Anne Tardif
Anne Tardif spoke 743 times across 17 days of testimony.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Bonjour. Merci, Monsieur le commissaire pour cette opportunité de nous présenter. My name is Anne Tardif and I’m here with my colleagues, Alyssa Tomkins and Daniel Chomski. We’re all lawyers with the law firm of Gowling WLG and we represent the City of Ottawa. The City is pleased to participate in this public inquiry. And again, we thank the Commissioner for that opportunity. As you are no doubt all aware, the first convoy participants arrived in Ottawa, not far at all, actually, from where we sit today, on January 28th, and they remained in our city for approximately three weeks. I expect you will hear from witnesses about the significant impacts on the City’s residents and businesses, and you will also hear about the City’s efforts to support the police-led response to the convoy, and to mitigate impacts on city services. We’re pleased to be here and we look forward to continuing to assist the Commission with its mandate. Merci.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, counsel.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I believe this is a draft.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I don’t know if it’s been finalized or not. I just can’t see the top of the document. My apologies. You just said it’s the update. I think it’s the proposed update.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s fine. I just wasn’t sure. Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, Counsel, these are text messages with Mr. Arpin? I thought you said these were text messages with Mr. Kanellakos.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
We're going to object to the document being put to Mr. Kanellakos. The document was listed by counsel for the protestors as a document they may put to Mr. Arpin only. It was never indicated to us that it was going to be put by -- put to Mr. Kanellakos. So in accordance with the rules, I believe my friends would need to seek leave.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Again, though, he wouldn't be aware of the context. If it had have been provided, we certainly would have given it to him, but it hasn't been.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, I think we might have to take this fact by fact. That was a fairly long read to ask whether the witness agrees with whether that entirety of a description is correct.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
In addition to that, Mr. Commissioner, I just point out that Mr. Miller is seeking to ask a question about a statement of a witness who hasn't testified yet and leave needs to be sought to question on that statement.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Hi.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Mr. Kanellakos, we've heard about the City's emergency response structure, the EOCG. We've heard that OPS was the lead agency on the enforcement, and we've heard about another entity, NCRCC National Capital Region Command Centre. Can you explain a little bit what the NCRCC is and what its role was in the response to the Freedom Convoy?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. Now you've mentioned incident command. Who was incident command for the Freedom Convoy, just so we're clear?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you've mentioned the role of the NCRCC. Thank you for that. Who sat -- and I appreciate there may have been quite a few, but can you give us an idea, beyond OPS and the City of Ottawa, who was embedded in or sat on NCRCC during the Freedom Convoy?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
All right. And I think you mentioned earlier, you made reference to Kelly Cochrane, if you'll recall.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And can you just remind us -- I don't think her name's particularly important, but what role -- what her role was in the response?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And now you mentioned earlier the EOCG provides strategic direction and looks ahead with respect to resources and staffing rotation needs and so forth. Who does the EOCG provide strategic direction to?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So we've described the role of the NCRCC, EOCG and I skipped one. Can you describe in your own words the role of the EOC in responding specifically to the Freedom Convoy?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. And I'm just going to take you to two documents and then that'll be it, Mr. Kanellakos. The first is OTT00029985. Could we scroll down to the bottom, please? Thank you. Or well up a little bit. We’ll start there. Perfect. Now, this is in relation to Coventry, Mr. Kanellakos. You were asked a number of questions about the use of Coventry Stadium. And this is an email from Michelle McElligott at the City of Ottawa to other individuals at the City of Ottawa. Do you know what Ms. McElligott does?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And she writes: “Hi Amanda, Thanks for taking my call! As discussed, we are looking to obtain permission to use the RCGT parking lot…” What’s that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
The one you were referring to earlier in your testimony?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“…for the overflow of vehicles that arrive for the trucker convoy (between evening Friday, [the] 28[th] January […] and Sunday, […] January [30th]…” She’s mentioning 2021, I think we can just assume that’s a typo. “This site is ideal as those you won’t fit on Wellington, can take a quick train ride (if they so choose) to demonstrate at Parliament Hill. I’ve spoken to Roads and they will send someone by the lot to see what type of snow clearing is/may be required. Thanks for your help!” Then can we scroll up a little bit, please? Now, there’s a new individual on this chain, Regan Katz. Do you know who he is, Mr. Kanellakos?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And who are the Titans?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you’ve mentioned that this is the parking lot for the baseball stadium. Do the Titans own or use the stadium? What’s the relationship there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So the chain sort of keeps coming up. Can we scroll up again? Right. And there’s a list of questions. And at the top there, just a little bit higher, please, Mr. Katz finally -- or, a little lower. Sorry, it’s harder to do this when you have to direct someone else. Mr. Katz responds: “Amanda, Sounds like this wouldn’t have any negative impact on us. We have no objections to the lot being used.” Now, you mentioned earlier that the Titans did express frustration with the use of the parking lot. When did that objection arise?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. Final document is OTT4 -- and I apologize. I actually realized I have the wrong number. I have our DOC ID. Ms. Tomkins, can you figure out what the control number is DOC ID OTT00001313? I apologize. Our DOC ID is OTT0001313, but I need the control number. Mr. Commissioner, this is my last question, so I think I’ll still be within my time allocation.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Again the DOC ID number is OTT00001313. Perhaps you could just read out the control number directly.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
There we go. Thanks everyone for your patience. Mr. Kanellakos, this is a letter dated April 28th, 2022. And if we can scroll to the bottom, you’ll see it’s signed by Mr. Ayotte. You’ve told us who he is, but that you’re copied on it. Do you see that there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perfect. And if we can go to the top now? It’s a letter addressed to Steve Bell, who at the time was Interim Chief of Police. Now, you discussed earlier the authority that the City uses to close roads. And so I want to draw the second paragraph of this letter to your attention and then ask you to explain the approach that was taken. This letter, of course, is in respect to the Rolling Thunder Convoy, which postdates the Freedom Convoy. And so Mr. Ayotte says to Interim Chief Bell: “In light of the information that the City has been provided with respect to the proposed rally, including the intelligence that OPS has shared with staff, the City remains of the view that the use of vehicles in the Rolling Thunder Ottawa 2022 rally will have [a] significant [impact] on the orderly movement of traffic in the City and could pose a serious potential for injury or damage to persons or property. As a result, in addition to traffic measures along the motorcycle route, the City and OPS have jointly agreed on the necessity of restricting vehicular traffic in the designated downtown core area.” So can you just explain the approach to road closures here?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You said “we” created no-go zones. Who is the “we” in that sentence?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you, Mr. Kanellakos. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It's just above ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- the original.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, I don't believe that -- that's not what my notes of Councillor Fleury's evidence reflect.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
There’s no indication in the City of Ottawa -- or the documents that have been produced to date that -- and counsel may have information but we haven’t seen any indication that Minister Blair was on that call. We don’t object to my friend’s question. He may very well have been, but if the Mayor is looking for it, I -- that’s probably why, counsel.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
This appears to be the inherent risk in going last, but we have no questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good evening, Superintendent. We also have no additional questions to those that have been put to you so far. Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, Commissioner, if I can interject. There's an echo here that's quite distracting. I don't know if there's a difficulty with the sound system.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
My name's Anne Tardif. I'm one of the lawyers for the City of Ottawa. You were asked this morning, Acting Deputy Chief, why the Ottawa Police Service did not proactively lock down Wellington and the downtown core before the first trucks arrived. You recall being asked that question?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
In fact, I think you were asked it several times in fairness to you. Are you familiar with the farmer's protest that I believe occurred in or around 2006?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you're aware that certain large farm vehicles like tractors came up and protested on Wellington in front of Parliament Hill?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And my understanding is they came, and they left without incident; is that in accordance with your understanding as well?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I expect that we will hear evidence that Chief Ramer -- and I -- am I pronouncing that right? I am? Chief Ramer of the Toronto Police Service, that he's indicated that using Ottawa, they locked down the City of Toronto, and that had Ottawa not happened, Toronto Police Service tactics would not have been accepted. And this was in relation to TPS's decision to lock down the area around Queen's Park after the convo had arrived in Ottawa. Are you aware that Chief Ramer has said that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And in fairness to you, since - - fairness to you and the Service I should say, since the events of the Freedom Convoy, my understanding is that the police working collaboratively with the City of Ottawa have, in fact, locked down the area of Wellington, exercise their authorities to close streets to prevent the event from recurring; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I'm thinking, for example, of Rolling Thunder.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I think there was also a veteran's event around Canada Day. You're familiar with those?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. Now I take it you're also aware that during the Freedom Convoy community members in Ottawa were being harassed by protesters in areas such as Kent Street, for example?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And for those who aren't quite familiar with the geography of Ottawa, fair to say that Kent Street is on the periphery of what later became known as the red zone?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I also understand that while the City and OPS were generally successful in maintaining emergency lanes open and clear, there were some issues in that respect; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
My understanding is that Kent Street never had an emergency lane open?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that Wellington Street, the intended emergency lane was in fact lost during that first weekend?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Now obviously, that represents a public safety concern. You'd agree with that, Acting Deputy Chief?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I just want to get the overall timeline. Perhaps you can help me here. I think I've got it now. The -- let's start with the first weekend. So the first truck rolled in on January 28, which was a Friday.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that first weekend, January 28th to Sunday, January 30th, OPS's plan, the Police Service's plan focussed primarily on traffic management; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you've described how on Monday, January 31st, when a number of the trucks did not in fact leave, the Service pivoted and considered it now, the event that is, to be a critical incident?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
An occupation. In other words, not merely a traffic event.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you described this morning how by February 4th, that's the Friday of that first week, OPS still did not have a new or evolved plan; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I think I heard you say this morning that during that first week, there were times, in fact, when the Service was floundering. That's the word you use. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And by February 6th, that's the date that Chief Sloly, former Chief Sloly, pardon me, asked for 1800 additional resources or officers; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Does that sound about right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I think that's the evidence the Commission has heard today.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I think I heard you say earlier that, in fact, you believe more resources than that were effectively needed to end this convoy occupation; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That same day, February 6th, the events that you described at Coventry took place?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
POU, that's the Public Order Unit, they conducted some enforcement there ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- that resulted in arrests?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And they did so without, as I understand it, advising the Police Liaison Team?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Came as a surprise to Police Liaison Team members?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that team I think you said felt betrayed?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the result, of course, was a breakdown in the trust between the Police Liaison Team and the protesters, to a certain extent at least?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You said you do think there was there an impact.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And again, for those of who are still learning about police Operations and don't have the experience you do, as I understand it, the Police Liaison Team is the group that is primarily responsible for communicating and negotiating with protesters.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So the breakdown in trust would be a significant event?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Moving ahead to February 8th, we're now 11 days into the convoy?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
We still don't have the almost 1,800 resources that former Chief Sloly has requested?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that turned out to be necessary; you'll with that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
We still don't have, if I've understood you correctly, a final operational plan?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
At least not one that's been approved?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Or, sorry, or which?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You were working on it. Fair enough. And I think you'd agree with me that by this time the force is probably exhausted.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Mentally and physically.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you'll agree with me that Ottawa residents, particularly those living on the periphery of the red zone, those facing harassment, noise, pollution, so on, so forth, they're also frustrated.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And they're also exhausted.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it's not an understatement in the least to say that things were dire by that point.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You're aware that on February 8th that the Ottawa Police Service reached out to the City Manager, whom everyone in this town calls Steve K?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
To ask him to meet with protesters?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And they felt, your Service felt, it would be a win for PLT to gain trust with the truckers.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh, sorry. I guess what I meant was it's a win in terms of re-establishing trust with the truckers, between authorities and the truckers, so that you can get to a negotiated solution.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. I think you said earlier that, you know, that was the goal. You in fact had wanted to see that in the Mission Statement, that a peaceful negotiation was the best outcome overall.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Steve K agreed to work with police and PLT and to meet with the protest leaders?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then I understood that you were off on February 11th and 12th; did I get that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I won't ask you about the events of those days, and we'll jump ahead to February 13th. I understand that Steve K briefed police about the negotiations on February 13; is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he told you that we needed the police at the table to confirm where the protesters should park, what locations.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, which?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
For logistics, yeah. That's probably a better word. And so he wanted the police because you were -- the police is going to need to execute this on the ground; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he wanted a senior OPS member involved at that stage?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And as I understand it, former Chief Sloly assigned Superintendent Drummond to that task.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that meeting occurred on the evening of February 13th.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
