Colleen McKeown

Title
Counsel
Organization / Affiliation
Criminal Lawyers’ Association / Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers (CLA/CCCDL)

Colleen McKeown spoke 52 times across 5 days of testimony.

  1. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Good afternoon, Mr. Kanellakos. My name is Colleen McKeown and I'm counsel to the Criminal Lawyer's Association and the Canadian Council for Criminal Defence Lawyers. These are two organizations with a joint grant of standing. Both represent criminal defence lawyers. I only have a ---

    03-184-24

  2. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Good afternoon. I only have a couple of questions relating specifically to by-law enforcement and whether you can help us put any of the numbers we've seen in some of the documents into context. In the City's institutional report, it says that 3,182 parking tickets, so specifically parking tickets, were issued between January 28th and February 22nd. Does that sound familiar?

    03-185-04

  3. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And in the City's injunction application, Mr. Ayotte swore in his affidavit that 2,000 tickets had been issued between January 28th and February 11th in relation to the demonstration. Does that sound right?

    03-185-13

  4. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    I believe that was a number that had just recently come up in questioning. And the -- Mr. Ayotte's affidavit also says that 1,732 of these 2,000 tickets were parking tickets. Does that sound right?

    03-185-19

  5. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And so am I right in understanding that the other, those that are not parking tickets but were other tickets, so 268 tickets, that these were issued for other infractions in that same 15-day period? Like, the illegal fireworks, fires, noise, idling, so non-parking infractions?

    03-185-24

  6. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And I'll only have a couple of other questions and if it's the same answer, then I'll pose those questions to Mr. Ayotte. But my understanding from reading these documents was that the primary goal of the parking enforcement piece within the perimeter of the demonstration was to ensure that the emergency lanes were clear; is that right?

    03-186-05

  7. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And do you have a sense of, of these sort of bucket of parking tickets, do you have a sense of how many of those would have been devoted to this primary goal of keeping the emergency lane clear as opposed to other parking infractions?

    03-186-13

  8. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. I also understand that By-law and Regulatory Services received approval for an increase to the set fines for various by-law infractions on February 8th. Does that ring a bell?

    03-186-20

  9. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And do you have either any data or an opinion on whether these increased fines had any impact between when they were changed on February 8th and I suppose when further enforcement measures came in on February 14th?

    03-186-25

  10. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Thank you very much. Those are all my questions.

    03-187-03

  11. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Good afternoon or almost good evening, Mr. Ayotte. My name is Colleen McKeown and I'm counsel to the Criminal Lawyers' Association and the Canadian Council for Criminal Defence Lawyers. These are two organizations comprised of criminal defence lawyers. Many of the questions I have for you have already been canvassed, so I've been trying to tailor them as we've gone along. If I could just pick up on some questioning you got earlier about sort of the number of tickets overall, over the course of a year, my friend said perhaps it was 300,000 or 250,000, and you said you didn’t have the numbers in front of you, but you know, that was sort of about right; is that right?

    04-273-14

  12. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And he gave you an estimate that that could mean something like 20,000 tickets being issued monthly, is that right?

    04-274-01

  13. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And my understanding, not having seen these figures myself, well, this would be for across the whole city ---

    04-274-05

  14. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    --- is that right?

    04-274-09

  15. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    But is it still your view then that the 3,000 tickets that were issued over the course of the demonstration, in the demonstration zone or related to the demonstration, that this would be a -- sort of a smaller fraction of tickets that By-law Services would have had the capacity to issue?

    04-274-11

  16. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Right. So there were many more infractions and this is a smaller number than the tickets that might have been issued but for the safety concerns you've already described.

    04-274-19

  17. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And I understand that By- law and Regulatory Services received an approval for an increase to the set fines for various By-law infractions on February 8th; does that sound right?

    04-274-24

  18. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And I know you've already adopted the contents of the affidavit you swore as part of the City's injunction application in the course of questioning by another Counsel, so I'll just draw your attention that you said in that affidavit that you didn't think that these increased fines had any impact on the ongoing By-law violations; is that right?

    04-275-01

  19. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And that was the affidavit you swore on February 14th, and I take it that your opinion didn't change after you swore the affidavit, that there wasn't some change after that fact?

    04-275-09

  20. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Right. And, yes, and after February 13th, there wasn't -- those changes from February 8th, you didn't change your opinion on whether they had an impact?

    04-275-15

  21. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

    04-275-19

  22. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Good evening. Mr. Freeman, can you hear me all right?

    20-220-08

  23. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    My name is Colleen McKeown and I’m counsel to the Criminal Lawyer’s Association and the Canadian Counsel of Criminal Defence Lawyers, two organizations with joint standing. I know I’m standing between everyone and dinner, so I’d like to ask you just a few questions about the role and limitations of the Highway Traffic Act and the CVOR system. I know my friends from the City of Ottawa and the CCLA have already asked you some related questions, so I’m going to try to be brief.

    20-220-11

  24. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    You said in your witness statement and repeated here that addressing protests is not the purpose of the Highway Traffic Act or its associated licensing tools. Do I have that right?

