Jean-Simon Schoenholz
Jean-Simon Schoenholz spoke 1153 times across 6 days of testimony.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Commissioner, my name is Jean-Simon Schoenholz, I’m Commission counsel. I’d like to call Kevin McHale and Nathalie Carrier as the next witnesses.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Merci.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. McHale, Ms. Carrier, could you please start by telling me your title at work?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I’d like to pull up a map, just to help orient ourselves. If we could zoom in there? Okay. And let’s go close to where Parliament Hill is, if we can zoom in? So Mr. McHale, you see at the top right there of your screen is Parliament Hill; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is Spark Street kind of the highlighted line there?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And if we could zoom out? Ms. Carrier, where does the Vanier BIA cover?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And those are indicated here on the map?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And did you have any engagement with businesses outside of those three streets during the relevant period?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you’re generally aware of the parking lot at Coventry Road that was used by some of the protestors?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can we just identify that on the screen, please?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that location that's been pinned aligns with -- sorry, the one on the left, please -- that aligns with the parking lot we’re referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And Ms. Carrier, the -- your BIA, as well as the Coventry Road location, would you describe that as being outside of the downtown core?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you liaising at all with any of the businesses on Coventry Road?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. We’ll talk more about that later. Can you just quickly tell us, what was your previous experience before joining the Vanier BIA?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you have experience in that role liaising with the City and Ottawa Police?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in referring to things that were Flagrant, you're referring to events during the January and February ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So for both of you, could you just start by telling me what kind of information, if any, did you receive from the City and OPS in anticipation of the arrival of the convoy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Mr. McHale?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I’d like to pull up Coalition document, sorry, COA00000060. If we could just scroll down? So, sorry, scroll back up. So this is a document dated January 27th. And if we scroll down, is this one of the emails that would have been provided to the local BIAs?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was this kind of representative of the information the BIAs were receiving in anticipation of the arrival of the convoys?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you expect?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And would you agree with that testimony, Ms. Carrier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you request that type of information? Did you or anyone else in the business association community?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What kind of information was provided during those briefings?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Again, ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, to clarify, ahead of the convoy’s arrival.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And would you agree with that, Mr. McHale?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was that similar to the -- were you receiving information that was similar to what you’d received in other large-scale events, Ms. Carrier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. How did it differ?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Now if we can -- if you can take a look at paragraph 4 here on the screen, it says: “All open-source information in our interactions with Freedom Rally organizers indicate this will be a significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period.” (As read) Did anyone during those briefings provide any explanation for what was meant by “significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period”?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. McHale?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was the impression you got from the communications from Ottawa Police Services?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
To clarify, was that your own assessment of the incoming convoy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right. Thank you. Did anyone during these meetings with city and police officials ask why access to the downtown core was not being blocked, Ms. Carrier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You don’t remember any specific response to those questions?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. McHale, do you recall any specific response to that question?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did they provide information on why that was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Who from the City of Ottawa was participating at these meetings, Ms. Carrier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the Mayor of Ottawa or the City Manager of Ottawa ever participate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No, finish your thought, please.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So did any of the senior OPS officials, former Chief Sloly, Deputies Bell and Ferguson, did they attend?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the deputies, did they attend?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Ferguson?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall -- so you say Chief Sloly attended once at that first week, so after the first weekend. Do you recall, you know, anything specific that he said during his attendance?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So did you each feel that the business community, the BIAs that you represent, that they got the information they needed to prepare for these events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Ms. Carrier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What specific information were you seeking that you did not receive?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I'd like to pull up document COA-00000063. So the document we'll see here, Mr. McHale, is an exchange between you and Councillor McKenney.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If you can scroll to the bottom, please? Yeah. Okay. So I'll just let you refresh your memory and read that exchange. So Councillor McKenney is asking if you need any additional information.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And your response is -- and if we can go up just a tiny bit? So on January 28, so before the arrival of the convoy you say, "I think we are good." And then continue. Can you just help maybe explain to us what that meant in the context of what you were just communicating to me?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In hindsight, were you prepared at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you consult OPS?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So did you keep the bollards in for the whole period?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Had you ever put these up for another protest before?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Ms. Carrier, I understand again, as you previously said, that you had some -- you liaised to a certain extent with the businesses on Coventry Road and visited that location.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why was Coventry kind of a significant location in these events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How frequently did you go visit that location physically?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So what did the manager or other personnel from Canadian Tire report to you throughout this period? And maybe try and identify which time.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did you - - were -- did the Starbucks location, and their manager, report anything to you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that you also visited the Coventry Road parking lot where the -- that the protestors were using during this period; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you took some videos?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I'll show a few to you. So if we can pull up COM, five zeroes, 744. If you could tell me when this was taken and where? [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So this was the first weekend you were telling me?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And when you say, sorry, you said your colleague at OPS. You mean a kind of a police liaison in that area?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And can you describe ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- what was on that video? Anything significant stand out to you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Let’s just play COM00000743, please? [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So based on your observations that day, it sounds in the video, did you conclude that people were there to stay longer term?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I want to just show one last video. COM0000749. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] So when was this video taken?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
There’s a few other videos ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- I won’t take you to because of time, but Ms. Li this morning testified that she saw urine in some of the streets.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever witness anyone ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- dumping urine somewhere?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
From what you -- sorry, from what you ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. From what you observed, were the participants in the convoy respecting the rules of the road at all times?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you observe that led you to that conclusion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Mr. McHale, can you describe, generally, the impact on the businesses in your BIA?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any businesses that received fines for ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. McHale, do businesses on Spark Street typically close during protests?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. What other impacts, Mr. McHale, on Ottawa businesses generally are you aware of as a result of the convoy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Those are all -- oh, go ahead.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much. Those are all my questions, we’re out of time. But I do want to allow you if there's anything that I haven't covered that you think we need to share with the Commission briefly.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much. Those are all my questions.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I have one question in re-exam. Mr. McHale, it was put to you some questions about federal assistance. Were there any costs that that federal assistance did not cover -- or federal or provincial ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Commissioner, Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Commission counsel. We'd like to call Steve -- sorry, Steve's in my head. Serge Arpin is our next witness.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No problem.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Arpin, could you start by telling us your title?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand you had an interview with Commission Counsel on September 8th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that interview was held in French?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So WTS00000015, we'll pull that up on the screen. This is a summary of your interview and that's drafted in French; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you've had an opportunity to review that summary?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have any corrections?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you didn't review the English translation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So this summary is going to go into evidence.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I'd like to start talking about the discussions that you facilitated with the protesters. According to your summary, you facilitated negotiations between the mayor's office and a group of protesters whose discussions were facilitated by Dean French; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So could you explain the genesis of those discussions?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And so my understanding is that the purpose of your discussions, and we'll focus on your discussions with Mr. French, as we've already heard Steve K's testimony, the purpose of those discussions was to find a solution that would kind of relieve some of the stresses on the residents of the downtown core; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What group of convoy organisers did you understand that Mr. French was representing or speaking on behalf of?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So was your understanding that some of the factions were not included in this negotiation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what exactly was being discussed in those three days? I think it was February 10th to February 12th. What was being negotiated?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is what you wrote up what eventually became the letter that went out ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- on the 12th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so Mr. French had a role in kind of providing feedback on that letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did -- in those discussions, did you agree upon -- and this is -- I know there's a subsequent February 13th meeting that Mr. K has testified about, but did you and Mr. French agree on where the trucks would be moving to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sure, yeah, yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, you said you would've expected that the City would've raised concerns. I'm assuming you meant OPS?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you say that you were -- you understood that some protestors wanted to move into the, you know, outskirts of the town or some wanted to go home, is that what you heard from Mr. French ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- or would that come ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That was Mr. French?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We can pull up that document, OTT406964. Was this -- we'll go into this in more detail, but was this agreement meant to achieve a permanent resolution to the protests?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was it ever raised that there would be some kind of protection for the trucks that limited themselves to Wellington Street, for example?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding from what you said just earlier is that OPS was not consulted on your discussions with Mr. French? Is that right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And neither was the Parliamentary Protection Service?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was it through someone else?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And -- we’ll get to that later. So okay. So looking then, this is the letter that was issued by the Mayor’s Office setting out the parameters of that agreement with Mr. French; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
When did the Mayor start having input with respect to this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in terms of -- you’ve mentioned this 75 percent number. And you’ve pointed to the fourth paragraph: “That’s why I am writing to ask that you remove your convoy and its trucks from all of our residential neighbourhoods and […] restrict your presence to […] Wellington [essentially].” And then if we just move down a little bit, it kind of details the conditions to meeting the Mayor in a bit more detail. And I don’t see the 75 percent in the letter itself. So maybe if you can explain how it fits in?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So that was communicated verbally?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that what you’re saying? Okay. And the last paragraph that we can see on the screen says -- references the departure of over 400 trucks from residential areas. That was your understanding at the time of how many trucks were in that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it was an ambitious undertaking to try and move these?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you’ve already said that the -- you know, the protestors weren’t necessarily one unified kind of group and that some of the fringe elements were not represented in your discussions with Mr. French; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say that it was an ambitious goal to kind of satisfy the conditions set out in this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the protestors provide any kind of assurances or, you know, through Mr. French on being able to liaise with some of those fringe elements and convince some of them to also vacate the residential areas?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No, okay. I expect that we’ll hear from Insp. Drummond that the PLT had negotiated similar kind of agreements to move trucks in the previous days and that convoy leadership had not been able to execute on those deals. Were you aware of that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
None of that had been brought to your attention?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you felt here that essentially there was nothing to lose in kind of making this deal?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was part of the agreement with Mr. French that some vehicles, some additional vehicles would be moving on to Wellington Street?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Would you agree that that’s no explicitly set out in the letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the timeline from this move was -- for this move was 24 to 72 hours?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can we pull up OTT00006965? So this is Tamara Lich’s letter of acceptance, same date, February 12th, essentially accepting the Mayor’s offer. It says, third paragraph: “We have made a plan to consolidate our protest efforts around Parliament Hill.” Is that reflective of your agreement with Mr. French?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry. You mentioned Mr. French was consulted on the wording of your letter. Were you consulted on the wording of this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you had been advised, as you said previously, by Mr. Ayotte that there was additional room ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- for those trucks to move onto Wellington.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he was your only source of information when it came to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. You provided Mike jones, Chief of Staff to Minister Mendicino with a copy of the Mayor’s letter shortly before making the letter public, right? About an hour before; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But apart from that, the federal officials were not consulted on this ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We understand that the PLT met with Steve K on around February 8th. Were they involved after that first meeting, once kind of you took over in your discussions with Mr. French?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that Sunday meeting you’re referring to is on the 13th; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you specifically aware of any PLT engagement in between ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- the 8th and the 13th? Let’s pull up Document OTT00030055; sorry, I missed another 5; 30055. And let’s go to page 13. So these are your texts with Mr. Jones, Chief of Staff to Minister Mendicino. And here you’re -- this is around the time where you had provided him with notice of this arrangement with the protesters. And so in the third -- the blue bubbles are you; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could just go up. Just keep going up. There we go. So that’s the 13th in the afternoon. That would have been around the time you provided him with the draft letter; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we can go back to page 13? And am I correct that your words are in the blue bubbles on the right-hand side of the screen?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so you say here in the second blue bubble: “But why don’t you tell me who you thought we should be meeting with when you made that suggestion when we spoke on Friday?” And we can -- if we just go down on the next page, and if we can zoom in on the bottom bubble there. Sorry; go up a bit. This one, starts the second one. So: “You said that the suggestion had been made that the City could be meeting with some of the more moderate elements.” So could you just explain what this is referring to? It seems like you had had a previous discussion with Mr. Jones about potential meetings with protesters?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, if you could back up? The very first text that Friday afternoon?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So this is Sunday, so we have to go, I guess, quite a ways back here.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So could you maybe just explain for us?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So your recollection is that on February 11th, Mr. Jones suggested that the City should itself be meeting with protesters.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And at that time, you were in fact already engaging with Mr. French.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did you tell him that at the time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why was this suggestion made by Mr. Jones?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What was the context of that conversation in which he made that statement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And we’ll look close -- more closely at some of those exchanges a bit later. So was it a response to the City’s frustration over those resource issues that that statement was made, that, “Well, if you want to relieve some pressure, why don’t you meet with them”?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Okay. If we can go to Document 698 -- sorry; OTT6985? So this is just a copy of the email; again, same time, afternoon of February 13th when a copy of the agreement is sent to both Council members, and then members of the OPS. So if you scroll down a little bit, you’ll see that it was sent -- if you go down a little bit more, a little bit more. So here, so we see the email from Matthew Gravelle and that's forwarding the letter to the councillors; correct? Is that right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then just above we see your email forwarding it to Steve K. And then just above that I believe is Steve K sending it to various members of OPS; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And is that the first time OPS was seeing kind of the terms of the agreement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
There was actually -- sorry to take you a little bit back in time, but there was a meeting around noon on February 13th. If we go to document OTT30059, these are the transcription of the notes of Kim Ayotte, and we'll go to page 12 once it's opened up. Are you there? So you see here, Sunday 2022, 13th, meeting regarding protest. So this was around noon as I understand, and here, the OPS was given a certain briefing on the terms of the agreement. Were you present at that meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You were? Okay. If we go to page 13? It says at the top here, "50 holdout truckers plus now they all need to participate." Do you know what that means?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No? Further down it says, "major backlash if that RCMP or $ from the feds." Do you remember that being brought up ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in the conversation? Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
At this meeting.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
M'hm. And but I think by that time, the letter had already been ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that the letter had already been sent.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let's go to -- I just have one more I want your thoughts on at page 15. Sorry, the ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- top of page 15. Okay. Sorry, just a bit higher. So it says Steve K, mayor's concerns. And you see the third one is where are the truckers going. So do you -- can you speak to that? What exactly was the concern here?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was your understanding that the exact terms of where the trucks were going to be moving, that was to be worked out at the Sunday evening meeting ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- with Steve K?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We expect to hear from Chief Sloly that he did not know that more vehicles would be moving onto Wellington and that that would have been contrary to what he was told was happening. What is your response to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You were present at this meeting and you sent him the letter.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So is your understanding then that Chief Sloly would have been advised that the trucks were to move onto ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that some trucks were moving onto Wellington?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's move to OTT25453.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Okay. So if you can just scroll through this document so Mr. Arpin can get a sense of it? Maybe start at the bottom and scroll up. So my understanding is that this is some messaging that was prepared for the mayor shortly after the agreement went public. You recognize this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And at the top, it -- just a little bit higher. Here we have a response from the mayor -- oh, just down a bit -- saying, "Should we add something about fines?" I assume that's supposed to say et cetera. Do you know what that's about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And just above, Matthew Gravelle answers, "It was Serge's position that we do not promote that unless asked."