With Superintendent Drummond at the table.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I know we'll be hearing from him next week, so I'll pick it up with him there. Thank you very much, Acting Deputy Chief.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good morning, Superintendent. My name's Anne Tardif. I represent the City of Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I'd like to take you first to your notes. I know you have them in front of you, and I'll give you the date, but I'm going to give the number so that everyone else can follow along.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It's OPP00000774. And I'm going to go to the date at February 3rd, Superintendent.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it's page 19 of that document, Madam Clerk. Do you see the date there at the top of the page?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Correct? And I'd like to the before last entry on that page, Madam Clerk, so just scrolling down a little bit. Perfect. So do you see the entry there, Superintendent? I think it's 1752, it could be 1952, I'm not sure the time matters, but do you see that entry?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And it says, "Supt. Alakas - FSB" in that note, and it's actually the last sentence I suppose of that entry that I want to draw your attention to. It says: "No real plan for them & no meaningful dialogue with truckers occurring." So first, is this something that you're reporting to Superintendent Alakas, or is he reporting it to you?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Forthcoming; okay. It's the second part that I want to talk about, the "no meaningful dialogue with truckers occurring." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And this is with respect to the Ottawa situation?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So by February 3rd, we don't have any meaningful with dialogue with truckers occurring. And you described the events of February 6th yesterday and again this morning; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
PLT went into Coventry to negotiate the removal of gasoline?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And Superintendent Patterson used the opportunity to seize the fuel and charge some of the protesters; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And PLT felt they had lost all the goodwill they were able to reach with some of the convoy organisers.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And were you aware that two days later, on February 8th, Ottawa Police asked the City Manager, City of Ottawa Manager, to meet with protesters?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we've heard that police felt they didn't have anything to lose by facilitating a meeting, and it would be a win to gain trust with truckers, and they could use it as a bargaining chip to move trucks. Were you aware of that at the time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
We've heard as well that the City negotiated an agreement to remove trucks from the residential neighbourhoods in the dates that followed. Were you aware of that at the time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
But -- and I guess that's what I'm getting at, Superintendent, because that's reflected in your witness summary, which has been filed into evidence. And so at the time that you received those concerns from your PLT officers, I take it you were not aware that the City had spoken with protesters at the request of police?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you were not aware that a senior OPS officer had been at the table to negotiate the logistics of how and where the trucks would move?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And just given in your -- referenced it already, but in your witness summary, you indicate that your PLT officers were frustrated because they were hearing from protesters that they had met with the Mayor and that they wanted to continue to meet with the Mayor. That's what you were hearing on the 15th of February.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the evidence this Commission has heard is that the protesters in fact never met with Mayor Watson. I take it you’re aware of that now?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. I want to switch tracks a little bit and talk about Supt. Earley’s notes. Now, she -- it’s -- I’m assuming Dana Earley is a she. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Just want to check. Thank you. And so Supt. Earley was in Windsor during the Ambassador Bridge blockade?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And so I take it that if you did have a conversation with her, it’s going to be about resources? I mean, that’s really the only reason for you to speak to Supt. Earley during the events of February 2022; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, when you were asked yesterday initially, you did not believe that you had spoken to Supt. Earley at that time. Do you recall saying that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And to be fair to you, we see that there’s no mention of it in your notes, except for the words “Dana [Earley] -“ on February 10th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You were then taken to Supt. Earley’s notes of that call. And I will ask that they be put up on the screen. It is OPP00004543. Thank you, Madam Clerk. And can we go to page 15? One five. Okay. This -- just to be fair to the witness -- oh, actually, the date is on it. Perfect. Do you see at the top there, 10th of February 2022? Can you see that, Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So just before we get into this, you described at some length in your testimony a meeting that occurred with the planning team and with the leadership of OPS at OPS headquarters on Elgin Street, and I believe that was on February 9th. Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Pardon me?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. We’ve got the same meeting in mind. So that’s the day before February 10th, obviously. Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So you explained during that meeting -- and I’m not going to take you back through all of it. you’ve explained it in some detail. It’s in your witness summary, which has now been filed, but at some point, as I understand it, Supt. Phil Lou of the RCMP tells then Chief Sloly to “pump the brakes” on the enforcement plan? Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he says that he thinks he can get 400 POU officers to Ottawa in a week’s time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Pardon me.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And is S/Sgt. Tetreault also with the RCMP?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perfect. So we’ve got an RCMP officer advising that they think they can get 400 POU officers in Ottawa in about a week’s time; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So if we’re at February 9th, that means they think they can get their 400 POU officers in Ottawa on or about February 16th; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. But I think we’ve heard at length that a number greater than that was actually needed in order to bring the convoy to an end; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. So the 400 was a start?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, if we can scroll down here to 1021? That’s the first indication of the call. Do you see that call? I can’t tell if that’s to or from. Not much turns on it. Craig Abrams, to confirm resources. And that’s consistent with what you’ve told us. Any call with Supt. Earley really would have been to focus on resources; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then: “Ottawa has been sending resource sheets…” Is that sheets?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“…to EOC.” That’s the Emergency Operations Centre of the OPP?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Based in ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s right. So you’ve gotten exactly where I wanted to get at. This is the same place that you both are writing to to get resources; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And then 1023 -- and then actually, before I get here, I think I heard you say that you believe that Supt. Earley had a scribe? Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And so you believe that these are notes taken by her scribe?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. That’s fine. So at 1023: “Advised Abrams Windsor is priority according to Deputy” Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the next line refers to a gentleman named Hargins. Is that -- Harkins, pardon me. Is that Dept. Comm. Harkins?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he’s in charge of the Field Services Bureau? Do I have that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Field Operations. Okay. And so as I’m reading this, the Deputy Harkins advised that Windsor is priority? Am I -- is that the way to read this?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s what that says. And Harkins, Deputy “Harkins told me” -- being Supt. Earley -- “to go through the EOC”. And you advise that that’s what was happening at that time; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So you’re both going through the same Emergency Operations Centre to request resources for your operations?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“Will have a much better idea of #’s this afternoon after meeting w POU commanders.” And then at 1024 -- sorry, 1026. I’m just jumping over the 1024. You can see it there, Superintendent. “Abrams will call EOC to confirm staffing process You are priority - we will take leftovers” Do you accept that you made that statement, Supt. Abrams? Either that or something to that effect?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You don’t recall?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Do you recall any discussion that Windsor was the priority for resources to be obtained out of the EOC at that time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And at 1026 again, the second 1026: “Abrams advised Windsor will need to tell you what you need” So we’ve got three statements between 1021 and 1026 suggesting that you were made advised here that Windsor was the priority, but you deny that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So we may just be lost in language and semantics. When I said you were never told, I was meaning to say by Supt. Earley. Do you accept that you were told by Supt. Earley that her understanding was that Windsor was the priority? I’m not asking you what you were told by Deputy Harkins.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s fine. But you accept it based on the notes. Thank you. If we could keep scrolling down? Okay. So I’m looking at the second 1028 note. And you were taken to this, in fairness to you, Superintendent, yesterday. Do you see: “Ottawa is just trucks on side streets” Do you see that note there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I think you said yesterday that you also did not have an independent recollection of this call; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
But you explained what you may have meant yesterday. You said that it was easy to drive around if you were south of Wellington, i.e., outside of the red zone.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh, pardon me. Did you say south of the 417? My apologies. No, that’s fine. I had south of -- south of the 417?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So if I understand it correctly, it was that if you were outside of the sort of impacted downtown core, you could drive around the city? You could navigate the city outside of the downtown core that was blocked? Is that fair? That was you ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- would have been ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you were aware, I take it, at the time, that some of the bridges between Quebec -- or between Gatineau and Ottawa were closed or subject to lane reductions?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s right. So we had health professionals having difficulty accessing their place of work; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you recall also, I take it, that we had patients having difficulty accessing their appointments.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Were you aware of that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And those side streets that the trucks were parked on in Ottawa -- because as you say, they weren’t parked on the bridge or on the 417. They were parked on side streets. Those side streets, you knew, weren’t residential neighbourhoods.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah. And so the trucks were parked at the front door of some of these apartment and condo buildings.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
They were idling and honking?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we’ve heard complaints of resident harassment in these neighbourhoods as well. You heard, I take it, Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson saying that they received complaints about that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I appreciate you weren’t in Windsor, but my understanding is that there were roughly about 100 trucks involved in the Windsor blockade. Is that accurate?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fine. Can you just confirm that the -- I mean, I don’t think it’s contentious, but that the blockade in Windsor was significantly smaller than in Ottawa in terms of number of trucks?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I just want to confirm -- last point, Commissioner. Under the not affect livelihoods -- I won’t go into details. You’ve explained yesterday that you were aware that businesses were affected in Ottawa, and I thank you for that. But I think I heard you say in response to my friend’s questions earlier this morning that you and Superintendent Earley may have discussed, in fact, the economic impact of the Windsor blockade, in particular with respect to international trade. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
More significant than in Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah. Thank you very much, Superintendent. Thank you, Commissioner, for your indulgence.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Chief Superintendent. My name is Anne Tardif and I’m one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If I could turn up, or ask to turn up, OPP00001792? And, sir, these are your notes. I don’t know if you have a hard copy there that you’d prefer to refer to, but otherwise, it will go up on the screen.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And could I ask that you turn to page 3, please, of the document? This is just to show you the date at the top, sir.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
The 8th of February 2022. And if we could scroll down to about the middle of page 4? A little bit lower. There we go. Now, do you see there’s an arrow there that has the words “From federal gov’t” at the end of it. And I’m going to ask you if you could help me out with your handwriting for the first part of it?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Do you see it there? There’s an arrow just below the middle line of the page.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
What did you write there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“Daily siege from federal gov’t”?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
What did you mean by that, sir?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Pressure. And was this pressure that was being placed upon the Ottawa Police Service?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
On Ottawa as a whole to get this result, ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- basically? And was this siege being applied just, you know, privately in calls to the Chief or to City officials? Or was this occurring publicly?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And can you just help us out? Who provided this briefing?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. So we can ask them about this. And I take it they were relaying this to you in your briefing, because that meant that the -- or that was impacting the response in Ottawa? Making things more difficult, if I can put it that way?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If we could turn now to page 12 of the document, please? Okay. And if you could scroll to the bottom of the page, Madam Clerk? Now, we can go back if you need me to, sir. We’re on February 9th at this point. If you could stop there, Madam Clerk? Do you want me to go backwards to see the date? Or you’re all right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Let me know if you do want me to. Do you see the entry there, 1034 ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- on February 9th? And it says “T/C”, which I take it is telephone call?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“…from Deputy Harkins…”? Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he’s the Deputy Commissioner for Field Operations ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- at the OPP? It says: “…need to be looking at this more broadly.” And there’s an asterisk: “Ambassador Bridge shut down”
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If we could scroll to the next page, please? Four oh two (402). That’s the highway; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“economic impact = $350 million/day.” Right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then it says, “Big auto” and there’s an arrow: “…24 hrs and they shut down [at] factories” Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
“shut down factories”. Okay. And this is being reported to you by Deputy Commissioner Harkins?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And then the next -- I’ll skip over the next asterisk, only because I think that may relate to Toronto? Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Because of the closure of the 402?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So this is an impact on the Toronto garbage dump arising from the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I see.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Understood.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then it says: “Planning to block access to impact Toronto.” That’s what you’ve just told us.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then the final little note here, it says: “Request to determine what the…” and what’s that next word?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Perfect. And then if turn over the page to page 24? And so now we’re at February 10th. And I’m actually -- if you could just go up to page 23, Madam Clerk? We’ll just see the beginning of this. Do you see -- oh, down a bit. Do you see at 921?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So this is again a telephone call with Deputy Harkins. And it says you were -- I guess you and the deputy were joined later by Commissioner Carrique? Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And this is on February 10th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And before we get into -- because I just want to back up a little bit. So we talked about the call just the day prior on February 9th, where you’re alerted to the situation in Windsor and asked about the current resource deployment to the City of Ottawa. And February 9th is the same day that you had the, I’m going to call it the meeting at Elgin Street Headquarters ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- of the integrated planning group with OPS command? Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And coming out of that, you mentioned earlier in your testimony there was an ask for staffing. And I think you said the number was 516? Five one six?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that was a maintenance ask?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So in other words, that’s the number of officers OPS needed from OPP just to maintain the current posture and traffic points; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So I don’t think we need to get quite to the level of specificity of numbers, but if I understand it, the maintenance ask on three shifts was 516, five one six, that’s correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
On three shifts. And if you drop it to two shifts, which you’ve said you were able to do, then it’s probably closer to 300? Is that about right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Three fifty (350). In other words, it’s about a third less?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Whatever that number amounts to. Fair enough. So that’s the number that comes out for maintenance of the February 9th planning meeting. But of course, the OPS was also looking for additional POU supports for their enforcement action; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the decision of the OPP coming out of that planning meeting was, “We will meet your maintenance ask. We’ll supply what turned out to be approximately 350 officers to maintain the current posture, ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- but at this time, we’re not going to move forward with the POU ask for the reasons you’ve already explained relating to the plan, et cetera.”
