Manitoba Committee Hansard — 18 June 2009 (Justice Committee, Sitting 1, 39th Legislature, 3rd Session)

39-3-ju1

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session - Thirty-Ninth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Justice Chairperson Mr. Daryl Reid Constituency of Transcona Vol. LXI No. 1 - 6 p.m., Thursday, June 18, 2009 ISSN 1708-6671

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Ninth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy, Hon. St. Vital N.D.P. ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley N.D.P. ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson N.D.P. BJORNSON, Peter, Hon. Gimli N.D.P. BLADY, Sharon Kirkfield Park N.D.P. BLAIKIE, Bill, Hon. Elmwood N.D.P. BOROTSIK, Rick Brandon West P.C. BRAUN, Erna Rossmere N.D.P. BRICK, Marilyn St. Norbert N.D.P. BRIESE, Stuart Ste. Rose P.C. CALDWELL, Drew Brandon East N.D.P. CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan N.D.P. CULLEN, Cliff Turtle Mountain P.C. DERKACH, Leonard Russell P.C. DEWAR, Gregory Selkirk N.D.P. DOER, Gary, Hon.

Concordia N.D.P. DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood P.C. DYCK, Peter Pembina P.C. EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside P.C. FAURSCHOU, David Portage la Prairie P.C. GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach P.C. GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson P.C. HAWRANIK, Gerald Lac du Bonnet P.C. HICKES, George, Hon. Point Douglas N.D.P. HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge N.D.P. IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Garry N.D.P. JENNISSEN, Gerard Flin Flon N.D.P. JHA, Bidhu Radisson N.D.P. KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie St. James N.D.P. LAMOUREUX, Kevin Inkster Lib. LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. La Verendrye N.D.P. MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns N.D.P.

MAGUIRE, Larry Arthur-Virden P.C. MARCELINO, Flor Wellington N.D.P. MARTINDALE, Doug Burrows N.D.P. McFADYEN, Hugh Fort Whyte P.C. McGIFFORD, Diane, Hon. Lord Roberts N.D.P. MELNICK, Christine, Hon. Riel N.D.P. MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East P.C. NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom Interlake N.D.P. OSWALD, Theresa, Hon. Seine River N.D.P. PEDERSEN, Blaine Carman P.C. REID, Daryl Transcona N.D.P. ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Rupertsland N.D.P. RONDEAU, Jim, Hon. Assiniboia N.D.P. ROWAT, Leanne Minnedosa P.C. SARAN, Mohinder The Maples N.D.P. SCHULER, Ron Springfield P.C. SELBY, Erin Southdale N.D.P. SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St. Boniface N.D.P.

STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo P.C. STRUTHERS, Stan, Hon. Dauphin-Roblin N.D.P. SWAN, Andrew, Hon. Minto N.D.P. TAILLIEU, Mavis Morris P.C. WHITEHEAD, Frank The Pas N.D.P. WOWCHUK, Rosann, Hon. Swan River N.D.P.

1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE Thursday, June 18, 2009 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Marilyn Brick (St. Norbert) ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Mr. Chomiak, Hon. Ms. Oswald Ms. Brick, Messrs. Dewar, Faurschou, Goertzen, Graydon, Ms. Korzeniowski, Mrs. Mitchelson, Messrs. Reid, Saran APPEARING: Mr. Kevin Lamoureux, MLA for Inkster WITNESSES: Mr. Mel Klassen, Association of Manitoba Municipalities Mr. Maurice Butler, Town of Morden Mr.

Keith Atkinson, City of Brandon Mr. Marc Robichaud, Ste. Anne Police Department Mr. David M. Sanders, Private Citizen Mr. Tom Simms, Community Education Development Association Ms. Diane Roussin, Inner City Safety Coalition Mr. Allan Wise, Inner City Safety Coalition Mr. David Chartrand, Manitoba Métis Federation Mr. Cyril Keeper, Private Citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 16–The Police Services Act * * * Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. Will the Standing Committee of Justice please come to order. This meeting has been called to consider Bill 16, The Police Services Act.

We have a number of presenters registered to speak this evening, as noted on the list before committee members. Before we proceed with the presentations, we do have a number of items and points of information for the committee members to consider. First of all, if there is anyone else in attendance in the audience here this evening who would like to make a presentation, please register with the staff at the back of the–this committee room and we'll add your name to the list.

Also, for the information of all presenters with us here this evening, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you're going to accompany your presentation with a written–with written materials, we ask that you provide 20 copies. If you need help with photocopying, please speak with one of our staff in this committee room and we'll assist you with the photocopying. As well, I would like to inform presenters that, in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from the various committee members.

Also in accordance with our rules, if a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, their name will be dropped to the bottom of the list. If a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters list. On the topic of determining the order of public presentations, I will note that we have a number of out-of-town presenters in attendance and they're marked, for the attention of committee members, by an asterisk on the list provided to you.

