Natalia Rodriguez
Natalia Rodriguez spoke 2301 times across 9 days of testimony.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Commissioner. My name is Natalia Rodriguez, as you know. I'm Senior Commission Counsel to this Commission. And I am going to be calling our first witnesses to the Commission, Ms. Victoria De La Ronde and Ms. Zexi Li.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Ms. Li. Good morning, Ms. De La Ronde. Can you both confirm that you are residents of Ottawa.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Ms. De La Ronde, are you retired?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Ms. Li, what do you do for a living?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you both live alone?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you both in Ottawa during the protests of January and February of 2022?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I want to speak a little bit about the impacts that living through the protests of January and February had on both of you. Ms. De La Ronde, can you describe for the Commissioner what was the impact, if any, on your physical well-being?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you describe those for us?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to what do you attribute these physical impacts that you experienced?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so can you confirm that you lived in the Centretown area or the downtown area? Maybe just give us a general sense of your location.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was the impact, if any, on your mental wellbeing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do these impacts on your mental wellbeing continue to this day or have they abated?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And, Ms. Li, I will ask you the same thing. What was the impact, if any, on your physical wellbeing of living through the protest of January and February of this year?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so can you confirm as well that you live in the downtown area south of Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Ms. De La Ronde, can you describe for us the impact, if any, of living through the protests in Ottawa on your ability to go about your daily life?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can I confirm, Ms. De La Ronde, I noticed you walk with a white cane. Can you confirm, do you have a visual impairment?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And does that visual impairment then cause you to rely on sounds and hearing in order to get around outside?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so how did the sounds change then from kind of normal day to day to when the protest was happening in January and February?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Ms. Li, can you describe for us what you saw, what you heard, what you experienced when you did go outside and walk the streets during the protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So would you say that you felt unsafe walking the streets?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That’s okay. Ms. De La Ronde, would you say that you felt unsafe walking the streets?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Ms. De La Ronde, was there anything else that you experienced that you would consider to be a threat to health or safety?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Ms. Li, what actions, if any, did you take because of your disruptions to your daily life?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, do you mean the police?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you describe -- sorry, can you describe what you mean by the egg-throwing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the result of that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so we'll get to that in a little bit. I just wanted to get a sense, for the honking, you both mentioned the sound of the honking. Do you have a sense for when it was -- was it -- was it all the time, was it louder during the day, was it just as loud at night? Can you give us a sense of that, Ms. Li, and then Ms. De La Ronde?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So would that be Friday, the 27th of January?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. Ms. De La Ronde, do you have a sense for when the honking was louder? Was it constant 24 hours a day, was it less at night, was it the same?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I want to show a map now that’s been produced at Exhibit D of the Affidavit sworn by Aaron Bernard, and he’s the Managing Director of Spatial Media. And for the parties’ benefit it’s at document COM50736 if you want to look at that. So this was based on -- this map was created based on -- yeah, you can click on that -- based on data that was collected through the two weeks, the first two weeks of the convoy. And what we see here is just a standard traffic noise in Ottawa during the day, and this is just based on known decibel readings throughout the area, and the decibel readings were collected at different points in downtown Ottawa, and this is a visualization of that data that was collected. So if we go to week daytime -- week one daytime? Thank you. So this is what it shows on this map, based on the decimal ratings collected on the ground in different locations through the first week of the convoy. And if we just zoom in to -- it's a bit of a heat map, so the darker the colour the louder the decibels. And if you can zoom in a little bit more? Okay, that's good. And so, you had said. Ms. De La Ronde, that you live on Laurier, can you tell us approximately a close intersection that you would be by, just so we can locate that on the map?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Laurier and Kent?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we can just zoom in on Laurier and Kent? You just have to zoom in a bit there. Yeah, just move over to the left. Yeah. We’ve got Lion, we’ve got Kent, and that’s Laurier -- where’s Laurier? Right there, okay. Yeah. So Laurier and Kent we see between 90 decibels and if you go up, about, so between 90 and 100. Okay. And it says, similar to a lawn mower. Does that accord with your recollection of the sound? It says as loud as -- similar to a lawn mower.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you would say it was louder in your experience?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Ms. Li, an intersection that you are near so we can kind of locate you on the map?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Laurier and Bank. Okay, so just over to the right a little bit on the mouse. Yeah, right there, that’s the corner. Okay. So again, similar, 100 to 110 decibels, similar to a lawnmower. does that accord with your kind of recollection of what it was like?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we're going to hear one of the recordings. If you go down to the blue there, you can see some of the recordings that were taken, so that one is at 100 as well in that zone, so it's similar to the area that you were in in terms of the decibel readings. And we're just going to play it so that everyone here can experience a little bit of what you experienced. (Audio recording played)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Does that accord with your recollection of the sounds when you were either in your building or walking outside, Ms. De La Ronde?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you agree with that, Ms. Li?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Ms. Li, you had indicated that you took videos and photos when you walked around. I just want to take you to some of those photos if we can.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It’s COM00000713, and maybe you can just -- when it comes up -- describe to us what we’re seeing here, and when it was taken, and why you took the photo? It’s ending in 713. Okay, yeah. Let’s see the full -- yeah, there we go.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And then the next photo is ending in 728, so COM00000728. Okay. And do you recall when this photo was taken and what we're seeing here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is this truck parked on the sidewalk; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was that common for trucks to be up parked on the sidewalks?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I see we are running out of time, so perhaps I will then invite parties to ask you additional questions. Thank you very much. Oh, before we go, is there anything else that you would like to tell the Commission? I do want to give you an opportunity if there's anything else we haven't discussed that you would like to discuss?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And, Ms. De La Ronde, is there anything we haven't covered that you would like to say?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And now I invite the parties to ask you some questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
She gave an anticipated statement, so it’s a statement of anticipated evidence, not a witness statement. So it’s not attributable to her, it’s attributable to the Commission, and that is different from a witness statement, which is attributable to the witness.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I just want to clarify that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No re-exam, thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Commissioner. I’d like to call Councillor Catherine McKenney and Councillor Mathieu Fleury to the stand, please.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good afternoon to both of you. Can I confirm, you both had an interview with Commission Counsel on September 8 of this year? Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you’ve had a chance to review the interview summary that was prepared as a result of that interview; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we have that witness interview summary at WTS.00000025. And I’m just going to pull it up here for you to see. And while we’re doing that, Councillor McKenney, do you have any corrections you would like to make to your witness summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Councillor Fleury, are there any corrections you would like to make to the witness summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Yes. Please, as we’re waiting for that to be pulled up? Yes. Thank you. And do you know approximately ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, okay. Well maybe we’ll scroll down a bit. Maybe just tell us what areas ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I think it might be up a little bit.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Let’s keep going up. I believe it’s on this page here above the harassment section. Let’s see there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“Physical violence ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- or threats.” Okay. So maybe I’ll give you an opportunity then to indicate what needs to be corrected.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So how would you like to change that witness statement? What aspects would you - --
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we will make those changes, and subject to those changes, the witness summary will be entered into evidence.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I understand that both of you are councillors to the City of Ottawa. Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you tell me a little bit about the wards you represent? Catherine McKenney, we’ll start with you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Councillor Fleury?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Perfect. So I’m going to pull up a Google Map that we’ve created. It’s been shared with the parties. And the orange section on the left there, Councillor McKenney, can you confirm whether that accurately represents the boundaries of your ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the area, the orange area on the right there, Councillor Fleury, maybe we can just go over where the boundary is, especially in the middle of the two. It’s a little bit hard to distinguish. Yeah. Right there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, that’s the Rideau Canal there. Okay. So Councillor Fleury, can you confirm that that area represents the boundaries of your ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And now I just want to take a moment to look at the geography of Ottawa as it relates to the events in question a little bit more closely, because as we know, there are people from outside of Ottawa that are watching and may not have a sense of Ottawa geography. We’ve touched on a few things this morning, but generally, we can see Parliament Hill, if we can just zoom in on Parliament Hill. There we go. And there’s a grey line that’s directly in front of Parliament Hill there. And that represents Wellington Street, where a lot of the protest activity was happening. And if we zoom out from here and we look at the areas that are south of Parliament Hill that are captured in your wards, Councillor McKenney, can you give us a sense for where the residential areas on this map and whether they’re confined to a specific area, or they’re kind of sprinkled throughout, or whether there’s a larger concentration in some areas?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So Laurier, if we can just ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- zoom in a little bit? That’s Laurier there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it goes south from there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And so we see Kent. We have the cursor right now at Kent and Laurier. So that’s the intersection there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then on the east side, how far on the east and west sides do the residential areas expand?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, where would the residential areas in your ward that were affected in this case by the convoy -- where would those be located on this map?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so yeah, that’s right ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, so we’re right there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And, Councillor McKenney, can you -- if we can go back to the residential centretown kind of area. Okay, yeah, there we are. Can you maybe give us a sense for -- and we’ll get to the basis of your knowledge on this in a second, but can you maybe give us a sense for how widespread the trucks were when the convoy was in Ottawa? Where did they go to in terms of blocking the roads and kind of establishing themselves?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So just one second.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So let’s just get to Kent and Somerset for a second and maybe we’ll just -- we’ll put a pin in there just so that we can visualize it. So I believe Somerset is ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Just up -- yeah, just in that corner there, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, right there. Yeah, so that’s Kent and Somerset. Are we able to drop a pin? Okay, well, we’ll have to, then, just visually visualize it ourselves, okay. So let’s zoom out from there. Okay. And then -- so that would be kind of the southeast -- the southwest corner?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And where else from there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, one block north of there, okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So several blocks south from Parliament down to Somerset is about -- it was six or seven blocks south and then expanding maybe five blocks east to west?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And, Councillor Fleury, then, in terms of where the convoy expanded into in your area, can you give us a sense based on the map?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, right there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, so we just got to go up on the map a little bit here.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, other way.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
There we go.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, that’s right. So we’re going that way now, okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, and we see a pin there just on the bottom there. Now, there’s a pin at the top there where it says “Shepherds of Good Hope” and I understand there was incident there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the trucks expand up to that area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we can expand -- if we can zoom out, rather. So we can -- it seems pretty expansive, then, if we’re looking all the way up there and then down to the residential areas in Centretown. Okay, so that’s very helpful to get a sense for the scope and breadth that we’re talking about when we’re discussing some of these issues. Okay, I think we can take the map down for now. Just a high level -- and we’re going to get into more details but I just wanted to ask at a high level how the residents in your ward were impacted by the protests of January and February of this year. Councillor McKenney, I’ll start with you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor Fleury, how about you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor McKenney, were the businesses in your ward similarly affected?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And I understand that during the second and third weeks particularly, both of you visited the site, walked around, walked the streets. Can you maybe describe a little bit of what you saw during those walks? I’ll start with Councillor Fleury.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, by “weapons” what do you mean by “weapons”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Councillor McKenney, what kind of issues did you observe on your walks?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm going to take you then, Councillor McKenney, to a document that you received. It’s a video that was sent to you by a resident and you have mentioned that residents were communicating with you and sending you correspondence. It’s at OT00012814. Now, first of all, do you recall receiving this video from a constituent?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the email indicates that it was on February 1st. Do you have a sense for where the video was taken just based on what you could see there? And we could just show it up again just to --maybe just a still shot of the video. Just on pause here. But does that give you a sense for where the video was taken?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that's the one we're -- that blue kind of beige one that we're seeing there, that's the Shopify building?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so this is a residential area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it's in your ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is this consistent with the kind of sound level that you experienced in that area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this is, you know, one video that was sent to you, but were there others in similar kind of nature, or how would you this relative to the other emails and communications that you received?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm going to take you now to another email you received, and it's at OTT, three zeroes, 14415. And so we can see that it's dated February 2nd, and the subject line is Centre Town Convoy Disruptions and Noise, and the sender starts by saying: "Good afternoon. I hope you're all having a peaceful afternoon. I'm not. I live on the intersection of Metcalfe and Cooper Streets in Downtown Ottawa. Since Friday, I have had a non-stop barrage of truck horns, a very illegal train horn, drunken revellers and plain old guys screaming in my neighbourhood. This is oftentimes directly outside of my window, and I am just above street level. See attached video to experience how loud it was this past Sunday. This started as early as 7:00 a.m., and over the weekend I heard honking and screaming until well past 1:00 a.m." (As read) Do you recall this email?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this person indicates that they're at Metcalfe and Cooper. And can you confirm that's a residential area within your ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this person describes horns as early as 7:00 a.m. and at times going past 1:00 a.m. Does that accord with your experience as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we look at the fourth paragraph, this person says: "Besides all of this, I have anxiety, constantly being on edge, not knowing how long I will have just a little peace and quiet, or if I will be able to safely get groceries. It's taking its toll on me. My jaw hurts from clenching non-stop, my heart constantly races, I have been sleeping on average of three to four hours a night, I can't stop shaking, I'm barely eating and my stomach ache is constantly upset. My anxiety is well-controlled in normal times, but prescribed medication and coping mechanisms can only do so much when the threat is real and constant." (As read) How would you say this resident's description of the impacts compares to the overall tone of communications that you were having with residents?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we're just going to look at the video that the constituents sent to you. It's at OTT, three zeroes, 14416. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [END VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, did you receive similar emails regarding impacts from your constituents?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And so for your ward, did the -- you showed us on the map how far east the convoy was kind of established. Would you say that the noise issues were spread in a similar fashion to where you indicated the trucks were located in your ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And we're going to go to a video provided to us by the affidavit of Sean Flynn that's been submitted by the Coalition of Businesses and Residents, and this is at COA, five zeroes, 132. Yes, five zeroes. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [END VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, can you -- are you able to tell us the location where that video was taken just based on the surroundings there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you walked through that area during ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And does that accord with your recollection of what it was like walking through that area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we know from this morning that February 7th, one of the residents, Zexi Li, who testified earlier today, obtained an injunction to stop airhorns and train horns in the downtown area. Would you say that the noise level improved after February 7th, and if so, did it stay like that, you know, throughout or did it come back? How would you describe the noise level after February 7th? I'll start with Catherine McKenney.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor Fleury?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I want to just take you to another video, also in the affidavit of Sean Flynn. It's at Exhibit F, and the document ID is COA, five zeroes, 136. And before we play it, I just want to preface it that based on the affidavit it indicates that it's on February 12th, that's what the affidavit states, which would be after the injunction, and the affidavit states that it was on Albert and O'Connor. So with that context we can watch. [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So based on that, would you say that that accords with your recollection of what it would have been like around the 12th of February in the downtown area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And February 12th would have been a Saturday. So ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of any kind of threats to safety, unruly behaviour, was any of that type of personal safety issues reported to you and/or did you witness any of that yourself, Councillor McKenney?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
How about you, Councillor Fleury?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So these were all incidences that were reported to you by constituents or business owners?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say you were forwarding these to the authorities, who in particular were you forwarding these incidences to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor McKenney, did you forward, also, reports that you were receiving from your constituents to authorities? And if so, to whom?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now I want to show a video that was part of the City of Ottawa’s productions. And it’s at OTT00010436. [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, first of all, have either of you seen this video before?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Yes. And do you know the context in which it came to us in our production? Do you know who it belonged to or how it came to us, by any chance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What I want to ask about it is, Councillor Fleury, you had used the term “weapons” when describing the trucks, and here in this video we see some unsafe behaviour. It appears to show a truck driving in the wrong lane against traffic on the sidewalk. Did you observe any kind of unsafe use of the trucks? Or what did -- can you expand on this notion of weaponizing that you mentioned earlier?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Councillor McKenney, I want to take you to an email that you received. It's at ORR-00017349. And if we go down to -- further down. Okay. So let me see. Go down a little bit more. Let's go down to the bottom. Okay. There we go. So this is an email from -- redacted, it's a constituent, so it's been redacted. It was sent on February 4th, and the -- yeah, there we go. And the subject line is complete absence of police on Metcalf Ottawa occupation. And so this email describes the -- says the occupation is growing on these streets. And then at the second paragraph it says, "OPS at 9:30 a.m. today said 150 officers would be deployed but there isn't one in sight 6 hours later, and they are only digging in to their Metcalf stronghold." (As read) Do you recall receiving this email?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go a little bit up from here, we'll see that you forward that on, on the same day to city council, Peter Sloly, some OPSB members. You copy a member of Parliament Yasir Naqvi, Minister Mendicino and Steve Kanellakos, the City Manager. And you talk about an absence of police presence in our downtown neighbourhoods and the ever-expanding red zone. Do you recall sending that email?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why did you forward this complaint? Was this part of just a general practice of forwarding complaints on to this group of people?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go up a little bit from here, you say -- if you go up a little bit more just to look at the top, yeah, so just the bottom part of that page, the next day it looks like to the same group of people and you say, "This is the message I received back from OPS, which says today we had 20 to 25 officers patrolling Centretown as well as NRT members." (As read) And then you say, "20 to 25. A friend went out last night at midnight into the heart of Centretown and reported not one physical police presence. We continue to be abandoned in Centretown." (As read) Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go up a little bit more, you get a response from Carol Anne Meehan, and I understand she was a member of the Ottawa Police Services Board at that time; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And she says, "So very sorry, Catherine. Wish we had the power to do something besides watch." (As read) Now when she said that, what did -- what do you understand that she's saying there seeing as how she's a member of the Ottawa Police Services Board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So when she says "wish we had the power to do something besides watch", did you understand her to be speaking about you and her essentially, the two of you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, if we go up, you say -- you respond to this exchange now and you say, "No police in ByWard Market, Rideau either." Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what does this -- does this email thread capture the sentiment from constituents about lack of police presence, or some people have talked about this morning feeling abandoned by authorities. What can you say to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you talk of the red zone, what is your understanding of the boundaries of that zone? What do you mean when you say “the red zone”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So that would encompass residential zones? I just want to make sure that we’re not separating red zone from residential zones because it sounds like there were residential areas within the red zone as well.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I want to take you to another email, OTT00005554. And its subject line is “Forward update re: trucks back on Metcalfe blocking two lanes as of this morning.” It’s dated February 8. And then if we go down to the original email -- yeah, there we go. The sender says: “They are quickly multiplying in numbers with cars now being added since I first saw them at 9:00 a.m.. Here are videos and footage from another neighbour.” And if we go down we see this photo. Are you able to, Councillor McKenney, based on the photo, give an indication of whereabouts it was taken?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go up to your Foreword, it says: “Trucks and vehicles taking over Metcalfe as I write a message to you.” And if we go up, I just want to see who you were sending this to. So you sent this to former Chief Sloly and copied Mayor Jim Watson, Member of Parliament Yasir Naqvi, Minister Mendocino, Councillor Fleury, and it looks like some other ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- councillors, other councillors, yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you get a response from Former Chief Sloly on this email, do you recall?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you confirm then that the footprint of the convoy in the residential areas, as this email seems to indicate, was expanding over time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you observed this kind of expansion yourself? It wasn’t just through people reporting this to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And Councillor Fleury, in your ward did the area of the convoy grow over time or did it -- was it static over the course of the convoy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So they were concentrated more on ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- on Rideau. Oaky. So Councillor McKenney, I want to take you to some videos that you took while walking through the neighbourhoods. If we can go to OTT00030053. And if you can just describe to us what we’re seeing in this video.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this a kind of a one-off? You saw this and took a video? Or is this something that you were seeing constantly through your walks?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Councillor Fleury, did you notice idling as well in ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I’m going to take you to a video that’s attached to an affidavit provided to us by the Coalition of Businesses and Residences. And it’s a COA00000112. (VIDEO PLAYBACK)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Councillor McKenney, it looks like that’s you that is depicted in the video. Can you confirm that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know who recorded you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it’s Mr. Najafi’s affidavit that this is attached to so that makes sense. And in the video it looks like you are taking a recording of a toilet, an outdoor toilet. Can you explain why you took that video? What was your concern there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would that be the February 16 council meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I want to take you to an image that was also provided in the Najafi affidavit and it’s at COA00000129. Are you able to locate this area or indicate whereabouts this is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Kent and Nepean, thank you. And did you observe, personally, what’s being depicted in this image?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you describe what we’re seeing here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what concerns did this raise in terms of health and safety or any other concerns aside from, obviously, they’re -- they don’t intend on leaving?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, in your ward, were there similar types of encampments or, I guess, similar to what we’re seeing here where there’s stockpiling of food, and wood, and fires?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Now, Councillor McKenney, I understand that on February 15 you attended a counter-demonstration, as it’s called, in the Billings Bridge area; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what do you know about how this counter-demonstration came about or what the purpose of it was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you -- you were there at some point in the afternoon.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you observe? What was happening while you were there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so how were these trucks being prevented from going into the downtown? Were people physically standing in the road? Was it cars ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that were being parked? Maybe you can explain that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I’m going to take you to a video that I’m hoping you can confirm whether it shows some of the events of that day, COM00000741. [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
These are just some images. So Councillor McKenney, can you confirm whether these images are of that counter-demonstration that you attended on the 15th of February?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we saw some police liaison team members there. What can you tell me about the police presence in that counter-demonstration?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what impact did this event have on the residents based on your interactions with them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, the Commission may receive some evidence that the counter-demonstration forced OPS to deploy resources away from the downtown to engage de- escalation at the counter-protest and that this did not assist OPS’s efforts to resolve the issue of the convoy. What would be your response to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So I want to speak a little bit now about the effects on the businesses, Councillor Fleury. If we can go to OPS document, OPS-00003441? If we go down to the January 26th original email. We'll go down a bit more to the first email in the chain. Yeah, let's just go down and make sure we got it. Yes. Okay. If we can keep going to the bottom? Okay. So that is the bottom, so now we'll go to the top of the email. So this is from -- if we can just see the from, ByWard Market BIA executive director, and it is directed at you on January 26th. So this is now before the convoy arrives. The subject matter is ByWard Market BIA concerns ahead of January 29, 2022 demonstration. And if we go down to the actual body of the email -- I'll just leave that there for a second to give you a chance to review it. It appears that the ByWard Market BIA executive director is raising a number of concerns. I'll just give you a second to read some of that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this email outlines several concerns regarding safety and security, regarding, you know, having more information about what to expect, suggesting that people may not be following public health restrictions. Was this one of the first emails that you received ahead of the convoy alerting you to the business's concerns with respect to the convoy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in the third paragraph, the last sentence says, "This, of course, in the context of coverage, detailing that there are some protesters suggesting and hoping that this weekend will be a Canadian equivalent of the American riots of January 6th, 2021." (As read) Were either of you aware of news coverage, these intentions by some of the protesters, or was this the first time that you had seen this suggestion? I'll ask Councillor Fleury first.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And, Councillor McKenney, had you heard any suggestion that some of the protestor's intentions ahead of the convoy was something similar to what's being described here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go up a little bit, we're going to see that the email you then -- yeah, let's keep going. You forward that -- if we can go up? So you forwarded that on the same day, the 26th. It looks like to former Chief Sloly, Roger Chapman, who I believe is the By-law - - the head of the By-law and ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Regulatory Services, Kim Ayotte, who is the head of the Emergency Management, and a few other people there in the City of Ottawa. And you say thank you to the constituents, and then you say, "Chief Sloly, Chapman and Ayotte, could you review the ByWard BIA concerns and connect with the BIA ED ahead of the weekend? I have cced Rideau BIA as well as GM of Rideau Centre who have similar concerns. How are we supporting local businesses through this demonstration from risk of ignorance to public health measures and pressures on a business they fear? Thanks for the prompt consideration, support and response." (As read) And if we go up, we can see that former Chief Sloly then forwards this to Deputy Chief Ferguson and says, "Trish, I got a message from Councillor Fleury wanting to follow up with you on this email and other related matters. He will contact you directly." (As read) And if we go to the very top -- oh, yeah, sorry about that. Yeah, Deputy Chief Ferguson says, "As a means of follow-up, this has been looked after." (As read) So did -- were you able to speak with Deputy Chief Ferguson about this matter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then is it fair to say that the concerns that were raised by the BIA were not satisfactorily addressed in your interactions with Deputy Chief Ferguson?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And on the subject of the Rideau Centre, I understand they were closed approximately 25 days straight. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Twenty-four (24) days. Thank you. And is that unusual?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have a sense for why it had to close on that first day? Was it because of safety concerns? Was it because there were too many people? Was it -- what was the concern there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Now, Councillor Fleury, I understand that you organized daily meetings with affected Business Improvement Areas, hotel associations, affected stakeholders. Do you know when these meetings -- when did you start having these meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, in your interview summary, you stated that the Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief of Police did not personally attend the meetings with the BIA. Were they invited to attend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have an explanation from them as to why they didn’t attend? They never gave one to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But they didn’t give you an explanation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did local businesses and BIAs express that they were content with the information they were receiving from the City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mention that at these meetings, that businesses were getting the public information that general public was receiving. Is that unusual?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the City officials and police representatives that were at these meetings, were they able to give the type of specific information that businesses were looking for, such as what you described? Or generally no?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your knowledge, did the City ever ask local bias to restrict material and financial support to the demonstrators, would not sell them certain items or anything like that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, maybe you can think about that and ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- then get back to me at the end. Okay, so for -- in the interests of time, because I know -- I’m sure a lot of the parties have questions as well - - I’m going to -- we’re going to just move on to the City’s response and your experiences as councillors.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Welcome back, councillors. I just wanted to ask a question with respect to the emergency lanes. We have heard that the City and OPS attempted to maintain an emergency lane at all times to allow for emergency vehicles to go through ambulances and fire. Councillor Fleury, you also mentioned an incident at the Chateau Laurier where fire or first responders were not able to get to the Chateau Laurier. So I’m just trying to understand, to what extent were emergency lanes maintained open? Was this on every street? Was this on some streets? Maybe you can describe a little bit about what you saw with respect to maintaining an open lane. And I’ll start with Councillor Fleury.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in terms of streets in the Byward Market, for example, did all of them have one lane of traffic open to them or no? Were there streets that were completely cut-off kind of on either end where any kind of vehicles couldn’t enter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Councillor McKenney, what can you tell us about the maintenance of an emergency lane in the kind of downtown core?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were there some streets for which and emergency lane was maintained throughout, do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Councillor Fleury, in your interview with the Commission, you spoke about problem that you perceived with the City’s bylaw enforcement and their response to resident complaints. Can you speak a little bit more to that issue? What were the issues, specifically, that you were concerned about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so with respect to your concerns about the City of Ottawa’s Bylaw response complaints, what can you tell me about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So then when the resident would call 3-1-1 they would be asked to describe the vehicle in order -- what was your understanding for why they had to describe the vehicle?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so is your understanding then that was in order to determine whether it was a vehicle associated with the convoy? Was that the purpose of kind of giving the description?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge as to whether Bylaw was choosing then not to engage, or whether this was Ottawa Police telling Bylaw not to engage? Do you have any knowledge of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that would have been those three individuals who told you that, the three people you named?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was regardless of where in the city this was taking place? Like, I imagine at some point you're far enough away from the main site that Bylaw is doing its regular work, say, in Kanata, Orleans, and Barrhaven. How far was this extending? Do you have any sense of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor McKenney, do you have any sense about the bylaw’s kind of structure and when it was being enforced and when it wasn’t?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm going to take you both to a letter that you co-authored on February 2nd, and it’s at OTT00014570. And this is -- Councillor McKenney, you sent this on February 2nd to Mayor Watson, Former Chief Sloly, Councillors, members of the OPSB. And I just want to go down to the signature line just to show that it looks like you both signed off on that. Do you see that there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we’re just going to go back up. So it says: “Mayor Watson and Chief Sloly, Ottawa’s urban core is in crisis, for six days and nights downtown residents have been under siege. They have faced unprecedented noise and pollution. Wearing a mask in public means being threatened with violence and sexual violence, of being spat at and screamed at.” And then you on to describe the horns keeping people awake, drivers threatening pedestrians, open fires, tanks of fuel being delivered to vehicles, illegal parking, downtown gridlock. And you're being told that more trucks may arrive this weekend to reinforce the convoy’s numbers. And then you say: “Therefore, we ask you, Chief Sloly, have you requested that the RCMP assume full operational control of Parliament Hill and the Parliamentary Precinct so that OPS can be deployed into the neighbourhoods to restore peace? “Mayor Watson, have you spoken to the Prime Minister, and what assistance did the Prime Minister offer? Have you requested that the federal government take control of what is happening in our city?” And you finish of with a plea. And do you recall authoring this letter and sending it to those people?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you receive a formal response to this letter from either the Chief or the Mayor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what you describe in the letter -- if we can go up a little bit; in terms of the open fires, tanks of fuels, blasting horns every day, drivers threatening pedestrians, et cetera -- was this based on circumstances that you yourselves witnessed or that were reported to you or a combination?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I’m going to start calling you “McFleury” from now on. And do you stand by the contents of this letter today?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. Councillor Fleury, at one point you asked the City to look into imposing a curfew; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you explain a little bit where this idea came from and what happened, what came from it, if anything?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you don't recall what happened to the idea of imposing a curfew specifically?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, Councillor McKenney, in this -- in the letter we saw a minute ago and also in a motion that you -- that was eventually brought, you had asked to formally petition the Government of Canada to assume responsibility for public safety and security within the parliamentary precinct in order to allow for Ottawa police officers to patrol neighbourhoods and be in charge of the neighbourhoods. And that was then a motion that was eventually brought to council. What was the purpose of this motion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did that -- that motion passed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did it have the intended effect?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why not?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I'm going to take you to a Ottawa document, OTT-00005837. And so this is an email dated February 8th, and it is from former Chief Sloly to Jim Watson, Mayor Watson, and Councillor Deans and copying Ottawa Police and City officials. And it says, "Dear Mayor Watson and Chair Deans, I am writing further to yesterday's special council meeting wherein the motion of Councillor McKenney regarding the parliamentary precinct was passed by City Council." (As read) So this would be the motion that we were just discussing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then he goes on to say, "In Ontario, policing is governed by the Police Services Act in accordance with Section 5(1)(1) of the Police Services Act. The City of Ottawa has discharged its responsibility to provide police services by establishing a police force, the Ottawa Police Service. As a result, the Ottawa Police Service is the sole police service of jurisdiction. It is important to note that the Police Services Act defines police force as either the Ontario Provincial Police or a municipal police force. The Ottawa Police Service maintains that Councillor McKenney's motion is absent jurisdictional authority where it intends for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to assume command of the response to the ongoing demonstration in the City of Ottawa." (As read) And he goes on from there. Were you made aware of former Chief Sloly's response to this motion the day following the motion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then in the kind of second to last paragraph, he says, "Although any deployment of officers will be under the direction of the Chief of Police as an operational consideration, the Ottawa Police Service will make every attempt to meet the spirit of the motion and have Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers work in and around the hardened area of the demonstration." (As read) Did -- to your knowledge, did that attempting to meet the spirit of the motion, did that have the intended affect that you were hoping the motion would have?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now I'm going to pose some kind of more general questions to both of you about generally the response to the events and authority's response. Specifically, we'll start with City Council. How would you, Councillor Fleury, describe City Council's response to the events in Ottawa, the events of the protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor McKenney?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So but Council is not the one who declares a state of emergency. That's ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- the mayor; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And there never was a motion brought with respect to declaring a state of emergency; was there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it was coming, is what you’re saying?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And there were several motions we know that were brought to Council, many of them which passed, relating to responses to the Convoy petitioning the federal government, asking the government for assistance for residents and businesses, for example. How would you describe generally the various motions that were brought to Council and that were passed? Like we know there’s different types of motions; some of them are more political in nature and are more symbolic, other ones actually have an effect where they can make a change. So what kinds of motions were these? Councillor McKenney?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding too, is that there was an amendment to the idling by-law which then made it a breach of the by-law, if you will, to idle below a certain temperature. And that was because in the winter, if it’s below a certain temperature, you can idle, but of course this was being used -- or this was not being implemented because the trucks were out there idling and so they raised the temperature –- or rather they lowered the temperature such that it would apply even in cold weather. Have I accurately captured the spirit of that motion to amend the by-law?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did that have an effect -- did passing that motion and amending that by-law to make it applicable in cold weather, have any practical effect?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why is that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor Fleury, do you have any information as to why that didn’t do very much?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at some point I understand there was a suggestion that there were enough votes in Council to pass a motion to request military equipment under the National Defence Act. Councillor Fleury, can you explain what that was all about and what came of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if I understand it, the City of Ottawa tow truck companies that were under contract with the City of Ottawa, were refusing to tow and offer towing services and this was a way to fill that gap; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what happened to that motion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. So it never made it to the floor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in your view, both of you, was there more Council could have done? And I’ll start with Councillor McKenney?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Councillor Fleury, was there more that City Council could have done?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you’re saying that before the days -- that during the first few weeks, anyway, trucks could leave the red zone and then re-enter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In you views, I want to ask you about the mayor’s response to this. Councillor McKenney, do you think there was more the mayor could have done, or how would describe his response to this event?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor Fleury, with respect to the mayor’s response, what would you say to that? NA
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. I want to take you now, just to close, to OTT00030058, and it’s a video, Councillor McKenney, that you filmed. And I believe we talked a little bit about this day that it was filmed but I’ll ask you to confirm it. We’re just going to stop it at 1:50 because I think there was, maybe, audio issues at the very end of the video. So we’ll stop it at 1:50 but we can go ahead and show it. [VIDEO PLAYBACK]
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So can you confirm, Councillor McKenney, that this was filmed on the day of the council meeting on February 16?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you say in the video, “I don’t know who is counting trucks but I can tell that the street is not cleared.” What was that in reference to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Councillor McKenney, did anyone give you any kind of assurances or comfort about the plan for that weekend after this video?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this was Interim Chief Steve Bell?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. Councillor Fleury, Councillor McKenney spoke about receiving threats to herself and to her family. Did you similarly receive threats? I believe we saw a bit of that in your witness statement, but maybe you can just explain that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this is funding to the convoy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this reported to the police?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in closing, is there anything that either of you would like to add that we haven’t covered about your experiences with impacts on residents and businesses, the City response, the Police response, or any other matter relating to the convoy in Ottawa? I’ll give you a chance to think about it. Have we covered it, from your perspective?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you both. Those are my questions. Thank you, Commissioner.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Bonjour, good morning. Natalia Rodriguez, senior Commission Counsel. And Commission would like to call Steve Kanellakos.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mr. Kanellakos.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Nice to see you again. Can you confirm your position with the City of Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as City Manager, I understand you're the most senior public servant in the administration; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you've held this position since May of 2006?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
'16, sorry. My mistake. And you had an interview with Commission Counsel on August 17th of this year; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And have you had a chance to review the summary of that interview?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Do you have any corrections you would like to make to that summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I would like to bring it up, so that we can have it entered into evidence. It's WTS1, ending in 1. Okay. So this is your witness summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Great. So we will have that entered into evidence. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you've also sworn an affidavit attaching the institutional reports for the City of Ottawa for this Commission; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And the affidavit is AFF3, if we can pull that up? Okay. And if we can just zoom in a little bit? Okay. So that is your affidavit; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the institution reports that it attaches are OTT.IR.00000001. And if we can zoom in? You recognize that as the City of Ottawa's institution report?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go to OTT.IR00000002. And this is the second institution report, which is a timeline of events submitted by the City of Ottawa; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And are you aware of any changes that should be made to either one of these documents?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we'll have those entered into evidence along with your affidavit.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So just by way of background, according to your witness summary and the institution report, there are 10 departments within the City. Each department has a general manager, and each general manager then reports directly to you; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And one of those departments is the Emergency and Protective Services?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Mr. Kim Ayotte is the General Manager for that department?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I understand that By- law and Regulatory Services falls within Emergency and Protective Services, and then that then subsequently reports to Mr. Kim Ayotte, and then up to you as City Manager; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you're also the Chair of the EOCCG when that group is activated; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The EOC ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what is the Emergency Operations Centre Control Group?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It's only one C. Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you for that. The EOCG then. And my understanding is that the EOCG includes all 10 city departments, in addition to certain independent agencies such as Ottawa Public Health, Ottawa Police Services and others; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as Chair, you have final decision-making authority for matters that are within the city's jurisdiction if there's a lack of consensus among the EOCG members; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So if it's an agency that falls outside of 1 of the 10 departments, then you don't have authority over those; is that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the lead agency for this particular emergency was which agency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And how was that decided?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it the case that every time there's a demonstration, that's considered a public order issue, and therefore, the police is the lead agency for that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Does it depend on the nature of the demonstration?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. What about in the case of a parade, for example?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And at the ELCG level, which I understand it is a City of Ottawa emergency group, what kinds of decisions are taken at that level?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So as city manager, having all city departments reporting up to you, and as chair of the ELCG, it is fair to say that you would have been aware of any major considerations or any major decisions or actions that the City would have taken with respect to the convoy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I’m going to take you to OTT 101. And all of the OTT documents will end in .0001, but I’m not going to say that. So it’s just OTT 101. And this is an email that was sent to you. If we go down to the bottom? All right. So all the way to the bottom. Okay. So if we go up a little bit, just to see who this is from. Yeah, okay. So we have Steve Ball. And do you know who Steve Ball is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who is he?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this is dated January 25th, so this is before the arrival of the convoy in Ottawa. And he says: “See note below. I spoke to this guy and he gave me more info about the plan shut down access to the city.” (As read) And then he sends a message there, which says, in part: “The current count of transportation individuals are estimated at 10,000 to 15,000 members, who will be attending for a duration of 30 to 90 days from the day of January 29th, 2022 to February 27th, 2022, extending to February 1st, 2022.” (As read)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, April 1st, 2022. And my understanding is that this message that was received by Steve Ball was somebody purporting to be on behalf of, it looks like, a Canada United Truckers Convoy, looking for hotels to stay in Ottawa? Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And after that message, it looks like, if we go up, from Steve Ball, he sent it to Mathieu Gravel. And he’s at the Mayor’s office? Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then he forwards that to you and to Steve Box, and to Kim Ayotte, and then he says: “After having raised three plus million through the crowd funding initiative, the truckers are starting to reach out to hotels to book stays of at least 30 days. Steve Ball spoke to this guy and he basically laid out the plan, which is basically that they will leave their trucks in place, chain them together, and attempt to block all accesses to the city. What is our level of preparedness to respond to this should it go on for many weeks or months? Who is our lead in responding and presumably liaising with the federal authorities? It would be helpful if we could have a quick call either today or tomorrow to share intel.” (As read) Okay. And then if we go up. So you received that on the 25th, and then it looks like you say that: “We are briefing the Mayor’s Office this week once we have the info we need.” (As read) And then Serge Arpin says: “Chief Peter Sloly has set up a briefing with the Mayor tomorrow after council.” (As read) And so it looks like then my understanding is that this information received from the Hotels Association was passed on to the Ottawa Police Service?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it looks like a meeting was held then on January 26th, which was the day after this email, with Former Chief Sloly. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was the information in this email discussed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I could take you to OTT 259? This is the email from Intersec on January 26th. Go down. Yeah. Okay. There it is. And if we go up a little bit more just to show that it comes from Intersec? And it came, actually, on the 21st of January, but it was forwarded to the City on the 26th of January, if we go up a little bit more. Yeah. And it says: “The situation remains fluid.” (As read) And it says, if we go up a little bit more: “All open-source information and our interactions with organizers indicate that this will be a significant and extremely fluid event that could go on for a prolonged period.” (As read) And that is under “Current information”, the first bullet point there. And so if we go up, it looks like you received this email as well. Kim Ayotte forwards it to Steve Box and to Beth Gooding, and then Steve Box forwards that to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you recall receiving this at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I could take you to OTT 538? And this is dated January 26th. It’s from Riley Brockington. I understand he’s a councillor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he sent this to you and to some other people at the City, including Diane Deans, who was the Chair of the OPSB at the time? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in his email, he says, in part: “This isn’t just going to impact downtown, but the entire city region. Many are now saying shut down the city until the restrictions are lifted. This is going to last more than a weekend. The OPS today estimated 1,000 to 2,000 to protest. No way. Expect many more.” (As read) So when he says that “OPS today estimated one to 2,000 to protest”, given that this is on January 26th, is it fair to say that in the briefing that was given to council and to you and the Mayor on the 26th of January, this was the number that was provided to council and to you about what to expect in terms of numbers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in terms of the City’s planning for this event, what basis did it plan on? Was it on the basis of a prolonged stay that could last 30 to 90 days as the Hotel Association was suggesting? Or was it on a different basis?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then it would have been until maybe February 1st or so? Or 2nd?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the majority of them leaving after the weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this was information provided to the City on the 26th of January?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who provided that information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in that weekend -- in that meeting, did anybody from the City say, "Well, you know, we have different information. What's the plan in case this goes on for longer, could potentially go on longer?"