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s not accurate?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sure.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Well in fairness to you, let me show you where I thought I saw that information, and you can perhaps correct me if I’m wrong. Can we go to page 19, please, of this document? Okay. And -- actually, just scroll up a little bit, please, Madam Clerk. The following page. So there’s that 516 number; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Three shifts as documented by OPS, 516. That’s the maintenance number. And we’ve explained that they went down to two shifts, so it ends up being more like 350; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And now let’s scroll down, Madam Clerk. Now, I see a number of POU requests here. And if we keep scrolling down? Okay. Stop there. You’ll see the lowest POU you get. POU by this stage, 55 plus 600. So that was their POU ask coming out of the planning meeting on the 9th; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And can we scroll down a little bit more, Madam Clerk, please? And you’ll see where it says 1635. Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It says, “Briefed team”. These are your notes, right, sir?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then it says, “Will staff to the maintenance plan which has roles and responsibilities built in. Continue to build our plan.” Right? So that’s what I was referring to.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that’s what I meant earlier. For the reasons you’ve discussed, the plan’s not there. Right now you’re staffing to the maintenance ask because that’s what you think is needed in Ottawa right then.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I understand that. But at this point, the immediate decision is to staff to the maintenance plan. Can we agree to that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, back to page 24, please, Madam Clerk. We’re going to move ahead to February 10th. And we’ll scroll up to the following page, sorry, 9:21. This is where we were, telephone call with Deputy Harkins. “Joined later by Commissioner Carrique.” We’ll scroll down to page 24. And if I could stop you, Madam Clerk, at the “CC”. Do you see that there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And it says, “Provincial priority has changed due to ongoing” -- now, you’ll have to help me with the next word.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Issue. Thank you. “...due to ongoing issue in Windsor. Both from [I think that’s] intel and impact assessment...”
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. “...it is now our priority [it being Windsor] while continuing to support the RCMP/OPS in Ottawa. We may not be in position to supply Ottawa with all they need at this juncture.”
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And that’s what Commissioner Carrique told you on the morning of February 10th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Just to put us in time, that’s the Thursday, right, before the weekend? Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And it’s my understanding that the maintenance ask, the approximately 350 officers, was actually only fulfilled on the morning of Saturday, February 12th. Is that accurate?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah. And I -- no one’s suggesting otherwise, sir.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I can pull up a document. It’s not a problem.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
A lot of people did? I missed the last part.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
To Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. So there -- and the circumstances you’re describing, Windsor and the reasons you’ve just described, that explains why the ask being made took, you know, from February 9th to February 12th to be fulfilled by the OPP.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Of course.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I understand. To be fair to you, it took three days for ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- OPP together with all of its partner agencies ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- to fulfil the maintenance ask by OPS.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It's the Internet that appears to be down, Commissioner. I don't think it's the party database, we've all lost internet connection. If that helps.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good morning.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
My name’s Anne Tardif; I represent the City of Ottawa. So I’d like to start with pulling up, Mr. Clerk, OPS00002990. And while that’s coming up, Inspector, you were asked a series of questions -- I don’t intend to go back there -- about the intelligence that you had going into the first weekend of the Convoy, so on and so forth. I take it you’re aware that the Mayor and City Officials were briefed by the Service on January 26, before the convoy trucks arrived?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And would you agree with me that the decision was made -- and I don’t mean to suggest this is inappropriate, by any stretch, but would you agree that the decision was made to only provide high-level detail to the City about the upcoming convoy?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So thank you Mr. Clerk, I think we can take that down. And so regardless of the information that the Service had and when it had it, leading into the convoy, the details of that were not shared with the City; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. Can we turn up your witness summary, please, Mr. Clerk? It’s WTS.00000024. I'll ask you to go to the top of page 3, please. Thank you. The last sentence, Inspector, "He", being you: "...stated that if he had known that thousands of vehicles would be arriving in Ottawa he would have requested larger numbers of reinforcements from police services across Canada in advance of the convoy's arrival." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. I thought I heard you say this morning that you did expect thousands. And I just -- I'd appreciate some clarity from you on this.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So you expected hundreds or perhaps a thousand, but not thousands; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And the reason I wanted to put that to you is that Superintendent Abrams of the OPP, I take it you know who he is?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
He testified on Friday that OPS indicated to him on the 27th that they thought they could handle three thousand vehicles.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. I want to switch tracks a bit and talk about the support provided by the City to the OPS response during the convoy. If we could start with OPS00004219, please, Mr. Clerk. Now, I believe there are one set of your scribe notes, Inspector, when they come up, and they should be for January 29th. Perfect. You see that there, Inspector?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I'm going to ask the clerk to turn to page 4, timestamp 9:26. Can we scroll down a little bit, please? Thank you. And you'll see there, it's a communication from Traffic Hull. I take it's Denis Hull ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- at the Service? He's in charge of the traffic planning for the response?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he's communication to the City, and it says: "Requesting Bylaw maintains static positions...[assists with] parking..." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I think there's a dash "City will advise" if I'm reading that correctly.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So that was the direction or the request I guess I would say from the NRCC [sic] to the City on that date; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And if I could now go to page 5, timestamp 9:57. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Again, this is Denis Hull, traffic -- in charge of traffic planning, to IC. That's you, correct, the Incident Commander?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, that's not what I wanted. Just give me one second. My apologies. Oh, just one up, 9:53. I can't read my own writing. My apologies. "City to Op Sup." Who's Op Sup?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So -- but it's police; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay: "Bylaw will tow convoy vehicles without police for safety." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And then it's -- "for safety reasons", pardon me, and then it's, "Op Sup officer will be there." Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And that was the communication at that time. And if we could go to page 10 of this document, please, and we're still on January 29th, and if we could go to 12:05, and just scroll down a little bit. Perfect. In the interest of time, I'll just jump ahead to 12:17. Do you see where it says "City" there at 12:17, Inspector?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So the City reported to NCRCC at 12:17 on January 29th that: "Bylaw officers [were] reporting they are being threatened and feel unsafe." Do you see that? And then it says, "OPS pull them back."
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
12:17.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Do you see it there? City: "Bylaw officers reporting they are being threatened and feel unsafe."