With this consideration in mind, in what order does the committee wish to hear the presentations this evening? Ms. Marilyn Brick (St. Norbert): I suggest that we hear out-of-town presenters first and then people from Winnipeg second. Mr. Chairperson: It has been proposed that we hear the out-of-town presenters first as listed. An Honourable Member: Agreed. Mr. Chairperson: Is that agreed? Thank you, so ordered. I would like to inform all in attendance some of the provisions regarding the hour of adjournment and the consideration of our business tonight. In

2 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 accordance with the sessional order adopted in the House, as we have–currently have less than 20 presenters registered, if this committee has not completed clause-by-clause consideration of these bills by midnight, a number of rules will apply, including sitting past midnight to hear presentations; (2) if they are not already finished, concluding presentations at 1 a.m.; and (3) interrupting proceedings to conclude clause by clause on this bill at 3 a.m.

Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise committee members and members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee. The proceedings of our meeting are recorded in or der to provide a verbatim transcript, and you will see the Hansard folks located directly behind the Chair. Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter from the public, the Chair first has to recognize that individual and this is a signal for our Hansard folks to turn the microphones on and off. Thank you for your patience, and we'll now proceed with public presentations.

Bill 16–The Police Services Act Mr. Chairperson: The first out-o f-town presenter I have is Mel Klassen, Association of Manitoba Municipalities. Is Mel Klassen with us here this evening? Good evening, sir. Please come forward. Do you have a written presentation, sir? Mr. Mel Klassen (Associ ation of Manitoba Municipalities): Yes, I do. Mr. Chairperson: I'll get the page to assist you, and then I'll give you the signal in a few moments to proceed. Please proceed when you're ready, Mr. Klassen. Mr.

Klassen: Honourable minister and members of the committee, the AMM is pleased to have this opportunity to make a formal presentation on the new police service act. This is an important piece of legislation for all of Ma–all Manitobans, and particularly for municipalities as protective services are a key municipal responsibility. Safe communities are more than just an expectation.

They are the cornerstone of a healthy and sustainable community, and because of the importance of policing, the Association of Manitoba Municipalities, as the umbrella group that re–represents all commu–municipalities in the province, would like to provide some comments and suggestions on the proposed act. Police boards: The move in this bill to force elected councils to appoin t a board to oversee local police services is counterintuitive and takes direct responsibility for policing out of the hands of those elected to run the force.

Municipalities certainly understand the need to be transparent in their decision-making process, and today's municipal council is more transparent and accountable to the people they serve than at any other time in history. If a local resident has a question about a municipal decision, they are well aware who their local representative is and often knows them on a first- name basis. Nearly all municipalities in the province have a Web site or an electronic way to communicate with citizens.

Manitoba Intergovernmental Affairs has worked with municipalities and our association to make municipal government in Manitoba an open process. Perhaps most important–importantly municipal councils face their electorate every four years. There are plenty of mechanisms already in place for citizens to stay informed on the decisions their council is taking, and there are opportunities to replace representatives if those decisions are not in tune with the desires of the local community.

Municipalities are concerned that moving the oversight of the local police force away from the elected council and into th e purview of an appointed board will not deliver a more transparent and accountable system of poli ce oversight. Should 16– should Bill 16 be passed as it is curr–currently written, these appointed boards will have control over the hiring of a police chief and can also hire officers. As currently suggested, police boards will set the direction of the municipal police force and will take on supervisory responsibilities as well.

Police boards will be charged with the duties of establishing priorities and objectives for the police service and must monitor the police chief to ensure compliance of community needs and values. Munic–municipalities are concerned that the proposed changes in police oversight will weaken the role of police in our smaller communities. In many communities, the police chief is an active participant in community initiatives, participating in various committees and helping to set the direction of key priorities.

These are ofte n outside the scope of traditional policing, however flexibility exists in the current system and allows the chief to participate, as

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3 the chief is viewed as a part of the municipal administration whose goal is to support the community. It is possible that by taking the chief–by making the chief accountabl e to a non-elected board rather than the council, the chief will no longer play this important role in the community. * (18:10) While the bill leaves the final responsibility for the police budget with local councils, the police board will be advising council on what is required.

Even if on paper the final authority lies with the council, it will be extremely difficult for the municipal council to refuse requests of the police board. This creates a potential of conflict within the community between the appointed board and elected council on a financial support–on, on the financial support for the police force. Municipal councils are expected to balance their budget taking in all factors, including limited revenues, increasing respon- sibilities and escalating infra structure costs.

Most of the communities outside Winnipeg that have their own police force are able to hold their police costs to under 20 percent of their total budget. This is done through a careful examination and balancing of the total needs of the community. The police board will have a single focus and is unlikely to provide a balanced review of community needs prior to submitting their financial request to council. This leaves municipal councils in the untenable position of having to either refuse a request of the local board or succumb to the request at the expense of other community priorities.

There is also reason to question the financial impact local police boards will have on municipalities. We understand municipalities will be expected to pay some of the costs for board members, and space will likely need to be provided for meetings. However, what is most concerning for municipalities is the ongoing administrative cost of these boards. Currently, in most small communities, the police chief and force get support from the municipal office. It is unlikely a board designed to be independent from council will want to maintain this relationship.

The result may be a separate, duplicate administrative process with the cost of this duplicate process undoubtedly falling to the municipality. We are concerned that this will not only cost municipalities financially but will prove to be a wedge in the delivery of services to the community. While the gold–goal of mandatory police boards is to provide greater citizen oversight into the management of local police services, we believe this is unnecessary and will in fact only complicate the process further. The need for mandatory boards is also reduced due to the other positive changes in the new act.