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so that was what we didn't want to promote kind of ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Now according to your witness statement, you say that 102 vehicles including about 40 heavy trucks were moved on the morning of February 14th. What do you know about where these vehicles went?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Nothing.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And your understanding, again according to the witness statement, is that the movement of trucks ended the afternoon of February 14th. Who advised you of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know the reason for that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. You weren’t advised -- the Mayor’s Office was not advised for what reason that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So the OPS put a stop to it, but you’re not sure why. Is that accurate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Going to Document OTT7120, so here we have an email exchange between the Mayor’s Office and the Parliamentary Protective Services Office, I guess. So if we just go down a little bit, down a bit more, down a bit more? Okay. Oh, one more, sorry. So James works or worked for the Mayor’s Office?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he received -- do you recall this exchange?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
He received a request for an urgent call, for the Mayor to have a call with Acting Director ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- Larry Brookson, yes? And if we go up a little bit, we see that James responds that the Mayor would be happy to speak to him now. And then if we go further up, one more, he further responds a little while later, sorry, that there’s been a change of plans. Do you know why the Parliamentary Protective Services was trying to reach the Mayor’s Office?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what reason is that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the PPS had not been consulted by the City in coming to this agreement, correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so you’re not aware of any -- of them being consulted in any way. You’re saying had they been consulted, it would have been through the OPS, but ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- you don’t have knowledge of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so, can you explain why the Mayor was -- I guess why there was a change of plans here, that he would not longer take his call?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The OPS command structure?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you remember, during that discussion that we touched on around noon on February 13th with the OPS, was there any discussion of reaching out to the Parliamentary Protective Service to advise them?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So we looked at Kim Ayotte’s notes of that February 13th meeting at about noon, before the agreement went out. Do you recall in that meeting with OPS any discussion of advising Parliamentary Protective Services of this deal?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in fact, that meeting wasn’t with PLT; it was with senior OPS leadership?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Why not direct them to speak to OPS?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In responding to this email chain, why not direct PPS?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The NCRCC?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that what you’re referring to? Okay. So we expect to hear from Mr. Drummond that the OPS put an end to the movement of vehicles to Wellington for two reasons: one, because there was no more room on Wellington and; two, because the Emergencies Act was invoked and the police needed time to consider the Emergencies Orders. Did you hear -- so starting with the first, had you heard anything about there being no more room on Wellington?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Had you heard to the contrary, that there was still room on Wellington?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And had you heard anything about the movement of trucks being stopped because of the invocation of the Emergencies Act on the 14th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But it was just speculation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So when was the last time you communicated with Dean French about the convoy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Essentially when the deal was completed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
When did you first start communicating with Keith Wilson then?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let’s go to Document HRF1465. So this is an email exchange between yourself and Mr. Wilson the evening of February 14th. If you scroll down just a little bit? Okay. So here it’s 6:05. You write to Keith saying: "'Is a touch base call possible this evening, between 8:30 and 9:00?'" And then if you scroll up, we scroll back up there's just acceptance there. Do you recall what your -- I assume, did you have this call with Mr. Wilson?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall what that call was about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So there was ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was the response to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was there a sense that it would be a significant challenge to get all the trucks moving out of the residential areas?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to HRF1466.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's go to HRF1466. So these are some texts between yourself and Mr. Wilson. We can go to page 3.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So there's a series of texts here where Mr. Wilson reaches out to you about the City obtaining an injunction and some concerns around that. What do you recall?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the -- that effort, being the City itself, going out to obtain an injunction?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So if we can just go down. Go down. Just go down. So this is this passage of the text that you're referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of whether they had that subsequent exchange?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the concern was just that notice of the injunction had not been provided to the protestors, which didn't align with the information you had?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can go to -- sorry. Keep going down. Keep going down. Keep going. Okay. So here, at 9:15 p.m. on February 15th, you receive a text from Mr. Wilson that says: "'The truckers want to move 40 plus trucks tomorrow starting in the morning. They have the room on Wellington to fit.'" And your understanding of the room on Wellington is not contrary to this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he continues: "That would just about clear...almost all of the residential areas.'" Do you know whether that was accurate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. All right. Okay, we can take that off the screen. I want to talk about some of your communications with federal and provincial officials. In your interview summary, you state that: "'The Mayor was initially hesitant to contact federal and provincial governments to request additional resources, but that the OPS eventually indicated that political pressure would be necessary to obtain the resources.'" (As read) What's your understanding of the reasons that the OPS put forward to ask for that political pressure to be applied?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So those are the letters, dated February 7th; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so your understanding is that prior to that date there had been requests being made by the OPS for additional resources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know how long those resource requests had been ongoing?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did she provide to you an explanation for why those requests ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- had been unsuccessful?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But it was felt at that time that it was no longer sufficient to be making those requests at the police-to-police level and that it had to be escalated?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right. Let’s look at OTT7429. This is an email exchange with the PMO where you request, initially, to speak to his Chief of Staff, Katie Telford. We can scroll down all the way to the bottom to the first exchange. And it’s -- you wanted to speak regarding Ottawa’s request for additional enforcement support, as we see there. Why did you feel it was necessary at that time, so this was two days after making the request, to engage directly with the PMO?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So we’ll go through some more of these exchanges, because there is some more of that as time goes on for a few days. Let’s go to OTT20712. So this -- these are text messages with Zita Astravas. What is her role?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So these -- so if we can go to page 15? These are texts from the 11th of February. And if you can just scroll down -- oh, so it’s the last one. We’ll look at the last bubble there. So you say: “Can you please ask […] the Chief of Police, if this has not been provided to him, be given [a] line of sight on the additional bodies…” If we could continue to the next page? “…on the additional bodies he will get today (number), the additional bodies we will get tomorrow […] and the same line of sight for Sunday […]. Let me know when we can debrief.” Can I actually just -- if we could just go up to the first page again? So where were you obtaining -- well first, why were you asking for the Chief to be given line of sight on the additional bodies he was getting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did someone ask you to make this type of request from Minister Blair’s ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well we’ll go to your texts with Mike in just a moment. I want to ask you first though, where, generally, were you obtaining your information on the OPS numbers? How were you getting that information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So those would have been briefings with OPS leadership?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Including Chief Sloly, presumably?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You obviously had no direct line of sight on a number yourself?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s go to Document OTT30055. These are your texts with Mike Jones, who again is Chief of Staff to Minister Mendicino; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so here, you introduce yourself, because it’s Ms. Astravas who directed you to Mike; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so you say: “[Hi] Mike, can you give me a quick shout before 3 pm - trying to help our Chief of Police get through his board meeting at 3:00… this is Serge Arpin…” So again, who is -- where was this request coming from to help the Chief of Police get through the board meeting at 3:00?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so was there a request by Chief Sloly to help him prepare for the OPSB meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the answer you receive here at the bottom of this page says: “RCMP confirms they have committed approx. 250 members…” Which is what you just relayed to us. And here is the breakdown for the weekend. And so we see the numbers deployed, and then the numbers still on standby. And you would agree that most there are on standby still?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you have -- what was your understanding of why there was -- a majority of those officers were still on standby?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so your understanding of these officers are standby is that they would have been still assigned with the RCMP to protect federal assets? Is that what you’re saying?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We can go to the next page, and we can zoom that in. And here it continues: “So what the Minister told the Mayor, that we would be getting an additional 250 on top of the 150, is not factual and is roughly the same number than at the start of the insurrection. We’ll try to connect with OPS to clarify. There appears to be no line of sight in actual increase, unless you know more about tomorrow.” So your assessment then is that there had been no actual increase in RCMP resources since the beginning of the occupation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then you continue: “Not looking to jam you up, just need to know if the progressive build-up is underway for Minister’s last exchange with the Mayor. The numbers suggest no increase.” So can you describe what had been promised to the Mayor by the Minister? And is this Minister Mendicino?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was the promise that had been made?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we go to the bottom of this page: “There are 187 on operational readiness but haven’t been given a shift.” And then you say: “We’ll have to find out if they’ve been sworn in.” So I understand one of the concerns that had been raised was whether these officers that had been assigned were being sworn in on a timely basis. Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you able to confirm whether there was any backup in swearing in RCMP officers?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right. And if we can go -- I’ll just bring up that exchange -- OTT24082. That’s at page 3. So we’ll see in this exchange -- these are your WhatsApp exchanges with Chair Deans of the OPSB; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So at -- so page 3 at 3:23, so you ask: “Does a Board Meeting have to be called every time you need to swear in new officers?” She responds: “No, she has delegated authority to approve and have them sworn in.” Then you ask: “Are you aware of any backlogs in approval?” Skipping forward to her response: “Backlogs and approval, you mean for swearing in officers? No, not at all.” And if we jump down, 2:58:09 p.m. you say: “Asking again, are there any backlogs...” So this was the next day. “...in terms of swearing in RCMP?” She responds that she left a message for Blair Dunker?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I believe she’s the CAO of the OPS. And at 3:35:59, Chair Deans states: “I have followed up with your specific question. So far, Blair has told me that officers are being sworn in twice daily at 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. and she is not aware of any backlog.” So that’s the information that you received from the Chair of the OPSB?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you aware of any backlog? I understand these appointments needs to be approved by the Ontario Solicitor General’s Office. Were you aware of any backlog at that end?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That question was never raised?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go back to the text exchange with Mr. Jones at 30055 at page 4, you state: “It’s worse than what you and in the thought...”
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Pardon me?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
“It’s 40 officers available to the OPS. As of today, it’s 20 per shift. The 185 you referred to are committed to protect federal properties and assets.” Who provided you with that information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You don’t know specifically who provided that number?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to page 5? So this is February 12th at 1:12 p.m. Mr. Jones says: “RCMP says we’ve sent over three shifts of 70 each.” You respond: “They are lying to you flat out.” What led you to make that statement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You continue: “Can you take a call with the City manager because the facts are not in dispute.” What did you mean by that? Because it seems to me when I read these texts the facts are in dispute of exactly what numbers were on the ground.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We can go down a little bit more. You say, “You can tell him”. Is “him” referring to the Minister? If you can go up a little bit, sorry, for context?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So: “You can tell him that he’s being lied to by the RCMP. Those boots are not under OPS command.” Would you agree with me that you were quite confident in the information you were receiving at that point to go so far as to make that kind of statement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to page 6 -- oh, we are at page 6. Go down a bit more. And here there's kind of a further report that's provided to you, and you state that that report's not factual. Those are not the numbers available to OPSD. And the response you receive is, "I don't know how we reconcile our numbers." And so were you ever able to reconcile these numbers?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to page 7? So -- sorry, let's just go up a little bit. I just want to see the date again that we're on. If you can just go up to the next timestamp, thank you. So that's on February 12th. And let's go back down to page 7. Here he says, "Also hearing Chief Sloly has not yet signed off on plan from the Integrated Planning Cell [you can get a -- if] you can get a status update on that." Was this the first time you were hearing this -- that this was an issue?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this was now February 12th. What -- as part of this exchange, what was your understanding then for the lack of additional deployment by the RCMP? Did you come to understand what was holding things up?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So there's two things that you've mentioned there and that are in the text messages. There's one being that Chief Sloly has not yet signed off on a plan from the Integrated Planning Cell. And the second being, which you say, "It took 10 Days for us to be told that you could not get agreement on a command structure..." So were those two separate issues or am I misreading the text?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did you or the mayor's office check in with the OPS on this issue after these texts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was the response you received?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That would have been in a meeting. How would you -- how would that follow-up have been done?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you recall whether OPS acknowledged the problem or denied the problem?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you remember whether it was addressed, whether that problem was addressed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Let's go to page 9. So this is February 13th. So in the fourth -- third bubble on the left, Mr. Jones says, "Was glad to hear Sloly was able to confirm the resources we've been sending through." And you response, "Yes, very positive. [...] I'm trying to get your support but..." Oh, sorry, this second half I think pertains to the deal with the protesters.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But can you maybe explain this short exchange on Sloly being able to confirm the resources on the 13th? Do you recall that exchange?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so you're -- are you aware -- because this was one day later, are you aware at this time that resources actually started coming through at this point, or not necessarily?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So in your witness statement, you say that major RCMP resources began arriving on February 16th or 17th. Do you have any insight into what changed between February 13th and 16th that led to that influx of resources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You're not aware if there was an agreement on, you know, signing off on a plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You're not aware if it was Chief Sloly's resignation that led to that change?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you're not aware of any change in resourcing being attributable to the emergencies -- the invocation of the Emergencies Act on the 14th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Let's go to OTT20712. These are your texts with Zita Astravas. And I'd like to go to page 17. We can go down a little bit. Down a bit more. Sorry. So here you state, and this was on February 15th, you state: “We had just gotten off a very successful call between the Mayor and Chief Sloly; I’m grateful in the change of tone since yesterday”. I’m just wondering if you recall what that’s about.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
It would have been, I believe, a bit later that afternoon, but that’s okay. If we can go to ONT311. So I want to talk a little bit about your engagement with the province. There’s a meeting that -- kind of a tripartite meeting at the DM level which Steve Kay attends. And if we go down, you’ll see there in bold, so this is on -- sorry, this is on February 6th that this meeting occurs, which is the day that the Mayor declared a municipal state of emergency. And the statement there in bold that Steve Kay makes is: “Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is going to declare a local Emergency in the City of Ottawa at 4:30. The expressed intent of this declaration is to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve this.” Did you have discussions with the Mayor about this decision to declare a local emergency?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you agree with this statement, that this was the expressed intent?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No? What was the intent in your view?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was your view at that time that it was necessary to put pressure on the province?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
This is February 6th.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you mentioned that you had a call, I think, with the Premier’s Chief of Staff on February 7th; that’s in your witness statement; there’s a mention in your witness statement that part of -- that on this issue of the need for resources, it was mentioned that resources were also necessary to respond to the blockade in Windsor that had just begun. What’s your recollection of that conversation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did Mr. Wallace, the Premier’s Chief of Staff, say anything about how they would prioritize resources between Ottawa and Windsor?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement you mentioned that Mr. Wallace also expressed concerns in the OPS’s leadership. Was this on the February 7th call?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you have a sense about the timing approximately when this would have occurred?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what specifically, when you talk about under the current leadership structure, what was meant by that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I guess one of the issues that has come up is kind of the, you know, integration of command structures and another issue that has come up is Chief Sloly’s leadership himself. And so do you have a sense of whether those comments went to one of those issues, both of those issues?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No specific concerns?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, and then did Mr. Wallace identify any specific concerns?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I believe the response that you received, and this is again in your text with Zeta, but I won’t bring you there, there was a response from the Province to the request to participate in trilateral calls that they would participate. Did you ever receive an explanation for that refusal?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s go to OTT10527. So these are text messages between Councillor Luloff and Zita, the Chief of Staff for Mayor -- for Minister Blair and he notes in this exchange that he at this point on February 12th has the votes to pass a motion requesting the invocation the National Defence Act Aid to Civil Power. We’re you aware of this proposed motion before City Council?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he says there: “I’m going to move it on Monday at a special meeting of Council.” So that would have been, I believe, on the 14th. So you were aware of this; did the Mayor’s office -- or did the Mayor support this motion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it became no longer relevant ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- at that point? And you've already mentioned, and I can take you to OTT24082, and I'll go to page 4 of that document. These are your texts with Councillor Deans. So at 5:39, you say: "'We will have to work hard to defeat a motion asking Peter to resign on Monday. As of today I don't believe we have the votes even though Council cannot remove him. Only your board.'" So your understanding is that a motion to asking him to resign would also be put before City Council on that February 14th; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I think it's at 6:52. Is that text you're referring or the message you're referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I would like to ask you about that, though. Is -- you say: "'This is what we're up against. We will have discuss tomorrow.'" And then in quotes: "'If Peter is too stupid to announce daily the number of OPP, RCMP, OPS...'"
