public safety’s preparation for the convoy, and that feeds into, Mr. Rochon, what you were telling us about public safety’s intelligence role. So at this point I’ll ask you to, I guess, please explain that and explain how it was -- how it fed into public safety’s preparation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 25 22-025-16

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

So I’ll start by explaining that intelligence with regard to the federal family, you have collectors of intelligence, you have assessors of intelligence and you have consumers of intelligence. Public Safety Department is a consumer. We don’t per se collect intelligence and we don’t assess intelligence. We consume it. Why does one consume intelligence? In order to be able to be better informed so that decisions -- so that decisions can be made. And those decisions are made across all departments and agencies. The key collectors of intelligence, CSIS, the Communications Security Establishment, CBSA to a certain extent, what they collect and what they see at the border, RCMP, but indeed, beyond the federal family, there’s also collection of intelligence that occurs within police of jurisdiction, which I’m sure you would have heard about it, municipal level, at the provincial level, et cetera. Intelligence is -- can be very broad. It’s not an exact science, and really only provides a piece of information at a moment in time. The federal family also has assessors of that intelligence, which means they pull different threads of intelligence together in order to be able to fuse it and provide a more holistic picture to again better inform potential decisions related to national security matters. Assessors are the Integrated Terrorism Assessment Centre, ITAC. You have the Privy Council Office also has a secretariat, the Intelligence Assessment Secretariat, but to a certain extent, CSIS, the Communications Security Establishment, perform their own assessments and are able to provide reports, as does the RCMP. When we convene the ADMNSOPs group, typically we will use different pieces of intelligence in order to be able to inform us on various issues that are happening all over the world that could lead to or are posing a threat to national security. So throughout the particular situation with the convoy, I would say that there was some intelligence that was likely being pulled together at a police of jurisdiction level. That isn't something that would make its way to our federal family table as a matter of course. The RCMP sits at that table and would bring any information that they would learn, as they're stitched up with different police of jurisdiction across the country, they would bring that information to the table if there was something relevant that needed to be flagged. But there is a distinction between something rising to (a), national security level, and something that is a police matter that they might be dealing with throughout the country.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 25 22-025-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And in your interview -- we're going to go back to some of that as we go along, but you explained that prior to the convoy's arrival -- this is taking you up on your last point -- NCSB, so the National Cyber Security Branch, wasn't gathering or dissemination intelligence about the convoy because, at that point, there was no indication that the events would be a national security threat. So can you explain and elaborate on that a little bit, what that threshold is and when, if at all, NCSB did start doing that and why?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 27 22-027-17

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

So, again, our branch does not collect intelligence. We're consumers of it. So we would be receiving that intelligence from different parties, be it CSIS or be it the RCMP in the federal family context. The Government Operations Centre is another element of Public Safety. They fall under the Emergency Management Branch. They don't fall under my branch. Nevertheless, the Government Operations Centre, otherwise known as the GOC, does have a role to play with regard to any potential emergency in terms of pulling together information and disseminating that information about a potential emergency. They're a 24/7 OP Centre at Public Safety. So the reason I mention them is, obviously, if there is a potential protest -- or, for example, on Canada Day when there are provisions that need to be made in terms of securing a particular area, or if there's a potential threat that may be arising, the Government Operations Centre does start collecting open source information and sharing that information across the federal security and intelligence community in order for there to be situational awareness about a potential for social disruption or something that may be of concern. So I would say the GOC was aware, and within Public Safety would have been the first entity that would have started collecting information. I think that the weekend before the convoy decided to make its way to Ottawa, they would have started collecting some information and disseminating it. Following that, Transport Canada, obviously given their mandate, would have started having concerns about slow rolls and disruptions to traffic. And the member of Transport Canada that is a member of the ADM in this OPs, Kevin Brousseau, would have called both Mike MacDonald and I to say that he wanted to make sure that the issue was brought to the attention of the ADMNSOPs Committee because it did have the potential of rising to a national security level given the fact that this was happening across Canada.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 27 22-027-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And when you say he would have called, you mean he did call?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

That actually happened? Okay.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-09

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And so I understand the GOC started monitoring this, as you said, around January 19th and it started producing 2 types of reports. One is called "Key Points on Potential Impacts to Critical Infrastructure" and the other is "Daily Operations Briefs." So these were being produced as of around January 25th, January 28th. Is there any difference, a marked or noticeable difference between those types of reports?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

No? Okay. And who receives those reports? Who are they disseminated to?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can't say for sure what the broad distribution list is, but it's pretty much federal, provincial, and then the key points would have been going to a selected group of deputies and senior public servants.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I appreciate that it's your colleague, Mr. Trehearne, who was in charge of the GOC, so he's the person with the best knowledge on this but ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 29 22-029-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

If you'd like, I could just clarify a point here.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 30 22-030-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Because my colleague has talked about the intelligence side of the operation. The GOC does not consume intelligence or report it. All it does is bring together open source information and operational information that it obtains from various parties. And in the event of a protest or an event in Ottawa that requires coordination with police forces, it will sit in on that and it'll report that information, but none of that is considered to be intelligence and therefore classified.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 30 22-030-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So maybe you could help us here a little bit to understand this -- oh, sorry -- the distinction between information and intelligence. Who wants to tackle that one?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 30 22-030-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I'll go first, and Dominic can follow. Information is anything that you can obtain via open source, and is not, by its nature, classified to a -- any degree. I suppose you could, you know, quibble about that, but as a general matter, and to the point that I was making, it really isn't needed to be protected in any way. Whereas, intelligence, which is classified at various levels, needs to be guarded and protected and, you know, represents a threat to the security of Canada if it's disclosed.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 30 22-030-19

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would just elaborate that there are different forms of intelligence. You have human source -- so human intelligence that you get from human sources, you have signals intelligence. So there are a whole series of different types of intelligence that can be collected and different departments in the agencies can collect that intelligence under their respective mandates. So they can only collect that information, provided that it follows the various legislation that underpins their existence.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 30 22-030-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And appreciating that Public Safety is a consumer, and neither a collector or a gatherer of intelligence, and the fact that we are going to be hearing from both CSIS and ITAC next week, I won't spend too much more time on this, but there was one thing I did want to raise with you. Mr. Clerk, could you please pull up TRN0000011? So this is an excerpt from a transcript of Commissioner Carrique's evidence from a couple of weeks ago. I'll set the context for you and then I'll ask you to maybe elaborate a bit on what he was discussing. So the reference is page 90, and just pull that up. So the context here is Commissioner Carrique was being questioned by my colleague Mr. Brousseau about a reference in an OPP Hendon report, and I'll just stop there. In the interview -- the Commission's heard quite a bit of evidence about Project Hendon and OPP's Hendon reports. And in the interview that we had in September, you told us that neither of you had heard of Project Hendon at the time specifically and that the Project Hendon reports hadn't been fed up to you. And I take it that that goes to your point of provincial law enforcement intelligence would likely not be directly fed up to you, but I'm wondering if you can -- or if it did, it would be through the RCMP. But I'm wondering if you could just explain, elaborate on that a little bit?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 31 22-031-09

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I certainly can. I would say, and you'll have the opportunity, I assume, to speak with the RCMP and with CSIS, as you have with police of jurisdiction, whether it be provincial or municipal. Every -- at every level, I would assume, and I believe it is the case, there are intelligence bodies that pull together intelligence on a wide variety of issues. And if there's a particular incident that is occurring, they will pull together a particular operation and start collecting information, intelligence about that particular issue. So I'm assuming here, in this case, that the Ontario Provincial Police will have -- would have started Operation Hendon. Now police of jurisdiction will get together and liaise with the RCMP, so I would be -- I am quite certain that the RCMP would have been privy to anything coming out of Project Hendon, as they would have been privy to anything coming out of the Ottawa Police Service and other police of jurisdiction across Ontario or indeed across Canada. And for the purposes of our National Security Committee that looks at operational situations, the RCMP would be feeding us any relevant information, but they would not be referring to an Operation Hendon or an operation -- whatever the various operations. They wouldn’t tell us where the information would be coming from specifically, they would simply be flagging anything that would be of interest for the table.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 32 22-032-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So if I can just summarize that; if the RCMP was privy to anything from Project Hendon that was relevant, you would expect to have knowledge of that through them?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 33 22-033-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Thank you, that’s helpful. So just getting back to this little transcript excerpt here. So Comm. Carrique is being asked about a reference in an OPP Hendon report to a potential threat to Canada’s sovereignty and national security; that’s around line 19, I believe?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 33 22-033-08

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And if we can just scroll down now to the next page, page 91.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 33 22-033-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Ninety-one (91).

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 33 22-033-19

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

No problem. Okay. So I’m just going to read through the first few paragraphs here. Comm. Carrique says: “What is required is further analysis of that threat, Hendon...did have those conversations with the appropriate security partners...to see if that potential threat rose to the point that would warrant them enacting their mandates for the items...they’re responsible for. And...as we know, [slow down]... It in the CSIS Act, it says [threat to the secure -- or] it says ‘the security of Canada.’ doesn’t actually say national security. Public Safety Canada goes to a much broader context when describing national security, and one of the items in national security, if you look at the national security strategy and how it’s described by Public Safety Canada, actually includes impact to economy, activities at critical infrastructures, international border crossings.” So Mr. Rochon or Mr. Stewart, whoever’s best placed to answer this, can you explain and elaborate a little bit on what Comm. Carrique is referring to here; Public Safety Canada’s national security strategy and definition?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 33 22-033-21

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I’ll give it a go. To be honest, the national security strategy dates back to 2004. And there are several academic institutions as of late that have recommended that the Government of Canada come out with a more -- a newer version, or at least refresh that strategy. I’ll start by explaining what was meant in terms of CSIS and whether or not the threshold was met with regard to their Act. What that -- what I think Comm. Carrique was referring to was the fact that, as I was mentioning earlier, CSIS has the ability to collect intelligence, but they can only collect intelligence if certain thresholds have been met. CSIS are only but one of a number of inputs into the national security landscape. And so they do have targets, whether it be -- and I’ll use a term here that I’m sure is going to come up, or probably already has come up that will come up fairly frequently, that of ideologically motivated violent extremism. Public Safety also has a counterterrorism strategy; we have a cybersecurity strategy; we’re developing an economic security strategy, as I mentioned earlier. We’re looking to create a hostile activities of state actors’ framework to deal with foreign interference. So the reason why we don’t have a -- perhaps an up-to-date national security strategy is because national security now permeates a whole host of things, all walks of life in terms of Canadian society. And I won’t even get into threats posed by climate change; indeed, the pandemic itself, the Public Health situation. Unfortunately, there is no -- as far as I know, no definition in legislation of national security. CSIS does have a definition of threats to the security of Canada. I believe the Security of Canada’s Information Disclosure Act, SCIDA, also speaks to a definition of threats and security of Canada. We have review bodies for the security and intelligence community: the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians; NSIRA and NSICOP. They have gone to great pains to sort of define what their purview is, in terms of national security. And indeed it covers, as I mentioned earlier, some 16 departments and agencies. So when it comes to national security, we’re not necessarily looking at one specific threat, a terrorism threat, but rather the impact on Canada’s ability to maintain the security of its institutions, its democracy, its people, its economy, the resilience of all of these things.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 34 22-034-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So from Public Safety’s perspective then, or its -- in its modus operandi, there’s a distinction between national security and threat to the security of Canada, as defined in the CSIS Act; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 36 22-036-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Okay. Moving on from there, I just want to situate us in time here. With the information that Public Safety was receiving prior to the arrival of the convoy; so the information that it was receiving from its various sources -- and Mr. Clerk, I’ll just ask you to pull up, at this point, PBCAN00000703; this is the GOC key points from January 27. But as that’s being pulled up, feel free to already start in describing what your state of knowledge was at that point, and what you anticipated happening when the convoy arrived.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 36 22-036-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So it -- maybe I’ll back up just one step to ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 36 22-036-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- for that, is just to say that we were monitoring, as you noted earlier, the rising level of protest around the vaccine mandate, which came into force on the 15th of January. So we were, through various groups, monitoring just that there were protests that were likely to arise. And we started getting word of the convoy’s formation on around January 20th, and were, through the GOC and its connection to planning and coordination groups, and one in particular called Intersect, which is a group that brings together all the police of the region and various other entities that have an interest in the security of the national capital. That would’ve been meeting and talking about that. And we were hearing reports and we were -- and then they would be reflected in these key points, those discussions. So this would’ve been January 27th, is on the eve of the arrival of the early -- in Ottawa, of the trucks, and, I believe, just prior to the blockade at Coutts. But the -- so we were growing -- paying a lot of attention to it, getting somewhat concerned about how it would manifest, how many trucks and from where. And there many -- there many convoys coming from east and west, and I believe south, and so we were trying to get a handle on that, and the RCMP were informing us about the numbers of trucks and when they were likely to arrive. And we were asking questions about what is the plan for, you know, managing this protest when it manifests.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 37 22-037-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, if we can just scroll up, I guess, or down; sorry. Keep scrolling, keep scrolling, keep scrolling. So as you’ve mentioned, convoys coming from several directions. Keep scrolling. Mr. Stewart, I think you covered most of this in your introduction. Keep scrolling. Okay, stop around there. So we see: “Ottawa Police are planning for around 1,000 to 2,000 vehicles...” The Convoy is going to be directed to Sir John A. The second-to-last or third-to-last bullet there: “Near Vanier, old Jetform park will be used to park trucks and passenger vehicles with cabs and LRT available for demonstrators to get downtown,...” So we’ve heard a lot of evidence on the Commission -- at the Commission already about what the plans may or may not have been, but I understand this reflects the notion that protesters would be -- would park at, I think what’s now referred to as, in common parlance, as Coventry Road, and then be bused in from there, or from various locations. And then if we just scroll down here to “Assessment”: “Ottawa police assessment determines [there’s] no need for people to stay home or for businesses to close....OPP is advising motorists to avoid travel...[because of the] delays....Ottawa Police, OPP...RCMP as well as the City of Ottawa, are...coordinating a response....disruption to government activities...expected to be minor...” Because most employees are at home: “INTERSECT is indicating...this will be a significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period.” It’s anticipated to be peaceful. Does that reflect, essentially, the information that you had at the time and your expectations?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 37 22-037-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So is it fair to say you anticipated that it would be -- well actually, I’ll just ask it open ended. How long did you think it would ask? What were you expecting to happen when the convoy arrived?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 39 22-039-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The expectation that I had was that the convoy would park and stay for the weekend and leave on the Sunday.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 39 22-039-20

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Rochon, was that your expectation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 39 22-039-23

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

As far as the Ottawa situation was, yes. And we were also watching to see whether other protests that were bubbling across the country would also -- but the expectation was they would all be peaceful and they would last for that weekend.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 39 22-039-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Is there anything in particular you’d like to highlight about what was going on across the country at that time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 40 22-040-02

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

No, other than to say, you know, transport obviously had some concerns with regards to various protests happening and how it might affect the flow of traffic, how it might affect supply chain issues, from a transport perspective. Canada Border Services Agency, I think, started to ask questions about particular ports of entry. And so from the critical infrastructure perspective, and this is really why GOC was involved, is to make sure that we were mindful that there could be impacts to critical infrastructure. And as a result, you were being watchful. But the expectation, although it does say in this document, I note, that INTERSECT, which was the broader group that Mr. Stewart referred to a moment ago, they indicated that the situation was very fluid and that it could go on for a more prolonged period, particularly in Ottawa.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 40 22-040-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would like to add to that, if I may.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 40 22-040-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So the convoys were very organic kind of protest, and it was very difficult, and I’ve used the word “intelligence” in a very technical sense before, but to be -- have good intel of what the plans were for any of the convoys as they manifested. And we were starting to see slow roll convoys in other places in the country, and as Dominic has said, we were concerned that this movement would grow and it wouldn’t be just a one time only event, that this would, in the end, manifest across the country in various places. And I believe right by the end of January, we were starting to see the blockade in the Coutts Port of Entry. So therefore, you know, we had evidence that it could in fact impair critical infrastructure and, you know, the economy and the lives of Canadians.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 40 22-040-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So one eye open that this could develop into something, but essentially, with respect to Ottawa at least, the expectation was that it would end after the weekend. And as we know now, that didn’t happen. And it didn’t end after the weekend. Some trucks stayed. Many protestors stayed. So the next sort of topic I want to address is, very broadly, how did the Federal Government respond? Let’s start by talking -- we know that there were a variety of committees struck and calls and meetings taking place. So Mr. Stewart, I’ll ask you to walk us through that, starting with the internal Federal Government response.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 41 22-041-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

All right. So we’ve established that prior to the convoy’s arrival in Ottawa, there were discussions taking place in the regular fora, which included the Deputy Minister’s Operational and Coordination Committee, and bilateral discussions across departments, including transport, to just take stock, basically, and make sure we had situational awareness. And I believe PCO officials would have been informing political officials at their end. We were certainly keeping the Minister apprised in his office. As the weekend progressed and it became clear that the convoy was intending to stay and the original thinking was that they would only stay a couple of days, and then it gradually morphed into an extended period of time, we ramped up the internal discussions and started to have a regular briefing on a daily basis of a small group of Ministers, including the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, quite often the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Intergovernmental affairs as well, and occasionally the Minister of Justice. So these were key Ministers in the context of the protests. And they were -- they -- we started daily briefings of that group at the beginning of the first week after the weekend. And they were supported by regular daily meetings of the DMOCC, Deputy Ministers Operational Committee -- Coordination Committee meetings, as well as other discussions that we were having, and that goes outside of government, but with other officials around the country. So those two groups, that DMOCC group of senior officials, and the Ministerial Briefing Group were the principle for -- in which the ongoing protestor on the country and the situation in Ottawa was discussed.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 41 22-041-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So DMOCC is another acronym ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 42 22-042-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

--- that we’re going to have to get used to pretty quickly. No, no, no. That’s one that’s going to come up a lot over the next couple of weeks, so we’ll learn it now. Deputy Minister Operations Committee, the DMOCC. Who attended the DMOCC? Who participated in it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 42 22-042-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The standing membership would be Chair of National Security Intelligence Advisor, the Intelligence Agencies, the Canadian Security Establishments, and CSIS, RCMP, Department of -- or Deputy Minister of Transport, Deputy Minister of Public Safety, Deputy Minister of Global Affairs, Deputy Minister of Immigration and Citizenship. I’m going to miss one here. The Chief of Defence staff. Sorry, I’m ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

CBSA. Yes, of course.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And so you referred just now to the Communications Security Establishment. Can you just explain what that is?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It’s one of the two primary Intelligence Agencies that does signals intelligence.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-22

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Signals intelligence. Can you explain what signals intelligence is?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-24

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Well on signals intelligence, I should point out the Communication Security Establishment is responsible for two things. One, collecting foreign signals intelligence on non-Canadians outside of Canada. It’s a very strict mandate. But they also have the responsibility for the Canadian Cyber Centre. So they produce threat assessments, for example, for cyber incidents and things of that nature.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 43 22-043-26

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Okay. Mr. Stewart, sorry about that. A little interlude. So there was the DMOCC and then you said there was these daily ministerial briefings. And at a high level, can you explain what those daily ministerial briefings were about?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 44 22-044-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

They had multiple purposes. the first was, of course, situational awareness. So there was a briefing at the beginning of it, typically by the Commissioner of the RCMP, and as well by the President of the Canada Border Services Agency on the situation on the ground across the country. That would be supplemented by any information obtained from other sources. If I had had conversations with other officials elsewhere, I would report on that. And then we would discuss, you know, the Federal Government’s ability to deal with the protest, what we were able to mobilize or what we were doing, such as the provision of RCMP officers to support the Ottawa Police Service. And we would also discuss, you know, what Ministers’ messages would be for Canadians, because they were making frequent public appearances.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 44 22-044-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And you mentioned that the principal briefer was often Commissioner Lucki from the RCMP?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 44 22-044-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well the police of jurisdiction in Ottawa were connected to the RCMP and are on a regular basis. The RCMP coordinates because they have jurisdiction over some areas of the city, small areas that are federal. And so they worked very closely together. And of course, the police were, including the OPP, they had an integrated command. They had a National Capital Region Crisis Centre that they were -- that they had staffed, and that was where the RCMP was getting the information. But the OPP was not in these calls, nor was the Ottawa Police. So they were, in a sense -- the Commissioner of the RCMP was, in a sense, the person who collected that information and brought it to the table.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 45 22-045-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So these two things that we’re talking about, the DMOCC and the Ministerial Briefings, these are entirely internal to the Federal Government?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 45 22-045-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s what you asked for.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 45 22-045-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

It’s exactly right. Okay. And before we move on to external, Mr. Rochon, just ask you to explain, you touched on this before, but what the ADMNSOPs was doing at the time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 45 22-045-22

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

So commensurate with those two meetings that Mr. Stewart just described, ADMNSOPs was also meeting daily and essentially feeding into those meetings. So it’s just one layer below in terms of Assistant Deputy Ministers from all of those same departments and agencies coming together and discussing situational awareness around the various incidents that were occurring across the country.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 45 22-045-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So would it be fair to say that the information chain would sort of be ADMNSOPs up to DMOC and then from DMOC up to Cabinet where warranted?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 46 22-046-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

The Ministerial level. Okay, Mr. Stewart, now I’ll ask you about the meetings that were happening that included actors external to the federal government.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 46 22-046-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So a couple of different points of note there. As a standing matter, there is a committee of federal-provincial Assistant Deputy Ministers which was our colleague, Talal Dakalbab, who is a co-chair of that committee, and it was a committee to discuss crime prevention and policing matters. And it exists on a permanent basis and involves ADMs from across the country, all provinces and territories. So that for a was used for outreach and discussion, information sharing ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 46 22-046-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And that’s what’s referred to as the FPTCPCC, I think?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 46 22-046-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct. Crime Prevention and Policing Committee.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 46 22-046-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

CPPC. So that was one forum. On an ad hoc basis, we convened Deputy Ministers of federal, provincial and territorial governments to discuss the situation with the protests around the country, and that happened more than once because I co- chaired a call and then my colleague, the Deputy Minister of Transport, had calls with Deputy Ministers of Transport departments around the country as the protest went on. I'm sure we’ll come back to that. But there was, generally speaking, Deputy Ministers at calls and meetings and, as well, I reached out to the City of Ottawa early in the week that the protests became entrenched and we stood up calls and discussions amongst officials and also at the Ministerial level involving the city and the province.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 47 22-047-01