The AMM is suppor tive of the creation of the provincial police commission as we see the merit in having a province-wide, civilian-led commission that can advise government under directions. The AMM is also supportive of an independent investigative unit that will handle those cases involving police use of fatal force, serious injury and other incidents. Policing is certainly a core municipal responsibility and one municipal councils do not take lightly. Community leaders know that to build and sustain a healthy community, public safety is paramount.

While we can fully support the need to make communities safer and support the need to make the system more transparent, we do not believe turning over control of local police forces from elected municipal councils be appointed–or to appointed boards will meet this objective. Therefore, the AMM requests the province to amend Bill 13 to make police boards voluntary for municipalities. We want to thank the committee for providing our association the opportunity to comment on the bill and would be pleased to respond to any questions of the committee. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr.

Klassen, for your presentation this evening. Questions of the presenter? Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Thank you, Mr. Klassen, for spending your summer evening with us here tonight on this issue.

You've echoed many of the comments that I've heard from other municipal leaders as well regarding the mandatory police board provision within the act, and certainly there's a concern that it, maybe it's been brought in as a response to something that happened in a particular municipality, but, by and large, and I think we're all happy for this, the policing relationship between the municipalities and their citizens seem to be working quite well in most rural areas.

Question for you: one of the things I've heard is the concern that the police board in some of the smaller communities might slow down the ability for responses, not responses to individual crimes. For example, where a councillor had a concern about a rise in break and enters in one particular area. At this level, now the council then goes to the police and

4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 says, you know, we're concerned about an overall increase in break and enters in our community, and it can be addressed fairly quickly. With another level in between the council and the police, that slows things down, but that's the concern that's been raised to me. Would you share those concerns? Mr. Klassen: Yes, we would share those concerns, but we do realize that the bigger municipalities, they probably don't have the concern as we would.

Like we're–like, in Altona, we're a small community and our police chief sits on our–at our council, and when we have our meetings every two weeks, he would respond to questions of council right there. So it's very transparent, but our concern is if we had another level of government in between the council and us and all the extra, extra costs to that, and that is something we're concerned about. Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Thank you, Mr. Klassen, for the presentation, and you and all of the members of the AMM and all the presenters for coming out and providing advice on this.

I–the–I just want to make a few comments and then ask you a question, 'cause I think there's going to be a, a–if I look at the pre–the presenters here, I think there's going to be a varied–as happened during our public presentation, there's going to be varied opinion as to how to go on this issue.

You talked about–my question will be–I'll come back to my question, but the–this–there's a–if there's a principle that if there's going to be a civilian type of board, it's either for, for all communities, if it make– if it's good for some communities, it ought to be good for all communities, and that strongly came out of our public hearings. Notwithstanding that, there has been some concern about smaller communities and their relationship.

We, we've tried to balance off, in the act, the issue of civilian input and control and democracy with the issue of municipal involvement, by allowing for municipal appointments to the board that could be co–could be co-terminus with, with in fact being on a municipal council. At, at least–we're going to at least bring forward one amendment tonight that's going to allow the municipal council to, to be chair and vice-chair of, of the police boards.

But it's very hard, and we spent a lot of time, many hours, trying to figure out at what level do you say there's a police board and what level you say there isn't a police board. And you say small; small connotes geographic. I know there's some police services that have one or two members; I know that some have 10 or 15. At what point do you say it's voluntary and not voluntary? Do you say it's only voluntary if it's a population of 700,000? Thirty thousand? Fifteen hundred? Five hundred? What's your comment on that? Mr. Klassen: I'd like to make a comment regarding Plum Coulee.

Presently, we–they have a contract with us. They're a little ov er 750 people. The reason they came with us is because they felt that the RCMP did not have time to work in their community. So they asked us for a contract. So we, we presently have a contract with them, and it works very well. It's efficient, an d it works well for us. We feel the efficiency is in there, and we feel if there would be– would have been a local police board, it would not have happened. It would not have happened because this was the bad elected people that made this decision.

And I think it's wor–it's working out very well because we did get a, in fact, a certificate. Both Plum Coulee and Altona got a certificate from AMM for being creative in how they handled this situation. And Manitoba Justice are th e one that supported the, the way that we set up the contract. Mr. Chomiak: Yeah, just two points. I don't want to imply–I don't think any of us are implying bad, bad governance or any ill intent on the part of any municipality. I, I–most of the people that do it aren't doing it for anything other than public service. I mean, that's–be a hundred percent.

So your point is that but for the elected members sort of getting together, there probably would not have been this coming together of the contract with Plum Coulee. We have put provisions in the act to allow for that kind of variation within boards, but I see your point. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Klassen, did you wish to comment? Mr. Klassen: I appreciate your comment. Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): Thanks for your presentation tonight, Mr. Klassen.

As I well know, the contract that you have with Plum Coulee has worked out very well and, and as of a couple days ago, talking with the people from Plum Coulee, they were ecstatic. If a contract like that had not been able to been worked out, what would have Plum Coulee been doing? They were unsatisfac–they were unsatisfied with the RCMP. They were having issues in their town, which have been resolved now. What would they do under this act if, if they had no contract with you, and with the Town of Altona?