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay, "'It is his own funeral.'" Where had you heard this comment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why did you want to work with Councillor Deans to defeat this motion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is that -- is it to avoid this motion that the Council meeting on -- that was scheduled for the 14th was delayed until the 16th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so this sentiment ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to take you, then, to OTT17368. So if we can go down. Down, down, down. Okay. So below this, there's a number of redactions, my understanding is because there's an exchange of legal advice, and I'm not interested in what that says. But if we go up above these redactions. So -- and feel free to ask to scroll down if you would like kind of to situate yourself, but if we go down just a little bit. Councillor Fleury emails you February 5th, and asks you to speak to him about presumably whatever is discussed under. Do you recall that conversation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I'd like to go -- I'll ask you about that, but if you go up. You forward this on to the Mayor and say: "'Is there anything at all out of this hot mess that can be salvaged? The city cannot implement a by-law that would violate Charter rights... We will liaise with Clerk and Legal on this.'" And then James Armbruster, which again is with your office, correct, responds: "'Why don't we just declare a state of emergency?'" So the sense I'm getting is that there was other options being discussed, and I'm just wondering what those other options were.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so instead the Mayor has declared that municipal emergency, which was mentioned as an option by James there?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I just want to quickly -- we expect to hear from Jason LaFace, a protestor, that he had a call with the Mayor, possibly -- or possibly someone at the Mayor's Office, shortly before the convoy's arrival, and that he would promise to keep emergency lanes open. Are you aware of any call with anyone ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- related to the convoy ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- prior to their arrival?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Nor anyone in the Mayor's Office?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
OTT20710. Let's go to the bottom of page 15. That's OTT -- okay. Yes. So the bottom of page 15. Here -- so here, it's the text on February 9th at 8:11 a.m., you were having a discussion, my understanding is, with Councillor Deans about postponing one of the motions she might have been bringing forward. But I'm interested in the statement you say in the last bubble there: "'There's a very significant chance we will still be into the demonstration in late February...'" I'm wondering what led you to make that assessment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement, you talk about the meeting that you and the mayor had with Councillor Deans on February -- the morning of February 16th. The morning -- later that day, she was removed from the OPSB. I'd like to go to OTT8842. So this is a draft -- what looks like a draft letter to me, "Open Letter to the Residents of Ottawa. Why Council Acted to Restore Confidence in the Ottawa Police Services Board." You recognize this document?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you author this document?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who generated the content of the document? Was it you or was it the mayor, or it was a collaboration?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yourself. And can you explain what its purpose was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why did he decide against it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so would you say that this letter captures your perspective on the reasons why Councillor Deans was removed from the OPSB?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I think we already have your -- kind of your perspective on why that happened in your witness statement. We covered that during your interview. But I do have kind of a few specific questions. If we can go to the top of page 2? And then I'm going to wrap up. Right. Sorry, let's go up a bit more. Okay. So you -- well, I'm going to say you, but I understand that it's your office. "At the same meeting,..." And you're referring I take it to an OPSB meeting on February 15th, day prior, after Chief Sloly had resigned; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
"...OPS Board were asked to give the Chair a Mandate to negotiate a contractual arrangement with a firm located in Waterloo. Under this contractual arrangement, a consulting services firm would be asked to manage the OPS effective[ly] February (21) or (22)." And this is the part I'm interested in. "No votes were taken and no authority was delegated that would allow the Chair to finalize an arrangement – Board members believed that they had mandated the Chair to undertake a search for an external Chief of Police. Board members insist on the fact that the Board Chair did not seek delegated authority to execute a contract for a new Chief of Police." How did you reach this assessment of kind of the lack of a mandate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you had discussions with a number of other OPSB members who relayed this information to you about ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I'm raising this because I expect that Councillor Deans, who's testifying in a few days may disagree with the statements.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You yourself didn't have any direct insight into the workings of the Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so you don't actually -- you weren't privy to that meeting and exactly what mandate she was providing; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I think my time is up, so I think those are all my questions, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mr. Commissioner. Commission Counsel would like to call as their next witness ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Commission Counsel, and our next witness is Councillor Diane Deans.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thanks.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Councillor Deans.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So, Councillor Deans, I understand that you're a City Councillor with the City of Ottawa?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you were Chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board during kind of the events of February -- January/February earlier this year up until February 16th; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You had an interview with Commission Counsel on August 16th of this year?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I'll pull up WTS00000010. And this is a summary of your interview; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You had an opportunity to review that summary?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any corrections?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so we'll put that summary into evidence. Councillor Deans, I understand that the Ottawa Police Services Board, which I'll refer to as the OPSB or the Board, it's a seven-member civilian oversight body for the OPS; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the City appoints three councillors to that Board and one resident?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then the province appoints another three of those members?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you were the chair of the Board during the relevant period?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to start by getting a sense of what was known to the Board prior to the convoy's arrival. I understand that the Board was regularly briefed by OPS leadership and that you personally as the Chair also had regular communications with OPS leadership?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How often would you speak to Chief Sloly, for example?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that -- from your witness summary that you were first briefed on the incoming Freedom Convoy by Chief Sloly and John Steinbachs, Executive Director of Strategy and Communications for OPS on January 24th; is that accurate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what do you recall about the information that was relayed to you during that briefing?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was there any information provided at that time about kind of the -- how significant the number of trucks would be or how long they intended to stay?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we'll get to that meeting in just a little bit. Before going to that, I'd like to go to OPS00002978. So this is a copy of a briefing by Deputy Ferguson that was -- if you scroll down to the bottom, please, just a little up? Up, up, up. Okay. So this is an email from Deputy Ferguson to Kim Ayotte forwarding information that was provided to the Board. So you see here it says below is a -- in the third line, "Below is the information we are sharing with our Board." So if we can go down? Over here, perfect. Thank you. And you'll see it says, "The purpose of this email is to update you on a Trucker convoy scheduled to arrive in Ottawa beginning Friday, January 28th. This will be a significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period." And this, again, was on January 25th. Do you remember this information being just ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- provided to you at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you remember when he would have told you that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And based on what you just said, is it fair to say that this kind of messaging around significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period, you just said there's a number of protests in Ottawa. Is it fair to say that this messaging was something different than what you were used to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We heard earlier this week from Steve Kanellakos that in the advance of the convoy's arrival, the City had received information from a local Hotel Association advising that protesters were booking stays of 30 days, and that that had been forwarded to the OPS. Did the OPS ever brief -- ever kind of work this information to any of the briefings for the Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So did the Board have any information on this at all? Were they notified?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Okay, so I'd like to pull up OPB00001257. So these are the minutes of that first board meeting on January 26th. This is a public meeting. So you called this special meeting; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And during that meeting, the Board was briefed by Chief Sloly and his deputies?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand this meeting was called on short notice. Why did you feel the need to call this meeting at this time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I'd like to go to page 2, and if we go down to the first kind of substantive paragraph here. It says, second sentence, "They" -- they, being the OPS: "...indicated that there was a coordination of intelligence between agencies, and the Service noted expecting that the 'Freedom Convoy' would arrive in Ottawa as early as Thursday, and likely to remain through Sunday." I'd like to just look at another quote and then get your thoughts. So at the third paragraph, it says: "Operational plans in place had been informed by threat and risk assessments. The Service advised that they had been in contact with demonstration organizers, and the information suggested that it would be a fluid event that could go on for an extended period. The number of people involved was not known." So were you able to -- these two kind of statements seem a little bit different ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in tone. Was any information provided that would allow you to reconcile them?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And when he advised you of this, this was not -- this was during a one-on-one call or during a Board meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I'd like to go to the third page, and the second paragraph on that page. So it says: "The Service noted that their priority was to the maintain safety of the demonstrators, their members and the community as a whole. The unpredictable nature of an event such as this was referenced." To what extent did the OPS brief the Board on its operational plans during this first meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was -- here it talks about the priority being to maintain safety of the demonstrators, their members and the community as a whole. Did the Board enquire as to whether there was a plan to ensure their egress from the City at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this juncture, before the convoy arrived, did the Board request that it be briefed with the OPS's operational plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Would it be fair to say that at this juncture the Board wasn't asking to see that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in this passage that I read, the second paragraph, it sets out what the priorities are. What extent did the Board have an opportunity to direct the OPS as to its priorities with respect to this event?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so as Chair of the Board did you feel that the OPS -- that -- or that the Board had had an opportunity to provide input into those priorities ahead of the convoy's arrival?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's go to the fifth paragraph on this page, so the one that starts with "A question". It says: "A question was raised regarding actions that would be taken should a highway or other major route be blockaded. The Service explained that there are a number of considerations when faced with unlawful activity, and that their reaction will depend on whether the blockade[s] [create] a large public safety risk. It was further noted that access to certain sites would be limited, and that the OPS plan had been put together to enable maximum flexibility with layers of scalable resources." Was the Board briefed on whether the OPS's plan would allow or restrict access to the downtown core?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know -- again, at this juncture, were you briefed on any contingency plans in the event that the protesters didn't leave at the end of the weekend?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you satisfied that it didn't go as expected and some either remained, or most remained, that there was a plan in that event?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that during this meeting, the OPS advised the Board that it had a staffing plan for this event. Was -- were any resourcing concerns communicated at this juncture?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether there were any contingency plans if resources became overwhelmed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I’d like to pull up OPP00001494. So this is a provincial operations intelligence Bureau Situational Awareness Bulletin dated January 26th. So this is the same day as this Board meeting. And we’ll go to the third paragraph on the left side there. So it says: “Once in Ottawa, Freedom Convoy 2022 organizers have stated an intent to remain at Parliament Hill until the Federal government concedes to repeal all COVID-19 public health restrictions and mandates. Organizers have indicated they are planning to stage disruptions that may gridlock areas around Parliament buildings and parts of Ottawa. There is no expressed departure date for when participants will disperse or the action will end.” And I expect that we’ll be hearing this afternoon, I believe, that Chief Sloly and some members of the OPS referred these reports from the Bureau that would have contained this kind of intelligence. Were you or the Board ever provided with this kind of intelligence or even kind of a high- level summary of this type of intelligence?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this -- the first Board meeting on the 26th, that was a public meeting; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And neither you, nor Chief Sloly, requested that there be an in-camera portion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Would it be fair to say that more information could have been provided, had there been an in-camera portion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you able to explain, you know, the -- was there some rational to why it was felt that there was no in-camera session necessary at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So was your understanding that the Board, even in camera, wouldn’t necessarily be entitled to this kind of information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what led you to come to the conclusion that the Board wasn’t entitled to receive this kind of information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Had he requested for an in-camera portion that day, would you have been amenable to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I understand from your witness summary that it’s during that first week that you realized that the protest was turning into something that was more prolonged. How did you reach that assessment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Who had told you that conversations had broken down?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is that communications between the PLT and the protestors? Is that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- what you believe he was referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So from -- you had this first meeting on January 26th. From January 27th through the first week and the first weekend -- or sorry, through the first week, the Board didn’t meet again until the next Saturday, February 5th; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why is that when you called the next meeting? Why not earlier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And we’ll get to that February 5th meeting in a little bit. Who was advising you not to over impose on the police by not calling too many meetings?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I'd like to go to OPB00001624. So these are notes from a February 1st briefing of the Board by Chief Sloly and Deputy Bell. Do you remember this briefing?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
There was a lot of them. Was it typical for the Board to receive this kind of briefing outside of regular Board meetings?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We can just go down a little bit on the first page. Okay. The fourth bullet down says: “Some resources have returned to GTA, but more resources retained from Peel, Hamilton and OPP More specific requests to OPP and RCMP” So whenever the -- my understanding is that whenever the OPS would receive additional resources from another police force, you were responsible for signing the memorandums of understanding?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And how -- these resources that are mentioned, again this is February 1st, at this stage can you maybe just describe the numbers and how long they were generally staying for?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in terms of the significance of the amount of officers, can you speak to that generally?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I'm interested here when it says, “More specific requests to OPP and RCMP”. This was as you mentioned prior to that Board meeting on the 5th, prior to the letter that you and the mayor sent out to the province and the feds. So what kind of requests at this time were being made of the OPP and the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I believe it’s the 2nd, but ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- I'm sure we'll have that somewhere.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You mentioned needing, kind of external expertise. Is that something that Chief Sloly said to you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Or was it just your assessment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So coming back to this briefing, so I understand it, as Chief Sloly is advising you and the Board that more specific requests were being made to the OPP and the RCMP; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you're not clear on exactly what those resources -- those requests were that were being made?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Is it at this point that the Board was advised that more resources were necessary; is this around the time, the first time the Board is advised?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay, if we can go to page six, near the bottom of that page, okay, so -- just going up just a tiny bit, okay. So there’s a question asked: “If there was legal authority issued around a Court Order for removal what would be the threshold for removing trucks and people, a large conglomerate of people and vehicles?” And then my understanding is Trish responds: “Indicated earlier on that we had a number of OPP commanders involved with previous occupation events. Consistently what we are hearing an injunction is an option on the table. Everyone we have spoken to we are not feeling that an injunction is the best way to go. Clear indication that an injunction might be the worst way to go. We will keep all options on the table and we’ll be able to justify using or not using them.” So do you know who made this statement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you remember this discussion about an injunction at this time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Absolutely. And I’m interested in -- here there’s a statement that an injunction might be the worst way to go. I’m wondering if you have any insight into what that meant?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well, I’m not necessarily interested in the content of the conversation.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Absolutely.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Commissioner ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
My intention with the question was just to understand what was said at this meeting; and my understanding is that Mr. White was not the person answering this question; so that was my intent for this particular question.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was what the meaning of, you know, an injunction might be the worst way to go, which was apparently communicated in this briefing, what that meant.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Correct.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Correct.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can go to the next page, near the bottom of that page seven. There is a question here: “Can you put boundaries, protect their right to protest but limit where they can go?” And the answer is: ”Very little.” Do you recall who said this during this meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of the reason that there was very little that could be done to limit access to further vehicles wanting to enter the downtown core?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I’d like to go to document ONT40001120. Go to the bottom of that document, just to provide the context; just the very bottom. So moving up from there. So this is just to kind of provide you the context. So my understanding is that on February 1st Krista Ferraro, who is the Executive-Director of the Board; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Had a call with Lindsay Gray; and who’s Lindsay Gray?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And there was a call on February 1st at -- about operational decisions; do you -- were you on this call? Do you remember this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can just go up to the top, then, of the document. So this is the email from the Solicitor General's Office, Advisor Lindsey Gray, to Ms. Ferraro, and it provides some citations, I guess from the Morden Report. Do you remember seeing this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so do you know what the context was for Ms. Ferraro reaching out to the Board advisor on this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it's fair to say that during this first week, the -- you and the Board were trying to come to a full understanding of what your role was in this kind of situation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And maybe at a high- level, could you -- you know, what were the key takeaways that you can recall of what the Board's role was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, that's helpful. Was your understanding also that the Board had a role in setting priorities and objectives in the ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- context of a large event?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Great. Save me time in not having to read a quote, so that's good. If we can just go ONT0001112. So this is just an email a week later. Mr. Swaita, I believe, one of the Board members, I guess had heard... If you can go right to the bottom, to the first email in the chain. Had heard that this engagement between Ms. Ferraro and the advisor had taken place, and was asking to be briefed. Do you know why kind of the information wasn't provided to the whole Board from the outset?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Okay, I'd like to go to OPB00000424. So this is on February 3rd, and it's an exchange between you and Chief Sloly. So if we could go to the first part of the exchange. Keep going down to the next -- yeah. So this is an email from you to the Chief, and my understanding is that you are offering him support in securing additional resources. Do you recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then if we go up to Chief Sloly's response. He responds that the OPS is making: "...efforts to secure additional resources from RCMP, OPP and municipal services." And he's encouraging the Board to use their influence to do the same. Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What -- and it may be that you've already given me the answer, but what kind of resource requests did you understand were being made at this time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And those were requests being made directly from the OPS to their policing counterparts at the OPP and the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know how many officers were being requested at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And how did you know -- as the requests were being made police to police, how did you come to know that that was the nature of the requests being made?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know, at this time, these resources, were they being requested to maintain the kind of a tired police force, or was it to build up to enough capacity to take enforcement action? Do you know?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know if that conversation was before your letter went out to the feds and the Province?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So on February 5th, as we've discussed, you call this meeting of the Board. And so what -- I understand it was called on short notice. What led you to call it on an urgent basis?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could go to OPB00001264? So these are the minutes of that February 5th meeting. If we could go to page 5? So in the second paragraph, it says, "Although the Board expressed frustration at the lack of clearly outlined plan that would result in the end of the demonstration, the Service noted having articulated a framework aimed at their surge and contain strategy." So I take it at this meeting the Board was pushing to get more information on what the plan was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you advised at this point that there was a plan to actually bring the -- bring these events to an end?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you provided with more detail?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So the next day he provides you with details on the resources that were necessary?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And we'll go to that table.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was any further insight provided on what the, you know, the operational plan was to specifically bring it to an end?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And here it says, "... the Service noted having articulated a framework aimed at their surge and contain strategy." What was your understanding of the objective of the surge and contain strategy? Was it to bring this to an end, or was it to manage the situation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's go to page 3 and it's the fourth paragraph down. So it says, "The Service had received supports from the [OPP], the [RCMP], multiple surrounding municipal services, however still needed more." I take it again that you were aware of these resources coming in because you had signed MOUs?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this point, again, this is on the 5th, are the resources coming in more significant?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And when you're saying the RCMP were attending to other things, is it -- I understand some of them were attending to federal institutions - --