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, can I ask you to pull up ONT00000159? These are notes that we received from Ontario from a meeting on February 6th, which I understand was one of the situation in Ottawa meetings that you describe, Mr. Stewart. And as you said, I believe you convened these meetings in order to have some input on what was going on in Ottawa and assist with that situation. Okay. So I just want to take you to the various things that you’re reported to have said in this meeting, so the first thing is you convened the meeting and you were looking to get a sense of what the -- what was going on on the ground in Ottawa and steps to resolving the situation. First thing is you noted that some of your federal Ministers were concerned and wanted a quick resolution to the matter. In addition, there continues to be concern from the federal Ministers about coordination of activities federally and with other partners. Can you just elaborate on what you were reporting there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 47 22-047-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So I was reflecting the fact that the federal government was taking -- and the Ministers of the federal government were taking the protests very seriously and were very concerned about how it was evolving. I’ve referred earlier to its kind of organic nature, the uncertainty that prevailed, the sense of, quite frankly, menace that was starting to manifest itself. And given that it was happening on a national basis, Ministers were actively, to the best of my knowledge, talking to counterparts across the country and trying to bring things -- bring powers and plans to the table. It’s important to note, I think, at least for the record, that at no time did anybody start to think about instructing police to do anything, but they were very interested in what the plans of the police were in various parts of the country and as well, you know, how we would mobilize, you know, for border crossings with the Canadian Border Service Agency and local -- local police. So the sense here that, you know, there was a growing set of protests occurring, that it was taxing the abilities of local authorities to manage or to address them and the lack of, at that point in time, a particular sort of coordinated federal-provincial approach, that was what I was referring to.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 48 22-048-08

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And just moving down, if we can scroll down to the next time you see Rob Stewart. There we go. Just keeping scrolling down a little bit, Mr. Clerk, so we can see. Rob Stewart posed the following question to Chief Peter Sloly, “What is the nature of the support that Ottawa is likely going to ask for?”. And it says here: “Note Rob Stewart was trying to understand in unsaid terms whether the OPS will directly request non-law enforcement assistance.” Can you tell us a little bit about what was going on there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 49 22-049-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I didn’t take these minutes and I don’t think that’s accurate. The Chief -- Chief Sloly was saying very openly, almost right from the beginning after the weekend, that he needed more resources. And fairly early on, the RCMP did add resources to help the Ottawa Police and the number was quite a bit lower than Chief Sloly was asking for, so we weren’t entirely clear as to what exactly he needed in terms of the type of resources, and here we’re talking about policing resources. I had already spoken to the City, and here I mean City Manager Steve Kanalokos, and clarified that the federal government had no intention of mobilizing the Canadian Armed Forces to deal with the protests. And so it was not -- it really, I think, is subject of discussion at that time and the issue was more just the scope and nature of the policing resources that the city was calling for.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 49 22-049-18

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And the next bullet point is what are the obvious and visible successes that Ministers could be told and can also see? What were you referring to there or what were you asking Chief Sloly about?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 50 22-050-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, Chief Sloly and I think the -- the document does give some clarity to this, was reporting on what the Ottawa Police Service was trying to do to limit and contain the protests and there had been, for instance, a kind of a shack erected in one of the parks, federal parks, which was causing quite a lot of heartburn in that the police were successful in negotiating being taken down. It was storing gas and was actually, I think, a barbecue stand. But that was, as an example, one of the things that, you know, Chief Sloly was reporting on the police having achieved. And you know, he was projecting a sense of intention that, you know, they were going to continue, the Ottawa Police, to the best of their ability with the resources that they had stretched as they were to take steps to interdict and to disrupt the protest. And so this is what that question gets at, is what are your plans in the short run to do that kind of thing. It wasn’t -- it wasn’t -- this is not predicated on that kind of thing. It wasn’t -- it wasn’t this is not predicated on, at that point in time, the expectation that the Ottawa Police would be able to actually bring the protests to an end.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 50 22-050-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And that, I suppose, reflects the fact that these meetings are information sharing and aimed at -- sorry, information sharing and attempting to sort of brainstorm solutions. Would that be fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 51 22-051-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 51 22-051-10

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Now, if we can just keep scrolling down. Sorry. Just stop right there. No, keep going until you see Jodie Thomas, National Security Advisor. And scroll down a little bit more, please. Okay. There we go. So Mr. Stewart, I just want to ask you a little bit here about these meetings were meetings at the official's level largely; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 51 22-051-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And there was participation from Ontario, Mr. Di Tommaso ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 51 22-051-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

--- would participate in these meetings, and we heard from Mr. Di Tommaso last week. And you'll see that quote that's attributed to Jody Thomas, who is the National Security Advisor, and you've already told us that the National Security Advisor is an official at PCO ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 51 22-051-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

--- who was involved in I think both chairing the DMOC and coordinating federal government response here. So Ms. Thomas is said to have said -- she noted that it was a positive meeting and regrets to end on this point, but would the Province be looking to the Federal Government if this protest was happening outside the City of Ottawa, e.g., happening in other places like Kingston? Mr. Di Tommaso when he was here last week, the transcript reference for this is TRN0000021, page 262, testified that he understood this comment to mean that Ms. Thomas was trying to have the federal government wanting -- or this comment indicated that the federal government was wanting to wash its hands of the entire thing. And I was wondering if you could comment on that? Was that your understanding of Ms. Thomas's comment here?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 52 22-052-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not at all. And I believe Mr. Di Tommaso misinterpreted what she was driving at. I think that it wasn't -- it was never the view of federal officials or ministers that the federal government didn't have some degree of ownership of the protest and some degree of responsibility for dealing with it, as it was a national event. And so it wasn't predicated -- the question I don't believe was predicated on the federal government is looking to not take action. In fact, it was the opposite. I believe that the concern here was that the province was not taking as much action as they might be taking. And I want to caveat that by saying that at no time did I think the OPP was not rising to the -- to deal with the event. Their response was, as far as I was aware and through the Commissioner of the RCMP, what it should be in terms of coming to the city and participating in planning and response. So -- and Mr. Di Tommaso, in my conversation with him, of which there were many, was always assuring me that the OPP was on the job, and this pertained to Ottawa, it pertained to Windsor, it pertained to other places in the province where slow roll protests occurred. So I think, you know, I would interpret this exchange as being largely about whether or not provincial politicians would be coming to the table as federal Ministers were coming to the table, to discuss what tools and tactics they could contribute.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 52 22-052-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And that leads into something I want to ask you about more specifically. I think you've already introduced it here, but which is Ontario's general position and attitude towards the Ottawa protests and what was going on in late January, early February. Mr. Clerk, can I just ask you to pull up WTS0000066? This is your witness summary. I'd like to refer directly to some of the things you said in our interview. Okay. If we can go to page 17? There we go. So in the interview you said, "...it was never clear whether the Government of Ontario was willing to assist Ottawa." And you noted the Mayor of Ottawa, in your recollection, was frustrated. And then you added, "...there was a question about how quickly the provincial government would endorse the OPP and whether it would put its weight behind the OPP..." And then I think you just answered that the OPP was fully behind this. But then you noted, "There is a misconception that in the normal course, protests in Ottawa are not a provincial issue, but rather [they're] dealt with by a combination of federal and local police. As he explained it, [he being you,] they were treating Ottawa as Washington, DC" Can you explain what you meant by that, they were treating Ottawa as Washington, DC, and sort of walk us through what your viewpoint was in the early days in February of attempting to deal with the situation on behalf of the federal government and the response you were getting from Ontario.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 53 22-053-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So in the normal course, the OPP does not come to Ottawa to deal with small-scale protests or Canada Day or any other major event. That tends to be coordinated -- that's within the scope and capacity of the Ottawa Police Service and it tends to be coordinated with the RCMP, who have responsibilities in the jurisdiction, as I've said before, for protecting Ministers and federal -- certain federal sites, and also the Parliamentary Protective Service, who have the responsibility of protecting the precinct, the Parliamentary Precinct. So those would be the people who would normally, you know, coordinate around the kinds of events that have occurred in the past, where the scale of the protest is not major. Here, we were talking about a situation where it had clearly gotten out of control and had become illegal. And notwithstanding that the Ottawa Police were being backstopped by the OPP and the RCMP, there was clearly more that needed to be done and ultimately was, to add, you know, rules and powers to address the situation. And this was lurking in the background on all the calls that we had with Ministers is where's Ontario. And the technical point that I think should be made here though is -- and I believe Mr. Di Tommaso touched on this. You know, municipalities are creatures of provinces. And under the law, if the Ottawa Police Service is in need of assistance, technically, they should be asking the OPP first and not the RCMP. That's according to the law. This isn't normal course, and indeed, it wouldn't be the RCMP's -- I believe it would not be the RCMP's position that they wouldn't do anything if Ottawa needed help. Police come to the help of each other all the time. But this issue here of Ottawa turning to the federal government, and asking for RCMP, and not really articulating, you know, how many more OPP they needed I think was also kind of a question that was floating around in the background.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 54 22-054-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

When you say according to the law they should go first to the OPP, what law are you talking about there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 55 22-055-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can't tell you the specific law. It's the one that Mr. Di Tommaso cited.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-01

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

I believe that was the Police Services Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe so.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-05

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So in addition to the meetings that we've already talked about then, the DMOC meetings and the Ministerial briefings, there were also a series of tripartites convened. Can you tell us a bit about those?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So bootstrapping, in the same way we did with DMOC and Ministers, from the calls that we had with Ontario and the City, City Manager, City Police, OPP, Mr. Di Tommaso, we convened Ministers and the Mayor and invited provincial Ministers to attend. In the end, only Mr. Di Tommaso attended those calls, but they were called tripartite because they were the City, the Province and the Federal Government. And they were of a very similar nature to the kinds of calls we were having with Ministers in turn with the Federal Government, a discussion of the situation, a discussion of what people's position and concerns were, a discussion of what we knew the plans to be at that stage. And largely, a sharing of information and concerns.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-10

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And you noted that those calls were not attended by any political -- any politicians from Ontario?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It did not have political representation of Ontario.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-26

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Who convened the tripartites?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 56 22-056-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I think the federal government did, although it was very much collective with the City. The City Manager and I would agree that this needed to be done.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 57 22-057-02

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And did you attend all of the tripartites?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 57 22-057-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I believe the dates of those would be February 7th, February 8th, and February 10th?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 57 22-057-09

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Before we leave this document, your witness summary here, the other statement I wanted to ask you about was the one where you say the provincial government was more engaged in Windsor because the Ambassador Bridge blockade impacted the Ontario economy. I realize we haven't talked about Ambassador Bridge in Windsor here yet this morning, but we heard several days of evidence about it last week, so we're aware of what happened in Windsor. Can you speak to a little bit that viewpoint that you held or hold that the Ontario was more engaged in Windsor than it was in Ottawa?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 57 22-057-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, to a certain extent, I believe it speaks for itself. In my conversations with Mr. Di Tommaso, we were also discussing, of course, what was happening in Windsor and what the plans were for ending the protest there. And it was clear that there was a lot of attention being paid to it at the provincial government level. And but there was -- and part because it was a smaller-scale protest, a much more active set of plans going on to bring it to an end. So in other words, as I understand it, I'm not a police official, you know, there are different skillsets the police have, and one of the skillsets, or one of the types of policing units that was necessary in both Ottawa and Windsor was Public Order Units, who wear, you know, who wear the helmets and carry the batons. These were needed and had to be mobilized from across the province. And so I was aware that that was the plan that was underway, that they were mobilizing to take out the protest in Windsor, and therefore, this would support the comment that I made.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 57 22-057-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. The next series of meetings that I'd like you to tell us a bit about you've already referred to. The acronym is FPTCPPC, so Federal Provincial Territorial Crime Prevention Policing Committee. Mr. Clerk, can I ask you to pull up PB.NSC.CAN.0000005 -- 000000005. I see you nodding, so you know better than I do. Okay. Can we just scroll down? So these are -- this is a read out of the FPT -- actually, this is a FPT DMs ad hoc meeting on February 7th. Do you recall this meeting, Mr. Stewart?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 58 22-058-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I mentioned it earlier.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 58 22-058-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Perfect. So here's the read out. And the first comment I want to take you to is just at the, sort of the end of that first paragraph where it says, "Intel. There [has been -- there] has not been significant element of violent extremism. We've discussed this before, can set up another meeting with CSIS and how monitoring threats to democracy. For now there is no planning going on [...] no degree of violent extremism going on, not saying this will happen." Can you just tell us a bit about what you were saying there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 58 22-058-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So CSIS officials and the CSIS Director was on many calls, Minister calls. In fact, I think it attended a tripartite meeting call.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And actually, can I just ask you to tell us who attended this particular meeting? What was this meeting?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

This particular meeting? This would have been the -- all the Deputy Ministers, those at least that were available across the country from provinces and territories, plus myself, and I believe Michael Keenan, the Deputy Minister of Transport.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So would these be all Public Safety Deputy Ministers or ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes. Yes. I mean, they're not all Public Safety ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- in various jurisdictions, but that's what their responsibility is. And this -- the purpose of this call was to share, as I've mentioned, information, you know, help people come to terms with what was going on, make plans in their own jurisdictions. And as we know, police of jurisdiction across the country learned very quickly, but there was still the broader issue of why are these protests happening, and what can we do to de-escalate them. So the Director of CSIS had been reporting fairly consistently that in terms of the threshold for monitoring under the CSIS Act, he was not observing any increase in activity or any evidence of plans, and this is, to be clear here, a very high threshold. CSIS -- and my colleague Mr. Rochon can explain this in more detail if you wish -- can only monitor people that they believe to be of certain threats to the security of Canada, and that's a high bar for them. And so they're -- it's not a very large number of people that they're monitoring. It's quite small. It does not, as a general matter, include the population or large elements of the population. They are very targeted in their activities. So in that context, given their targets, they were reporting they were not seeing any activity on the part of those targets. And that's what I was reporting there. And then the simple observation that on the ground in Ottawa, things were kind of chaotic. We didn't have the evidence of planning, weren't hearing about planning, and no sense of extremism in the violent sense, although there was plenty of criminality by that point.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 59 22-059-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And we will be hearing from CSIS directly next week, but I think it might be useful, Mr. Rochon, you can just elaborate briefly on what CSIS can and cannot do and what it was and was not monitoring here, following what Mr. Stewart said.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 60 22-060-27

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Well, in this particular case it, again, refers to extremist elements. So from a terrorism perspective, I had mentioned earlier the ideologically motivated violent extremism, which is something that CSIS is coming to grips with, and indeed, have provided language in and around defining that, because historically, I would say, individuals are influenced by a singular definable belief system. And that's how we used to treat terrorism. There's been an evolution with regard to terrorism as of late. Now there is a confluence of a whole series of grievances that can come to bear, and it becomes a lot more difficult to track exactly how a particular threat can manifest itself in this IMVE environment. So there are xenophobic violence, anti-authority violence, gender-driven violence, other grievances that CSIS now have to wrap their minds around, how do we go after and collect information to protect Canadians against these emerging threats, when it can -- as opposed to a, as I mentioned earlier, a believe system where there is a clear head and a org structure behind a particular organization. In today's world now, we're seeing more and more that a lone wolf, a lone actor can actually perpetrate a particular extremist violent event. Nevertheless, the tools at our disposal and at CSIS's disposal is very much the CSIS Act that was written in 1984. And there is part 2C of the CSIS Act, or indeed part 2 of the CSIS Act gives 4 different distinctions as to what they can collect intelligence on, and it describes threats to the security of Canada. So in this particular instance, what we were referring to, as you can appreciate, federal provinces and -- or sorry, provinces and territories, representatives would be under the impression that federal government is sitting on a treasure trove of classified intelligence. And based on that intelligence, they would want to know, are we seeing something from an intelligence perspective that would show that these protests are organized and that, ultimately, they constitute an extremist threat to overthrow the government or something to that effect. So specifically, with regard to that extremist element, what we were saying here, or what the Deputy was referring to here is that as of yet, CSIS has not met a threshold to cause them to collect additional intelligence on a broader set of Canadians because they had not seen evidence of that. That being said, I should just also qualify that that doesn't mean that they weren't monitoring certain extremist targets of theirs that have met that threshold and seeing whether or not they were interested. And I also want to qualify a comment that I might have made earlier, intelligence, again, is not an exact science, and it's not foolproof. So just because you have a piece of evidence, or a piece of intelligence rather, doesn't mean that you have the full picture. And it becomes a very difficult mosaic to try and pull together in terms of pulling together intelligence emanating from CSIS, emanating from police forces, emanating from Canada Border Services Agency, pulling that picture together to determine whether there's a national security threat is a different proposition than indicating whether or not CSIS specifically had evidence of a violent extremism meeting their threshold.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 61 22-061-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. That's helpful in understanding that. So the second bullet point then, to go back to Mr. Stewart, on people protesting in accordance with the law, "In Ottawa, the law has been disregarded. The norms of behaviour and laws.” You talk about what’s going on in downtown Ottawa: “Police have not been able to control. Have heard comments made to federal ministers: do something. CBSA, Transport and PS [that’s Public Safety] officials have heard from our Ministers. Roles of police and govt, have not tried to get involved in enforcement but staying in touch with police. Police including rcmp and outside of Ottawa have supported […] Have strayed [I think that’s probably stayed] in close touch. Political layer is engaged.” And then the last line is: “Strong desire [not to] engage protestors and to let enforcement take tis course.” Do you recall what that referred to? In particular that last line?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 63 22-063-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That last line refers to essentially the decision by Ministers not to speak to the protestors.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 64 22-064-07

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So this was -- to situate us in time, this was on February 7th and at that point, that was the position being taken?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 64 22-064-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was the position.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 64 22-064-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, we can take that document down. And the next one to pull up is SSM.NSC.CAN00000246. So these are the NSIA’s talking points on February 8th, and it looks like they’re for a Cabinet briefing. We’re going to get into the specific Cabinet meetings in a bit. But for now, if we can go to page 4 of that document, Mr. Clerk? There’s just a couple of specific points I’d like to ask you about. Oh, sorry, up a bit. “Yesterday an FPT table of FM of Public Safety and [Transport] met to discuss a national and coordinated strategy […] that is built upon ‘maximum and strategic enforcement’ using any and all tools available at all 3 levels of government, and need to align all communications to protestors about ‘maximum enforcement’ and the consequences. General support for approach - more to come.” So the first question is, is that FPT table that happened the day before, is that the call that we just looked at?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 64 22-064-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Now, I think we’re going to hear a lot more about this in detail when you colleague, Deputy Minister Keenan from Transport Canada testifies, which is on Wednesday, but can you briefly explain to us what this idea of a maximum strategic enforcement strategy was?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 65 22-065-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The idea here was to use tools that would not normally be used in addition to the powers that the police have. So that would -- in a sense, it would include enforcement of bylaws and traffic laws, but it would also involve, as a means of deterring people from joining protests or being party to protests, the use of regulations and other provincial authorities, which are related to trucking. So here, you know, as an example, and as you said, Mr. Keenan -- Deputy Minister Keenan can speak to this, you know, we’re talking about deregistering a commercial vehicle, making it unable to be used for, you know, commerce. Not renewing license. Or various other ideas that were being floated around that we could do -- we could use at the Transport level, Transport authority level, that would have some effect. So that’s the general idea.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 65 22-065-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And if we scroll down a little bit more to page 5: “Departments have developed a rolodex of ‘creative alternatives’ to be explored in addressing this matter.” So that refers to -- that’s what you were just talking about? This idea of trying to come up with alternatives or ideas. And can you give us some examples of what those -- that rolodex would have contained?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 66 22-066-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well certainly what I just spoke of, I would really need to refer to the lists that we developed to be accurate, and there are lists in evidence, which come up or manifest a little bit later. So off the top of my head, I don’t recall any other specific things, other than in the Transport realm.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 66 22-066-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Well, again, I think Deputy Minister Keenan will be taking us through this in great detail. But sort of skipping to the conclusion, what happened with the idea of the maximum enforcement strategy? Did that ever materialize? Were steps taken by the provinces to -- or municipal authorities to actually implement some of these?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 66 22-066-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well the most obvious manifestation of action would have been the Ontario Emergency Order on the 11th of February.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 66 22-066-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Before we get there, there’s another topic I’d like to ask you about, which is requests for federal assistance. So this again falls within the rubric of what was going on between the provinces, municipalities, and the Federal Government at the time. So request for federal assistance. I understand that that’s a responsibility that falls to the GOC. So can I ask you -- to an extent, at least -- be processed through the GOC, if I can put it that way. Can you explain, Deputy Minister Stewart, how that process works?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 67 22-067-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So it’s under the Emergency Management Act and a responsibility of the Department, and then that’s delegated to the Government Operation Centre to coordinate. And the Government Operation Centre, for the record, is a coordination unit, a surveillance and coordination unit. It doesn’t have powers. It doesn’t have authorities. It just works to bring partners to the table. So an RFA is, in essence, a situation in which the provincial capacity to deal with an issue or -- yeah, it’s the provincial and territorial capacity to deal with an issue has been surpassed and they need federal assistance. And the role of the GOC is to discuss the request and to coordinate the response. They occur most frequently in the world of, you know, natural events, fires, floods, but there were many in the context of the pandemic as well. In fact, there were, I think, well over 190 in the last two and a half years or so, which is way, way beyond the normal level. In the context of the protests, there were only three. And some of them can be very routine. So one of -- the first one was for to use a federal space, the Cartier Drill Hall to park police vehicles. And that was just -- that’s a federal land, it needed permission granted. There was also an RFA from the Parliamentary Protective Service at one point in time to make sure that they could be supplied with food and support in the event that they were barricaded in due to police enforcement. So those are two RFAs that occurred. The main RFA that I think is of note is the one that came in from Alberta. And that one did not follow the normal course. The normal coruse for an RFA is for it be flagged by a provincial emergency authority to the GOC, allows for some back and forth about, you know, is this possible? Can we meet this need? And how are we going to respond to this? And, you know, that just smooths and expedites the process. In this case, it came in by letter from an Alberta Minister directly to a Federal Minister, and we had no forewarning of its appearance. So do you want me to further explain that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 67 22-067-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Sure. And maybe, actually, at this point, it would be helpful to bring up the document. It’s PB.CAN00000718. So this the RFA, Request for Federal Assistance, from Minister McIver to Minister Blair. And the request here is for tow trucks and personnel, described largely. So I believe, Mr. Stewart, you were in the process of telling us how that RFA was dealt with in Public Safety?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 68 22-068-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes. So background. This is with respect to the situation in Coutts. The RCMP is the police of jurisdiction and were, you know, faced with a problem of getting the trucks off the border crossing and the highway, and the absence of tow trucks. And in a general sense, it was a feature of these protests across the country, and particularly where they manifested as encampments, that the local tow truck industry would refuse to provide service, ostensibly due to threats to their livelihood. So this letter came in. It, as you said, came a bit out of the blue. It wasn’t hard to understand why the request was being made. And the question became, you know, is this a RFA that we can address. And, you know, two issues surfaced. One was whether we had the resources, and that would be, in effect, the towing equipment of the Armed Forces. You know, they have a base in Edmonton quite a long way from the border, and it has equipment to tow heavy vehicles. However, there's a very limited number of those units I understand, and moreover, they were not of the same type as heavy lift tow trucks and would have, had they been used, likely damaged the trucks they towed. So the general conclusion was that the resources of the Canadian Armed Forces were not appropriate to the task. And of course, we didn't have any other tow trucks elsewhere. The other issue that surfaced was whether the province had exhausted its authorities. And here, I note that the province had a Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, which gave them the power to command tow truck industry, as we did with the Emergencies Act, and that had not been used. So for both of those reasons, we signalled that we would not be meeting this RFA, although we bore it very much in mind. It's when we formulated the orders under the Emergencies Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 69 22-069-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So just to make sure I understand that, on the one hand, it was determined that the Canadian Armed Forces did not have the appropriate equipment, that was not suited to task, and on the other hand, Alberta did have in its own powers the ability to compel tow trucks under its Critical Infrastructures Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 70 22-070-08

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. The next topic I'd like to address briefly is the engagement between Public Safety and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. I understand there were a couple of calls around February 10th, February 11th. Are you able to speak to those at all and tell us a bit about what you were hearing from Homeland Security?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 70 22-070-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I'll expand a bit. I was party to a call involving an official from the White House and the National Security Intelligence Advisor, and the call was essentially to express the concerns that the U.S. had with the situation at the Windsor -- at the Ambassador Bridge, and also what was going on generally in terms of public order. And that conversation was a situational update. We were -- we explained, and the National Security Intelligence Advisor provided some insight into the thinking in Canada around what we were doing and how we intended to address the protests. The White House official offered support, you know, whatever they could think of, and in particular, say tow trucks from Detroit. So that was that call. There were subsequent calls. She -- that person was the White House person responsible for the Department of Homeland Security.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 70 22-070-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

What was her name?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 71 22-071-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I think it's Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 71 22-071-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was the only call I was on. There was calls with the Department of Homeland Security officials, and I believe you did one.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 71 22-071-13

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

So the Assistant Secretary responsible for Counterterrorism and Threat Prevention, Samantha Vinograd, did reach out to my National Security Policy Directorate to ask about, you know, for situational awareness about what was going on with regard to the protests, and whether or not threats were manifesting themselves. And so I was brought in. I don't have the date off the top of my head, but I was brought in I think the week of February 10th. During that week, I provided a brief to her and some of her officials in terms of the situation happening in Canada and whether or not we had any -- how we were coping with the potential threat to national security. And similarly, obviously, on her side of the border, you know, following -- the year prior with the January 6th capital event, they still had potential extremist elements and there was also the possibility of convoys happening in and around various activities happening in Washington. So we were just comparing and we agreed to keep each other in touch with regard to the threat situation from the counterterrorism perspective.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 71 22-071-18

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Were they expressing concern about various convoys happening through the U.S. as well?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-10

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

From my recollection, not specifically, but they certainly had it on their radar as -- they were expressing concern about what they were hearing about, and seeing in Canada, and wanted to make sure that they understood how we were coping with it and whether or not it could manifest itself on their side of the border.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

The next topic I want to get into is the inputs that you were providing to Cabinet over the course of the convoy. So, Mr. Commissioner, I don't know if you'd like me to start now or if this would be a good time for the break?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-19

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

If it's a good time for you, it's a good time for me. So ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Oh, it's a good time for me.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-26

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

--- we'll take a 15-minute break and come back in 15 minutes to continue.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 72 22-072-28

The Registrar (POEC)

The Commission is in recess for 15 minutes. La commission est levée pour 15 minutes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 73 22-073-02

Upon recessing at 11:14 a.m.