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5 Mr. Klassen: Okay, I want to be careful that I don't badmouth the RCMP because I–we, we've–we have been well-served in our area with the RCMP. It's just there are not enough RC MP officers to do the policing work that's needed to carry–do, do bylaws and that. They just can't do that. So that's what Plum Coulee was concerned about. They said we, we reached the 750 num ber so, therefore, now we can have a choice. Do we go with RCMP or do we go with the town police?

They felt they wanted to go with town police because now they could get more for their buck, as you call it, right? They could get the, they could get–but what we do is we will go into the schools. We'll go to patrols. We will service their, their by-laws, make sure that they 're enforced. So those are things they're getting now. * (18:20) Now your question is what would they have done had we not been able to make a, get a contract? I know they're also talking to some other jurisdiction in the area.

Otherwise, they would probably, if they couldn't get a contract with us, they would have had to go back to the RCMP. I take it that's what would have had to happen. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Klassen. Next presenter we have on our list from out of town is Maurice Butler, from the Town of Morden. Mr. Butler, are you here, sir? Welcome. Thank you for your patience. Do you have a written presentation, sir? Mr. Maurice Butler (Town of Morden): Yes, I do. Mr. Chairperson: Just give us a moment and we'll distribute to committee members, and I'll give you the signal to proceed.

Please proceed, Mr. Butler. Mr. Butler: Thank you. Honourable ministers, members of the committee, good evening, and thank you for allowing me to make this presentation this evening. On March 5th, 2009, on behalf of the towns of Morden, Altona, Plum Coulee and the City of Winkler, a presentation was made to Mr. Ron Perozzo, concerning the proposed new Manitoba Police Services Act that would see the mandatory implementation of a civil–civilian police board comprised of members who would possess little or no expertise in the operation of a police service.

This board will be mandated to hire, fire, direct and monitor the chief. In addition, it will be allocating funds provided from the municipal budget. Overall, the municipal police service must operate under the general directions and supervision of the municipality's police board. The three police departments currently operating in the Pembina Valley represent the largest contingent of municipal policing in the province. They have a total complement of 40 highly trained, highly skilled professional officers with a combined total of 344 years of service.

These officers have an extensive background, knowledge and understanding of police procedures, and the expertise to implement same in providing safe and healthy communities to some 20,000 people in which to live, work and play. The Morden, Winkler and Altona police services are viewed by other communities as examples of municipal policing that works. Various communities have been in discussion with the respective police chiefs about the operation of their departments, and the departments have received numerous positive comments as well as commendations from other law enforcement agencies and Crown attorneys.

Our police services are beyond reproach, which brings one to question the vali–validity of forming an outside civilian agency to perform the role of watchdogs. The Province has now tabled the new Police Services Act as Bill 16. The Morden Town Council have reviewed the legislation and would like to provide the following comments. The old, existing act is in real need of replacement. For this reason, we are pleased to see Bill 16 moving forward. It will address a number of issues th at are, that are in need of change.

Once the new act is in place, Morden Town Council will be providing well over $1,000,000 without having a say as to how those dollars are spent. As well, the relationship between the police chief and officers with the town is effectively cut. Though still considered town employees, the chief will no longer report to or take direction from council through the chief administrative officer. We have already stated our appreciation for the Province moving forward on replacing the outdated act. Many departments have been asking for a new act for years.

We do not view all the proposals in the consultation papers as positive. It is important to ask that the new act becomes legislation and serves Manitoba well into the future, rather than be viewed

6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 as a quick reaction to a single event. This is our one opportunity to get it right, and we are prepared to assist it to ensure that it is right. Our council has made our concerns known to the Association of Manitoba Municipalities, with the expectation that they will lobby the provincial government for changes to the proposal to ask for mandatory civilian boards. As a former law enforcement officer with 30 years' experience, I've witnessed departments that had civilian boards in place.

It would be fair to say that this practice does not work effectively or efficiently. I personally foresee the possibility of morale breakdown within the police department as one of the biggest issues. We are in opposition to mandatory municipal police boards. In communities our size, our view and experience with civilian involvement has not been productive. With the current set up of our municipal policing we can only view the recommendations of civilian boards being de trimental to the overall effectiveness of our police services.

As well we see this as usurping the authority of local councils who are elected by and accountable to the community. To quote a rural phrase, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Once again, honourable ministers and members of the committee, thank you for allowing us this opportunity to present th ese views to you this evening. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Butler. Questions for the presenter? Mr. Goertzen: Thank you, Mr. Butler, for your presentation. You brought up an interesting–well, you brought up a few interesting points.

First of all we agree, totally, that there needed to be a review and a new police act brought in. It'd been decades and I think everybody in this room would be in agreement that it was time for a new act and so in complete agreement on that point. The point that you made that I want to just touch on is that of morale in, among police and that it might lower the morale by having a police board intercede in between the co uncil and the police right now. That's an interesting point.