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Or, sorry, "they are being threatened and feel unsafe." And then I think that's OP Sup Police ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- "pull them back." Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So that was the request or the instruction given at that time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. If I could now ask the clerk to pull up OPS00004879. And it may not be necessary to go through this, through the documents, though I appreciate a lot happened during this time period. I want to talk about burn barrels. Do you recall the issue with burn barrels in the downtown core, Inspector?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And my understanding is that Ottawa Fire was available to assist, but needed approval from the lead agency police in order to actually go and put out burn barrels. Is that accurate?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you for that, Inspector. I don't think we need to turn up the documents. I appreciate your assistance with that. I'm going to ask you to pull up OPS00008424, please, Mr. Clerk. Now, you said in your witness statement, just while that's coming up, that you spoke with, I think it's Superintendent Brookson, the Acting Director of Parliamentary Protective Service ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- before the convoy, and it was their preference that no trucks or vehicles be on Wellington at all. That was your understanding of their preference.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And that's obviously not what the Service did.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you got exactly where I wanted to. You're worried about the residents of the city, your concerns are not limited to the security of Parliament Hill; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay, thank you. If this is 8424, and we've got this up now, could we please go to, I think it's page 7, page 6, pardon me, bottom of page 6. Right at the bottom there. If we could just pause there, Mr. Clerk. Do you see the timestamp 11:57?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And these are your scribe notes for February 8th, just so you're aware, Inspector.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you see, it says: "[D]iscussion [with] PPS in regards to the risk factor of moving Rideau/Sussex." And I want to pause there. My understanding is that PLT was negotiating with the truckers at that intersection to get them to move westward onto Wellington and closer to the Hill.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, yes, but that was what they were trying to achieve?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Keep going. "They are" -- I'm getting the look. I'm almost done I promise, Commissioner. If I could just have a moment's indulgence: "[T]they are in agreement [with] plan as long as they do not pass 'load safe'..." A few other specificities around tractor trailers staying on the northbound side of the road and westbound lanes lonely -- lanes only, pardon me. So that's correct, the PPS were in agreement with that plan provided those conditions could be met?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And the only point I want to make is they were agreeable to an increased number of trucks on Wellington West at this time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Begrudgingly, fair enough. Do I have time for one more question, Commissioner, or have I exceeded my indulgence? If I have I'll sit down.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I can -- I appreciate it. I can put it to Superintendent Drummond tomorrow. Thank you very much, Commissioner. Thank you, Inspector Lucas.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Commissioner, we have -- I have 20 minutes I believe. I'm wondering if... Anne Tardif, pardon me, for the record, for the City of Ottawa. You're looking at me because I think I'm next. I'm not sure it'll make much sense to do two minutes and then eighteen.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
But I'm in your hand as to whether you want me to start now or wait afterward.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Superintendent. My name’s Anne Tardif, and I represent the City of Ottawa. So I’d like to ask the clerk to pull up OPS00014932. And these, Superintendent, I understand are your handwritten notes. Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the date there, February 3rd?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I’m going to ask the clerk to please turn to the bottom of page 5 of this document. Right there. Now, Superintendent, you’ll have to help us if you need us to scroll up for context here, but the words or the passage I want to draw your attention to is, “Lost confidence of the community. Have to take it back.” Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And is that an accurate assessment of the situation at that point in time, February 3rd?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Now, you told us that there was no operational plan with complete supporting plans in place between February 3rd and February 10th. Is that correct? During that time period, the Service did not have a complete operational plan with supporting plans. Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And up until February 10th, the date you took over -- I think you took over in the evening, to be fair -- as Event Commander, the Service lacked an overall plan to restore normalcy to Ottawa; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Up until that point; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it you’re aware of the miscommunication concerning the arrests that were made after certain protestors removed fuel from the stadium at Coventry on February 6th. You’re aware of that; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you’re aware that there was a miscommunication insofar as PLT was not advised of those arrests prior to them being made.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So you’re aware of that now. Fair enough. And you knew, obviously, by the time you took over as Event Commander that PLT was demoralized and, to a certain extent, ready to leave. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, can I ask -- actually, sorry, not yet. We can take that down, Mr. Clerk. By February 7th -- and to help you out, that’s a Monday, if that helps. I think of it in terms of weekdays. You knew that PLT was attempting to work with leaders of the Rideau-Sussex group -- protest leaders at the Rideau-Sussex interaction. You know what I mean by that; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
To convince them to move to Wellington Street. Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And I actually that -- I’m looking at my notes -- from your witness summary. So you knew whatever capacity you were in.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I know you weren’t Event Commander, but you knew that PLT was attempting to work with the group at Rideau-Sussex to remove vehicles from that intersection, right, up onto Wellington Street? You knew that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And I take it the benefit of that would be twofold. One, that it would allow the Service and the city to open up that intersection again; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So two benefits there. One, shrinking the footprint, and two, the benefits that you’ve described to the community. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, I’d like to ask the clerk to pull up, please, OPS00010549. And as it’s coming up -- there we go. This is an email that was sent February 12th to you, correct, as Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it was sent by Sergeant Ferguson, who I understand is a crisis negotiator, but who was leading the OPS PLT at this point in time. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we could scroll down so we can see the body. Yeah, that’s perfect. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. You’ll see that Sergeant Ferguson is notifying you because by now, February 12th, you’re Event Commander, of a possible future decision point. Now, he says counsel -- and do you see how it’s redacted there? The name’s actually in the sentence, Wilson. And the meta data associated with this document indicates that it was, in fact, Keith Wilson that he was referring to. So it’s counsel Keith Wilson, who is one of the lawyers representing one of the convoy groups, reached out to PLT members. “Wilson indicated that he was working with the convoy leadership in an effort to get buy-in from the truckers for a proposal to relocate the trucks from all residential streets in the downtown core and to consolidate them on Wellington Street and Elgin starting Monday.” And Monday, of course, was February 14th; right? Sorry. It’s a verbal transcript. We actually need a “yes” even though it’s ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
He indicated that the balance of the trucks would potentially camp out of town and the drivers could be shuttle bused down to Wellington Street. Wilson said he would update PLT on progress later today and a potential meeting is scheduled to be determined.” And then it goes on from there. Now, the Commission has heard evidence that Keith Wilson was actually involved on behalf of protestors in the negotiation with the Mayor’s office. I don’t know if you were aware of that at the time, but that’s the evidence that’s been heard by the Commission to date. Are you aware of that now?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s fair enough. And I’m just asking that. But this would appear to be -- and you can just correct me if I’m wrong, but the description of the potential deal is what you actually found out the city had negotiated on February 13th at some point in the day; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the substance of that deal was communicated to you as event commander on Saturday, February 12th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Through this email.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you won't get -- a number of the lawyers in this room will feel your pain about the number of emails that we've been receiving, so you've got lots of sympathy on that. But the only point I wanted to draw to your attention was that, at the very least, PLT was aware on February 12th that the substance of the negotiation was ongoing; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. If we could turn up now, please, OPS00011039? Now according to the title of this document, Superintendent, these are the scribe notes for Chief Sloly. And if you scroll down to the bottom, very bottom, Mr. Clerk, just out of fairness to the witness -- it actually might be on the bottom of every page, do you see they're prepared by Vicki Nelson? And I think you told us earlier she's in the Legal Services Group at the service?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So if I could ask you to go back up to the top, Mr. Clerk, I apologize for the gymnastics. These are Ms. Nelson's notes of February 13th, 2022; you see that, Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I'm going to turn it to -- ask you to turn to page 6, Mr. Clerk, if you will. Okay. Right there. So this is the meeting that occurred shortly after 1 p.m. on Sunday, February 13th. And you'll see there it says "negotiating update meeting"; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And now notwithstanding the February 12th email that I just took you to, you told us that the first time you were advised by the executive command that these negotiations were taking place with the mayor's office was on February 13th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I believe it was during this meeting; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh, of course.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, there you are ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- where it says Bernier.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Perfect. If we could just come back up a little bit? That's perfect. Now I take it you weren't aware at the time that the Chief and at the time Deputy Chief Bell had information about ongoing negotiations the day before, on Saturday the 12th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now you'll see here there's a comment attributed to you, and can we scroll down just a little bit, Mr. Clerk? Thank you. And I think to put it in context, I would start with Trish, and that refers to Acting Deputy Chief Trish Ferguson; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And she says in relation to the negotiations, "...this does not change the operations. We can make this work to our advantage." There's a next bullet, "Those remaining behind will be there of their own choice." And then jumping down to you, "BERNIER - the plan aligns with what we planned and accelerates it. No concerns."
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the Chief continues and says, "...there was an expression that there were no trust/confidence in PLT, they want a [senior] member to be involved in the next movement." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that turned out to be Superintendent Drummond; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then you say, and I think in fairness to you, Superintendent, you explained, "...victim of circumstance over the last 2 weeks. Meeting this am gave them a clear focus of where we are going." And do I understand your statement there to basically be saying, look, to the extent there's a lack of trust or confidence in PLT, it's unfair to put that on PLT. They're a victim of the circumstances over the last two weeks. Is that a fair interpretation of that remark?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. Now could we turn, Mr. Clerk, to OPS00010635? Okay. Now these are your scribe notes; is that right, Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
For February 13th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And can we just go to the bottom on the first page, Mr. Clerk? Okay. And stop right there. Now I just want to make sure I understand this. You explained earlier the process for scribing and that it's intended that the scribe notes are the Commander's notes; is that correct? Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You explained yesterday that, you know, the intent in having a scribe is to take -- you maintain an accurate record of all decisions and communications while you're in command; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yes.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. You got there much more quickly than I could. I appreciate that. Now at the end of every page, there's a sort of initials on the left-hand side, and a signature on the right- hand side; do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And is the signature on the right-hand side yours?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it it's the scribe's initials on the left-hand side of the page?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And am I correct that this is on every page basically?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And when do those signatures -- when do you sign it?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sure. And if you need to make an entry after the signature's been made, do you identify it as such, as a late entry, for example?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you for that. If I could turn to page 12, Mr. Clerk? And I think we were here earlier. Now do you see -- we're still no February 13th. The time there 1328, Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So this is during that, just to situate you, that same meeting that we were looking at, except previously we were looking at the Chief's scribe's notes and now we're looking at your scribe's notes; right? Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So if we could scroll down a little bit, please? Still going. A little further down, please. Sorry. And you can scroll -- there is -- thank you. At 1331 is Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson's comment, "this is a good move in right direction. PLTs..." Sorry, can you turn to page 13? Let me just make sure I'm in the right spot. Yes, okay, perfect. That was Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson's comments. And then your comment, EC at 1334; do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you say, "I support what DC Ferguson..." There's a word missing. I assume it should be said. "...going through plan now to approve this actually accelerates what we wanted to do in the next couple days - no concerns from my end..." And that's the comment that my friend Mr. Au took you to earlier today, and that's what reflects what you said in that meeting; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Now if we go to the bottom of this page -- stop right there, Mr. Clerk. Thank you. You'll see there's an addition here at the bottom of the page. And it's jammed in right at the bottom, seems to be a different pen. Handwriting looks slightly different. And you have to write around your signature. Or I shouldn't say you, I don't know who wrote it, but do you see what I'm saying?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It goes all the way around. Whose handwriting is that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And can you explain why it appears to be a different pen and appears to be writing around the signature and it's crammed right at the bottom of this page?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So you'll agree with me that it appears this comment was made after this page was signed; right? The way that it's kind of coming around your signature on the right-hand side; do you accept that, sir?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, after that signature. Oh, thank you, Mr. Clerk. He's got his cursor right there. See how you're writing around the signature?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, that's your signature there.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right? So this is what I have -- the question I'm asking you is, looking at this, the impression I'm left with is that the signature was placed, and then afterwards this comment was added.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And this would happen you've said at the time -- if I accept your evidence or if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying this would happen whenever it is that you're reviewing this note?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So it's not at the time the comment is made, but at some point later.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And there is no timestamp next to when this comment would have been made. Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
At which time, sir?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you believe you would've done that at the end of that day or possibly the following, given how ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- busy you were at the time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And this comment here does not appear in the Chief's scribe's notes. So will you accept that this was not a comment made in the meeting with the Chief and the deputy chiefs?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So you wrote: "Concerned that this is a ruse to get more trucks onto Wellington and no one leaves - Police can't have a..."