Upon resuming at 11:30 a.m.

The Registrar (POEC)

Order. À l'ordre. The Commission is reconvened. La commission reprend.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 73 22-073-06

DM ROBERT STEWART, Resumed

ADM DOMINIC ROCHON, Resumed

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SHANTONA CHAUDHURY (cont’d)

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So as I mentioned before the break, the next topic I'd like to address with you is the various inputs that you were providing to Cabinet over the course of the convoy. So, Mr. Clerk, I'll ask you to pull up SSM.NSC.CAN.00000292. These are minutes from a Cabinet Committee on Safety, Security and Emergencies on February 3rd. So, Mr. Stewart, the first thing I'll ask you to do is can you tell us what the Committee on Safety, Security and Emergencies or SSE is?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 73 22-073-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It's a standing committee of Cabinet under the current government, created to provide a forum for discussion on issues associated with its title. And it's chaired by Minister Blair, meets periodically. And generally, is a forum for bringing forward policy and expenditure items in this domain. But it also is a forum for discussion of extraordinary events.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 73 22-073-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I understand that the SSE Committee met three times in relation to the convoy and this was the first meeting that addressed the events of the convoy; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 74 22-074-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I think that's right. I could quibble a bit and say I think one of those meetings was a regular meeting and they talked about the convoy, but I believe there were two ad hocs.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 74 22-074-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. If we can just scroll down to page 5, Mr. Clerk? We'll see about halfway down that page the Deputy -- there we go. Deputy Minister of Public Safety. So, Mr. Stewart, I'll read this slowly, for the benefit of the interpreters. "The Deputy Minister of Public Safety provided an overview of engagements to date with the City of Ottawa, and the province of Ontario. The Deputy Minister stated that the view of the Ottawa Police is that they will not be able to bring the protest to a conclusion without the assistance of the federal government due to concerns for public safety. There is a risk that increased enforcement will provoke some protesters. There is work being done by the city on an injunction however, there is no timing on if and when it could be issued. Finally, Ottawa may seek compensation for policing costs and consideration for compensating the businesses and people impacted..." So if I understand correctly, what you were putting forth to Cabinet at that point was the result of all of the various conversations you were having both within the federal government and with counterparts from Ottawa, Ontario, et cetera. So this was the state of the situation that you were reporting on February 3rd; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 74 22-074-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 75 22-075-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So a couple of specifics in here. The view that the Ottawa -- the view of the Ottawa Police is that they will not be able to bring the protest to an end without the assistance of the federal government. Can you tell us where that view that you're expressing comes from?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 75 22-075-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Chief Sloly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 75 22-075-19

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And more generally, what was he expressing and also, was he -- you say specifically here without the assistance of the federal government. Was it federal specifically or was it both provincial and federal? So essentially, just convey to us what Chief Sloly had conveyed to you and what you were bringing up to Cabinet here?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 75 22-075-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would say that a general matter, Chief Sloly was not trying to pick who would come to his assistance and the assistance of the Ottawa Police Service. And so what I would say, I was just focusing on the Federal Government for the purposes of this meeting. It’s implicit that the provincial police would also be required to assist to meet, I believe the number he was using on or about that time was 1,800 police officers, which is a very large number. So I wasn’t meaning to suggest that the provincial government was not involved at this stage.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 75 22-075-27

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

But what you’re conveying essentially is that at this point, he’d formed the conclusion that the OPS couldn’t do this alone, they needed help?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 76 22-076-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 76 22-076-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. That’s enough of that document. Can we go, Mr. Clerk, to SSM.NSC.CAN00000293? So this is the next SSE meeting, which was on February 6th. These are the minutes from that. And again, at page 5, please. There we go. Paragraph 3 there: “The Deputy Minister of Public Safety provided an overview of engagements to date with the City of Ottawa, and the province of Ontario. The Deputy Minister stated that there is a clear indication that the City of Ottawa will declare a state of emergency. An emergency council meeting is planned for Monday to identify options which will likely result in a request to the Government of Canada for police support. The Deputy Minister indicated that the Ottawa Police Services view the dismantling of structures at Confederation Park [as] a success and will continue to enforce further. The Deputy Minister reiterated the views of provincial colleagues that negotiation is the ongoing preferred option for resolution at this time”. So can you tell us what essentially in, not these words, but your own words now, where that information was coming from and what you were attempting to convey here?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 76 22-076-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was an extension of the activities that we’d discussed. My conversations, bilateral conversations with the City Manager, multi-lateral conversations involving the Chief of Police, and the OPP, and the RCMP, conversations -- bilateral conversations with the Commissioner of the RCMP, and with Deputy Minister Di Tommaso. Those are the principal points of contact that I had.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 77 22-077-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Now I want to take you to something specifically that actually arose in the last extract and was sort of alluded to here as well. But the law enforcement response in Ottawa generally. So what happened in Ottawa, the OPS’ reaction and response to the protests as they happened. And I’ll take us away from the minutes for a second to pull your interview summary up again. So Mr. Clerk, that’s WTS0000066. Can you go to page 12, please, Mr. Clerk? Okay. So this is a topic, Mr. Stewart, that we canvassed fairly in depth at your interview. And you’re starting here, I think, from the very initial reaction of the OPS to the protests. And you say from the beginning -- well you’re actually conveying Commissioner Lucki’s words here, or her views: “She reported that from the beginning, the OPS were on their heels. The volume of people exceeded their ability to do policing and they made a mistake in allowing trucks to come into the downtown core and park on the street. Commissioner Lucki also reported […] that the NCRCC was not working particularly well because there were personality issues involved. [Deputy Minister] Stewart explained that he got the sense that as time went on, the OPS pulled it together and the OPP got involved.” So I’ll just stop there and ask you to describe, in general terms, what you were hearing about the OPS response and what views you formed about it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 77 22-077-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

My understanding, both first hand and in conversations with Chief Sloly, and second or third hand through the Commission of the RCMP, was that the situation having come to where it was, in other words, an embedded protest that, you know, had formed a perimeter, in essence, that was hard to enter and to do any enforcement within, that there was considerable debate behind the scenes as to what the strategy would be for enforcement. And kind of a chicken and egg situation, where the various police forces involved, and here I’m not just referring to the OPP and the RCMP, but also other Ontario police who ultimately came to Ottawa to assist, were waiting for a clear plan of action before they mobilized the vast amount of police officers that ultimately came to the city to take action. And that plan, you know, in the early going, was very fragmentary in the sense that it involved some enforcement actions, but it wasn’t a take down the protest plan. And the formulation of the take down the protest plan took time. And in general, I think there were differences, as far as I could tell, of a view about what the right strategy would be, and it took a couple of weeks before the right chemistry in behind the scenes in the Integrated Command Centre was attained. That was my impression.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 78 22-078-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And if we could just scroll down a little bit here to page 13? Paragraph 3. So just scroll down a little bit. So here you’re adding: “…it was difficult to get people to come to an agreement about a plan because there were personality issues in the mix.” And then you go on to talk about that. So that probably refers to what you were just saying about chemistry at the NCRCC? Can you elaborate a little bit on the personality issues that you were hearing about?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 79 22-079-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not really. I mean, this -- in a sense, what I said before is probably the main substance of this and what I knew and understood. And I don’t -- I would not want to lay this at the door of Chief Sloly, to be honest with you. I was hearing that he was very involved and that it was difficult, partly because everybody was stretched so thin, to get to a landing zone on a plan, and that there were disagreements about what the right strategy was. My own first-hand experience with Chief Sloly was quite limited, and to the calls that we had with the City, I had seen him before in another context, but not met him. And I knew he had a strong personality.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 80 22-080-02

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And then just scroll up again, sorry. The previous page. There we go. “The RCMP’s position was that the OPS should have asked the OPP more resources and it was the OPP’s responsibility to come and serve. He explained [this is you explaining] that the RCMP felt pressed by the OPS, but that the OPP was the force that OPS should look to pursuant to legislation…” So that’s what you were telling us about according -- so that information is information that you were being given by the RCMP, “We’re not the right people. The OPP are the first, sort of, call to action here.” Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 80 22-080-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I just want to correct the last part.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 80 22-080-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The RCMP was always willing to come and assist and always wanted to, you know, sort of play a role, and were willing to do so. But to get RCMP officers into Ontario is actually quite a significant logistical issue, because they only have federal police in the province. They don’t have contract people. Now, RCMP is contract police in a number of provinces and territories, which is your regular police, and who are trained and equipped to do public order and enforce the law, and relatively speaking, they had very few federal police in Ontario. So to get RCMP officers into Ottawa required them to be mobilized outside the province, and that requires, you know, some paperwork and agreement and a request of the Minister of the jurisdiction and approval by the Minister of Public Safety. So they were -- they were concerned that they were being pressed to do this without a plan and they wanted the OPP to be first in line to come and help, but they were always willing to help.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 81 22-081-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

That’s fair. I was sort of talking about the order as opposed to willingness, so that’s a fair response. Thank you. And just the next issue I want to raise here is the issue of swearing in. So if we can just scroll down a little bit. There we go. So there’s also the obstacle, you say, of swearing in RCMP officers so they would have the jurisdiction to enforce municipal and provincial laws. We’ve heard again evidence about this already in the Commission. Mr. Clerk, if you can just scroll to page 13. Now, I appreciate here that it was your colleague, not you, speaking. But can you speak to the swearing-in process at all and how that may have played into difficulties on the ground?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 81 22-081-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

My understanding is essentially reflected in these -- in these comments, which was that when the RCMP had come to a decision about people to bring into the province, they had to go through this administrative process of getting sworn in, which was a decision of the Solicitor-General of Ontario, and as for that purpose then they had to send a detailed list of names and then when that list was sent, it wasn’t coming back -- that’s what I was hearing -- as quickly as, you know, it might otherwise. I can’t really put a time on that, to be honest with you. But it was a material enough issue that, of course, when we did the Orders under the Emergency Act we decided to, you know, exempt the RCMP from that requirement so that they could move a lot of people into the province very quickly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 82 22-082-10

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So that was a concern that had been raised.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 82 22-082-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was an impediment to mobilizing police resources.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 82 22-082-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Mr. Clerk, can we pick up the February 6th minutes again, so SSM.NSC.CAN.00000293? Page 5. So Mr. Stewart, the last line of that little blurb of what you were saying says: “The Deputy Minister reiterated the views of provincial colleagues that negotiation is the ongoing preferred option for resolution at this time.” What were you referring to there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 83 22-083-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, two things, in essence. One, it was my experience two years before when we had the Wet’suwet’en protests and we had the situation in Tyendinaga where the trains were blocked. And my conversations with, again, Deputy Minister Di Tommaso at that time where he was very clearly and strongly expressing the view, and this was based on history through the OPP, that de-escalation is very important to managing a protest, and enforcement can only lead to further trouble. And that was certainly -- seemed very likely in the context of the Wet’suwet’en protests. But I’d say as a more general matter in the context of the conversations that I was having with him he just always held that view, that from a policing point of view -- and I want to say this -- actually, I want to say this very quickly. The police, as I understand them -- and I’ve come to know them fairly well in the three years I’ve been in the job, at least the RCMP, are very concerned about public safety and protecting public safety and keeping the peace. And they will always prefer, given the latitude to do so, to de-escalate and to find ways to stop protests and prevent violence from occurring without taking enforcement action because it’s safer for their members and it’s safer for the public. And so this is, in a sense, the first principle of policing, protect the members and the public from, you know, things escalating. And in that context, you know -- and it’s been mentioned, I think, in testimony before the activities of the Police Liaison Teams is very important.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 83 22-083-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So this -- in time, we’re in February 6th here and this was a view that you say you held from your own experience and was being expressed by Mr. Di Tommaso from his policing experience. Okay. Mr. Clerk, can we now bring up February 8th minutes, which is SSM.NSC.CAN00000295. Page 10, please. There we go. Paragraph 8. So here the Deputy Minister provided an update on engagement with Ottawa, confirming that since the injunction has been in place, there have been no horns used in Ottawa by the protestors. “The OPS is reporting that their staff are tired and need enforcements. It is evident that the protest is well organized and that the blockade at Ambassador Bridge is designed to divide the attention of the Ontario Provincial Policy. The Deputy Minister confirmed that Ottawa has developed a plan that is being reviewed by the OPP and the RCMP, which includes four key elements: reliance on negotiation; ongoing enforcement; containing the demonstrations once an area’s cleared, and gathering intelligence of various trucking companies.” Okay. So a couple of things I want to ask you about here. First of all, just to situate us in time, this is now February 8th and the blockade at Ambassador Bridge has happened and sort of coalesced on February 7th. So one thing you note is that there’s -- the Ambassador Bridge blockade is designed to divide the attention of the OPP and that this is evidence that the protest is well organized. Can you comment on that and whether -- where that observation came from and...?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 84 22-084-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It may have been an overstatement. It is evident that the protests were being organized in a way that attracted significant numbers of individuals, and it wasn’t, in fact, just the Ambassador Bridge. It was elsewhere in Ontario, ultimately, other ports of entry where convoys manifested. So well is perhaps too strong a word, but there were -- there was definitely organization happening. And I want to be a little bit clear here that, you know, we were not well sited when it came to how people were communicating with each other. They were using different social media platforms and maybe others -- other tools. But we -- in part going back to comments made by my colleague -- weren’t monitoring other than through open source what was going on. So we would -- we would not have felt -- we did not feel well equipped to understand what plans were, and yet things were happening, so that’s the genesis of that comment. And also, just to flag that, you know, we were sensing that this was nationwide because convoys were happening across the country.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 85 22-085-22

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I’m going to ask you to tell us a little bit about that keeping in mind that we’re going to be hearing directly from CBSA, Canada Border Services Agency, and from Transport Canada, who will have a lot to say about the specifics of what was going on at various ports of entry and places across the country. Would you be able to give us sort of a high level overview of what you were seeing and what you were being informed about around this time across the country?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 86 22-086-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, there was quite a list, actually. I’d have a hard time itemizing it, but there were -- the principal places in which disruption was occurring were Windsor, of course. And that happened well after Coutts started being blockaded, and shortly after Coutts started, we had Emerson in the Province of Manitoba. And slow roll and traffic highway blocking protests near the Blue Water Bridge in Ontario, you know, the Peace Bridge in Niagara and some sense that this -- something could happen in Cornwall. In -- later on in British Columbia, we had the Pacific Highway convoy. So those would be the principal ones. Every day in our calls with Ministers, CBSA would be reporting across a whole set of ports of entry what they were observing, and they had -- they had taken steps to better equip themselves to see what was going on and to talk to local police authorities to see if it could all be met, could be managed that if a trucking or a convoy manifested itself, it could be directed away from the port of entry and couldn't install itself in the port, or on the bridge, or whatever the case may be.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 86 22-086-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So essentially, as you've said, you in your position as DM Public Safety, were looking at not just what was happening in Ottawa, but what was happening across the country and ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 87 22-087-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, the federal government was as a group. We were all conscious that this was not something which limited to Ottawa. Ottawa is the most extreme example. But the general impression we had was that what had begun as a protest about vaccine mandates had become something more than that and was attracting various -- people from various -- with various issues and causes and had become kind of a popular thing. And we were seeing in other countries, by the way, too.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 87 22-087-21

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Can you tell us a bit about that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yeah, there were convoys in New Zealand with Canada flags, which were just essentially emulating the protest.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

That was happening in Canada?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-07

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Now let's go to now the February 10th minutes, so this is SSM.NSC.CAN.00000209. So these are now minutes from a different Cabinet Committee called the Incident Response Group. And we will be hearing from PCO later in the week of the details of what that is and how that transpired, but again, can you just give us a very brief definition of what the Incident Response Group is?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, to begin with, I wouldn't call it a Cabinet Committee as such.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Cabinet committees, in the -- I guess in the normal course are standing committees to deal with various, you know, policy and -- policy matters. The Incident Response Group is an ad hoc committee that the Prime Minister convenes as and when required, and so it doesn't have regular meetings, and indeed, it only meets when something extraordinary is happening.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-20

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So and an IRG, that's the acronym that we'll come to know and love over the next couple of weeks, the IRG was convened on February 10th, so this is the first meeting of the IRG; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 88 22-088-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 89 22-089-03

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Can we go to page 6, please? Scroll down a little bit until you see Public Safety Canada. There we go. Okay. "Public Safety Canada reported on a conversation with the lead negotiator (OPP) who noted that in Ottawa, approximately 80 [percent] of protesters had a weak connection to the cause, 5 [percent] had a strong devotion to it, and 15 [percent] were a swing factor. The negotiator suggested that the leaders of the protest could potentially be encouraged to leave and denounce the blockade in exchange for a commitment to register their message with the Government." Okay. Mr. Stewart, first question is, is the lead negotiator OPP you were speaking about there, who is that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 89 22-089-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Marcel Beaudin.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 89 22-089-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Marcel Beaudin. So we've heard Mr. Beaudin come and testify here. Can you start off by just telling us a little bit what you were reporting here to Cabinet at this time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 89 22-089-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So I've mentioned earlier that the federal government, to the best of my knowledge, had made a decision not to engage formally the leaders or the protesters in -- you know, just allowing them to represent their views. And that was, as far as I was aware, an issue of principle and rooted in a sense that it was hard to know who to engage and also what that engagement would lead to. And there was definitely no desire to get into discussions around the Federal Public Health Policy, which was one of the original reasons the protests occurred. As time passed, the notion of engagement kind of morphed into more of what I've already mentioned as being kind of a police tactic and a potentially useful one. So shortly -- the day before, in fact, this meeting occurred, we were -- we Deputy Ministers were meeting and agreed that we would pursue any ideas we could come up with from our list, which you have I think attached to this document, and see what it turned up by way of possible decisions, possible actions for the federal government. So I had reached out, in fact, on the morning of this day to Marcel Beaudin, who had been identified to me by the -- no, by Mario Di Tommaso and echoed by the Commissioner, Commissioner Lucki, that he would be the right person to talk to. And we had a general conversation around, you know, the role of PLTs and de-escalation, and which was very educational for me. And what I took from that conversation was that there was some possibility that if they could identify appropriate interlocutors, and he said that they knew of six people that they could talk to who were leaders of a sort within the protest, and offer an opportunity for them to be heard, that this would have the effect of allowing people to achieve something, and some success, and feel that their objectives had been achieved and therefore leave. And this is where the statistics come up is that, you know, 80 percent of the protesters -- at particularly 2 and 2-and-a-half weeks into the protest, you know, where they'd been sitting on the streets of Ottawa in freezing weather were probably likely to go if they had the right offer. And so we were talking about that possibility. And it was really at that point in time, not about engagement in the way that it had been about engagement before. It was more in the context of engagement as a steppingstone to enforcement, because it was very clear by the 10th of February that the RCMP, the OPP and the Ottawa Police Service were beginning to come together on a plan, and enforcement was only a matter of time. And so in the background, of course, was this question which I think was very material in the overall decision to invoke the act of what would that enforcement engender by way of reaction. And we had strong concerns, as Mr. Rochon has mentioned, about, you know, lone wolves, and people who'd been attracted to the protest that could act out in a violent way. So there was a virtue to de-escalation in this context.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 89 22-089-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Engagement as a steppingstone to enforcement. I just want to unpack that a little bit. So you said -- at this point, the engagement that was being contemplated would not -- was not something that would lead to an end to the protest in and of itself.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 91 22-091-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So the intention would have been ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 92 22-092-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Shrink it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 92 22-092-05

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

--- to shrink it. To shrink the footprint, as they say in the lingo that we've learned. Okay. And we know what ultimately comes of this, or at least part of what comes of this is something that's come to be known as the engagement proposal. Can you tell us how that proposal came to be?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 92 22-092-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, it flowed directly from what I've just spoken about. In the context of coming up with options for federal government action, at a point in time when the protests were in Ottawa in particular, but just nationwide given the slow roll convoys manifesting all over the place, what could we do that would help. And so with the aid of Inspector Beaudin, I drafted a very short document. It's attached to the minutes of one of these IRG meetings. And, you know, brought it forward for consideration. Essentially, it was the notion that the federal government would acknowledge the desire to meet and offer to do so at a later time, away from the protest, on the basis that a protester would denounce the protest and leave. So it was essentially a, you know, a bargain. And it was positioned to be just a hearing of protester's views and not any discussion of what the federal government would do or could do. There was at -- it happened very quickly. We did it over a day or so and didn't have time to do anything other than consult with sort of key authorities, which would have been the RCMP and the OPP and colleagues at PCO, who obviously were leading the overall effort. It could have been consulted more, it could have been, you know, talked about, but it was raced forward to the Cabinet table two days after this conversation occurred.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 92 22-092-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. You noted that there were some colleagues from PCO involved. Do you recall who was involved ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 93 22-093-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