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- federal properties?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Maybe it's helpful -- so at this February 5th meeting, the Board approved the appointment of 257 RCMP officers, which I guess would have been sworn in as special constables. So did that mean that 257 were on the ground? Like, what does that mean in practice if 257 are approved?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we go to page 3 and the third paragraph? Okay. Oh, sorry, third paragraph from the bottom. So second sentence, "The Service later, however, highlighted the need for additional legal supports in both the short and medium term, requesting assistance to find uncharted legal territory. The Service referenced the Criminal Code as being archaic and both the Provincial Highway Traffic Act and City of Ottawa Bylaws as being limiting in that they all failed to consider events such as the trucker convoy." Do you recall who said this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you understand this to be -- to mean?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I guess, did you ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you understand it to be saying that they needed new enforcement authority to effectively end this -- these events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was there any specific type of authority that you understood they were asking for?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Let’s go to page 5, paragraph 5: “A question was raised regarding whether the Service’s assumption that the demonstration was only going to last for the initial weekend was due to a lack of intelligence. The Service noted having had a large amount of intelligence from the time the convoy began its travels cross- country. The intelligence indicated that there would be small groups staying into the week, but ultimately it had seemed as though the crowd would be departing.” Do you know who provided this information to the Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could go to OPB00001647? So these are the in-camera minutes for this same meeting. Page 2, paragraph 4. Sorry, yeah: “The Chief reassured the Board that there was a comprehensive plan, however he could not provide all the details of what the Service was doing operationally.” Why was this raised during the in-camera portion of this meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you understand him to be saying that the Board was not entitled to that information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you recall the Chief ever telling the Board, or telling you, that he needed to receive the resources before he could finalize a plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
OTT at 00017349. So this is a February 5th email that a resident forwarded to -- an email between a resident and Councillor McKenney that was forwarded to the Board as well. And if we just go down just a little bit? Thank you. We see here a response from your colleague, Councillor Meehan. And she was also a Board Member; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you see she says: “So very sorry Catherine” who she had forwarded this resident’s email, “Wish we had the power to do something, besides watch.” Did you or other members of the Board share in this sentiment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So what did you feel that you could do as a Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s go to OTT10010. So these are notes from Jessica Bradley, who I understand is your assistant, of a meeting between you, the Chief, and the Mayor on February 6th. Do you remember that meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you’ve seen these notes before?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And they reflect, generally, you know, the content of that meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So at the top, it says: “Large operation going on at Coventry. Planning has gone on overnight. Operation commenced around 4pm Elevated level or resistance, brought in more resources. Not going well.” So I take it an operation was ongoing at Coventry to clear out Coventry at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why was it not going well?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was the Board advised as to -- you or the Board as to why it failed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we go down just a little bit, you see the heading: “Pass or enhance existing bylaws” and then there’s a number of sub-bullets, and then it says: “Sloly to provide top 3 Bylaws we should focus on.” Can you maybe just explain what this discussion was about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that included the possibility of passing new by-laws?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so this final bullet: “Sloly to provide top three by-laws we should focus on...” That was kind of the action item from this discussion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was he supposed to do?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was that list of three by-laws provided?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was the idea here -- I guess the question that comes to mind is, if there was difficulty enforcing existing by-laws, what was the reasoning here in identifying additional enforcement power under by-laws?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Then it says at the very bottom of the page there: “The Chief needs 1800 officers”. Is that the first time he kind of specified the number?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s go to OTT0005590. So the next day, my understanding is that you and the Mayor received a table from Chief Sloly setting out the resources he required and substantiating essentially that 1800 number; do you remember this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let’s go just down to see the table; there we go; thank you. And so this was a response to that discussion the day prior?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you satisfied with the level of detail provided in this table?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did Sloly ever brief the Board on how these 1800 officers would fit in to his operational plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You weren’t provided with that kind of level of detail?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I expect that we’ll hear testimony suggesting that in preparing this table and this request for 1800, Chief Sloly instructed his officers to ask for double of what they required; had you ever heard anything about this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so later that day this -- I don’t think I’ve mentioned it; I think this email is dated the 7th; if we could just -- thank you. So later this day you and the Mayor issued those letters to the Feds and the Province requesting the 1800; was this table ever provided to the Province or the Federal Government; do you know?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know if they ever received a detailed breakdown to go along with your request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We heard from Mr. Arpin the other day that the Mayor was initially reluctant to send out that letter but that the OPS had essentially told him that their requests were not being heard and so it needed to be escalated to the political level; does that align with your recollection?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So, Mr. Arpin testified that the Mayor was reluctant to sign the letters to the Province and to the Federal Government initially but that the OPS had communicated to him that their own request for resources, the ones we talked about earlier, were not being received; were not being heard. And so -- that it required escalation and at the political level?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And so you sent, and “you”, I mean you and the Mayor, sent these letters to both the Province and the Federal Government at essentially the same time. I expect that we’ll hear that the Federal Government had some concerns that this request didn’t follow the proper process set out in the Police Services Act where it should have essentially -- the notion being that it should have gone first to the Province, and then if necessary, to the Federal Government. Were you made aware of those concerns at any point?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did anyone ever advise you from the Federal Government or the Province that a different process should have been followed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You weren’t advised that this would somehow delay the process or delay the response to the request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I’d like to pull up ONT5000851. So do you recognize this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
This is the response from Minister Jones on February 10th.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could just go to the top of page two. So it says: “Regarding the City of Ottawa and Ottawa Police Services Board’s request for significant additional operational resources, please note that I have shared your correspondence with Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Thomas Carrique. Commissioner Thomas Carrique and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Commissioner Brenda Lucki will continue to liaise with Chief Peter Sloly ... to determine how policing partners can provide support based on available policing resources and the operational plan proposed by the Ottawa Police Service.” Do you remember reading this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what were your thoughts on reading this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Let’s pull up OPB858. So this is an email chain with respect to your approval -- and sorry, this is on February 10th -- your approval of 400 RCMP appointments. If we can just go down, so if -- yeah, it’s that one, if we can just go down? So if you -- yeah, so that one in the middle, sorry. So you see this email from Krista Ferraro to yourself and asking you to please provide approval for the ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- 400 officers. And if we just go up to the top of the chain, there's the response from Julia Keast. She's from your office; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And she says, "The Chair approves this request. She's asked me to convey her concern[...] that MOUs for new resources articulate that RCMP officers are fully embedded in the OPS and [...] fully deployable." That was in reference to your concerns that you've previously indicated that they would be assigned to federal resources or otherwise not deployable; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you briefly explain to us -- I think it would be helpful if we could understand the process for swearing in these officers. So, you know, you -- the -- and I understand this only happens with RCMP officers; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So could we just walk through, let's say the RCMP says we're going to give you 250 officers. What's the first thing that needs to happen?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you need -- is it that you need to approve it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then what happens after the swearing in?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say your line of sight is just on the approval ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- and the swearing in?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And at -- I think the only other element is the signing of the MOUs. At what point does -- did that occur in kind of that sequence?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know if that came before the swearing in?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. All right. And my understanding is it's necessary to swear in the RCMP officers as special constables, so that they can have the authority to enforce provincial by-laws and ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- laws; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So I think you've already said that -- we've heard from Mr. Arpin and his communications with Mr. Jones from Minister Mendocino's office. That was -- there was a difficulty reconciling the numbers being provided by the RCMP and the numbers being provided by the OPP. You were aware of that, I take it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I think we missed our -- we missed one step in our previous discussion. I believe the Solicitor General's office also needs to sign off on the approval of these officers; are you aware of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No? Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you wouldn't be aware if there was any delays at that level?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We heard the other day that Mr. Jones reported to Mr. Arpin that RCMP officers were assigned to Ottawa but on standby because they hadn't been given an assignment by the OPS. Are you -- do you have any information, you know, are you able to confirm or deny that -- those kind of statements?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you were never told that RCMP officers were assigned to OPS but on standby?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So from your vantage point, where was the holdup in the deployment of these resources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Mr. Jones also reported to Mr. Arpin on February 12th that there was delays in deploying officers because Chief Sloly hadn't signed off on a plan. Had you heard anything about that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. By this point on February 12th, had you seen a plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let's go to OPB00001272. This is the -- these are the minutes from the February 11th public meeting. And if we could just scroll down? Okay. So right in the first paragraph. Can we just expand that so it fills the screen? "Chief Sloly provided opening remarks, indicating that there remained sensitivity surrounding the OPS' operational plans. He noted that demonstrators were now subject to higher penalties and fines. The Service was aware that more people were planning to return to Ottawa over the weekend, and they were deploying all available resources. The Chief indicated that although progress was being made, the key remained resourcing." Do you know again here why this was raised at the very beginning of the meeting in terms of sensitivity around OPS' operational plans?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you beginning to suspect at this time that there was some association between the delay and the plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let's go to OPB00001648. These are the in-camera minutes for the same meeting on February 11th. At the outset, it mentions that threats were received by you and your staff. Can you maybe shed some light on what that was about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall, these threats, was there any information provided in them that would associate them with, you know, your response to the convoy or something like that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Let’s go to page -- I guess the bottom of this page. Okay, so a question was raised regarding resource supports received from the OPP and RCMP. They had 60 OPP officers and 40 RCMP at that time and had since Monday. That was the total additional officers received - - or provided. Was this aligning with the number of officers that had been committed by the province and the federal government?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is -- do I understand this correctly that there had effectively been no change in the number of resources between February 7th when you made your request and Friday February 11th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And again, these number reported were reported to you via Chief Sloly; you weren’t seeing these numbers directly?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you remember during this meeting a conversation about a possible request to invoke the -- to ask for the use of the National Defence Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Let’s go to the top of page 4. It was noted that at the time of the convoy’s arrival, there was no intelligence that suggested the demonstration would turn into the occupation that it had become. Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who made that statement; do you recall?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let’s go to OTT00010555.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so I’m just going back to the minutes of the February 11th meeting that we were looking at, and if we could just expand that. So I just want to ask again about the -- this last paragraph: "The Board expressed concern that it did not seem as though the service was being provided with the resources required. A question was raised regarding whether the service would be in favour of a number of councillors asking the Mayor to request the Attorney General’s support through the National Defence Act." Do you remember, you know, here’s it’s “…whether the service would be in favour…”. Do you remember what that -- how that discussion went? Were they in favour of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair to say the request was never made?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. All right, so let’s go to OTT1055. This is a text you had with Blair Dunker who’s the CAO of OPS, correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is on February 12th. And let’s just go to the first -- sorry, back to the top, the first text exchange there -- down, down, down, okay. So you say: "How many RCMP officers have been sworn in since the start of the demonstration? Are any pending?" And if we scroll down, Blair responds: "421 RCMP officers are on the list provided to OPS. Of those, 306 are sworn in. There is no delay in swearing in. RCMP asked for two swearing in times, when shifts change, 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. From the time we get the name from the RCMP to getting it approved by the Ministry and sworn in, it’s within in a day or less. We are very flexible. It’s important to note that this does mean the officers sworn in are deployed and it doesn’t mean the ones on the list that are not sworn in have arrived." So do you know who was deciding whether or not to deploy an RCMP officer that had been sworn in. Was it OPS or the RCMP; do you know?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And when she says, "It doesn’t mean the ones on the list that are not yet sworn in have arrived." So am I -- is my understanding correct that they would first have to arrive in Ottawa and then they would be sworn in by Ms. Dunker?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you asked Ms. Dunker to provide you with a table of daily deployments, correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let's look at OPB00001014. This is a copy -- you can confirm for me, but I believe this is a copy of the table you were provided by Ms. Dunker?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So if we can try to fit the table on -- there we go. Thank you. And so you've seen this table?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I believe it was provided to you the next day, on the 13th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you describe what it shows?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether -- and maybe we just scroll up a bit so we can see the title of the chart -- do you know, is this showing officers that were deployable or officers that had actually been deployed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was your impression the first time you looked at this table?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Would you -- so if we can -- I look on the big screen. It's okay. So would you agree that there seems to be some increase, a rather significant increase in the RCMP and OPP numbers on the very last day, on the 12th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why that was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know if this trend continued over the rest of your term, at 13, 14, 15, 16?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know how many resources were available to OPS when you were removed on the 16th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's go to OPS00011610, and go down. Okay. So it's the second email there, an email from Jessica Bradley from your office to John Steinbachs. Who is John?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so you say: "I recognize that this was not part of the initial request for the in-camera briefing, but the Chair and the Board have been asking Chief Sloly to provide an overview of the Plan to end this occupation. Specifically, the Chair would like to know the methodology behind the request for 1,800 additional resources and how the will be deployed. We recognize that some information with respect to the plan will be confidential and cannot be shared; however, as [an] oversight body, the Board should be apprised of the general priorities and objectives of the Plan. The Chair would like to be able to put out a statement similar to the one Toronto put out last weekend." And then if we go down, you say, "I have highlighted the relevant sections." Sorry, let's go back up. Okay. So the third paragraph under the bold heading there: "Board Members were briefed on the details of the operational plan, including the priorities and objectives [of] the operation, and had opportunities to ask questions of the chief and obtain further information." So you remember making this request on ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- February 14?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was your -- and so why did you make this request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So when you read this, what led you to conclude that they were getting more than you had?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So the Toronto Police Services Board has actually provided us with an institutional report, and that’s TPB.IR.00000001. I won't take you to specific passages, but they relay that in applying the lessons from Morden, they had integrated a Board representative into -- there was one sitting at the executive management table for the event, one was invited to attend the services executive command centre, and that this allowed ongoing Board access to operational briefings and updates in real time. Was this -- was anything similar offered to the Ottawa Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why that was felt not to be possible?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you were requesting a greater -- more insight into what the plan was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what the operational plan was, and you were not receiving it; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Little snippets.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the Board -- how did the Board push back? You know, presumably when it was not getting what it was asking, how does the Board push back?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever -- did the Board ever formally direct Chief Sloly to produce additional information? My understanding is under the Police Services Act there is authority to direct the Chief. Was any kind of formal direction ever issued in that respect?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was it -- did you understand that that would be an option?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement you said that when you requested to see the plan you would receive “wiggle words”; can you explain what you mean by that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can we go to OPB00001646? So these are text messages between yourself and Amanda Galbraith ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- I’m not sure how to pronounce that -- February 12th. If we can just go down to February 12th at 10:59 a.m. So who is Ms. Galbraith?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so she was advising you on communications matters.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so here, February 12th at 10:59 -- these are texts, again, between yourself and Ms. Galbraith -- you say: “I wish I thought there was a plan!” “Yeah. I hear you. Ignorance on operational matters (while appropriate) only provides so much comfort.” And you respond: “Not much at all. Joanne Chianello from CBC sent me a message last night and asked if I think there is a plan. I didn’t respond.” I think we’ve already talked about you not being satisfied with the disclosure of the plan to this point. Had you concluded by this date that there was a possibility that there wasn’t yet a plan on how to bring an end to the occupation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So from what I heard from you earlier, it sounds like the reason that the Board didn’t direct the Chief more formally to provide that information was because you wanted to maintain a cooperative relationship; would that be accurate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know during the relevant period, did the Board issue any formal directions to Chief Sloly?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did the Board adopt any policies during that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I just want to get your understanding here of kind of the tools available to you and the exercise of that oversight function. If you were to have directed the Chief to provide additional information and that was not done, were there any tools available to you to enforce that request, to your -- to the best of your knowledge?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you aware that OPS had arranged for an in camera briefing by the OPP on February 15th that would include a briefing on some of the intelligence that had been provided to it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Had you requested that kind of a briefing? How did that come about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know why that kind of briefing was not provided earlier?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