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in that meeting, it's fair to say there was no discussion about conflicting intelligence or conflicting information about the duration?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did it concern you then that you're hearing from other people that this could be longer but the planning is only for the weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were confident then that the City was prepared and that OPS was prepared?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so how did that first weekend go in terms of what you expected and what actually happened?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, there are documents that suggest that the City was upset about certain incidents that weekend, such as the National War Memorial being desecrated, the Terry Fox statue as well. Did that raise any concern for you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to take you now to OTT10560, and these are text messages between you and former Chair Deans. That's okay. We're just waiting for them to be pulled up.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
10560.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we can zoom in, they're on page 3. Let's go to page 3. Okay. And if we zoom in a little bit more? Okay. And my understanding is this is a text from Chair Deans; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And she says to you, "Hi, Steve. Questions are being asked about why heavy trucks were allowed into the core. I have heard a couple of explanations from police but wonder what your thoughts are." (As read) And you say, "The problem is that we don't have enough locations that could park all those vehicles and we didn't want them just parking their vehicles in neighbourhoods and other streets and walking away. So it was a negotiation to balance their need to get downtown and get them to park in controlled areas." (As read) So can you explain the rationale that you're laying out here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of that strategy, was the City consulted on that strategy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the City inform the OPS of the impacts that would result on the city because of the strategy? So by-law infractions, trucks into, you know, non-truck areas, effects on businesses and residence, was that something that was communicated to the police?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what I think you're telling me is that OPS made the decision, informed the City, and you worked with them to achieve whatever changes and modifications and accommodations needed to be made?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Regardless of the impact on residents and businesses and the city services?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did Chief Sloly say was the basis for allowing the heavy trucks in, or having to allow the heavy trucks in?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 5 of this document, Chair Deans asks, “If the ones that have left come back, will they be allowed downtown?” And then you say, “No, once a truck leaves, no other trucks including the ones that left can return into the zone. It's a bone of contention with the truckers who feel that if one goes out someone else should be left in.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, let in.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, I thought maybe it was my eyes. Okay. Can you explain that, that it was a bone of contention with the protesters? Where are you getting this information from?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we heard evidence on Friday that trucks that were leaving the red zone early days were being allowed back in. Do you have any information about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And how often would you say you were in touch with Chief Sloly during this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, and we’ll get to those in a minute. And so do you agree that the City as an entity through bylaws, has authority to close roads?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But in this case, exercising that authority was not contemplated. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did the City ask the police then, Chief Sloly or anyone else at Ottawa police service, to look into that, to consider that, to work with the City to achieve some road closures?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then on February 4th and 5th, which was the second weekend, there were several additional convoys that entered the city. And I believe you are aware of that at the time, that they, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, that wasn't - at that point I understand they actually did go into the city, they were not stopped or turned away in any way. Was there any session prior to that to try to prevent them somehow from entering and joining the existing convoy that was already downtown?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So for the second weekend the posture of OPS was still that there was no legal authority to stop them from entering on that second weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know whether that posture ever changed throughout the -- at least throughout the time that Chief Sloly was was Chief?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, we have some notes from the Ottawa Police indicating that the City had asked Ottawa Police to harden the downtown core. Do you have any understanding of what that means, or where this might have come from, this solution?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The City asked the police to harden the downtown core.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The councillors you mean?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, you talked a little bit about overflow spaces, Sir John MacDonald, which everybody refers to as SJAM, and Queen Elizabeth. What were the other designated overflow areas?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let's talk about Coventry. Do you know how the Coventry Road stadium parking lot ended up being used by protesters on that first weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that parking lot is city owned?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's right. And who determined then the use of 1500 Bronson, how did that come about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that 1500 Bronson is a federal building?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it's not owned by -- that's not owned by the City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the City wasn't asked for permission to use that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But they were asked to use the Coventry Road baseball stadium parking lot?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And me understanding was that the use of that was only meant to be for the first weekend; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that the tenants that were renting the space or not happy about the -- what was happening at Coventry Road. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in fact, they wrote some angry letters to the City asking the City to revoke OPS’s - --
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- access to that site. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were these issues raised with OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the response?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that it was initially meant for protesters to park and then make their way into downtown, and it looks like that's not what ended up happening. What's your understanding about how that area was being used?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of any safety or security issues with that site in particular?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the OPS say anything about why they couldn’t evacuate or get that encampment shut down?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I want to take you now to OTT 4144. This is an OECCG -- oh, this one says OECCG. Well, I guess we can use both acronyms. Update 10. And this is on February 5th. And these updates, I understand, were put out daily? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And these are the Emergency Operations Control Group putting out a situational update as to what’s going on so that everybody is aware of the situation on the ground? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in the second paragraph there, it says ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The final one is identical, but it isn’t -- we received it after -- anyway, my notes were not finalized at the time. So we do have the final one, which says the same thing in terms of what I’m going to take the witness to.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, no problem. So on the second paragraph, and the final version says the same thing, it says: “There were about 13 convoys that arrived today, and unfortunately they refused to park in the designated overflow space. Instead, they came into the city.” (As read) And so in this case, what was the designated overflow space on February 5th for them to go into? It wasn’t Coventry, because I think at that point, Coventry had already been taken over.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was it 1500 Bronson?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What about Sir John A. MacDonald?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know how they were able to come in despite there being designated overflow spaces for those convoys?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so can you confirm then that the truckers -- the area that the truckers took up in downtown grew because these 13 convoys entered the downtown area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I’m going to take you to OTT 10455. And this is a chat that seems to be among people within the Emergency Operations Centre perhaps. And so I just wanted to confirm who some of these people are, just so that we can be sure that they are in some way related to the Emergency Management. Beth Gooding, I believe, is the Director of Public Safety? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who is Nicole Ward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Kelly Cochrane?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Steve Box?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Ryan Perrault?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Andrea Lanthier- Seymour?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were any of these people representatives to the NCRCC?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And just for the record, the NCRCC is the National Capital Region Control Group -- Control Centre?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Command Centre. Thank you. And so there seemed to be, in this chat, situational updates. Can we generally take these situational updates as accurate?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I want to talk a little bit about towing. Who was responsible, in your view, for ensuring sufficient towing capacity to tow convoy trucks or any trucks that were parked illegally?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So both the City and OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what happened with the towing capacity in this situation? My understanding is that there wasn’t sufficient towing capacity. So maybe you can explain what happened? What the situation was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So was the city taking the lead then on procuring towing capacity on behalf of both the City and OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were those -- were any of those efforts successful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mentioned that some of the tow truck companies refused to tow vehicles that were associated with the convoy, or they were not willing to tow. What’s your understanding of why they were refusing to tow?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And these are companies that the City has on contract? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is your understanding that the refusal was coming both from the existing contractors with the City and with others that you were reaching out to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would this be -- were they contractually obligated to respond when the City called on them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what measures did the City take to enforce these contracts, if any?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the two heavy truck, tow truck vehicles that OC Transpo had, did those end up being used?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why not?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so do you know if -- where the trucks came from that were eventually used for the police operation that cleared the area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But the City wasn't the one procuring -- didn't procure those?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The police did. Okay. So does the City have any knowledge of where they came from specifically?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And can you give us a sense for how by-law was being enforced outside of the immediate red zone? So I understand that within the red zone there were a lot of issues with safety, but outside of the red zone, we heard on Friday that vehicles that appeared to be associated with the convoy either because they had flags or something indicating that maybe they were part of the protest, that they were not being towed, even if they were outside even as far as, you know, some areas of Councillor Fleury's ward, east of the red zone. Do you have a sense for how By-law was enforcing issues outside of that zone?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you know when that integration happened?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was happening then?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So prior to that integration, By-law was acting independently and ticketing and towing as they saw fit?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So then your understanding is that the police was not preventing By-law from exercising its authority; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say go in, you're talking about the red zone?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so outside of the red zone, before the integration, could By-law ticket and tow as they saw fit?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But not really towing is my understanding.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so when you speak of the OPS and By-law integration, is that when -- we had heard on Friday that when some residents would call 3-1-1 to report a By- law violation, they would be redirected to NCRCC. Is that part of the integration that you're speaking of?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you're saying that happened sometime in the second week; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so just on the point of emergency lanes, my understanding is that a lot of the towing that happened early on was to, as you say, keep those emergency lanes open. Can you describe a little bit the emergency lanes, if you will? We've seen images that show some streets appear to be completely blocked by trucks. Was every street supposed to have a lane open for emergency, or was it just certain arteries that had a lane open?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. So I want to talk a little bit about the city's municipal state of emergency. And I want to take you to OPS5187. And this is from January 31st, which is pretty early on. This looks to be a briefing that occurred with Chief Sloly and the mayor and some councillors. You were there as well and Kim Ayotte. It happened at 11. This is in the institutional report of the City, so I assume you recall this briefing.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so it looks like the Chief gave an update. And then if we go to the questions at the bottom. So “Questions”; there we go. And do you know; the questions that are being posed, we can see who’s posing them, but in terms of the answer, do you know who was answering questions at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if you go to 6, if we scroll down a little bit, if we look at question number 6, Councillor Luloff says: “When do we know when to invoke a state of emergency?” And the answer is: “Infringing on this if we need more resources than we currently have, but does indicate to the public that this is getting more serious and all hands are on deck. Will consider and may make recommendations to the Mayors [sic] office.” So who has the responsibility to recommend to the Mayor’s office whether or not to invoke a state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so is it fair to say that you probably answered 6(e)?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then so then you said: “Will consider and may make recommendations to the Mayors [sic] office.” Did you consider it at this point, January 31st?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you didn’t recommend, I take it, on January 31st that the Mayor declare a state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why not?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But as you mentioned, it does have other functions, such as signalling to other levels of government ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- or even, you know, for the public to know, and maybe for the residents to know that the City is taking this seriously, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever tell the Mayor not -- that it wasn’t -- that you did not recommend it? Meaning, did he ever ask you and you say, “No, not yet,” with respect to whether you should -- whether he should declare a state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we know that on February 6th, the City did declare a state of emergency. So in your view, what was the tipping point; why was that the right time to do it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I’ll take you to that document. It’s ONT311. And it looks to be a call between the Federal Government, the Province, and the City of Ottawa. And it took place on February 6th at 11:00 a.m. And so you recall this call with Deputy Minister Stewart?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And who was there from the Province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we go to the second bullet point, it says: “Steve Kanellakos, City Manager from Ottawa, provided an update from the city’s perspective.” And it says: “Steve Kanellakos is concerned about the posture of local councillors who are pointing the finger at the province and federal government to provide assistance to resolve the matter.” And then it says there in bold letters: “Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is going to declare a local emergency in the City of Ottawa at 4:30 p.m. The expressed intent of this declaration is to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve this.” You said in the meeting that that was the intention of the state of emergency.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of pressure were you hoping to put on the Province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
On the 11th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so was part of this, then, an effort for the -- was this trying to encourage the Province or to signal to the Province to also declare a state of emergency provincially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so from the City’s perspective, did it consider that the Province wasn’t doing enough to be engaged in the issues and to help resolve it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says -- so if we go close to the bottom, it says: “Ottawa City council is likely going to ask the Premier and Prime Minister to intervene directly. The Mayor of Ottawa Jim Watson is feeling the pressure and want[s] this issue to be pivoted back to Ontario and Canada. City of Ottawa is looking for a way out.” Can you explain what’s mean that by, “City of Ottawa is looking for a way out”? What would you have communicated that led to that notation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we’ll see in a bit that you did speak to the Solicitor General, you and the Mayor had a discussion about what could be done. What -- generally before we look at those documents, what was the general feedback from the Solicitor General to those suggestions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so had the City declared a State of Emergency sooner, would that, you think, have brought in other levels of government sooner to assist?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to take you to 2218. And this is now with respect to the City of Ottawa’s injunction. So I’m going to move on to that topic. So if you go to the first email there from Chief Sloly at the bottom, he says -- this is dated January 30th. Yeah, there it is. He says: “Steve, thank you for the call we just had and for your agreement too for the City of Ottawa commence the former process of preparing for and seeking an injunction in regard to the demonstration. My general counsel, Christiane Huneault, will be OPS lead on this matter. She will have the full support of the OPS to provide the information required by the City for this injunction application. We recognize that the City will have the final say on whether or not to make the final injunction submission based on your own assessment.” (As read) And what was your understanding -- you had had a call with the Chief about this. And what was he asking the City to do on that call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you have an understanding for what -- an injunction for what, exactly?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he didn’t come to you to ask for anything specific? He just said “an injunction”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he says though: “We recognize that the City will have final say on whether or not to make the final injunction submission based on your own assessment.” (As read) So he seems to be putting the ball on the City to say this is your decision. If you want to do it, go ahead, based on your assessment; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you’re saying in the end it’s up to the City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on February 4th, I’m going to take you to an email, OTT 3935. And the email of February 4 -- right. So, Councillor Fleury says: “Are you aware of this idea?” (As read) And he posted a Twitter link. My understanding is that was a link to a Twitter post asking the City to seek an injunction? Are you aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you saw it at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go up, this gets forwarded to you then. Or it was -- it was CC’d to you by Councillor Fleury, and then you respond to him and to the City Solicitor, David White, copying other people, saying: “Everyone has ideas, but if they paid attention to the multiple briefings that have been provided to council and the media, they would know that the Chief, and I, and City Solicitor have addressed this idea. We have initiated the process last weekend to go get an injunction. The problem is that once we get it, we have to action it, which means that police have to be prepared to initiate a tactical response to remove the trucks and protests. We are working with police to gather the evidence required to successfully get an injunction and for police to tell us how an injunction would be enforced. This is actively being worked on.” (As read) So what was done between the 30th of January then when you had that discussion with Chief Sloly, to now February 4, when Councillor Fleury is saying, “Has this been thought of?” Essentially, “Have you thought of this idea?”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you say that the police never answered the questions that the City was asking in order to be able to finalize that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know if answers were ever received to those questions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But the City went ahead anyway and did obtain an injunction ultimately on February 14? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in the end, you didn’t need the police information in order to obtain the injunction, because it was obtained without the police information anyway; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in hindsight, could this have been pursued sooner? Because you’re having the discussion on January 30th with Chief Sloly, and it’s not actually heard and obtained until February 14, two weeks later - - more than two weeks later.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But you never understood that because they didn’t answer your questions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the injunction obtained by Ms. Li put pressure on the City to get one as well? I understand citizens were not happy about that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in the end you didn't need that because you defined the scope yourself; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever talk to Keith Wilson, who was counsel for some of the protestors on the ground, about the City's injunction?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. They have produced some texts, kind of at the last minute, that have some of those discussions. So my understanding is you did, I just don't know the context of those discussions that you had.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
See if I can find it. It would be up to -- we didn't give notice of these, obviously. They came in, I think, last night or the night before, but we do have a doc ID for them. Thank you. It's HRF1466.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It appears it is in the party database at this time. It's HRF, four zeroes, 1466. Okay, while we're looking for that, we can move on to something else and then we'll see if we can get that because ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The texts seem to reference a call with Mr. Kanellakos about that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So because we don't -- we can't seem to get them, we can move on to some communications that you had with federal officials and provincial officials. So I understand that after the first weekend of protests you had some contact with Deputy Minister of Public Safety Rob Stewart. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did that discussion come about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the purpose of the call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he's reaching out to you to get a better understanding of what's going on?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it wasn't necessarily for him to offer any kind of assistance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And after that, I believe that situational awareness calls were set up ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- and that several of them took place, according to your witness statement, you say February 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And these came out of that initial discussion you had with the Deputy Minister on February 2nd?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And according to your witness statement, these meetings sometimes included Jody Thomas from the Privy Council Office; Director David Vigneault from CSIS; Deputy Minister Michael Keenan from Transport; Commissioner Brenda Lucki from the RCMP; Commissioner Tom Carrique from the OPP; former Chief Sloly; Mr. Kim Ayotte; Laurie LeBlanc from MTO; and Deputy Minister Maurio Di Tommaso, the Solicitor General. Did anyone else that you recall attend these meetings, or is that generally ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the purpose of these calls?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So my understanding is that letter from former Chair Deans and the Mayor came on in February 7th requesting the 1,800 officers. And so two of the meetings, on the 7th and the 8th, of these situational awareness calls would have been or could have been about that specific request.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was the conversation around resources? Obviously resources were needed, but in terms of getting them to Ottawa and how soon they could get here and why they weren't here yet, what was the discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of the disagreement? Just about counting -- like it was improper counting, or what was the issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did that ever get resolved during those -- during the time that those calls were taking place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the last meeting took place on February 8. Why did they stop after the 8th of February?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It was just to be fair to the witness so that he understands the context in which the question was asked, but I can ask it without the context, I'm fine with that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's fine. So to your understanding, though, you did not have a conversation with Keith Wilson about the City's injunction, a call specifically with Mr. Wilson?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, my understanding is that based on the timeline produced in the institutional report, that you and the mayor had a call with Solicitor General Sylvia Jones on February 9, and we talked a little bit about that. And my understanding was that the purpose of the call to ask Ontario to provide resources to the Ottawa Police Service. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
To provide OPP -- to facilitate OPP officers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that right? Okay. And what was the response for that request?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in that call what's the issue about the truckers’ insurance and CVOR certificates also discussed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did the province offer any tangible assistance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
LeBlanc.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So my understanding is that you also took part in what were called tripartite meetings, and these took place on February 7th, 8th, and 10th. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you participate in all three calls?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is these were intended to be meetings of all three levels of government, municipal, provincial, and federal. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that generally, Minister Blair, Minister Mendicino, yourself, the mayor, Deputy Minister Rob Stewart, and some others joined those calls. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you know off -- do you recall who else would have been on those calls other than the people I mentioned?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
My understanding is that he was in the situational awareness calls, but not in the tripartite.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know why -- my understanding is that Premier Ford was invited to participate in these meetings and declined. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so I'm going to take you to one of the readouts from that meeting, it is SSM.CAN.NSC ending in 2676. And so, this is a read out from one of those tripartite meetings, it looks to be the last one on February 10, and there we see people’s initials. BB is Bill Blair, my understanding; JW, Jim Watson; MM, Marco Mendicino. And if we go to the second page, it looks like your contributions are redacted, and on the second page Mayor Watson says, “We would like to get MTO more involved, put pressure on insurance companies --". Oh, sorry, just up. Yeah, there we are: “We would like to get MTO more involved, put pressure on insurance companies -- it was a disappointing answer from the province. Yet they are always setting up blitzes on the 400 series highways to check tires, etc.” So my understanding is that this is in relation to the call that took place the day before on February 9?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was this in relation to the ask about the commercial insurance that they had declined to get involved?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in terms of other regulations, were these other regulations that the City was asking specifically, saying you know, this regulation, that, can you look into that? Or were you simply saying, can you look at what you have in your toolbox available to assist?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the answer was this is not -- this should not be dealt with at the political level?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was it ever suggested to you that pulling truckers commercial insurance, or doing anything with respect to that would upset the trucking industry, or would upset the truckers themselves?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But -- and it was never said to you there's nothing more in our toolbox, we can't do anything? The answer was simply, we’ll get back to you, and they never did?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then if we go to page 3, if we go down to Bill Blair’s comment, so he says: “Thanks -- if we can speak frankly for a moment. It has come to the media’s discussion that they are not in this meeting for the third day -- statement from On[tario] is that this table will accomplish nothing” So is it fair to say that in the meeting there was frustration at Ontario's lack of attendance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when Bill Blair says “this table” he means the tripartite meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your understanding, this comment that's attributable to the Premier, that it will accomplish nothing, was that made in the group or was that made in the media? Do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Just -- Bill Blair at the top says, “Thanks -- if we can speak frankly for a moment”. He says, “It has come to the media's discussion that they are not in the meeting…” and I assume this is talking about Ontario, because then it says “statement from On[tario] is that this table will accomplish nothing.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so if we looked at the bottom at mayor Watson's comment, the third line he says: “I can say that I am disappointed that the province has not come to the table -- Premier is telling me, ‘anything you want’, but then there is silence.” Did you share the mayor's disappointment that Ontario was not at the table?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what do you mean by that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding is that then the Premier would've told them not to look into that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Fair enough. now, on page 4, Minister Mendicino, in the middle of the page, says -- just this -- towards the end: “To the extent that Sloly is laying out the plan to colleagues, the Province should be at this table. It is a useful forum to show leadership and coordination.” (As read) So do you agree that it would have been helpful to have Ontario at the table?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, back to page 2, where it says “RS”, and we’ll go down. That’s Rob Stewart? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he says: “From what I understand, the plan of the Chief has not yet been completely fleshed out. That may affect the speed with which the RCMP can deploy resources.” (As read) What did you understand -- what was the discussion around this point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this was the last tripartite meeting on February 10. Do you know why they were discontinued?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I want to speak now about the deal that the City made with the protestors, the negotiations with the protestors.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I understand that on February 8, you received a call from then Deputy Chief Bell?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you tell us a little bit about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Tell us about the call that you received. What was the discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did he tell you why PLT was going to be coming over with protest leaders?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you didn’t ask what for?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you tell anyone about that call before you met with them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what happened then? Did they come to City Hall? How did that play out?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did -- sorry, did they explain to you why -- did they say why they had lost the communication ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- with the protestors? What had happened there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at that point, I wasn’t convinced that I should meet with them, because I felt that that was opening up another door in terms of a signal that we’re prepared to start negotiating. I told them that I need to call the Mayor. And we brought Serge Arpin, Chief of Staff, into the call. So I went into the next room, in my boardroom, called the Mayor, told him that they want me to meet with them and to have -- as a show of good faith, to -- police need us to meet with them. He was very reluctant. His initial reaction was we shouldn’t and thought that doing that was going to put pressure on the Federal Government in terms of, you know, if we meet with them, someone else would have to meet with them. And Serge Arpin was of kind of the same view. So we batted it around a bit and I basically advised the Mayor that I thought I should meet with them and hear what they have to say and maybe there’s something we can get in return, and “It won’t involve you, it will be me, it will be me doing the discussion, and you’re out of it. It’s not a political leadership meeting.” And so ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Mayor express any concerns about this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And sorry, this was around noon, you said?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So OPS was the one who made the suggestion that maybe the exchange for meeting with the Mayor would be getting the trucks out of the neighbourhoods?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, when Keith and Eva came in after, did the PLT officers also join? Or was it just - --
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then we had a discussion about the protest and would they be willing to move trucks out of the neighbourhoods. They said yes, they’d be willing to do that. And we said well then we have to work out the logistics, and they’ll get back to us. So we met for about, in total, about an hour and a half, I’d say. Maybe 90 minutes. They left with the understanding that we would reconnect and talk about what the terms would be of them moving the trucks and the conditions under which that would happen, and get an agreement to do that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What was your understanding for why the protestors wanted to meet with the Mayor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so at the end of the meeting, what was decided, who would do what, what were the next steps that were going to be taken after that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, my understanding is that the next day you did indicate to Chief Sloly and Deputy Chief Ferguson, Deputy Chief Bell that this had taken place, and relayed a little bit of the information that had been exchanged; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did they express any concerns about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So at that point, the deal was if you move trucks out of the neighbourhood we'll have a meeting with -- we'll facilitate a meeting with the Mayor. So it was kind of high-level.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, that was the... So no details had been fleshed out at that point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you exchange numbers, you brief the Mayor about what had happened, and then what happened?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then you became the point person for that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So between February 8th, when you have the meeting with the PLT members and Tom Marazzo et al., and then the 10th of February when the call from Dean French comes in, was there any kind of movement on that deal between the 8th and the 10th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, I know the 13th was a Sunday.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It would be a Thursday.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you weren't involved in the drafting of the letters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So specifically, the letter talks ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry. Specifically, the letter talks about Wellington Street. Was that one of the points of discussion with OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then, if I understand correctly what you're saying, on the 10th, Dean French called and announced himself as potentially being helpful or a potential mediator, and then the letters were drafted and sent I believe on the 12th of February, and in that time you were having discussions with Chief Sloly, was it Chief Sloly, or anybody else within OPS? Deputy Chief Ferguson?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so they're dated the 12th, but you're saying they were exchanged on the 13th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so while they're being finalised, your involvement is putting -- getting some input from OPS and suggesting some wording to the letter, including the area where the trucks are going to relocate to ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was Wellington Street chosen? Who chose Wellington Street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So before we get to that meeting, before the letters were finalised I understand that Chief Sloly had a chance to look at those letters; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And actually, that's OTT6985, so I'll take you to that. OTT6985. So he says, "Thank you, Steve," but if we go down to the bottom we can see: "'Steve, as suggestion, alter this line in the Mayor's letter: "As the departure of the over 400 trucks from residential areas is a significant logistical undertaking that will probably take 24 to 72 hours, we ask that protesters stop asking more demonstrators to come to Ottawa this week and over the long weekend..."'" So it looks like that highlighted portion of "this week and over the long weekend" was an edit that he wanted in that letter; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go up. You say: "'Hi Chief. The letter from the mayor has already been signed and sent to Convoy leadership. It just hasn't been made public. So can't make edits now but can discuss when we meet them.'"