When I talked to Inspector Beaudin, I was accompanied by a PCO official, Jeff Hutchinson, and I included him in the call because I wanted PCO to be fully plugged in to what we were -- what I was doing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 93 22-093-10

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So but Mr. Hutchinson's role there was essentially ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 93 22-093-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Observer.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 93 22-093-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

--- observer. Okay. And I understand there was some back and forth that you had with the RCMP and with Inspector Beaudin about the proposal itself. So, Mr. Clerk, if we can just pull up OPP00000150? Excuse me. So this is an email that is not sent to you, so you may not have seen it before, but this is Commissioner Lucki speaking to Commissioner Carrique and Inspector Beaudin, I believe. So she attaches a draft of the engagement proposal and then says, "I am not the SME [-- SME we know stands for subject matter expert --] in this area, but my folks are a bit worried on a few items and need[...] to get your thoughts." Do you know what Commissioner Lucki's concerns were at that time? And I'll just say two things. One, we're going to hear from her directly, so we can ask her that question; and, two, in the course of our interview, you mentioned that one of Commissioner Lucki's concerns may have been around the issue of police independence, so just to situate a little bit -- you a little bit.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 93 22-093-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe that Commissioner Lucki's concerns were essentially (a), in the issue of, you know, if this came forward to a Cabinet table and was decided upon would it constitute some kind of direction to police to do it, and, of course police want to maintain operational independence and maximum flexibility. So it -- she did not want it to be construed in that fashion. She may also have had concerns -- she didn't express them to me -- about how it played out. So were it to have been used as a strategy and failed, would it -- would the RCMP or the OPP, PLTs, the Police Liaison Teams be held accountable for that in some way.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 94 22-094-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So I think the line we've heard expressed is there may have been some concern that it crossed the line between church and state. That would be the ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 94 22-094-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's a good way to put it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 94 22-094-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. One thing you noted when we were speaking in your interview is that the government could benefit from some clarity around where that line is in police independence. Is there anything you'd like to add or share about that in this context?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe there is virtue in clarifying the RCMP Act on this basis. Recent experience in other contexts has led me to think that too.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-06

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Sorry, you just said recent experience?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In other contexts.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And what would those be?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The discussions that were going on with respect to developments in Nova Scotia and the role of Minister Blair and ultimately a decision to ban assault rifles. It engendered a lot of questions about the communications between the Ministers and the police.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, can we bring up OPP00000171? So, Mr. Stewart, as you've noted, this is something that evolved over the course of the one or two days, and we're just trying to put together the chronology of how things evolved. So if we can scroll down, top of page 3 I believe? Okay. So in this email, you're raising some concerns about the engagement proposal, but to the very last bit of the email now. Sorry. "If I can manage to work through this process, and the RCMP Commissioner will be privy to the discussion, I think I can assure you that the federal government's commitment will be solid. But we have to get there first! Thanks" So at this point in time, and this is Saturday, February 12th at 11:23 in the morning, what was your understanding of what level of support there was in the government for this notion and where it came from?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 95 22-095-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I had support from colleagues to bring it to the Cabinet table for discussion. I couldn't tell you about the specific, you know, views in terms of whether they thought it was a good or bad idea. It was just in the options sent.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 96 22-096-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And the next document then that we want to look at is SSM.NSC.CAN.00002958. So this is a text between Minister Mendocino and Katie Telford, who's the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff, and I believe this is on the evening of February 11th. And Minister Mendocino expresses here that he's just learning about the engagement proposal, so do I understand that, at this point, while this was playing out, you hadn't yet had the opportunity to brief Mr. Mendocino on this; is that right or ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 96 22-096-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, Minister Mendocino was aware that I was working on this idea, as it mentioned, the day before in the context of the IRG meeting. He had not seen the proposal, and as I say, it came together really very quickly, and I only had time to solicit the news of -- and it wasn't the Ontario government. It was the OPP, I believe. And just to make sure that nobody had any objections to what it said, or put on -- you know, put forward. So he would have just had seen it in terms of paper, and he would have, I think felt -- feel uncomfortable that he had not had an opportunity to contribute to the drafting of it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 96 22-096-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So it was the OPP as opposed to Mr. Di Tommaso, you think, who you were speaking to about it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 97 22-097-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I'm pretty sure. I'd have to check the emails, but I wasn't -- I mean, I was certainly conveying to Mr. Di Tommaso that this is something that we were considering. And there was a parallel event, I think I should note it for the record. So he knew that I was talking to Marcel Beaudin. He had given me the name. And he knew that, you know, the general idea of what I was trying to bring forward. On the day of Friday, the 11th, Ontario did their Emergency Order, which I didn't know about. He called me in the morning and informed me. And then later in the day he called me and he said that they were planning to do enforcement over the weekend on the Windsor bridge, the Ambassador Bridge, and that as a steppingstone to that enforcement, they were going to adopt this idea of offering a meeting, and that Minister Jones, Sylvia Jones was interested in making that offer, and would the federal government join the Ontario government in making that offer. And I signalled that that was not possible. We had yet to discuss engagement at the federal level. And so, you know, there was no way on an hour's notice that he was going to get a decision to sign on. But he sent me a draft letter that -- which is referred to here, that they were going to use with the protesters, the OPP was going to use with the protesters on the Ambassador Bridge. So it was a kind of a parallel exercise, which was really an independent exercise of the Ontario government, but in a very similar way to what was put forward to the Cabinet table the next day.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 97 22-097-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And so when you communicated to him that you couldn't get the federal government to sign on to Windsor, that was a matter of timing as opposed to a position being conveyed?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 98 22-098-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 98 22-098-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Because they were going to do it that evening.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 98 22-098-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And there was also, we've heard evidence about another potential sort of engagement possibility, which was the Mayor of Ottawa's sort of deal that was happening to potentially move some trucks up to Wellington Street, et cetera. That was playing around -- been around the same time. What was your awareness of that at the time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 98 22-098-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I had no awareness of it until it was fait accompli, when the City Manager, Steve Kanellakos called me and said, "We've made a deal with a representative -- somebody ostensibly representing the protesters to move these trucks and the Mayor is sending a letter."

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 98 22-098-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So would it be fair to say that there’s sort of these different branches of potential engagement going on with not perfect sight over all of the ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Right. No coordination at all.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-05

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

No coordination at all. Okay. And what ended up ultimately happening to the engagement proposal? Where did it go?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was not taken up.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was discussed, not taken up.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-13

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So it was brought to Cabinet, or to the IRG, rather?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

On February 12th. But it was not taken up. So with the benefit of hindsight, and this I’m going to ask you, although it’s completely speculative, but what effect, if any, do you think that that might have had? The engagement proposal.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I only know what Inspector Beaudin was telling me, which was that he believed it was worthy of consideration and, you know, given the sense he has of the behaviour of protests, that it might have effect. If I were to push it, I would say I had the feeling that it was a very low order of probability that it would have had a material effect, because the protestors had been in Ottawa in a determined way for an extended period of time. And, you know, I think the general view here is just it’s part of the toolkit of policing and you want to try and discourage people from staying at a protest if enforcement is going to occur, because it’s going to get rough.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 99 22-099-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So would it be fair to - - it’s an option worth considering, but not a deus ex machina?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 100 22-100-08

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. I now want to move to the invocation of the Emergencies Act itself. And appreciating that we’ll be hearing from a lot of people on this topic, I’m going to target my questions quite specifically. You mentioned in our interview that the Emergencies Act started to be seriously considered around February 11th. Is that about right in your recollection?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 100 22-100-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yeah, I could go back a day, maybe, to the 10th.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 100 22-100-18

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Well why don’t you just tell us your recollection of how it sort of came on the radar?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 100 22-100-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Okay. So the Emergencies Act has a history in discussions and rooted in the pandemic, where at one point in the pandemic, the Federal Government conducted consultations on whether the Emergencies Act would be a useful tool to help address the pandemic. At the time, it was determined that that was not the case. So it was always sort of in the back of people’s minds. And it came up in meetings along the way as something that we should bear in mind. Serious consideration of the use of the Emergencies Act was -- began in the latter part of the week of February 6th or 7th and then became, you know, a matter for discussion and decision after that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 100 22-100-23

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I understand that Public Safety was asked to provide its input on potential measures that could be helpful under the Emergencies Act. Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 101 22-101-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

All departments involved in this -- in these -- in managing the protests were asked for ideas that would provide additional tools to police to -- and generally, to deter protests and cause them to de-escalate. So Public Safety, we were using the information that we’d gained from our regular consultations and our calls with federal and provincial colleagues. So an issue, for instance, of note there is the use of tow trucks. Other parts of the Public Safety portfolio, such as the RCMP provide independent views in terms of what might be added to an Emergency Measure Order -- Emergencies Act order, and other departments did as well.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 101 22-101-11

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So this would have been a topic of discussion at the DMOCCs happening around that time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 101 22-101-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 101 22-101-25

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, can we pull up SSM.CAN00000399, please? So this is an email, and you weren’t on this email, so -- but it reports something that you said. It’s from Mike Keenan, who is the Deputy Minister of Transport, to Kevin Brosseau, ADM of Transport. And it’s reporting on the February 13th DMOCC. And you’ll see: “Emergencies Act is fast -- don’t need to pass anything Rob and I argued [Rob being you here, I believe?]…”

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 101 22-101-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-10

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

“… that [the] Emergencies Act can backfired in building more energy.” What did you mean by that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well we were having a discussion around the pros and cons of using the Emergencies Act, and one of the concerns that I had at the time was of the potential for serious violence. So in fact, one of the reasons to invoke the Act was also a concern, in terms of what happens when you invoke it? And if it were to lead people to become violent, then that would be, you know, an undesirable outcome. So that was just one of the many considerations we were discussing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-15

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So essentially it might do more harm than good by inciting, rather than calming?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-26

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Another document, related topic, PB.CAN00001147, please. Okay. Scroll down a little bit, pleased, until we see something that says “these are okay”. An email from Mr. Stewart. Page 5, please. Okay. There we go. So this is forward a bit in time, but it’s on the same topic. This is in preparation for, as it says, some technical briefing remarks that Mr. Rochon was due to give on February 15th about the Emergencies Act once it had been invoked. And Mr. Stewart, your comments here are: “These are ok, but will be duplicative, I expect, of what Justice will say and rather short of substance. If possible, we need to weave in a few more ‘for instances’ that suggest how law enforcement authorities (and the CBSA, as relevant) will deploy the new powers, e.g. intercept and turn away attempted blockades from critical infrastructure, facilitate synthesis of local police and the RCMP…” And then you say: “(I’m afraid I don’t have a lot of great ideas because there aren’t a lot of significant benefits, but we have to try to PS portfolio specifics as much as we can).” So can you tell us what you were expressing her vis a vie the measures that were being implemented?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 102 22-102-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Can I get the time stamp on that email, please?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 103 22-103-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Sure. February 14th, 11:12 p.m.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 104 22-104-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Okay. So I believe that I underestimated the impact of the Emergencies Act that in aggregate, the measures that it contained had material benefit. And this was not -- this was me reacting to what I’d seen drafted and feeling that I hadn’t really got a handle on how it would be implemented, and also me saying, you know, to Mr. Rochon, you’re in these technical briefings and you’re representing Minister Mendicino and you’ve got to talk to the elements of this portfolio that are going to be operationalizing these powers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 104 22-104-04

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Can you actually explain what that technical briefing is?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 104 22-104-14

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Sure. Following the invocation of the Act, I was given the responsibility to lead a number of government officials into a series of technical briefs that occurred over the course of, I want to say three, possibly four days. Those briefs included briefing leaders of opposition parties. In fact, culminating, I think we briefed all members of the Senate and their -- and Senators’ offices, and we essentially offered up as many technical briefs as necessary to explain why the Act was invoked and how it would be implemented. So I was chosen as -- given my position and my role with regard to National Security Policy, as the main chef d’orchestre of the brief, but included with me were members of CBSA, RCMP, Department of Finance, Department of Transport, and, of course, Department of Justice.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 104 22-104-16

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So they're essentially explanatory brief meetings, sort of an explanatory this is how -- what it is, this is how it works kind of briefing?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-04

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I should point out, I think we also did -- offered same technical briefs for members of the media.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

We do technical briefs a lot, particularly when we table legislation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-12

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Thanks. That's helpful. So just to take you back then, Mr. Stewart, to what you were saying, would it be fair to say that, at the time, so shortly before and immediately after the Act was invoked, you had some hesitancy about it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I saw pros and cons.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-20

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And then you said that in hindsight, you think you underestimated the utility of the Emergencies Act. Can you tell us a bit more about why that is? Not why you underestimated, but why you say that it was an underestimate?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, it's judgment only because the police have attested to the value of the Act in terms of getting the protests to disperse, and particularly in Ottawa, but generally speaking, there was within two weeks very little manifestation of those kinds of protests around the country. So I think it's just -- it's essentially on the basis of the fact that others have come forward to say that this was a tool that they, in the end, used and found useful.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 105 22-105-26

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And you're speaking there not just of Ottawa but of the situation across the country?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 106 22-106-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yeah, absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 106 22-106-09

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Another topic I want to touch on briefly, and I appreciate the time is short, is something you noted in your interview was the consultation with the provinces. You said some of the consultation was discounted because it wasn't premised on whether the government was going to decide to invoke the Act. What did you mean by that comment? I could pull up the reference if it's helpful.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 106 22-106-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I'm going to infer that, you know, what it represents is the view that, you know, we had been actively engaged for over two weeks with a variety of concerned parties, including police of jurisdiction, the RCMP, federal, provincial officials. And we were not on the face of it asking the question should we invoke the Emergencies Act. We were asking what tools do you need? What are you facing in terms of challenges? How can we work together to overcome these challenges? And so we deemed that to be consultation on the -- but what was ultimately the decision to invoke the Act, because this was about the substance of that decision.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 106 22-106-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So when Mr. Di Tommaso testified last week, I can bring up the references if we need them, but he noted that you spoke to him on February 13th and essentially gave him a heads up, if I can put it that way, told him or advised him that the federal government was considering invoking the Emergencies Act. Do you recall that conversation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 107 22-107-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not in its detail, but, yes, I would have talked to him, and I do accept that I would have said to him it's on the table.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 107 22-107-08

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Another thing -- and I'll come back to that in a second, but another thing he noted you said was that the provincial declaration of emergency that had come in on February 11th "had more teeth" than the provisions in the Federal Emergency Act. Do you recall that and what you were speaking about then?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 107 22-107-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, again, more by way of inference than by, you know, clear memory, I would say I was conveying to him that -- I would have been -- let me back up and say I would have been trying to be a good colleague with a provincial colleague, but not at the expense of betraying any federal decisions or, you know, kind of thinking in a political sense. I would just have been trying to keep him apprised of the state of affairs. And I would have said to him, I believe, that, you know, there are pros and cons of invoking the Act, because that was my view. And one of the cons, which had been noted in other discussions, was the fact that the penalties under the Emergencies Act are not very big. It's, like, $5,000 on indictment, 6 months in jail. Whereas, the Ontario order, which was put out on the Friday, contained very significant penalties, $100,000. And so as a form of deterrence to anybody thinking of joining a protest, it was clearly a more -- a substantive tool, but that wasn't the only -- that was really just one of a number of considerations.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 107 22-107-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So the reference to had more teeth was specifically in reference to the penalties?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

To the penalties, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-09

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Are you aware of any other discussions with provincial officials on the 13th or before the invocation of the Emergencies Act in which they were notified that the Act was under consideration?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not aware.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-14

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So the other thing that Mr. Di Tommaso mentioned was that you had a call with him the following morning, I believe, on February 14th. And on that call, he inquired as to whether the Act was going to be -- the Emergencies Act was going to be invoked that day. And his comment on the notes was "silence!" So I'm gathering that you said nothing at that point about whether it was going to be invoked. Can you just explain a little bit how that conversation went?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I can't really give you the blow-by-blow. This would have been a normal conversation to touch base on what's the status of things? Where's enforcement? How are things going with the OPP? And I would have been -- because on that morning, I believe, the Prime Minister held the first Minister's call to formally consult on the invocation of the Act. And I was aware that that was going to take place. And I didn't want to do anything that would get in the way of that conversation. So I was not in a position, as I've said before, to convey anything about what the state of federal thinking was at that time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 108 22-108-24

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. We'll fast forward now to the issue of revocation. So, Mr. Clerk, if I can ask you to pull up SSM.CAN.00000429? Okay. So just to situate us a little bit, you told us in the interview that between invocation and revocation, the government was tracking developments across the country, at the ports of entry and receiving input from the RCMP as to what powers were being used, whether they were necessary. Mr. Clerk, can we just scroll down a bit here until we get to an email from Rob Stewart? So we'll see this email probably a couple of times over the course of the next couple of weeks, but this is a discussion that's happening between officials, including yourself, Jody Thomas, the NSIA, several officials from PCO, Mike Keenan at Transport and others, about what considerations should go into revocation and when the Act should be revoked. And your comment here is -- your quick comment, "My quick comment is that, while these are [probably] all worthy considerations, they focus[...] too much on the utility of the Act and not its proportionality. In other words, we need to assess the threat in terms of serious violence, not in terms of whether the truckers are hanging around." What were you attempting to convey here to your colleagues?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 109 22-109-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I think in the back of my mind was the grounds for invoking the Act, and that's a high bar, which Ministers decided was met. And in that context, serious violence was an important element. There was economic impacts as well, but particularly from a Public Safety point of view, the uncertainty and risk of serious violence was an important consideration. And so given that that was the reason for invoking the Act, I thought it should be the reason for considering revoking it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-07

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So essentially, bring revocation right back to invocation, coming full circle.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Same grounds.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-18

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. That takes us to, essentially, the end of our time together today. But I'll just before leaving completely ask you, is there anything that we haven't covered in the last two-and-a-half that you think we should have, or anything else you would like to say about the events.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I’d just like to do a technical clarification on “intel”, if I may ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- for the record, because it’s used in many different ways. And when we spoke about it earlier today, I conveyed the impression that it was all classified and very, you know, kind of secretive, and in fact, intel is a vast spectrum of things. And one of the issues that has surfaced in this context and more generally, frankly, is the compilation of intelligence in the general sense from not just, you know, use of our intelligence agencies, but from open sources, is a real challenge, and it’s one that we are grappling with today. And so you know, intelligence is something that is -- was underneath the rationale for invoking the Act, was the lack of good intel as to what was going on. And when I say that, I don’t mean top secret. I mean a compilation of information from any possible source.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 110 22-110-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

So sort of a -- can you elaborate on what was lacking, essentially?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 111 22-111-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Any information about the plans and intentions of protestors around the country.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 111 22-111-17

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

And that was a result of inability to gather that information or was it at the gathering level or the sharing level or ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 111 22-111-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It may have been both. It was certainly in the context of having a clear line of sight. And when I say plans and intentions, I mean to convoys and slow rolls and obstructing, you know, critical infrastructure. I don’t mean the causes that they were espousing. That was quite clear.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 111 22-111-22

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So maybe some lessons to be learned in the information gathering, sharing and line of sight.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 111 22-111-28

Shantona Chaudhury, Co-lead Counsel (POEC)

Mr. Commissioner, those are my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 112 22-112-04

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. So we can now start with the cross-examinations. So first I’d like to call on the convoy organizers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 112 22-112-06

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRENDAN MILLER

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Good morning. For the record, my name’s Brendan Miller. I’m counsel to Freedom Corp, which is the organization that represents the protestors that were in Ottawa in January and February of 2022. Thank you for coming here today and testifying. First, before I begin, sir, I am going to be referring to one document that I believe I need leave before I do so. It has been referred to in the notice I gave already, but because it is a witness statement with a witness who’s not yet testified, but it’s relevant to this, it’s WTS00000060. It’s the statement from the CSIS panel. The relevance and materiality of that is that these gentlemen were the -- essentially the consumers of information and there is a lot of statements in there with respect to what the government was told and when, and I’m intending to put that to them. So I would ask for leave to be able to refer to that document through my examination.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 112 22-112-11

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Seeing no objection, that’s fine.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 112 22-112-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Thank you, sir. So just to begin, Deputy Minister Stewart, you’ve been the Deputy Minister of Public Safety since December of 2019. Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Until just recently, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Until just recently. All right. And when you took over that portfolio, I take it that you had familiarized yourself with the process of law enforcement and the intelligence agencies with respect to investigations. Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Let’s say I learned on the job.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You learned on the job, right. And -- because prior to that, you were with Finance. Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And prior to your appointment into the portfolio of Public Safety, is it fair to say that other than financial intelligence, that you had not worked in the area of law enforcement or the intelligence field. Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not entirely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Not entirely?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In the world of finance, there were criminal issues.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 113 22-113-27

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. Exactly. So financial intelligence within the criminal sphere of the Ministry of Finance.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Anti-money laundering, securities crimes, those kinds of things.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right, right. And so in your evidence here today already, you’ve spoken about the thresholds for investigations in your chief, and I want to discuss that for a moment. Okay? So you understand, I take it, that law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Canada, the threshold that you’re speaking of with respect to opening an investigation, it’s referred to in Canada as reasonable suspicion. Are you familiar with that term?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Reasonable grounds to suspect, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-15

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah. So there’s -- and we’ll get into that. And you can agree with me that that’s a pretty low threshold, is it not, in law enforcement terms?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would not agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And you’re aware that the law recognizes, though, that reasonable suspicion essentially requires more than a mere suspicion, but something less than a belief based on reasonable grounds. Is that your understanding?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would say it’s reasonable grounds to suspect.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 114 22-114-27

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so reasonable grounds to suspect is different than reasonable grounds generally. You understand that; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. So you don’t know the difference between reasonable grounds and reasonable grounds to suspect.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don’t understand where -- what you’re trying to get at here.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So there’s two -- there’s two thresholds in Canada with respect to investigations criminally and in intelligence. We have the lower threshold of reasonable suspicion, which you call reasonable grounds to suspect, and then reasonable grounds, which is also called reasonable and probable grounds. Reasonable and probable grounds is a higher threshold than reasonable suspicion. You understand that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would have gone the other way.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Pardon me?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would have put it the other way, so this just shows what I know.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So your understanding is that reasonable suspicion is a higher threshold than reasonable grounds.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