M’hm.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did -- and I understand that that briefing was cancelled, was put off because of Chief Sloly’s resignation that same day.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever have any briefings with OPP or RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
A lot changed in those few days.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Let's go to ONT00001116. So this is a PowerPoint that the OPSB prepared for the February 15th meeting, that's my understanding. Have you ever seen this document?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Previously, had you seen it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Is it possible that it was also part of that, kind of, cancelled briefing on the 15th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We can take that down, thank you. Could you please tell us how Chief Sloly’s resignation on the 15th came about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did anyone reach out to you ahead of his resignation to suggest that you should put pressure on him to resign or anything like that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the -- I understand from your witness statement that the Board had some conversations about his leadership. Did it consider whether it had the authority to remove him?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you concluded that you did not have that authority as the Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is it fair to say that the concerns that the Board discussed about his leadership were related to what you previously have talked about in terms of in-fighting and those kind of issues?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did your personal interactions with Chief Sloly give rise to any concerns about his leadership?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
As the Chair of the Board, yes, sorry.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I guess what I meant by my question is in your own interactions with him in your role, did you have any -- you know, did anything arise from those communications that gave you concerns?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And coming back to the plan to end the protests in Ottawa, did the Board ever lose faith in his ability to accomplish that task?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Turning to the February 15th meeting, once, you know, the announcement was made that he had resigned, but then there was a briefing from OPS, would you agree that during that meeting it was clear to the Board that the OPS -- the wheels were in motion to now bring this to an end? Can you maybe describe that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know what led to this change in tone?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Turning to the 16th, and I don't have much time left, and so I'll only briefly touch on the events on the 16th, let's go to OTT8842. This is the draft letter that I discussed with Mr. Arpin the other day that he drafted on behalf of the mayor to explain their perspective on what occurred on February 16, and specifically, your decision to sign a contract with Mr. Torigian ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- to replace former Chief Sloly. So if we can go to the top of page 2 is the section that I'm most interested in. Just a little higher. Sorry. Just the -- if you have the overlap between the two pages. Okay. So it says here, "No votes were taken and no authority was delegated that would allow the Chair to finalize an arrangement – Board members believed that they had mandated the Chair to undertake a search for an external Chief of Police. Board members insist on the fact that the Board Chair did not seek delegated authority to execute a contract for a new Chief of Police." And Mr. Arpin told me the other day that this information was provided to him by some of your fellow Board members. I'm just interested in your response to this information.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Arpin, in his testimony the other day, and the Mayor’s witness statement, say that you told the Mayor on the morning of February 16th that you wouldn’t sign the contract with the new Chief without his approval and that you then did it anyways later that day and that that’s when he lost faith in you. Did you tell the Mayor that morning that you would not sign the contract without his approval?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What did you tell the Mayor?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. My understanding is that your assistant made an audio recording of this conversation with the Mayor?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that recording was disclosed to Commission Counsel this morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. I think the Commissioner framed the question. Can you tell us why the disclosure occurred this morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Commissioner, would it be appropriate for me just to state for the record, the document I need?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it’s POE, and I don’t need anyone to bring this up -- POE-OPD00000001.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I have two short questions before I wrap up.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, I’ll be very quick. You were the Chair of the OPSB for one day after Chief Sloly’s resignation; did you notice any change in that short time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In that one day did you notice any changes?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And did the Board ever consider making a request -- I understand under Section 9(5) of the Police Services Act there can be a request by the Board for the OPP to provide assistance. Did the Board ever consider making such a request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Those are all my questions. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I believe we can. This has sort of just been dealt with on the fly, but I believe the hearing's clerk has it. It's POE.OPB000001.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I think that was it for the -- oh, sorry.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Two brief questions.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Councillor Deans, you were asked a number of questions on cross about the information you received. Do you feel that the Board received the information it required to exercise its oversight functions?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And we listened to the recording, and there was a number of questions about that as well. In your view, did the Mayor interfere with the Board’s autonomy by exerting pressure on the Chair?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you feel like it was undue pressure was being imposed on you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Councillor Deans. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Commissioner. Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Commission Counsel. Our witness this morning will be Mr. Jim Willett.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mayor Willett.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I understand that you're the Mayor of Coutts, Alberta.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you have been a resident of Coutts since 2013?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And a councillor for the past five years?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And Mayor for four years now?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you had an interview with me and my colleagues on September 6th of this year? Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you remember seeing a summary of your interview?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So if we could just pull up WTS00000012. So this is going to be a summary of that interview. You had an opportunity to review this summary; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand that you have a clarification to your summary this morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. So I'll bring you to that passage just so that we can confirm. So the second page, and it's the fourth paragraph down. So this is where you say, the paragraph starting on January 29th, at second to last sentence: "He observed approximately six RCMP vehicles at the border that day." Then you say: "On February 1...an additional 42 RCMP vehicles arrived at the border..." And what you're saying is that between those dates there was a gradual build up?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. Thank you. So we're going to put that summary into evidence. Now, I understand, Mr. Mayor, that you live about four blocks from the border and three blocks from where the protest was occurring. Is that about right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And while these events were happening, would it be fair to say that you attended the location or went to look what was going on on a fairly regular basis?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what's the population of the Village of Coutts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand that the village's amenities include a convenience store, a restaurant, a bank, but that a number of the other services that residents would use would be found in Milk River. Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And Milk River is about 18 kilometres away?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sounds good. So if we could just pull up COM924. This is a map of Coutts and the surrounding area. We looked at a similar map yesterday with one of the other witnesses, and so I won't go into detail on this. But if we can just go to page 5, and if we could -- yeah, that works. So my understanding is that the blockade formed around the point identified as Checkpoint 4?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That's correct. And Smuggler Saloon, which we'll talk about a little bit today, that is a local establishment, and that's identified here on the map as well?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that's where a number of protesters regularly met?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. And so my understanding is that the blockade that occurred was on Highway 4. Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that highway connects Coutts and Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
When -- and I know things may have fluctuated during this period, but when the blockade was blocking both lanes of traffic was it preventing Coutts residents from travelling to Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And would it have also been preventing traffic flow from the border, coming out from the border?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And any traffic south to the border?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, I also understand that there was some kind of route, and I'm hoping you can explain this to us some kind of alternative route available through what I think you referred to as Patty Joe's field or something like that.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so how is that route being during January and February of this year, when there was a full blockade on the highway, what did it allow traffic to do?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so would it allow traffic coming from the border to circumvent the blockade and go all the way up to Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I assume the same is true for any Coutts residents trying to get to Milk River, they could have also ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- used that route had they known? Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of whether RCMP was redirecting any traffic through that route?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you very much. I understand that police services for the village are provided by the provincial division of the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the nearest detachment is in Milk River; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And how many officers are posted there?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I'd like to go to COU00000249. I understand that on January 4th, a protest organizer attended the village office to advise of the upcoming protest. Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And during that phone call, how did the protester describe the anticipated protest?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to COU00001515? So I understand from your witness statement that on social media, a little bit later around the 27th, I think you said, you saw a post suggesting there would be an attempt to block the border.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that correct? Is this the post that you saw?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know where you saw this posting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so were you concerned at that time about the risk of a blockade occurring?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why were you concerned, in particular for your residents? Can you tell us about why you were concerned?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that wasn't a protest. That just a number of people trying to cross the border at the same time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I understand -- so if we can just pull up for reference COU183? I understand that on that same day, January 27th, you wrote to the Premier, Premier Kenney of Alberta and the Solicitor General, Sonya Savage, to advise them that you had heard about this risk of a blockade; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand someone called you the next day in response to this email?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So my understanding is that you observed on January 29th the convoy driving up to the border; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And can you maybe just tell us what you observed on that day?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that pinpoint, that checkpoint 4 that we looked at before on the map, that’s where you saw them begin to U-turn to head back towards Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding from your witness statement is that about 45 minutes later, you observed that they had blocked that intersection where they were U-turning; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And how many RCMP vehicles did you observe that day?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever hear about anything about it being a splinter group or something like that that had caused the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
A splinter group ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- from the group that had organized the convoy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That’s okay. You told us in your interview the RCMP appeared to be caught off guard by the blockade. How did you come to that conclusion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Van Huigenbos yesterday told us that on January 31st, the protesters let some commercial vehicles through; commercial vehicles that had been waiting at the blockade since the time it had become blockaded. Are you aware of that, of commercial vehicles being let through on the 31st?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I understand that you had regular communications by phone and text with Minister Sawhney, former Minister of Transport for the Province; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So we’ll pull up your text messages with her and go through some of those. That’s COU00000016, and we’ll start on the second page, I believe. So in here, this is February 2nd at 12:41 p.m. Minister Swanee -- Sawhney, sorry, says: “I’m sorry this is happening. Please take care. I’m working on this non stop.” What did you understand her and the Alberta government to be doing at this time to respond to the protest at this early stage?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding is that she was trying to negotiate some kind of resolution.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go a bit lower? Okay. So here we see at 6:16 on February 3rd, you asked Minister Sawhney whether she was willing to come to Coutts to meet the protesters; you recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the response is: “Of course! I just have to get clearance from the Boss and [the] RCMP” Did she ever come to meet the protesters?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you understood that to be permission from who?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did you ever receive an explanation for why that permission wasn’t granted?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And why did you believe that it would be helpful for her to come to Coutts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we can go down a little bit to the next page. A little bit lower. Okay. At 7:21 on February 3rd, you say, the second line: “They’ve closed the highway down again. It was open briefly. A few commercial vehicles did go through, then someone barricaded the highway again.” So can you maybe give us a sense of how often -- it seems to me that there -- the highway was reopening at times. We see later in your text messages that some traffic was trickling through. How often was the highway completely blockaded?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you’re attributing that to the lack of -- the lack of leadership in the group at that time.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I think if you go down a little bit more you’ll see those comments that you just mentioned, “Still some mob rule going on. Hoping they have an established command structure soon.” You visited Smugglers Saloon and met with some protestors on February 3rd?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you observe for yourself this lack of leadership at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we could go to page 10 of this document. So this is February 5th at 2:16. So you see that second bubble, you say, “Now that Marco seems to have established control, it might be good for someone to talk about provincial mandates.” And then if we go just down just a little bit, she responds, “Let’s chat later.” So is your understanding that at this time on February 5th a clearer leadership structure was emerging in the group?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you have a discussion with Minister Sawhney regarding provincial mandates at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. If we can go just a bit -- just to page 12, and this is February 5th at 11:59. So just a bit lower till we get to 11:59. There we go. Here you tell Minister Sawhney that the messaging to the protestors needs to be controlled better. There seems to be conflicting messages being circulated as true. Do you recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was the problem with the messaging at that time, as you understood it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can go to page 14. It’s February 6th at 2:40 p.m. So you say that you talked to Mayor Feyter, and I believe that’s the Mayor of Fort MacLeod. Is that right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And Glen Motz, who’s a federal MP; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you say you talked to them about Marco, “Marco is not in favour of the legal action, has been working to move toward a legal protest.” And when you say moving towards working towards a legal protest, did you understand that to be opening one lane each way?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were those efforts successful?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we can go to page 15, February 7th at 10:20. I believe it’s at the bottom of the page. So Minister Sawhney says, “I heard the blockade is back up.” And you respond -- if we could go to the next page, I believe. You say, “Yep, tractors just now, highway is blocked.” If we keep going. Keep going. She says, “I guess they were hoping for an announcement today.” Was your understanding that the -- this tractor blockade on February 7th was because of frustrations associated with the lack of an anticipated announcement as you were just mentioning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is a member of the protest who told you this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So the next day, on February 8th, Premier Kenney announced a plan for the gradual easing of pandemic-related health orders. Did that have any impact on the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to page 19. This is on February 8th. If we can go down a little bit. Down a bit more. So you say: "Need access to some land. No construction." And then on page 20, if we can skip down. Minister Sawhney says: "I'm glad...we could help you out with the land parcel." Was that in connection with the plot of land for the legal protest site ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that was established in Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. Yes, I had been in the meeting in Milk River with the mayor from Milk River, Reeve from the County of Warner, some representatives from -- I'm trying to think who else was in there. Anyway, we had had a meeting and a discussion of where to have an alternate parcel of land. The Milk River people and the County determined that there was Queensland available, and so I happened to have the contact information for the Minister of Transport who could make that happen, and that's what happened here. I gave her the note that they'd be calling her, they did, she made things happen so I could get that parcel.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you understand, was there any buy-in from protesters on moving the protest to that site?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand, though, that once the blockade in Coutts came to an end there is a group that moved to that site.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And they stayed there for a number of weeks?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let's go to page 26, February 14th, at 12:42 p.m. So Minister Sawhney asked you: "Are there people still there at the blockade?" You respond: "Oh yeah. Nobody's leaving yet. It's all fake news." So your understanding at that time was that the protesters were not leaving yet; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you hear that afternoon?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you were told by the RCMP that they had been notified by protesters that day that they would be leaving the site?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand you had a conversation with Mr. Jory Evans, who was a protester, about that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- as well? When did you have the conversation with him about this decision to end the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So he explained to you that day that -- he spoke to you about the RCMP's arrest, and did he explain to you that that was one of the reasons why the protesters had decided to leave?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And your -- was your understanding that the agreement was that they would, or that their intention was to leave the next morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did you observe them leave the morning of the 15th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so no enforcement was required by the RCMP at that time to get them to leave?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so you're not aware of any enforcement powers available under the Emergencies Act being used to clear the blockade then?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
When you met with the protesters on -- at Smuggler Saloon on February 3rd, did they explain to you what their plan was, what their objective was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I was asking about February 3rd, ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- when you attended the Smuggler’s Saloon. Did you get a sense that they had an exit strategy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could go to COU00000012? These are your Facebook messages with Mr. Evans.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I’d like to go to page 2. Go down a little bit. Okay. So here he tells you, and I think this is in the context of the mandates, the provincial mandates: “Yeah they keep ignoring and these guys wanna get this shit done and go home […] Also connected with the group that closed down Windsor ON today and things are going crazy in Ottawa so it […] adds flames to that fire over there” In your discussions with Mr. Evans, did you ever understand that the -- were the protestors in Coutts in communications with protestors in Ottawa or Windsor? What was your understanding of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this text message is -- this text message is all you ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- all you have. Okay. Thank you. I understand that Mr. Evans told you about concerns he had with more extreme elements participating in the protest. Can you tell us about that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he agreed with -- -
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