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then he ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to OPS10664. We go -- there we go. It looks to be from Christiane Huneault, and she says: "'Steve – Can you send me a copy of the letters we just discussed on our call re demo convoy negotiations. Thanks.'" And who did you understand her to be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, Christiane Huneault.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And she mentions a phone call that you had with her about the letters.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see, and this would be on February 13th at noon there was a call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
On the Sunday? Okay. And if I can take you to OTT6990? It looks like on Sunday at 1:44 you send those letters to Chief Sloly, Deputy Chief Bell, Deputy Chief Ferguson, Christiane Huneault and John Steinbachs.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to OTT7009? Looks like title is Police Contact, Sunday the 13th at 3:26. You say to Chief Sloly, "Chief, can you please provide the name and contact info of who will be joining Kim Ayotte in the negotiations with the Protest[...] leaders to deal with the egres [and]..." I believe that should be "and"; right? Relocation plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what is that about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who was provided?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you understand his role to be then, just to -- was he going to be partly negotiating what was going to happen?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But by then, the idea that they would be relocating to Wellington had already been determined ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- right? Okay. And in your call earlier that morning, or at the noon call, did anybody on the call, Steve Bell, Trish Ferguson, Peter Sloly, did anybody raise any concerns with the arrangement that had been reached?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so despite Chief Sloly's reservations, did he ultimately agree that this should move forward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but he did provide you Superintendent Drummond as a ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- OPS representative?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so now we're at this meeting February 13th. You said it was you, Mr. Ayotte and who else was there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Chris Barber?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah. Was Tom Marazzo there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. How many protest individuals would you say were there? How many protesters were there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, I don't know if they're available. They weren't available yesterday, but I'm not sure if they're available now. But in any event, there were a group of protest leaders that were there, you, yourself, Mr. Ayotte. And we don't have a lot of time, so if you can just briefly maybe tell us what happened at that meeting and then we will have to get my friends to pick it up from there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I understand at some point the operations stopped. Do you know why it stopped?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm just going to take you to the last document, OTT7480. And this is an email. If we go down -- yeah, no, sorry. This is 7480. Yeah, that does look right. Okay. Let's go up for a second. Yes. So Larry Brookson, do you know who he is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Who is he?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, okay. Yes, because the email is quite informal, so I figured you must have had some pre-existing relationship with him.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
He says, "Hi, Steve. My office is looking to setup a call [this] morning. Wanted to provide you with some context of my concern regarding the City of Ottawa's recent decision which lead to Wellington being turned into a parking lot of 200 plus trucks. Quite honestly Steve I am at a loss as [...] how this sort of agreement could have been worked out with a clear disregard to security, especially considering that we just finished a bomb blast assessment which included the threat of explosive[s] being transferred via large vehicles. Hoping we can find time in the morning.” So is it your understanding that PPSC -- sorry, that PPS, the Parliamentary Protective Service, did not have notice or information about what was going to be happening with the relocation of the trucks onto Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so -- and did you tell anybody at the federal level, yourself, about this deal? I know February 8 is when you kind of had that discussion. And it also coincided with the tripartite meeting. Is that something you would have brought up at a tripartite meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so ultimately the Mayor never met with the protestors? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And those are all my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Very briefly, I’m going to take you ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, for the record, it’s Natalia Rodriguez, Commission Counsel. If I can take you to COM693? And just briefly, you had -- in responses to questions from Mr. Champ, you had indicated that the City treats parades and other types of events differently from protests. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I’m just going to take you to the Special Events on City Streets Bylaw. And I want to take you to the definition of special event on page 2 of the Bylaw. And it’s section 1(k). And you’ll see there: “‘special event’ includes a demonstration, parade, sports event, festival, carnival, donation station, street dance, residential block party, sidewalk sale, outdoor mass and other like events…” So a protest is a demonstration; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So under the Bylaw, a protest would be included as a special event?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so if we go to “Section 2 - Special events - permit required”. And it says: “No person shall participate in a special event on a highway unless such special event is carried [out] on under the authority of a permit issued by the General Manager pursuant to this by-law.” So according to the City Bylaws, even protestors should be getting permits in order to participate in a demonstration; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the word there is “shall”, so it’s not discretionary. It’s they must get a permit?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to Section 5(1), which is on page 3 of the Bylaw, there it is: “The General Manager or the Chief of Police…” And here the general manager refers to a City manager; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So it's a City official?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So, "The General Manager or the Chief of Police may at their discretion cause to be closed one or more highways or parts of highways..." And in this case, highway just means a city road, like, any road essentially; right? "...to pedestrians or vehicular traffic, or both, and cause to be erected such ropes, barricades and other barriers as may be needed to preserve public order and protect persons and property during the time of such special event." And so, Mr. Champ [sic], I put to you that the City has a responsibility to protect the public and you indicated that that was mainly the responsibility of the police; do you remember that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And under this section here, it looks like the General Manager or the Chief of Police, so either the City or OPS has the authority to barricade or close roads in order to preserve that public order; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but the by-law grants authority to both independent of each other.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so finally, my last question relates to a proposition that counsel for the Government of Canada put to you in terms of forcing the -- enforcing the City of Ottawa's injunction. And the suggestion was that enforcement of the injunction came in the days after the invocation of the Emergencies Act. And my question to you is, was the City's injunction ever used as a measure, are you aware?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Those are all my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'm Natalia Rodriguez, senior Commission Counsel, and we would like to call Mr. Mayor Jim Watson.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mayor Watson. How are you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Nice to see you again. And you had an interview with Commission Counsel on August 18, 2022, and on September 7th, 2022; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you've had a chance to review the interview summary that was generated from those interviews?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any corrections at this time to make to that interview summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So I'm just going to pull it up, WTS00000018. And so that's your witness summary there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we will enter that into evidence today. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now I see that you have a document with you today; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And does it have any notations on it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I would ask that you can have the summary of the timeline. And I believe the timeline you're referring to is -- yeah, so we're going to take that one.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you can have the timeline of events as -- yeah, and that is the institution report of the City of Ottawa with respect to the timeline of events; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you've indicated that -- are there any notations on that one?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And can you tell us why you're having that with you today for your testimony?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it's a way to remember the dates?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now my understanding is that you were not involved in the day-to-day planning and preparation for the convoy's arrival in Ottawa; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that was left mainly to the City Manager, Steve Kanellakos, and others within the City; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand that you had a briefing with former Chief Sloly and Mr. Kanellakos on the 26th to talk about what to expect in terms of the convoy's arrival, so this is now before the arrival of the convoy; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you tell us what the Chief told you in terms of what to expect?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of scope, scale, number of vehicles, number of protesters, can you give us a sense for what you were told?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did he give a sense for how long you could expect them to be in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So it was -- one or two days was the sense that you got from the Chief in terms of how long the convoy would be in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And the Chief didn't give you any indication that it would be other -- anything other than the weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did that concern you at all?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in your discussions with Chief Sloly on the 26th, was there any discussion about what would be done in the event that the protestors decided to stay longer than a couple of days?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, at some point you began to use the term "occupation" in your correspondence. At what point did you determine that this was no longer a protest and that it was an occupation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say by Monday, the 31st, after that first weekend, when the majority of the trucks were still there, that that's when you determined that they were not going to leave anytime soon?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thereabouts, either -- whether it's the Monday or the Tuesday, and then certainly that was solidified in my mind that they weren't going to leave on the weekends. When the weekends started to create this very tense situation where people were coming in from all over the region, and in fact, different parts of the country to come and support the protestors, and that's where the havoc and the chaos was created in our communities.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there ever a discussion that you had with either Chief Sloly or the deputy chiefs about blocking access to the additional convoys that were coming that second weekend to join the original protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you raise the issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So it wasn't a concern that there were additional convoys that were coming to join to kind of expand the footprint of the original convoy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But there wasn't a discussion to try and prevent that from happening?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Now, I want to take you to a document, which is a readout of a call that you had with the Prime Minister on January 31st, and it's SSM.CAN.NSC.00002812. And so you had a call with the Prime Minister on the 31st; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did this call come about? Did he reach out to you, or did you reach out to him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can just make that bigger so we can see. Okay. So you say, "Hi". And as we know, these are summaries of the call, it's not a transcript, but it gives you a sense for what's being said. And if we go to -- right. So JW is when you're speaking, PM is when the Prime Minister is speaking. And so the second thing -- second section there before the redacted portion, the second sentence, third sentence, you said: "These people had their time and need to move on. We have been trying to get this across to the chief of police." Do you see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say "these people" are you speaking about the protestors?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you say: "We have been trying to get this across to the chief of police." So this is now Monday, the 31st, so right after the first weekend. And so what discussions did you have with the Chief of Police about this issue, about letting them or asking them to move on?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you had discussions with Chief Sloly over that weekend or on the Monday?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so at some point, you told him it's time to move on, we need to get these people out of here. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at the bottom there... If we can just move it up a little bit. No, sorry, at the bottom. Yeah. It says, "The turning point...", so right after the redacted portion, you say: "The turning point is the [T]erry [F]ox statue, the tomb, Shepard[s] of [G]ood [H]ope. People just can't fathom how this is acceptable." And so you're referring to the incidences that took place over the weekend with respect to the war -- National War Memorial and the Terry Fox statue; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And further down, you say: "[Chief] of police said it's so volatile, but kept under control so far. Trucks are starting to leave, but some diehards chained themselves to this. Unfortunate for people living in residential neighbourhood. They just doing themselves a disservice.” Which is what you just said right now. “Chief of police spoke to Chief Lucki, and we need a few more sources.” Can you explain this last part? “Chief of police spoke to Chief Lucki, and we need a few more sources.” What was this discussion.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what was the discussion then?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the discussion around this point then?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, you were aware that Chief Sloly had reached out to Commissioner Lucki by this time to ask for more resources. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so by the Monday it was clear that OPS did not have the resources that it needed to handle this demonstration. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, in this call there were no specific requests for assistance from -- you requesting from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister offering anything specific back to you. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Okay. So if we just go to last page then, just to kind of see how the call ends off. And it’s -- the Prime Minister says: “the remainders will have no choice but to incite as a counterbalance, so we all have to be careful. …we really appreciate your support for cities. …thank you for your steadfast leadership and your whole team.” And so that was the end of the call there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
All right. And If I can take you to OTT3855? And this is a February 3rd e-mail that you sent to City Council to update them, it looks like on the efforts of the city.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this is now Thursday before the second weekend. And you indicate that you had a call with the Prime Minister on the 31st. If we can just go down a little bit, yeah. So and then in that third paragraph you say: “This morning, the City Solicitor and I had a discussion with the team from Go Fund Me to request that the funds raised so far remain frozen until the end of the occupation.” Can you explain how the discussion with Go Fund Me came about and what action was taken?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what happened after that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any subsequent calls after the initial call with Go Fund Me? Did you have any more discussions with them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, if we look at the following paragraph, it says: “In the last hour, I had a very good discussion with federal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, where I reiterated our City’s call for additional resources to support our officers responding to this demonstration on the ground. He assured me that our request for assistance was being given the highest consideration by Commissioner Lucki, and he offered his ongoing support until we see an end to the occupation.” So by this time, February 3rd, that's the language you are using there. And when you say you reiterated the City’s call for additional resources, when did you make the original call for resources? Because this is February 3rd and you're referring to reiterating the call for resources, are you referring to the 31st call with the Prime Minister, or was there another call for resources between the 31st and February 3rd?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in terms of a specific request for resources, this February 3rd call with Minister Mendicino would have been the first time that you asked for resources from -- other than in January 31st call, which was not as specific, this would have been the request that you made for additional RCMP officers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were there, at this time by February 3rd, provincial -- discussions with the provinces beyond the assistance to the businesses that you've discussed? Any other requests for assistance other than that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, I mean with respect to your discussions, or your requests.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of support were you looking for in that discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
OPP officers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know when that call with Lisa MacLeod took place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so her response was ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- we’ll take it -- I’ll take it back and we will look at it.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah. And at the bottom as well, if we see the end of the letter there: “A number of colleagues have suggested to me, and I have agreed, that a Special Council meeting be called to discuss the impact of the truck convoy demonstration on our residents and businesses. The Clerk will be issuing a Notice of Special meeting before the weekend for the meeting to be held […] on Monday, February 7.” So and eventually a Special Meeting was convened for the 7th. Why was that not convened sooner than the 7th? It seems that by the 7th, you’re almost 10 days into this situation.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And let’s speak now about the Declaration of the State of Emergency of February 6th. And I’m going to take you to OTT4231. And this is the Declaration of the State of Emergency that you issued? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was this done on February 6th? What was the tipping point or the reason why it was necessary at this point in time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But beyond the potential measures that were made available to you as a result of this declaration, it’s also, as you say, an important signal, or it’s symbolic in a way, and it allows others to understand that the City considers that it is beyond the capacity of the City to deal with the emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you seek advice prior to February 6th as to whether you should declare a State of Emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what discussions did you have with Steve Kanellakos about using this as a way to engage the Province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I’m going to take you to ONT311. It’s a Summary Call Between Canada, Ontario, and the City of Ottawa. And I believe this is what they would refer to as situational awareness meetings. And if we could just zoom into that? And so Steve Kanellakos is present at this meeting, along with Deputy Minister Rob Stewart and others, and it says there it’s attributed to him: “Steve Kanellakos, City Manager from Ottawa, provided an update from the city’s perspective.” And in bold there: “Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is going to declare a local emergency in the City of Ottawa at 4:30pm. The expressed intent of this declaration is to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve this.” Based on what you said, you said that this was mainly for procurement. Is this bolded sentence overstated or was that the express intention of declaring the State of Emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so when you say that -- or when you deemed that the Province wasn’t doing enough, it was because they weren’t coming to this tripartite table? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we’ll get to that in a second.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But I just wanted to point out that the tripartite meetings took place on February 7th, 8th, and 10th. So on the 6th of February, which is this meeting here, that would not have been a reason to want to engage the Province, because those tripartite meetings had not taken place yet, so ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we're going to -- we'll look at those in a minute. Further down it says, "The Mayor [is --] Jim Watson is feeling the pressure and want[s] this issue to be pivoted back to Ontario and Canada. The City of Ottawa is looking for a way out." Can -- are you able to explain -- this is something that Steve Kanellakos said in a meeting, but he is saying that you're feeling the pressure and you want the issue pivoted back to Ontario and Canada. Can you expand on that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you to OTT18172?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is a February 6th email from it looks like OPS to you and to Chair Deans. So it's from James Armbruster. I believe he's with the OPP.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Or the OPS, sorry?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, okay. I'm sorry. And that's to you and to some other people in your office.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'm looking at the one above. But in any event, if we go down -- yeah, you're looking at the one underneath it.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, sorry, and if we go down to the original one, okay, that's -- okay. Perfect. So if we go up to see the two? So this one is from the Ottawa Police Service, John Steinbachs.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it's to you and to Diane Deans, Serge from your office and other people there from the OPS, et cetera.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it says, "Chair Deans and Mayor Watson, Please find below the list of Ottawa Police Service asks to the Federal, Provincial and Municipal levels of government that was requested yesterday by the Board. These asks are designed to assist with the management and safe conclusion of the demonstration."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is February 6. So it's ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- the day that you declared the state of emergency.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says, "The Chief is requesting a meeting as soon as possible to discuss. We are available this evening." And if we go down to see what the list of asks is, there's some things there for the City to do and it looks like then the Chief was asking the City to assist in several ways that are reflected there; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And one of those points, the third bullet point on the second page there, it says -- yeah, sorry, if we go up? Yeah. Where did it -- "Convene financial institutions, insurance companies, gas companies, trucking companies, trucking associations and local BIAs to restrict material and financial support to demonstrators." Can you explain what the -- what was being asked of the City in that point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that done? Did the City take any steps towards those things?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And in terms of insurance companies, was that part of the discussion that was being had with the province to be able to restrict the commercial licenses and insurance of the participants?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you had a call with the representatives from the Ministry of Transportation; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were not on those calls, but it was reported back to you that they didn't think it was a good idea?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any understanding as to why they didn't think it was a good idea?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then the final point that's on the top of that page there, "Daily emergency operations centre meeting[s] to coordinate whole of city response, including daily public briefings led and coordinated by the city, so that the police can focus on operations." I don't believe this was ever done. Are you able to confirm that? Did the City have daily briefings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But this says daily public briefing, so I imagine that's for the public.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then under advocacy, it says, "Mayor to play advocacy role with other jurisdictions on below asks:" So there it talks about the 1800 officers, which you did advocate for in your letter of February 7th, coauthored by Chair Deans.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it also says on the third bullet point, "professional mediation and negotiation capacity." Can you explain what this was about? What were they asking for there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So the Chief -- was the Chief asking you then to engage a professional mediator for that purpose, to try and deescalate the situation with the protesters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then, if I can take you to OTT20707.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is on February 7th. It's the next day after that email from the OPS ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- the requests. There is an email on February 7th, and it looks like... If you go down. It looks like Councillor Egli is saying: "Serge, here's a quick and dirty draft. Jean is fine with the Mayor seconding the motion." And then there is -- this is a draft of a wording for a motion, and there's a lot of "whereas, whereas", and then it says at the bottom: "Therefore, be it resolved that the Mayor supported by City Council, formally request that the Federal Government appoint an independent mediator forthwith to assist in de-escalating the protest as well as the orderly removal of the protesters and their vehicles from the City of Ottawa." So is this in -- is this the response to the request from OPS to engage a professional mediator?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know why they didn't want to appoint a mediator?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, did they tell you why? Did they say why they were not interested in this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I'm going to take you to OTT5513. This is now February 7th, and as we saw earlier, Chief Sloly had made a request for 1,800 officers. He also -- we haven't looked at the email, but there is an email in which he sets out a chart indicating what kind of personnel he's looking for and how many?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this is a letter, then, dated February 7th, to Premier Ford and Solicitor General Sylvia Jones. And this is a letter in which you request... If we go down. There we go. And there, you are asking for those officers.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, further down on the second page, yeah. Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we know that Chief Sloly had asked that you advocate for the resources at different levels of government.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did he ask you specifically to write this letter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go up. There we go. On the second paragraph there you say: "What was initially described as a peaceful protest has now turned into a siege of our downtown area." And then you say: "As of today, there are currently between 400 and 500 trucks occupying Ottawa's downtown core." Then you go on to say: "These acts and the occupation are having damaging and long-term impacts on the well-being of our residents. People are living in fear and are terrified - and they've now been subjected to the non-stop honking of large trucks for nine days, which is tantamount to psychological warfare." Then you say: "Given the scope and scale of the armada of large trucks that are now occupying our downtown core..." And this is now on the second page: "...we are writing to you to ask today for your help to secure 1800 officers to quell the insurrection that the Ottawa Police Service is not able to contain." And then further down, you say: "We must do everything in our power to take back the streets of Ottawa, and our parliamentary precinct, from the criminal activity and hooliganism that has transpired over the last nine days. We need your help to end this siege at the heart of our nation's capital and in our residential neighbourhoods and to regain control of our city." So was that description of the situation accurate as to what was happening on the ground as of February 7th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say, "and to regain control of our city", you're conveying here that you, you, the greater you, I suppose, you, OPS, the City, OPS had lost control of the city?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if I can take you now to OTT6057. And this is another letter, dated February 7th, and this is now directed to the Prime Minister and to Minister Mendicino; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it's essentially the same letter.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And -- now I understand that discussions with the Prime Minister and with Minister Mendicino were ongoing. The 7th is the same day as there was a first tripartite Ministerial meeting, on the 8th there was as well, and on the 10th. So did you receive a formal response to this letter from the Prime Minister or Minister Mendicino?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, the Solicitor General did respond to your letter on February 8 -- sorry, on February 10? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If I could take you to ONT851? And this is the response dated February 10. We can see there it’s from the Solicitor General of Ontario. And it’s to you and to Chair Deans as well: “Thank you for your letter, also addressed to the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, requesting additional officers…” And then she says: “Public safety is a top priority for this government. The Ministry of the Solicitor General is committed to working with our policing and community partners to provide them with the resources and tools they need to keep Ontario’s communities safe and resilient.” Then she talks about: “The right to peacefully protest is core to our Canadian identity - peaceful protests are a cornerstone of a healthy democracy. However, criminal behaviour is never tolerated, and hatred or intolerance must be condemned by all.” And she says, the last paragraph at the bottom: “We have been encouraging all those participating in the Ottawa protests to govern their actions in a way to ensure they are peaceful and respectful to the community and to those charged with keeping the peace.” And then she says: “Regarding […] request for significant additional […] resources, please note that I have shared your correspondence with [OPP] Commissioner Thomas Carrique. Commissioner Thomas Carrique and [RCMP] Commissioner Brenda Lucki will continue to liaise with Chief Peter Sloly, Ottawa Police Service, to determine how policing partners can provide support based on available policing resources and the operational plan proposed by the Ottawa Police Service.” So what was -- what’s your reaction to this letter? Did this satisfy what you were looking for in the letter that you sent on February 7th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did the Solicitor General commit to do anything, either in this letter or in any discussions that you had with her? Any kind of specific action that the Solicitor General was committing to take?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
M’hm.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you expected that the Windsor issue, and by that, we mean the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge, would be resolved before Ottawa became a priority to become resolved? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you to ONT858? Now, this was a letter that was not sent to you. It’s the next day after the response from the Solicitor General, the kind of template letter, as you described it. And this is now February 11th. And this is directed to Commissioner Carrique, and the Solicitor General says: “This letter is being sent regarding the protest activity occurring in Windsor…” So this is the Windsor situation you were talking about.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“The Government of Ontario is proposing that a meeting occur within an agreeable time period, between a select group of protest leadership and representatives of the province to allow their issues to be heard. To move forward with our offer to schedule a meeting, all protesters must leave the protest site immediately, denounce all unlawful activity and encourage a period of quiet. This means no unlawful, unpeaceful, unsafe protest activity can occur between the time of acceptance of this offer until the meeting takes place. Please share this with the protest leadership and note that immediate agreement is required. Any time delay in acceptance will negate this offer.” So in this letter, the Solicitor General is offering that the Province will meet with a group of protestors in Windsor if they leave the protest site immediately and denounce all activity. Are you aware if the Province ever offered to meet with protestors in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is it fair to say that that option was never discussed either with the Premier or with Solicitor Jones at any of your discussions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that’s right. It was not a letter that was sent to you, but the question was whether this type of offer that was being made with respect to the protestors in Windsor, if that ever came to your attention, if that ever happened with respect to the protestors in Ottawa. And what I hear you saying is that, no, that never ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If I can take you now to -- I’m going to take you to the first tripartite meeting that occurred on February 7th. And it is PB.NSC.CAN2335. And if we go down to the bottom of that page? Yeah, right there. Okay. So this is -- my understanding is that this is a read out of the first of the three tripartite Ministerial meetings that took place with you, Minister Blair, Minister Mendicino, I think -- I believe Mr. Kanellakos attended as well, and at times, Deputy Minister Rob Stewart was in attendance as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And BB there is Bill Blair, and in the second line, he says: “Spoke to PM last night - felt it was important to convene table, all of them have already been working well with city officials.” And so it looks like there, the Prime Minister felt that it was important to convene this tripartite table with everybody at the table so that issues could be discussed. And if we look at -- MM is Minister Mendicino, and in the third line, he says: “We have confirmed 250 Mounties have been deputized.” He says: “We have been timely and responsive in putting our response together Minister Jones will want to have a discussion with what they can contribute…” So I understand that he’s saying here that they have made 250 RCMP officers available? Is that your reading of that too?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to the next page, you say -- in the first line, you say “150 already preassigned." And are you talking about RCMP officers here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You say, "Not on Wellington Street or Kent Counted as part of the total, but this doesn't help our foot soldiers with OPS Down to 100 spread over three shifts over eight hours, [this] isn't a lot Our request is significant -- biggest crisis facing our city, we are filled with angst." So what are you trying to convey in this section here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then further down in the middle of the page it says, "Watson," that's you, "on tripartite table -- has the province agreed to this?" And Bill Blair says, "Both of us have reached out ([Marco Mendocino] and I) we are working on it. She wasn't able to join today unfortunately." And "she" would be the Solicitor General?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "Will continue to engage to encourage them to join these talks." And then you say, "Province is very reluctant to be a part of what is going on Premier -- line was "anything you need, I will be there for you". I have gone to Sylvia Jones with that message The protesters are digging in, tried to light a fire for example They are misleading people on social media" So what is the sentiment that you're conveying there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did he say why he didn't think that was going to be -- that wasn't necessary or helpful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when did you see engagement from the province? When did you start seeing that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we know that the province declared a state of emergency on February 11th. Would you say that they were engaged before that time or that's the point of time when they became engaged?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if I can take you now to another document SSM.NSC.CAN.2052? And I believe this is a readout of the second tripartite meeting, and it looks like the participants on the first page are Minister Mendocino, Minister Blair, you -- if we go down a little bit, yeah -- and it looks like Chief Sloly was in attendance. Do you recall him attending one of the tripartite meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then on the first page, you say, "Why no SOLGEN [in] attendance?" I suppose that's Minister Jones, Solicitor General ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, and then Minister Mendocino says, "No word back." So at this point, you had expected that Ontario would have been at this table; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, this may assist because then you say, "I am speaking to Premier tomorrow." So you probably spoke to him then on February 9th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then you say, "Will ask that his Minister be at the table." And if we go to where it says Blair, "on Ontario involvement. I know Marco's been having good conversations with [Ontario]. They are worried about being visible and then being asked about what the province is doing." Do you know -- what was the discussion around that point, they are worried about being visible? Can you expand on what the discussion was there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So do you know what Ontario's concern is? It says they are concerned about being visible and being asked about what the province is doing. You can't shed any light?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then the Chief gives a breakdown of what's been going on, the breakdown of the resources, what they've been doing. And then on page 3, so it says on page 3, at the very top, "Public safety risk is higher on RIDEAU. It's being contained by a..."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
On the very top of page 3.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It says, "Public safety risk is higher on RIDEAU. It's being contained by [...] QC criminal organization and they are radicalized elements as well. There is some negotiations ongoing leading to movement and that's 48 hours away. If we had resources tonight we [can] move on that tonight." And Minister Mendocino says, "confirm Rideau is ahead of Wellington?" So my understanding that this is in terms of clearing areas, that Rideau and Sussex would be ahead of Wellington in terms of an area to clear, because of the criminal activity that's being described here. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And then Sloly says: “Yes, it's blocking a hospital route, etc, high risk to public safety. When we have resource reliability we will be able to move.” So here he is indicating that that area is blocking hospital route and therefore a priority for clearing it out. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then further down, Sloly says: “For every action we do, there is a counter reaction that can exceed our resources. We saw that in Coventry. Our public request for more [than] 1800 more people resulted in the activity in Windsor, plus a national call for protesters to drive to Ottawa so they can outnumber even increased police presence.” So do you recall what Sloly was saying here about the public request for 1,800 officers, did he see that as a concern that that request was publicly made?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so then Bill Blair says, “have you looked at traffic laws etc?” So he seems to be suggesting to use existing laws to deal with this.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at the bottom -- oh, sorry. Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And Chief Sloly alludes to this at the bottom. He says: “it’s a challenging situation to enforce. Just yesterday 100 people surrounded 30 officers when they apprehended an individual with a gas can and we're almost overcome. We need extra public order. Bylaw[s] aren’t my control.” So he's essentially saying existing by laws, existing resources is not helpful to end the situation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then you say: “‘show me the mounties’. We need to come out of the meeting with the down payment on resources…What will you commit to?” And then Minister Mendicino says: “there is a 5pm RCMP call with the city I believe. We need to have the province present on these calls. OPP will play [a] critical role.” And then you say: “it's hard for me to blast the province when I don't have a commitment from the feds.” So explain that comment there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But as you mentioned, the municipality is a creature of the provincial statute, and here you're saying you want a commitment from the federal government, but you haven't secured commitment from the provinces, and isn't that the proper sequence? As a municipality, to go to the provinces, and then the provinces can then subsequently, you know, push that request up to the federal government. Why was that sequence not being followed here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And did anybody within the federal government, either Minister Blair, Minister Mendicino, the Prime Minister indicate to you that by not going first to the provinces to secure that kind of commitment, that there was a delay in procuring those resources as a result of not following what you called, “The niceties”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you didn’t understand from anybody in the federal government that you were following -- that they thought you were following the wrong process by going directly to them.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, fair enough.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to SSM.CAN.NSC2837? And this is a readout of the call with the Prime Minister on February 8. And so you recall you had a discussion with the Prime Minister on this day?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If we can zoom into that? Yeah, February 8. Yeah, thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we’ll go down to the -- kind of the meat of it. Yes, a little bit down more. There we go.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, it should be on the screen there, February 8, ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- a call -- a readout of the call with the Prime Minister. And if we go to the second page, yeah, you say -- well, the Prime Minister asks how you’re doing. You say: “A challenge for everyone. Still a pretty unstable situation. Nasty people out there that just don't represent Canada. Reminds me of the republican party down south. Can't reason with them, so vulgar, and hateful attacking people, ripping masks off, honking their horns. It's not over yet, and I appreciate...”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, okay, sorry. I’m just aware of the time, but, yes, you’re right. Let’s slow down for the interpreters. “It's not over yet, and I appreciate that I had a really good conversation with Marco and Bill. We have a table with the PT this afternoon at 4:30,...” Do you know what the reference to the PT? Is that just the tripartite, or what’s the PT; do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. “...and hopefully more resources from you on RCMP...” Then you say: “Ford is just staying away from this, but I want to bring him into the tent.” So when you say, “Ford is staying away from ‘this’”; what is the “This”? Is it ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then the Prime Minister says: “Have they (province) indicated they will be there at 4:30?” You say: “It’s been set up by Bill's office. Slyvia [sic] Jones is the name on it. She has been disingenuous saying there are 1400 opp, bul [sic] that's not true. I spoke to Ford yesterday, and he said anything you want, so I'm going to hold his words to it.” So this was the issue that you had raised about the 1,400 OPP officers; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So either 14 or 1,500.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So she was on the invite, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then you ask about resource, and the Prime Minister says: “One of the challenges is that it goes In steps. The first step is to go to the OPP, then RCMP. It's difficult for us to say what we need to do directly until we have a better idea of what the province is doing. That's why this table is so important.” So can you explain what the Prime Minister told you here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so when he says this: “...goes in steps. The first step is to go to the OPP, then RCMP.” Did you understand him to be saying that the proper order of operations was not being followed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So Minister Mendicino and Deputy Minister Stewart, as we saw yesterday, was very -- they were both very active in reaching out and offering their assistance and asking what the City needed. On the provincial side, was Di Tommaso or Laurie LeBlanc or Sylvia Jones, were they also reaching out proactively to see how they could help?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you weren’t hearing them proactively like you were from the others?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And then the Prime Minister says: “But on the Ottawa policing side, you have seen, as II [sic] have,...”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we’re now further -- the last paragraph at the bottom. There; now it’s in the middle. It’s the Prime Minister; it’s in the middle of the page, “but on the policing side...” It’s on the second paragraph of the Prime Minister’s ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“But on the Ottawa policing side, you have seen, as II [sic] have, some concerns on how things were handled from the beginning, how is your relationship with the police chief and how are you guys working together? There are moments [when] you are saying one thing and he is saying another, is there anywhere we can help around that?” Now, the Prime Minister here seems concerned that you and Chief Sloly were delivering different messages. Do you have a sense for what that concern was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the Prime Minister says he had some concerns with how things were handled from the beginning, and he said, "you have seen, as I have, some concerns." What were those concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So when you say all three levels of government had erred in this way in letting them in, what could the City have done to prevent that situation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And -- so -- but if we go back to that time, there were no discussions with Chief Sloly that you had with him about blocking access to the downtown area; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then you say in response to the Prime Minister's suggestion that maybe there is some concerns about how things are being handled in your relationship with the Chief, you say, "[O]ne thing was when he said...", and "he" is the Chief; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"...it's not a police solution, but it is a police solution, I think he is just a bit frustrated everything is coming down on him. But that doesn't make sense, this is a police matter. I have been trying my very best to back him up every day, as you know PM now is not the time to change courses, we have to do our best to support him." And so when you say now is not the time to change courses, are you speaking about -- well, what are you speaking about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
He left on the 15th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So on that point, did you ever have any discussions with anybody, either within the provincial government or the federal government, about Chief Sloly's leadership and whether or not there should be a change in course?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, at the bottom, the Prime Minister says: "[L]isten, yes, you can say the federal government will be there with more resources, but again, the thing that frustrates me, and everyone is conflated..." And then there's some inaudible part. And then he says: "[B]ut Doug Ford has been hiding from his responsibility on it for political reasons as you highlighted, and important that we don't let them get away from that, and we intend to support you on that." So what was your understanding of the political reasons of why Premier Ford, according to the Prime Minister, was hiding from his responsibility?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But the Prime Minister here is saying that you're saying that it's for political reasons.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then you say: “If they keep dragging their feet, I’m happy to call them out on it. It’d be nice if we have something firmed up with the federal government to shame them. Ford didn’t even make an effort to come and see what’s going on.” So it’s clear you’re sharing here the Prime Minister’s frustration about the Province’s lack of attendance at these meetings and general lack of involvement in the solution finding.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So would it have been helpful to have the Province in attendance at these meetings for everybody to be on the same page and for everybody to know what the numbers were and what was going on?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so if the Province had participated in these meetings and been more engaged, do you think there would have been less of a delay in receiving resources? That the process would have gone faster?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And Commissioner, this may be an appropriate time for a morning break, if you wish.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I’m going to take you now, Mayor Watson, to SSM.CAN.NSC2676, and this is the readout of the third and last tripartite ministerial meeting dating February 10, and it looks to be with Minister Blair, yourself, Minister Mendicino, Mr. Kanellakos, and Deputy Minister Stewart. And on the first page, Minister Mendicino talks about discussions with Commissioner Lucki of the RCMP to provide an additional 275 RCMP officers, and then he says: "This will be operationalized in conjunction with the OPP, need to have a sense of the plan." It’s in the middle of that big paragraph. Do you see that? “This will be operationalized…” -- there it is ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- “…in conjunction with the OPP, need to have a sense of the plan.” And then on -- so my understanding, and we’ll see a little bit later, is that this is in relation to Chief Sloly’s plan to use the resources that will be made available. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we go to the second page, just under the redacted portion -- keep going, yeah, there, “RS”. So that is Deputy Minister Rob Stewart says: "We are engaging the province on all these areas…” Which are the ones above that are blanked out: "…as well as the evolution of the plan. From what I understand, the plan of the Chief has not yet been completely fleshed out. That my reflected the speed with which the RCMP can deploy resources." So what did you understand about the state of the plan from the OPS’s perspective, the OPS plan, at this stage, which is now the 10th of February?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but here in this meeting, they’re not talking about specifics of a plan but they’re talking about, “We need to have a plan in order to deploy the resources,” so it was a discussion that the fact that the plan had not been completely fleshed out, that that would affect -- or that could delay the RCMP resources.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so the federal -- your federal partners here are telling you that the plan is not completely fleshed out; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were hearing this from others as well, that there was issues with the Chief’s -- with the readiness of the plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, and so your Chief of Staff yesterday testified that he was informed by Chief of Staff Mike Jones that by February 10 there was no agreement on an integrated plan and he indicated yesterday that you were aware of this as well and that it would have been communicated back to OPS, the fact that there were concerns about the readiness of the plan. Did you communicate that back to Ottawa Police Service or the Chief Sloly?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure, but here, Minister Mendicino and Deputy Minister Stewart are indicating that not having a plan can affect the deployment of the RCMP officers. Did you convey that back to Chief Sloly to let him know that this was -- that the readiness of the plan was delaying?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on page 4, if we go down -- okay, and then you say: "Thank you. If we can word from the Commissioner to Sloly sometime today, we can get this moving. We don’t have to pick it up and leave it on Monday." (As read). Okay, sorry, I meant the second point at the bottom there where you say: "This is a good step. At some point, I will call the Premier to get them to sit at this table." So this was the last tripartite meeting, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so they -- in the end, the Premier did not come to the table, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why the tripartite meeting stopped after February 10?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in the three meetings that we looked at, there’s some common themes that we can see. You’re expressing frustration that you’re not commitment from the Federal Government. You say you need boots on the ground, “Show me the Mounties. Let’s get a downpayment on RCMP officers.” So you felt that the Federal Government was not committing to the resources that you needed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, did you say that the process unfolded as it should?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you agree that it took three weeks for that to happen, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But you're not just an armchair critic. As you say, you're the mayor of Ottawa and you see that your city is in need, and so you have a duty, really, to raise those issues and to push all levels of government to do whatever they can to get this resolved quickly, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But ultimately, there was a significant delay in getting those resources, although they ultimately did come ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- barely? But there was a significant delay in both RCMP officers and OPP officers; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And other municipal officers. And so essentially, what we're seeing in these three meetings is that you're not getting what you need from any level of government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So one issue then was not having an understanding of what was needed soon enough; is that right? Like, if that had been communicated sooner, the chain of events that subsequently happened could have started earlier, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The first part is, you're saying that you eventually got the number of resources that were required, and you sent the letters off on February 7th, but had you understood what was required earlier, from January 31st, you already know that there are not enough resources, as we saw in your call with the prime minister. So had the chief communicated to you the requirements and a number sooner, that could have been passed on sooner, and the sequence of events of the meetings and trying to get those resources could have begun sooner, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if the RCMP officers had been secured, and if that commitment from the federal government had have been secured earlier, then also, the situation could have potentially been resolved sooner. There was a delay there in getting those federal resources, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if the province had been at the table, at the tripartite table, and had been part of the discussions, and you were able to communicate directly to the solicitor general or to the premier what was needed and when, that also could have helped resolve the situation sooner, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. So really, it was a failure at all levels. Would you agree with that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so we've talked a little bit about what the OPS could have done differently, what the federal government and the provincial government could have done differently. What about the municipality? What could the City have done differently?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you said, you know, early on, it was clear that you were -- the City was overwhelmed and that it couldn't -- it didn’t have the resources to handle this ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- not just on the police side, but on the municipal level as well. From the 31st, I think it became clear that this was not something that was going to just resolve itself on its own, and I'll come back to this point, could declaring a state of emergency earlier, as of, for example, the 31st of January, have signalled that the City was overwhelmed, that it was treading water, and a signal to the other levels of government to act accordingly?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so aside from maybe signalling that need for assistance earlier with the state of emergency, what else could the City have done differently, and what else will the City do differently next time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you agree that it was unacceptable that residents would have to go through this for three weeks, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I just want to ask you about the negotiation that happened with the protesters. We heard much more detail yesterday about that and we'll hear more detail in future I'm hoping with Superintendent Drummond's evidence. Can you just tell me, what was your understanding of the deal that was struck? What was the deal?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What were your concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, I believe that was on the 14th, on the Monday the 14th they began. The 13th I think there was a meeting ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- 13th there was a meeting to sort out the logistics and on the 14th, they started that movement.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, no, go ahead.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so in total about over -- about a hundred vehicles in total, 40 of them big rigs and the balance passenger vehicles and pickup trucks; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know why the police stopped those operations? Did anybody from the police tell you, "This has been stopped for these reasons"?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But nobody from OPS said that to you? This was conveyed to you by Mr. Kanellakos?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so in terms of the deal that was brokered, was it your understanding that this was meant to be a way to solve the situation, end what you had called the occupation, such that all of the protesters would leave? Was that what this deal was for?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was the deal then that once they relocated to Wellington, was there any kind of assurance as to how long they could stay there then? Was the City giving them permission to occupy Wellington Street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But to your knowledge, did the City ever suggest that once they were relocated, they could stay there on Wellington, this was -- they would be then protected from any kind of police action to remove them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But at that time, there are about 4 to 500 trucks occupying the downtown; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now on February 14th, we know that the Emergencies Act was invoked. Were you consulted on the invocation of the Emergencies Act before it was invoked?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did the City request that it be invoked?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the City weigh in on whether it was required, necessary, or needed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge as to what measures under the Act were used in order to affect a police operation that ultimately ended the occupation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But you don't have any knowledge as to where the tow trucks came from, or who procured them, or under what authority, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So just so I'm clear, do you know that these tow trucks were procured under the authority of the Emergencies Act, or is that your assumption?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that’s your assumption based on the fact that they were refusing to do it and then they showed up, essentially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you don’t know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we know on February 15th that Sloly and OPSB reached a mutually agreeable separation. were you consulted on Chief Sloly’s departure before it happened?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you have a view that you should or shouldn't be consulted or notified when the Police Chief is going to be replaced or removed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on the 16th of February there was a City Council special meeting. Do you recall that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this was the meeting after the Emergencies Act was invoked, and this is the meeting in which Chair Deans was removed as Chair, and of -- well, as a Member of the Board. And so, my understanding is that you had communications with Chair Deans between Chief Sloly’s resignation and before the council meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you describe those discussions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you had a concern about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But hiring a Chief of Police is within the exclusive purview of the Police Services Board, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So they didn't need to consult with you about that decision, did they?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But that decision was the Board’s to make, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Which she was entitled to do as Chair of the Board, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you consider that discussion with her about asking her not to sign the contract, or telling her that you wished her not to sign the contract, compromised the independence of the Board in any way?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And very briefly, I will take you to OTT29762.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is the in camera council meeting minutes of February 16th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at page 6 of that, Councillor Leiper, at the top: “…observed that the Motion spoke [of] a loss of confidence in the Board, which was linked to the hiring decisions.” So it says there that the motion to remove the Chair as a member of the Board was linked to the hiring decisions. Now, what we heard yesterday was that the motion was linked to a loss of confidence that you had lost in Chair Deans. Can you clarify what the -- why this Motion was brought forward to remove Chair Deans?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And in this in- camera minutes, we don’t see any mention of the assurances that the Chair gave to you, according to you, about not hiring a new chief, but that it was linked, rather, to the Board’s hiring decisions. And ultimately, as you know, the Chief that had been selected ultimately rescinded his offer to take on that role, ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- as a result of the turnover at the Board. You’re aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And before the Motion was introduced at Council, you had asked Chair Deans to resign; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you consider that the turnover at the Board contributed to that instability that you were looking to avoid?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And I see the Commissioner glaring at me, so I am out of time. And those are all my questions for you. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, before we do that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. It’s not actual re- examination but I have been asked to just reference the document that Mayor Watson has in front of me by -- in front of him, rather, by Doc ID so that it can be clear for the record. And the document is the timeline of events submitted by the City of Ottawa in its Institutional Report; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the reference for that is OTT.IR.000002, maybe six zeros but “2” is the last number. So that’s just for the record, thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, you can keep that, thanks.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Of course. For the record, Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Commissioner Counsel. And the Commission would like to call its next witness, Kim Ayotte.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good afternoon, Mr. Ayotte.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Nice to see you again.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You had an interview with Commission counsel on August 8, 2022; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And have you had a chance to review the interview summary that was generated from that interview?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And, at this time, do you have any corrections to make to that summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so we will not proceed to enter that into evidence as WTS20, and I’m just going to pull it up. And this is your witness summary, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, excellent. Thank you. I want to cover a few short areas with you just to maybe clarify a few issues that have come up in the last few days. You were not originally intended to testify and some issues have come up that we think you might be able to clarify for use. The first area is with respect to the issuance of permits; can you confirm whether any permits were ever sought or issued for this protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, there was some suggestion, I believe, that some -- that a permit was granted for some Porta-potties; do you know anything about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, but that was not in response to a permit request, was it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this was just your own -- your own incentive?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. I want to talk a little bit about Bylaw and Fire Services and your role as the -- you’re the General Manager of the Emergency and Protective Services, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so Bylaw Services reports in you; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And is that the same for Fire Services?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so I want to understand a little bit more the relationship between Bylaw and Fire, on the one hand -- and Fire Services -- and OPS in the -- over the course of these events. And “these events”, obviously we’re talking about the convoy protest in Ottawa and January and February of this year. And I want take you, just to refresh your memory and provide some context, to OTT2120, so 2-1-2-0. And the document is entitled “Media Availability, January 31st, 2022” and you’re the custodian of this document. It was brought to us by the City of Ottawa. It was produced by the City of Ottawa and you were listed as the custodian. Did you author this document?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you would have reviewed this document before any key messages were delivered to the public based on this, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, if we look at the fifth bullet point -- so there’s a few questions there. Yes. So it says: "What was Bylaw’s role this weekend?" And by “this weekend”, it means the first weekend of the convoy since this is dated January 31st. And it says: "How did they support Ottawa Police and what kind of infractions were incurred?" And then it says: " Bylaw and Regulatory Services’ role is to support the lead enforcement agency, Ottawa Police, to keep demonstrators peaceful by assisting with parking control and other issues as requested by the City of Ottawa." (As read).