If you’re going to suspect something, you’re going to have a particular act in mind.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And it’s the same thing with reasonable grounds; right? You would also have a particular act in mind. Can you agree that reasonable grounds requires some reliable information that there was a reasonable to believe a person or group could have committed an offence or pose a threat to the security of Canada? Can you agree with that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 115 22-115-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. So whereas reasonable suspicion, it just requires a reasonable suspicion; right? It’s a lesser threshold than reasonable grounds. Can you -- can you agree? And you know that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 116 22-116-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I’m a little concerned about getting into a discussion about legal terminology on which I’m not an expert.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 116 22-116-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And so can you agree, though, that it is CSIS who is the main agency that administers the CSIS Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 116 22-116-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And they’re the agency that’s primarily responsible for assessing if there’s a section 2 CSIS Act threat to the security of Canada; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 116 22-116-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And under section 12 of the CSIS Act, CSIS is only required to have a reasonable suspicion that there is a section 2 CSIS Act threat to open an investigation. Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 116 22-116-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And they’re not required to meet the higher threshold of reasonable grounds to open an investigation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-01

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Well, for section 12 they would have to get a warrant.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

For section 12, and that’s reasonable suspicion. That’s what it says.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-06

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Again, I’m not an expert when it comes to CSIS, CSIS Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

When CSIS gets a warrant, they have to bring a case to a Judge, a federal Judge.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So there’s going to be more than just reasonable grounds in that case.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. So can I bring up WTS00000060, please? And can we scroll down to page 5? Okay. And can we scroll down to the heading “Intelligence”? And just the first paragraph, I’ll give you a moment to read that. Would you help me with the pronunciation of Minister David’s last name? We’ve all been debating about how to pronounce it properly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Vigneault.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Vigneault. All right. So David Vigneault, he stated that at no point did the service, being CSIS, assess the protests in Ottawa or elsewhere, those referred to as the Freedom Convoy and related protests and blockades in January and February 2022, constituted a threat to the security of Canada as defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act, and that CSIS cannot investigate activities constituting a lawful protest. And I take it you were advised of this; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 117 22-117-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And can we scroll down, then, to page 7? And go to the heading “Foreign Influence”. So Director Vigneault explained that the use of the term “foreign influence” under section 2 of the CSIS Act refers to a foreign state interference as the term is used within the national security community ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 118 22-118-08

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Just slow down, please.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 118 22-118-15

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. “CSIS assessed there was no indication of foreign state interference occurring in the course of the protest. CSIS did not assess that any foreign state supported the protest through funding, that foreign states deployed covert or overt disinformation techniques, or that any foreign state actors attempted to enter into Canada to support the protest.” (As read) And I take it that you were advised of that by CSIS and Director Vigneault; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 118 22-118-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 118 22-118-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And if we can go down to page number 8, and the heading, “Recommendation to Cabinet”? There, Director Vigneault states that he learned that the EA reference, the threat definition set out in section 2 of the CSIS Act, once the federal government began to seriously consider invoking the EA between February 10th and 13th. He requested that the service prepare a threat assessment under risks associated with the invocation of the EA. He felt an obligation to clearly convey the Service’s position that there did not exist a threat to the security of Canada as defined by the Service’s legal mandate. The threat assessment prepared by the Service was that the invocation of the Emergencies legislation risked further inflaming IMV rhetoric and individuals holding accelerationists or antigovernment views. You were told that; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 119 22-119-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 119 22-119-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. So can we now please bring up document number TS.NSC.CAN.00100000206_REL_0001. So in this document, which is already actually in evidence -- I just want to scroll down to page 5, please. So there again: “On February 3rd, CSIS assessed [there’s no indications] that known IMVE actors were planning to engage in violence.” And it’s on February 13th, I believe, that this is the document that Director Vigneault is referring to that states that, you know, it could’ve been a risk if you invoke the Emergencies Act to making things worse; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 119 22-119-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And you knew about that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so did Cabinet; they knew about all of this; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. Okay, if I could bring up the next document, which is going to be TSNSC.CAN.001.00000160_REL_0001. Now, before I get into this, you can agree that it was clear to both you and Cabinet that CSIS did not have reasonable suspicion that there existed a section 2 CSIS Act threat during the protest; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was clear to me, and I believe it was clear to Ministers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can’t say with that with authority, however.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And I also understand that the Canadian Security Establishment, the CSE, they never advised you or the government or Cabinet that they had identified a section 2 CSIS Act threat either; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That would be correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And both the RCMP and the OPP, from at least their evidence and things we’ve seen today, they never identified or advised the government that there was a section 2 CSIS Act threat, right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 120 22-120-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

To the best of my knowledge, no.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-02

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so the entire intelligence apparatus and law enforcement apparatus within Canada, tells the Cabinet and the government that there is no section 2 CSIS Act threat, is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, that is not right. CSIS -- and, you know, Director Vigneault will be here to speak for himself. CSIS assessed, according to their standards, under their Act. Nobody else was assessing under the standards, under the CSIS Act. You asked me, did they tell anybody that it met a standard, they weren’t -- they wouldn’t use the CSIS Act, that wouldn’t be their tool. They would be looking at broader national security issues.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. So what intelligence bureau or agency or law enforcement agency told the government, “Here’s the evidence of reasonable and probable grounds, of reasonable grounds, of a section 3 CSIS Act threat”? And you know, I take it now, ‘cause it’s advised to you, that that’s required to invoke the Emergencies Act, it’s in the documents; you were advised of that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. So what agency gave you the evidence and the intelligence that said, “Hey, we have reasonable grounds of a section 2 CSIS Act threat? There wasn’t one, was there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So let me explain. Nobody bringing advice to the table, other than CSIS, is assessing that -- against that threat, nobody advising the Cabinet. The Cabinet is making that decision. And their interpretation of the law is what governs here, and the advice they get. And their decision was, evidently, that the threshold was met.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 121 22-121-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And I understand that. But you understand that when Ministers or administrative agencies et cetera, are entitled to make a statutory decision, whether or not a statutory requisite is met, they do so based on the evidence that is before them and the submissions before them; you know that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

And indeed, they had a lot of evidence.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-12

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And you have the RCMP, you have CSIS, you have the entire intelligence apparatus in the federal government, and none of them said that this threshold was met, did they?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

They weren’t asked.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. So -- and with respect to the Ministers making the decision, when you’re talking about Ministers, you’re talking about the elected executive; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. So the Prime Minister.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Among others.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. To your knowledge, what training in national security and law enforcement does the Prime Minister have?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 122 22-122-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I couldn’t answer that question.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-02

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yes. Can you agree with me that he doesn’t have any, to your knowledge?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I couldn’t answer that question, I’m sorry.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And what about Minister Mendicino? He, I understand, has training as a Crown prosecutor at least, is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was his former job, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-11

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And Minister Blair, he was the Chief of Police for the Toronto Police Service.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And when did Minister Blair first tell you that he was thinking about invoking the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Minister Blair didn’t tell me. It came up in discussions ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- at the officials’ level, and then it came up in discussions at the Ministerial level.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

There’s a record not yet in evidence that states that Minister’s Blair’s strategy was from February 4th on to invoke the Emergencies Act; were you aware of that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-23

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Can you please bring up the next document which is -- oh, we have the input, and I’ll just ask you about these. These are the -- if you can scroll up to the top, please? I take it that this is the input that CSIS gave to your Ministry, Public Safety, with respect to the key messages they thought should be put out with respect to the convoy, is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 123 22-123-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Presumably. I don’t have a date on this document, so I’m not really sure where it falls in the overall scheme of things.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. So I’m just going to go through it with you, then.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-12

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

You’re out of time, so you’re going have to do it very quickly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. I’ll be quick. This document, you agree that none of the messaging from this document was actually incorporated into the messaging from Public Safety, was it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I -- really, I wasn’t the spokesperson for Public Safety; my colleague may be able to answer it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And I have to be quick so, I just want to bring up one last document. And that’s SSM.CAN.00001079_REL.0001. No, that’s not the correct document. It’s okay. I’ll deal with it with another witness. So thank you very much for answering my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 124 22-124-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

You’re welcome.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-02

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Well, rather than -- or maybe I could ask the City of Ottawa; are you going to be taking your 10 minutes, or if -- because we can do it after lunch, if you prefer?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-03

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

I’m content to either do it now or after lunch. I think we will need our 10 minutes, and there’s a chance -- there’s a better chance we get right under the 10 minutes’ mark if we have the lunch break to shorten it up and tighten it up Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-07

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

But I am content to go now if that’s your preference.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-13

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

We’ll take the lunch break. We’ll take another one of our long lunches. We’ll come back at 2 o’clock and have an hour and five minutes for lunch.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-15

The Registrar (POEC)

The Commission is in recess until two o'clock. La commission est levée jusqu'à 14 heures.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-18

Upon recessing at 12:54 p.m.

Upon resuming at 2:01 p.m.

The Registrar (POEC)

Order. À l'ordre. The Commission is reconvened. La commission reprend.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-22

DM ROBERT STEWART, Resumed

ADM DOMINIC ROCHON, Resumed

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Is there a point of clarification, I believe?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 125 22-125-27

Nusra Khan, Counsel (POEC)

Yes, thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 126 22-126-01

Nusra Khan, Counsel (POEC)

Just a small clarification coming out of the overview report that was presented this morning. The first Cabinet meeting of full Cabinet in relation to the convoy was held on February 13th and not February 3rd. Thanks.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 126 22-126-04

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. So with that clarification, City of Ottawa, please. Ready? You're okay to go, go ahead, yes? Oui?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 126 22-126-09

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANNE TARDIF

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Good afternoon. My name's Anne Tardif. I'm one of the lawyers for the City of Ottawa. Can I ask Mr. Clerk to pull up PB.NSC.CAN.00009542? And this is an email chain, and if we could -- well, you're not on it, gentlemen, but Mr. Dakalbab? Have I got that correct? Thank you. You're both nodding. Is on the chain, and I understand he was interviewed along with you and some of your other colleagues by the Commission in this case; right? And we'll need an audible answer, sorry.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 126 22-126-16

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And he is at Public Safety as well; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 126 22-126-26

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And if we scroll down to the top of page 2, Mr. Clerk, and actually, just scroll up a little bit, just so we get that email? Up a little bit higher. There we go. This is an email from an individual with the Solicitor General's office in Ontario to your colleague, Mr. Trehearne, among others, at Public Safety; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 127 22-127-01

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And he says, "Hi, Trevor and Deryck [your colleagues,] I was hoping for some clarity on a few RFA [meeting requests for assistance,] process-related item based on some references I have been seeing in recent media coverage for Ottawa." Scrolling down to number two, which is the one that interests me, it's titled "Request for Law Enforcement Support Under Ontario Police Services Act." "this article [and there's a link that we can't access] says that the feds approved a request from Ottawa for RCMP support. I would have assumed such a request would have required a provincial Minister request. But clearly it didn't [as in did not]. I am fine with that but want to check on process. Was that a political decision that by-passed process or this type of request could be made by either a municipal or provincial police service?" So scrolling back up, Mr. Clerk, this is a question, as we've seen, that the Solicitor General's office is putting to your colleagues, and I believe the date is February 4th. If we could scroll up, Mr. Clerk? Yeah, February 4th. And if we scroll all the way up to the top, you'll see there's an internal email chain within Public Safety and your colleague Mr. Dakalbab says, "This is far from being solved. Still discussions on their way to clarify [Question] 2" Which is the one I just read. You see that there? Yes? So fair to say that at least as at February 4th, within Public Safety, there were still discussions in terms of the process for OPS for Ottawa requesting law enforcement resources from the RCMP; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 127 22-127-09

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. Now, Mr. Stewart, I heard you say in your testimony that almost right from the beginning, right after that first weekend, Chief Sloly was adamant that he needed more resources than he had at his disposal to dismantle the occupation; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 128 22-128-21

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And you're aware that on February 7th, I won't turn it up, the Mayor of Ottawa and Ms. Deans, who was then the Chair of the Police Services Board, wrote a letter to the federal government asking for 1800 additional officers to support the OPS: correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 128 22-128-27

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. So I'd like to go -- that was on February 7th. I'd like to now turn to a read out of the SSE Committee of Cabinet, which I take it is a committee that deals with safety, security and emergencies?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-05

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Have I got the acronym right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well done.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-11

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. And, Mr. Clerk, it's SSM.CAN.NSC.00002661. And this should be a February 9th meeting of the SSE Committee of Cabinet. It's a read out. And you'll see there the date February 9th; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe the Committee meeting was on the 8th but ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-17

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. So the Committee meeting was on the 8th. The read out is being circulated on the 9th; fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-19

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Can we go to the bottom of page 1, please? Right there. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Do you see it says, "RCMP resources deployed"? Are you with me, Mr. Stewart?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-23

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

"340 members on duty every day within RCMP mandate." And that would be in part the protective mandate that you described earlier; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 129 22-129-27

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

So to protect federal assets and people?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-06

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

"Increase in protective posture associated with RCMP mandate." And then this is what I wanted to draw your attention to. It says, "50 uniformed resources in support of OPS mandates since last weekend." So from January 31st to February 8th, roughly 50 uniformed RCMP officers in Ottawa; fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-07

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Under OPS command, I should say; fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-16

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And then it says, "Working to deploy another 200 people on new plan with OPS and partners." Right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-19

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And then finally it says, "OPP setting up integrated planning cell to review OPS plan." And that was going to include "2 RCMP members" as well; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 130 22-130-24

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

If we can scroll to page 3, please, the second bullet at the top of the page? There we go. Again, we see that the plan, and this is the OPS plan, is going to be "subject to review and verification by OPP [and] others", presumably the RCMP; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-02

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And that had to happen before additional resources were committed to Ottawa by the RCMP; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don't believe that's true.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-11

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. Let's keep going then. So I'd like to turn then to the first meeting of the IRG, which I understood occurred on February 10th?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-12

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Right. And that's day 13 of the convoy or occupation here in Ottawa; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-16

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, if we could turn to SSM.NSC.CAN.00000209, please? Okay. And if we could turn then to page 5, please, halfway through the first complete paragraph. Yeah. So you'll see there it says, "The RCMP" -- it's about six lines down; do you see that? Thank you, Mr. Clerk. "The RCMP has provided all [recourses] requested by the OPS." Do you see that there?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 131 22-131-19

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

But I think we can agree that the 1800 or any significant portion thereof requested on February 7th was not yet in Ottawa by this date February 10th; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-01

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Right. And then if we scroll to page 6, please, halfway through the page, right there, "The Commissioner of the RCMP"; do you see that, Mr. Stewart?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-06

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

"...indicated that Windsor remains the number one priority." I don't think that's quite contentious. This is February 10th, but that was what the Commissioner indicated on that date; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-10

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And I put it to you that that's the reason that the IRG was not convened until this date, that is, until Windsor had occurred, the blockade at Windsor?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would not agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-19

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. And then why did it take 13 days for the situation in Ottawa before the IRG to be convened?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's not a question that I can answer, other than to say that there was extensive involvement at the federal officials and political level, right from the start. So when the Prime Minister chose to convene the IRG is a decision that you should ask either him or colleagues of PCO about.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 132 22-132-23

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. Will do. Okay. So I guess we'll jump ahead now to the second IRG meeting. I only have a few minutes left. We can turn it up. It's SSM.NSC.CAN.00000214, Mr. Clerk. If we can go to page 6, please, at the bottom. And the last two sentences. "There continue to be challenges..." and I should say the date. It's February 12th. This is the second meeting of the IRG. "There continue to be challenges working with the Integrated Planning Team in Ottawa around communication and [I think that word should be decisiveness] of the OPS Chief. Every request made by the OPS has been fulfilled with RCMP personnel exceeding the 250 agreed upon in the MOU.” And maybe this comes back to what you were saying earlier, Mr. Stewart, that you thought more had been provided than that 200, even before the plan had been finalized. But I take it we can agree that the large number requested, the number that was eventually needed in order to dismantle the occupation, was still not in Ottawa by this date on February 12th?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 133 22-133-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

To the best of my knowledge, that is true.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 133 22-133-23

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Right. And that was the number that had been requested on February 7th; correct? The 1,800 from both levels of government. That’s not here yet at this point in time; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 133 22-133-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, that’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-01

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Right. And you mention -- pardon me, Commissioner. If I could just have one minute? I think I’m out, but I’m wrapping up. Thank you. You said earlier that it took several weeks ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-02

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

But on condition you speak slower.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-06

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. Understood. I heard you say earlier, Mr. Stewart, that it took several weeks for the right chemistry to be achieved at the Integrated Command Centre. Recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-08

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And I take it the ICC established unified command over the operation to dismantle the convoy; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s my understanding.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-16

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Between all three police forces? OPS, OPP, and RCMP; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-17

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And you described Chief Sloly as a strong personality; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-20

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

You’d heard it was challenging to get him to relinquish his authority?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s what I had heard.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-25

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And I expect we will hear evidence that Commissioner Lucki of the RCMP told her counterpart at the OPP on February 5th, so during that first week, that the Federal Government was either losing or had lost confidence in the OPS? Did you share that view?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 134 22-134-26

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Did you hear of any such concerns, either from the Commissioner or from Ministers?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I heard concerns about the ability of the OPS to manage the situation. Definitely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-06

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Now, you’ve said that the OPS should look to the -- should have looked to the OPP first, right, to fulfil its needs?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Technically speaking. But I want to be clear on this point. This is not a situation in which you go by the book.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-11

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Fair enough. I think you also said the RCMP was always ready and willing to assist?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-14

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And I appreciate there were logistical concerns, paperwork, swearing them in, getting them to Ottawa if they’re deployed elsewhere; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-17

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

But fair to say, the real issue was what was perceived at least as the OPS lack of a plan; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was a major impediment.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-24

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And what you understood to be Chief Sloly’s reticence to relinquish authority, because he was controlling the approval of the plan? That’s what you understood?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 135 22-135-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

You can put the two points together. I’m not sure that I was -- I can testify in any direct way that that was the case. I mean, two things seem to be facts that I was hearing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-01

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

Okay. The relationship between the two, you can’t put together?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-07

Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)

And the reason I put to you that the OPS, or that the Government of Canada wanted the OPS to look to the OPP first was that it hoped the OPP could resolve the issues around leadership and the plan?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don’t know that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-12

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Next, if I could call on the Ottawa Police Service, please?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-14

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JESSICA BARROW

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Good afternoon to you both. My name is Jessica Barrow and I’m one of the counsel to the Ottawa Police Service. My questions will be directed to you, Mr. Stewart. I just want to start by discussing some of the information that was known to Public Safety prior to the arrival of the convoy, and I know you went through some of that already with Commission Counsel, but I wanted to clarify a couple of things. So you indicated in your witness statement that there were challenges in obtaining information in relation to the convoy because the novelty of the events made it difficult to distinguish between things seen on social media that were credible versus not credible. Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 136 22-136-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-04

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in fact, you testified this morning that because of the organic nature of the events, it was difficult to obtain what you referred to as “good intel”? Correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-09

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you would agree with me that these would have been challenges that all law enforcement agencies would have been facing as well; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-10

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So Commission Counsel took you to one of the key points documents, and I want to take you toa couple as well. I’ll start with January 26. And Mr. Clerk, the number is PB.CAN.701. And if we could scroll down to page 2 towards the bottom of the page? In the third to bottom bullet, it says: “Some supporters suggested they would not leave Ottawa until vaccine mandates for public servants, Canadian travelers and cross-border truckers are lifted.” Do you recall seeing that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-14

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so this suggests that there was at least information available to you and others to the effect that some protestors may not leave Ottawa; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 137 22-137-26

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

But again, as you’ve indicated, with open-source information, it’s difficult to know whether that information was credible or not; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

And so from your perspective, this information was not enough to raise any kind of alarm bells that this was going to be the three-week occupation that we ultimately saw here in Ottawa; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-05

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And the RCMP was presumably privy to this same information as well?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would believe so, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-11

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you indicated in your witness statement, at page 10, and I’m happy to turn it up if necessary, but I suspect you’ll recall saying this, that if the RCMP had intelligence that the convoy was planning on becoming entrenched in Ottawa and failed to report that information up to Public Safety, that you would have considered that to be problematic; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-12

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And notwithstanding the fact that we see that there’s at least some information to suggest that protestors might stay, the RCMP was similarly not raising any kind of alarm bells around that; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-24

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And if we scroll to the top of the document, if you go down a -- yes. The first sentence there: “The following relates to a planned peaceful demonstration in Ottawa on 28-29 [January].” So even with that information in mind, you’re still planning for, you know, a couple of days; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 138 22-138-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-05

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. So I want to turn back to the one on the 27th, which you did speak about briefly with Commission Counsel. That number, Mr. Clerk, is PB.CAN703. And if we could go to page 3, please? That’s perfect. Thank you. My friend took you to one of the bullets in the bolded section that we see here, but I want to turn to some of the bullets that precede that one bullet. So what we can see here is a number of directions that appear to have been provided by OPS in relation to where the trucks could park when they arrive; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-06

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And is it your understanding that this information was coming from INTERSECT?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That would be my understanding.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-20

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And so what we see is a number of different options. The first one we see is from the west, they’re being directed to Sir John A. MacDonald Parkway; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-22

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And then following this, Kent and Metcalfe exits can be used, the George-Étienne Parkway can be used, and then ultimately we see in the third bullet there that Wellington will be closed, but there will be three lanes dedicated to the demonstration; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 139 22-139-27

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so you were provided information prior to the convoy’s arrival that the OPS plan was to allow at least some of the truckers to park downtown; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-05

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And I’m just going to bring you to the INTERSECT document. That one is PB.CAN1234. If you could scroll down a little bit, please? So this is presumably then the INTERSECT information that ultimately we see coming through that key points document? Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe so.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-17

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

and so again, we see here that there is information to suggest that OPS’ plan involved having some truckers park on Wellington; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-18

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so again, this didn’t raise any kind of alarm bells from your perspective, that this was the plan for OPS; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No alarm bells.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-25

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And again, this information would have been available to RCMP?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 140 22-140-26

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And similarly, RCMP didn’t raise any concerns with you in relation to the plan?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not with me.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-03

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you understood at this point, and I’m happy to turn back to the previous document if necessary, but I think you would agree that this was a group at this point that was cooperative, and from your perspective, was exercising their democratic right to peaceful protest; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-04

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Mr. Clerk, could we turn to SAS12, please? So these appear to be the minutes or notes from a deputy minister's call on February 7th. Do you recall that meeting?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-10

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so I just want to take you through a couple of the comments that you've made in here on February 7th. The first bullet references, "A protest of significant proportions we have not seen before." Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-16

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And if we can go down to the third bullet point, please? And in there, we see, "Setting a standard to worry about. Setting a standard for behaviour. How to go above the norms and laws." So I take it you agree that you made those comments?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 141 22-141-23

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And what you meant by this comment was that what Ottawa was doing was unlike any protests that any city in Canada had ever seen before; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-05

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And specifically, you were saying that the behaviour of these protesters was unlike anything seen in previous protests?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That may be too broad a statement. There's certainly the aspect of having the trucks involved and being used to essentially occupy physical spaces was the unprecedented part.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-09

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right, as well as the honking, some of the harassment that we saw exhibited by ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, in terms of behaviour, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-15

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

The behaviours of some of the protesters ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-17