He agreed with that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you yourself observe the nature of the protests changing over time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I think you, in your witness statement, you say that about your meeting on February 4th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you observe any violence or harassment during the protest?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you yourself receive any threats?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did you ever observe any weapons yourself around that time in Coutts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever hear anything about efforts by protestors to dissuade tow truck drivers from assisting the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever have any discussions with CBSA officials about the protest?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that the RCMP attended a village council meeting on February 8th, and in your summary you state that they described their response as “building the airplane while you’re flying it.” What did you understand those comments to be referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. In the short time we have left, I’d just like to talk about the impact on the village and its residents. In the summary, you say that the blockade greatly disrupted everyday life for Coutts residents. Could you maybe explain to us in what ways?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How’s ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How significantly did the protest interfere with residents’ ability to access services in Milk River?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did you hear any reports of intimidation of some of your resident -- residents by protestors?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And lastly, I just wanted to ask you, was there any impact on emergency services or access to emergency services?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you so much. Those are my questions, ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- Mayor Willett.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. Oh. Yes, okay. I just have two brief questions for you. Just to clarify a point, when you were talking about your discussion with Mr. Evans about the arrests on the 14th, I think you kind of trailed off a bit under your breath and said something about the weapons were all fake. Something like that. is that something Mr. Evans told you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I just wanted to confirm, that was not your own assessment of the situation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Commissioner, Jean-Simon Schoenholz for the Commission. And as you said, the next witness is Mr. Ian Freeman.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Hi, Mr. Freeman.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How are you?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good to see you again. So Mr. Freeman, you sat down with Commission Counsel, I believe last month, for an interview; you recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So let’s pull up WTS00000021. You’ve -- we’ve prepared a summary of that interview and you’ve had a chance to review it with your counsel?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any changes to make to the summary?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We can scroll down to try and find that.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Great, thank you. Any other changes?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Wonderful. So I’ll have that entered into evidence. So Mr. Freeman, could you start by telling us your current position?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand that wasn’t your position during the events of January and February ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And can you tell us briefly what your responsibilities are -- were at the time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what generally is the MTO’s mandate?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And your role within that is the lead on policy development.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who do you report to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who is the Deputy Minister at the time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And how many other Assistant Deputy Ministers are there?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you regularly have direct contact with the Minister of Transport?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of contact would you have had with her during the events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what role did the Minister have, then -- have in responding to these events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thanks. Can you tell us generally what Acts and Regulations MTO is responsible for enforcing?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And am I correct that both police as well as MTO officers can enforce the provisions of the Highway Traffic Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So in some cases, MTO officers could enforce independently; in others, they would require enforcement by police?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I'd like to go to ONT00000447. So this is a email dated January 21st from Jessica Barton, who I understand is at the MTO. And if we go to the second paragraph, it says, "The convoy is expected to start in some areas of Ontario on January 25th, ending travel to Ottawa January 29th at noon. Primarily, it will be bobtail trucks but may also include four-wheel vehicles and trailers as well. Currently, there's no estimated number of trucks; however, it is expected to be in the thousands into Ottawa." (As read) Did you receive this briefing? Yeah, if you go up, you can see the recipient list ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You weren't a part of that. Was this information that was generally available to you at this time on the 21st?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so can you maybe just tell us who the ADM for that branch would -- or was at the time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Can you tell us, do you have information on what MTO did at this time upon receiving this type of information in anticipation of the events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And if we can go to ONT00005150, I just want you to confirm, I believe this is a copy of that plan that you just mentioned that was developed. Is that the plan you mentioned?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And again, the purpose of that plan was to kind of anticipate what type of actions MTO officers would be required to take as part of this event?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what was anticipated at that time for possible actions they would take?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So have you had a chance to review Ontario's institutional report ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that's been provided?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. So we don't necessarily need to pull that up, but it states that on February 4th, MTO officers began supporting the OPP with issues arising from a planned protest at Queen's Park in Toronto. Do you recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I guess what support was being provided?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And would engagement have been only subject to a request by OPP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that request didn't come; I take it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the request for that support for that visibility in Toronto around that time, that would have been on OPP's request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know whether there was any requests by either OPP or OPS for a similar kind of presence in Ottawa ahead of the arrival of the convoy in Ottawa?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
How many -- just to provide us with some context, how many MTO officers are there in the province?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I take it that those -- the MTO is able to deploy those to different areas as necessary?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know if that was done in the present case, redeployment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In the institutional report, it states that on February 4th there was a meeting between the MTO, Transport Canada and others to discuss certain measures that might be available. If we can pull up ONT00002759? And if we can just go down to the next email? Yes. So this is an email that you sent, I understand, with a summary of the calls. I understand there was a first call on the 4th and then a follow-up on the 5th; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is your summary of those calls?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's -- I want to touch on a couple points in this ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- email. So here at the point that starts by number one, it says -- well, I guess I'll start just above that. "They", they being Transport Canada; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
"...are looking for the following." And then you ask for a response to this. You say point one, "Can we provide the impacts of any charges that could be laid to truck drivers/operators, for example, types of charges that lead to CVOR points, what are potential impacts of that? Insurance, sanctions, contracts. Are there other potential non-CVOR impacts?" (As read) So what was the inquiry here from Transport Canada? What were they looking for?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you anticipate my question that defining CVOR. So that’s very good. Did MTO make those inquiries?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what generally -- -- can you explain to us what the response to this point would have been?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We’ll talk a bit more about that later, ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- but that’s a good introduction. Thank you. It continues at point two: “Some jurisdictions have legislation in place that protects critical infrastructure services from occupation, disruption with significant fines, et cetera. Does Ontario have anything not that I’m aware of?” (As read) And can you maybe explain what that was about and what the response was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. It continues at point three: “Tow operators. Are there any incentives we might recommend to get them to help if needed or penalties if they don’t?” (As read) And then you say: “This is a tough one, as I’m not sure we have any direct contracts with them.” (As read) Et cetera, et cetera. So can you explain again what the nature of the request was here and what the response was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did -- and what did you find out on that point?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Let’s go to ONT00000311. While we’re pulling that up, we’ve heard from the City of Ottawa that they asked the Deputy Minister of transpiration whether there was anything that could be done in regards to trucker’s insurance or CVORs, but that the Province wasn’t prepared to do anything in that respect. So I guess my question is, is that accurate? You know, what’s your response to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. That’s helpful. And we will get to that. So if we can go -- these are minutes taken from, or a summary of a call between the City, the Federal Government, the Provincial Government, on February 6th. And if we can go to page 6? My understanding is you weren’t present at this call; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Your Deputy Minister was present?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So if we can go down? Down, down, down. So right there. So here we have a few points, a summary of what was said by the Deputy Minister; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And here, first it says: “On tow trucks, they will be working with the private sector […] to see what[‘s] available and can be provided.” Are you aware of what efforts MTO made to work with the private sector to obtain tow trucks at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you aware of what was making that so difficult?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in the end, I think you've already said in your correction to your witness statement, MTO was able to find 10 tow trucks that were deployed to Ottawa?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And how were those found?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And would those have been made available to the OPP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know if the powers available under the Emergencies Act were used to secure those 10 tow trucks?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Second point says: "From an enforcement perspective, the [MTO] is providing assistance where requested. However...enforcement resources are limited." Can you explain what that referred to and what way were they limited?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was there ever a shortage of MTO officers being requested to be deployed in this event, or was it more so just getting them to where they needed to be?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The third point here: "In response to the point about using licensing and sanctioning as a tool, she..." Being Deputy Minister LeBlanc: "...noted that demerit point is a long- term strategy that will not help with immediacy of the situation. It will not impact the actions of many in the short-term." Can you -- I think maybe you've already touched on this a little bit, but could you maybe explain this short- term, long-term dilemma?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so your evidence, then, is that there was no mechanism to apply that kind of penalty in the short-term?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Last point: "In addition, it seems that many of the trucks were from outside the province and it adds a layer of complexity to the enforcement of the licensing regime." Can you explain what that additional complexity is when it comes to out of province vehicles?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I think my understanding from your interview summary is that the -- while the convictions would have some inter-jurisdictional impact, Ontario had no way of imposing penalties on outside of the province vehicles; is that right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. I just want to put to you in relation to this call, there was testimony from Mr. Steve Kanellakos, the City of Ottawa's City Manager. He recalled that during this call the issue was raised of what tools were available from MTO's perspective, and he recalled that Ms. LeBlanc seemed to be a little miffed that she got put on the spot and basically said, "I'll get back to you, I'll look into it", and never did. So I'm just wondering if you heard about that interaction if you have any response to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Are you aware of any more detailed response on kind of the points you've outlined to me being provided to the City of Ottawa at any point outside of this call?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So let's pull up SSM.CAN.00000363. So my understanding from the Institutional Report is that Deputy Minister LeBlanc attended a FTP, Federal Provincial Territorial, meeting with federal counterparts to discuss transportation enforcement responses to the protests. So that would have been on the 7th. And if we go down, these are the notes from that call. You're familiar with those?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what the purpose of this meeting was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Well, here we can start at the top here. It says: "TC Proposal: Maximum enforcement strategy." You're familiar with that strategy that was put forward by Transport Canada?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let's go down to page 2. And it says here, under Ontario, on the second point: "Collective enforcement rather than maximum enforcement." I understand that to be Ontario's response to the -- to Transport Canada's proposal. Are you able to explain what was being proposed as a change to the fed's proposal?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That’s helpful. So we can ask him, then. From our interviews with Transport Canada, they seem to have understood that Ontario was concerned about being perceived to be directing law enforcement agencies in how they were carrying out their functions. Would you agree with that characterization?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that was part of what -- that was part of what guided MTO’s response.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so would you -- would you agree, then, that in addition to the various practical concerns around the actual enforcement powers that were available, MTO was also concerned about only stepping in in assistance to police and upon their request? Is that fair to say?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could go to ONT00000095. So this an email from you with some key takeaways from a meeting earlier on February 8th with representatives from Transport Canada. So if we can go to page 2. Here we go. So maybe just go up first to the top of that email. So this an email from yourself to the Deputy Minister, and you’re briefing her on the key points from that call; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So if we can go back down past the redactions there. So it says, and I think this may go to what we were just talking about: “Sol-Gen is the Ontario lead for anything to do with enforcement of legal regulatory authority. Communications requests should go through them to ensure consistency and nothing is taken out of context.” (As read) Is that essentially reflective of what you’ve just told me?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so is your understanding that enforcement issues, enforcement requests would come through OPP through to Sol-Gen and then if MTO was needed, those requests would be channelled through Sol-Gen to the MTO?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And would I be right to say that this isn’t necessarily the usual approach for MTO that it would apply in every circumstance? It’s unique to the type of activity in this case that would be police led?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So in the normal course, MTO would be able to enforce without coordination with police.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Moving to the second point, in Ontario, licence demerits and operator registration points are affected by convictions, not charges. That point is just a reiteration of the kind of - - the fact that this is a long-term process; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Obviously. And a conviction taking some time, as it has to work through the Court system.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the final point: “MTO Enforcement is ready to assist with commercial vehicle enforcement that supports its road safety mandate at the request of police.” (As read) And so going to maybe your earlier point, why was this different that MTO would only act at the request of police? Is it because it was a public order issue?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And had there been any requests from police for assistance at this point? Again, we’re ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
February 8th.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so essentially -- and was that -- that second response, that was complied with, I guess, by MTO?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We can go to ONT00000458. So this is an email from Param Patel. Who is he?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We can go down. Down, down, down. Okay. So he says, "I just got off a call with OPP Chief Superintendent Rohan Thompson. There will be a request coming through Sol Gen [I guess] to request a couple of things. Heavy toe and information and support." (As read) I think we've already talked about ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that. And then it says, "MTO Enforcement support. MTO Enforcement officers would be put under the incident command of the OPP to assist with ongoing protests across the province." (As read) That's the request you were just referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so, effectively, MTO officers would be available to the OPP but they would only act at their request; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that request, as you already said, was approved by MTO?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to ONT00000460? This is another email from Mr. Patel. We can just go down. Down a bit more. Down, down, down. Sorry, if we can go up? Up. Okay. So it's this paragraph under the bold. "The role that MTO officers would do can include patrolling highways as a deterrent, provide intelligence on highways, be a subject matter expert on CMVs..." (As read) What are CMVs?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. "...for the OPP, provide CMV expertise to municipal police services and OPP, CVSA inspections..." (As read) What are CVSA inspections?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
"...dangerous goods support and providing other support as required. The work will be coordinated through OPP Emergency Operations Centre and MTO Enforcement officers will be fully embraced within the OPP incident command for deployment and dispatch." (As read) So that's consistent with what you just told me, that they would be integrated within the OPP. And is the list I just went through there in that first sentence, is that consistent with your understanding of what they would be doing in support of the OPP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can just go up to the top of this email, just right up to the top? So are you aware of what was the purpose of this email?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it's effectively to brief officers on what the agreement is ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- between OPP and MTO?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Let's go to ONT00000461. We can scroll down. I think there's a portion in bold. This is -- sorry, before we go down, so this is an enforcement directive. So is this a directive that would have been issued to all enforcement officers?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. On -- so this is February 9th. If we can go down, there's a section in bold there. It says there, "Officers are not to engage in enforcement activities with individuals or vehicles participating with the Convoy for Freedom or related protest activities." (As read) What specifically was this meant to address?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was this direction coming on request to the OPP, or was this a decision from MTO not to have officers conduct enforcement themselves?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So I'd like to go to ONT0000156. This is a February 8th letter from Deputy Minister Leblanc to Deputy Minister Michael Keenan of Transport Canada. You're familiar with this letter; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you involved in discussions around the drafting of this letter?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And can you maybe explain what the purpose generally of this letter was? What was it in response to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we could go to the third paragraph in this letter? It says, starting at the second sentence, "Ministry of Transportation stands ready to provide support as needed to law enforcement in areas where the Ministry is well placed to help, and we have been working closely with the Ministry of the Solicitor General including the OPP to assist where possible. This includes providing traffic management support such as messaging signs and barriers to support traffic rerouting caused by the protests and rigorously enforcing any convictions resulting from the protests. It also includes providing commercial vehicle enforcement support in ways that support the Ministry’s road safety mandate at the request of police. Ontario’s response is being coordinated through the Ministry of the Solicitor General and all requests should be directed through them.” (As read) So was the Federal Government to understand then that all requests for MTO enforcement assistance were to come through police and to be communicated through the Solicitor General’s Office?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so was the response here effectively trying -- communicating to the Federal Government that they were asking MTO to go beyond their enforcement capabilities?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this last paragraph here on page 1: “However, I want to clarify some potential misunderstanding on the applicability of drivers’ licenses and commercial vehicles operator permissions in a protest situation.” (As read) I won’t read the full paragraph, but essentially was the clarification here along the lines of what you’ve already provided on CVORs?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Was the Federal Government asking MTO to apply sanctions under that regime, like, without convictions?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well we’ll see later that there were warning letters issued, after the Provincial State of Emergency was declared, of potential CVOR consequences under that law. Could that have been done prior to the invocation of the provincial emergency? To send warning letters about known potential violations?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was that type of measure ever contemplated or discussed, as far as you know?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. We could go to PB.CAN.00000810? And we’ll go to page 4 once you open that up. So our understanding is that OPS had identified potential violations of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act. Go down to page 4 and down to that background section, please. And you’ll see here in this third paragraph: “The Ottawa Police are seeking the assistance of TDG [which I understand to be Transportation of Dangerous Goods] inspectors to participate in joint police and MTO operations to provide subject matter expertise to confirm violations under the Act and Regulations.” (As read) Are you aware of these joint operations?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. And so does MTO play a role in enforcing this Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether MTO officers engaged any enforcement of that Act during these events?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. If we could go to ONT00000111? So this is a February 9th -- I think it’s an email. If we could go down? Right. So my understanding is in this email chain, there was a question of whether OPP would be collecting CVOR information in Windsor. And MTO was advised that most vehicles in Windsor were not commercial vehicles. Was that your understanding?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was different than in Ottawa, I take it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know whether MTO received CVOR information on vehicles in Ottawa?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. At the tail end ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of the protests? And is that something that was done on request of police?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
MTO was provided with that information?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. If we can go to SSM.CAN.00000374? We’ll go to page 3. So these are internal emails at Transport Canada on February 10th. I just want to get your comments on their content. Oh, to where it starts -- sorry, page 3 and the paragraph that starts with “Third”. Okay. So it says -- so it appears here that the Federal Government understood that the MTO was suggesting that the Federal Government had authority to manage international crossings. And then it says: "...but this purposefully confuses authorities between governments." Was the MTO of the view that the Federal Government had the authority or that Transport Canada, maybe more specifically, could act on its own to enforce with respect to the Windsor blockade because of authority on international crossings?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to this paragraph: "The Bridges and Tunnels Act has some authorities but they do not bring any authorities to bear on the blockade..." And then it talks about how the protest here is not on the bridge itself, but is on the road in front of the bridge. Do -- are -- would you agree that as the blockade was not on the bridge itself, the -- Transport Canada did not have enforcement authority?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I take it from you're saying, then, that you're not aware of the Provincial Government purposefully confusing authorities between governments?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. It continues... If we go down. Paragraph starting -- yeah: "We can further suggest quietly to Ontario truly wants us to invoke federal authority to manage this crisis they need to declare an emergency they cannot manage so we can thereby invoke the federal Emergencies Act to manage the blockades. IE turn their request to use federal authority into a poison pill based on the fundamental reality of legal authorities." So it seemed that federal officials are suggesting that Ontario is trying to force the federal government to use its own authorities. Are you aware of any authority other than the Emergencies Act that would've been available to Transport Canada to respond to the blockade in Windsor?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. February 11th in the Institutional Report it states that: "The City of Ottawa requested MTO inspectors to perform inspection and enforcement duties in and around Ottawa and that MTO approved that request and provided officers." (As read) I understand from one of the documents that they -- the City was requesting four MTO officers. You recall that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah. We can go to ONT00000463, and we'll go to the third page. If we can go down. Oh, sorry, right at the top there, "Ottawa City requesting... ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- ...our 4 officers."