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“Demonstrations”, yes, thank you. So can you explain what Bylaw’s role was in that weekend, meaning, did it have the role of enforcing, as requested, or could it enforce on its own initiative?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now did you participate in the update that Chief Sloly gave the briefing on January 26th with respect to what to expect when the convoy arrived? I believe the mayor was involved and Steve Kanellakos. Were you there as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in that briefing or anytime before or after, was it suggested to you that By-law would not be issuing tickets and towing on that first weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So prior to the 29th, was By-law exercising its authority to issue tickets and to tow independently?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So on Friday the 27th when they started to arrive, Saturday the 28th, By-law was functioning as it would normally at any regular day, issuing tickets and enforcing as it normally would?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Sorry, my apologies. I keep thinking that Saturday was the -- okay. Got you. Sorry, so Friday the 28th and Saturday the 29th. So up until that point on the Saturday, on the 28th, everything was -- By-law was acting as it normally would and on the 29th, something occurred for that to change.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that was decided at the outset, that that's the way it was going to work prior to the arrival of the convoy; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so on Saturday, you're saying that something changed on Saturday; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you say the red zone, what did you understand that zone to be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what was By-law's role outside of the red zone?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you're saying that there was an integration then with NCRCC, does that mean that calls to By-law to 3-1-1 were being redirected to NCRCC?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so I just want to be -- I just want to clarify in your witness statement, just to make sure I make sure that that is, you know, in line with what you're saying now. In your witness statement, and we can pull it up if that's helpful to you, but it says, "OPS directed the City on January 29 to instruct By-law officers not to ticket or tow vehicles anywhere in the red zone without police approval." (As read) Is that essentially what you're saying about what happened on January 29th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this was told to you through the EOC. Bev ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Gooding would have been the one to inform you of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so that stance from January 29th about the red zone and that By-law was not to ticket and tow without police approval, that didn't change throughout the protest; did it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but the stance that By-law could not ticket or tow without police approval, that was maintained throughout the entire protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In the red zone. And as you said, outside of the red zone, if there was some sort of indication that the vehicle in question was related to the protest, then the police would make the decision as to whether or not to ticket or tow; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And Mr. Kanellakos testified yesterday that sometime in the second week there was an integration between OPS and By-law to ensure By-law safety. Do you have a sense for when that was; do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you’re saying that was primarily for by-law officer safety; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when 311 calls were being redirect to NCRCC, was that within the entire municipality of Ottawa? How did that work exactly?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of any instances in which By-law wanted to act and wanted to enforce some By-law violation and they were prevented from doing so?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if a vehicle did not appear to be related to the convoy, that vehicle could be ticketed or towed? There had to be some discretion. So if it was in a no stopping zone, it was towed no matter what, even if it was related to the convoy because we needed to keep the emergency routes opened, and they did an excellent job keeping the emergency routes opened. We did ask our officers to use some discretion because, you know, the perception of us ticketing our citizens, you know, of a vehicle and then not ticketing one because next door it’s a convoy, it was just not proper and it wasn’t appropriate. So we did ask them to use discretion and to be careful on when they ticketed citizens that were mixed up in with the convoy because it just looked like we were taking sides, and that’s not appropriate, and that’s not what we were trying to do.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And quickly, it appears based on the evidence we’ve received so far, that there were numerous fire code violations and other infractions that would involve fire services, such as open fires in barrels, stockpiles of fuel, illegal fireworks, et cetera, and not just in the red zone, but in residential areas as well. So I want to ask about how fire services, which is also under your direction, was able to exercise its function within this system that you’ve now described where by-law is essentially integrated with the police.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But that was with OPS support; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so if fire services saw potentially a dangerous situation and it wanted to act to remove that hazard, they had to have OPS support in order to do that; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so fire services never acted on its own authority, like independently from the police?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we’re going to take our afternoon break now, and thank you very much.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Welcome back, Mr. Ayotte.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to OTT9778, and before we do, I have been asked if you can please slow down your answers a little bit -- I am also guilty of this -- for the purposes of the translation. So I think we will both try to speak a little bit slower, if that’s okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Okay. And this is not the document I wanted, 9778? Yeah, okay. Well, it may be that I have it wrong here in my notes, but in any event, if we can actually go down, this is -- I didn’t want to take you to this one before something else, so we can go to this document. That’s fine. So this, my understanding, is a letter that you wrote to Mr. Paradis, who is the Director of Real Property Services at Public Services and Procurement Canada; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the purpose of this letter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you contacted them first and they said, "Put the request in writing," and that’s what this is; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did they provide that fencing, and did they put that fencing up?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did this request come from OPS, meaning did OPS ask you to reach out to procure this fencing, or was that something the City did on its own accord?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So OPS, through the EOC, was asking the City to ask the SPC to provide this fencing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we can take that down now. I wanted to ask you about towing and towing capacity. My understanding is that -- and I had a document ready for that, but it's the wrong one -- in any event, that there were about 28 vehicles that were towed that first weekend. does that sound about right to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is that most of this towing was directed at ensuring that the emergency lanes were clear; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were any heavy trucks ever towed by the City at ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- any point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So any towing and any towing numbers refers to pickup trucks and passenger trucks, essentially, passenger vehicles; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, we see later on -- and I think you'll agree with me -- that minimal towing happened subsequent to that first weekend? There were sometimes there would be no days where -- sorry, there'd be days where there'd be no towing, and there'd be days where there'd be one or two vehicles towed. Does that sound about right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so we heard that towing companies were not willing to participate in towing for various reasons, and that was the reason why towing wasn’t more aggressively pursued; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But the towing that was being procured or was being looked at was heavy towing capacity; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in terms of the other towing capacity, towing capacity for passenger vehicles, the City had that, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And passenger vehicles or smaller vehicles include pickup trucks, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the reason there were 28 tows in the first weekend and very minimal towing after that, there was no other day where there were double digit towing? It was one, two, sometimes zero vehicles being towed? And there is a chart that will be entered into evidence that shows the number of vehicles that were being towed every day. Is that because the towing companies that had been towing that first weekend refused to continue towing, or is it because bylaw was not requesting additional towing of passenger vehicles after that first weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the purpose of towing was exclusively to maintain emergency lanes; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if the emergency lanes were maintained, then no towing would take place, generally?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So let me ask about emergency lanes then. I'm trying to -- I want to understand a little bit about how they worked. So the question is whether emergency lane -- there was an emergency lane maintained on all streets, or whether certain designated routes were ensured that they had an emergency lane, north-south and east-west. Can you shed some light on that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if an emergency occurred on Kent Street, a street that you've indicated was completely blocked off, so a building in the middle of Kent Street there is a fire or some emergency, how would the emergency vehicles get to that street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I assume then that there would be some areas that would not be completely accessible. If a lot of streets were closed off completely or there were several streets that were closed off, then there would be at least some buildings that would have been inaccessible to emergency vehicles?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you said the CAD, they would look at their own CAD, what did you mean by that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, can you repeat that? Computer ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in this case, were there any delays from EMS or fire or ambulance to be able to access any points within the areas that were occupied with trucks?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now I just want to ask about the relocation of the trucks as part of the negotiation between the protest group and the City of Ottawa. I want to take you to OTT30057. And is this a text message from your phone?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it says, "Chris (protester)." Is that the name that you entered for that phone number?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And who's Chris protester?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so in green, this would be you speaking and ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- the grey would be Mr. Barber; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And if I can just take you to page 4 of those exchanges? So you say, "Are you continuing to try to move trucks today or has that effort stalled?" And if we just go up a little bit more, we'll see -- I just want to look at the date that was sent. If we go up, yeah, so it's on Tuesday, February 15. Okay. Thank you. We can go back down. "Are you continuing to try to move trucks today or has that effort stalled?" And he says, "We moved maybe 40 yesterday. I wore myself out yesterday with that. Rested up now and preparing to get at it again." And then you say, "Thanks, Chris." So we have heard that there were about 40 heavy trucks that were relocated as a result. Is that your understanding as well? Is that what Mr. Barber was telling you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And there were additional passenger vehicles that were towed as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
There were people ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this 40 number refers to the heavy trucks only; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And we know that shortly after this message, the effort to relocate trucks stopped or was ended. You also had discussions with Superintendent Drummond, who I understand was the OPS liaison to this relocation effort. Did he explain to you why there were no more trucks being relocated to Wellington at a certain point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he didn't give you an explanation for why?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Those are all my questions for you, Mr. Ayotte. Thank you very much.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The Commissioner would like to call Superintendent Robert Drummond.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good afternoon, Superintendent Drummond. How are you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good. Nice to see you again.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You had several interviews with Commission counsel in September and October. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we generated a witness summary from those interviews. And you’ve had a chance to review that summary; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any corrections to make to your summary at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we can just pull it up, it’s WTS00000050. And can you confirm that is your witness summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we will have that entered into evidence. Thank you. And I understand you’re, in fact, Acting Superintendent. Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, for simplicity, is it okay if I just refer to you as Superintendent Drummond?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And my understanding is that the rank of Superintendent is one below Deputy Chief. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how many Superintendents are in the OPS, approximately?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Eight of them. Okay, thanks. And I understand you assumed a formal role in the response to the convoy on February 7 when Superintendent Patterson asked you to be the PLT and POU representative within the Incident Command System.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you explain what that role entails, the one that you took on that day?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is it fair to say that the role also entailed ensuring coordination between those two groups?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So you reported to Superintendent Mark Patterson. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I want to start first with February 8, which is the day that Mr. Kanellakos, City Manager of the City of Ottawa, met with some protestor -- with, actually, Mr. Marazzo at City Hall. And you’re aware of that meeting; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to start there. We’ll start at OPS00008527. And this is an email thread, and if I can go to page 2 of this document. So you see there on February 7th at 8:48 p.m. -- there we are. And it’s an email from Superintendent Patterson to Acting Deputy Chief Bell -- sorry, Deputy Chief Bell and saying, “PLT members continued their conversation with”, and that’s redacted, but I understand that’s Tom Marazzo.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“...this evening. He has requested a meeting with an elected official or city manager level member. He has indicated that if we coordinate a meeting around noon tomorrow that he could facilitate the removal of trucks unknown number. These conversations will continue tomorrow morning. May I ask, given your relationship with City officials that you provide a name that would be willing to participate in this discussion? I know this is a vague ask, but this is what Rob was provided. Rob, hope I captured this properly." Now, you'll see you're cc'd in that. So when Superintendent Drummond [sic] says Rob he's referring to you; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, Patterson. That's right. And he says... And if we go up a little bit. And -- right. So then Deputy Chief Bell responds: "I will contact the City first thing this morning to see if they will sit down with the group." So you were provided this information -- according to that first email that we saw, you were the one who was provided with this information, right, that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Mr. Marazzo wanted to meet with a City official?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so this was a sort of, you know, if he's able to meet with a City official then he will attempt to negotiate movement of trucks out of the Rideau and Sussex area. Is that essentially what it was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in the witness summary that we just looked at, you provided a bit more background, and you said that moving these trucks was being considered because there was space available on Wellington.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why did you understand the protesters at Rideau and Sussex wanting to move to the Wellington area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was that important to open up that road?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is it fair to say that this move would've been seen as helpful to OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go to the first page. Up more, please. Keep going up to the very top. Oh, I see: "Do we know what they want to talk about Mark?" Okay. Yeah, so there is another email in which you say that this was the ask and you're going to see if he can get a private meeting.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this was seen as being helpful to the PLT group that wanted to ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- essentially clear ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that area; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Mr. Kanellakos testified last week that when PLT attended City Hall for this meeting, which did eventually take place, that he was told by the PLT officers who were there with Mr. Marazzo that communications had broken down with protest leaders and that they weren't communicating anymore with the PLTs. And he said that this was a significant issue in their ability to continue to try to negotiate on the grounds in terms of the things that they needed to, and that they had asked to meet with someone from the City as a show of good faith. Were you aware that communications between PLT and protest groups had broken down at this point in time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But this was still seen as something positive for PLT ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- to kind of build trust with the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- protesters? Okay, and I want to take you to Staff Sergeant John Ferguson's notes. And you were saying he was the head of the PLT at the time, and he reported into you; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if I can take you to OPS00014568. And if I can take you to page 36. So these are his notes of the discussions. And actually, we can go up to 35 so we can see a little bit of the context. So he says at 1929: "Contact Supt. Drummond - Advises him of the request to meet. Time sensitive. He asked what City official meant." And then if we see at 1933, "Contact Supt. Drummond." If we go down a little bit more: "I clarified the request with Sgt. Le - Marazzo wanted the City Manager or an elected official." So that's the context in which now the notation at 2044 happens. At 2044 it says, "Contacted by Dr. Collins". And who did you understand Dr. Collins to be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he's with the OPP?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, so he works with the OPP.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it says: "Update provided - Discussions about City official strategy. Agreement that this was win-win. Also face-saving." Do you know -- do you recall Staff Sergeant Ferguson conveying to you that he the saw the City's involvement as a win-win?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but you were in contact with ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Staff Sergeant Ferguson; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so he is saying that there is agreement that this was win-win between him and Dr. Collins.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did he share those views with you as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did he ever convey to you that he saw the City's involvement as face-saving for the OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you have any sense for what he means by that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at the bottom of page 38... If we can go to page 38. It says, "Meeting occurring." So this is now -- the meeting is taking place, and Staff Sergeant Ferguson is making notes that the meeting is happening: "Meeting occurring - group looking for a possible exit strategy." Is that what you understood the purpose of the meeting with Mr. Kanellakos to be on February 8?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And specifically, when you say "certain areas", we're talking about the Rideau and Sussex ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- area here; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Because we heard Mr. Kanellakos say last week that the meeting was about trying to see if the protesters could get a meeting with the Mayor. That's what he understood ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that meeting to be.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But for OPS, the meeting was in exchange for facilitating a meeting with the City Manager, Mr. Marazzo would agree to try and get those areas cleared and moved to Wellington.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the meeting did take place, and according to your witness summary you indicate that on February 8, you and Superintendent Patterson had a call about these negotiations, and that this was reported up to Deputy Chief Bell and possibly Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in your witness statement, you also say that you do not recall whether at the time PPS was notified of these negotiations, although it may have been brought up at the NCRCC where the PPS had representation.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you receive any correspondence about any concerns that PPS might've had at this time, February 8, about moving vehicles to Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So -- well, maybe I can refresh your memory. If we can go to OPS000 -- actually, we're in the same document, 14568, just on page 39. So: "Rideau/Sussex Contacted by Sgt. Le “…Marazzo/Kanellakos meeting complete. Marazzo to attend Rideau-Sussex to work on moving, opening that intersection. Contacted Supt. Drummond, updated re: meeting. Advised him that Marazzo was working on Rideau-Sussex. He asked if we were going to get other roadways: Wellington. I indicated that I understood the priority was Rideau- Sussex. Will if city promised anything.” And then, if we go to 1538, rather 1554: “Email received from Supt. Drummond re: PPS response to Wellington Street vehicle relocation plan.” Do you see that there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you recall receiving an email from PPS regarding the response to the Wellington Strategy Vehicle relocation plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then it’s ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I haven’t seen an email. There probably is but in the thousands of documents it may be hard to pinpoint the email. But it’s very possible. And if we just go down a little bit more, 1606, S/Sgt. Ferguson says: “…contact Inspector Lucas, re: PPS email to discuss their concerns.” So this seems to suggest that the email that was sent to you had concerns from PPS. Do you recall any concerns being expressed by PPS at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if there were any concerns it was about the trucks being on Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the concern specifically about trucks being on Wellington, that you recall?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So they didn’t raise any specific security concerns about that arrangement?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But you know that eventually PPS did express concerns, ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so did those concerns include any safety concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, in your witness summary, you indicate that OPS facilitated but did not attend the meeting with Mr. Kanellakos and Mr. Marazzo?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What’s the basis for that understanding?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So Mr. Kanellakos testified that he initially met one on one with Mr. Marazzo and then afterwards the PLT members joined that meeting, and there was a meeting with everybody together?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So -- but you don’t have any specific information to the contrary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I believe it includes Sgt. Li (phonetic), and others.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the understanding is that this meeting between Mr. Marazzo and Mr. Kanellakos took place, it was facilitated by OPS and in return Mr. Marazzo was to speak to the Rideau and Sussex group to get them to Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now in your witness statement you say that you were advised that Mr. Marazzo left the meeting to go to the intersection of Rideau and Sussex to move the trucks at that location, pursuant to this agreement, but that he was not successful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what’s the basis for that understanding?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was the reason why there was no movement at that time? It sounds like, ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is that your understanding for why the Rideau and Sussex group didn’t relocate to Wellington, as had been anticipated from this deal?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that’s your understanding for why that move didn’t happen; he wasn’t able to get them to move, essentially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what about the fact that the move was not approved higher up in the chain of command within OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But the move was not approved higher up, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But at that time there wasn’t approval?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is that there was some sort of miscommunication between you and S/Sgt. Ferguson about allowing them to move to Wellington; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we can stay on this document at page 40, just at the bottom. This might refresh your memory as well, at 1739, and this is, again, S/Sgt. Ferguson’s notes. And he says: “Contact Supt. Drummond re: vehicle relocation to Wellington. He indicated that there had been a miscommunication, when I said clear Rideau-Sussex, he was under the impression…” And we can keep going: “…that they meant they were leaving.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“I described the impact of this on the relationship with organizers and our ability to continue to do our PLT job. He said that the plan to relocate the trucks to Wellington had not been approved. I asked if that was at the Chief level, believed so.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So can you explain this discussion; what’s -- what is the exchange happening here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So when he says: “When I said clear Rideau-Sussex, he was under the impression that they meant they were leaving.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you didn’t ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. So your understanding at the beginning was that if the meeting was facilitated with Mr. Kanellakos, the Rideau and Sussex group would leave, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. He says that -- he says he described to you the impact of this on the relationship with organizers. Can you explain what he described to you there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So when you explain the impact, I assume that means the negative impact ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that it would have had; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then you told him that the plan to relocate the trucks had not been approved?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
When did you seek that approval?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure, you can look at your notes if that’s helpful. Perhaps if you can try to recall whether it was before or after the meeting took place.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
With Mr. -- yeah, that’s right. Would you have sought approval to have them move to Wellington before that meeting or after the meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So sometime between the time that you were briefed on the outcome of the meeting, that it happened, that it was a successful meeting, and then the time when you're having this discussion now at 1739 with Staff Sgt. Ferguson, you would have sought approval to have them move onto Wellington because at this time now, you understand that the quid pro quo, so to speak, is for them to move to Wellington; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That’s right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who would have denied the request?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
How do you know the chief would have been involved in that decision? Did you speak to the chief about this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, the meeting happened on the 8th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I understood your evidence to be that before the meeting took place, you thought they were leaving altogether.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you had sought that approval, you're saying, on February 7th, the day before the meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Okay. So maybe you can try to refresh your memory at a break. We'll keep going.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if we just go down a bit further, Staff Sgt. Ferguson then writes: "I indicated that we were just continuing with the relocation plan from before and that if we were aware that it was not approved, we wouldn't have moved forward. Miscommunication/misinterpretation." So what was your understanding -- what was the relocation plan from before? What was your understanding of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then he says, "This provides us the ability to open that intersection without force." Do you understand what he means by that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then at 1814, "Updates Supt. Drummond that we have shelved the Rideau Sussex plan or put it on hold due to darkness."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at that point, I assume it had gotten too dark and there was no approval in any event; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to the next page, 41, "He said that he would reopen the discussion with the exec about the move to Wellington."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the plan to move the vehicles from Rideau and Sussex to Wellington on February 8 was shelved because there wasn’t approval and because it got dark afterwards; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the exec never approved this move? Ultimately, the move was never carried out?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we can just go to page 43 here, I believe this is now the next morning at 11:07, "Contacted by Sgt. Lee ---" and he was the PLT officer that had been involved in this meeting; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"--- re Rideau Sussex move. He advised that there was a loss of momentum after last night." And if we go to 11:50: "Contacted by Sgt. Lee. He now advises that the group at Rideau Sussex are no longer listening to Tom Marazzo after last night, and they have galvanized." Were you aware of this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you understand that that was because they weren’t able to move the night that they wanted to move because there wasn’t approval?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So ultimately, the move to Wellington didn’t happen, first, because that request wasn’t approved, and my understanding is it was never approved, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then because Mr. Marazzo had lost maybe any good faith he would have had with that group after the move didn’t take place; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, after that meeting on February 8, the PLT Team and Staff Sgt. Ferguson briefed you that the city had discussed with Mr. Marazzo a meeting with the mayor in exchange for protestors moving trucks onto Wellington; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So after this meeting took place with Mr. Kanellakos and Mr. Marazzo on that date, February 8, the PLT Team and Staff Sgt. Ferguson would have reported back to you about what happened in that meeting, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Kanellakos testified that they were. I mean, he was there, so ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But you would agree with me that the person at the meeting would be in a best position to say who was in attendance, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
He said it was Sgt. Lee and other PLT officers. He didn’t know all of their names.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did PLT or Staff Sgt. Ferguson debrief you after the meeting about the content of the meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Fair enough. So I want to turn now to the deal with the protestors that was made later on by the mayor and the letters exchanged with Tamara Lich, you recall those events, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we're moving forward a little bit in time. And my understanding is that you learned through an executive briefing on February 13 that the City had been negotiating with a group of protestors; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you understand at that time the deal to be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So your understanding was the trucks are going to leave the residential areas and move onto Wellington; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to OPS00014455, these are your notes, and at page 43 -- yeah, if we can go to -- let see -- okay, if we can keep going down? There we go. So at 1315, you see that’s the exec meeting where you're informed ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- about these negotiations, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it says: "City has been negotiating with protestors directly, protestor representative and lawyers, remove of all trucks south of Wellington involved an SJAM. Will no longer keep staging area, Coventry and other staging areas." So your understanding at this time was that the staging areas would also be relocated; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was it understood at this time that the trucks would be relocating on to Wellington Street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you’re saying, at this point in time, 1:15 on February 13th, it was not understood that the trucks would be relocating onto Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So at this meeting, what would have been the discussion? They’re going to leave the residential areas and where are they going?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I’m going to take you to Acting Supt. Bernier’s scribe notes at OPS00010635, and these are his notes of the same meeting. So sometimes when we see different people’s notes, we get a clearer picture of what was said in the meeting because everybody seems to think different things are important to write down, so it can be sometimes a helpful tool. If we can go to page 11 -- yeah, keep going. Okay, we’ll have to go up a bit because it’s somewhere in here. Yeah, we’ll keep going up. Yeah, there we go. So the second part of that -- so we’ll just go up to see the timestamp. Oh, okay, we’ll go up to the other page. So it’s around 3:20. It’s between 3:20 and 3:35, so let’s keep going down -- sorry, 1:35, keep going down. Okay, right there. So it says: "Mayor would then agree…" So now this has been -- the discussion has happened to take those trucks out of south of Wellington, and then it says: "Mayor would then agree, prepare to meet, and listen to their concerns and pass them along further up in gvmt." I think that says “government”. Do you recall this part of the discussion, that the mayor would agree to listen to their concerns and pass them along further up in government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, if we go back to your notes, OPS00014455, and if we go to page 44, and if we go down -- okay, we’ll keep going down a bit. Oh, okay, keep going up, I guess. Oh, sorry, page 44; we’re at 34 -- 44, yeah, that’s better. Yeah, so see that fourth dash down: "There may be some groups that don’t move, Rideau-Sussex."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says: "Chief request…" And there are, if we go down a little bit, four, five -- keep going down. Let’s see. Yeah, we’ve got five points there.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, so what was your understanding, then, about the Rideau and Sussex group being part of this negotiation, being part of the deal to leave?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was it your understanding that in accordance with the negotiation, all of the stages areas, including Rideau and Sussex, had to be cleared?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then we see the Chief has indicated some requests.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was he saying here with respect to the negotiations? What were his concerns at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Supt. Bernier today testified that he generally did not have concerns and that it would accelerate his plan to have this deal go through, but that he was concerned -- he privately told Insp. Springer that he was concerned that this could be a rouse to get more trucks onto Wellington. Do you recall any concerns being raised at this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in your witness statement, you say that Acting Supt. Bernier expressed concerns about the City negotiating an agreement separate from OPS.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But if we see the notes in the meeting, he says he has no concerns; he adopted that today in his evidence with the caveat that he had this side discussion with Insp. Springer. But it sounds like in the meeting itself, he did not express concerns, but you indicate that he expressed concerns. So did he express them privately to you outside of this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is 1:15 Exec Demo Meeting on the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what were those concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In your witness statement, you said that he had concerns about the City negotiating separate from OPS. What can you tell me specifically about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you share any concerns about the City negotiating separately from OPS at this time when you learned about it on the 13th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So generally you were positive and supportive of it even though you saw some risk; is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And I understand that at that time, shortly after this meeting, you were asked by Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson to be the police liaison with respect to these negotiations; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what did you understand your role as liaison to be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So attend the meeting and report back with any concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you role include ensuring that the deal was in accordance with OPS’ overall strategic plan at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And at this time, though, the deal was kind of a little bit high level?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So at this time, two letters had been exchanged, I believe, at 3:00 p.m. on that day, on the 13th, that was made public.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you were also there to assist with the details; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, you -- were you aware that at the time, the Integrated Planning Group were working on a plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so were you asked to ensure that the -- whatever deal was finally struck would fit within that plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but it sounds like at that meeting there was general enthusiasm for the arrangement because it would assist in the OPS's plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did your role as liaison include negotiating terms?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who were you to report back to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this time - - by this time, had Superintendent Bernier expressed concerns to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand that after you informed Staff Sergeant Ferguson and OPP PLT Giselle Walker about the letters, and you ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- sent those letters to them, so ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that they would have awareness?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did they express any concerns back to you, that you recall, at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then your notes also indicate that at 4:46 p.m., you were asked by Chief Sloly to attend a meeting. So at this time, you had asked by Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson to act as liaison ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- and then a little bit later, you got a call, I believe, from Chief Sloly asking you to attend this meeting with Steve Kanellakos and Kim Ayotte from the City; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at that time, did the Chief express any concerns to you about the arrangement?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did he explain what your role in that meeting should be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did he ask you to report back to him when it was done?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what did you see as OPS's role with respect to these negotiations?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So then you would be involved in the logistics; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you would need to allocate resources to carry that plan out; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is that meeting took place at around 5:30 on the 13th of February at City Hall ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And according to your summary, in attendance were Steve Kanellakos, Kim Ayotte, Tom Marazzo, Chris Barber, Joe Jansen, Eva Chipiuk and Ryan Olson. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now at page 47 of your notes, you say -- yeah, right there, "They stated that their plan was to move all the trucks onto Wellington." So was this the first time that this move to Wellington was raised?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And was this because the letters talk about leaving the residential areas and maintaining only onto Wellington ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So based on the letters, it was your understanding that they would be ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- relocating? Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then you say ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I think I got it. "Group explained that they didn't control the Coventry location. That..."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"...that was controlled by Mike Clark." Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
They also didn't control Rideau Sussex group Farfadaa." You see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then it sounds like those were now being excluded from the locations that were going to be moved; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then, "I asked what happens to the trucks that don't fit on Wellington." And then it says, "Agreed to west limit is Bay Street and east limit as south lane of Elgin." See that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So, first of all, what was the answer to what happens to the trucks that don't fit on Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And where would they go?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you knew that they wanted to -- a lot of them wanted to be closer to ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Parliament Hill ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- to have that kind of photo and to be kind of in that area; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But it was thought that maybe some people would go to Arnprior; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so here, and when we look at the limits, it's Bay Street on the west side?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Just out here; correct? And south lane of Elgin on the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- east side; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the letters actually state that the western limit would be SJAM; isn't that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So why was it restricted to Bay?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you mentioned a map, so we might as well go there. OPS00014929. And I believe this might be the map that you're referring to. If we can zoom out a bit? Yeah. Okay. Let's maybe zoom in a little bit now. Yeah, okay. So does that map look familiar?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is this the map that you took to the meeting with you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we look closely at the map, we can see there's some markings in pen at around Bay Street and Elgin. Do you see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who made those markings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you made the markings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go back to your notes, OPS00014455, and we're at page 47. If we go down? And then it says, "Freedom Convoy group needs to sort out who is staying on Wellington and who is leaving." Now is this because it was understood that not everybody could be on Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- was the group's response?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you said that your understanding was that some people wanted to leave but were blocked in ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- by other trucks. Can you explain that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then in your witness statement, you said that protest organizers wanted to be allowed to bring in more fuel to keep trucks running. And I believe there is some notations to that effect in your notes as well. According to you, you would not agree with this.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you explain what they were looking to do?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were putting some constraints on this deal, it sounds like.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And then even though the letter said that the western limit on Wellington would be S.JAM, you indicated that not, it was going to be Bay; right? Is that -- was that a safety issue as well, or what was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you’re doing -- sorting out some of the details and negotiating some of the nuances of this deal. Is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. On page 49 -- keep going down. “I asked the group what the exit strategy for them to leave Ottawa and open up all streets.” And then it says: “Meeting with federal government. They have been ignored by federal government and Prime Minister.” So what was that discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then this deal was not meant to bring an end to the demonstrations. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And actually, you say that just the next point: “I explained that even if the group moved to Wellington, they can’t stay there forever. At some point there will be a line in the sand and will require action by the police. Protest group understood.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So they understood that this negotiation was not meant to bring an end to the demonstration because they said what they actually wanted was a meeting with the Prime Minister; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you also explained to them that “At some point, you will have to leave Wellington. We’re not going to just allow you to stay there indefinitely”. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did anyone at the city -- any of the city reps, Mr. Ayotte or Mr. Kanellakos, ever say that the trucks could stay on Wellington definitely?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you suggest that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So my understanding is that once this meeting ended, the protest group was to go out and speak to the truckers on the ground to get buy-in on this deal. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what’s your understanding of those discussions? Were they successful? Was there resistance? Was there acceptance? Do you have a sense for ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand also that after the meeting, you called Acting Superintendent Bernier and Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson to update them about the meeting that had just transpired; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was their response at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So you think that -- your understanding was that some groups would nevertheless stay. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And now, Chief Sloly had been the one to ask you to attend this meeting. Did you also report back to him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, we expect Chief Sloly to say that he did not know at the time that trucks would be moving into the red zone. Rather, he thought they would go to areas south of Wellington, go home or to areas outside of the city. What’s your response to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we also expect him to say that he was not aware that any trucks moved onto Wellington in front of Parliament and that that would have been contrary to his understanding of the negotiations. He -- we expect him to say that relieving pressure in the residential areas was benefit, but adding additional trucks to the red zone could have increased public safety issues. Did he express anything along those lines to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so is it your understanding, then, that he would have understood that that was -- that was the arrangement?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he said that moving trucks to Wellington could -- or we expect him to say could increase public safety issues. Did you share in any of those concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, earlier we saw that the Parliamentary Protective Service on February 8 when they learned about a possible move from Rideau and Sussex to Wellington had expressed some concerns. At this time, did you indicate to anyone that we should notify PPS or did you notify Mr. Brookson at PPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is at 8:30 that evening -- so the meeting happens with the protestors and Mr. Kanellakos and Mr. Ayotte at 5:30 and then, at 8:30, there’s a meeting in which you’re updating and briefing several people on teams. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I wanted ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It is a perfect time, yes. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So, Supt. Drummond, I want to take you now to the following day, 14th of February, Monday, which is when the movement of the trucks actually started. Now, I understand on Monday morning there was bit of confusion about what the deal was going to be and what OPS’ role would be; is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so -- and to your understanding, what was the -- what was the confusion or the misunderstanding there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so that concern, or that misunderstanding or confusion, that was brought up the morning of February 14th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
On the 15th, okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So let’s go to February 14th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The 13th in the evening, we know that the meeting with -- that you attended took place and the following Monday, February 14th, was when the movement of the trucks, according to this deal, was going to start. My understanding that on that morning, there was a bit of unclarity about what the deal was; in fact, the trucks didn’t start moving until about 1:00 p.m., right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But within OPS there was some confusion about what the deal was as well; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Well, maybe you can help us out, then, if I can take you to OTT00010455. And you probably haven’t seen this before. This is a chat with members of the NCRCC reporting to City officials about what’s going on on the ground. Can we see that in native form; it might be easier. Oh, there we go, thank you. And if we can go to page 22, and if we go to -- okay, so we see there “Todd Piper”. Do you know who he is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But he was ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
He worked for the City and he was on NCRCC, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so he’s giving an update here to other City official and EOC representatives and he says: "Good morning, all. Here’s the latest. Work beginning on the deal negotiated between the Mayor and the Freedom Convoy President to move trucks from residential neighbourhoods to Wellington and SJAM. Confusion unfolded into the evening over whether the deal was on." And here, Mr. Piper’s describing some -- what you were referring to, some confusion with the protest groups about whether the deal was on or not on; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go further down, he says: "These conflicting directions are likely to hinder progress and cooperation by those trucks aligned with the official Freedom Convoy Group, not to mention the challenges in dealing with the numerous independent splinter groups." And then, at the bottom, he says: "No specific details have been shared with us by OPS re: traffic management at this point but they have confirmed that once the vehicles start to move, side streets and exits will be fully blocked to prevent vehicles from deviating from their planned route." And then at 9:26 there, he says: "Correction, OPS has shared their draft plan, still not formally approved by their commander, with City staff here at the NCRCC. Their focus this morning is on getting vehicles to leave the core, not on repositioning trucks along Wellington and SJAM as originally thought." Keep going down: "The draft plan appears to focus largely on diverting vehicles eastbound on Laurier Avenue West to Nicholas and then to the eastbound offramp. Once all willing vehicles have left, the PLT will then work with the organizers at a later time to reposition the remaining vehicles along Wellington and SJAM as part of a separate phase or operation." But this is bit different from what you had discussed with the protesters the night before; isn’t that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you're not aware of any other issues that arose that morning within OPS, it was the protesters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
My understanding is that morning at 11:00 a.m. there was a meeting that you were in attendance. It's not in your notes, if you're going to look at your notes. There seems to be a gap in your notes between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. for February 14, but we have other people's notes that seem to indicate you were in attendance.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I'll take you to OPS00011045. And these are Acting Superintendent Bernier's scribe notes for February 14, and at -- I'll take you to page 13. The meeting started at 11:00. It's further down, but if you go to page 13. So if you want to see the beginning of that meeting, it's further up, but this is now in the middle of this meeting, and it goes until a little bit after 1:00 p.m., and you can see there at 1312, the Event Commander, which would be Superintendent Bernier, is that right ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- at the time? Says something to you that says "Drummond" there at 1312; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, if you look at the notation, it says: "Tasking Drummond to advise D/C Ferguson about PPS. Potential concern that they have with this."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So do you recall being in attendance at this meeting? And maybe we can go up to 11:00 a.m., the timestamp, just to show kind of the beginning of the meeting. It seems like it was a long meeting, a lot happened there. Okay, yeah. So if we go up a little bit more. So there's an end of meeting at 1025, and then there is a meeting starting at 1050, and it kind of goes on from there. It looks like Giselle Walker is there. The Event Commander... If we go down. And then more people are seen there in that meeting. If you can down, please. Does this refresh your memory about this meeting at around 11:00 a.m. on February 14?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It's an ongoing -- it looks like it's an ongoing meeting, but it looks like they're speaking about this issue. And you do seem to be in the room, since that is attributed to you that the Event Commander says to you that he's tasking you to advise DC Ferguson about PPS and potential concerns.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you don't recall being asked by the Event Commander to advise the Deputy Chief about potential concerns that PPS would have with the move?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we can go back to page 13. So it looks like they're making arrangements there. And if you go down to 1327, right there. It says -- it looks like you are saying to the Event Commander: "Prime Minister is considering an Emergency Act." Do you see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this was something that would've been discussed in -- with this group?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