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"...role in movement of trucks..." Can you read that last bit there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
This is the 13th. And Mr. Clerk, can you just scroll down a bit, and go to the left, like go that way, and scroll back up? Sometimes there is page numbers, but there aren't on this one. So it's the 13th, and it's the time... And page 13 of 38. I'm looking at the bottom there.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So obviously here, you're identifying a concern that you had articulated to yourself that this might be a ruse and that police should not be involved?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, sorry, Inspector Springer, okay, is not being called to testify, and we don't have his evidence in this proceeding. So unfortunately, I'm not able to do that. But what I meant -- okay. So you said that this is not something that happened in the meeting with the Chief. That's what I was getting at.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So this happened at a separate meeting; is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I see, okay. So at the same time that the comment is only shared to Dave Springer, who is an OPP POU Commander; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay, perfect. I just wanted to make sure I had the right person in mind. So you did not, and this is really the point I was trying to get at, I apologise if we got a bit offside, you did not share this concern with the Chief or the deputy chiefs at the time.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Just help me understand, though, because in the meeting you said "I support this", and then within a half hour, in a sidebar with Commander Springer, you say you're concerned that it's a ruse.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You support it, notwithstanding this comment?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And in fact, I think, and I'm coming to this, that the PLT's negotiations with Rideau and Sussex to move the trucks ended up, for example, not yielding any movement of trucks out of that intersection; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It did not happen. Okay. Could we go to page 21 of this document, please? Timestamp 1556. Perfect. This is a conversation between you and Chief Superintendent Pardy. I know -- if I could just have a few minutes indulgence, Commissioner, my apologies. I just want to take you -- you're explaining to Chief Superintendent Pardy that you want increased PLT and negotiation on this date, correct, on February 13th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Just in the interest of time, just give me one second so I can figure out where -- all right, what I can reasonably take you to. Let me put it this way, is it fair to say that your primary concern about the Mayor's negotiation was that the plan, the negotiation and the Operational Plan required to support it, were developed outside of your purview as Event Commander?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And -- so that there were issues internally with communications to the Service; is that fair? At this point in time, respecting this?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Superintendent. My name is -- I’m a little taller than Ms. Rodriguez. My name’s Anne Tardif and I represent the City of Ottawa. So you were tasked on February 7th with overseeing PLT and POU; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And at the time, event commander was Supt. Patterson, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And February 7th, that’s the date after the events that this Commission has heard a fair bit about at Coventry involving PLT; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And just to close the loop on that, I’m going to ask Mr. Clerk to bring up OPS00008055. I think we might need that a bit bigger. And then can we scroll down, please, Mr. Clerk, all the way to the bottom? Perfect, right there. This is an email from Peter McKenna. I apologize, I don’t know his rank.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
S/Sgt. McKenna to Insp. Lucas dated February 6th, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And here, S/Sgt. McKenna is explaining what occurred at Coventry, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And in the second paragraph from the bottom, he says -- oh, not second. It was the second - - third paragraph from the bottom, he says: "PLT have made incredible headway but they now feel absolutely betrayed. Work needs to be done to reassure them and explain what happened. These members are chosen as they have a high level of emotional intelligence that goes along with a very determined work ethic." It goes on to say what pride they take in their work. S/Sgt. McKenna continues: "What has happened is an incredible blow to them and then program’s future." And provides more detail; it even refers to an individual explaining that they’re “ashamed to wear this uniform right now”. Now, this was the day before you took over responsibility but I take it you were aware of this?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And so it’s fair to say that by February 8th, while PLT may have been communicating with the protesters, certainly there had been a breakdown in trust?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we’ve heard some evidence that it may have affected other locations; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. Now, you’ve explained that PLT was working with the group or discussing with the group at the Rideau-Sussex intersection to move from that intersection onto Wellington; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we can take this down, Mr. Clerk. Thank you. And it’s my understanding that the goal was to move 38 trucks from the Rideau-Sussex intersection to Wellington; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Let me put it differently. We’re dealing with 38 trucks at that intersection; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Now, I just want to get the sequence here with the request for approval and the involvement of PPS, so I’m going to turn up your notes, and that’s OPS00014455. And I’m going to go to page 11 of the document. And I know you have a hardcopy with you, Superintendent. Okay, there we go. If can just scroll to the top so the superintendent can see the page in his notebook, page 50. Do you see that, Superintendent? Okay. So if we scroll down about halfway through the page -- right there. So this is February 7th; can you just confirm that for us, Superintendent?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And it says: "Spoke with John Ferguson…" That’s S/Sgt. John Ferguson who leads the PLT unit, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay: "…negotiations with trucks by PLT; working arrangement to get the trucks to move out of Rideau/Sussex, move vehicles west on Wellington to be…" You’re going to have to help me with that one: "…to be closer to groups on Wellington." Is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And: "Some may leave."
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And then: "Need discuss option of PLT option versus POU plan to clear intersection." Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we’ve discussed already that that POU operation was delayed to allow negotiations to proceed; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So that’s the first note that I can find in your notes of this request by S/Sgt. Ferguson to get approval to move trucks from Rideau/Sussex to Wellington West, and that’s on February 7th; does that accord with your recollection?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Let’s just jump ahead to page 11 of this -- or sorry, page 12 of this document, the next page, right at the top. Sorry, scroll down a bit. Keep going, right there, same day. So it says: "Call from John Ferguson - PLT." Now, we’re still on February 7th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"Looking for a decision on allowing the trucks at Rideau and Sussex to move up on Wellington. Advised I would discuss with Mark Patterson." who’s the event commander: "Discussed with Mark and want more info on truck numbers." Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it keeps going: "Following up with John Ferguson, 38 trucks involved, no…" What’s the next word?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"…no number…"
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Would leave?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"…on how many may leave the demonstration. Think they can all fit on Wellington and may be able to open access to Elgin. Will discuss with Mark Patterson." Right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So this all occurring on the 7th. Let’s scroll to the next page, page 13, still on the 7th: "Call from John Ferguson, PLT asking to get a meeting City Manager or elected official." We talked about this and that was the meeting that occurred involving Steve Kanellakos on the 8th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if you scroll down -- thank you, Mr. Clerk. Keep going. Thank you. It says: "On the PLT request…" Are you with me, Superintendent? Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"On the PLT request to move trucks from Rideau/Sussex to Wellington, need to notify and discuss with PPS for impacts on senate." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So that’s all occurring on February 7th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Now, I can’t put the document to you now because I did not seek leave, but I can tell you that on Tuesday, which was yesterday, Insp. Lucas testified that PPS agreed, albeit begrudgingly, he said, to the additional trucks moving onto Wellington provided certain conditions were met. So that approval was obtained, according to Insp. Lucas, from PPS on February 8th, okay?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Does that -- were you aware of that at the time?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. I couldn’t find that in your notes, just so you’re aware. And the reason that’s relevant is I’m going to jump ahead to page 31 of your notes. And if you see, it’s page 70 of your notebook. And I’m just going to ask to confirm that that’s February 10th. I believe it’s five pages earlier for you to confirm the date, Superintendent.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay, so we’re not at February 10th. Can we scroll down a little bit. And there it is right there, “Request” -- I don’t know the next word -- “continued”?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"Request continued PLT negotiations to go ahead with letting the Rideau/Sussex group move west on Wellington. Mark…" And that’s Supt. Patterson, right, who was Event Commander at the time? Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Agreed to suspend the POU action for tomorrow and let PLT move the Rideau-Sussex group west on Wellington to shrink the red zone footprint. If you could just scroll down a little bit, Mr. Clerk. “Spoken with John Ferguson, head of OPS PLT, authorized PLT to move the Rideau- Sussex protestor west on Wellington to shrink footprint to get the intersection open up. Approved.” So on February 10th, then, you got the approval from Event Commander Superintendent Patterson to allow the trucks at Rideau-Sussex, up to 38 of them, to move on Wellington West; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it’s reasonable to assume and, indeed, we heard from Inspector Lucas, that PPS agreed to that beforehand; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And last question. I don’t want to get back into the reasons. You’ve given evidence about that reasons why the movement of trucks stops. The only question I have for you in that respect is this one. When you finally told the city -- and I believe it was Mr. Ayotte, who’s the General Manager of Emergency and Protective Services. When you finally told him that the movement of trucks was stopping and you explained why, he understood.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah. And there was no pushback from him at that point.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you very much. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Chief Sloly.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Or Mr. Sloly. My apologies. My name’s Anne Tardif. I represent the City of Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I want to start by confirming what I think -- what I hope is an obvious point, and that is that the Ottawa Police Service was the lead agency with respect to the events that bring us here today.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. And the only reason I raise that is in your witness summary you indicated that the City saw OPS as the lead agency, and that’s, of course, because it was the lead agency.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Great. Thank you for that. Okay. Now, we’ve heard evidence already that, obviously, OPS would provide some briefings and messagings to the City in advance and during the demonstrations; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And my understanding, for reasons you’ve already gone into, is that in general, those briefings were at a fairly high level. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you. And I realize I was unclear, Mr. Sloly. I meant that the information provided would be a fairly high level.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you. Now, we’ve talked a bit about how, by January 31st, which is the Monday, in your view this had turned into not only in your view, but since I’m the one questioning you, into an occupation; right? There was a pivot required, to use the language employed by some witnesses. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And from that point forward until your last day in office, my understanding is that the number one thing you needed was resources. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And we talked a bit about how, from January 30th, forward, because this is now an occupation, the OPS is working on -- perhaps on a new plan, but on evolving the plan to meet the changed circumstances; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. I want to talk a little bit about the injunction. I appreciate we spent some time on it already. I can take up documents and I will if we need to, Mr. Sloly, but I think we might be able to get by without it. My understanding is that as early as January 31st, both Commissioner Lucki of the RCMP and Commissioner Carrique of the OPP expressed some concerns around an objection -- an injunction, pardon me, being obtained at least at that time. Is that accurate?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And at least part of that concern had to do with an issue you’ve already raised, which is if you get an injunction, you have to be able to implement or enforce it. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you did not, I take it, until the day you left office, have the resources to do that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. All right. So if we could then bring up OPS00014454. And these are Ms. Huneault’s notes, the notes of your general counsel, just while they’re loading. And if we could start at page 6, please, Mr. Clerk. And I'll take this opportunity, Mr. Commissioner, I did not bring up my watch. I don't expect to go over time, but please don't hesitate to let me know if you want me to stop my questioning for the lunch break because I did come up at quarter to one o'clock, Mr. Commissioner. So I'll accept the -- briefly the interruption.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I did. I wasn't expecting one after my previous refusal so. Okay. So this is the Chief's meetings with City Councillors; you see that there on January 31st?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And if we could just scroll down. My understanding, Mr. Sloly, and you'll have to correct me if I'm wrong, is that this is you briefing these bullets. And perhaps we can go back up to the top, Mr. Clerk, just to give Mr. Sloly a moment. My understanding is this is you providing information to the Councillors. Does that accord with your understanding?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, okay. That's my understanding as well. That's helpful. Thank you. And you'll see there so we're January 31st. The fourth bullet down, "increasingly volatile and aggressive." Do you wee that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I should have started a point above. We've already talked about this, turning from demonstration to occupation; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we scroll down then to page 7, right here, a little bit -- well, before we -- just stop there. And you'll see there it says, "The crowd is turning and officers getting swarmed." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Now I couldn't tell, to be fair to you, Mr. Sloly, who made that comment, but does that accord with your recollection of events? Is that some of the volatility you were speaking to?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Perfect. And so let's scroll down a little bit, please. A little bit further, Mr. Clerk, sorry. Perfect right there. Now do you see where it says "Matthieu" at the top?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And so my understanding is that's a reference to Mathieu Fleury, who was at the time a City Counsellor; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And he has some questions. He's very shaken. He has some questions about OPS focusing on the Hill but need to look at other communities and some of the concerns that he in fact raised is in this proceeding; do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we scroll down a little bit, there's a response attributed to you, and it says, "Chief Agree many minor incidents that would usually get a police response but this is not normal times. - we'll look [at] new areas but call[...] for more resources [and] complexity" So does that sort of accord with what Service was able to do? You know, there were some minor issues, minor incidents that would usually get a response, but you simply couldn't up until that point because, again, you lacked resources.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh, that's fine.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I understood it in the way you've just explained it, but I appreciate that, Mr. Sloly. So with that explanation, those, you call them here minor, you've elaborated now on what you meant, but those are the kind of incidents that you say would normally get a police response but didn't over the weekend into that first Monday because the service simply lacked the resources; fair? And if we keep scrolling down to page 9, yeah, a little further down. And stop there. And scroll up a little bit. Sorry, Mr. Clerk. Just up to where we see Minard. Okay. S. Minard is Councillor Minard; do you see that, Mr. Sloly?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I'll let you just read what he says. The point I'm going to draw your attention to is at the bottom. He says, "2 messages: it's peaceful but violence if we proceed". Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, then we'll scroll down to your response, or the response attributed to you in the notes. You say, "- better language re "peaceful" [because] Chief feels this..." This is what's attributed to you. "...this is peaceful [pardon me] - can't build a mott [sic] [I think that word is mote] around the city re people/cars - Charter violation." Do you see that, Chief?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thank you for that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I wonder, Mr. Sloly, if I could put this to you. We can bring it back up if we need to, but you've been taken twice now to David White, the City solicitor, Mr. White's email, his summary or his notes of the call he had with you. And is it possible that this focus on, you know, public safety, maybe he's reflecting a change in your language over time, that perhaps you use words like minor and this is peaceful with him, intending what you've explained here today, so possibly his notes of that call reflect wordings or language that you were using at the time but now you've since explained, well, I wouldn't use that wording, and as it went on, I don't use that wording.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Fair enough. Now if we could go to page 10? And there should be -- if we could keep scrolling down, keep scrolling down, there we go. We have a note from Steve K., who is Steve Kanellakos, the City Manager; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we're still in the same meeting, just so you're aware, Mr. Sloly.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he's explaining in response to various queries, "- no, [they] haven't opened the lines [with the] province [and] fed[eral] [government] - not a fan of bringing military in to deal with civil issue[s]" And then he says, "- our lead will come from Chief on whether he needs more supports." Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