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you recall that request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And it says here: "...they would like visible enforcement...fly the flag and show of force on the roads as their enforcement capacities have been limited and they want to instill public confidence. Essentially a mini-blitz." And so was the request essentially just to be a show of force in the City of Ottawa but not necessarily one that would lead to actual enforcement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. We heard from the City of Ottawa General Manager of Emergency Services, Kim Ayotte, in his witness statement that the City had enquired with MTO about towing capacity and that he understood that MTO was unable to assist. I take it from the evidence you have provided today that ultimately MTO was able to assist but that wasn't provided directly to the City. Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The Mayor of Ottawa testified that there were some discussions between the City and MTO regarding the potential of leveraging insurance to end the protests, and that the MTO was reluctant to explore this idea further. Can you maybe explain the specific issue of insurance?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Might penalties and demerit points under the CVR, might those have an impact on insurance?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So what you're saying is -- here is that the MTO could not have imposed some kind of suspension on insurance, or something like that, of its own ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- enforcement power?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. We'll pull COM00000910. This is Ontario's Emergency Regulations that were adopted after the provincial state of emergency was declared, so you can reference it as necessary. But what was your understanding of what additional powers the Emergency Declaration and the Regulations provided to MTO and to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So is it your understanding, then, that it provided MTO and the Registrar of Motor Vehicles the power to do what was being requested prior but couldn’t be done?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can go down to section 3? So here it says: “No person shall impede access to or egress from, or the ordinary use of, any highway, walkway or bridge, where such impediment has the effect of, preventing the delivery of essential goods or services; severely disrupting ordinary economic activity; or causing serious interference with the safety, health or well-being of members of the public.” Do you know whether MTO or the provincial government had formed an opinion on whether that would apply to the vehicles parked on the streets of Ottawa; whether they would be causing, you know, (a), (b), or (c)?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And do you know whether either the MTO or the Registrar used any of the powers? And I believe if we go down, it’s -- keep going down. So the power at section 5 to order the owner or operator to remove a vehicle. And then I think it’s at section 6, is to impose penalties. Do you know if those powers were used by MTO or the Registrar?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know when those powers were used?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So at the tail end, ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- during the enforcement action?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I see a request on -- this is in the institutional report on February 12th, by the OPP to the MTO to supply concrete barriers. Is that a type of assistance that MTO would normally provide to OPP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I take it MTO responded to that request positively?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I saw in an email on this topic, I can pull it up if need be but that there was difficulty in -- with certain contractors in providing those barriers. Are you aware of ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could pull up ONT00000081? So this, I believe, is a February 15th email with respect to the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Crime Prevention Policing Committee. And it’s on this topic of Transport Canada Strategic Enforcement Strategy. We can go down. So I believe this is an email where MTO provided some comments on Transport Canada’s draft Strategic Enforcement Strategy. What was your understanding of that strategy?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I understand MTO had some revisions, some proposed amendments to this strategy. Do you know what the nature of those amendments were; what were MTO’s concerns?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know whether the strategic enforcement strategy was finalized and whether those comments were integrated?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why that is?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So do you know whether it was ever implemented, then?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In the institutional report on February 17th, it states that, at the request the OPP, MTO secured heavy tow trucks to support police efforts in Ottawa; those are the 10 tow trucks we referred to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the Provincial Declaration of Emergency assist at all with that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we could pull up ONT975. If we could go down to the second email there? This is a February 17th email: “I wanted to share as FYI a request we received from OPP to confirm access to driver photos in response to the Trucker Protest....As you may know, MTO currently has strict guidelines for the use of MTO photos by officers however police can access under extreme circumstances. Police indicated they will be using these photos to help in criminal investigations regarding identifying offenders.” Are you familiar with this request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well, I guess the question is was -- is this a type of request that -- I understand in extreme circumstances that would be done. In other circumstances, it didn’t require any emergency legislation, provincially or federally?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we go to, I understand an Operations Plan for Ministry officers was adopted to assist with the enforcement action in Ottawa at the tail end of the protest; you’re familiar with that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you just briefly explain the purpose of that plan?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So their additional duties would be involved in the removal of vehicles and bringing them to storage.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether that plan was developed in conjunction with law enforcement?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And just for the record, that document is ONT00000452. We don’t need to pull that up. If we could -- I just want to pull up briefly ONT00000976. This is one of the enforcement letters that was issued. Sorry, one of the warning letters. If we can go down. Sorry. So this is the type of enforcement letter. Were these actually issued?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I think there’s a reference in document ONT453 -- we don’t need to go there -- to this being done at the request of OPP, as you said. Do you know why -- this was in relation to authority under the provincial Declaration of Emergency; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know why -- as I understand, these were issued on the 17th of February. Do you know why there was a -- it took five or six days before these kind of letters were issued?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Lastly, I’d just like to go to SSM.CAN.00000439. So I understand that there was a -- kind of a post-mortem discussion that was held between Transport Canada and the MTO. Is that right? Or maybe this is just ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So it says here at the top, “As mentioned the other day, we reached out to MTO for a post-mortem discussion on the blockades”. This is on March 4th. Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you remember preparation for the call or ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- hearing about it after the fact?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. Okay. So I’ll just get your take on some of these takeaways from the call. It says: “Here are a few key takeaways. They are now [they being MTO, I understand] are now working through regular regulatory processes with respect to the trucks involved in blockades. For example, if there were tickets laid that impact CVOR, they will run the course of conviction and then would be reflected on the record.” (As read) Can you explain what that means?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And here it says that they are now working through. Has there been any change since the events in question here in MTO’s approach to those types of convictions?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. And then if we just go down a little bit, the third bullet point: “For out-of-province trucks, of which there were many, plates were seized and mailed back to the registrar of the home jurisdiction with an explanation letter. However, there is no mechanism to ensure that there would be an impact on the operator record. MTO is waiting to hear what the response from those provinces and territories will be.” (As read) So my understanding is that that’s still an issue, the ability to enforce CVOR penalties in other provinces and territories?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then lastly, if we go down in terms of lessons learned to the second bullet under that: “At provincial level, what was lacking for MTO was ability to take immediate action on misconduct aside from temporary powers under the provincial Emergencies Act. The system right now only kicks in when there are convictions.” (As read) And that’s consistent with what you’ve told me to date; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Great. Thank you so much, Mr. Freeman. Those are my questions.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Commissioner. Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Commission Counsel. Our first witness today is Marlin Degrand. (SHORT PAUSE)
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mr. Degrand.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Good to see you again. So Mr. Degrand, you’ll recall that you met with Commission Counsel on August 30th for an interview.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Remember that? And we prepared a summary of the evidence that you provided during that interview; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I’ll just pull up WTS00000007. So this is your witness summary, which will come up on the screen. Do you have any corrections to that witness summary this morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Great. And you can confirm this is the witness summary that you’ve seen; you’ve reviewed it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. So I’ll have that entered into evidence. You also will recall that the Province of Alberta, the Government of Alberta has prepared an institutional report?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You’ve had the chance to review that as well?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I also understand that you’ve sworn an affidavit attaching and confirming the content of that institutional report?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so just for the record, the institutional report is ALB.IR.00000001, and then the affidavit is AFF.00000015.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So Mr. Degrand, I understand that you are Assistant Deputy Minister of the Public Security Division, and Director of Law Enforcement for Alberta Justice and Solicitor General; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you’re -- so you’re still Assistant Deputy Minister?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your -- can you maybe describe your responsibilities at the time.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And who did you report to at the time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Fantastic. And they reported to Minister Savage; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And so my understanding is that you would -- one of your roles was to liaise with law enforcement on behalf of the government and the Solicitor General?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you maybe start by providing us with a brief summary of policing services in the province?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so my understanding is in communities under 5,000 though, then the policing would be provided by the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so that would include, for example, Coutts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that's -- I believe that's the K-Division of the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Perfect. Thank you. Can you maybe describe as well, I understand the Sheriff Highway Patrol is also under your purview? Can you maybe explain their role?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So normally, they would have -- or in all cases, I guess, they would have the authority to enforce -- the Highway Traffic Act, for example, would be one of their key pieces ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of legislation that they enforce?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so maybe can you just explain a little bit more why in this case they were -- they would operate at the direction of the RCMP?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. You mentioned briefly there the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. Can you maybe explain for us what that is, what does that law do?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is your understanding that highways are a piece of critical infrastructure under that Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And who's able to enforce that Act? I think you already mentioned the sheriffs, both the sheriffs and the RCMP can enforce?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Municipal. Yes, thank you. And so what kind of function -- you've already mentioned you liaise with police. Do you play some sort of oversight function as well?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So I'd like to talk now about Coutts a little bit.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So my understanding is that the province was aware that a slow roll was headed towards Coutts and scheduled to arrive on January 29th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Where would you typically get your situational information on an event like this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you would have received all those situational updates?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was the province aware of the threats of a blockade prior to the arrival of the convoy at the border or near the border?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Mayor Willett, I don’t know if you heard his testimony ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- a few days ago? He testified that he advised the Premier and Minister Savage on September 27th of the risk of a blockade. Maybe we could pull up COU00000183.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Oh, my apologies. Sorry. I wrote up my notes late last night.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sorry. January 27th, of course. So here you see Mayor Willet’s email: “I became aware of an organized effort planned to begin Saturday to totally block all north bound and south bound traffic here at the Coutts Border crossing as well as Carway and Del Bonita.” Were you ever made aware that this information had been provided to the Alberta Government?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
More generally, were you provided with any intelligence that there was a risk of a blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you advised prior to the arrival that there may be a splinter group, potentially, that had an intention to blockade the border?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
All right.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So Mayor Willett testified that he received a call the next day from someone he believes to be from Minister Savage’s office informing him that, you know, “Thank you for the information. The RCMP are on it.” You’re not aware of ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that discussion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you briefed on the RCMP’s plan for that event prior to the arrival on the 29th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether there was planning for the possibility of a blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall what that number was for the Coutts region?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You were satisfied, generally, with their plan, I take it?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And obviously we will speak to them about that as well, but it’s good to get your recollection. Have you formed an opinion since then on why the RCMP was not able to prevent the blockade from setting in on that date?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You understood that the blockade blocked traffic to and from the border; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And that it also prevented access by Coutts residents to Milk River and vice versa?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And you understood -- I think what you’re telling me is you understood it was a key artery for Coutts to get to essential services and ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. You spoke just now about the RCMP briefing you about creating an alternate route for residents. Can you maybe just tell me a little bit more what you know about that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the first few days.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that they would have successfully created some alternative route when the highway was fully blockaded for residents to get out?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And is your understanding that -- were you ever advised that that route was used for commercial vehicles as well?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well not to cross the border, but once -- you know, once they had crossed the border, to kind of get out?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
M’hm.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So fair to say, to your knowledge, there was no alternate route available for commercial vehicles? RCMP was relying on, essentially, the good faith of the protestors?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Well, through Coutts- Sweet Grass border crossing, that would be accurate.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I might have some more questions on that later but that’s ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that’s helpful. Thank you. So my understanding from the institutional report is that on January 31st, the RCMP was prepared to conduct some enforcement action but that some protesters left around that time, and there was attempts to negotiate with the remainder of the protesters, but that that was not ultimately successful. Is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of why those negotiations were unsuccessful at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Were you advised at this -- around this time, January 31st, that the protest leadership had -- was not quite clear yet?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And is one of the reasons that enforcement wasn’t pursued at this time; again, January 31st, because some more moderate elements started coming forward and expressed an intent to become a more lawful protest? Had you been briefed on that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what did you understand a more lawful protest to look like?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did that succeed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So around the 10th, 11th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And were -- is your understanding that during this time, commercial vehicles were still using the Coutts point of entry, maybe in limited numbers but some -- there was still activity at the Coutts port of entry?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And maybe I just want to clarify; my understanding is that the blockade was -- I don’t have a sense of the distance but maybe a kilometre away from the actual ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- Customs point of entry, and so that’s why I’m kind of making a distinction between the two.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, yes. Okay. So you’ve already spoken about the contingency planning that was made with alternate point of entries. Do you have a sense of what the impact was of having to reroute some of that traffic to those other points of entry; can you speak to that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could pull up ALB00001573? I understand that on February 3rd, Deputy Commissioner Zablocki of the RMCP sent a letter to Minister Savage requesting the deployment of additional officers under the PPSA, right?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that’s the Provincial Police Service Agreement between the Province and the RCMP; is that correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Right, yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is the response from Minister Savage. And if we can just go down a little bit. So there’s a response the same day that approves the request; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And it says, if you go down to the fourth line: “This is in response to a current blockade near the Coutts land border crossing and intelligence suggesting further blockades planned throughout the province. In my opinion, this constitutes an emergency in the Province of Alberta, under the Provincial Police Service Agreement.” So why was additional deployment necessary according to the RCMP; what did they tell you about that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And he eventually obtained, I think, 40 officers from British Columbia; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you tell us about -- here it mentions, “...intelligence suggesting further blockades planned throughout the province”; what can you tell us about that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So at this time, and this is February 3rd, what was your understanding of why the RCMP had not yet been able to bring the blockade to an end?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And by that time the RCMP had begun to look for towing resources; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did they feel obtaining those resources would be necessary to any enforcement action?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I take it you’re familiar with Alberta’s Emergency Management Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