This is the 14th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If you don't recall.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, there's certainly discussions that seem ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- to be happening; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you know, if you have a chance ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And -- so do you recall having this discussion with the Event Commander on the 14 about the Emergency Act potentially being invoked?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The 14th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I believe it was the 14th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you know who told you this, how you got this information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did that indicate that there was likely some significant POU action that would be commencing shortly thereafter? Is that what you understood from this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I'll take you back to your notes, OPS00014455. And we'll go to page 55. And by this time, this is 3:40 p.m., the movement of trucks has started. Your notes indicated it started at around 1:00 p.m.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this is a few hours in. So if we go to page 55. Yeah: "Update meeting with Integrated Command Team at NCRCC." And you say: "26 trucks moved to Wellington from O'Connor." And then you write: "Issues on Bank Street with group not wanting to move. - Traffic/PLT on Kent tried to move to Wellington." And then you say: "No movement of trucks offsite or to Embrun."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So what are you indicating here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it your understanding that no trucks left the city, not relocated, but just outright left?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go further down: "Looking for POU options on areas outside of Wellington." Why not on Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So there were POU options being considered at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so now, you're saying that the POU options are going to be restricted to areas outside of Wellington; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And that was because, as you say, you had just relocated them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you couldn't then just take them out ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So how long could they stay there without POU action?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But certainly on the 14th you didn't feel or the call that you had, or this meeting, it wasn’t felt that, at that time, a POU action could take place on Wellington.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to the next page, 56, at 5:00 p.m. there, “Exec Demo update.” So there’s another update and we know from other people’s notes that Chief Sloly was in attendance, Deputy Chief Bell, was in attendance, Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson was in attendance, Supt. Bernier, Insp. Lucas, I believe Supt. Patterson was also in attendance, based on the Chief’s notes of this meeting. Does that sound about right to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, if we go to the middle of that page, it says: “Plan enforcement for vehicles south of Wellington.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So, again, this is -- there was concern, then, that having put these trucks onto Wellington, POU action could not take place at that time, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you see this, or did anybody in the meeting express any view that this would be -- this was tying OPS’s hands, with respect to the options that they had now?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So when did trucks stop being relocated onto Wellington? We know it started at 1:00 p.m. on the 14; when did it end?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So once it got dark, and that was it? And that never resumed, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I’ll take you to the Chief’s notes of this meeting, OPS00014566. And we’ll go to page 9. Okay. So we actually just go up a little bit to show what this is. Oh, sorry; page 9 at the bottom. Sorry; let’s keep going down, yeah. All right, there it is. So 1701 “Demo F-22 briefing.” So this is the same meeting that we saw your notes about.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we look at the second bullet point, it says, “TRISH”; and I assume that’s Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It says: “PPS not happy with trucks on Wellington.” You see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you recall that being part of the discussion in that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Yes, and actually he reached out to the Chief about half an hour before this meeting started. Did the Chief relay that in this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, I don’t think so.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And look at the last bullet point there, “Had to pivot due to new,” and unfortunately it’s cut off there. Do you have any sense for what that may be referring to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Was that part of the discussion in that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 10 of this document, on the third bullet, it says: “We are drawing on the resources given to us.” So was this an expression -- it seems to me, maybe I’m reading this incorrectly but somebody reading this it seems to suggest that implementing this deal is taking up resources. Is that how you read that as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the next bullet says: “We will need some significant legal advice regarding the Mayor’s position that they can be on Wellington.” Now, this wasn’t just the Mayor’s position, was it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But you would agree with me that OPS seemed to support this plan. Certainly gave a lot of resources to make that happen, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in this meeting, why was it felt that legal advice was needed; what was the issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but what was the issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in this meeting it sounds like the issues that PPS had raised were discussed; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the Chief indicate at all that he had had a call with Steve Kanellakos right before this meeting -- and it’s in these notes but I won’t take you to it -- where he told Steve Kanellakos that it was over?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I can take you to it. It’s on page 9 at 1652, yeah: “Call with Steve K. Got off phone with Brookson.” He’s from PPS; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“2 concerns - does the level of govt have ability to negotiate and direct police” So I think this is indicating the concerns that perhaps Brookson identified.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
“Are they directing you - no they are not.” And then it says: “We weren’t involved in negotiation. We don’t have a say in it, but it fits in our plan. The devil is in the details how many trucks, how close are they going to be, if you want to be involved, you should have been briefed. I briefed our people and RCMP.” And if you go just to the -- they have more discussion about it: “I don’t think he is going to throw a crowbar into this, but he want to be at the table. He gets it that [it] is done.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That’s how I read that as well.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was that discussed at the meeting that you had later on, that 1701 demo briefing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But fair to say that there were concerns raised at this demo meeting at 5:00 p.m. ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- on the 14th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say that by this time now, no more trucks are being relocated; this is kind of the end of it, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And now the next day on February 15, there is a call at 9:30 a.m. and I think you talked about that. This is the meeting that -- where the issues that are here. And if we go to your notes, OPS00014455, and we go to the 12:00 p.m. mark -- there’s a meeting on 9:30, then there’s another meeting at noon with the Integrated Command Table.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it’s page 59. Okay let’s keep going down. Let’s keep going to 12. There it is. “Meeting with Integrated Command Table,” and it lists people that are there: Representatives from the RCMP, OPP, and OPS; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And some of the members of the integrated command table -- the integrated planning group, rather -- Inspector Springer is there too, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, perfect. And if we go to the next page, page 60, and the last bullet point there, so now these are discussions that are being had. If we go down -- okay. So if we go up a little bit more, just to the one before to get some context: "PLT need to clarify what OPS is doing with the providing safe movement of trucks to Wellington, as per the City agreement with protestor Freedom Convoy, not facilitating. Agreement is with City only to provide safe movement."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says: "Problem is the change with Emergency Act and not orders yet. Moving trucks so area that we may want to do enforcement on later." Can you explain that note?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And with "order", you mean the regulations that would come with the invocation of the Act; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the invocation of the Act then seemed to imply some POU action of enforcement which is what is noted there, and that moving the trucks to that area may not be a good idea if you're looking to do enforcement now that the Act has been invoked; is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So we can agree then that the reason the relocation of the trucks from residential areas to Wellington, the reason that stopped was because the invocation of the Act changed OPS' priorities and objectives?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But there was room on Wellington. It was not full at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, your witness statement indicates that Wellington was full, in your witness statement.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I'm just trying to marry that with your evidence right now.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I'm going to take you to Supt. Bernier's scribe notes from that noon meeting on February 15, OPS00011410. And so this is the same meeting at noon on February 15, and if we go to page19 of those notes, at 12:38, see there, it says Drummond? "Do we even still have room left on Wellington, Elgin, Bay?" And then Inspector Lucas says, "I think there is, but we'll check cameras and assess." And then who's Hodgekins, Hodgins?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Says: "Are we complicating the problem on Wellington? No more room on Wellington, go home. No room, stay here, not helping us." So what's the discussion there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Fair enough. So if we go to page 22 at 13:09 -- yeah, at the bottom there -- Lucas reports back, "Gaps on Wellington," and he indicates where the gaps are there. Do you see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So really, the trigger for stopping the relocations was not that Wellington was full? You would agree with me on that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But we can there that it was not full, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So OPS stopped -- made a decision on the 14 in the evening to stop facilitating that deal, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But on the 14, the chief is telling Steve Kanellakos it's done, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That was the meeting with Mr. Kanellakos. He gets it that it's done.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That was earlier he had spoken to Larry Brookson. But in any event, in that meeting on the 14 in the evening where there was that discussion, it was essentially decided that OPS was no longer going to facilitate the movement of trucks onto Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I don't know that we have a lot of time for that, but sure, I will see if we can bring that back up. If we go to OPS00014566? So if we go to page 9. Okay. So call with Steve K at 1652. If we go down, so this seems to be a discussion with Steve K., and the chief is relaying a discussion he had with Larry Brookson, but he's also speaking to Steve K.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Fair enough. And if we go to the meeting that happens right after, we go further down to -- yeah, the demo briefing, "Okay. Had to pivot due to new," and we know at this time PPS is not happy with the trucks on Wellington, according to what Deputy Chief Ferguson is saying on the second bullet point. And if we go further down, we go further down, okay. Let's go further down. Yeah. And before that point was where they wanted to get legal advice about the mayor's deal. If we just go up a little bit? Yeah. There we go. Now, I lost it, but there was a point about seeking legal advice.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah, exactly. So are you saying that there was still a consideration at this time to continue moving vehicles?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, because they had heard that the movement had stopped?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I guess I'm asking about your understanding of this meeting that happened at 5:00 p.m. on the 14. Was it decided at that time that OPS would no longer be facilitating the movement of the trucks? We know they didn’t move after that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it was on the 15 it was decided that that would be the end of it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I think we agree that there was room on Wellington but eventually it would have run out; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this deal was not meant to end the demonstration, was it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Could this have been a first step towards a negotiated end to the demonstration?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But the meeting notes seemed to indicate that the primary concern here was the invocation of the Act, POU action on Wellington, potential future POU action on Wellington, the use of resources, and PPS concerns.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Hi, I have a few more questions for you. Now, in relation to what you were asked by counsel for former Chief Sloly, you indicated that your reason for believing that Chief Sloly knew that the deal was to move trucks onto Wellington and that the move actually happened was the letters exchanged between the Mayor and Tamara Lich. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I just want to take you to OPS00014566. And again, these are Chief Sloly's notes from February 14. We looked at them earlier. And if I can take you to page 8. If we go down. So we see here, we talked about the call that he had with Larry Brookson, and Brookson says: "[T]rying to get understand[ing] the meeting to completely fill up Wellington St. Chief briefed his team. Understood that the intersect team would then brief everyone including PPS." And if we keep going down. And then he says -- Brookson says: "[P]refer negation to going hard in. For an administrator to reach-out on their own and then permit the vehicles to sardine in on Wellington St. [t]his was purely political." And the Chief says: "We were not given any level of details. Rob Drummond is our liaison at the table with the City. We advise him that Brookson will have full access to Rob Drummond." Now, first of all, did Larry Brookson reach out to you after the 14 at all?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go down to page 9, right before the redaction, if we keep going. Now, this is the 5:00 p.m. demo briefing and we know that Chief Sloly is there because these are his notes. And if we look in the middle there, "We need some significant legal advice regarding the mayor's position that they can be on Wellington." So does this refresh your memory about whether the chief knew that trucks had been relocated onto Wellington, at least by the 14?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So that was explicitly stated at this 5:00 p.m. meeting, as we can see here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I want to take you now in response to what my friend, Mr. Miller, asked you about regarding whether any protestors who wanted to move were prevented from moving, prevented from moving, exactly. If I can take you to your notes, OPS00014455, and I want to take you to page 60. And so this is the meeting where the issued are being discussed on the 15th. It's the noon meeting on February 15 with all of the people that we had indicated. And if we go actually to page 62, and then we're going to go back to page 60, so at 1329, after the meeting, you say: "I called Trish Ferguson and notified her of the integrated command table's position on the truck movement to Wellington, and the reason why to stop." And you have four kind of bullet points there. PLT position, advice from Dave Springer, PPS issues and concerns, and then lastly, Emergency Act, no orders yet, but is concerned may contravene. See that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you will agree with me that it doesn’t say in any of those four points that the reason to stop is Wellington is full, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it doesn’t say there that the reason to stop is because protestors no longer want to move, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Well, that’s not a notation that you made in any of your notes, right? There's no notation in your notes that protest groups are no longer moving, there's not one more truck that wants to move, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I want to take you now to OPS00014455. Sorry, I'm there. Sorry. I want to take you to -- I wanted to take you to John Ferguson's notes, and I thought that’s where we were.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. Well, he's acknowledged. I don’t think I need to go back. But I do want to go to John Ferguson's notes, and I just need to make sure I have a reference here for that meeting. I had taken you there earlier. I'm just going to find the reference in my notes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. That is probably what it is, yes. Thank you. I'll know it when I see it. Yes, that’s it. Thank you very much. And if I can take you to page 75, at the bottom of the page, right before the 1330. Right. It says, "Room for additional trucks on Wellington Street. Security concerns expressed by PPS/Supreme Court." And these are Staff Sgt. Ferguson's notes of the same meeting at 12:00 p.m. Do you see that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he's acknowledging here that there is room on Wellington to move more vehicles, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And finally, I want to take you to Supt. Bernier's scribe notes from this meeting as well, OPS00011410, at page 22. At 1305, the Event Commander, Supt. Bernier, says, "Deal was --" I think that may be bartered "-- before the PM declared Emergency Measure Act." And see, there's an arrow. "Will no longer support agreement."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you agree with me that in none of these meetings, and certainly not in this meeting at 12:00 noon -- because I've read everybody's notes that was at this meeting -- it was not indicated that protestors were no longer moving vehicles, correct, that they weren’t wiling to relocate? That was not mentioned in this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That the issue was that you could not find any more trucks to move. That was not the issue here, right? There likely were other trucks that were willing to move, there was room on Wellington, but it was OPS's decision to stop implementing the deal, as it indicates here, "Will no longer support agreement. Deal was bartered before the PM declared the Emergency Measure Act," as it says there, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Good afternoon, Mr. Sloly. Nice to see you again.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
For the record, it’s Natalia Rodriguez for the Commission.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I’m going to pick up where my colleague, Mr. Au, left off with your resignation. Can I ask, was it your decision to resign?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Board ask you to resign?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I believe Chair Deans told us when she was here last week that she did not lose confidence in you. But you’re saying you felt that she had lost confidence in you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did the Board, anyone at the Board, or the Chair, express that they had lost confidence in you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I assume you're familiar -- and maybe I shouldn't assume -- are you familiar with the evidence that she gave on that exchange last week?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, maybe you can tell us how it transpired from your perspective?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as she tells it, at that time, you told her that you would not resign, but then the next morning, you called her to say that you had reconsidered; is that accurate, from your perspective?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what made you change your mind?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did anyone within the City of Ottawa or the Government of Ontario or the Government of Canada express to you that you should resign?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, it's more about did anybody tell you, did anybody put pressure on you or suggest to you that you should resign, that at the time, obviously, you would have been aware of that if somebody had said that to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In all three levels?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any political pressure on the Board to seek your resignation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
My understanding is that motion didn’t make it to the floor. There was not a vote on that motion.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. Now, I want to go back to the beginning, if I may, and just go through some of the events with you kind of from the municipal/Board lens, if you will. So I want to talk a little bit about pre-arrival intelligence, and you talked about that with my colleague, Mr. Au. And I want to just talk about what was -- what information was relayed to the Board with respect to what could be expected before the convoy arrived. Now, Mr. -- Supt. Abrams of the OPP confirmed in his evidence that on the 27th, there was an Intersect call and on that call, OPS confirmed that their planning was on the basis of assuming 3,000 trucks coming into the downtown. You're aware of that, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I believe Interim Chief Bell indicated in his witness summary that as the convoy drew closer, they were expecting 3,000 to 4,000 vehicles to arrive in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. And then I believe Inspector Lucas, in his evidence, confirmed that by January 26th, the OPS was expecting about 10,000 people on the 29th, on that side.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And so now I want to just, having that context, turn to what the Board understood would be the situation on the 26th when there was that Board meeting. And my understanding is that the January 26th Board meeting was the only pre-arrival, pre-convoy meeting that dealt with the convoy; is that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. My understanding is it wasn’t discussed in any level of detail, but you can agree with me then that this would have been the briefing meeting in which substantively, the details would have been discussed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if we can turn to the minutes of that meeting, OPB00001257, and these are the minutes of that meeting. And I want to take you to page 5. So now, this is the portion where -- and we can scroll up, actually, because just to note that there are no kind of numbers that we can see there being given -- if we can keep going up. So these are -- yeah. In any event, there's no actual numbers that are provided, but there's a question from one of the councillors at page 5 regarding the numbers. So I'll just take you to page 5 then, Councillor Brockington. And then the question was raised regarding whether the Service had an idea of how many people and vehicles were expected. "The Service noted that although the information is in flux, the truck movement began on the West Coast and had swelled and shrunk as it has travelled. The Service is also monitoring other groups expected to participate in demonstrations over the weekend. The Service was anticipating in the 1,000 to 2,000-person range; however, they indicated that it could change even with an hour." So by this time, there was a plan in place assuming 3,000 trucks entering the downtown core. Why wasn’t that information given to the Board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I mean, the question is kind of very directly put, how many people and vehicles are expected? And the answer appears to be 1,000 to 2,000 people.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you were present at this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so by this time, you would have known that that was the expectation or that was what the plan was based on, 3,000 vehicles, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in terms of numbers, this was the only pre-arrival briefings, so there were no other updates that were provided to the Board about the number of people or vehicles expected?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go to page 2, if we look at the first paragraph, “They indicated…” -- I’m just looking in the second line there: "They 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 remain through Sunday. Their destination remained Parliament Hill. Questions regarding counter-protests and protest groups was expressed." (As read). So this was the information that was provided in terms of the expected stay of the convoy; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But at this point, there was at least some indication from intelligence that there was the possibility that they could stay longer, right, through the Hendon Reports and other ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding was that there was in-camera portion to this meeting.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I guess my question is -- the OPS had much more detailed information about what was expected by this point in time. So my question is, why not share that with the board as, you know, they are tasked with oversight and assisting in helping to prepare for these types of events?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So we did ask Councillor Deans about this and she testified that she didn’t know to ask for an in-camera portion because she wasn’t aware that there was additional information that could have been provided in-camera.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so I understand you’re saying there were other updates with the chair but in terms of the board as a body, this was the one briefing that they received and there were no updated briefings before the arrival of the convoy as more information became available; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, I want to speak about the injunction to the City -- or you had a call with the Solicitor David White on January 30th about the possibility of seeking an injunction. Ultimately, we know that the City did seek an injunction and was successful but by that time, it was quite further along in the events and the injunction was not actually ever used as an enforcement tool. And we’re trying to understand why that’s the case. So you recall you had a call with Mr. White on January 30th about the possibility of the City seeking an injunction; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And so what exactly were you seeking from him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was your understanding of what the injunction would be for -- an injunction for what?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you felt that that would fit within OPS’ overall plan to have an injunction from the City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, my understanding is that, at that time, there were enforcement opportunities that were not being taken because of lack of resources and potentially the concern that it might incite the crowd, if I will.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I think we can agree that enforcement was not being consistently done on every occasion for various reasons, including lack of resources, potential safety concerns, et cetera; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So at that time, there were multiple bylaw, Highway Traffic Act violations so I’m trying to understand what more -- you know, considering that there were violations happening that were not being enforced, what would the injunction then add to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Fair enough. So I’ll take you OTT00029695, and this is an email from David White, City solicitor, to Steve Kanellakos, who’s the City Manager, and this was after his discussion with you, Mr. White’s call with you. He emailed the City Manager copying others at the City about the discussion that he had just had with you. So that’s the context for this email in case you haven’t had the chance to see it before. So he says: "I just got off the call with Chief Sloly and his team that is coordinating the OPS response to the protest on the issue of an injunction." So then he says, “This is what they’re looking for.” And then if we go to the second paragraph -- oh, third paragraph, excuse me: "I also took the opportunity to explain to the chief that any request for an injunction would need to be founded in public safety concerns. While the OPS’ main concern seems to be around noise, traffic impacts, public frustration based on the idea that the police should be doing something about the protest, mounting costs, air pollution, et cetera, there does not yet seem to be significant violence associated with the event, nor much in the way of public safety concern…" So I just want to pause there for a second. Is that what you told the City solicitor on January 30th, that there was not much of a public safety concern at that point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you did not express to him that there were no significant public safety concerns at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he says “according to the police”. So do you have any sense where he would have gotten that information from?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So there seems to be a bit of a theme of conflicting narratives here about the degree of public safety, especially in the first week -- in the first weekend. So on the one hand, we have the City being told that, you know, enforcing bylaws and any laws, really, was too dangerous for public safety issues, that there was the risk of violence, there was the risk of injury and death. And I can take you to some notes where that’s indicated. But on the other hand, the City was also told -- at least in this email, seems to have been told that there wasn’t much in terms of a public safety risk and we’ve seen, actually, from some EOCCG, which is the group that manages the emergency response on a municipal level -- that group was putting out updates every day and they used language such as “party-like atmosphere”, “it’s festive”. So there seems to be these two competing narratives, was this a tinderbox waiting to explode or was this a family-friendly carnival with bouncy cases. And so I wanted to get your perspective on those two narratives.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, my understanding is that in terms of the discussions of the injunction, the City got to the point where they were looking at potentially seeking an injunction for various things, but they required OPS to provide them information that they can then use to support an application for an injunction. And that was never provided, according to the City witnesses that we heard from. Do you have any sense of why that is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Now, I understand that you were looking to have the City exercise kind of political influence at different levels of government in order to assist in getting resources and there were various -- various things you had asked them to look into and to do on that February 6th email where you told them, you know, “We need 1,800 officers”. I believe in one of the -- and actually, maybe we should go to it, OTT00018172.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So the answer was “very”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Low.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this is the email of February 6. If we go to the first email of the thread -- right. And go up a little bit so we can see who it’s from. Yeah, right there. So it’s John Steinbachs from the OPS, and it’s to Chair Deans and the Mayor and others in Ottawa, and you as well. And if we go down, Chair Deans and Mayor Watson: “Please find below the list of Ottawa Police Service asks to the federal, provincial and municipal levels of government that was requested yesterday by the Board.” So as my colleague pointed out, on the 5th of February you were asked to provide a number of resources that you required as well as other requirements that you needed in order to bring this to an end. And if we go down, we see that you have some asks there from the City. And I wanted to just briefly ask you about a few of these, if we go down. Okay. So here -- and actually, this is an interesting question because I think we touched on it earlier but maybe didn’t get a clear answer. So it says there, “The Service requires 1,800 additional staffing and enforcement resources.” So this is, I think, the first reference that we see to the 1,800 ask. And this is on February 6th. I believe it’s at 4:07 p.m. There’s later a meeting that you have with Chair Deans and the Mayor in which you provide them that number as well, and then the following day you send them an email with a chart. You might recall that chart, and that was on February 7th. So the question was, you had been asked by the Board to come up with the number of resources that you required to end the protest on February 5th. And on February 6th at 4:30, you send this email. So at what point did you determine the number of additional resources you needed and how? Because my understanding is the meeting that happened later with your command team was after this email was sent in the evening at 7:45 p.m.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So your understanding is that February 5th in the evening you would have had a meeting ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Yeah, I just don’t think we have in our documents a meeting on February 5th in the evening where resource numbers were discussed, so I think that’s the question that we’re kind of left wondering with. And so if we look at the third bullet point, “Professional mediation and negotiation capacity”, what were you asking for there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so with that in mind, you’re asking the City to exercise its political influence and to look into professional mediation, even. You’re aware on February 6th it’s also the day that the City of Ottawa declared a state of emergency. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so according to some of the documents that we’ve seen and the evidence, the expressed intent of that declaration or at least one of the reasons for that declaration was to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve the situation in Ottawa. Did you ask the Mayor to declare a state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. But it can exercise some political leverage, can it not?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. I wanted to just ask about the legal opinion that you had received in which you said you believed, based on that opinion, that you were not able to block access to trucks entering downtown. Did I get that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. How would you put it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. My understanding is that pre-convoy, or when the convoy arrived, we saw an opinion, in any event, that was dated January 28, and I assume you saw it sometime after that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that goes to the heart of my question. Councillor Fleury was here some time ago, a few weeks ago now, and he testified that at the pre-convoy briefing with you and the City Manager, the Mayor, Councillors, this was on January 26th, he had specifically asked about maintaining truck routes in the city, and you said to him, in answer to that question on the 26th, that you had a legal opinion that said that the Charter prevented you from doing that. That’s what he told us. So I want to understand what would have been the basis for your understanding that the Charter prevented that on the 26th of January when you didn’t receive the legal opinion until the 28th. Was there another legal opinion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you testified that by the 29th, on the Saturday, I thought I heard you say this morning, that the demonstration was an unlawful demonstration? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what did you mean by that? What were the laws broken?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can you give me a sense? Like are we talking Criminal Code violations?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are we talking about ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So by-law, Highway Traffic Act offences. Okay. So my question is, with respect to the first weekend, I think it could be assumed that 3,000 vehicles in the downtown core would lead, necessarily to Highway Traffic Act and by-law violations; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Within a limited space, would necessarily mean some violations, such as blocking traffic, parking illegally?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I’m talking about, you know, 3,000 tractor trailers and big heavy vehicles coming into the downtown in a space that had been designated for them to be there; right? But ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- they weren’t designated to be there to be legally parked. Clearly they were all going to be taking up lanes and preventing traffic and et cetera.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So then I’m just trying to understand what changed from the moment they arrived to the 29th. What additional violations would have occurred? It seems to me that by the time they arrived, those violations would have already been crystalized.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if by the 29th it had become an unlawful demonstration, why was access not prevented into the downtown core by the second weekend, the 5th of February, when additional convoys came and joined? By then, surely, you would have the authority ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was not my intention.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. The downtown core was never hardened, so to speak?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I want to turn to OPS00005665. And this -- these are notes from a command briefing on February 1st. And I’ll take you to page 3. And I think you had testified today that by the 30th, you had recognized some elements of an occupation, as opposed to a demonstration. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so it says, that first point: “If more demonstrators are expected back this weekend, early request for resources is required; decision on whether this is an occupation needs to be made by tomorrow; use experienced resources ie Rob Bernier and others - pull from sections” Why did there need to be a decision about how to kind of classify this kind of a demonstration, whether it was an occupation or not? What turned on that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. And if we can go to the bottom of page 2? And trying to find my reference. Yeah, just at the bottom. The third line from the bottom. “PLTs have done an excellent job in preventing rioting and de-escalation by overall position in change needs to happen; looking more like an occupation than a negotiated end…” If we could just keep going? “…too many photos of police with protestors/trucks - Chief would like this addressed” Now this -- you also conveyed this sentiment to the Mayor and to the Councillors on the 31st, explaining that you didn’t think that this was okay, photos being taken between police officers and protestors. So I just wanted to ask, Inspector Lucas testified this week that this was part of de- escalation, that this was trust building. It seems like you might have had a different view, so I just wanted to ask about that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I'll take you to OPS00005187, and this is notes of a meeting that you had with the mayor. So update from chief. And if we go to the bottom ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Michael Anderson sent these to John Steinbachs. It's points of the meeting that happened on the 31st, update from mayor to chief, and then there's -- you give an update first and then it looks like the mayor has some things to say after.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if we go to 7, if we go to page 7, and I believe there were councillors here at this meeting as well. So at 7(f), Councillor Menard says: "Curious on why certain behaviours are being allowed to continue. Not peaceful, need to move on from that language. Want services to be maintained and acts of hatred to be addressed. Residents should not feel intimidated. By law services should continue." And so (f) seems to be your answer. I had asked one of the witnesses who was answering these questions and I believe it was Mr. Kanellakos said that for the most part, you would answer these questions. And so the last line there, "Officers posing in images is unacceptable and are following up." Again ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- I can give you more context if you like. There's another notation, your last full day in office of February 14 when you also kind of addressed the same issue. And if it's helpful, I can take you to that, OPS00014566. And these are, I believe, your notes. And if we go to 1932 -- or sorry, 9:32 -- okay. So Chief's Morning Brief. If you look at the first point, Media Report 2XJTF2. Do you know what that reference is, what that is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "Were supporting the demo here in Ottawa, supporting the command and control of it, now being investigated internally. Pat Morris last night --- " I assume this means indicated; he was not indicted, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "Pat Morris last night indicated we might have a significant issue with police members being involved in demos." So I just wanted to ask about concept in general.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
How did -- the public was seeing this; the public was pushing back a little bit. And so what is your view on that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you think this might have contributed to the erosion of the residents' trust in the OPS?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I want to talk now about the role of the Board. How would you describe the Board's oversight function? What is the scope of their oversight?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what's your understanding of the Board's role in a major event?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do they have a role ongoing throughout the duration of a major event?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Can I take you to OPS00014484? And I'll take you to page 36. And I believe these are some of your notes. We've seen these before, notes about meetings that you've -- that you often make to yourself, and this one's dated February 5th. The subject line is "Call From Chair Deans". I understand here she's called you for a Board meeting and you say: "I advised that I was fully focused on the major demonstration and all other operational priorities. I can refuse a Board direction." I assume that means can't?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "I can't refuse a Board direction for a meeting, but I stated that I would put my ability to lead the Service in this critical operation in jeopardy, and should be delayed until Monday." So was it fair to say that these meetings were distracting you from your operational responsibilities?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And from her testimony last week, we understand that the Board started asking for more information, more details of an operational plan to bring an end to the demonstration as of about February 5th. There was some more pressure to provide that information. Would you -- is that a fair assessment?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I can take you to the meeting minutes of that Board meeting on February 5th, OPB00001264. And at page 5, paragraph 2: "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 what did you understand the Board to be requesting in terms of information at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you were not able to provide that to the board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So there wasn’t a fully formed plan ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that you could take - --
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So this meeting did go in-camera, and I’m going to take you to the in-camera meeting minutes, OPB0001647. And so at page 2, the 4th paragraph -- sorry, if we can -- oh, sorry, yeah, at the bottom, the last -- the paragraph at the bottom: "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." So I just want to marry that with the concept that by February 5th, there was not actually a well kind of conceived fully formed plan but the board is being told there is a comprehensive plan. So I just want to give you a chance to reconcile that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but they’re asking for a plan that would result in the end of the demonstration and you’re saying, “Well, there’s a comprehensive plan. Don’t worry.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, Councillor Deans testified that she understood there was an evolving plan but she was asking for details about a plan to end the demonstration, which was not provided to her.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So had there been that plan, or once that plan was developed, my understanding is the board never, never saw a plan, or even a high level, or even a summary of the plan. So even by the time it was developed, that was not provided to the board. So I just wanted to ask why that would be.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, I’m asking about your time, not about ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Interim Chief Bell.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was -- how was that being addressed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But your obligation to provide the board the information they need in terms of to be able to exercise their oversight function, that’s irrespective of whatever internal issues the board may be dealing with on its own; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is your evidence that the reason that more information on the operational plan was not provided to the board because you had confidentiality concerns about that board specifically?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so what were the other factors?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But a summary wasn’t provided either; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In terms of, like, a document which provides a high-level summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Well, Chair Deans testified that at times she did not have the information she needed in order to exercise her oversight function. Does that concern you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I’ll take you to OPS00011037, and these are again your notes. These are from February 11. And I’ll take you to page 6 of your notes. And if we got to 13:01, there, where it says: "Call back from Diane Deans, 13:01." And then it says: "Expectations for board meeting. Going to do like we did on Monday, minimum level. Cannot and won’t be drawn into what I cannot lawfully provide, i.e., staffing numbers, what the plans are. Need you to be clear and understanding about that." And if we keep going: "The response will be as much as we gave you on Monday. Cannot go into the confidential. Accusatory language in request for information that is unlawful for me to provide, you will not be provided. She is accusing us of not responding to crimes; we don’t respond to Twitter. She needs to report any threats. Was reported to Stephine Lemieux. Encourage the board to not ask questions which cannot be answered - operationally." So I want to ask you a few questions about that. It sounds like that was part of your exchange with Chair Deans on February 11. What did you mean by, “Going to do like we did on Monday, minimum level”? Is this -- are you referring to the amount of information that you’re going to give her?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So “minimum level”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you -- just to go up a little bit to the first part of that exchange. So when you say, “Cannot and won’t be drawn into what I cannot lawfully provide, i.e., staffing numbers, what the plans are,” you’re indicating there that the board is not entitled to those, right, staffing numbers and what the plans are?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Why is that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then you say, “Cannot go into the confidential.” In camera would have allowed you to go into the confidential.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But my question is; can’t you get into confidential matters in camera?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
February 11th.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you are saying you can give confidential information as long as it’s in camera.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what did you mean -- what did you understand to be unlawful for you to provide in terms of information, and what made it unlawful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In your view, as you sit here today, is there any information that you lawfully cannot provide an oversight board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Generally, the Board is entitled to any information ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- they need in order to ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I mean, the Board, as you know, takes an oath of confidentiality, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And I guess what I’m saying is that whatever Board -- issues the Board may have does not alleviate your responsibility to provide information that the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- Board needs, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you would agree with me, then, that under the Police Services Act, there’s no restriction on the information that can be provided, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. And so right now, there’s nothing specifically that you can point me to to say it would be -- it’s unlawful for me to provide this type of information, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, my understanding is that during these events the Board did not issue any formal directions to you, as it can sometimes do under the Police Services Act.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was a formal direction from the Board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So aside from that, did the Board ever specifically direct you to provide more information, as a direction?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, had they specifically directed you to provide them with a copy of the plan once it was then formulated, that 3.0 that we hear about, would that have been provided to the Board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, we’ve heard from some councillors that they were concerned about the ability of OPS to police other areas of the city was compromised during the convoy because all of the resources were concentrated in the downtown area. You’re aware of those concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I want to take you to the Morden Report, COM00000616. And we’ve talked before about the Morden Report, and I know you’re very familiar with it. So we’ll go to page 37.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it’s the independent review into the events of the G20, for those who may not be familiar, and it’s often referred to as the Morden Report; it was authored in 2012. And if we go to Recommendation 22: “The Board should review the Toronto Police Service’s continuity of service [plan] for major policing events. Where there is a large event that may impact upon the...Service’s ability to deliver regular policing officers in [in this case] Toronto, the Board should consult wit the Chief of Police concerning how continuity of service can be achieved. The Board should be provided with any plans developed by the Toronto Police Service to aid in the consultation.” And so I wanted to ask whether the Board was ever -- our Board, the Ottawa Police Services Board, was ever provided with plans with respect to the continuity of service in areas outside of the downtown core?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So they didn’t receive any plans, but informal briefing explaining what the plan was, essentially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. All right. I want to turn now to negotiations with the City and I think you’re aware, maybe you can explain whether you were aware, that on February 7th some protesters asked to meet with the City Manager in exchange for facilitating a move from the Rideau and Sussex intersection to Wellington. Were you aware of that at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So my understanding is that meeting between a City Manager and the protester in question was Mr. Marazzo, took place on February 8th, but then the move from Rideau and Sussex to Wellington never happened. And according to Supt. Drummond, who was here on Wednesday, he said that the move had not been approved, and I said, “By whom?” and he indicated that it had not been approved by Supt. Patterson or by yourself as well. So I just want to understand why that move would not have been approved.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And earlier than the 8th, my understanding is there was also a potential move from the Rideau and Sussex, again to Wellington, that had been negotiated by PLT after the January -- the first weekend, so it would have been around the Monday after that first weekend, the 31st. There was a PLT-negotiated potential move from Rideau and Sussex to Wellington at that earlier time. And according to Insp. Lucas, he said that that had been negotiated, but that the direction came from you to prevent that move from happening. So I wanted to ask about your ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And were you generally aware that the Parliamentary Protective Service had concerns about moving more trucks onto Wellington after that first weekend?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you first learned of negotiations between the City of Ottawa and protesters, I believe was around the 12th of February.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is it fair to say that you were generally receptive to the Mayor’s office negotiating with protesters to come up with some sort of negotiated solution?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So on February 12th, my understanding is you received a call from Steve Kanellakos advising you that over the last 24 hours there had been some discussions, and then you had a meeting after that with Deputy Chief Bell and Ms. Haneault to inform them of that call. And my understanding is that Mr. Kanellakos had indicated to you that these discussions were confidential because they were ongoing, they hadn’t been finalized yet. And my understanding is that in a subsequent meeting with Deputy Chief Bell and Ms. Huneault, you asked Deputy Chief Bell to also keep that information confidential; right? Did you see any -- did you have any concerns about having to tell him to keep it confidential? Were there any -- do you see any issues with that? The fact that you asked him to not share that with anybody else?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you thought it was reasonably why?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And since then, your view, you’re saying, has changed. So what’s your view of that now?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Who would have been Supt. Bernier at the time; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Twelfth (12th).