All right. And in fact, when you did need more support from the City, fair to say that they offered that support including with the letter of February 7th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If we could turn, please, to OPP00001521? And you've already seen this, Mr. Sloly, but these are notes. They've been produced by the OPP, and I believe also the provincial government, of a call on February 6th involving you and various federal and one provincial representative. You're familiar with this document?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
The meeting? Fair enough. So if we could scroll to page 2, please? Further down. Go further down. Perfect. Stop there. And you'll see here you explain to provincial and federal representatives -- and I should mention there's also a City representative on the call, that the OPS was successful in negotiating the resolution of the encampment at Confederation Park; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that had been, in fact, just that day or the day prior; right? Confederation Park was resolved February 5th into February 6th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we turn to page 3, in big bolded words, so, Mr. Clerk, you can just scroll down. Perfect. Thank you. And that's where you advise that the, "...Service is compiling a list of resources that [the Service will] require for the next 72 hours to 2 weeks to assist in managing the situation. [And it] will be exhaustive, and [...] provided to the Mayor of Ottawa." Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sort of 72 hours until the end, if I can put it that way?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And this is the list of resources you were preparing further to the direction provided you by the OPSB or Board on February 5th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you’re giving them a heads- up that this is coming, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And if we can go to page 4, please, of the document? Further down, there we go. Deputy Chief Bell, he’s explaining on the 6th that the service has about, as of that date, 120 to 130 officers of the ground -- on the ground, pardon me, and that’s a combination of OPP, RCMP, and Ottawa Police Service; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
February 6.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You believe the numbers were higher?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And do you ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
No, that’s no problem. The 100 and to 130 officers, would that have been per shift or both shifts combined?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And then at the top of page 5, the second bullet, second clear bullet, you’ll see there: “The additional support from OPP and RCMP...” Which was expected as of this date: “...will help provide relief to Ottawa Police Service Officers who have been 12...” I think there’s a word missing: “...working 12 to 14 days straight.” Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the influx that was expected as of that time was really to help the service maintain its current posture. It was not to shift; it was not enough, basically, in the coming days to shift towards an enforced solution to the demonstration.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. If I could take you to the bottom of this page, please. And you’ll see in the second, “Response from Chief Peter Sloly”; you see that Mr. Sloly?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you’ll see that first bullet underneath: “He is concerned about the risk and efficacy of enforcement actions now.” You say: “The powers of existing legislation are sufficient but whether to enforce given the dynamic risk situation is the issue and the number of vulnerable individuals such as children and families embedded in the encampment elevates the calculation for Ottawa Police Service.” Right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that’s the same issue we’ve been discussing; that is, that you can’t enforce powers unless you have the resources necessary to do so safely?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If we could go to the bottom of page 8, please, and actually into the top of page 9. Keep going. There we go. And you’ll see here their discussion again of the possibility of involving an interlocutor, and there’s a couple of names mentioned there. You see that, Mr. Sloly?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And so this was still in the mix, if I can put it that way, as of February 6th, as a possible way to manage the demonstrations?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So is it fair to say that by February 6, we’ve still got the notion of a negotiation strategy, perhaps involving an interlocutor, on the table, but we’re also looking at what a POU enforcement plan would look like. Because you’ve testified at some length that you were looking for a POU briefing up into this weekend; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we need to go the enforcement route then we’re going to need resources; no questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. But if you’re going to end up, however long you get there, at the enforcement end, you’re going to need those massive numbers of resources we’ve discussed, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And when we’re talking about the involvement, or potential involvement of a negotiator and interlock -- my goodness, interlocutor, fair to say that the person or the entity that the protestors really wanted to exchange with was the federal government; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
No?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That was not your understanding?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, and I -- sorry; and I think I misspoke. What I was trying to say was you said earlier these were the interlocutors, but you couldn’t say if the government would agree to that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That was my question is; who is the government when you said that? Who were you referring to?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. That’s all I wanted to clarify. I can keep going, Mr. Commissioner, but my sense is that we’re right around 1 o’clock?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yes.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Afternoon.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Still Anne Tardif for the City of Ottawa. Before the break, we had a bit of confusion around the number of resources. I want to take you back to that chart that my friend, the lawyer for Canada had up, just to avoid any confusion. So Mr. Clerk, if we could go to OPB00001014? I think you'll recognize this, Mr. Sloly. So this was the chart of resource deployments for the Service from all agencies that was prepared and some version of this went to the Police Services Board, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if you look at the 6th, 6/02/2022 which was the date in issue, and you look at regular members, there's a total there in the dark blue of 355. You see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the two days prior, which would have been the Friday and the Saturday, before of course, the 6th is the second weekend of the convoy, Sunday, are roughly the same number, 329 on Friday the 4th, 362 on Saturday the 5th, and 355 on Sunday the 6th, from all services, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And so when we saw in the minutes of that meeting that there were about 120 or 130 officers on the ground, that must have been -- I'm assuming that must have been per shift?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. But these numbers are the ones that ring a bell to you and that you were referencing in your testimony before the break, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. All right. Thank you for that. If we could now turn up OPS00008325, and if we could go right down to the bottom, please, Mr. Clerk, and we'll work our way up. Right there. So this is an email, Mr. Sloly, from John Steinbachs, and I -- you'll forgive me, I can't remember his exact title, but I do know part of it is Communications.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay, thank you. So from him to you, and some of your colleagues at the Service, and he says, "MO," which is the mayor's office - - you can see there the subject line, "Mayor's Office Request." And this is on Monday, February 7th. And he says: "MO, Mayor's Office, called Chair Dean's office this a.m. advising that we need to send a letter of request for staffing to our federal, provincial counterparts prior to sending a letter to sol gen -- " Meaning the solicitor general --- "--- and public safety minister. Has this occurred yet? If yes, can we bundle them all and send over to chair and mayor. If not, Kevin and Michelle are on this email and can assist in drafting, organizing. John." And so my understanding, Mr. Sloly -- and I do see this email went to you, among others -- is that the mayor's office wanted to ensure that the request had been made, chief to commissioner, as it were, before they sent a similar request for 1,800 officers to their political counterparts.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right, because I take it in your capacity as Chief, you never sent a letter requesting resources to the premier or prime minister, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And I think the "we", the way I read it, is because it's John Steinbachs drafting the email -- he's the author, and he's with Ottawa Police -- so the way I read it, just so you understand, is that the "we" was police. And if you read it differently, that’s fine, but my understanding is that in the ordinary course, before -- first level of request would be from chief to commissioner, fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
All right. Can we scroll up? Well, maybe that'll help. Past the redactions. No, scroll down a little bit. There we go. Sorry, just up a little bit so we can see who it's from. This is from Michelle Gauthier, and she works with John Steinbachs; is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And it's to John and you, among others. And if we scroll down, she says: "This is what I have so far in terms of requirements for immediate, 30 days, greater than 6 months. Getting more details through my calls with superintendents, et cetera. My discussion this a.m. is focused on immediate needs as per 9:00 a.m. call. Will need a breakdown of the officers - - general duty, and public order officers in terms of immediacy." So fair to say, she's trying to put together the numbers, correct ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- that are being requested of other forces?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And Mr. Clerk, could we scroll up from there, please? No -- and this is Blair Dunker now forwarding the information, because she -- Blair Dunker, I understand, is the one who would have, in addition to Michelle, all of the information around resources, fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And just to make sure we've gone to the top, to be fair to you, Mr. Sloly, can we scroll all the way up, Mr. Clerk? I think that’s it. Right. And it ends with an email from Blair Dunker. So fair to say what we've seen here is the Ottawa Police, those involved in this process, quarterbacking the resource requests and trying to figure out what, in fact, they are, right? That’s the emails we've just gone through?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And leaving aside this email -- so I'm no longer asking you about this email -- but my general understanding is that where the Service requires additional resources over and above what it can provide in the ordinary course, the request is made from chief to chief or chief to commissioner?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And I think you've mentioned and you've agreed that the letter from the mayor and the chair deems that the OPSB was uncommon, but that these were uncommon times?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. Okay. And then I don’t need to bring it up, but you're obviously familiar with the February 7th letter signed by the chief and Chair Deans sent to their political counterparts in support of the OPS request for roughly 1,800 officers, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And my understanding, and you testified to this is that Chair Deans, on the meeting of February 5th, directed you in her capacity as Chair of the Board, to particularize your request for resources; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And after you’ve done so, you gave it to the Mayor and the Chair and, in fact, you briefed City Council at their February 7th Council meeting; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And at that Council meeting, you did explain that, in fact, this request for 1,800 officers was being made.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And once again, you’ve said that’s out of the ordinary, but given the events leading up to that and the request by Chair Deans, that’s what happened in this case.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. If we could now turn up OPS00014565, Mr. Clark. And while that’s coming up, Mr. Sloly, you told us that after the pivot to recognizing this is an occupation on January 31st, the service had to evolve its plan, right, to address these new circumstances. And my understanding is that the service did that and we have seen -- I don’t need to bring it up, but we have seen as part of these proceedings a plan that’s not what’s on the screen now, Mr. Sloly. A plan that’s dated February 9th and that’s referred to as the 3.0 Plan. You’re familiar with that plan?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So this is your scribe notes of that same day, February 9th. It’s not the plan, but it’s scribe notes of that same day. And if we scroll down, Mr. Clerk, right there, you’ll see there’s reference to a phone call that you received from the Mayor, Steve Kannellakos, the City manager, and Serge Arpin, who’s the Mayor’s Chief of Staff, in the afternoon of February 9th. Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the scribe indicates “only heard Chief’s side of conversation”, so I think we’re safe attributing these bullet points to you. So you explained to the city representative that you’ve been in in a meeting all morning and into the early afternoon with the RCMP and representatives from the “Big 12”, and that’s the big 12 police forces in the Province of Ontario; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Regarding the resource requests that went out yesterday. And I assume that’s the request for the 1,800 officers or so; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you say, “Making progress, but we have not gotten one officer out of it”; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then a few bullets down, there’s a bullet that starts with, “If Mayor hears anywhere”. Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You say: “If Mayor hears anywhere that we don’t have a plan, we have a plan.” Right? And that’s what you were communicating to the Mayor on that day.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. If we could turn now to OPS00011411. These should be, yes, your scribe notes of February 10th. And I’m going to scroll to page 2, please. A little further down. And then just the call with Steve Kanellakos, Mr. Clerk, so we could -- perfect. Do you see there at 9:48 a.m. on February 10th, you had a call with the City Manager?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right? And again, you explain to him, and it’s the second bullet there, “We spent almost 24 hours with OPP and big 12, presented them our plan.” Right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And although obviously the City would not have participated in that meeting, I assume that’s a reference to the February 9th meeting that we’ve heard something about in these proceedings.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perfect. And then you’ll see there’s a reference there to, again, “We cannot do anything more if they don’t give us the numbers”. That’s you communicating to the City Manager that you still need resources to action the plan; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And below that, you’ve provided some -- I don’t think we need to go through it, but you’ve provided some additional details to Mr. Kanellakos about resources that you think will be forthcoming, including from the OPP; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So there’s reason for cautious optimism at this point in time; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then if you go to the before last bullet of the call, you see it says, “We”, and I assume, but I’ll ask you to confirm, that you mean Ottawa -- “We are not their number 1 priority. Their concern is Sarnia and Windsor.” Was that your understanding at the time? And this is February 10th.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. And then you say, “Chief has low expectations”. And I take it what you mean from that was you knew it was going to take a little bit of time for those resources to come to Ottawa while the situation was resolved in Windsor; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Understood. And one final document, if I may, Mr. Clerk. It’s OPS00010373. So these are scribe notes of a meeting on February 12th between yourself and other Ottawa Police Service representatives and Commissioner Lucki of the RCMP and Commissioner Carrique of the OPP. They’re an OPS document, Mr. Sloly, so I believe they were taken by an Ottawa Police Service scribe.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If we could go to page 2, please, Mr. Clerk. So do you see the comment there that’s attributed to Commissioner Lucki, “Getting exhausted that someone cannot communicate with Mayor or Steve Kanellakos”? Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I expect that we will be asking Commissioner Lucki what she was referring to then at that point, but given that you were in the meeting, I thought I’d ask you whether you recall that comment or a comment to that effect and if you know what she may have meant by that.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So just an expression of that frustration that the numbers that the OPS was providing the City and the numbers that the RCMP and OPP were providing provincial and federal politicians didn’t add up, an expression of that frustration.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you very much, Ms. Sloly. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