You mentioned it before, this is one that you actually need to invoke; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so, under that Act, the Government of Alberta can declare a State of Emergency throughout the province?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware that the use of that Act would’ve allowed Alberta to compel the use of towing resources, of operators; and, also, to prohibit access to certain areas?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement you say that Alberta considered invoking this legislation, but that it was determined not to be necessary. Can you explain the basis for that assessment?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Did you -- did -- what was the basis, I guess, for the assessment that some people may not comply even if compelled? Did you receive advice on that from RCMP, from intelligence, or was it just ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the RCMP ever request that the -- this Act be invoked?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we can pull up COU00000016. These are text messages between Minister Sawhney, former Minister of Transport and Mayor Willett. And we can go to the second page, if we can go down a little bit? Okay. Here. So you'll see here on the right, Mayor Willett says -- he's talking about meeting with the protesters. "They need someone from government [to] get a straight answer from [...] If it comes up, are you still willing to take a trip to Coutts?" And she responds, "Of course! I [need] to get clearance from the Boss and RCMP." Were you consulted on whether the government should send an emissary of sorts to Coutts to meet with protesters?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what the reason for, because my understanding is that Minister Sawhney did not end up going to Coutts. Do you know what the reason for that decision not to officially engage with the protesters was?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the Institutional Report, it says that the RCMP asked the Sheriff's Highway Patrol not to take enforcement action until February 7th. Do you remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know why that was the case?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what changed on the 7th? Because I know after the 7th, there was a number of violations were issued. Do you know what changed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Do you know if any protesters left because of that limited enforcement action around that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In the Institutional Report, it states that the province made a alternative protest site available, and we heard this from other witnesses, at Milk River, and that that would have been on February 10th. Can you tell us how that came about?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did the RCMP brief you on whether that was done because there was buy-in from protesters on something like that, or done in hopes that once it was set up, they could get by it; do you know?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
The Institutional Report states that the Sheriffs Highway Patrol maintained certain checkpoints at other points of entry to prevent blockades.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of whether any potential blockades were thwarted by those efforts or not?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah. I understand that on February 9th, I believe, a charge under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act was laid against Pastor Artur Pawlowski?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Is that the only charge that was laid under the -- that Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So you understood that the Act could apply to the situation?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the RCMP ever explain to you why it wasn't utilised more?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that was within their discretion to decide under what Act to charge an individual?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did the Alberta Government ever take any steps to kind of attempt to have the Act used more fulsomely during this period or anything like that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Your understanding is that law enforcement action in the early morning of February 14th is what led to the end of the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Did you ever hear from RCMP that one of those factors may have been the rumours that the Emergencies Act would be invoked?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. So when did you hear that they would -- sorry, let me back up. The evidence we've heard is that protestors met in the morning of February 14th and decided they would be leaving the next morning. Were you advised on the 14th that they had made that decision?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall around what time you were advised?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So within the morning, you understood they were leaving -- would be leaving the next morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And was it -- I forget his name -- Deputy Commissioner Zablocki ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- is he the one who would have been briefing you on that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And your understanding is that the next morning they were all gone by early morning?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding with respect to Milk River is that throughout that day at some point, the protestors at the Milk River checkpoint would have moved to the legal protest site, or at least some of them?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
This may be too on the ground from your vantage point, but are you aware of any protestors moving from Coutts to that legal protest site?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so your understanding is no -- other than the raid early that morning, no enforcement action had to be taken to clear that -- to clear the blockade in Coutts?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Oh ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in the actual clearing of the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding is none of the powers under the Emergencies Act were used at that ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- to clear the blockade?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
What about other protests in Alberta at that time, what was their status, if you can recall?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in your witness statement, you state that there was always a possibility that protesters would attempt another blockade, but to your knowledge, there was no intelligence suggesting that might occur. So is your evidence then that there was no credible threats of a blockade forming after the 14th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And were you ever briefed on any factors that would have led to there being no uptake of those kind of threats?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No. Okay. Let's talk a bit more about towing capacity. So I understand that fairly early on, I believe February 1st, the Province began to make requests for towing resources; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And those requests were always for both tow trucks and tow operators?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So when I -- I'll refer to tow resources but ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- I mean both.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Was -- and I think you've already told us that those -- that capacity was critical and necessary if any enforcement action was to be taken?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Can you tell us a little bit about the challenges the provinces faced in obtaining tow capacity?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could pull up ALB00000153? So I’ll have just a couple more specific questions on this topic, but you’ve provided great overviews. Thank you for that. So my understanding, and I think you’ve mentioned it, is that the RCMP had already made a request of Public Safety Canada for assistance from Canadian Armed Forces; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that they had declined to become involved? Is that your understanding?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know whether any other options were being explored other than the Canadian Armed Forces within the Federal Government for these kinds of resources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Let’s go to ALB0000097. So this is the February 5th letter from Minister McIver to Ministers Mendicino and Blair. Can you explain what the purpose of that letter was while it comes up?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And it says, we can see at the bottom of that first paragraph, at the end of the third to last line: “…the Royal Canadian Mounted Police […] have exhausted all local and regional options to alleviate the week-long service disruptions at this important international border.” So what was meant by that? That the RCMP had exhausted all options?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
So that was only referring to towing capacity ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- is your understanding?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And then if we can go to the second last paragraph? So you see there: “To support this approach, I[‘m] requesting federal assistance that includes the provision of equipment and personnel to move approximately 70 semi- tractor trailers and approximately 75 personal and recreational vehicles from the area.” So that was the request that was ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And here it doesn’t specifically indicate that this was a request for Canadian Armed Forces resources, but was your understanding was that was what you were looking for?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you weren’t necessarily specifically aware of other sources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I understand that there was a conversation between Minister McIver and Minister Blair on February 7th, so two days later, following up on this request. And do you know what the response from Minister Blair was at that time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I think your Institutional Report indicates ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- that he raised some doubts about the use of ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- the CAF ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
At that time, it wasn’t clear ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- either way?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to ALB00001868? So these are the text messages between Ministers McIver and Blair.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we go to page 2? If we could just go down? So February 8th, Minister Blair says: “Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I spoke to our Minister of Defence and conveyed the importance and urgency of an answer…” If you could keep going down? “… from CAF. She is speaking to the Chief of Defence Staff this morning and will advise.” You were advised that that had taken place; that they were in communications?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And in parallel to this, as you’ve already described, the Province was undertaking its own steps to obtain these resources; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
We’ll come back to this, but if we can go to ALB00001328? This is an email chain from February 12th; we can start at the bottom. So who is Rae-Ann Lajeunesse?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so she writes to you that she’s communicating with Transport Canada, and that they’ve struck a working group, and that it would be a good idea to loop you into that conversation. And if we go up to the second email, you advise, and the federal government, as you see, is copied on this exchange; correct?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Transport Canada specifically, Mr. Keenan. You say: “[We’re] actually posed to make several purchases today as a matter of fact,...[the] number of vehicles identified for followup [sic].” So you were aware that you had communicated with the federal government that that was taking place at the same time?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Sounds good. And you say: “Our biggest challenge appears to be obtaining operators at this time though we might be faster on equipment acquisition[s] if we can combine efforts.” And so were you -- were you of the view that you were making progress on the equipment, but the operators were still the largest issue?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And that was one of the things you had asked the federal government for.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we could just go up to the top? So again there, third paragraph down, Transport Canada was coordinating a working group to support local police, provincial authorities, in securing truck and tractor removal capacity. So you were -- what was your understanding of those efforts; if you can describe that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If you go to ALB00001468? So that same day you had communications with Kevin Brosseau. Who is he?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And if we can go down, what were you providing him with here on February 12th?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
On the 13th.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we -- if we can -- so you provide him with the list. And then if we go up, oh, sorry; go down to the bottom, actually. I understand you guys had a phone call that day. What do you recall being discussed?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And your understanding at that time was that they were still working on the request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And did the Alberta government ever received a formal response to the February 5th request?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we could go to PB.CAN.NSC00000690? So my understanding, and we’ll see this when the document comes up, is that this is a draft response to that request. If we go down a little bit, you’ll see, second paragraph: “Below is [a] current draft of RFA request response...” If we go down -- we’ll go down a little bit further. Sorry; down more. Okay. Oh, I’m sorry. Okay, so: “My colleagues and I have given your request serious consideration and we have consulted key partners to assess our ability to assist you. Given the lack of commercial resources, the Canadian Armed Forces...would be the only Federal asset that might potentially meet this request. Unfortunately, discussions have made clear that the CAF [sic] have neither the type of assets required, nor the expertise to do this without significant possible risk.” Was that sentiment ever communicated to you verbally, or in writing some other way?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I just want to look at this paragraph that starts with further. It says, "...I understand that Alberta has the required legal authorities necessary to enforce compliance, as a highway is considered essential infrastructure, and it is unlawful to wilfully obstruct, interrupt or interfere with the obstruction, maintenance use or operation of any essential infrastructure in a manner that renders the essential infrastructure dangerous, useless, inoperative, or ineffective as per the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act of Alberta. There are a number of contraventions or other applicable legislation that may also be enforced by Alberta and its police forces. I encourage you to look at the actions taken in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Ontario who have used new or existing authorities to safeguard critical infrastructure." Had this type of sentiment been communicated to you in your discussions with Federal Government that Alberta ought to be making better use of the enforcement authority at its disposal?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the police didn't request any additional enforcement authorities?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can go to PB.CAN.00001514. So this is a call -- notes or -- yeah, notes from a call on February 13th between Assistant Deputy Minister Dalkalbab and Brousseau. I believe you participated in this call and there was ADMs from Manitoba, Ontario, Alberta. You recall this?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
If we can just go down, there's a bullet marked "Alberta" in bold and I'd like to look at the second bullet under that, "[Alberta requests CAF support --] Alberta requests for CAF support have been denied, but they are surprised that their request to access Reservists with operational skills needed to drive towing trucks was not accepted (this part of the request is news to us and we committed to follow up on this specific point)." I should clarify, these are notes taken on the I believe Transport Canada side. Was your understanding from this call that the request for the towing trucks denied?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
That -- sorry, that the ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Would not be considered. And was your understanding from this call that Transport Canada had not considered the part of the request with respect to operators?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Only the Reservist portion.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can -- Mr. Clerk, I don't know if you still have that text message exchange available that I said I would come back to.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
No, Minister Blair and Minister McIver.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yes, I'm just ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- looking for it here.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, sounds like there's a consensus. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. I know I'm coming up on my time here. I have I'd say maybe five minutes left, if that's okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. If we could go to page 3? If we could go down? So there was a follow-up on February 10th and February 21st, and your understanding is there was no answer from the Minister before the invocation of the Act?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
But you had ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- in the call on the 13th, you were aware through Transport Canada they would not be providing the tow truck resources?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And so I'll just look at the response here from Minister Blair on February 21st, "You may be aware that we invoked the Emergenc[ies] Act on February 15, which addressed the tow truck issue quite effectively. Happy to answer any questions you may have although..." And we can continue, "...I am sure the RCMP can advise you on how it works. A letter will be forthcoming." You can keep going. "I understand [...] Prime Minister spoke to Premier Kenney about the Emergenc[ies] Act, but I..." You can keep going. "...will ensure correspondence follows to you." And then Minister McIver responds, "We received no help until after Coutts issue was resolved and you know thaat [sic] Disappointed to hear you say otherwise." Keep going to the next page. "As I was disappointed to learn of your reaction to our efforts to respond to the threat to critical infrastructure and the integrity of our International borders posed by these illegal blockades. Fortunately the CACP, the OACP, [and] RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police have been clear and unequivocal that these measures have been essential to their efforts to [...]solve the criminal blockades and occupations. We are all grateful that the RCMP was able to resolve the very dangerous situation at Coutts safely.” Keep going to the next page. “What is true is that Coutts was resolved on the 14th. And we got our own tow trucks after you could no [not] help.” I guess. Continue. “Your letter speaks for itself.” “As does your lack of response until too late…” Getting to the end. “To be clear. Is your point that we should have invoked the Emergenc[ies] Act earlier?” “No. You were too late and did the wrong thing. My point is saying nothing now would have been better than not telling the truth.” I wanted to ask you about this last text from Minister McIver that you were too late and did the wrong thing. What is that in reference to? If you have an understanding ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of what that could be in reference to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Understood. Thank you. Just a last topic here that won’t take me very long, my understanding is that a First Minister’s meeting was held on February 14th, where the Federal government consulted with the Premiers of the provinces on the potential use of the Emergencies Act. You’re generally aware of that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge of whether Premier Kenney was provided with advanced notice of that First Minister’s meeting?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much, Mr. Degrand. Those are all my questions.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Two very brief points. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Jean-Simon Schoenholz for the Commission.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
First, I just want to make sure the record is clear on a point raised by my friends for the Convoy Organizers. If we could pull up the Institutional Report ALB.IR.00000001 and go to page 30 at paragraph 138? You'll recall my friend was asking you about the provision of provincial RCMP resources to the response in Ottawa. You remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And I think you mentioned it was on the 16th. You weren't terribly sure about the date. If you -- the first sentence here of ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- paragraph 138 says, "On February 18th..."
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
"...Commissioner Brenda Lucki of the RCMP requested that Alberta provide 42 officers to support efforts in Ottawa." Is that the request you were referring to?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. The only thing I -- other thing I wanted to ask you, my friend I believe for the JCCF was talking to you about that list of resources that you had acquired on February 13th. You remember that?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And the point I wanted to make sure that we understood, I believe you had a meeting with the federal officials on the 13th. Are you aware whether or not the fact that those vehicles had been obtained on the 13th was made known to federal officials?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether and when the federal officials would have been advised that that list ---
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
--- of resources had been acquired?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Those are all my questions.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Commissioner, Jean Jean-Simon Schoenholz for the Commission. The witness is Kenneth Weatherill. He's on Zoom.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And this is just for a cross-examination by some of the parties on his witness statement, so Commission Counsel don't have questions in-Chief.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I just had one point of clarification first, just for the record. My friend for Chief Sloly mentioned the dates of some of the Board meetings. The dates -- so the dates of Board meetings were the 26th, the 5th, the 11th, the 15th, and the 17th. I don't know that that's material, but just wanted to the record to accurately reflect that.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
I think it might have, yeah, it might have been an informal briefing, not an official board meeting. I just wanted to clarify it for the record.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
In terms of questions on confidentiality, you -- would you agree that if information is not provided because there is a belief that a board is a leaky board that that would be an impediment to proper oversight function by the board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And what would you suggest that the proper steps would be to follow if there was such concerns? You mentioned it, but you didn't really go into detail of what those would be.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
And can you maybe just describe those for each?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so you would agree with me that a leaky Board issue has to be addressed in some fashion?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Because if it's not addressed it leads to a breakdown in the relationship, in the oversight function.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Thank you so much for your time this evening. Thank you, Commissioner.
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, and I am aware that that is in, you know, certainly in the other witness statement that was entered. Do you maybe want to address that question then raised by my friend, what, if anything should the Solicitor General's office be doing if they're aware of a leaky Board?
-
Jean-Simon Schoenholz, Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much.