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so with that caveat that you gave us before about wanting to make sure that these negotiations fit within the overall plan, informing Supt. Bernier on the 12th, or the earliest that you learned about it, would have facilitated ensuring that those negotiations meshed or fit in to the overall plan; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But for example, he could have contacted the Mayor’s office and put some parameters around the negotiations or ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, go ahead.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That was the question.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Why is that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But again, if it’s being done separately from the OPS’ plans, there’s the potential of conflict; isn’t there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But if something is negotiated with OPS input, can OPS then prevent it from moving forward?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you wanted to ensure then that the City’s negotiations was completely independent from the OPS’ plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Despite the fact that this was a police-led operation and the police was the lead agency in the response?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then the February 13th, that morning, you got a call from Steve Kanellakos confirming that there had been an agreement reached, letters would be exchanged, et cetera; right? I believe then at noon, there was a meeting with city officials called by Steve Kanellakos, and the people who were on that call were Steve Kanellakos, yourself, Deputy Chief Bell, and Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson, and a subsequent meeting then took place to inform a broader group of your team; right? Now, I understand that day, shortly after 1:00 p.m., you called OPP Commissioner Carrique to update him on the negotiations with the City; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he knew, as of February 13th, at around 1:00 p.m.?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
On that call, did he express any concerns to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And Drummond testified, Supt. Drummond, rather, testified that at that subsequent meeting with the broader team was the first time that he learned about those negotiations and he said everybody on the call was cautiously optimistic. Is that -- does that accord with your ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then after that meeting, you called RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, and she said she was aware of the negotiations. Did she express any concerns to you at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is significant resources were required to carry out OPS’ assistance to implementing that deal?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so if I take you now to just the next day, which is February 14, I’m going to take you to OPS00014566. And these are your notes, again. And I’ll take you to page 8. And at 1631 -- so just to give you some context, the trucks started moving at 1:00 p.m. on this day. It was decided that that evening, on the 13th, the night before, Supt. Drummond went and coordinated kind of the details, and the following morning, it was to start -- it didn’t start until 1:00 p.m. And this is now at 4:30 p.m. that same day. So trucks have been moving for the last three hours, give or take. So you have a Teams call with Brookson. So maybe you can explain who Brookson is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And I’m not sure either, so we can go with Mr. Brookson.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
He said: “…trying to get understand the meeting to completely fill up Welling St.” And then you say: “Chief briefed his team. Understood that the intersect team would then brief everyone including PPS” So is it fair to say that you had reached out to the OPP Commissioner and to the RCMP Commissioner, but you didn’t reach out to PPS and he’s essentially calling you out on it and saying, “Why didn’t you let me know?” Is that essentially what’s happening here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So maybe just explain that discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we just go down, there’s more to the discussion. So again, these are point form notes. It’s hard to really get a good sense for what’s being kind of conveyed here, but maybe you can review those point form notes and give us a better sense of what transpired in that discussion? And specifically, I want to understand the references to: “…does city usually direct police on how this goes”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then the note: “For an administrator to reach-out on their own and then permit the vechils [sic] to sardine in on Wellington st. [sic] This was purely political” What was the discussion around that point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I just want to confirm that by this time, certainly he’s telling you that trucks have moved on to Wellington. So you knew by this time; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And your witness statement says you didn’t know, but I think we can agree that you did know. This is probably ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then my understanding is at 1701, so you have this discussion with him, you’re not able to give me too much more than what’s there, it sounds like, based on your recollection. If we could go to page -- is this still page 9? Yeah, 1701. So it looks like there’s a demo briefing call at 5:01. On the second bullet we see "Trish", that's Acting Deputy Chief Ferguson: "...[l]ots of Convo with Carson at NOK, PPS not happy with trucks on Wellington." And at the bottom it says, "Had to pivot due to new". Do you have any sense -- it seems to be some words missing at the end of that. Do you have any sense for what that's referring to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to page 10, the bullet before the redaction, "We need" -- or -- right, the last -- the first redacted portion, the bullet before: "We need some significant legal advice regarding the Mayor's position that they can be on Wellington." Can you just explain what that refers to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Are you able to give us any insight into what was the issue that was concerning?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So this is the day before you resigned at 5:00 p.m. So I don't know if that helps to situate you in the timeline of events and if you have a recollection of this meeting. It would've been one of your final meetings.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we know that after this meeting, certainly by nightfall on that day, no more trucks were relocated onto Wellington, and that kind of ended the facilitation of trucks onto Wellington. Do you have any sense for why -- what was the reason behind OPS no longer supporting the movement of trucks onto Wellington?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you can't tell us why.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So just quickly, last time we spoke in our interview, I asked you about kind of lessons learned. We talked a little bit about that today. You spoke with Mr. Au about that. And I asked you if in your kind of reflection since these events you had thought about anything you could have done differently as Chief of Police. And at that time, you mentioned, you know, clarifying your comment about there may not be a policing solution, which I understand you've done that now, but nothing really else came to mind. And so I wanted to ask now, having had the benefit of hearing your former colleagues, going through documents in preparation for your evidence today, whether there is anything else that you would add to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Reflections on what you may have done differently or what you would do differently next time if you were in the same position, what could you have done differently as Chief of Police.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I understand kind of at a systemic level, but I'm asking more on a personal level, something you could have done differently as Chief of Police. And if nothing comes to mind that's fine, that's the answer, but I wanted to give you that opportunity.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I don't know what you're talking about.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And you mentioned your recommendations to the Commission. I understand you have spoken to some of those. But I wanted to give the opportunity to highlight some of the other ones that perhaps we haven't had a chance to get to, if that's something you would like to do.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much. Those are my questions for you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Hi Mr. Sloly, again. I do have some clarification questions that arose from your questioning today. I wanted to take you first to OPS00014565. Now, counsel for the City of Ottawa took you to this document and asked you some questions, and these are your notes of February 9. And I want to take you to the fifth bullet point. Sorry; fifth from the redacted portion. “Important for Mayor to know.” So this is now a phone call with the Mayor, Steve Kanellakos, Serge Arpin at about 2:20, and this is your side of the conversation as reported by the scribe: “Important for Mayor to know... until this is fixed in Ottawa - this will continue in other area in the province. If Mayor hears anywhere that we don’t have a plan - we have a plan. They think we have a too aggressive -- too aggressive of a plan here” So I wanted to ask you about that part. My understanding is that 12:10 or so, there was a meeting with respect to the 3.0 plan. And so when you say, “They think we have too aggressive of a plan here”; I assume that the “They” in that sentence is OPP and RCMP, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so I wanted to ask why did you think that their view was that the plan was too aggressive?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And was there anything in particular that they thought was too aggressive about the plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. Now, in response to a question from my friend for CCF, you indicated that in a conversation with Minister Blair, you had indicated to him that you had towed hundreds of vehicles, when he asked about enforcement and whether enforcement had been considered. You recall saying that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It wasn’t in a document. You were relaying a discussion you had with Minister Blair in which you said to him, “You know, we’ve issued thousands of tickets. We’ve towed hundreds of vehicles.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Mr. Ayotte testified that on the 1st weekend, 28 vehicles were towed as a result of, essentially, blocking emergency lanes. And so towing was used as a way to clear emergency -- emergency lanes. He testified that that was essentially the purpose of towing; to maintain those emergency lanes. And after the first weekend, there was generally compliance with maintaining those emergency lanes and therefore there wasn’t much towing needed after that. And he agreed that there were about zero to three vehicles towed thereafter, after the first weekend, every day. So many days there were zero, some days they were one, two, up to three vehicles. But in total the number of vehicles towed was quite low, and there were never any heavy trucks that were towed. They were all passenger vehicles. So I just want to understand where you got that understanding, that hundreds of vehicles had been towed.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we can rely on Mr. Ayotte's evidence and the documents from the City of Ottawa By-law with respect to the number of tows?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. I want to talk to you a little bit about a discussion you had with Mr. Miller about crowd dynamics and generally the risk of harm in enforcement efforts. If I can take you to OPS00014454? And this is, again, Ms. Huneault's notes. And I'll take you to page 6, which is notes from January 31st. And I believe we've seen this before. If we can zoom in? Right. So if you see the third bullet, "- Turning from demo to occupation - Increasingly volatile [and] aggressive" And then it says, "- Police intervention to remove - massive risk injury, loss of life." And so if we look further down, after the list of police forces that are there, it says, "- Operational arrest - no safe way to do this - injury death" And then under that, "avoided full scale riots". So I wanted to understand your basis for understanding that there was no safe way to carry out removals or arrests without the risk of injury or death. What was the basis for saying that there was no safe way to do arrests without risking injury or death?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So you're telling me there was enforcement, and my understanding is no police officers were ever assaulted.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you also then -- in that assessment that there was risk of injury or death and that the crowd was volatile, were you receiving specific intelligence about the composition of some of the people there that led you to think that? Were you receiving intelligence or information that led you to believe that there was this risk?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you were using that then to determine when enforcement action should be used and where?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry, by you I meant OPS generally, not you, personally.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Ms. Taman for the Coalition of Businesses and Residents had asked about closing access to the downtown core prior to the convoy's arrival and your view that the Charter precluded that activity. You recall that discussion you had with her?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever consider the distinction between an individual's right to go down to Parliament Hill and protest and the need for the trucks to access the downtown? So that is, did you ever consider blocking access to the trucks but not the individual protesters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Sorry, just so -- but the skateboard is clearly able to go into downtown. There's no restrictions to skateboards. There are established truck routes that allow only certain types of vehicles to be on certain roadways; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you also told counsel for the City of Ottawa that one of the OPSB's primary functions was to assist in getting the resources that OPS needed. Do you recall that exchange?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now are you aware of the other primary functions of the Board during a major event such as this one?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, in setting priorities, especially when it comes to a critical incident or a major event such as this one?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I'll take you to the Morden report, which we've seen before, COM00000616. And I just want to make sure that we're clear about the scope of the function of the Board, that it's not limited to getting resources, at least not according to the Morden Report. If we can go to page 22? So there it talks about three elements to the consultation protocol. So the first element is, "Information exchange between the Board and the Chief of Police: [...] reciprocal information exchange [...] must exist..." And I'm going to kind of condense it a little bit for time. "...to ensure that each obtain information relevant to their respective roles. [...] the Board will be provided with operational information that will inform its policy-making function and the Chief of Police will have an opportunity to provide his or her views on policy options the Board is considering. With this exchange, both policies and operations may be adjusted to address changing circumstances." And so the first step is exchange of information. Now the critical point is the second element, which, "...seek[s] specific operational information from the Chief of Police where a "critical point" arises." And now according to Morden, this is specific policing operations, such as a gun and gang operation, events such as, for example, a G20, or organizationally-significant issues. And so I would put to you that the events that happened in January and February of 2022 in the convoy was a critical point that the Board should have been involved with at an operational level. Would you agree that that's contemplated in Morden?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, maybe we should keep reading. So specifically, I was considering the point of "event", not an -- a specific operation but an event like an international summit of world leaders, a protest of this size I would put to you is a significant event that would trigger the second element that's identified here.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I'll take you to the third element: "Board collaboration in defining the 'what', but not the 'how', of an operation:" So it says: "The Board should use the operational information it obtains from the Chief of Police to determine what the...Police Service's overall objectives and priorities will be for a particular operation, event, or organizationally-significant issue." So if I hear what you're saying correctly, you're telling me that the protests in Ottawa was not -- did not fall into any of these categories. Is that what you're telling me?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"With these established, the Toronto Police Service can create specific operational plans that will outline how the policing mission[s] and objectives will be achieved. The Toronto Police Service must always maintain its autonomy to make and execute particular decisions during the operation. The Board should review the Toronto Police Service's operational plans to ensure they are consistent with the mission or objectives stated by the Board and that they have the benefit of an adequate policy framework." So if I'm understanding correctly, your view is that that doesn't apply to this situation; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, fair enough. And so it's fair to say that in this case the Board did not have an opportunity to provide input on the what, as is contemplated here; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, during the February 5th OPSB meeting, Chair Deans asked you to indicate what you needed in order to bring the demonstration to an end. We've talked about that. And today, the fact that the answer was made public has come up as something that was potentially problematic. Do you recall ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that was being discussed? So in your witness statement you say: "Chief Sloly publicly announced the request for 1,800 police resources during a special City Council meeting on February 7th. This was not his normal course of action, but the Freedom Convoy was unprecedented. Specifically, Ms. Deans asked Chief Sloly in a public OPSB meeting to provide a detailed report on that level of resources required." (As read) And then at page 43, you say: "Commissioner Lucki expressed concern that his public request for 1,800 officers was creating officer safety issues. Chief Sloly recalls defending the decision, as it had been made by his Board Chair, Ms. Deans, at a public meeting." (As read) Did Chair Deans or the Mayor consult with you on whether to make the specifics of the request public?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in terms of them asking whether or not the request should be made public in a public forum and to be released to the public, was that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever ask that it not be made public?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Those are all my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, the numbers were not provided in-camera, and that the letters were made public and were not kept confidential, like sent on a confidential basis.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'm happy to respond. My question was whether the request was ever made to keep the request private, not public. It wasn't about the letters, it was about the resource request, the numbers, whether that was ever -- it was ever requested that the number of resources required be kept confidential. I wasn't asking about the letters, I was asking about the number of resources, but in any event.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's -- those are all my questions. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Commissioner.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The Commission would like to call Mayor Drew Dilkens.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Natalia Rodriguez, Commission Counsel.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good morning, Mayor Dilkens. How are you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good. Nice to see you again.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You had an interview with Commission Counsel on September 2nd of this year; you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we had an interview summary that was made as a result of that interview; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. And you’ve had a chance to review that summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any corrections to make to that summary at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s pull that up. It’s WTS00000019. And I believe you’re referring to evidence that was on page 5, so we’ll go to page 5 of that. (SHORT PAUSE)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it’s the paragraph that says, “Towing Resources” right there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So what is it that you would like to change with respect to that paragraph?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So they were facilitating the movement of tow trucks and drivers over the border, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, perfect. We’ll make that correction. Thank you. And we’ll have that witness summary entered into evidence. You also swore an affidavit attaching two Institution Reports from the City of Windsor.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we’re going to bring -- well, first of all, we’ll bring the affidavit up; it’s AFF00000013. (SHORT PAUSE)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
AFF00000013. (SHORT PAUSE)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can scroll down a little bit? Do you recognize this as your affidavit?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, great. And we’ll go to the two Institution Reports, then. WIN.IR00000001. (SHORT PAUSE)
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go down a little bit? Okay. And you recognize this as the Institution Report for the City of Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any corrections to make to this Institution Report?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So Windsor has been a city since 1892 but it was amalgamated in 1935.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. We’ll make that correction, and it will be entered into evidence. And then if we can just have the second Institution Report, WIN.IR00000002? And this, I believe, is a timeline of key events. And you recognize that; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have any changes to make to that Institution Report?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. We’ll have those entered into evidence, along with your affidavit. So I understand you’ve been a mayor -- the Mayor of Windsor since 2014, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is you’ve also been the Chair of the Windsor Police Services Board since that time as well.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as Mayor, you are also part of the Community Control Group, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you explain what the Community Control Group is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say, “Commissioners” those are the kinds of leads of the different departments in the City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, great. And that includes EMS and the heads of -- well, I assume also members of the WPS, or at least one member of the WPS would be there as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, okay. Thank you. And my understanding is that CCG was activated during the blockade in Windsor of this year. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of decisions would be made at the CCG level?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what’s -- what’s an example of the kind of decision that was made for this particular event, which was the blockade?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there also an aspect that dealt with maintaining city services and ensuring the impacts to the residents and businesses was as little as possible?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And so you kind of -- you wore three hats, in a sense, during the event. You were the Mayor of the city, you were the Chair of the Windsor Police Services Board, and you were a member of the CCG; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in your role as CCG, who was the -- who would have been briefing you? Would that have been Chief Laforet?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as Mayor, would it have been the CAO who briefed you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in many ways, your three hats were kind of together at the same time. There wasn’t really a distinction between the three roles that were you playing.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to familiarize the Commissioner and others with Windsor and the geography of Windsor and the Ambassador Bridge, which is the bridge in question, because I think it provides some context to what we’re going to be talking about in the next couple of hours. So I wanted to bring up the map that was circulated earlier. And so this is a map of Windsor; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
A portion of it. Okay. Thank you. And we can see at the bottom there the -- yeah, that -- where the cursor is, that yellow line that goes east to west. Is that the 401?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So maybe we can zoom in a little bit on the municipal road. So that would be the yellow road running northwest. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what’s the name of that road?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Huron Church Road. Okay. And so that’s a municipal road now within the boundaries of the city; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so to get to the bridge, we’re going to zoom in. It’s about five kilometres, is my understanding, from the 401 to the bridge on Huron Church Road. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. And so let’s zoom in a little bit there. And so where would the entrance, then, to the bridge be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so that’s still within the city. And is that now -- is there any federal agencies that are in that area that are in charge of securing that area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And does CBSA have a presence on this portion on the entrance of the bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, great. And so I wanted to make the map 3D, if we can, just to show the elevation because the bridge actually starts not at the river there, but actually further down in the actual city. So I just wanted to show that. If we can zoom in a little bit. So it looks like the bridge really starts -- well, we can see there now it’s going underneath Wyandotte Street. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It goes over, yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so it looks like part of the bridge is actually going through the city itself, not over water. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the other side looks to be quite residential. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we can zoom back a little bit, yeah, and just move back. So in order to, then, enter the bridge, drivers would come north on Huron Church Road and they would enter what we call -- is this called a plaza, this area where vehicles would enter to go through Customs and go through the border?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. And my understanding is that the blockade occurred at the intersection of Huron Church Road and College Street. Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So let’s go to that area. I believe that’s where the green cursor is. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The green dot. Okay. Thank you. So now with that in mind, we can talk a little bit about the blockade and how it occurred, having a better understanding of the layout of the city and where the bridge is in relation to the rest of the city. So thank you for that. So you had mentioned that the Ambassador Bridge is privately owned. And that’s on both sides of the border; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the southern end, the Canadian port of entry is, as we saw, within the City of Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that there are a few other points of entry, or there are other areas to be able to get to the U.S. side, including a tunnel. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of vehicles pass through the tunnel, as opposed to through the bridge? Why would one go over -- into the tunnel, versus the bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding is there’s also a ferry between Windsor and Detroit. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And does any kind of just regular traffic go also on the ferry? Or is that exclusively limited to hazardous goods?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand there’s also a rail tunnel that connects Windsor to Detroit? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what kind of traffic goes through the rail tunnel?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is it generally commercial traffic?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, according to the Institutional Report that we saw earlier, my understanding is that there are over 2.6 million truck crossings over the bridge, or there were in 2020. Does that sound about right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this is about 28 percent of all of Canada’s truck crossings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding also is that the bridge handles over $390 million of trade each day. Does that sound right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the bridge also serves as an important corridor for travel for Windsor residents? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And generally, what kind of day-to-day traffic, in terms of residents, is going over the bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And now you had mentioned that if there was an accident on the bridge, it would be the Windsor Police Service who would respond to that accident; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. Now what happens if, for example, somebody is trying to cross unlawfully or there’s another type of situation that’s not, say, an accident?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Does the OPP have any jurisdiction anywhere in Windsor or the bridge, to your knowledge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But is -- the 401 is outside of the city limits is my understanding. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And does the RCMP have any jurisdiction anywhere in Windsor or on the bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, just going back to the arrival of the convoy that caused the blockade, and to even go further before that time, my understanding is that there were slow roll protests that happened at the end of January. Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you aware of those at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And these were convoys of trucks going up and down Huron Church Road kind of slowly in a slow manner? Is that your understanding of what that was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, at the end of the January, were you aware of the convoy protest that was happening in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you have, at that time, any information to suggest that those protests might impact Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So when were you first advised that there was potentially a risk of a blockade to the bridge or that there was maybe a plan to blockade the bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I’m going to take you to WIN0000010. And this is an email dated February 4th. And if we go to the bottom of the first page, yeah, we can see the email is from somebody at CBSA to Carolyn Brown and some other individuals. Who is Carolyn Brown?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Your half of the tunnel. Okay. Not the bridge, the tunnel?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so she’s saying -- sorry, Mr. Boismier is saying to her: “We have heard of additional ‘slow roll’ protests in and around Huron Church and the Ambassador Bridge over the next few days. Information on social media also suggests that ‘if we don’t see any change by Monday we will be shutting down the Windsor border crossing completely’. While there is no information that I have been made aware of regarding protests at the Tunnel, if any such blockade occurs at the Ambassador Bridge, we may see an increase in passenger traffic and those commercial vehicles that are able to utilize the Tunnel.” Okay. So were you made aware of this information at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at that time, was there any discussion about potentially trying to prevent a blockade from occurring?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did the City do anything in response to this information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So we’ll go to those text messages since you’ve mentioned it. WIN00002295. So these are your text messages to Minister Mendicino? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the blue is you and if we go down, there’s some white. The white text is him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we just go back up a little bit: “Hi....I know things are crazy for you. Wanted you to know that police here are prepping for the potential return of truckers (and other malcontents) next week. It sounds like they may be attempting to block traffic to the Ambassador Bridge.” So that’s on February 4th, as you mentioned, it’s -- when it’s -- came to your attention that there was a risk of a blockade; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down, it says, “Thx man. Let’s try [to] connect this...” -- let’s go down a little bit more, “...this weekend Stay safe” Okay. So it sounds like you knew him from before, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. It’s not the first time you’re texting him.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And he mentions to connect that weekend; did you speak to him prior to the blockade taking hold? So this would be Friday the 4th, so either on the 5th or the 6th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, moving forward to February 6, my understanding is that there was a risk of a blockade at another location in Sarnia, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you aware of that at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you tell us a little bit about what that was about; where it was and what was the issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that’s in Sarnia?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did -- do you know how long that lasted or when it got resolved?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that raise any concerns with respect to the Ambassador Bridge and possible blockades there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So let’s move now to February 7th, the day the blockade actually happened. Can you just walk us through that day; what it was like for you, when you found out, and what you did that day?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And ultimately, the tunnel was not blocked, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So the bus was not -- did not need to be used?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So there was a sense that the temperature was increasing, as you say. And then on the 7th, what happened on that day?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any discussion about doing any kind of actions to prevent a blockade from taking hold? Because it sounds like there was an anticipation that this could happen; it hadn’t yet happened. Was there any discussion about trying to prevent it from happening?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, because Huron Church Road does serve as an access point between the east side of the city and the west side. It seems to cut right through the city, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so there was a CCG meeting in the morning, and then what happened after that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know at what point the blockade, the slow roll became a blockade, and the blockade took hold?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I’ll take you to an email -- it may help. WIN00002223. So this is another email -- if we go down -- from CBSA to Ms. Brown, and this is in the morning: “Open source information states that a convoy will meet up in Comber, Ontario between 0900 [and] 1000 this morning and start heading for the Ambassador Bridge at 1000. Info also states that they will only be going to the Bridge and the Tunnel will be left open for emergencies and emergency vehicles.” So this would have been at 10:00 a.m. or at 9:44, in any event, the bridge was still not blocked. Did you receive this information; was this passed on to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, I’ll take ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so I’ll take you to WIN00000098. And this is another update from CBSA to Ms. Brown. And if we go down, let’s go down. So actually let’s go down all the way. Let’s keep going. There it is. So Mr. Boismier says: “I have been advised that all lanes of the bridge are closed and negotiations have halted. Protestors have advised that they are staying put and not moving. They appear to be setting up a camp of sorts. Both lanes to and from the Bridge, are at a standstill.” So this is now at 7:18 p.m. So do you recall hearing at some time in the evening that the blockade had taken hold.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And if I can take you to WIN00002204? Now, this is the CCG meeting that you had mentioned that had happened on February 7th in the morning. It looks like this was the first kind of blockade-specific or convoy-specific CCG meeting that took place. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down, let’s keep going to the next page. Yeah, we’ll keep going. Let’s see -- no, let’s go up a little bit more. Yeah, okay. Good. Yeah. So I’m looking at the part that says, “We do have a comprehensive plan.” Okay, yeah. So at the bottom there, Deputy Bellaire; can you tell us who Deputy Bellaire is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you already mentioned Chief Mizuno, who’s the Chief of Police, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
At the time. And so Deputy Bellaire says: “OK, we do have a more comprehensive plan and some fallback and negotiation strategies. There is freedom of movement and we do live in a democracy. If it is an aggressive [keep going down] public demonstration, we have incremental steps to take place as we have done our legal homework.” Do you recall what the discussion was around this point; what Chief Bellaire was trying to express here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that in this meeting, the Police Service explained it had a plan in place if the protest worsened, and that in the meeting preparations were discussed such as jersey barriers and mobilizing towing resources, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And can you explain a little bit the City’s role in securing jersey barriers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario ultimately did provide a significant number of jersey barriers. Does that accord with your recollection?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is the City was not -- did not secure towing capacity, or was not able to secure towing capacity, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So they didn’t refuse to provide services; it’s just they were one company and couldn’t do all of it, essentially.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But you are aware that they did receive some kind of negative, I guess, repercussions as a result of assisting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that originally both the north and the southbound lane of the bridge was blockaded, and then at some point one of the lanes opened up. Do you have a sense for the kind of the movement of the blockade and the different points of entry?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding, too, is that the access from Wyandotte Road was open at one time, and then that also became blockaded over time.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say, “A leaderless movement”; is this information you received from the police, or how did you come to that conclusion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, on the 7th, which is the day of the blockade, I understand you had a discussion with Solicitor-General Jones; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And she asked what Windsor needed to respond to the blockade?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if I understand correctly, it started with a discussion between you and the Chief. You asked her what she needed; she told you 100. You then went to Solicitor-General Jones and to Minister Mendicino and said, “We need 100 officers,” and they came back and said, “Please put that in writing,” and then you went back to the Chief told her, “Put it in writing,” and on the 9th these letters went out. Is that a fair summary?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So when you spoke to the Solicitor-General on the 7th, that would have been to tell her the request for 100, and is that when she told you, “I need it in writing”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And on February 8th that was your chief of staff that participated in that staff meeting, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you recall anything else noteworthy from that discussion with the Solicitor-General at that time on the 7th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of your discussion with Mr. Mendicino that same day, was it similar kind of tenor? Is that essentially the same type of discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, on February 8th, there was also a meeting of the Windsor Police Services Board; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that was an in-camera meeting is my understanding. Do you recall that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So I’ll take you to the minutes of that meeting. WIN00001999. Okay. And if we go down? Oh, sorry, I think this was actually your request to call the meeting.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you called this meeting as Chair; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So and the minutes of that meeting are actually at WIN00002174. There we go. So it was on February 8th at 7:00 p.m. And we can see the Chief was there, two deputy chiefs, you were there as well, some councillors were there, and others. And if we go down to, I believe it’s -- there we go. “Chief Mizuno provided an update to the WPS Board on the recent situation regarding the Ambassador Bridge Blockade. WPS was notified last week of the potential for this protest to take place in Windsor.” And then if we go to the end of that page: “WPS has requested assistance should we need it from Chatham Police and Lasalle Police. Out top concerns are public safety and de-escalation.” What was the Board’s role with respect to securing resources from other local police forces?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the WPS request any assistance from the Board at this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go down, keep going, Chief Mizuno there, in the middle, says: “WPS officers are doing a fantastic job. Lessons have been learnt from Ottawa and from our own past experiences and external assistance has been requested.” Do you know what the Chief meant when she says “Lessons have been learnt from Ottawa…”? Do you know what those lessons are?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether there were actions taken to contain it so that it wouldn’t grow?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of the request for 100 officers, do you have a sense, or did the Board have a sense for how those -- that number was conceived?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And in terms of an operational plan, did the Board ever see how those officers were going to be used?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did the Board ever request to see an operational plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware whether those resources requested were ultimately provided?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say you were amplifying the request politically, what was the response that you were getting from the Federal Government and from the Provincial Government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the Board take any specific actions to support the WPS during this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So it was the Board’s understanding on February 8th that the only thing preventing the blockade from being dismantled was the influx of resources? There was a plan in place and it was just -- they were just waiting for the resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Board adopt any policies pursuant to section 31 of the Police Services Act with respect to either the slow roll or the blockade?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Board ever direct the Police Chief in any way as contemplated in the Police Services Act?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who was advising the Board on these issues? On legal issues and interpretations of the Act, et cetera?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, are you aware of whether the WPS had any communications with protestors or blockade organizers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any discussions with protestors or organizers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have a sense for whether the protestors were local to Windsor, whether they were coming from the outside, whether they were coming from Ottawa? Do you have a sense for who these people were?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, on February 9th, you said to reporters that arresting the demonstrators opposed to pandemic health measures and towing their vehicles could lead to violence and -- because you said some of them were willing to die for it. Do you recall saying that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did you reach that assessment, that they were willing to die for it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have a sense for how many vehicles or number of protestors were involved?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sorry. Are you referring to protestors or vehicles?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes. Protestors and vehicles.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so then is it fair to say that Bylaw was not ticketing and towing, they were not enforcing because of the reasons you mentioned in terms of escalating?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And are you aware of any other incidents of threats or violence with respect to the blockade aside from the one you just mentioned?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, maybe tell us about that one.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware of any other individuals who received threats, anyone within City Council, anyone within -- in any other kind of prominent position?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did that materialize?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to go back to the request for resources, if I can, for a minute. Can I take you to WIN00001623? And these are the letters that Chief Mizuno sent. I believe this one is to the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, there we go, to Minister Blair. And that’s on February 9. And I just want to go down -- yeah. Here we go. So it says: “Windsor Police Service is requesting a minimum of 100 police officers be dispatched to the City of Windsor to bolster current and potentially future requirements.” Okay. And if we go down, I just want to see the signature. Yeah, Pamela Mizuno, Chief of Police. Thank you. So that’s the letter that she sent to Minister Blair.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to WIN00001648. So this is now also dated February 9 addressed to the Honourable Sylvia Jones, Solicitor-General. And if we go down, I believe -- so this one is also requesting 100 police officers. I believe it’s the same letter. The letters were also asking, in the second paragraph, “marked police vehicles and tow trucks, including heavy tows for large transport vehicles”. And if we go down, it’s also from Chief Mizuno. Now, you had mentioned that your understanding was that the requests were made to the RCMP and the OPP. Are you aware of other letters that were sent to the -- to the Commissioners of the OPP and RCMP?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So these would be the requests, the letters that were sent.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on February 9 that same day, your Chief of Staff scheduled a meeting between you and the Office of the Solicitor-General. Do you recall that? I know we had a discussion on the 7th or the 8th, and now it looks like there’s another one on the 9th. What was the purpose of that discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was anything requested at that time or offered in terms of assistance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go to WIN00001583. So this is now text messages between you and Premier Doug Ford; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the dark is you speaking and then the light-coloured text is Premier Ford; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And it looks like he is asking you to call him on February 9. Did you have a call with him on February 9th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the discussion on that call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did he make any offers of assistance or anything of that nature?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And now this is two days before the Province declared a provincial state of emergency. Did that come up in your discussions with him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So he didn't ask you whether you wanted that or whether you needed that or anything to that affect?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. What about the Emergencies Act, the Federal Emergencies Act, was that ever discussed with the Premier?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now the next day on February 10, you spoke to the media and said that additional resources were being deployed by the OPP and that the Premier and Solicitor General were responding rapidly to your call for support. Was that accurate at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It was on February 10 ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- you told reporters that this request was being actioned very quickly and that the OPP was being deployed and that the Premier and Solicitor General were responding rapidly to your request for resources.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you have a sense for when -- it says there "OPP resources started to arrive." So by the 10th you were receiving or the City was receiving OPP resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Because my understanding is that the Windsor Police Service did not have at the time a PLT Unit or a POU Unit; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So they were coming in from other -- the OPP was providing those; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have a sense for when RCMP officers arrived in Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Board have any role in swearing RCMP officers in?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you know how that was done or who did that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now my understanding is that there was an injunction that was sought and granted with respect to the blockade; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did this idea come about? Who was the initiator of this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So I'll ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Go ahead.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so City Council adopted a resolution that an injunction be sought; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And this was on February 10th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you were able to call a meeting that quickly to get everybody together from the 9th when you kind of conceived this to the 10th; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it seems like the police was on board with the injunction, they thought it would be -- it wouldn't hurt, in any event.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, ultimately, as you say, the injunction became effective at 7 p.m. on February 11 is my understanding; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was the City an intervenor in that application and not the main applicant; do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so my understanding is the Attorney General of Ontario was also an intervenor in that application?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did they become involved and what was the coordination with them like?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Who took the lead on the injunction from the City’s side?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So she would have had the coordination with the Attorney General? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Fair enough. So as we said on February 11 at 7:00 p.m., the injunction came into effect. It was extended then on February 18? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what, if anything, did it change on the ground? What impact did it have, if any?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the City, in fact, assisted to distribute these pamphlets once the injunction was granted, to give notice of the injunction? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So would you say there was adequate notice given about the injunction to those in the blockade and in the protest area?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did it have the effect of having people leave? Did anybody leave as a result of the injunction or was it simply that then they were charged with violating the injunction once the arrests took place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, was there any discussion with the Windsor Police Service about whether they had the resources at that time to enforce the injunction and whether that was a concern at all?