You've got eight, I think about an average of eight years of experience based on the stats that you provided for us which is also pretty remarkable considering how difficult it is to recruit and keep officers these days. Can you just expand a little bit more on how you think morale would be affected by putting in a police board as it compared to the current system that you have. Mr. Butler: I think to answer that question I would go back to the proposal that we submitted to Mr.

Perozzo where I indicated in that proposal and that presentation the fact that in a small community it's very, very difficult to be able to form a civilian board that is not completely objective and that don't come with any personal agendas. This is what breaks down the morale within the police department. When you're policing in a small community, be whatever small it is, whether it be Ste. Anne, whether it be East St. Paul, whether it be Morden, Winkler, Altona, the opportunity is there to wear many, many hats.

One day you're sitting having coffee with your next door neighbour and then you go to work and you lock him up overnight and then you still go to see him and have coffee with him again the next morning. And this is gonna happen frequently. We have what we, I, I think policing in small towns has become known as the coffee shop politics. There's a lot of things and a lot of decisions made at the local coffee shop tables. Those are brought to the committees and this is when I made reference in my presentation this evening. These are the differences that are brought to the table that make it difficult.

Some of these things are inevitable in a small town. Mr. Chomiak: Yes, thank you, thank you for your presentation and I, I, I think we all appreciate the fact that, that, that there's support for other aspects of the act and this is one, one aspect of the act where there's not complete agreement. Well, actually you can probably say that about the whole act. But in terms of ac–in terms of

an act I think, generally, people have, have bought in to most of the changes. What, where, where's the cutoff, where's the cutoff line between a police having a board and not having a board? Is it, is it population? Is it that, is it history? If, if it's good for the town of, of Mink Creek is it good for the town of–why, why, why not, particularly when it's weighed in terms of appointments towards the municipality. * (18:30) Your suggestion I, I–would be along the lines of the AMM which would be voluntary, but I don't know how you make voluntary boards, how you, how you'd–so perhaps you could help me with that.

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 7 Mr. Butler: I think–Honourable Minister, I, I heard you ask the question of Mayor Klassen in the same regard, and I think that the, the difficulty of population is one to consider. But in my presentation to Mr. Perozzo in March of this year, we identified in our presentation that we don't have a disagreement or a misunderstanding about the, the role of boards within the Manitoba provincial–like the old Manitoba police commission, or the Winnipeg city police that had an advisory board, Brandon city police.

Those larger populant areas, I think, could quite well serve a board of that nature. But, in small towns, as I say, from previous experience, I've seen them become very detrimental to the, to the efficiency of the police department. Mr. Graydon: Thank you for your presentation tonight. It was excellent. I was just wondering, Mr. Klassen brought up that he, the Town of Altona tried to stay within 20 percent of their budget, their overall budget for policing. Is that number something that you look at in, at about the same in your jurisdiction? Mr.

Butler: Well, we certainly do, and that's one of the things that council has a responsibility to do is to try and keep that well within the keeping of our expenditures on our budgets in all departments, and, as he indicated in his presentation this evening, we're at the one million mark for our police department, and that's significant, and if we see a board taking a responsibility away from us to disperse that money. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Very quick question.

I don't know if it's a trend or what makes a trend per se, but let's operate on an assumption that there's a trend to move towards civilian boards of this nature. Are you aware of any jurisdictions where civilian boards are on their way out, or where maybe there was a civilian board at one time but because of some of the frustrations that you've experience–that you're referring to, where the civilian board is no longer in existence? Mr. Butler: Yes, I am. The village of Ste. Anne, and the town of Morden, both of which I was chief constable. Mr.

Lamoureux: Could, could you give an impression in terms of what happened in, in that situation? Mr. Butler: Too much local political interference from the residents who were on the board. Mr. Chomiak: I–we're, we're probably going to agree to disagree on this, but I, I don't accept the, the proposition that the town council will not have authority over the million dollars. The budget will be allocated by the council.

The–I, I do recognize that the, the police board would make, would come to council and make a request, which wouldn't be fundamentally different than what the, than what the police or the CAO would do now, and all liabilities, et cetera, would remain with the, with the town council. But I think we're going to probably agree to disagree on that. We tried to craft the legislation to the extent that, that the council would not–and I was well–we were well aware of the issue of how we've seen some areas of, of governance that independent bodies drive budgets. Gosh knows we do it.

We see it all across a system, but we did, I do take–I do not accept the proposition that you won't have say where all that money is spent. I, I don't think it'll be any less well controlled by the council, or well monitored, or well expended by the council in the future with a, a board structure than it is now. I, I just don't see it. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Butler, did you wish to comment, sir? Mr. Butler: I just wish to thank the honourable minister for that comment. If that's the way that he sees the act being interpreted, then that may be a possibility that we could, as a council, accept.

But the way the act was reading, it was saying that they would have control over that money. Mr. Chomiak: Yeah, I, I can say, unequivocally, no to that. They will not have control over that money. They will have the recommendation powers to make on the budget. The council will have control and, and say on–now, having said that, and having been in government and opposition for some time and knowing how Treasury Board and all those things work, I know, you know, lo oking at everyone's faces here, that that's easier said than done.