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- as well as the trucks, I take it you're saying. And so the protesters were prepared, from your perspective, to disregard the laws as well as the social norms of behaviour that we had come to expect in a city and other places as well with respect to the behaviour of protesters; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-20

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And when we walked through - - I took you to two of the key points documents, and I take it you would agree with me that the specific references to this idea of honking or lawlessness or the departure from social norms, there wasn’t really any indication that the protesters were going to engage in that type of behaviour; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 142 22-142-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is fair.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-06

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in fact, as far as you're aware, they weren’t engaging in that type of behaviour before they arrived in Ottawa?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, there was quite a bit of honking on the highway, but I -- we did not assume that they would do anything other than peacefully protest.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-10

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Fair enough. And so you would agree with me then that the behaviour was unexpected?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-13

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And I don’t need to pull it up, I don't think, but please correct me if that’s not the case, but on page 12 of your witness statement, you indicated that the other cities that subsequently had similar events were able to learn from what was seen in Ottawa. Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-16

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so you would agree with me that it's because of what happened in Ottawa that other cities may have been able to prepare in a different way?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-25

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I just have one last issue I want to raise, and that’s in relation to the engagement proposal that you went through with Commission counsel earlier. And so I wonder if we could pull up OPP142, Mr. Clerk? And if we could scroll down to page 2, we'll see an email between yourself and Inspector Beaudin, and that’s setting out some considerations in relation to the proposal. If we can -- I think it might be up a little bit. Yes, there. Do you recall seeing this email with all the considerations?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 143 22-143-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, indeed.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-10

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And what we see from Inspector Beaudin is that he was of the view that this could constitute a win of sorts for protesters in terms of providing an exit strategy; is that -- do you recall that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-11

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And would you agree with me that the comments that come from Inspector Beaudin involve an advocacy for a measured approach consistent with the national framework rather than simply resorting first to enforcement?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-20

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in your witness statement, you indicated at page 18 that there were particular difficulties, actually, to enforcement operations in Ottawa. Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-21

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And that was because the protesters were very entrenched and they were aggressive towards the police?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 144 22-144-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-01

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so the proposal was presumably aimed at trying to change that posture; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That would be true.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-04

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And you indicated in your witness statement that you did not share the proposal with OPS; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe it was shared with OPS because there was a question about who would -- if it were actually approved, how it would be managed, and I think OPS was alerted that their PLTs, their teams would be perhaps delivery agents.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I didn’t consult OPS.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-14

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You did not consult them. So maybe we'll just bring up one last document. I'm almost completed, Mr. Commissioner. OPP633, just to provide some clarity on this point.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-15

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

So you're asking for more time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-20

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

If you wouldn't mind.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-22

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Yes, you can have a little more time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-23

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you very much. And so it's just that first email we see from Inspector Beaudin, and he's indicating that it's the opinion of Deputy Chief Ferguson that the letter go to her and she will ensure the letter is disseminated to the proper people. So you would agree with me that Deputy Chief Ferguson was both aware and approved this, correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 145 22-145-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would infer that, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-04

Jessica Barrow, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yes. Okay, thank you. Those are my questions, and thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-05

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay, thank you. Next is counsel for former Chief Sloly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-07

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. TOM CURRY

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Thank you, Commissioner. I'm Tom Curry for former Chief Sloly. Thank you. I just have a few questions. My colleagues have covered some of the things I was going to ask you about, so the -- Mr. Stewart, you said just a minute ago in response to one of my friends that you don’t go by the book in a situation like this. Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-10

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And does that capture the idea that what you were dealing with during the time that we are speaking about with protests in different locations across the country was completely without precedent, and there is therefore no playbook that you can follow?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree with you that we were in unprecedented and unanticipated circumstances, absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-23

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

One of the things that you have spoken to us about in your statement and today was the role of various of the federal government entities that concern national security. You recall that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 146 22-146-26

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And did this -- did the events, in your opinion, reach -- become a national security threat?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

They were decided to be and adjudicated to be a national security threat, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-05

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

But was that your own view?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I was very concerned about the possibility of physical and serious violence.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-08

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Mr. Rochon?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-10

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Same opinion?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-12

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And as a consequence of -- and of course, as you've described to, I think, one of my friends, it was not thought to be a national security threat at the time that the convoys began to organize and come to Ottawa?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, it was not.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-18

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Do you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-19

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

I'm going to ask you, if I can, about the -- one more thing, and I think you've probably covered this, but former Chief Sloly has described these events as representing a paradigm shift in protests in Canada, probably for the reasons that you've given, Mr. Stewart, concerning the use of heavy vehicles. You share that view?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I do.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-27

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Mr. Rochon?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 147 22-147-28

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, the -- you've spoken to my friends about Chief Sloly's consistent requests for the need for additional resources. Do you agree that those came in two forms? First, there was a request for resources to maintain the safety of the citizens, the protesters, and police service members who were policing the areas on Ottawa that were the subject of the protest?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-02

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And second, of course, that a greater need for resources in the event that a dismantling of the occupation was required?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-13

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Two very separate ways of thinking of resources; do you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-14

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Do you also agree that the second, that is the -- an effort to bring public order and to dismantle an occupation requires the greater number of resources that you were eventually speaking about?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-17

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And everyone understood, didn’t they, that the OPS itself did not have the resources needed to do the second thing?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-22

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And it's true also, of course, they didn’t even have the resources to do the first thing because their own members were stretched so thin, I think you said?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 148 22-148-26

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, this was, of course, the same thing that occurred, in a sense, in both Windsor and Coutts and probably other places in terms of the under-resourcing of police services trying to manage those situations. Is that true?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I think there’s a confluence of events here. Obviously, the unprecedented nature of these protests did lead us into a situation where more resources were required. I don’t know if that equates to chronically under- resourcing Police because if we were better prepared and is as they were in other cities they didn’t need more officers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-08

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Understood. I suppose that it wasn’t -- we know, don’t we, that the protest in Coutts, the blockade in Coutts, was not prevented or able to be prevented by RCMP officers on the ground there.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It wasn’t anticipated and it happened before they could mobilize.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-18

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And then once it did, once they were -- the protesters were there, the vehicles were on the road, and stopped, then enforcement became very challenging, correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-20

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And I think in fact one of the lessons that was learned in Coutts by your team, I assume, and others was that an effort, an early effort to enforce failed because protesters resisted and police were required to fall back. Do you recall that happening, February 1st?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 149 22-149-25

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And that’s an indication, isn’t it, of the challenge of enforcement. You need significant resources to enforce that kind of a police operation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-06

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, in terms, quickly, about Windsor, do you understand that the Windsor -- that resources that were requested by the Windsor Police Service and by the OPP were pledged by the RCMP prior to the completion of a plan by the Windsor Police Service?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don’t know the details of that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would be inclined to believe that the RCMP would have made a commitment to support whatever action would be taken.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-15

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

In the absence of a plan?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Just a commitment.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-19

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Right. And of course, for the reasons that you've given to one of my friends, the circumstances of the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge was a significant escalation in the national security threat, wasn’t it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-25

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, of the protests across the country, do you agree that Ottawa was the most complex and the most challenging?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 150 22-150-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In the physical sense I believe that’s true. In the economic sense, not as much.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-01

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Fair enough. In terms of the, as you say the physical sense, or if one thought about it as a security issue, it was the more volatile. It had the most vehicles and the most protesters across a larger area; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-03

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, the -- I think you indicated that there was a time at least when there was a debate between or perhaps even a disagreement between federal and provincial officials in Ontario, that is, about which police service was the first port of call for the Ottawa Police Service to call on; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, we’ve been shown evidence to that effect. I didn’t have that issue with my colleague.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-15

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

All right. Understood. Now, a couple of other things. You were also aware -- and I think you've told the Commissioner, that enforcement was not the preferred strategy here in any of these protest locations -- negotiation, de-escalation was the preferred strategy.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is always the preferred strategy.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-24

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And yet the ministers -- the federal government ministers with whom you were interacting were demanding some kind of action. Is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 151 22-151-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The ministers we were briefing wanted the situation to be resolved. There is no question about that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-01

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And the same was true, to your observation, of municipal officials here in Ottawa?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-06

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And of course, the community, the residents?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-09

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

A high level of impatience and a high -- it was a highly challenging situation for the police service and for Chief Sloly.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, absolutely.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-13

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

You observed, and I'm sure you felt that the two of you were in the middle of this too. Can you tell the Commissioner, did you yourselves feel enormous pressure to try to do something to solve this problem?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-14

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Mr. Rochon?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-19

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

That would be fair, yeah.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-20

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And you observed it across the spectrum of police services and other government agencies; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That would be fair.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-24

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Do you agree that Chief Sloly, during the time that you were dealing with him, was a passionate defender of the city’s residents and of the Police Service in trying to find a solution?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 152 22-152-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-01

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And acted in good faith in the performance of his duties?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-04

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, one last area, if I may. Chief Sloly has described options that were other than enforcement and do you agree that Commissioner Lucki also expressed a preference for even the effort of an interlocutor to try to negotiate something with protesters? Do you recall that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-05

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

May I just show you, please, a document then and see if you can assist us because I think you received it. You're a member of the -- one of the acronyms -- the Deputy Minister’s Committee on Operational Coordination?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-11

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

True? DMOC? Could I please show the witness the interview summary from -- oh now, I won’t need to go to that. Let me show you the document, PBCAN00000750. See if this assists your recollection if you would, please, Mr. Stewart. There’s a suffix on that, REL.001. I don’t know if that’s important, Registrar. There we go. Thank you. Do you recognize this document, “Truckers Convoy and protective services key messages for DMOC,” February 3rd, at 2:30 p.m.?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, these would be speaking points for the Commissioner. I would not have received her speaking points.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 153 22-153-26

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

All right. Can you conform for the Commissioner, for this Commissioner, that you were at this meeting?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-01

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Could you please just scroll down if you would, please, Mr. Registrar, to an expression that begins, “I will be honest…” the second page. There it is. Just read that, if you would, Mr. Stewart. For the record: “I’ll be honest. This may not be something that can be negotiated out of or resolved only with enforcement. There may need to be some other solutions, maybe the engagement of an interlocutor.” Does that refresh your recollection that on the 3rd of February in the afternoon Commissioner Lucki raised this concern that there may not be a solution through -- only through enforcement and there may be other solutions including an interlocutor?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, it refreshes my memory.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-21

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And that she said that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can check against delivery but I believe she did.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-23

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

All right. I’m out of time. Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-25

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Thank you. Next, the Ottawa Coalition.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 154 22-154-28

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Good afternoon, Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-02

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. EMILIE TAMAN

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Mr. Stewart, M. Rochon, my name is Emilie Taman. I represent the Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses. And I just have a couple of questions for you arising out of your testimony today. M. Rochon, if I could start with you, please, sir. You explained that within the broader Intelligence matrix in Canada that public safety is a consumer of Intelligence, right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-04

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you indicated this morning that the government has determined -- had determined prior even to the Freedom Convoy that there is a need for a refresh of the National Security Strategy. Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-14

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Not technically speaking. The government is always looking at policy matters and it will be a decision for the sitting government of the day, whether or not to publish an update to that strategy. But subset to the National Security Strategy, there are a series of other strategies like a cyber security strategy, a critical infrastructure strategy. So we’re always working on those, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-18

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. And the current strategy, I believe you said, dates back to 2004?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-25

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

The national security one? Yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 155 22-155-27

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And at that time I think you explained that threats to Canada’s national security were understood to be different than they are today; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 156 22-156-01

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Indeed, I would say post 9- 1-1 the very creation of our department at public safety, followed and indeed I think that was the impetus for Canadian’s National Security Strategy at the time, in 2004.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 156 22-156-04

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. And so in pursuing a refresh or in continually considering and reconsidering the government’s approach, it’s a recognition that the current strategy may not be optimal because it could miss certain kinds of threats from groups oriented around certain radical ideologies, or even, as you said I think this morning, individuals acting alone on the basis of a broader range of grievances than the current strategy might have otherwise been built for; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 156 22-156-08

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would even go so far as to highlight the counterterrorism strategy which I think dates back to 2012, if I'm not mistaken, and we're in the process of refreshing that. Parliamentary Committee and the House of Commons for National Security, SECU, has recently done a study on ideologically motivated violent extremism, which came out with 33 recommendations. We recently tabled, I believe, the government response to that study and we're in the process of updating our counterterrorism strategy that will deal with what you referred to, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 156 22-156-17

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. And you testified this morning that in the leadup to the Freedom Convoy's occupation of Ottawa, there was no reason to see the convoy as a national security threat; right? Based on the intelligence that had been produced for you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 156 22-156-27

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But ultimately, a national security threat was, as Mr. Stewart articulated, I think adjudicated to exist, at least from the perspective of the federal government, which ultimately led to the invocation of the Emergencies Act; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 157 22-157-05

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So as a consumer of intelligence products then, would you agree that the intelligence product you were provided with was flawed in the sense that the threat posed by the convoy was grossly underestimated at every level, OPS, OPP, RCMP, CSIS?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 157 22-157-11

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I wouldn't say flawed because intelligence is only as good as a moment in time when it's collected, and you have to know where to go looking for it. And at the time, all of the various indications were pointing to a peaceful protest. And so police of jurisdiction, who handle these types of protests on a regular basis, there was no reason to question their integrity in terms of their assessment. But as the protests grew in number across the country and, indeed, witnessing the various behaviours and the entrenchment of the occupation in Ottawa, and the impacts on Canadians, Canadian lives, the economy, the reputation of the country, trading issues, supply chain issues, yes, it definitely rose to the national security concern.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 157 22-157-16

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But we can't necessarily know if the issue was how the available intelligence was interpreted, or if it was actually a failure of intelligence to actually see what might have been in front of law enforcement authorities; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-01

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

The difficulty is that you don't know what you don't know.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-06

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-08

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

And therefore, there are always unknowns.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-09

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. So we heard from former Chief Peter Sloly that he believes that there is a double standard that exists in how national security threats are identified and communicated, and that right-wing extremism and white supremacy are often not flagged in threat assessments while radical Islam and Islamic-based terrorism threats are. Do you agree with that assessment?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-11

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would only agree with it insomuch as perhaps historically, there might have been a bias, but I believe more recently, as I've indicated, ideologically motivated violent extremism is -- has risen to the level where our security and intelligence agencies have it as the top priority at the moment. I would argue that if you look at just at the terrorist listings that we're responsible for with Public Safety, we've I think listed up to nine now INVE groups in the last three years. So I would not agree with that characterization in the present day. But historically speaking, we certainly were more focussed on other types of terrorism.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 158 22-158-18

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So you wouldn't agree then I take it that the potential threat posed by the Freedom Convoy wasn't recognized or articulated as a national security threat because of biases and intelligence gathering and in a reluctance to identify certain types of threats as being national security threats?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 159 22-159-01

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Mr. Stewart, in your statement, you're said to have expressed the view that the government and law enforcement lack certain tools to monitor social media and properly distill its content to identify threats; is that accurate?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 159 22-159-08

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But I wonder if you would agree then that it's likely surprising to Canadians that law enforcement continue to have a deficit in that regard, given the central role that social media plays in modern-day communications, and particularly given that it can be monitored on an open source basis. Is that something, to your knowledge, that will be addressed in the refresh or reconsideration of the National Security Strategy?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 159 22-159-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I'd like to clarify that point. There is a very high noise to signal ratio in social media. So there's a challenge inherently in monitoring all the channels that people use to communicate, to the extent that they're accessible. And there are many that are not, they're encrypted. So it would be, I think, a mistake to say that the police or any institution have necessarily all the capabilities they need to monitor what is going on in the electronic world. And then beyond that, it's about assessing it and trying to make sure that, you know, what we understand to be the case is either likely to be or is the case, and that assessment process is also very challenging. So I think there's a lot of inherent challenges here.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 159 22-159-22

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Thanks. Okay. So just switching gears a little bit, we've heard evidence, and I'm completely moving to a different area now, that by February 3rd, Mayor Watson had spoken with the Prime Minister and with Minister Mendocino about the situation in Ottawa and the need for federal resources. From the perspective of Public Safety then, the convoy occupation by that time was recognized to be a significant event; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 160 22-160-07

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But no one within Public Safety at that time, on February 3rd, was considering invoking the Emergencies Act at that point; were they?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 160 22-160-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

There was no active consideration at that time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 160 22-160-19

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And the Commission's heard evidence that on February 4th, a private citizen launched a class action against the convoy because residents felt completely abandoned by all levels of government and policing institutions; you're aware of that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 160 22-160-21

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But no one within Public Safety at that time was considering invoking the Emergencies Act; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 160 22-160-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was not under active consideration at that point in time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-02

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you've indicated that it did become an active consideration around February 11th; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I did.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-07

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So would it be fair then to say that the federal government never really saw a role for the Emergencies Act as a tool for dealing with the Freedom Convoy until the international borders were blockaded?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, I think that's putting it too linearly. I think the -- a combination of factors led it to become more actively considered, including the borders being blockaded, the protracted protest in Ottawa and the, you know, the threats of personal and economic harm.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-12

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. But a significant part of the consideration with respect to economic harm had to do with international trade; didn't it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It had to do with blocking ports and gateways, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-20

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. So had it not been for the border blockades, would, in your assessment, residents of Ottawa have been -- continued to have been left to deal with the effects of the convoy despite the tremendous social and economic harm they were experiencing?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

There was always going to be a police action in Ottawa. So ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 161 22-161-27

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- I think you are neglecting the fact that that was mobilizing, albeit in a very incremental way.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-02

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But specifically with respect to the Emergencies Act, would you, you know, based on your understanding of the discussions that took place around that, in your view, would the Emergencies Act have been an appropriate tool to deal with the situation in Ottawa had it not been for those other events?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The Emergencies Act is generally considered to be a tool of last resort, under very exigent circumstances, urgent time limited. So there were many other tools in the toolkit. Indeed, Ontario used one. And, you know, it was not used until quite a bit later in time. So I would say, you know, we were all conscious of it as being a tool, but in the minds of those who were, you know, sort of discussing it with counterparts, there were other tools as well.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-11

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-19

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Next I'd like to call on the Ontario Provincial Police.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-21

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. CHRISTOPHER DIANA

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Good afternoon. My name is Chris Diana, counsel to the OPP. I wonder if we can start by bringing up your witness summary, which is WTS66? And while that's coming up, I expect that most of my questions will be directed to Mr. Stewart through Mr. Rochon. If you have some insight or some information, then please chime in. All right. So this is your witness summary. Can we go to page 21, and the last paragraph? And I want to ask some questions about the consultation that took place before the invocation of the Act. It reads: “DM Stewart added that the Act was welcomed by law enforcement (especially police of jurisdiction). Though they were never explicitly asked to invoke the Act, they were asked whether they had the tools they needed and the answer was consistently that they could use more tools.” I want to ask about that paragraph in particular; you used the word “they” which suggests that multiple law enforcement agencies were canvassed about tools that could be used under the Act. Is that a fair characterization of the summary?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 162 22-162-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

There’s a spelling mistake in there just for the record, the “were” in the second sentence. No, this is a composite statement based on all the consultations we undertook with officials as well as with police.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 163 22-163-17

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Right. And so my question arising from that is, which law enforcement agencies were consulted about the use of the Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 163 22-163-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

What I was saying in this witness summary, and what I would say to you, is they were – no police agency was asked about the Act itself. They were always asked “Do you need more tools”?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 163 22-163-24

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. And so my question is, which agencies were asked whether they needed more tools?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 163 22-163-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

RCMP, OPP, OPS.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-03

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. Do you have any knowledge on how that consultation took place?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, it would have been guided by the RCMP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-06

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. Because Commissioner Carrique, and I don’t know if you heard his evidence, he testified that the OPP was not consulted about the use of the Emergencies Act or any tools by anyone with the Federal Government; do you have any reason to dispute his testimony in that regard?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would not have first hand knowledge of this. The RCMP was our primary interface as a department and in the discussions that we were having.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-14

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. So is it fair to say that that paragraph is based on information that you would have received from the RCMP rather than your own personal direct knowledge?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Insofar as it pertains to the OPP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-21

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Or other law enforcement agencies?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Law enforcement here could also represent officials in provincial government.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-25

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. Because we were talking about tools which in terms of law enforcement agencies, is what I am referring to. And so do you have any direct knowledge of other law enforcement agencies that were consulted about those tools?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 164 22-164-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No direct knowledge.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-04

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. Now at the time of course you would agree that the OPP had a very prominent role within the province, both in Windsor, Ottawa and elsewhere in Ontario?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-05

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And you would agree that the OPP, considering its role and multiple scenarios would be in a good position to provide a meaningful response to a consultation request?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree. Indeed as heard, I assumed they were.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-14

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And indeed the OPP would have a different perspective in the RCMP because they have different jurisdiction; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is true, they have different jurisdictions but they work very closely together.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-19

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. And do you know if there is a written record of consultation with law enforcement agencies on the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-21

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Considering the extraordinary nature of the Emergencies Act do you agree that perhaps there should be a written consultation record for accountability purposes?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 165 22-165-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The consultations were -- in the broader form, were often required and there have been notes to that effect; and, again, they weren’t about the Act, they were about the tools. And then the formal consultations were also recorded and reported to Parliament.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-01

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And the reason I ask, is because there is a consultation record which I won’t take you to unless you want to see it, but that consultation record refers to consultation with different provinces and officials, but there is no specifics about consultation with law enforcement; and my question is, whether -- are you aware of any document that deals directly with the law enforcement side of the consultation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, I’m not aware.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-14

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

But you would agree that perhaps considering the fact that law enforcement has to use those tools, it would be a good idea to have written records of that consultation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-19

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Did you have any direct involvement with consulting law enforcement? I think you said you did not; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not police, other than the RCMP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-23

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Right. If we can turn up document PB.NSC.CAN.000003256.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Actually, if I may, I’ll correct that answer. Because I did have calls with Chief Sloly on which Commissioner Carrique was also participating. So I would say I had first hand evidence from Chief Sloly that he needed more tools as well.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 166 22-166-27

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

All right. Now, I don’t think -- I don’t know if you were -- you don’t appear to have been copied on this document. This appears to be an exchange of emails between Commissioner Lucki and Mike Jones. Do you recognize this email?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-04

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Now Patrick Vezina is counsel, I believe; who are Alison Whelan and Dennis Daly?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

They are RCMP; one’s a civilian member, the other is a regular member.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-12

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Okay. Did you see this document at the time that it was generated or around the time it was generated?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I do not recall seeing this document.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-17

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Now Mike Jones as I understand it, was Chief of Staff for Minister Mendicino; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-22

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And if you scroll down to the bottom, it starts with an email request made on February 13th from Mike Jones to Brenda Lucki. Part of it is redacted; if you scroll up I think it’s clear kind of what the purpose of the email is if you scroll up a little higher, higher, higher. Commissioner Lucki -- stop there. Commissioner Lucki kind of gives a list of some tools that she might find useful; is that your understanding of this email?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 167 22-167-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is my understanding.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-04

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Now, I note that this exchange ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