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So fair to say that the injunction and the resources were coming at the same time, essentially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So at -- there was also a Board meeting, a special in-camera Board meeting on February 11th. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So that was the second Board meeting with respect to this blockade. And I’m going to take you to the minutes. WIN00002173. Yeah, and if we go down. If we keep going down. Okay. And yeah, keep going down a little bit. There’s a part where you ask a question. I’m just trying to find that. Keep going down. Okay. Let’s go back to the first page. Oh, there it is: “Chair, Mayor Dilkens: Is there anything required from WPS from the Board? Chief Mizuno: No other resources required at this time. We initiated OPP resources Wednesday. Additional resources are flowing in. RCMP have come to town as well and are helping.” So this lines up with what you’re telling me. By the 11th of February, it sounds like resources have been mobilized, they’re starting to come in, and there’s no real concern over resources anymore. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down a little bit more. So Chief Mizuno there says: “If and when we take action we will be well positioned with resources to support that. State of Emergency does help and gives us additional tools in terms of future protests.” Now, this on February 11. I assume she’s referring to the Provincial State of Emergency; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have a sense for what those tools were that the Provincial State of Emergency could assist with?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And do you have any sense for whether that Provincial State of Emergency encouraged protestors to leave the site?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, I want to go back to your discussions with the Minister of Public Safety -- sorry, Minister Mendicino at WIN00002295. And these are the text messages that we had seen before. If we can go to page 3? So you say: “I told Premier I spoke to you and he asked for your number I get the sense he is going to follow Alberta and Saskatchewan” What did you mean by that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you have a sense that that was because of the protests across Ontario?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 9. Go down. You say: "I'm told our police support is going to be good. I think protesters are looking to make show of things." So in terms of the "police support going to be good", was that from your discussions with Chief Mizuno?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Bellaire. Okay, thank you. And my understanding is you texted -- once the injunction was granted, you texted the Minister as well as Deputy Premier Jones and the Premier to let them know that the injunction had been granted; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to page 12 of this document. Okay. And he says, "Do you think it will end today", and you're saying, "I'm thinking it will". So what was your sense on February 12th of where things were at in terms of resources and a plan to move forward to clear the blockade?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in text above, you mention the congregation from Harvest Bible Church. My understanding is they had something to do with continuing the blockade at some point on the 12th. Can you explain that situation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. So the police started moving in on the 12th, and weren't able to because now the number of protesters grew in size?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 12 of this -- oh, we are on page 12. Okay, keep going down, please. Keep going down. Okay. So you say: "It will end today, fingers crossed. Police have full control of the area now." And this is now on the 13th; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"[G]ood. Bridge re-open today?" "If so, it will be later once jersey barriers [etc.] are removed. There is still some activity in the plaza at..." I can't really read that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"...Tecumseh and Huron Church. Police just got permission from owner to trespass these people. Stay tuned." "Ok keep me posted. Head[ed] into meetings with the PM." And if we go to page 18. So this is now 3:40 p.m. on the 13, and he says: "About to head into meeting with PM, any critical updates?" And you say: "Small flare up. A block from Huron Church. A few arrests made. Simultaneously working to get Huron Church open. 25-30 malcontents on scene." Keep going down: "Update: [about] 25 arrests now. Police hoping to reopen bridge tonight. Trying to secure 1,100 jersey barriers...failing which, one side of Huron Church will be open and operate for 2-way traffic like a construction zone." And if we go down. And then -- it looks like, then, on the 13th, that's when the bridge reopened is my -- or the blockade was cleared on the 13th; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then on the following day, he asks, "How's it going this am", on the 14th, in the morning. "Smooth so far." And then you say: "Are you guys taking some legislative action re: Emergencies Act?" And then he says: "Will call you this [afternoon]. To the extent you can be supportive of any additional authorities that gets Windsor the resources you need to keep the bridge open, people safe, that would be great." So I want to ask you about that exchange. What gave you the sense that there was some consideration of the Emergencies Act being considered at that time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he said he would call you about that. He didn't respond over text, but he said he would call you. And did you have a discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, you didn't.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then what did you understand him to mean when he says, "To the extent you can be supportive of any additional authorities"?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, on that point, the City of Windsor actually declared a municipal state of emergency after the Province did, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And it was on -- I believe on the 14th, is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So maybe just explain why the municipal state of emergency was called after the blockade had already been cleared, and not prior to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And as you had mentioned, the injunction was really a signal to the public that the City was doing everything it could. Why couldn’t the state of emergency also be a signal, even if measures wouldn’t necessarily be used or that it wasn’t much additional powers that could be gained from it; wouldn’t it be a signal to the public the City was doing everything it could?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the purpose, then, was to get some sort of financial compensation for the businesses that were prevented from getting business because of the jersey barriers that were blocking east-west traffic?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how long were those jersey barriers in place along Huron Church Road?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of the potential of another blockade taking hold after the original one was cleared?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that there was also the concern that once Ottawa was cleared, that those protesters would come to Windsor.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what can you tell us about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to WIN00000972? Now, this is February 16, so a few days after the blockade has been cleared. And this is a briefing, I believe these were some remarks that you gave; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if you go down -- keep going. So there; the bolded section there, you say: “Let me be clear - this remains a national security situation that prevents us from simply reopening Huron Church Road to regular traffic at this time.” What did you mean by “National security situation”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any discussions with Minister Mendicino or anybody else at the federal government about the risk of another blockade after the one on the 14th was cleared?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in terms of continuing threats to the Ambassador Bridge, you're getting that information from the Chief of Police or the Deputy Chief of Police. You're not getting any information from any federal entities giving you kind of intelligence or information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And to your knowledge, were any of the federal emergency powers ever used to prevent further blockades?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now on March 17, you wrote to Ministers Mendocino and Blair and to the Solicitor General explaining some issues that you believed had been brought to light by these blockades. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what were some of those concerns that you had at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And have you had any response back?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So can you give us a sense for the impact of the blockade, specifically on the auto sector, in Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what discussions did you have then with counterparts or others in the U.S.?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. Any other discussions with U.S. folks?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I want to take you to WIN00001628. And these are remarks that you gave. Now we're going back in time on February 9. But you said, at the bottom of -- sorry, the top of page 2, you said, "If Canada becomes known as a difficult jurisdiction to do business with -- to move goods in and out, for example -- then supply chains will evolve and reconfigure to remove this element of risk and avoid Windsor-Essex." What were you basing that information on?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so were you concerned to some extent that the image or the viability of Windsor as a city to invest in might be compromised by this.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of impacts on residents, what impacts did the blockade have on the -- on city services, social services, medical services, transportation? What -- can you give us a sense?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you had mentioned that the cost to the city was over $5 million; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And most of that, I understand, was for the Windsor Police Service. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Because in addition to OPP and RCMP, there were several local police forces that came to assist; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And just to be clear, the blockade on -- was cleared and the bridge reopened before the Emergencies Act was invoked. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, great. So none of the measures in the Emergencies Act were used to clear the blockade since it came after; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions for you. Thanks.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, just very briefly. Natalia Rodriguez for the Commission.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Mayor Dilkens, my friend for JCCF had asked about an annual marathon I believe that takes place that closes the bridge in its entirety. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I just wanted to better understand how the closure of the bridge for that purpose affects the just-in-time delivery that you had spoken about in your earlier testimony.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is a time-limited period more than 24 hours?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. Okay, thank you, that does help clarify. And I just wanted to also clarify the communications that you had with the Premier and Solicitor General Jones over this period of time. My understanding is that you had one phone call with each of them; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And with respect to the Premier specifically, we know you had a discussion with him on February 9, it's in the Institutional Report. When would the second phone call have taken place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And with Solicitor General Jones, my understanding is that there was also one phone call around the 7th or 8th of February to discuss the resource request. Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And aside from that, the discussions would've been over text message?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Anything else that you can tell us about the content of those discussions, other than what you've told us?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I understand you also had a discussion with the Prime Minister on February 10th; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did he initiate that call or did you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what can you tell us about the content of that discussion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was the Emergencies Act discussed in that call, either by you or by him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. Now, with respect to my friend from the City of Ottawa, you told her that at some point somebody did indicate to you that the normal order of operations would be to go to the OPP or the Province for resources first and then to the RCMP or the Federal Government. Can you tell us who indicated that to you and at what point in time in terms of the resource request?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So there was no sense that RCMP resources could be delayed as a result of having gone to the OPP first, for example?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And finally, my friend for, I believe former Chief Sloly, spoke you about the in-camera board meetings that you had. I just want to clarify, who requested that these meetings be held in-camera?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You did.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you very much. Those are my questions.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Good afternoon, Commissioner. Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Commission Counsel. And the Commissioner -- the Commission would like to call again Mr. Di Tommaso.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Welcome back, Mr. Di Tommasso.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You've been sworn in, so I don’t believe you'll have to do that again. You're under oath as you were yesterday.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I'm Natalia Rodriguez, as I said. I'm taking over from my colleague, Mr. Poliquin, who was examining you yesterday. And I'm going to continue where he left off. So he took you to your notes, and I will take you to your notes as well. ONT.00005153, and it's at page 2. And you'll recall, these were your notes from a call that you had with Deputy Minister of Public Safety, Rob Stewart on February 3rd. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And yesterday, my colleague took you to some text messages with Commissioner Carrique in which you kind of agreed that the tenor of those text messages was essentially that things seemed to be under control. Do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So now, looking at these notes, again, this is a call with Deputy Minister Rob Stewart and these are the notes you took from your discussion. You wrote, "Three hundred (300)--- "
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, 500? Okay. Excuse me -- "500 CMV in Ottawa," and that is commercial motor vehicles?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
"Three thousand (3,000) people, noise," in all caps there, "verbally assault -- " does that say RCMP or people?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
People. "No outbreaks of violence. Political are very exposed, stalemate. Nobody really in charge. Some who claim to be. Far right extremism." And if we go down, "Not going to be able to move once they are there," or "they are here," rather. "How do they leave? Change in policy or de-escalation? Create incentives for them to leave. City has stated to -- has started to enforce bylaws. Get right on it as soon as they get here." Did that accord with the tenor of the types of information and the discussion that you were having with Commissioner Carrique in terms of the public safety issues or what was happening on the ground?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did you feel that you were getting similar messaging from both Commissioner Carrique and from the deputy minister in this case?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
After speaking to Deputy Minister Stewart, did you have any public safety concerns about the situation in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So public safety can mean more than physical violence, you'd agree?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were there other public safety concerns aside from, as you say, Criminal Code violations, murders, assaults, that type of thing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did it rise to the level of a public safety concern?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did the tenor of your briefings from Commissioner Carrique change over the course of the protest? Did at some point, did it become different in tone in terms of the public safety risk and the issues that were arising?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Now on February 2nd, I understand from Chief Sloly's witness summary that you spoke to him, and he then requested to speak to the Solicitor General; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And now in his witness statement, he said that you were looking for verification on a report that ambulances were being denied access to Ottawa hospitals; do you recall that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And he told you that that was not the case; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would that have been a public safety concern if in fact ambulances were not able to get to hospitals?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why were you looking specifically for that information? Why was that important to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so independent from that, would that have been a concern for you in terms of your role with respect to public safety in Ontario if that had not been raised to you by the Minister -- or Deputy Minister of Health?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In his summary, Chief Sloly also said that in that call with you, he asked you if you were aware of the public safety implications that the Freedom Convoy situation in Ottawa posed to the rest of Ontario. Do you recall him saying that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you recall him telling you that there were some public safety implications to the rest of Ontario with respect to what was happening in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And was this the only call you had with former Chief Sloly during these events, like, a one-on-one discussion with him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now it looks like during this call, he indicated that he wanted to speak to the Solicitor General, and it looks like he did manage to speak with her on February 2nd. Were you on that call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you prepare the Solicitor General for that call? Did you brief her ahead of time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of what was discussed on this call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now on February 2nd, former Chief Sloly said that there may not be a policing solution to this demonstration. Do you recall hearing that at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the reaction within the Government of Ontario to this statement, if any? Was there any concerns or questions raised as a result of this statement?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in your view, did this statement affect the provincial response in any way?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. So I want to take you now to your notes again, ONT00005153. And if you can go to page 5? This is a call you had with Commissioner Carrique on February 3rd, and it's at 17:10. Yeah, there it is. So Commissioner Carrique says, "No POU." What did you take that to mean?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then if we look down it says, "Chief very concerned about Sloly as is RCMP. Still haven't pulled together his plan. [Federal government] expressing his concerns about his ability to lead" So you're hearing at this -- in this call that there are some concerns with respect to Chief Sloly's ability to lead, as indicated in these notes; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, and who was -- and Commissioner Carrique was communicating that to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were hearing that there were concerns at the RCMP level and with respect to Commissioner Carrique about Chief Sloly?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you relay this discussion to the Solicitor General, let her know that the OPP and the RCMP have concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know what her response to that was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now what is available to you, what can you do if, you know, the two Commissioners of Ontario and the OPP and the RCMP have lost confidence as -- is what it seems like, in one of their -- a local Chief of Police? Is there anything in your toolbox to be able to respond to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your knowledge, was that ever considered in this case?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Why?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if the local Police Service Board of jurisdiction does not take steps, and it appears that perhaps adequate policing is not being effectively carried out in an area, why wouldn't the Solicitor General then exercise whatever authority he or she can, in this case she, to do something when it looks like other entities are not acting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so if the Commissioner of the OPP and the Commissioner of the RCMP have lost confidence in the Chief, are they not best positioned to make that determination?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So to rephrase the question, if it were the case that the OPP and the RCMP had lost confidence in a Chief of Police, would it be appropriate then for the Solicitor General to recommend to the OCPC to step in?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So there was no -- so if I understand what you’re saying, there’s no role here for the Solicitor General if adequate and effective policing is not being carried out?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go a little bit down in the notes, where the star is, “Windsor in Ambassador Bridge”, is this with respect to a possible blockade at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were hearing that there was a possible issue at the Ambassador Bridge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 6, at the bottom of the page -- keep going down. Yeah. Where it says: “CONTAINMENT NEGOTIATION PRESERVE LIFE/PUBLIC SAFETY PROTECT CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE” Were these -- now, I’m trying to understand whether this was still within the context of your discussion with Commissioner Carrique and whether these were priorities of the OPP that were communicated to you, or whether this was your notes to yourself indicating what you thought the priorities were?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And then at the bottom, it says “FLASHPOINT”. Can you explain that notation there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. so I’ll take you now to ONT00004063. And I understand on February 3rd, the Ottawa Police Service requested assistance from the Ministry of the Solicitor General regarding the urgent appointment of members of the RCMP as special constables. Were you aware of this at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is this approval kind of administrative done on paper type thing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So is it fair to say it’s a bit of a formality? You sign a paper and then it’s done?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I could take you now to ONT00005252? And these are text messages you exchanged with Commissioner Carrique. And this is February 4th, I believe. And it says there -- and I believe Commissioner Carrique is in the white and you’re in the green? Is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so in the white there, it says: “I spoke with Commissioner Lucki, Chief Sloly and Chief Ramer last night.” And that’s the former Chief of the Toronto Police Service? Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Oh, I thought somebody else had been appointed. My mistake. Okay. So it says there: “All have access to the necessary OPP resources.” So what did you understand to be the status of the provincial resources in Ottawa on February 4th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so the implication here is that the OPS had all of the OPP officers that it needs, or that it has requested; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. We can take that down. Now, on February 4th, there were also protests in Toronto, specifically around Queen’s Park. You were aware of those; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that those protests wrapped up fairly quickly? Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So maybe you can shed some light, at least from your perspective, of what was done -- what worked in Toronto, what was done right in Toronto that wasn’t done in Ottawa? What was the difference here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so do you know who is -- who would you credit with the appropriate response here in the Toronto protest? Was it the police? Was it the politicians? The Mayor? How did this end up getting wrapped up?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was your understanding of the purpose of the protest in Toronto? What were the protestors protesting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there an element as well, or at least from the Province’s perspective, that this was about provincial measures in addition to federal measures?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But in your view, it didn’t include protesting provincial mandates?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. I want to take you to OPP00004580. And this is -- I’ll take you to page 56. These are more text messages between you and Commissioner Carrique. And if we go to page 56, this is now February 5th, Saturday. If we go down? Down some more. So there, -- and just maybe you can clarify. The green, I believe, is you, and the blue, I believe, is Commissioner Carrique. Do you know if that’s -- are you able to clarify that? If we go down, that might help. Keep going to the next page.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, if we can go up, maybe I’ll just ask the question, and it may not make much of a difference. So it says there at 10:11: "Info on OPSB is clear to share." And that would be the Ottawa Police Service Board; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down, there’s a link shared, the Ottawa Police Service Board calls a special meeting. And if we go down to page 57: "Live link PSB meeting." So I just wanted to ask -- there seems to be some texts exchanged about the OPSB meeting on February 5th and my question is, were you monitoring what the board was doing or were you -- did you take an interest in the board’s meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why were you taking an interest in the board’s meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I understand that the Ministry of the Solicitor General has a representative that goes to the meetings and advises the boards on various issues; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you may or may nor know this but I understand that in Ottawa, it was Lindsey Gray; do you know that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what is that representative’s role?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And does that representative report back the activities of the board to the Solicitor General’s office?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But the Solicitor General’s office does not receive any information back from that representative?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And is there a reason for that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And to what extent were you briefed on the ongoings of the board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was through whom, just from watching the board meeting that were public or was there another source of information?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And this would be Lindsey Gray?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you had discussions with her about?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Understood, thank you. I want to take you now to -- we’re moving on to February 6th to a summary of a call. It’s ONT00000311. And this is a call with the City of Ottawa. There are representatives from the federal government that were there as well. You were present. I believe on behalf of the Ontario Government, it was you and the Deputy Minister of Transportation, Laurie LeBlanc, who were the two attendees for the province; is that correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know who took these notes?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you -- but you’ve seen them before?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you saw them at the time; they were sent to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see, okay. Thank you. My understanding is that Deputy Minister Rob Stewart convened this meeting; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And before attending this meeting, did you have any instructions from the Solicitor General or from the Premier on what your role was to be or what you were to contribute to this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how did you prepare for this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what was the purpose of doing that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you see as your role in this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what did you see as the province’s role in trying to bring these protests to a peaceful resolution at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was there anything else?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go down on this page, the second bullet point: "Steve Kanellakos, City Manager from Ottawa, provided an update from the City’s perspective. Steve Kanellakos is concerned about the posture of local councillors who are pointing the finger at the province and federal government to provide assistant to resolve the matter." So were you aware at this point, then, that some leaders within the municipal community were pointing fingers, well, both at Ontario and the federal government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then it says in bold: "Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is going to declare a local emergency in the City of Ottawa at 4:30 p.m. The expressed intent of this declaration is to put pressure on the Premier to exercise powers to resolve this." Were you aware that the mayor intended to put pressure on the Ontario government by declaring a municipal state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, and why is that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And so what did you understand the exercise of provincial to resolve this to be in this case? What did you understand the municipality to be looking to the province to do?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you -- you understood this to be additional resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. Although, it says “will also be looking”, so it seems like this is something separate from the bullet point above; you could agree with that interpretation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you see the Declaration of a State of Emergency at the time that it was declared?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were not aware, then, at the time, that the declaration stated that the demonstrations were a threat to the security of the residents?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that was not reported to you through your chain of reporting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. At this point, given the local emergency that’s about to be declared and some of the other information that you've received, did you have public safety concerns about the situation in Ottawa by February 6th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But I think you can agree that public safety encompasses more than just violent crime, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So were you aware at the time that there were open fires in barrels on the streets and fireworks going off and open fuel that wasn’t properly stored and diesel fumes that were entering people's homes? Were you aware of all of those circumstances on the ground?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But in your view, that did not pose a public safety concern?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But from another perspective, it did, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So in your interview summary, you indicated that you were of the view that the protest in Ottawa was a "significant inconvenience" -- and that’s a quote -- but that it did not present an overriding public safety risk. Now, Commissioner Carrique was asked about this and in his evidence -- I'm not sure if you watched his evidence -- but he indicated that it wasn’t really about one being a safety risk and the other one not being a safety risk, but it was about prioritizing resources, and that the Hendon Reports made clear that there was a security risk in Ottawa. You would agree with me that he was closer to the ground in order to assess the situation in Ottawa than you were, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you still stand by that statement today, that it was an inconvenience but not a public safety risk?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, after this meeting, did you brief the solicitor general on the fact that the City was going to declare a municipal emergency and that the stated intent was to put pressure on the province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know if the premier was aware of that stated intent as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Did you speak to the premier at all throughout the course of these events?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the declaration, in fact, put pressure on the province to act?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, for example, the provincial state of emergency came on the 11th. Was there any pressure from this local state of emergency to do that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it fair to say though that this may have provided a signal to the province that the City of Ottawa was in need of more assistance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And we'll get to that request in a second. So with respect to the stated intent, Mayor Watson, when he testified, stated that the City did not consider that the province was engaged enough at this time, February 6th, in finding a solution to the situation in Ottawa. So I just wanted to give you a chance to respond to that.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That was in his testimony. I can bring up the transcript, but he did say in his evidence when he testified here at the Commission that by February 6th, he did not feel that the province was engaged enough in finding a solution.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when you mention the injunction, what was the province's role with respect to the City's injunction?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I believe that was Windsor. So I'll take you to page 2 or the bottom of page 1, rather. And you see: "Ottawa City Council is likely going to ask the premier and prime minister to intervene directly. The mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson, is feeling the pressure and want this issue to be pivoted back to Ontario and Canada." So it's fair to say that in this meeting, it was communicated or it was expressed that Ontario or that Ottawa felt that it needed additional help, both from the province and from the federal government, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And on page 2, if we go to the third bullet point, Mario Di Tommaso -- that’s you -- Deputy Solicitor General, noted that the province expedited the approval of 249 special constables from the RCMP to assist Ottawa Police Service. So this is what we had looked at earlier where there was an approval of RCMP officers to be sworn in as special constables?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so at this point, what else had Ontario done at this point, by February 6th, other than what you've indicated there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that was -- so the OPP provided resources, and was there anything else?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we to page 5 ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But you can agree that Ottawa doesn’t seem to think so. They're expressing that they don’t think there is enough engagement, right, whether or not that’s accurate, that’s their sense that they're conveying?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at page 5, if we go the first black bullet at the bottom -- keep going -- yes. Question from Mario Di Tommaso, Deputy Solicitor General: "Has Ottawa Police Service been working with the Ministry of the Attorney General to explore your options and in relation to position of the Crown for summary offences?" What were you suggesting here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to page 9, Jody Thomas, National Security Advisor in the sub-point, the black sub-point: "Would the province be looking to the federal government if this protest was happening outside of the City of Ottawa ([for example] happening in other places like Kingston)?” What did you understand this comment to be in reference to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And as you said, the Provincial Government did as well. So it was really the responsibility of both levels of government to come together and work together to find a solution?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mentioned finding an interlocutor. Can you maybe expand on what the idea was there and what steps, if any, were taken?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what steps were taken beyond that -- the discussion of the names? Was anything done?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. Okay. And that was through Commissioner Carrique, you said?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was Minister’s Jones’ response to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know why that didn’t happen with respect to Ottawa if she was willing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So why didn’t it happen, I guess is my question. Why wasn’t there a similar letter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when you say the PLT brought this forward, was that the OPP PLT or the OPS PLT? Do you know?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And that was, from what I understand, with respect to Windsor. Was there ever an approach from OPS in Ottawa or the OPP in Ottawa to say the demonstrators in Ottawa would like to meet or would like to have communication with the Provincial Government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And we asked Mayor Watson whether he was aware of any such overtures from the Solicitor General were made to Ottawa, and he said no. And there was a time when the Ottawa protestors approached the City of Ottawa because they wanted to have a meeting with the Mayor. So I’m just wondering why that wouldn’t have signaled to the province that if they’re willing to meet with the Mayor and they’re willing to negotiate something in return, why they wouldn’t be willing to do that with the Province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so did you ever specifically indicate that the province would be willing to meet with Ottawa protestors?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was his response to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. and you don’t know why?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, you mentioned that the Province -- or from your perspective, you thought the Federal Government had a role to play for various reasons, one of them being that the protestors were protesting federal vaccine mandates; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so I’m just wondering, why does the substance matter of the protest affect who should be the entity that responds to that? Or the level of government that responds to that protest?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in terms of the Parliamentary Precinct, Wellington Street is a municipal road, it is the jurisdiction of the Ottawa Police Service. So in terms of any kind of federal jurisdiction over that street, you agree there is no federal jurisdiction over Wellington Street in terms of policing Wellington Street?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was it ever communicated to you that the local police service, in this case the Ottawa Police Service, or through the Mayor, because the request did come through the Mayor and the Chair of the Board, that it had to be done through the Province and couldn’t go directly to the RCMP in terms of requesting resources? Was that ever something that was communicated to you by anyone in the Federal Government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so in this case, the letter from the Mayor and the Chair of the Board requesting 1,800 officers went to both the Solicitor-General and Premier Ford and also to the Minister of Public Safety and the Prime Minister. And so my question is whether you are aware if the fact that there was a request made to the provincial government directly from the Mayor and the Chair of the Board and not through the province, whether that delayed RCMP resources. Are you aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether it was an issue in terms of the federal government being able to deploy those resources given that it could have been seen as circumventing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So my question is whether anyone within the federal government communicated to you that the request being made directly to the federal government was a problem because it wasn’t being made through the province.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you. Now, at the end of this call -- this was a lengthy call among various people at different levels. Did you have any concerns at the end of this call? Were you satisfied that OPS and the Chief were taking the right approach? What was -- what were your takeaways from this call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that something that was discussed in this meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But by this time, February 6, you were aware of that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- that there was a lack of a plan.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So there was a plan for maintenance of the status quo, but not to end the situation, essentially.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you were getting this information from Commissioner Carrique and Commissioner Lucki?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it was exclusively from Commissioner Carrique in terms of the readiness of this plan that we’re speaking about.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you know how he formed that opinion?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So I’ll take you to ONT00001912. And if we go down to the bottom, five bullets from the bottom, there it is. So the -- this is some public remarks that were made, and I believe this was made by the Solicitor-General: “To be clear, since the beginning of the protest, more than 1,500 Ontario Provincial Police personnel have been deployed to the City of Ottawa, providing a range of support to the Ottawa Police Service.” This was a press release, I believe. Are you able to confirm that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you or your office participate in drafting this press release?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And I’ll take you now to ONT00005345. So if we go down. Right. It’s Fuad Abdi to you, subject line, “OPP deployment number Ottawa”. And it looks like he is providing you with some OPP Ottawa deployment numbers. My understanding is that these numbers were requested by the Solicitor-General’s office from the OPP. Is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why was this request made from the OPP in terms of the number of officers?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then it says at the end of that paragraph: “I have noted for the OPP we will not -- and only bottom line numbers being used to confirm support being provided to Ottawa and having a sense of what the feds need to bring to that table.” So a few questions. With respect to that in particular, was this chart being used to confirm the number of OPP officers that have been provided to be able to then say, “Well, now, this is what the federal government needs to contribute”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in terms of the comment that having a sense of what the feds need to bring to the table, are you aware of what that’s referencing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I understand from Commissioner Carrique’s evidence that the 1,500 officers, OPP officers, was an administrative number and that, in fact, referred to shifts and not to actual 1,500 individual OPP officers. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
But were these 1,500 different individuals, if I can put it that way, or were these, you know, 100 officers on one shift and then potentially similar number of officers on another shift and ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- you’re reusing some of the same officers at different times; correct? It’s not 1,500 officers ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And were you aware that there was confusion at the municipal and the federal level with respect to the number of individual OPP officers deployed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there ever a discussion with Chief Sloly to clarify that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when was that? Do you recall?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so what was explained to him in that call, then?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he accepted that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you get the sense that he accepted that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And why wasn't he happy?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that because there was an -- there was a sense that giving numbers of officers was an issue in terms of giving away police tactics or it could have some sort of detrimental affect on the police operations, or was it because he felt that the number was not being accurately portrayed?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I see. So if the public thinks he has 1500 officers to work with, they're saying why isn't he doing anything with them?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And these officers were mainly, as you said, being used for maintenance, to rotate tired police officers out and bring other police officers in?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But what I mean is they were not being used to ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- dismantle the protest.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Correct? Okay. Was there any concern that revealing the number of officers deployed could be harmful to operations?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
From Chief Sloly.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have that concern?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If so, why were the numbers made public then in the press release?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you would have been against doing that; is that what I'm understanding? If you had been asked, you would have said no?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you weren't consulted on it, and so you weren't able to give that advice; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can turn to ONT00003843? And this is now February 7th. And if we -- there it is. So you have a call. You say, "Briefing this AM" And then it says, "Call with OPC CC."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that's OP -- okay, so this would be Commissioner Carrique?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. "Briefing this AM Would be asking for twice the number of officers he requires." Can you explain this notation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did he give you any more context other than that? Why or what the purpose of that would be, whether he agreed with it, whether he had concerns about that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
You put a star there though and underlined it twice.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
It seems like perhaps you were expressing in your notes some concern?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And at this point, the -- Chief Sloly had made known the number of officers he required. Were you made known by this time, February 7th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to 17:15, a little bit further down on this same document? And can you just, for the record, indicate who the individuals in this meeting are?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you now to ONT00001141? So these, I believe, are the Solicitor General's notes?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So that's fine. We'll go to OTT0000 -- or 000, rather, 29488.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
OTT00029488. Okay. Is there anything further down? Okay. Okay. If we can keep going down? Yeah, keep going down. I believe it's coming up. Yeah, keep going. Yeah, we'll keep going down. Yeah, keep going down. Okay, yes. So there it is. If we can just go up a little bit more? So it's dated February 10, and if we go down just to the signature line, so this is a letter that was sent by the Solicitor General to the Mayor and to the Chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board. This is a response to the request that was made for those officers. Were you involved in drafting that response?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And have -- did you read this letter at the time? Were you aware of this response at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding from the content of this letter is that the Solicitor General is saying that she will forward the request to the OPP Commissioner, as we saw in those notes, in the meeting that was held earlier?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so is your understanding that the resources were contingent on a plan in some respects?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this time, there was not one?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Mayor Watson testified ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But the government can help to bring that request forward and to encourage the OPP Commissioner to deploy those resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So you did not believe you had the ability or the authority to recommend or to talk about the needs in Ottawa and to make any suggestions to the OPP Commissioner?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, on February 9 at 3:30, there was a call between Mayor Watson, Premier Ford, and Minister Jones. Were you on that call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
There was a call on February 9 with the Mayor of Ottawa, the City Manager, Mr. Kanellakos, and Solicitor General Jones. Were you aware of that call or were you on that call?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So in that meeting, Mr. Kanellakos indicated about that meeting when he testified that Minister Jones expressed the view that the request was a law-enforcement issue that needed to be dealt with between the Chief and Commissioner Carrique, and that accords with what you just said right now; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So fair to say that she did not see a role in helping to pass on that request to Commissioner Carrique other than saying, you know, “Here’s the request”; right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Mr. Kanellakos testified that on this call, the City asked what other actions the province could take in terms of regulation or legislation to put pressure on the protesters to leave, and he reported that Minister Jones said that this was a law-enforcement issue and so therefore it should be dealt with law enforcement. Do you share that view that there was not a regulatory or legislative action that could have been taken by the province?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. So aside from the declaration of the emergency, was there anything else that the province could have done at this point?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if I can take you to OPP00004580. And these are some text messages with Commissioner Carrique, and I’ll take you to page 70, the bottom of page 70. And if we go up a little bit. So it looks like you’re in blue because there it says: "Thanks, Deputy, much appreciated." That would be you, right, when -- the green, when -- when the person says, “Thanks, Deputy,” they’re referring to you; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That’s right. Okay, perfect, that’s what I meant. Okay, so if we go up -- if we can go up a little bit more: "Deputy, on the call OPS and CACP. Any word if the requestion for operational resources to the premier and SolGen will be referred to OPP?" So that would be Commissioner Carrique saying that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And then if we go down, in response to that question, you say: "Confident it will be referred, not certain." Why would it not be certain that the referral, anyway, would be made?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So this was because you hadn’t had that discussion yet ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- to make the determination.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would there be a scenario in which that referral wouldn’t happen?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If I can take you to ONT00005154, and we’re moving ahead to February 8. When it says, “Call with OPP,” is that likely Commissioner Carrique?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we go to page 4 -- "Noon, meeting with feds and City of Ottawa."