But certainly it was not the intention of the government to have the control of the funding move from the council to the police board. It was worded specifically to, to not have that happen. Mr. Butler: I thank the honourable minister for that comment. Mr. Chairperson: Any further questions for presenter? Mr. Graydon, a short question please, sir. It's–time's almost up. Mr. Graydon: Do you see any use for this board?

8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 Floor Comment: None whatsoever. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Butler, sorry. Mr. Butler: Sorry. None whatsoever. Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Seeing no further questions, thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Butler. Mr. Butler: Thank you very much. May I ask the committee chair, are we in a position to be excused? I have another meeting in Altona this evening and I'd like to make it, if I possibly can. Mr. Chairperson: Yes. Mr. Butler: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, sir.

Next out-of-town presenter we have on our list is Keith Atkinson, Chief of Police, City of Brandon. Good evening, sir. Please come forward. Do you have a written presentation, sir? Mr. Keith Atkinson (City of Brandon): I have an oral presentation, but I have some written material for reference. Mr. Chairperson: Give us a moment and then we'll distribute it to committee members, and then I'll give you the signal to proceed. Please proceed, Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson: Thank you. Honourable ministers, committee members, my name is Keith Atkinson. I'm the Chief of Police of Brandon, Manitoba.

I'm here today to represent the City of Brandon, and I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak here this evening. The City of Brandon praises the government for introducing Bill 16, The Police Services Act, as the current legislation is badly outdated and in need of review. For the most part, the City of Brandon supports the majority of the legislation. The City recognizes and supports the need for a provincial police commission.

It is hoped that the provincial police commission will become a proactive body that continually monitors policing trends and sets policing standards to meet the needs of Manitobans. In particular, the City of Brandon welcomes the establishment of policing regulations in the area of offices, detention faciliti es, vehicles, technology, firearms and equipment, as the current regulations are badly out of date or do not address many of the standards proposed. Other regulations discussed in

section 48(2) of the proposed act are also acceptable. As the new act will provide all municipal police officers authority throughout the province, it would also be important to consider a provincial discipline code, a discipline procedure and discipline procedures, rather, so all police officers are treated in the same manner throughout the province.

Section 76 somewhat addresses this which is also supported and welcomed. The City of Brandon is also supportive of the establishment of an independent investigation unit. There is a need to prov ide transparency when investigating serious incidents involving police officers. Investigations of this nature demand a certain amount of transparency while not compromising the integrity of the investigation. The system should also respect the rights of all concerned including the subject police officer.

The appointment of a civilian director to oversee the operations of a– of the independent investigation unit should strike the proper balance between investigational independence and the public's need to know. Alberta currently has a model similar to that proposed within this act that appears to be working well. Civi–civilian oversight bodies can increase the public's level of trust and can prevent perceptions of conflicts of interest when police services investigate their own members.

Likewise, it is recognized that due to the vastness of the province, it would be difficult and cost prohibitive to have a unit devoted to invest–to the investigation of all police-related incidents. The proposed model still provides the proper oversight to investigations of less serious incidents by individual police off–or police services while the director still oversees the investigation. * (18:40) The City of Brandon, however, is strongly opposed to the establishment of mandatory local police boards.

In response to the police act consultations held earlier this year, the council of the City of Brandon unanimously passed, in part, the following recommendation: that the decision to establish a pol–a local police board be left to the discretion of each Manitoba municipality who has or sets up its own police service. The proposed legislation outlines the pu rpose of the police board, the general duties of the police board, and specific duties of a local police board in sections 27 through 29. The City of Brandon submits that these functions currently take place in our current structure with

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 9 myself reporting directly to the city manager, who is responsible to City Council. The proposed roles of the local boards is also a bit confusing, in that it appoints the police, police chief yet the municipality is deemed to be the employer and sets the pay and other benefits for the chie f. Likewise, the police board may appoint police officers but, then again, is not considered the employer. The local board would also have no involvement with collective bargaining.

The police board develops the police budget but council is responsible for the total budget of the police service and there is no dispute resolution proposed. The City of Brandon feels that the current system works well and community policing concerns are properly addressed in a timely manner. The creation of a local board will only create confusion and establish another layer of bureaucracy for citizens. It will also complicate council's role in establishing citywide priorities and budgets.

The City of Brandon would suggest that police boards become voluntary and not imposed through the act, and as a result I'd like to thank you for providing me the time this evening for the comments I have just made. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Atkinson. Question for the presenter? Mr. Goertzen: Thank you, Chief Atkinson. A pleasure to see you again tonight; thank you for coming out on relatively short notice.

Not to pre-empt the minister's question about looking for a demarcation line on the, the population for a, a police board, one of the things I was wondering about to try to maybe overcome that obstacle, there's gonna be under the act a–the establishment of a police commission that'll have certain authority and then been given certain tasks.

I wonder if it would be something to consider, to have the police commission being given the mandate to determine where the, the board should be applied, recognizing that, that every community seems to have a different history with police boards, seems to have a different culture, seems to have a different experience with, with their own local policing, whether the police commission in consultation with the, the police, the community and the local governing body might play that role in helping to decide whether or not a police board is appropriate for an individual community , to try overcome the, the barrier of, of a population-based criteria for a police board.