And for the record, that is what I assumed the RCMP would have consulted with colleagues about.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-07

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Okay. So this is evidence of consultation with the RCMP from the Federal Government side; my question is whether or not it’s unusual that this request comes from the political side, comes from the Chief of Staff rather than from your office, from the Deputy Minister’s Office?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Under the circumstances I wouldn’t say it was unusual.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-16

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Because typically, and I know the way it works provincially of course, because that’s my area, but Commissioner Carrique testified that almost all his dealings were directly with Deputy Di Tommaso and the communication went through the level of the Deputy Minister, but the Commissioner of the RCMP is a direct report to the Minister of Public safety.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-18

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And so it’s more common then for the political side to engage directly with the Commissioner of the RCMP?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 168 22-168-26

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And I wanted to follow up on a comment, because this is an opportunity for us to look at all these issues, all of these kind of broader systemic issues because you raised it yourself earlier in your evidence about Nova Scotia. And maybe taking another look at what is the appropriate role of the political side as opposed to your side of the house; do you have any thoughts on how, from the federal side that could be improved from where it’s at now?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 169 22-169-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s a very open-ended question. I don’t think my opinion is here or there. I would observe however, and this is why I raised it this morning, that that has become an issue in a number of domains where people have asked what’s the division between requests for information and advice which this I think constitutes versus what are, you know, versus what are, you know, sort of interference or, you know, engagement in police operations. And so I’m – I would certainly agree with the proposal that that could be clarified.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 169 22-169-10

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And I guess one of the reasons I ask, you’re not copied on this and as Deputy Minister, if there is going to be direct engagement with the political side, don’t you expect you would at least be copied on it for your information or awareness?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 169 22-169-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

At one in the morning? It probably wouldn’t matter.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 169 22-169-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, I think it would have made sense for her to copy me; she copied her subordinates.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 169 22-169-27

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Right. And I guess again we’re here, we’re in this context where we can look at these issues; these opportunities don’t come across very well. And you’ve got a lot of experience in your role, as do you, Mr. Rochon, so you can weigh into this question as well, but is there any merit in having clearer lines or more clearly defined lines about how the interaction between the political side and the RCMP Commissioner to avoid any kind of misunderstandings. There is merit. Do you have any recommendations on how those lines should be drawn?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-01

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Do you have any thoughts, Mr. Rochon?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-12

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

And just finishing up on the question about intelligence; you were asked a question by my friend who was up before me about whether or not there was essentially a failure of intelligence. Now your evidence earlier was that you’re in a position where you’re only receiving, or you’re consuming the intelligence; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-21

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

But you only know what’s provided to you; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-22

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

So for example, you didn’t even know about Hendon, what you’re looking at is what other people are synthesizing, putting together, and letting you know; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 170 22-170-25

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

So really, you wouldn’t be in a position, especially at the time, to know whether you would have reviewed all the intelligence, or whether what had been provided to you was an accurate reflection of what was out there; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 171 22-171-02

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would argue that the reason why we have an ADM National Security Operations Committee Table every week is to have subject matter experts across 16 departments and agencies bring forward information that would be relevant for that table, and then we ask questions and try to anticipate threats to national security. And in this particular instance, we would have all been aware of convoys and we would have been deferring to the RCMP or Transport, or indeed, CSIS, ITAC and others to flag for us if there was something more to bring to our attention. And at the early stages, that wasn’t the case.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 171 22-171-07

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Right. And so if the RCMP or whoever is reviewing this information decides that information such as there’s no exit strategy, an intention to make the workings of government more difficult, if that doesn’t get included, then obviously you would never know. So there’s a lot that’s put on the shoulders of those who are providing the information to you. would you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 171 22-171-18

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Yes and no. I mean, there’s enough experience around that ADM National Security Operations table to ask those types of questions. You know, intelligence fusion is always a challenge. And so bringing together all of the various pieces of intelligence to get an accurate picture at a moment in time is something that we have experience with, and at that point in time, we had no reason to believe this was going to be anything more than a peaceful protest.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 171 22-171-25

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Thank you, gentlemen. Much appreciated.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-05

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Thank you. Next up is the Windsor Police Service.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-07

Thomas McRae, Counsel (Win-WPS)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. This is Tom McRae for Windsor Police Service. I have no questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-09

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Thank you. Next is the Government of Alberta.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-12

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. STEPHANIE BOWES

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Good afternoon. My name is Stephanie Bowes for the Province of Alberta. I just have a few questions around the RFA that came from Alberta. I think, Mr. Stewart, you’re probably the one who will be answering these questions today. But certainly if this is something that both members of the panel can respond to, please feel free to do so. For now, can I ask that the Clerk please bring up the Public Safety Institution Report? That’s document DOJ.IR.00000008. And while that’s happening, Mr. Stewart, I believe you mentioned in your evidence that the RFA that came from Alberta didn’t follow the usual course. Namely, that there wasn’t discussion before it was submitted. Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 172 22-172-28

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Do you know if there had been discussion ahead of the RFA, would that have changed the response by the Federal Government in this case?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 173 22-173-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In all likelihood, it would not.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 173 22-173-04

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. And then on that Institutional Report, Mr. Clerk, can you please scroll down to page 22 and look at paragraph 75, please? And this is referring to the February 5th RFA from the Minister of Municipal Affairs for Alberta, and it says: “Upon reviewing the request, it was determined that the RFA process was not the correct mechanism for addressing the issue of additional law enforcement personnel. Requests for additional RCMP officers must be made under sub-article 9 of the Provincial Police Services Agreement and not through an RFA.” So is it true that the RFA from Alberta was interpreted to be a request for RCMP officer deployment?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 173 22-173-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was perceived to largely be a request for tow trucks.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 173 22-173-23

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. There is a mention of personnel in the RFA. I’ll just take you to that as well. That’s Document PB.CAN.00000718. And I’ll take it you’ve seen the RFA from Minister McIver before? Is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 173 22-173-25

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. And then if we look at paragraph 5 -- or sorry, paragraph 4, within that paragraph, we see: “To support this approach, I am 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.” Do you know at the time this was received what the interpretation of personnel was meant to be? And I’m not talking from Minister McIver’s point of view. I’m asking what the Federal Government interpreted that request to be.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 174 22-174-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can say quite authoritatively, I believe it was not assumed to be law enforcement, because everybody understood the Article 9 process very well. It’s been used many times over the years. So this was inferred to be Armed Forces personnel.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 174 22-174-17

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. Thank you. And we do know, of course, that there was a request for deployment of RCMP officers that was appropriately made under the Police Services Agreement that came just a few days later; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 174 22-174-22

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

All right. Now can we please take a look at Document PB.CAN.00001514? And this is an email from Mr. Dakalbab to yourself on February 13 and it outlines a meeting that Transportation Canada individuals had with colleagues from Alberta, Manitoba, and Ontario. And if we scroll down to the bullet points that begin with “Alberta”, we can see those there. “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).” Do you know if there was any follow up on that point?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 174 22-174-27

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

All right. Now ultimately, the Government of Canada was going to deny Alberta’s request for assistance; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 175 22-175-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Actually, what happened was that we evaluated the initial request and determined that the CAF equipment would not be appropriate. And as this indicates, it was not my understanding that there was another dimension to the personnel request. However, we did not formally notify Alberta that the RFA would be turned down on the basis of the fact that we were still having discussions about the federal toolkit and ultimately addressed the tow truck issue via the Emergencies Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 175 22-175-20

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. Now I’d like to take you to some draft letters that were in Canada’s production for this. Beginning with PB.NSC.CAN00009547. We can see that this is dated February 7th, it’s addressed to the Honourable Minister McIver, which is the Minister of Municipal Affairs for Alberta. And if we scroll down to the last paragraph on the first page, it says: “Further, I understand that Alberta has the required […] authorities necessary to enforce compliance, as a highway is considered essential infrastructure, and it is unlawful to wilfully obstruct, interrupt, or interfere with the construction, 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.” And this letter is unsigned. Do you know why it was unsigned and unsent at this time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 176 22-176-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

For the reasons I just explained.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 176 22-176-24

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. But you would agree that on February 7th, the Government of Canada’s position was that Alberta had the required authorities to deal with the illegal protests around Coutts, Alberta?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 176 22-176-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

We determined that the full suite of provincial tools had not been exhausted, which is sort of a first principle of the RFA.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-02

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

All right. And then there are a number of other follow up draft letters that contain essentially the same language in it. Just for the record, I will take you to SSM.CAN.NSC00002745. And this is a memorandum for the Minister of Emergency Preparedness. I understand, if you scroll down to page 2, that you digitally signed this memorandum on February 9th? Do you see that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I see that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-13

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

And in this memorandum, you recommended that the Minister of Emergency Preparedness sign an enclosed reply indicating that the Government of Canada was refusing the RFA; is that correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe so. I haven't seen the attachment, but I believe so.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-18

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Well, in the enclosed correspondence on this one is actually redacted, but if we look at the body of the memorandum and we see the reasons for refusing, on page 2, the paragraph above the heading "Recommendation" says: "This remains an issue within provincial jurisdiction. Alberta has the required legal authorities necessary to enforce compliance." So very similar reasons for the refusal that was being outlined in the February 7th draft, correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 177 22-177-20

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

And then if we turn now to SSM.NSC.CAN00003115, this is a series of emails from February 11th. And in the email from Radey Barrack to Minister Bill Blair, it says, "Here is the latest draft in reply to Alberta's RFA." And again, going to page 2, we see a paragraph starting with "Further, I understand," and it says, "Alberta has the required legal authorities necessary to enforce compliance," and then refers to the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. So again, here we are, February 11th, very similar reasons to those expressed on February 9th and February 7th, correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 178 22-178-04

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

And if we scroll to the very top of this, we see that Minister Blair approved the response. Were you aware that he had approved such a response?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 178 22-178-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

And I told a provincial official, though I cannot remember who that was.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 178 22-178-22

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Do you know the level of provincial official you told or the meeting in which you told them that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 178 22-178-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

A deputy minister called me and asked if we were going to approve it sometime within 24 to 48 hours of the original request, and I said my expectation is we were not.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 178 22-178-27

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. So very early on, the decision was made it would be refused. The reasons for refusing it seem to not really have changed throughout the course of the time when the draft response was being considered; is that fair to say?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 179 22-179-03

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

And then I'm going to take you to one last draft, and that is on PB.CAN.NSC00000690. And this is an email -- my understanding is with the timestamp, this time is actually the true time that this was sent should be five hours ahead of this, so sometime in the evening on February 12th. If we scroll down to the second email there, and on the second page, we again see we've got a draft response, and again the wording is very similar, "Further, I understand Alberta has the required legal authorities," and reference to the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. So by as late as February 12th, the Government of Canada's position on Alberta's RFA was that it had the required legal authorities necessary to enforce compliance of any illegal protest activity occurring in Alberta. Do you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 179 22-179-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It had powers to address the circumstance, including compelling tow truck drivers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 179 22-179-24

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

You are now well out of time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 179 22-179-27

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Can I just have one minute to clarify which Act that power comes under, Mr. Commissioner?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-01

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

So -- I'm sorry -- you referred to Alberta having the power to compel tow truck operators under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. I'm going to put to you that that Act is not actually the correct Act. It is only five sections long and the Commission has heard evidence from the Assistant Deputy Minister Degrand that that legislation makes interfering with critical infrastructure an offence but it's not something that Alberta needs to invoke. Alberta does have the Emergency Management Act which does grant in it the power to compel service providers to provide services. So despite maybe having confusion about which Act that power falls under, it doesn’t change the position that Canada -- of Canada's response to Alberta's RFA; would you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-04

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-18

Stephanie Bowes, Counsel (AB)

Okay. Thank you, that’s my only question -- those are my only questions today.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-19

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay, thank you. Next, if I could call on the CCLA, please?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-21

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CARA ZWIBEL

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Good afternoon. Can you see and hear me okay?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-24

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

My name is Cara Zwibel. I am counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. I wonder if we could pull up Document PB.CAN.00001584, and this -- just while it's getting pulled up, I believe is an email chain related to the technical briefing that you mentioned earlier that -- I guess there several technical briefings that happened. And if we scroll all the way down to the bottom, just so we can see where this starts, so this is someone in the Communications Branch of Public Safety and writing to say that there needed to be a follow up, a second -- I think here, we're talking about a media briefing; is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 180 22-180-27

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. Because there wasn’t enough time for all the questions, given some other briefings that were going on. And if we scroll up a bit more, there's some discussion here about the possibility of doing this another way, could we do this in writing? I gather at this point everyone in your department is running on fumes and there's quite a lot going on, and the idea of doing yet another briefing is not necessarily something you feel is the best use of time; is that an accurate characterization?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 181 22-181-12

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would simply say from my recollection that we pretty much ran full on doing technical brief after technical brief after technical brief with different stakeholders, be they the both Houses of Parliament, media, as well as stakeholders, and each one typically would run for half an hour to an hour, but in this particular case, we were affording stakeholders sometimes up to two hours, sometimes even longer. And we were trying to address as many questions, but as you can appreciate, we had a panel of experts from a great number of departments and agencies, and therefore, questions stemmed from law enforcement activity to border service activity to finance, and therefore, we were, I think, if I look back at this exchange, probably wondering whether there wouldn't be a way of having people submit questions in writing and maybe there would be a better way of posting our answers online as opposed to continuing with the number of technical briefs that we were providing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 181 22-181-22

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay, thank you. And can we now go to Document SSM.CAN.00002668? So I think this is going to be, I believe, your speaking notes for -- maybe it's one, maybe it's all of these technical briefings. And if we can just go down to the first full paragraph on page 3. And I think this is the document that we were talking about earlier about the need to focus on the public safety portfolio elements a bit more and not duplicate what Justice or other departments might say. And so -- yes, okay. So on this page -- I gather this is roughly what you communicated during these briefings. So first, noting that the Emergencies Act is a significant step, one that will help ensure law enforcement across Canada, at broad and clear authority to protect public safety, ensure out borders remain open, and safeguard our national security. And then scrolling down a bit, it's also noted that this is a message to people who are participating in these protests and interfering in critical infrastructure, that there will be consequences. And then at a little bit more, the next paragraph notes that these measures will supplement existing provincial and territorial measures and assist the RCMP in becoming integrated. I think this -- it probably speaks a little bit to that question of avoiding the swearing in and some of that red tape. And then it's this last next paragraph that I want to ask about. So it says: “It’s important to underscore that invoking the Emergencies Act does not give the federal government the authority to direct the Police Services in any other jurisdiction.” So two questions, I guess, but the first is -- is that statement, that the use of any other jurisdiction -- are you saying here that using the Emergencies Act allows the federal government to direct the federal police, the RCMP? Or are you just clarifying that nothing in the Emergencies Act changes the normal situation where the government does not direct police in their operations?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 182 22-182-12

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I would say it’s the latter interpretation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 183 22-183-24

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay, thank you. But would you agree with me that while invoking the Emergencies Act doesn't give the federal government the authority to direct police services of any jurisdiction, the orders, the Emergency Orders that were made under the rubric of the Act grant police new authority to enforce those measures granted -- sorry, can you just answer that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 183 22-183-26

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Sorry, I wasn’t sure if you were finished.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-05

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

That’s why I was waiting. So my apologies. Yes, I think it certainly gives them additional tools by other means of additional authorities that they can avail themselves of.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-08

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And just like the Criminal Code gives the police certain tools, it’s ultimately going to be police officers that will make determinations about the manner of enforcement?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-13

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And ultimately police authorities that will decide how they will exercise their discretion, this notion of police discretion as an important piece of this; would you agree?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-18

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And you would agree that these orders under the Emergencies Act provided all police across the country with the authority to enforce these new measures?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-23

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And although the federal government was no directing the police service of any jurisdiction, would you agree that by invoking a federal emergency, and making the Emergency Orders the federal government was clearly intending to communicate a message not just to people participating in protests but also to law enforcement of all jurisdictions that this is something the government takes very seriously and were looking to you to enforce?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 184 22-184-28

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

I think at some point also Minister Blair made a comment. This was a bit before the Act was invoked but I think he was sharing with the media that this was something the federal government was considering. And he said it was important that police do their jobs. Do you recall that comment?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 185 22-185-10

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

But I don’t disagree with the thought, I guess.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 185 22-185-18

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And Mr. Stewart, in your testimony earlier you said that enforcement -- and I think this is when you were talking about the engagement proposal. That the engagement proposal was not really an alternative to enforcement; it was something that would be used to try to shrink the footprint, as we’ve heard. And sort of lay a path to eventual enforcement. And I think you said that enforcement was only a matter of time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 185 22-185-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 185 22-185-28

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

And I think you also told my friend, Ms. Taman, there was always going to be a police action to dismantle what was going on in Ottawa. It was a question of timing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-05

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And one more question related to -- there was a document that you were taken to before and this is around the relationship with the Government of Ontario and the powers that they have under their Emergency Act or their Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. And I think you noted that the Ontario legislation had more teeth than the federal legislation in terms of the penalties. Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-14

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. But you would agree with me that the provincial legislation didn’t allow for the kind of broad financial powers that were included in the emergency regulations invoked -- enacted by the federal government.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-19

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

So that the freezing of assets immediately without notice or due process is likely something that the province would not have been able to do or is not contemplated under their legislation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It was not contemplated and indeed it was done under the Bank Act. So that’s a federal statute.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-24

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. And can we just go back to that PB.CAN00001584. This is the email chain again related to the technical briefing. And sorry to jump around a little. I’m just trying to use my time as effectively as I can. So if we just scroll down a little bit -- keep going. Thank you, right there. So Mr. Rochon, this was again I think you were discussing sort of how to make the best use of everyone’s time. And it’s a very busy time. And you note there was better control in the first meeting because it was one that you were chairing. “Second (2nd) brief was bananas -- Justice is at fault.” Can you tell is a bit about that second briefing and what happened there in terms of the communications?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 186 22-186-27

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Certainly. The way these briefs are typically handled, in my experience having gone through many of these over the course of my career, is that you normally have a moderator. So a moderator from a particular department will invite -- will essentially moderate a call. This typically will happen on a teleconference line. The teleconference line will be open to a series of stakeholders. If it’s a media event, for example, you'll have a number of media spokespeople who will be in a queue and they -- having never been on the other side, I’m not sure what technology they use. But they get into a queue in order to be able to ask questions. Normally, a moderator will open up, will explain who is representing the government, will walk through the time that will be allotted to an opening statement by the government officials, and how much time will be allotted for questions, and whether or not questions -- whether or not stakeholders are afforded a follow-up to that question. Having been a former Assistant Deputy Minister of Communications in a previous department, this is protocol that we normally follow. Unfortunately, in light of the way that these were being set up, this particular brief, from my recollection, Justice was supposed to be lead. So the first meeting was chaired by Public Safety. We would have followed that protocol. And therefore, we only would have gotten to six questions because the six questions were likely rather broad and they were followed by each a follow-up. And we didn’t -- the cut-off time of an hour, if I remember correctly, that first brief, ended up limiting itself to six questions. And there were a number of people in the queue that complained about that which is my first point. The second brief was one that was led by Justice officials. They didn’t have a moderator. And so if I remember correctly, I came on and had to play the role of moderator and try to police how the call was being managed because there was no moderator. Hence, my comment that it was rather bananas.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 187 22-187-14

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. So it’s more -- it’s a question of the procedure. Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 188 22-188-23

Cara Zwibel, Counsel (CCLA)

Okay. Thank you very much. Those are all my questions. Thank you.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 188 22-188-26

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next is the Canadian Constitution Foundation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 188 22-188-28

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JANANI SHANMUGANATHAN

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Yes, good afternoon. Can you hear me okay?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-03

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Okay, great. So my name is Janani Shanmuganathan and I'm here for the Canadian Constitution Foundation. And my questions are for Deputy Minister Stewart. So sir, in your interview summary, you explained that an Ottawa municipal and provincial authorities were not used more extensively because the OPS was overwhelmed by protesters. Do you recall saying that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-06

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

And I take it what you mean by that is that authorities like the Highway Traffic Act, noise bylaws, were not being enforced by the OPS because they were overwhelmed by protesters.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-19

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

So there was this resource issue in Ottawa, you know, not enough police officers on the ground to enforce the law.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-23

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

So I’d like to take you to your interview summary, and Mr. Clerk this is WTS00000066. And it’s page 12, please. So if we look at the third paragraph under the Ottawa Police Service heading, what it says here, it says: “The DM…” That’s you, sir. “…also described how there was some tension between the City of Ottawa and the federal government because Chief Sloly wanted more assistance, and questions were raised about how many RCMP officers and resources had been deployed to assist the OPS rather than to protect federal assets." So what you're describing here is that there's this tension because Chief Sloly wants more help to address the resource issue and is asking, well, how many of these RCMP officers are really just being used to protect federal assets rather than helping us, the OPS, enforce things like the Criminal Code and the Highway Traffic Act to deal with the protest; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 189 22-189-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is fair.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 190 22-190-18

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

And the tension is that OPS wants more help and is questioning, well, how much help are we actually getting right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 190 22-190-19

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

And you go on to say in that paragraph, "The RCMP's position was that the OPS should have asked the OPP for more resources and that it was the OPP's responsibility to come and serve. He [-- that's you, sir --] explained that the RCMP felt pressed by the OPS, but that the OPP was the force that the OPS should look to pursuant to legislation...' And then there's a reference to the Ontario Police Services Act. So there's this tension and the RCMP is feeling pressed and the response you're hearing coming from the RCMP is that the OPS should really go to the OPP; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 190 22-190-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not exclusively.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 191 22-191-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not exclusively though. To be clear, not exclusively. The RCMP had agreed to come with resources that they had to hand to help, and there was some confusion around how they were counting heads, and whether those people were at the disposition of the OPS or whether they were RCMP -- under RCMP control and potentially deployable.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 191 22-191-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

So there's some confusion about that. But at all times, there was an expectation that the OPP would come as well.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 191 22-191-22

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Yes, right, the RCMP position was, well, OPS should go to the OPP first and then come to us; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 191 22-191-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is the RCMP's position, as I understand it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 191 22-191-28

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

And so the position - - you know, the response that you were getting from the RCMP wasn't, well, the OPS is asking us for help. We should do everything we can do to give them whatever they need as soon as possible. That wasn't the position you were hearing?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not to that extent. No, the RCMP's position was that they could provide some help, but to the extent that more help was required, the Ottawa Police should be asking the OPP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-07

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Right. And so, you know, maybe it's just me, but it kind of sounds to me like there's one level of government saying, you know, passing the buck and saying you should look to another level of government. But I take it you don't agree with that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don't agree with that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-16

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Now this idea that the OPP was a force that the OPS should be looking to pursuant to legislation, Commission Counsel asked you about that in her examination, and she suggested that it was the Police Services Act and you said, "I believe so." Right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-17

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

So there's this idea that's going around that there is something in the Police Services Act that means the OPS should be going to the OPP primarily or first before it goes to the RCMP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is my understanding.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-27