My apologies. Perhaps I've missed it. Is the fact that the letter was made public just that it's sent? I just want to make sure I understand the question.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, the -- and perhaps I've just misunderstood, Commissioner, that the letters were made public when they were sent to the Prime Minister and the Solicitor General and the Premier and the Minister of Public Safety, or that they were otherwise made public?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
No, I just mis -- I ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That was certainly not my intention, Commissioner, I'm just trying to understand the basis for my friend's question. That's all. I just -- I don't understand what my friend means by making the letter public. I just -- I don't understand. And if the suggestion is that the letter was made public otherwise than by sending it to the politicians, then I question the basis for the question. That is all.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, Commissioner, I -- and I -- perhaps it's late in the day and I'm -- I apologise if I'm only adding to the confusion. I certainly don't intend to cross-examine my friend on her question. That was by no ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, I don't ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I don't believe I was, Commissioner, with -- and certainly I can assure you and my friend that was not at all my intent. The reason I'm -- the only reason I'm speaking is I had understood Mr. Sloly to say in his witness testimony, and it came out during his evidence, and I put it to him that he had made the number public during the February 7th Council meeting. My friend has asked him whether the letter was made public. And I didn't understand that to have been the case or that to have been in evidence up until the moment of the Council meeting. So I'm just asking what is meant so that I can understand the basis for the question. It's not a cross- examination, but of course there has to be a basis for any question put forward. That's the only clarification I was seeking. If it's confusing, I'll leave it there. I think I've stated my concern for the record, and I'll leave it there.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I'm more than content to leave it there. I just -- again, maybe it's late in the day. I'm content to leave it there.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That is correct, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Mayor. My name is Anne Tardif. I’m one of the lawyers for the City of Ottawa. You mentioned in your testimony, and I think in your witness summary, that you had calls with both the Solicitor General, Sylvia Jones, for Ontario, and the Federal Minister of Public Safety, Minister Mendicino; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you were requesting additional police resources, and I should say that you were amplifying the request that your chief had alerted you to. Fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. And you mentioned that the Federal Government in particular was very supportive?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Both were very supportive. Fair enough.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it that staff -- if I understood you correctly, staff at the federal level asked that your request, or the request for additional resources be put in writing? Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And we saw the letters that Chief Mizuno sent further to that request to both the Provincial and the Federal Government; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it they were sent more or less at the same time? Fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Is it fair to say then that no one at the Federal Government said to you, “You’ve got to go to the Province first. You’re not following proper protocol,” or anything of that nature?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perfect. Thanks very much. If I could bring up WIN00000410? And while this is coming up, Mayor, it’s an email exchange between Jason Reynar? Am I pronouncing that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. At the City of Windsor, and Chief Laforet, who I understand is the Fire Chief in Windsor and was also the Chair, if I understood correctly, of the CCG?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we scroll down to the bottom? There’s the email from Mr. Reynar to the entire Corporate Leadership Team, including, of course, Chief Laforet. And he’s advising that the injunction has been granted and will “…come into effect at 7 PM tonight…” which is Friday, February 11th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we could scroll down, Mr. Clerk? He says: “But these advancements may have the effect of ‘ratcheting up’ the protestors (and their supporters). We will be watching closely to see what developments happen over the next 24 hours.” And it goes on from there. So this concern about ratcheting up the protestors with the issuance of an injunction was something I take it that the City was aware of on the 11th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
M’hm.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take then your Chief reassured you that that was not a concern, or not one that she had at heart?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Thanks very much. I understand, and we’ve heard already in your testimony that there was an original injunction time limited for 10 days obtained on February 11th, and that the City then moved to obtain an indefinite extension of that injunction; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And this will be the last document I’ll ask Mr. Clerk to put up, and it is WIN00000921. Mayor, this is the factum or the legal argument - - well you’re a lawyer, the factum, I guess I can use that word, that the City of Ottawa, if we scroll down just a little bit -- City of Windsor, pardon me, filed in support of the order -- seeking the order for an indefinite extension of the injunction. If we just scroll down, you’ll see it there. Factum of the intervening party, the corporation, and the City of Windsor. And if we could go to paragraph 2, Mr. Clerk? And before I take you through this, you’ve given ample evidence already about the concern that the City had about the possible resurgence of a blockade at the bridge if the injunction were to expire; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I just wanted to draw this out. This is the argument put forth by the City of Windsor and it says: “The events in the days since the February 11[th] Order […] was made have reinforced the ongoing need for the injunction. Since the February 11[th] Order came into effect at 7:00 PM on February 11[th], 2022…” It’s paragraph -- subparagraph A: “Protesters defied the February 11[th] Order, with numbers increasing and peaking at between 600 and 800 individuals during the evening of Saturday, February 12[th], 2022…” And I take it that was information the City obtained from police?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And that was information that formed part of the City’s decision then to seek a continuation of that injunction?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thanks very much, Mayor. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good evening, Deputy Chief. My name's Anne Tardif. I am one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Mr. Clerk, if we could put up WPS000000216. All right. And if we could go to page 8. Well, actually, let's just identify the document first. There we go. Deputy Chief, these are the scribe notes for the Critical Incident Commanders during the period in question. Is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sorry, the WPS scribe notes, right, for the Windsor CIC.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yes.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I may not have said it, it's late in the day.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And thank you for that. And so these would have been scribe notes for you during what we're calling the midnight shifts and Inspector Degraaf during the dayshift; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And we've heard some evidence from the Mayor this morning about his being reminded or advised at some point that he perhaps should not have made the - - the concerns about making specific requests for additional resources public. And I just wanted to go to page 8 of this document first. Just to situate us in time, do you see the date there, Deputy Chief, February 9th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we could scroll down to page 11, it'll still be February 9th, but just to situate us. At timestamp of 11:35, please, Mr. Clerk, if we could scroll down. Do you see there, it says, "CIC Supt Mike McDonell." And he's a Superintendent with the OPP; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then it says: "[C]omm's OPP liaison via phone. CIC relay message from him..." Being Superintendent McDonell: "...to Chief & also to Mayor, not discuss any requests or additional resources. Goes against/contrary messaging from OPP and RCMP. Prompts protesters to gather strength and intensity..." That should perhaps be "intensify presence". Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I take it that Superintendent McDonell from the OPP was asking the Windsor CIC to relay to the Chief of Police and to the Mayor their advice or their request that any request for additional resources not be discussed publicly. Is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we scroll to the 11:35 timestamp. That message, I guess, was relayed; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
If it's in the scribe notes, fair to assume that it was ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- in fact relayed?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you very much. Those are my questions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
They have. We're prepared to cede our 10 minutes ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- Commissioner. Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
We ceded our time, so we have no questions, Commissioner. Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Anne Tardif, City of Ottawa. We have no questions. Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good evening. My name is Anne Tardif. I’m one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So we’ve explained that the CVOR is the Commercial Vehicle Operators Registration; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you need one to operate a commercial vehicle in Ontario.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Correct.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the CVOR program monitors and evaluates the operators’ safety records.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the CVOR operator, the person who holds the registration, can be either a person or a corporation responsible for the operation of the vehicle.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And I take it it only applies to certain categories of vehicles.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I have a note here that it’s 4,500 kilograms gross weight. Does that make sense?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perfect. And we -- certainly we’ve seen in the documents and in your witness summary reference to sort of a demerit point system; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it that CVOR tracks the operators’ collisions; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Infractions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Convictions.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And any findings on safety inspections.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And over time, they rack up points until you get to a state where they have so many points that the Ministry may issue notice of the intent to either suspend or revoke the CVOR.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
That’s the end of the process.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And you’ve talked about the notice requirements, the due process and the appeal rights that are embedded within the suspension.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And I take it we can agree that certainly some of the large trucks that participated in the convoy in Ottawa had CVORs. They were of that size.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that at least some of them were involved or were committing or had committed as part of their convoy activities potentially offences under the Highway Traffic Act and possibly other statutes and by-laws; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And if convicted, some of those offences would end up on their carrier record; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And contribute to that escalation of points that we’ve talked about.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I heard you explain that that process takes time, and that’s why the Ministry thought it’s not really a short-term solution; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. You could issue notice of an infraction, for example, under the Highway Traffic Act today, but it would take perhaps several months, if not longer, to get a conviction for that to be reflected on the carrier record and you’d need several convictions before you got to the point in time where notice of the suspension would issue.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. Now, I understand that, but you also mentioned, and it was in one of the documents we saw -- I can turn it up if I need to -- that there was significant considerations with the use of the CVOR for non- roadside enforcement purposes. And in fairness to you, I wrote down that you said earlier today that you didn’t want to use that process, the CVOR process, to dry and do something else and that there was concern about affecting the legitimacy of the process. Do you remember saying something to that effect?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Can you help me understand or help us understand what you mean by that? I understand the timing concern, but the other concern, this notion that you shouldn’t be using the CVOR process, the normal process, for what you perhaps viewed as an illegitimate or end to which is not suited.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Was the concern -- just so I understand, was the concern that if there was a conviction for an offence; for example, under the Highway Traffic Act, that occurred during the convoy and that ended up on a carrier’s record, and at some point in the future form part of notice of suspension or grounds for a suspension of their CVOR, was that a concern to the ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- the Ministry?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So it was just a bypassing your normal process that was a concern to the Ministry.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
What is that something? That’s, I think, what I’m struggling to understand.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Understood, thank you. Could we pull up ONT00000111? And could we scroll to the bottom? Or sorry; yeah, just to the top of that email. Perfect. You were taken to this email, Mr. Freeman, but not to this part of the chain. This is an email from Mr. -- I’m going to pronounce it Boparai -- I apologize if I’m butchering that. And if we scroll down we can see in his signature block -- a little bit further down, Mr. Clerk, thank you. He’s with the MTO; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
With the Highway Operations Management?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So scroll up a little bit. He says, “Good evening Chief Supt. Carson Pardy:” So Chief Superintendent Pardy is with the OPP; we heard from him earlier in this inquiry. And he says: “My apologies for the cold-call. I’ve been working with Chief Supt. Thompson and Supt. Eaton on some other files and have recently been asked to lead/coordinate MTO’s overall response at the provincial level related to various...” And I’ll slow down here: “...blockades in the province. I am reaching out to you regarding the ongoing blockade at the Windsor-Detroit Bridge.” And I’ll pause here because C/Supt. Pardy was actually in charge in Ottawa, not in Windsor. Mr. Boparai was confused and that get clears up -- that gets cleared up, pardon me, up the chain. He says: “We are wondering whether the OPP has been collecting CVOR information of trucks blocking the bridge crossing and if available, can this information can [sic] be shared with MTO. This will allow us to review and be better prepared to support the OPP as this situation continues to evolve. Would be great if we can discuss this further or if you can connect us with the appropriate OPP contact. Thanks,” And if we scroll up, just so you can get the context, Mr. Freeman, that’s C/Supt. Pardy’s response advising that he’s in Ottawa leading the support plan for the OPS, and advising him who’s in charge in Windsor and giving some additional information. The reason I bring this to your attention is I had understood that in fact the position of the MTO was not to reach out and offer to assist with CVOR but only to act in response to specific police requests for assistance. And can you help me reconcile that with this email?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. Those are my questions.