Do you have any comment on that? Mr. Atkinson: Yeah, I think the police commission could play a role. If, if you look back into the history of policing and, and it's still prudent today as it was back then, Sir Robert Peel, who invented made– modern day policing, had a comment that the police are the public and the public are the police. I think that comment holds true today. Without the public support, the police are ineffectual. Therefore, I, I would suggest that the best place to determine whether or not–I don't think a population limit should be imposed.

I think it's best to be decided by the public at, in the community that they're in, whether through debate at City Council or through a plebiscite. I think that type of thing would send a strong signal to the elected officials as to whether or not they want a police board or not. Mr. Chomiak: Yes, thanks, Chief Atkinson, and I, I appreciate the, the, the Brandon-style of acknowledging what they see as good and then making suggestions for where they see is a problem. That's–I, I, I'm happy to see that tonight and, 'cause that's not always the case when we deal with legislation so I appreciate that.

The, I was struck by , I was struck by your comment that all municipalities should make boards voluntary.

From my discussions that would mean there'd be no police boards, which then means the principle of having some civilian direct input and responsibility while still leaving the financial and the labour matters with council which would–which is what we've done to make a compromise would not be provided–and that's interesting and that's not being critical but Brandon, if, if, if the position of Brandon and all the communities, Brandon and smaller, are taken into consideration, that means only Winnipeg would have a police board.

And I think if I asked the City of Winnipeg today would you rather have what you have or a police board I think they'd say they'd like to stand– stay with the status quo. And we think, and for a whole bunch of reasons, that, that I could go, go, get into that it, that it's, if there's validity in a dem–in, in, in a, process of having civilians on a board then it should apply across the board and does get back to the demarcation point but I do think in, if it's voluntary we will have none, and that says either things are working 100 percent or we are hoping, actually, that this can actually improve the situation.

10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Atkinson, did you wish to comment, sir? Mr. Atkinson: Well, I've worked under both systems. I was in Saskatch ewan prior to arriving in Manitoba two and a half years ago, as, as we've talked before, and I, I do prefer this system. I think it's much more efficient, especially in regards to council inquiries. My–I've been in this business 30 years now and I've found that when people have a problem with policing, they go to their elected officials, they go to their city councillors and the city councillors ask the questions. I respond quickly.

We have a good system in Brandon, where if a council inquiry comes in, it's immediately shipped to me. I–I'm afraid that if we had a local police board– and I don't think there's enough business in the local police board, or would be for Brandon, to meet every month–I would suggest they would meet the minimum, which is required, which is every three months. If an inquiry came in from the City Council from a member of the public in January, after the local police board had met, that would then be brought to the board's attention in the next meeting which would be March or April.

It would be sent to me for a response, if you're following protocol properly, and then it would be responded back to council, perhaps in June or July, which, in my view, isn't a, a quick reaction to a problem. I think it's, it's important that the police have an open line of communication, and, in my experience, what happens with police boards is citizens will, will come to the board to speak with them, and they use it as a platform or a soapbox, and I–and I've seen that many times. If they deal with council, they know there's a little bit more decorum required and they act accordingly. Mr.

Lamoureux: I understand that there is a chief of police association that goes across Canada, from what I understand, and they do deal with a wide variety of different issues and take positions. Is this an issue that you're aware of? Has, has that local association or that association dealt with this issue and, if so, if you can just provide comment on that? Mr. Atkinson: One of my other hats, I'm the president of the Manitoba Association of Chiefs of Police, so I can answer that question.

Our position, from that association, was we would not make any recommendation in regards to it because it might be perceived that we are picking our own boss. So we have deliberately stayed out of that debate. I'm also a member on the board of directors of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, and we've never really discussed that because each jurisdiction has its own rules. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Graydon. Short question, sir. We're almost out of time. Mr. Graydon: Thank you, Chief Atkinson.

It's–this new provincial police commission that we're talking about, if there was an issue in any jurisdiction, and from what we've heard tonight, there's three jurisdictions, fairly large jurisdictions that are satisfied with the status quo, but if there is an issue someplace, would this new police commission, could that actually act as, as an ombudsman sort of a situation or a go-between in, in, in a jurisdiction that does a–have an issue? Could you see that being used? Mr. Atkinson: I believe it could.

I know in other jurisdictions they allow for provincial commissions to do audits, to go out and do studies of police services to make sure that everything is, is up to standard. They, they have gone in other jurisdictions to the community, speaking with community representatives to see what the issues might be, so that–it could take place in that provincial board, yes. Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Atkinson. Next out-of-town presenter we have on the list is Marc Robichaud, Ste. Anne Police Department. Good evening, sir. Please come forward.

Do you have a written presentation, sir? Mr. Marc Robichaud (Ste. Anne Police Department): No, I don't. I'll just be presenting verbally. Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Please proceed when you're ready. Mr. Robichaud: Thank you. I will keep this quick because I'm, I'm simply going to be reiterating what's already been said by my predecessors here tonight. And I am pleased to have the opportunity to meet with the legislative committee on Bill 16, The Police Services Act. This committee is addressing a topic of longstanding interest to municipal police in the province.