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
We down, we see all of the participants at that meeting. If we go down -- and this is a staff-level meeting, is my understanding, with provincial representation, federal representation, and also municipal representation; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if we go to the bottom of the page, so it says: "Blair and Mendicino both want three- way with Mayor and SolGen and this is desire." Can you explain that notation?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did that meeting take place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, so this would be what we’ve been calling the “tripartite meetings”; are you aware of that terminology that we’ve been using in the hearings here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And at this time, at this meeting, did you have a sense of whether this was something that was possible and that could happen? Did you give a response to that request?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you did that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you recommend that she attend, or did you give any recommendation with respect to attendance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you make any recommendation about attendance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, ultimately, she did not attend, is my understanding; is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And my understanding, too, is that they were looking for some provincial representation, if not the Solicitor General, then the Premier, and he also did not attend. Were you aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And I'll turn now to Document SSM.NSC.CAN00003019. So if we -- these are some text messages. This is involving Mike Jones, who's the Chief of Staff of Minister Mendicino. And if we go down, we go down a little bit more, okay. And so essentially, if we go up a little bit -- so it looks like Mike Jones is saying: "On Ontario, we haven't had much from Jones, so we've asked the premier's office if there's someone else they'd like us to play with." And then if we go down, "How was that?" "Fine. He didn’t say no and promised an answer by end of day." So my understanding is that they were looking for some representation but ultimately, there was no provincial representation. Do you know why that was the case?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If we go to SSM.NSC.CAN00002052, and this is a readout from the February 8 tripartite. And if we go down to where Minister Blair is speaking, we go down: "Ontario involvement, I know Marco has been having good conversations with Ontario. They are worried about being visible and then being asked about what the province is doing." Do you understand what this is in reference to?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
When he says, "They are worried about being visible", do you know who he would be having discussions with at the provincial level to make that assessment?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Is it accurate that the province was concerned about being visible and that was why it was not attending the meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, it wasn’t visible in those meetings because it wasn’t attending, so was that a concern that if it came to the meeting, it would be asked about what it was doing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you so SSM.CAN.NSC00002837. And this is a readout of a call between Mayor Watson and the prime minister on February 8. And if we go down -- keep going -- keep going -- yeah, keep going down -- all right. So we see the prime minister at the bottom says: "I know we are looking very carefully at what we can do more. Brenda Lucki is looking at that. One of the challenges is that it goes in steps. The first step is to go to the OPP, then RCMP. It's difficult for us to say what we need to do directly until we have a better idea of what the province is doing. That’s why this table is so important, but we are there to give more support as needed." So were you aware that the purpose of these ministerial meetings was to sort out who's providing what resources and in what order, essentially?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. But in terms of the notion that having the three levels of government present at a meeting where resources can be discussed, official numbers can be clarified, the prime minister is indicating that that would be helpful, and I'm asking whether you would agree that that would be helpful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So here it looks like the politicians are, in fact, discussing resources, how many have been deployed, how many are required. We saw the mayor of Ottawa send a letter for resources. Is it your position that those actions were improper?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So short of deployment, I don't think anybody's arguing that the prime minister should be deploying resources, but in terms of passing along resource requests in terms of sorting out the numbers that have been provided and what's needed and what the order of operation should be, should the province be providing all OPP officers first and then the federal government and then the RCMP? It's unclear, and so my question is whether there is a role, short of deployment, that the politicians can play?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is there a role for politicians in assisting with these -- with the resource matters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, my question is to you, sir.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So that said, you would not have considered it important for a provincial representative to be at these meetings, if I take what you're saying then?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And is there a role in helping to coordinate?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So then if these meetings are in order to try to coordinate a solution and to come up with solutions, would you agree then, aside from the resource requests -- which I understand your position, I take your position on that -- was there -- there is a role though outside of the resources that the politicians can play, and these meetings could be a helpful venue for all three levels of government to be speaking to each other about those other measures that could be ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. The mayor testified that had the province participated in the trilateral meetings, there likely would have been less of a delay in receiving resources. Do you agree with that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. If we go to the bottom of page 2, yeah, and the prime minister, in the middle of that paragraph says: "But Doug Ford has been hiding from his responsibility on it for political reasons, as you highlighted, and important that we don’t let him get away from that, and we intend to support you on that." What is your response to those comments?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any political reasons that Premier Ford would have had or the Ontario government would have had for avoiding these meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, my understanding is that there was a commitment by the Solicitor General to participate in these tripartite meetings. And, in fact, in a call with Premier Ford and Minister Mendocino, Ford appears to have committed to asking Jones to participate, but then later kind of withdrew that. Do you know what caused this change in posture?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now Mayor Watson also testified that when he spoke to Premier Ford about attending these meetings, that Ford was adamant that he did not feel it would be useful to have three levels of politicians sitting around the table. And from the Mayor's view, he thought the Premier felt that it would be a waste of time, and he indicated that it wouldn't accomplish anything. Do you agree that it would have been helpful to have three levels of government at these tripartite meetings?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about to help kind of coordinate the flow of information and align positions, would it help for that as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now the Commission may hear evidence that the perception was that Ontario did not want to participate because they wanted the City of Ottawa to lead the response, and basically that it was a municipal response and that it should be limited to the City, and because Ontario viewed this as a federal problem. Are either of these reasons accurate, to your knowledge? Are you aware of these?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was there more to unpack there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Well, the question ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, the question was whether these two reasons, whether to your knowledge, those were reasons for not participating. One, that the City of Ottawa should lead the response to these protests, and two, because this was a federal problem.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you to SSM.NSC.CAN.00003104. And, again, my understanding is this is Chief of Staff to Minister Mendocino and somebody from the Prime Minister's office. If we go down, Samantha Khalil, I believe. Keep going. Keep going down. Okay. So, "From [Chief of Staff] mayor about the mayor minister Jones call. It did not go well. She told him she had no interest in being part of a political round table." (As read) Were you aware that that was Minister Jones' position?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you have discussions with her about participating in these calls?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Were you ever present on calls between Minister Mendocino and Minister Jones?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to SSM.CAN.00006068? And this is a read out of a call between Premier Ford and the Prime Minister on February 9. And if we go down, keep going, can you keep going. So they exchange some pleasantry there. And then PDF is Premier Doug Ford. And he says, "I understand and we all agree with peaceful protest but I'll start off with Ottawa [versus] Toronto. I'll say that the police chief and Ottawa Mayor totally mismanaged this. The Toronto [Police Department] and Toronto Mayor did a great job. They've entrenched themselves in Ottawa." You had -- you said you did not have discussions with the Premier during this time; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that includes phone calls but also correspondence?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And he would be getting his kind of briefing from Solicitor General; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you have an understanding for the basis of the Premier's view that the Ottawa Police Chief and the Mayor totally mismanaged it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you share that view?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The view that the Ottawa Police Chief and the Mayor totally mismanaged it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, I'm asking whether you shared the view, not with him, but in your own mind, whether you had that same view as he is expressing here.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Oh, sorry, I mean, did you have -- did you hold that view? I should probably use that better. Did you hold the same view?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about with respect to his comments regarding the Mayor? Did you have any view about the Mayor's actions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And then Premier Ford says, "The bigger one for us and the country is the ambassador bridge and the state ground there." Would you agree that the provincial government's priority at this time was the Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And are you aware whether politically the Ontario Government also viewed Windsor as a political priority?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we keep going on his comments, keep going down the next page? So he says, I've asked -- second line, "...I've asked our AG to look at legal ways to give police more tools and exhaust legal remedies because the police are a little shy and I can't direct them. So that's one area we can focus on. We [can] take their polar licenses, we checked that. We can shut down their fuel consumption and cordon off highways. That's where we're at." What was your understanding at this time, and this is February 9, of the tools that the police needed, aside from boots on the ground, as they say, just resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That's correct.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you ever have a discussion with the Solicitor General about what tools or legal remedies the Province could provide to the police?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you have any sense for what the Premier is suggesting here?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. The last two sentences of the first paragraph.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
That could be a typo.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you. And then on - - we’re now on the second page. The Prime Minister says, on the second line: “You shouldn’t need more tools - legal tools - they are barricading the OB economy and doing millions of damage a day and harming people’s lives.” Were you of the view at this time that there were no other legal tools that were required, that the tools required were available to the police at this time? Not resources, but legal tools.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you felt that the police had the authority that they needed in order to bring these protests to an end?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And in that same paragraph, in the middle of the paragraph, the Prime Minister says: “The bridges and tunnels act means the federal government has responsibility over the bridge and border, so there is a role for us to play and we’re happy to play it. But nobody can get on the bridge because they’re on municipal land being blocked.” And then further down, so just stick a pin in that, I’ll ask you something about that in a second. Further down, he says: “has Windsor asked […] anything of the OPP?” I think we’ll have to keep going down for that. Okay. There it is. “Has Windsor asked […] anything of the OPP? Have they made a formal request to make a […] request to support them” And the Premier says: “they’ve put that request in through the solicitor general. I spoke to the Mayor and that was the plan. [Solicitor General] was in touch as well and I understand the request is going forward” So at this time, it sounds like the Windsor request has gone through. Had the Ottawa request gone through at this time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on page 3, if we keep going down, yeah. The Prime minister says: “what are the next steps? You said the OPP are going in. are they keeping you apprised and do they understand the urgency? They can’t talk this out for 3 weeks, they need to act immediately” And then the Premier says: “they’ll act, but without directing them, it’s hard to describe their game plan. They’ll have a plan unlike Ottawa [where they] didn’t have a plan. I’ll get briefed tomorrow from the solicitor general and we’ll keep you updated. This is critical, I hear you. I’ll be up their ass with a wire brush.” And then the Prime Minister says: “We’re there with resources. Bill Blair will coordinate on our side, but you can reach out to Leblanc or me. You and I need to work together on this. People will be reassured by the two of us working together and we need to demonstrate this is not a place of lawlessness” And the Premier says: “agreed. You’ll get an update tomorrow” And then the Prime Minister says: “On Ottawa - it’ll go through stages of OPP to RCMP and we’ll have a plan. City of Ottawa has been struggling but as soon as OPP leans in a bit more, we’ll have more clarity on things. The federal government has no jurisdiction over Wellington street so it’s an area we need to [go through --] work through together. If the Ottawa residents have to go through another weekend like the past few weeks, it won’t go well” So in this discussion, there’s been some jurisdictional issues that have been identified. For example, the Federal Government doesn’t have jurisdiction over Wellington Street, the RCMP doesn’t have jurisdiction over Wellington Street, the Federal Government has some responsibility over bridges and tunnels, but policing is a provincial matter under the Police Services Act. So I just wanted to get your views on some of the jurisdictional challenges or issues that have been brought to light as we can see in this discussion, and how you see the different levels of government working together to come to a resolution to specially the events in Ottawa, which brought together many of those jurisdictional issues?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And once it becomes beyond the abilities of the local police service, how then do the other two levels of government work together to try to come to a solution, specifically with respect to Ottawa, which has those issues that we’ve identified?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so do you see the Provincial Government’s role in a city like Ottawa to be different than, for example, as somebody raised in one of the meetings, a city like Kingston that is not the National Capital Region and that is not the Capital City?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So those would be treated the same from the provincial standpoint?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, when the local police service is -- has gone beyond its capacity, is -- do you agree that the Province has primary responsibility to respond to those requests for services through the OPP?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I thought you just told me it was -- my understanding from what you said is that it didn’t matter whether it was Ottawa or Kingston. So in any city in Ontario.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Unless there’s a distinction.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so to the extent that the OPP has exhausted its resources, it would then turn to the RCMP to require additional resources from the RCMP? Is that the kind of logical ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. And in your view, the RCMP has a role to play as well; is that fair?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So it’s really a coordinated response among all three levels of government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now, at any point, did Commissioner Carrique, who I understand was mainly who was briefing you throughout this process, make any suggestion or ask about a provincial state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any discussions -- did you ask him whether he thought any of the measures under a provincial state of emergency would be helpful for him?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So did there come a point where you considered that a provincial state of emergency would be helpful as you see these resources being spread out thin?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in terms of declaring a provincial state of emergency, that’s within the purview of the Premier; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And Cabinet. And does the Solicitor General have a role in briefing or advising the Premier with respect to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what’s that role?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. But it’s not at the Solicitor General’s recommendation that the Premier would do that; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of whether that recommendation was made by the Solicitor General?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And do you have the ability to also make a recommendation to the Solicitor General with respect to declaring a state of emergency?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you do that in this case?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So is it your understanding that the decision to declare a state of emergency was made before the measures were determined, what the measures would be that would fall under that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you have any knowledge what was the turning point or the tipping point for declaring an -- for wanting to declare an emergency as of the 10th of February?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And I’ll you to ONT00005149, and this is the briefing note that the Solicitor General sent to Cabinet regarding the declaration of the emergency of February 12th. Did you advise the Solicitor General on this briefing note?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And so you saw it when it came out, essentially; you didn’t have any input into it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are aware of whether the drafting of the emergency measures had started by the time that the declaration was made on the 11th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what was your understanding of the objective of the declaration and the emergency orders that accompanied it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay, thank you. And if we can go down on this document. And so I just want to look at a little bit about -- look a little bit at the measures and what it -- what they prohibit. And so the first -- A(i) says: "Preventing someone from travelling to or from critical infrastructure as defined in 2(f)." So if we can go down to 2(f) -- yes, there it is. And so we see there from (i) to (x), or 1 to 10, the different elements under what is defined as “critical infrastructure”. It’s interesting to note that the Parliamentary Precinct is not included under “critical infrastructure”. Do you know why that was excluded from the definition of “critical infrastructure”?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And why was that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go back up to the beginning of that -- those measures -- keep going up. So if we go, then, to -- so, as you mentioned, then the Parliamentary Precinct would not be part of the definition of “critical infrastructure”, however, if we see in number 5, A(5), that the measures also prevent individuals from: "Preventing someone travelling to or from walkways, bridges, or highways, other than 400-series highways, which are already captured as “critical infrastructure”, if doing so would:" And there’s three conditions. Can you explain that particular measure and maybe explain what the purpose of that was.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And as you mentioned, highway in this case means essentially any road?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any concern that this might be over broad, if it captures any road anywhere in Ontario?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And conversely, given that there are three requirements or three possible requirements -- one of the three would have to be triggered -- was there a concern that potentially, it wouldn't be able to apply to Wellington unless one of those three was met?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So you were confident that these measures were targeted to the situation in Ottawa, but would not be over broad so as to impede peaceful protests in the Parliamentary precinct; is that a fair assessment?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to ONT00005152?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yeah.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So it was ONT00005152. And this is now February 14, and these were amendments that were proposed to the Emergency orders. Were you aware of these at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you consulted on the amendments?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did the solicitor general consult with you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the consultation with the solicitor general?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what can you tell us about the purpose of the additional measures?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Sure. Sorry, maybe I'll just clarify.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What was the intended purpose of these amendments?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
What are they targeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And if we go to the second page in the first paragraph under "Why does Ontario need these changes?" We'll keep going. Right. Here we are. It says: "Following the declaration of emergency on February 11, 2022, action by police services have addressed the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor. However, as the bridge has just begun to reopen to regular traffic, there remains a threat of impeded access to or egress from the use of it and other critical transportation infrastructure, including essential trade corridors." What was your understanding of the continued threat of impeded access to or egress from the Ambassador Bridge at this time? This is February 14.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there any coordination with the federal government on the tools that might be needed in the measures, in the provincial measures, to end the situation in Ottawa? Was there ever a discussion with federal counterparts about the measures?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So to your understanding and to your knowledge, neither did the solicitor general and neither did the premier, correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right. In your view, was the provincial declaration of emergency helpful in resolving the situation in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in Windsor?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how so?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So these measures were significant?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And to your knowledge, was any other level of government consulted on this provincial declaration or any of the emergency measures under it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And you mentioned that you also spoke to Commissioner Carrique about what measures would be helpful?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any similar discussions with Commissioner Lucki?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was -- did anyone ask the province, anyone meaning within the federal government, the municipal government, OPP, or RCMP, was anybody requesting that the province declare a state of emergency, to your knowledge?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Were the elements there prior to February 10 for declaring a provincial state of emergency? Could it have been declared sooner?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you doing that analysis in your mind as time went on?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And when -- at what point did you conclude that that was -- that that had been met?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So prior to that, it was your assessment that the conditions were not there; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
For the declaration?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So had that request been made, you would have considered it sooner?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now it's my understanding that the provincial state of emergency closely coincided with Ontario relieving some of those provincial mandates. Is that your understanding as well?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, Commissioner, I'm about to move on. This might be an appropriate time for a break. I'm sure my friends would appreciate that as well.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Give the Commissioner a minute.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Mr. Di Tommaso, I want to take you to ONT00005157. And this is now a call you had with Deputy Minister Stewart on February 13. Do you recall speaking with him about the Federal Emergencies Act at that time? If we can go to page 10?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And the third point, "Also Federal Emergencies Act is being discussed s on the table but great reluctance to invoke. Primarily because Provincial penalties under EOs are much greater than what is available under [Federal] Emergencies Act. Advise both [Minister] Jones and SoC of above." So what did you understand Deputy Minister Stewart to be telling you about the relationship between the provincial and the federal measures?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was this the first time you were informed of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you understand him to be saying that the provincial emergency measures were greater than the federal emergency measures, based on those notes that you made there?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The penalties. And did he give you a sense for why it was being considered, if that was the case?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I'll take you to ONT00003847. And these again are your notes. This is now February 14. And this is -- you make some notes in relation with -- to a call with Deputy Minister Stewart. At 8:55, "I inquire as to whether Federal Emergencies Act will be invoked today. Silence!" What was your interest in inquiring about the Federal Emergencies Act.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And did you take that to mean that that was the affirmative; in not wanting to answer one way or the other?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the Province expecting this to happen, or was this just you asking, or were you asking on behalf of others?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know whether the Solicitor General or the Premier were expecting the government to invoke the Emergencies Act?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And when Deputy Minister Stewart indicated that to you, that it was being considered, is that something you passed on to the Solicitor General?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, the Federal Emergency Act measures were put in place to help solve what you’ve indicated was a policing matter, so a law enforcement issue. Did you see any concern about using federal measures to deal with what is substantially a provincial matter, which is policing?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And there was a First Minister’s meeting on the morning of February 14; were you aware of it at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Do you know whether Premier Ford was given advance notice of this meeting and what the topic of the meeting was?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether he was briefed on the Emergencies Act prior to that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did the Solicitor General seek your input or advice on the Emergencies Act prior to that meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was it your view that the Federal Emergencies Act could help the police resolve the situation in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so, if that’s the case then, were you of the view that the Ontario measures were not enough to bring those protests to an end?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, it was not your view?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So, if it was your view that the Provincial measures were enough to bring these protests, at least in Ottawa and Windsor to an end, why did the Government support then, the invocation of the Emergencies Act by the Federal Government?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And in your view, did you support the use of the Emergencies Act?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And just to clarify, your views were not canvassed with respect to whether or not the Province should be supportive of the use of the Emergencies Act, was it?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we’ve heard testimony earlier this week about the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge, we’ve spoken a bit about that briefly as well. Is it your understanding that the request for resources that came from Windsor were, in some way prioritized by the OPP?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And do you understand, or do you have any knowledge of whether the Solicitor General directed Comm. Carrique to prioritize Windsor resources?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay and why would that be?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So, the prioritization of resources, you would say, is an operational matter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And, but you would agree with me that the Solicitor General can issue directions to the OPP Commissioner that are not related to operational matters.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And what is your understanding of the scope of that authority; that the Solicitor General has to direct the OPP Commissioner on non-operational matters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, but as you mentioned human resources would fall under that. So, prioritizing human resources in one area over another; would that fall into ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And are you aware of whether the Solicitor General did in fact issue any directions to the OPP Commissioner throughout these events?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we see in the Institutional Report that filed on behalf of the Government of Ontario, that the Business sector became quite activated with respect to the Windsor blockade. And I think you mentioned something along those lines as well, right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did that play a role in the decision to prioritize Windsor as an issue that had to be resolved?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now witnesses have testified before the Commission that the City of Ottawa attended to make a deal or did make a deal with protesters to move trucks out of residential areas; you’re aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And did you know that it was Dean French who was the person representing, or negotiating on behalf of the protesters?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And you didn’t -- you weren’t aware of that prior to his telling you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Do you know how Mr. French got involved and became the representative of some of the organizers in this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any contact with Mr. French during any of the time of these protests?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether Premier Ford or his staff had any contact with Mr. French?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of whether Mr. French was acting under the instructions of the Government, the Ontario government, to broker this deal, to find a resolution?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now we know the Emergency Management Ontario and the Provincial Emergency Operation Centre were both engaged in the Windsor situation. They were not engaged with respect to Ottawa; do you have a sense for why that is?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And what about the Provincial Emergency Operation Centre?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, but I mean it was activated with respect to the events in Ottawa on February 11th. Is that what your ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- what your evidence is? Okay. But not prior to that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you able to tell us when it went into enhanced mode?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Can I take you to PB.NSC.CAN.00007378? This is a letter from Commissioner Carrique on February 22nd to you. And if we go to the second page, you recall receiving this letter?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If we go to page 2, the last paragraph, Commissioner Carrique says, "While this situation is unprecedented, the OPP worked with Legal and determined that because we are engaging companies under the provisions of the Emergencies Act, not as procurement, contract or agreement, that we should work within the reasonable compensation provisions consistent with the terms of the Regulations." (As read) Now my understanding is that the tow truck operators were indemnified under the Emergencies Act. Are you aware of that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And were you involved in discussions around what indemnification could be provided to tow truck operators?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And my understanding is that the OPP was delegated power under the Emergencies Act to compel tow truck operators; is that right?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that done, were tow truck operators compelled under the Emergencies Act?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. In the evidence we received from Commissioner Carrique, it seems that the trucks had been lined up and ready to go before the letters were sent out, but that he had concerns about them backing out at the last minute. Do you recall this? Were you aware of this at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now just to go back to a point regarding the day-to-day enforcement operations, which as you have testified, the Solicitor General can't direct, in your view, was the OPS providing adequate police services at the time when the convoy became entrenched?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so then you understood that to mean that there was public order in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Now the Police Services Act provides that if the Ontario Civilian Police Commission finds that a municipal force is not providing adequate and effective police services, it can communicate that finding to the Board of the municipality and direct the Board to take the measures that the Commission considers necessary. Do you have any views on whether the Solicitor General's office should be able to recommend to the Commission to take such a step? I understand that right now that's not contemplated in the Act. I'm asking whether something like that would be helpful.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And -- right. So that's a different provision. It's my understanding that the Commission may, at the request of the Solicitor General, investigate, inquire into and report on the conduct or the performance of duties of a municipal Police Chief. Did the Solicitor General, to your knowledge, consider making such a request from the Commission?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are there any other mechanisms that can be used for the Solicitor General or the Commission, in this case the Oversight Commission, to remove a Chief of Police or have a Chief of Police step aside if it has concerns about its performance?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So my question is, should there be a mechanism, doesn't exist in the Police Services Act, but should there be a mechanism by which the Solicitor General can take steps to ensure adequate and effective police services if it is of the view that there are circumstances that warrant it where perhaps the Board is not able to act, or is not acting, it's receiving inadequate information, where there's a deficiency of some kind, which then does not allow for the Board, who as you say, would be the entity that would normally be the one to do that, would it be helpful to have some -- that kind of a mechanism in place?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And on that point, if I can take you to OPB00001647? So these are the meeting minutes of a meeting of the Ottawa Police Services Board on February 5th, and this is the one I believe you and Commissioner Carrique had been texting about on February 5th about a meeting at the Board. This is the in-camera portion of that meeting. And if I can take you down to I believe it's page 2 or 3, if we can just go to the second page? Okay. If we keep going down. Just scroll down. Okay. So in the middle of that paragraph, it says, "The Chief reassured the Board that there was a comprehensive plan. However, he could not provide all the details of what the Service was doing operationally." (As read) So here's an example where the Board has been told by the Chief that on February 5th there's a comprehensive plan. My understanding from your testimony is that there was not a comprehensive plan to end the demonstration on February 5th. Were you aware that the Board was being given then information that there was a comprehensive plan on February 5th?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. What were the options?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So were you aware that the Board was informed on February 5th that there was a comprehensive plan?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
If I can take you to OPP -- and I’m almost done, Commissioner. I just need a couple more minutes, if you will. OPP00004580. And if I can take you to -- these are text messages again. If I could take you to page 128? And this is between you and Commissioner Carrique. And at 3:59, if we can find that, so we -- again, we said the blue is you and the green is Commissioner Carrique; correct?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And so you say to Commissioner Carrique: “In a confidential board meeting I’m hearing Sloly tendered his resignation and external chief will be hired. Still confidential as meeting is going on.” And he says: “Interesting - this will be very important to confirm.” How did you learn about what was happening in the confidential board meeting as it was happening?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Lindsey Gray?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how were you receiving information about what was happening at the Board meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was that through text messages?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And sorry, what was the name of the person you indicated?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And who is Ken Weatherill?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And how was Ken Weatherill aware of what was happening at the board meeting? Was he in attendance at the board meeting at the time?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And that would be Lindsey Gray?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. So if I understand it, Lindsey Gray is in the meeting, she’s communicating with Ken Weatherill, and he’s communicating to you?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Is that normal protocol in a confidential board meeting?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Now, in his evidence, Commissioner Carrique indicated he was concerned about the hire of an external chief in Ottawa. Were you aware of Commissioner Carrique’s concerns?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Did you have any concerns about an external chief being hired?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if I can take you to my last document, OPP00004583? And I’ll take you to page 52. Now, these are text messages between Commissioner Carrique and Commissioner Lucki. So you were not on these messages. The second blue bubble on page 52. Let’s keep going down. Okay. So sorry, in the green. And I understand that green is Commissioner Lucki and blue is Commissioner Carrique. “With respect to your comments yesterday, I agree, we need to ensure OPS leaves Steve in play until we have done what we need to do. Introducing a new external player in the short term will set us back.” And again, this is February 16 at, it looks like, 12:36 or so. Were you aware that Commissioner Carrique was passing on the information that you had relayed to him to Commissioner Lucki?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And were you aware that commissioner Lucki asked Deputy Minister Stewart to reach out to Steve Kanellakos about this?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And if we can go down? So for context, we’ll keep reading. So Commissioner Carrique says: “I will see what I can do to get them to delay bringing in an interim Chief, if you think that will help” And Commissioner Lucki says: “If you have some influence, I think it would be helpful. Our Ministry Police Advisor is going to suggest the same.”
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Thank you.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you very much. So then with the new colour coding, Commissioner Lucki says: “I will see what I can do to get them to delay bringing in an interim Chief, if you think that will help” And Commissioner Carrique says: “If you have some influence, I think it would be helpful. Our Ministry Policing Advisor is going to suggest the same.” And then if we keep going down? “10-4” And again, this is, Commissioner Lucki said: “Had DM Stewart reach into Steve K (Ottawa City Manager. He assures that they are very sensitive to this, keen for the ICC plan to proceed and don’t want Bell to be displaced. Rob got the sense that there’s a lot of political infighting going on.” To what extent were you aware of these discussions that were being had with respect to the Chief of Police in Ottawa?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. And the discussions that are being had here, would you agree that this is impermissible, kind of political interference in something that is in the exclusive purview of the Board?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
So if these actions had been taken, is it your view that this would have been improper?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Are you aware of any communications between the Province and the City with respect to this issue?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Was the response to -- the Ontario Government’s response to the events in Ottawa and Windsor adequate in your view?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
The Ontario Government’s response to the situation in Ottawa and Windsor, is it your view that that was an adequate response?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And was there more the province could have done?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In your view, was the federal response adequate, in this case, to Ottawa and Windsor, from your vantage point, of course?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And from your vantage point, was there more that the federal government could or should have done, or done earlier?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And same question with respect to the municipal, again from your vantage point.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
In terms of what could or should have been done differently in order to respond to the events in Ottawa.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Right, it’s just more toll in the toolbox.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
And would you agree with me that the situation that went on for 25 days in Ottawa, it was unacceptable that it lasted that long; would you agree with that?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Thank you, Mr. Di Tommaso. Those are my questions for you. Thank you, Commissioner.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
No, no re-examination from the Commission. I just wonder if one of the parties may have been skipped, the National Police Federation? No? They had no questions?
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Okay. Perfect. Well, that ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Yes, it's been a ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
I think it was me who was sleeping this time. It's been a long day. Thank you, Commissioner.
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
Excuse me for interrupting. I just want to be clear. If you go back to the top of page 1, we have an issue again with the date stamp. You said February 14th ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- but if we subtract the five hours, it’s the ---
-
Natalia Rodriguez, Senior Counsel (POEC)
--- evening of the 13th.