-
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.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
But I am content to go now if that’s your preference.
-
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.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And he is at Public Safety as well; correct?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Have I got the acronym right?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. So the Committee meeting was on the 8th. The read out is being circulated on the 9th; fair?
-
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?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So to protect federal assets and people?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Under OPS command, I should say; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then it says, "Working to deploy another 200 people on new plan with OPS and partners." Right?
-
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?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that had to happen before additional resources were committed to Ottawa by the RCMP; correct?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And that's day 13 of the convoy or occupation here in Ottawa; correct?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And then why did it take 13 days for the situation in Ottawa before the IRG to be convened?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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 ---
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I take it the ICC established unified command over the operation to dismantle the convoy; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Between all three police forces? OPS, OPP, and RCMP; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you described Chief Sloly as a strong personality; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You’d heard it was challenging to get him to relinquish his authority?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Did you hear of any such concerns, either from the Commissioner or from Ministers?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough. I think you also said the RCMP was always ready and willing to assist?
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. The relationship between the two, you can’t put together?
-
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?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon. My name's Anne Tardif. I'm one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa. Mr. Clerk, can I ask first to pull up OPP00000601? Commissioner Lucki, this is an email exchange that you had with an officer out of BC. And if we could scroll to the bottom of that first page to start off with? So a little bit lower. Yeah, there we go. This is an email from John Brewer with the RCMP, who I take it's out of BC to you dated February 2nd. Do you see that there?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we could scroll now to page 2, and it's the last -- second-to-last large paragraph in that email. There we go, right there in the middle of the page. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Do you see there? And Mr. Brewer's explaining to you that these types of protests leave very limited capacity for police to solve this situation without some movement by government to allow protestors to have a "win" of sorts. And he goes on to explain what he means by that. In the interests of time, I won't read it all into the record. Do you see that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we can scroll up to the first page -- keep going -- right there, thank you -- you respond, again on the 2nd, and you say: "Thanks for the great response. I already used a few of the items when I was briefing some of the ministers today. Thanks a ton." Did you brief the ministers? I'm assuming these are the ministers, at least of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Did you brief them with respect to that concept, the concept of the fact that the solution might require a potential outreach by government to create a win of sort for protesters?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
It is, and I'm afraid I just don’t have the time to take you ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- through it.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Is it a reasonable proposition? Can I put that to you?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I appreciate that. I'm no longer asking that. I'm saying is the proposition that I read out -- not did you brief it ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- is the proposition that I read out, is it a reasonable proposition?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yes, it is, depending on the circumstances?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay, thank you. Sorry, I don’t have the best hearing, so ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- if I -- that’s why. You explained -- you both explained, but I think primarily you explained, Commissioner Lucki, that in Ottawa, the RCMP went from about 30 to then 50 officers per day, correct, initially?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that obviously is over a period of shifts, so if it's a two shift, you might have 25 officers in the day shift, 25 in the night shift, correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Perhaps Deputy Commissioner Duheme can assist?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Let me put it this way. I -- the Ottawa Police Service has prepared -- and we've seen in evidence -- a chart of deployment numbers that has a total of RCMP forces per day hovering around 50 to 60 per day and not getting anywhere close to -- not hitting that 200 number that you were talking about into your evidence -- until after February 12th. Does that sound reasonable?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you. And I won't bring it up, in the interests of time. Now, you explained earlier -- again, this was Commissioner Lucki -- that you did not need or that the RCMP did not need to see an operational plan before sending Public Order Units or POU units to Windsor to assist with the OPP-led operation there. You recall that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yeah, I understand that. I'm just asking if you recall. You recall that evidence, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And did you listen to Deputy Minister Stewart's evidence yesterday, by any chance?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Well, one of the things he told us, and one of the things he reported to the SSE Committee of Cabinet was that the OPS plan was subject to review and verification by the OPP and others. And that was the case, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that was really from -- so the Integrated Planning Cell, that was really from February 8th on. That’s the evidence we've heard of when they arrived in Ottawa, so from that point on, yes, subject to verification by OPP and others, fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So the February 7th request for approximately 1,800 officers resulted in what you’ve just described, Deputy Commissioner; a process where we got SMEs together from the OPP and the RCMP, and of course the OPS, to see what was really needed, verify the requirements, and that resulted, ultimately, in setting up the Integrated Command Centre on February 12th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Fair enough, and I think you’ve explained that several times. I guess what I’m asking is; the RCMP wasn’t going to fulfil that request until it had the information that you’ve just outlined; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
From the plan?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And from a verified plan, verified by yours and the OPP’s subject matter expert.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. Can we -- let’s see how much time I have. Okay, Comm. Lucki, you described earlier today that the Ministers -- the federal Ministers were checking in to see what other resources were required, and were generally offering to provide whatever assistance was needed to bring the occupation in Ottawa to a resolution, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And during the convoy you provided regular briefings to Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and to Cabinet; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And your role was to provide accurate briefings, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you couldn’t provide them with all the information, for a whole host of reasons, but you wanted to make sure they had the key facts, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And Commission Counsel put to you that you reported, on a number of occasions, that the RCMP was fulfilling all POS asks. You recall that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And then he also took you to the February 7th request for 1,800 officers, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you’ve already explained at some length -- and I won’t take you through it because I definitely do not have time -- the process involved before you could send additional resources for enforcement purposes in support of the integrated operation. So you’ve explained that. But I think we can agree that the RCMP did not fulfil that February 7th ask or request until the enforcement plan was approved and almost ready to go; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Yes.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And I think you both have explained that ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- several times. My question is a bit of a different one. You told Cabinet and the Ministers that the RCMP had fulfilled all OPS asks. And what I’m asking you is whether it perhaps would have been more accurate to say that you had fulfilled all asks for frontline officers and were assessing the latest OPS requests for resources?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. I think I have one more minute, and with that, I’m just going to conclude on -- do I have one more minute?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh, I was out? Okay. You were -- and I won’t, obviously, take them up but you were taken to your team’s chat, Comm. Lucki, Deputy Commissioner, you were taken to your notes, several references to, in your case, Comm. Lucki whether they were going to the -- whether there was a decision to go to the Province with respect to Peter Sloly; in your case, Deputy Commissioner, a comment by Minister Blair querying jurisdictional change. And that didn’t trigger any recollection; you couldn’t recall, neither one of you, the context for that. Commissioner Lucki, on February 15th, you had a meeting with OPP representatives in which you said that you had lost confidence in Chief Sloly. And you indicated that you didn’t want -- you know, it might be time to look at a command change at that point. You didn’t want this, and you didn’t think he wanted this; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And I take it that it’s both your evidence that none of the federal Ministers ever discussed -- none of the federal Ministers, nor Comm. Carrique prior to that, ever discussed a transfer in command of the operation for Ottawa?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Sure.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you very much. And thank you, Commissioner, for the indulgence.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Good afternoon, Ms. Thomas. My name is Anne Tardif. I’m one of the lawyers representing the City of Ottawa. You discussed the IRG, or Incident Response Group, this afternoon ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I heard that that’s a committee of cabinet that also includes officials who are subject-matter experts; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it’s chaired by the prime minister?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it’s purpose, if I understood you correctly, is to make quick, rapid decisions -- well, let’s just go with “rapid” -- rapid decisions about issues of national importance or crisis ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- including Covid?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And you gave a number of other examples; right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And it’s the committee that is the most effective in dealing with crises?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And my understanding is it met first on February 10th?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And that was, of course, day 13 of the convoy here in Ottawa; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And I think, as you mentioned earlier, we were in fact going into our third weekend in Ottawa; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the Commission has heard some evidence that in fact weekends were more volatile; is that right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
At least in Ottawa? I’m just talking about Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And Commission counsel took you to the minutes of that IRG meeting. I won’t turn them up but I’ll give the reference for the record. It’s SSM.NSC.CAN.00000209. And you had reported -- if you need me to turn it up, I will, but you had reported that in Ottawa, the situation at the time remained largely unchanged; do you recall that?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So the reason, then, that the IRG was convened at that point was not because something new or something had changed in Ottawa; fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
You know, I’m -- you’re perhaps seeing where I’m going here. I’m assuming it had something to do with the blockade in Windsor and perhaps concerns about other protest activity outside of Ottawa in addition to what was going on in Ottawa.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Right. And just to sort of close a loop on this, the SSE Committee had met I think it’s three times prior to February 10th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And the decision to invoke -- or convene, pardon me, the IRG represents and escalation of the federal government’s response; is that fair?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Understood, and we’ll do that, then, thank you. The other document I want to take you -- or I guess the only document I’ll take you to is -- these are the -- I can put it up if I need to but, in the interest of time, I can maybe just put it to you. I was going to take you to the minutes of the cabinet meeting of February 13th and your mention of a breakthrough. Do you want me to put it up?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I’m happy to. No, okay. Can you just tell us what you were referring to?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And can we, then, turn up PB.NSC.CAN.00003245? And bear with me, Ms. Thomas, this is the last document I’ll take you to, the only and the last. So these are talking points that Commissioner Lucki sent you to you and Minister Mendicino on February 14th; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we scroll down to page 3, Mr. Clerk, thank you. Yeah, “Moving back to Ottawa”, if we scroll down a little further. There we go. This is the agreement, I take it, that was being reported and that you’re referring to in the last two bullets? Now we’re at the 14th. I appreciate we’re the day after cabinet but this is the same agreement, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And if we -- I won’t read it but that’s what’s described there in those bullets ---
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
--- the last two bullets on page 3. And scrolling down to page 4, Mr. Clerk, there’s the rest of the description, just in fairness to you, Ms. Thomas. That’s the agreement, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Okay. And you’ll see there the final bullet on the page -- well, the third bullet from the top: "While this is a step…" “This” being the agreement. "…in the right directions in terms of reducing the truckers’ footprint and impact on Ottawa, it is not a win." That’s what Commissioner Lucki was reporting to you, right?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
And do I understand that to mean it’s a step in the right direction but it -- by “it’s not a win”, it’s not going to bring the whole convoy to an end? Is that what you understood?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Oh.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you.
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
I -- thank you very much. And I apologize. I confess, I’ve never quite gotten that Greenwich time down. So Ms. Thomas, you understood what your counsel said?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
So I apologize if I misled you. I’m not great with the time change. Thank you, counsel. And the last point I want to take you to is that final bullet. Commissioner Lucki reports: "This agreement compliments the plan to reduce the footprint through the work of the public liaison team. Integrated Command planners…" And that’s a reference to the Integrated Command planners in Ottawa; correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
"…need to now incorporate this development into their resource and enforcement plan." And that’s -- that’s the information you had and the breakthrough -- potential breakthrough, to the extent you were aware of it; is that correct?
-
Anne Tardif, Counsel (Ott)
Thank you very much, Ms. Thomas. Those are my questions.