    20-220-22

  25. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Instead, the purpose of the HTA is to keep traffic flowing and keep the roads safe. Is that fair?

    20-220-27

  26. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And you identified in your witness statement some of the provisions in the Highway Traffic Act that would make it an offence for individuals to block a highway. And in the interest of time, I’m not going to pull up your witness statement, but you identified a few provisions. Is that right?

    20-221-04

  27. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    There’s section 170(12), which prohibits parking or standing a vehicle in a way that interferes with traffic? Is that one of the sections?

    20-221-11

  28. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And then section 132, which prohibits unnecessarily slow driving that impedes or blocks traffic? Is that one?

    20-221-15

  29. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And then section 134.1, which authorizes police to direct the removal and storage of vehicles or debris blocking traffic?

    20-221-19

  30. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Is that right?

    20-221-23

  31. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And of course, you knew at the time that parking vehicles in the roadway was something that protestors did both in Ottawa and in Windsor? Is that right?

    20-221-25

  32. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And that’s why you pointed to these particular provisions in your witness statement?

    20-222-01

  33. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    These are the ones that are responsive to that concern?

    20-222-05

  34. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And you’d agree with me that blocking a road can interfere with keeping traffic flowing and keeping roads safe?

    20-222-08

  35. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And you told us a little bit today about some of the ways the HTA and associated licensing tools can’t be sort of used properly. And for example, you explained that the MTO was concerned about the delegitimizing the CVOR certificate system by misusing it in the context of civil disobedience. Do I have that right?

    20-222-12

  36. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And the MTO took the position that the scheme couldn’t be used to just cancel a CVOR certificate outright? At least not until the Emergency Order was in place?

    20-222-20

  37. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Right. That’s the lengthy process that you sort of -- several counsel took you through and sort of shortcutting that, that’s the kind of action that would be a misuse of the CVOR scheme?

    20-222-27

  38. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Or misuse of the demerit point scheme for outside the commercial trucking context.

    20-223-04

  39. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    But I take it that it’s not the MTO’s position that the police should refrain from laying charges under the Highway Traffic Act where appropriate simply because this was a protest.

    20-223-07

  40. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Right, because that’s a policing decision, whether or not to lay charges, whether it’s an appropriate situation, whether there are other concerns. That’s a policing decision, not a decision that comes from the MTO.

    20-223-15

  41. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. So police deciding to lay charges under the HTA, that’s not something that would be the kind of misuse that the MTO was concerned about.

    20-223-21

  42. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And so should the Commission understand your comments about the role of the HTA as being related specifically to the suggestion that perhaps the MTO could get involved and cancel licences or cancel CVOR schemes -- so I guess my question is, is your comment about the limited use of the HTA specifically responsive to that sort of suggestion that was being made perhaps by Transport Canada as they tried to understand the scheme, perhaps by commentators in the media? So should we understand your comment in light of those suggestions?

    20-223-25

  43. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

    20-224-10

  44. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Good evening. It’s Colleen McKeown. Our questions have been asked. Thank you very much.

    21-385-11

  45. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Thank you very much, Commissioner. Can you hear me all right?

    22-210-10

  46. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. My name is Colleen McKeown and I’m co-counsel for the Criminal Lawyers Association and the Canadian Counsel of Criminal Defence Lawyers, two organizations with joint standing at the Commission. My questions are related to the consultation process, and I’m directing them to Deputy Minister Stewart. If the Clerk could please bring up the witness summary? WTS00000066? And I’m looking specifically at page 21, and a paragraph that you’ve already been brought to. Just scroll down a bit. It’s with respect to the issue of consultation with provinces. Do you see that paragraph?

    22-210-14

  47. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    First I have a question of clarification. When you say that it is being -- sorry, it’s that first sentence: “With respect to the issue of consultation with provinces, DM Stewart stated that there was a lot of consultation done with the provinces that was discounted because it was not premised on whether the federal government was going to decide to invoke the Act.” When you say it was discounted, can you just clarify for us who was doing the discounting or what context you’re making that comment in?

    22-210-28

  48. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And of course you understand that the Emergencies Act requires consultation in section 25? Is that right?

    22-211-18

  49. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    And of course, the Federal Government tabled with Parliament it’s explanation of the consultation process it undertook?

    22-211-22

  50. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Now, back to this paragraph in the witness statement, Commission Counsel’s already asked you what you meant by the paragraph more broadly. And what I’ve written down in my notes, which I welcome any corrections you have, as I was furiously typing. What I’ve written down is you’ve explained that you deemed these broader discussions to be consultations on the Act because the conversations were really about the substance and what ended up being the substance of the Act, about tools, what was needed. Do you remember saying ---

    22-211-27

  51. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Okay. And I just want to clarify. To the extent that you’re able to answer this question, is it your view that these broader consultations, discussions, they’re about tools and about substance, but not about the Emergencies Act in particular? Is it your view that those can be considered consultations under section 25 of the Act?

    22-212-09

  52. Colleen McKeown, Counsel (CLA/CCCDL)

    Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

    22-212-17