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

All right. So I've taken a look at the Police Services Act, and I think we should bring it up. Mr. Clerk, that's CCF00000011. And to page 15, please. And so if we could just pause here for a moment. So Section 9 of the Police Services Act, Section 9(1) talks about, you know, when a police service is absent during adequate OPP assistance may be sought. So what 9(1) says is, "If the Commission finds that a municipality to which 4(1) applies is not providing police services, it may request that the Commissioner have the Ontario Provincial Police give assistance." So what it says is that it may request that the Commissioner have the Ontario Provincial Police give assistance. And now if we scroll down to subsection (6), what it says here is, "A municipal chief of police who is of the opinion that an emergency exists in a municipality may request that the Commissioner have the Ontario Provincial Police give assistance." So what I say is, you know, these sections enable the OPS to go to the OPP, but I don't see anything in the Act that says the OPS cannot go to the RCMP first or that the OPS can only go to the RCMP after they've gone to the OPP. Do you have a different understanding of this legislation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 192 22-192-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

This is the first time I've seen the legislation. So I was operating on the basis of what I understood the case to be. But I think I would not agree with the way you put it. As I understood it, in the circumstances we faced, the RCMP was willing to help and did not stand on principle as to whether they were the first or the second asked. They felt the OPP was what the Ottawa Police Service should be asking. So ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 193 22-193-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- but they were not holding off in responding because the OPS hadn't asked the OPP.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-09

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Fair enough. But you do agree that it was your understanding that it was the RCMP's position that the appropriate force to be seeking assistance from was the OPP; is that fair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Technically, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-15

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Okay. Technically, that was what the RCMP's position was. Well, not technically. That was the RCMP's position.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I understood it to be, and you've just obviously improved my understanding, that that was what the law required. The circumstances drove a different set of considerations.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-19

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Okay. Fair enough. And now you're not aware of any other law or legislation that requires the OPS to go to the OPP for help first before seeking help from the RCMP?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-23

Janani Shanmuganathan, Counsel (CCF)

Okay. Those are all my questions. Thank you very much.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 194 22-194-28

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next the City of Windsor.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-02

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JENNIFER KING

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Good afternoon. Can everyone see me?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-05

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Hi. Good afternoon, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Rochon. My name is Jennifer King. I am Counsel to the City of Windsor. I have some questions for you about emergency management of critical infrastructure in Canada. Will you agree with me that local authorities play a central role in emergency management in Canada?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-15

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

You are familiar with the current emergency framework for Canada third edition?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-16

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

And that can be found at WIN00002230. So, Mr. Stewart, I can't see who's responding, but this is Public Safety's Key Policy Framework for Federal Provincial Territorial Coordination with respect to emergency management in Canada; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-19

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

And you'll agree with me that the framework does not directly engage with municipalities?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The framework tends to operate through the basis of provinces and territories as being the primary authority.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 195 22-195-27

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. And the framework relies on provinces and territories to engage with local authorities?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-05

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

The approach outlined in the framework provides for a scaling up where the provincial and federal governments step in only when local capacity is exceeded; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe so.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-10

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

And you'll agree with me that this approach requires excellent multi-level coordination?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-13

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Would you agree then to ensure effective coordination on the ground, municipalities and other local first responders should be directly engaged in Canada's framework?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I think there is a high degree of virtue in interoperability and interconnectedness across the -- all of the first responders. Insofar as we are talking about -- and ultimately, requests for assistance, I believe there is a chain of authority that has to be worked through and shouldn't be worked around.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-18

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. Well, there are coordination instruments that are referenced in the framework, and, Mr. Rochon, I think you referred to a National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure this morning?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 196 22-196-24

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

And the intention for this is to provide for, intended to kind of create an approach between the federal, provincial and territorial governments to emergency management with respect to critical infrastructure; correct?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-01

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Yes, not just that, but also, better coordination with the private sector and all levels of government.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-05

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. And all levels of government including municipal?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-08

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

You would agree that the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor is critical infrastructure within the meaning of this National Strategy?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would be inclined to agree that it is as critical infrastructure; however, I do want to clarify the point that we weren't operating in large measure in invoking the Emergencies Act under the context that that strategic -- that framework speaks to. That framework speaks to emergencies other than law enforcement emergencies.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-14

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

And it doesn't address the role of the different ministries and levels of government to support a police-led response?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, I'm -- it's obviously been some time since I've looked at it, but I'm conveying to you my understanding here that we did not treat -- in general, we did not treat the protests as an emergency management issue, and that the framework that we have designed and agreed with the provinces and territories to deploy does not typically apply to issues of public security ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 197 22-197-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

--- in defence of law enforcement. It deals with natural disasters and the like.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 198 22-198-03

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

So you're saying that the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure is not intended to address the type of protest that we saw in February?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 198 22-198-05

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

So those are two separate things. Emergency management is one framework. Critical infrastructure is a separate one, and the original Critical Infrastructure Strategy written back in 2010. Unfortunately, there are different strata within the management of emergencies, so cyber -- in a cyber event, cyber security, or a national security event, a terrorist event does not fall under the rubric of emergency management and it would follow a different set of circumstances. As it is written now, the new Critical Infrastructure Strategy that we're pulling together, we're currently consulting and we're leveraging various different tables in order to better understand how we can manage critical infrastructure going forward and that is still a work in progress.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 198 22-198-08

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. Well, I think I'm running up on my time, and if I could just have one or two more minutes, I have a few questions to wrap up. I just wanted to -- and perhaps I won't take you to the document but are you aware - --

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 198 22-198-22

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

You can have one or two minutes. Go ahead.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 198 22-198-27

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Thank you, Commissioner. Are you aware that Mayor Dilkens of Windsor wrote to Minister Mendocino, Minister Blair and the Ontario Solicitor General in March indicating the need for broader collaboration in support from provincial and federal governments to bolster the safety and security of our borders?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, I -- if I was aware, I'd forgotten.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-07

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. Well, I won't -- I don't have the time to show it to you, but I will say that Mayor Dilkens in his testimony did indicate that he went on to request a meeting to debrief emergency regulatory obligations regarding the Ambassador Bridge. Did you discuss this request to meet with Minister Mendocino or Minister Blair?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-09

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. Would you recommend that the Ministers meet with Windsor provincial and federal representatives to discuss long-term needs and planning to protect Windsor's international crossings?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree to the more general statement that it's important that federal and provincial Ministers take lessons learned from -- as it pertains to protecting critical infrastructure.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-20

Jennifer L. King, Counsel (Win)

Okay. I think that's all my time. Thank you very much, Commissioner.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-24

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next call on Province of Saskatchewan, please.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 199 22-199-26

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MITCH McADAM

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Good afternoon, sirs. My name is Mitch McAdam and I'm one of the lawyers for the Government of Saskatchewan. I just have a few questions for you today. First, Mr. Stewart, in your interview summary at page 20, you indicated that you are aware of the Federal Emergencies Act back in 2020 at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and you mentioned that again this morning. So I take it that you were involved in the discussions back in 2020 about potentially invoking the Emergencies Act to deal with the COVID- 19 pandemic. Isn't that true?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is true.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-11

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And, sir, I'm going to ask you a few very general questions about that time. I have some documents that I can pull up if you need to see them, but in the interests of time, I'm not going to pull them up unless it's necessary. But if you do need to refresh your memory, by all means, ask me to pull them up. My questions are going to be quite general.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

All right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-19

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

To begin with, sir, you'd agree with me that in that case, there was a process of engagement with the provinces that spanned at least a couple of weeks?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is my recollection.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-24

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And you'll agree with me that there was a letter that was sent by the Prime Minister to the Premiers formally initiating consultations under the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 200 22-200-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is my recollection.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-01

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And you'll agree with me that that letter was followed up with a meeting between the Prime Minister and the Premiers to discuss the matter?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-02

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don't have any direct knowledge of that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I know there was a call that was organized for Minister Blair, who was Public Safety Minister at the time, with his counterparts to have a discussion about the potential utility of the Emergencies Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-08

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. But you're not aware of any telephone conference call involving the Prime Minister and the Premiers?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not aware.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-15

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And are you aware that the Premiers were given about a week to provide a formal written response to the idea of invoking the Emergencies Act to deal with the pandemic?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not in that specific sense.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

But I was aware that they were given an opportunity to respond.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-22

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And they were given some time to do so?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-24

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That I don't -- that's the specifics of it. I don't know that.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-26

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. So if I say they were given a week, you can't agree or disagree with that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 201 22-201-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-02

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. But will you agree with me, sir, that the process that was used back in 2020, when there was discussion about invoking the Emergencies Act to deal with COVID-19 pandemic was quite different than the process that was followed in February of this year before invoking the Act to deal with the blockades and protests?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-09

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. Thank you, sir. Next, sir, I'd like to ask you a few questions about the FPT meetings that were discussed this morning. And, Mr. Stewart, you talked about a meeting of Deputy Ministers that you attended on February 7th. Do you recall that meeting?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, it was a call.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-15

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And, Mr. Rochon, my understanding is that you attended a meeting of the FPT Crime Prevention and Policing Committee on February the 11th. Do you recall that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-16

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

Yes, I believe that's correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-20

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Yes. And, Mr. Stewart, would you agree with me that at the meeting on February 7th, at no time did you advise the provincial officials that were on that call that the federal government was contemplating invoking the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That is correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-27

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And, Mr. Rochon, would you agree with me at the meeting on February 11th, at no time did you or anyone else from Public Safety Canada advise the provincial and territorial officials on the call that the federal government was considering invoking the Federal Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 202 22-202-28

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

That's my recollection, yes.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-05

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And, Mr. Stewart, would you agree with me that these opportunities, the Deputy Minister's meeting that you had and the meetings of the CPP Committee would have been a good opportunity to discuss the potential invocation of the Emergencies Act with provincial officials?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Had the invocation of the Act been a subject of active discussion, yes, but it wasn't.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-12

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. So at the time of these two meetings, it wasn't under active discussion?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In the time I did the meeting, it was not.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-16

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

So on February 7th it was not?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That's correct.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-19

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And, Mr. Rochon, when you had the meeting on February 11th, was the Emergencies Act under active discussion at that time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-20

Dominic Rochon, ADM (GC-PS)

I'm trying to think. At that time, I believe situation of the national security threat was certainly top of mind, and we were -- my recollection and not having the document in front of me, I -- my recollection is that we were looking at every available tool available to us and to provinces and territories and municipalities in order to be able to deal with the situation, the threat that seemed to be growing.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 203 22-203-23

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Mr. Stewart, you're aware of a meeting that Mr. Dakalbab from your department attended with officials from Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and the RCMP on February 13th? That's a meeting that he reported to you by email on Sunday night; do you recall that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I do.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-10

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And at that time, the invocation of the Emergencies Act was under active consideration by the federal government; wasn't it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, it was.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-14

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

And your information is that Mr. Dakalbab or the other officials, federal officials on that call did not advise their provincial counterparts that the Act was under active consideration; did they?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-15

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can not say for certainty that any of them knew.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-19

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. So you're saying the federal officials that were on the call would not have known that the Federal Emergencies Act was under active consideration at that time?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-21

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I'm not sure that they did.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can’t say for sure.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-27

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

So they couldn’t have advised their provincial officials of that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 204 22-204-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Indeed. Had they not known.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-02

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. And as far as you know, they didn’t advise provincial officials of that, ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-05

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

--- as far as -- thank you.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-06

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

So you’re now out of time.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-07

P. Mitch McAdam, Counsel (SK)

Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Those are all my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-08

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next is the National Police Federation.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-10

Nini Jones, Counsel (National Police Federation)

Yes, Hello. This is Nini Jones for the NPF. We have no further questions. Thank you.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-12

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next is the Democracy Fund.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-14

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ROB KITTREDGE

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Good afternoon, Mr. Stewart, and Mr. Rochon. I’m Rob Kittredge, representing the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. And I only have five minutes today, so just to make efficient use of my time, I’m going to direct my questions to Mr. Stewart. So I apologize for leaving you out. Can we bring up Document SSM.CAN.1096_REL.0001, please? And this is the document that my friend representing the convoy organizers was trying to show you earlier on when he ran out of time. Mr. Stewart, the Liberal Research Bureau, an entity within the Liberal Party that receives government funds, conducts research, and provides briefs to support the liberal party politicians, Ministers, and MPs; right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 205 22-205-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I’ll take your word for it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-03

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I’m not familiar with it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-05

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Okay. You’re not familiar with the Liberal Research Bureau at all?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, I have nothing to do with it.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-08

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And you’ve never heard of it?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Oh, I’ve heard of it, but I didn’t know what it does.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-11

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

You have no idea at all what it does?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-13

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Okay. So this document on the screen, would you agree that it appears to be a brief preparing MPs as to what they should say in response to the motion and in debate in response to the motion to support the invocation of the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-16

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Certainly how it appears.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-21

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

All right. Can we scroll to page 4, please? Towards the bottom of page 4. And you can see here at the bottom of page 4, it outlines the CPC’s position, the BQ’s position, and the NPD’s position, which it indicates that the NDP will support the motion? Would you agree with that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It’s what I observe.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 206 22-206-28

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. And in your dealings with the Ministers and elected executives, they told you that before the Emergencies Act was invoked, they already had the support of the NDP to uphold the invocation; didn’t they?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No, they did not.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-05

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

When did you first learn that the NDP were going to support the invocation of the Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Upon the vote.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-08

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Okay. Are you aware of any polling that was done to assess public support for the invocation of the Emergencies Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-09

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Not aware.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-12

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

All right. And moving on a little bit, numerous witnesses from the OPP and the OPS have testified that the invocation of the Act may have been helpful, but it was not necessary to clear the protests. Would you agree with them on that point?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-13

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I believe that the invocation of the Act provided very useful tools to law enforcement.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-18

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Useful tools, but not necessary tools?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well I’m not in a position to render an opinion on that, I don’t think. I would only observe, as I’ve observed already, that upon the invocation of the Act and the use of those tools, the protests diminished and stopped, and that goes beyond useful.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-22

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

When discussing the invocation of the Act in an email on the night of February 14th, you indicated that the emergency powers didn’t bring a lot of significant benefits; didn’t you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 207 22-207-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I acknowledged that was perhaps an under estimate on my part.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-03

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. But you were -- at that point, you were having trouble even coming up with examples of how the emergency powers might be useful in clearing the protests; weren’t you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-05

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I was encouraging my colleague, for the purposes of doing technical briefings, to try to be more specific and clear.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-09

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. But you were running out of ideas on how it might be useful?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-12

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

The ideas were already on the table, in the sense of the drafting of the various orders and measures. The issue here was how they were explained.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-14

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. Provincial powers at that point hadn’t been exhausted, had they?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-17

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

In Ontario, I would say they had.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-19

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

You would? Your interview summary indicates that you thought that the power to compel tow trucks was important. Do you remember that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-21

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

But really, you have no personal knowledge of whether that power was actually necessary to clear the protests; do you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It has -- it was reported to Ministers, and I was present at this time, that that was an important element and was used.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 208 22-208-28

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

You have no knowledge at all of whether tow trucks had already been retained by the OPP prior to the invocation of the Act; do you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-03

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. And you have no direct knowledge of whether the power to compel tow trucks was useful to police anywhere in Canada; do you, really?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

No first-hand knowledge.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-10

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. Similarly, while you suggest that the Declaration of Emergency, the financial measures, and the other emergency powers may have acted as a deterrent, you don’t actually have any direct knowledge of that; do you?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-11

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well that’s a hypothetical. In light of my observation that the protests were significantly de-escalated and stopped, I think deterrence was a major factor.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-16

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

So you’d speculate that the invocation of the Act had a deterrent effect, but you don’t actually know that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-19

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was its intent.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-22

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Pardon me?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-23

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That was its intent.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-24

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

But you’d speculate that it was effective?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-25

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It’s hard to observe it in the ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 209 22-209-27

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. So you have no real direct knowledge that it did have that effect, you just speculate that it had that effect?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-01

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Okay. You could call it speculation. I would call it conclusion.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-04

Rob Kittredge, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-06

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay. Thank you. Next, the CLA/CCDL, Criminal Lawyers.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-08

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Thank you very much, Commissioner. Can you hear me all right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-10

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. COLLEEN McKEOWN

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Okay. My name is Colleen McKeown and I’m co-counsel for the Criminal Lawyers Association and the Canadian Counsel of Criminal Defence Lawyers, two organizations with joint standing at the Commission. My questions are related to the consultation process, and I’m directing them to Deputy Minister Stewart. If the Clerk could please bring up the witness summary? WTS00000066? And I’m looking specifically at page 21, and a paragraph that you’ve already been brought to. Just scroll down a bit. It’s with respect to the issue of consultation with provinces. Do you see that paragraph?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-14

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

First I have a question of clarification. When you say that it is being -- sorry, it’s that first sentence: “With respect to the issue of consultation with provinces, DM Stewart stated that there was a lot of consultation done with the provinces that was discounted because it was not premised on whether the federal government was going to decide to invoke the Act.” When you say it was discounted, can you just clarify for us who was doing the discounting or what context you’re making that comment in?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 210 22-210-28

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

What I was trying to convey there is that to the point made by one of your colleagues minutes ago, there was -- there were expressions of points of view that there was insufficient consultation on the invocation of the Act.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-13

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Okay. And of course you understand that the Emergencies Act requires consultation in section 25? Is that right?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-18

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

That’s my understanding.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-21

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

And of course, the Federal Government tabled with Parliament it’s explanation of the consultation process it undertook?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

We tabled an extensive report. Right.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-25

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Now, back to this paragraph in the witness statement, Commission Counsel’s already asked you what you meant by the paragraph more broadly. And what I’ve written down in my notes, which I welcome any corrections you have, as I was furiously typing. What I’ve written down is you’ve explained that you deemed these broader discussions to be consultations on the Act because the conversations were really about the substance and what ended up being the substance of the Act, about tools, what was needed. Do you remember saying ---

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 211 22-211-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Yes, I do.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 212 22-212-08

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Okay. And I just want to clarify. To the extent that you’re able to answer this question, is it your view that these broader consultations, discussions, they’re about tools and about substance, but not about the Emergencies Act in particular? Is it your view that those can be considered consultations under section 25 of the Act?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 212 22-212-09

Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 212 22-212-17

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Thank you. Next I’ll call on the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 212 22-212-19

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CHEYENNE ARNOLD-CUNNINGHAM

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Good afternoon. My name is Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham and I’m counsel for the Union of BC Indian Chiefs. I’m going to be directing our questions today to Deputy Stewart. So we’ve heard a lot in this inquiry and even today on the topic of consultation. The Union of BC Indian Chiefs would like to know what First Nations Governments, representatives, members or indigenous groups did you consult with during the Freedom Convoy situation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 212 22-212-22

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I am not aware that we consulted with First Nations on matters associated with law enforcement in urban areas or at border points.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-03

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Are you aware of any efforts on behalf of the Government of Canada or Police Services to consult with First Nations of the territory?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-06

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Of the territory?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-09

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

On which the events took place?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-10

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Oh, sorry, excuse me. I am not aware.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-12

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

From a public safety perspective would you agree that it is important for the Government of Canada and Police Services to consult and cooperate with First Nations of the territory in a situation like this, in a public order emergency event?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I would agree.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-19

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Thank you. Are you familiar with federal legislation which came into force on June 21st, 2021 to affirm and implement the United Nations Declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples also known as “UNDRIP”?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Only superficially familiar.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-25

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

If I could please ask the Clerk to bring up document BCC00000049 and I would like to just quickly go to section 5, which is on page 5 of that legislation. While the Clerk brings that up, Section 5 essentially mandates the Government of Canada to, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, to take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the declaration. Can you explain at all prior to your departure in the role, how laws and policies were being aligned with UNDRIP within Public Safety Canada and how that would specifically relate to a public order emergency event?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 213 22-213-26

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I can. At public safety at the current time there is a very significant engagement process going on with First Nations on the issue of -- on two issues. One on enlarging the support for policing that’s provided through a Grants & Contributions Program called the “First Nations & Inuit Policing Program”. And the other part, more significant I would say, is on making policing -- drafting legislation, co-developing legislation to make policing an essential service. That engagement process has been going on since the spring and has resulted in -- or involved extensive consultation across the country by the Minister and officials and does relate in its ultimate goal in ensuring that First Nations are the beneficiaries of policing services on an equal basis to other areas of the -- or parts of the country. And therefore by extension, would be very much more engaged in the management of public order events.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 214 22-214-11

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Thank you. Did you consider UNDRIP or work to implement it at all in carrying out your role and mandate within Public Safety Canada, and specifically in responding to the Freedom Convoy situation?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 214 22-214-27

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Well, what I just described I think would be consistent with UNDRIP. And in the convoy situation, my consultations were with federal, provincial and territorial officials.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 215 22-215-03

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Okay. And just – oh, thank you. Just one last question. Is public safety or policing response to a public order emergency event, from either a strategic, operational or tactical point of view, is it different depending on who is involved in the assembly or the event?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 215 22-215-07

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

It should not be.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 215 22-215-13

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Just to follow- up on that; if I can keep the same document up, but go down to page 14. Appended to the legislation is a copy of UNDRIP. And I would like to draw your attention just very quickly to Articles 26 and 28. Articles 26 and 28 are, I won’t read through them for timing purposes, but what they essentially say, is that indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they’ve traditionally owned, occupied, or otherwise used and acquired, that states shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources and that indigenous peoples have the right to redress when these lands, resources or territories have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used, or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent. Keeping in mind these articles and UNDRIP as a whole, and the unique, distinct, legal rights that indigenous peoples hold, does the protection and recognition of these rights, should they impact how Government responds to those rights in a public assembly?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 215 22-215-14

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I don’t believe I can answer that question.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-06

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Would you be able to confirm who you think might be able to answer that question?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-08

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

Insofar as it becomes a matter of interpretation of UNDRIP, I believe Justice officials would be the first person -- the first people to ask.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-11

Cheyenne Arnold-Cunningham, Counsel (UBCIC)

Okay. Thank you very much for both of your time, and thank you to the Commission for the opportunity to ask our questions.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-14

Paul Rouleau, Commissioner (POEC)

Okay, thank you. Next, I’ll call on the Government of Canada.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-17

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBERT MacKINNON

Robert MacKinnon, Counsel (GC)

Good afternoon; I’m Robert MacKinnon, counsel for the Government of Canada. I wonder just on that last question you were asked, whether we could go to SSM.CAN00000121 of the Consultation Report; I understand on page 5 is relevant. Around the middle of the page of the consultation; so that’s the bottom; go up a little bit – no, go up a little bit; stop, stop. “The Government of Canada also engaged indigenous leaders regarding the blockades. For example, the Minister of Crown Indigenous Relations spoke with the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, the President of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the President of the Metis National Council, the Grand Chief of Akwesasne and the Grand Chief of the Manitoba Southern Chiefs Organization.” Do you see that?

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 216 22-216-20

Rob Stewart, Deputy Minister (GC-PS)

I do. And for the record, when I answered the question by the person prior, it was on my own involvement.

Volume 22 (November 14, 2022), page 217 22-217-11

Robert MacKinnon, Counsel (GC)

All right. And so do you see that there’s a refe