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 11 Firstly, firstly, I would like to thank the government for introducing this bill. It is the culmination of significant work by the Department of Justice, and, certainly, a move in a positive direction. The commitment of this government to address these issues is certainly appreciated and long overdue. * (18:50) As a representative of the Ste. Anne Police Department and the town of Ste. Anne, I feel compelled to bring forward a few of our views in regards to amendments that should be made to the proposed bill.

Our, our sole concern with this bill is directly related to provisions set out in division 2 and 3 of the act, specifically sections 26(1) and 42(1). Again, those sections are around the mandatory formation of, of police commissions. This

section attempts to force elected councils to appoint a board to oversee local police services. I agree with Mr. Klassen's comment that this is counterintuitive. Not only that, we feel that it's intrusive into municipal affairs. It takes direct res ponsibility for policing out of the hands of those elect ed by the community to ensure the safety of its citizens. A common complaint regarding policing, in general, in rural Manitoba surrounds a lack of input with regards to policing by municipalities.

There is no doubt to the need for transparency and accountability in communities' decision-making process with respect to police oversight. That being said, policing is certainly a central focus of municipal governments' responsibility and one of munici–one municipal councils take very seriously. Community leaders know that to develop and sustain vibrant communities, public safety is paramount.

While we committedly support the need to make communities safer and support the need to make the system more transparent, we do not endorse turning over control of local police forces from elected municipal councils to appointed boards. Countless examples can be cited in which good intentioned–which the good intentioned formation of a local police commission has resulted in an overall negative impact to the policing of the community, the recent disbanding of our own police commission included.

Should Bill 16 be passed in its current state, boards will have control over the hiring of police chief, a key municipal employee. It will also have control over the overall direction of the department. This is unacceptable and does not take into consideration the needs of the community or, I believe, the wishes of Manitobans. I fully appreciate the objective of the mandatory police boards to provide greater citizen oversight into the management of local police services. We believe that in rural Manitoba that function is best served by the elected municipal government. Therefore, the town of Ste. Anne, the Ste.

Anne Police Department and I request the Province to amend Bill 16 to make police boards a voluntary option to communities. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Robichaud. Questions for the presenter? Mr. Goertzen: Mr. Robichaud, thank you very much for coming out tonight for your presentation. First of all, let me just make a comment about exceptions. I know that the minister has made a couple of points that the police board is–they believe to be a, a point of princi ple and that the principle should apply, you know, formally.

Let me tell you that having been around here not as long as some of my colleagues, but for some time, that every piece of legislation has exceptions, and we were debating The Medical Amendment Act not long ago and there was significant exception for pharmis in there– pharmacists in that act that, that applied for, for the– that applied for no other profession. And I think that there was a, a probably good reason why that exception existed, and every piece of legislation we debate has exceptions. I just want you to know that in the front.

When we talk about this act, there's certainly the feeling rightly or wrongly that some of the, some of the changes were a result of what happened in East St. Paul and that this local board issue might be in response to that. Whether that's true or not, that certainly is the feeling. And I know that the Ste. Anne Police Department has been in the news over the last number of years, not always in a positive way, but I think that there's some good things that are happening and, and more solid footing today than it was in times past.

But can you speak from a perspective of a small municipal police force, why challenges sometimes arise in, in these communities, and whether or not police boards would make that difference, or is there something else that, that's causing the problems and something else that's a solution for the problems that sometimes happen with small municipal police forces?

12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 Mr. Robichaud: Yeah, I think that, again, one of the, one of the key points is that within smaller communities there is a direct contact between the citizens of, of those communities and the elected council. There, there's generally an ease of, of dealing between councils and police chiefs because it's a quick–very, very much what the other presenters have said here, it's a very quick approach to dealing with, with problems.

These elected officials are elected by the community, and one of the key points that, that, that many of these elected officials come to, to office on are issues around public sa fety and the safety of the community. I, I don't know if that answers your question. But I think it's simply for ease. And I think, again, we get into situations where we have boards that are, that are put in place often with people that don't, don't understand the concept of, of governance versus management. We run into, you know, problems at, at almost every level with that or for what I've seen anyway. Mr.

Goertzen: Just for clarity then, some of the challenges that were happening in Ste. Anne–it's not my riding but I'm, I live close by, and so I certainly follow with interest–were result of the, of the local police board in some ways, and so it's not that the board proves to be a solution but it might be part of the problem. Mr. Robichaud: One hundred percent. For sure. Mr. Chomiak: Thanks for the presentation and I appreciate the comments, both the critical comments and the positive comments, I appreciate that. I–one thing I haven't pointed out–actually, two things I just wanted to point out.

I know this is supposed to be a question but, just for the edification of the–I think the idea of the Manitoba Police Commission, which would be the first body that would be launched under this legislation, is going to have one of its roles of qualifying, instructing and providing education to board members along with a number of activities, so it is true that the Manitoba Police Commission is going to have a fair amount of ability and can be used and we're, we're deliberately structuring in such a way so that it can be a, a, a failsafe solution to some problems that may come about.

But the, the second point is that we, we've tried to craft the legislation so that a lot of the issues that have occurred in our experience in, in the past with the police boards, will not occur. The clarity of their role–and actually, I see that, actually, it hasn't been that well communicated, because we had this earlier discussion about the financing issue.

I, I thought it was very clear that–we thought it was clear that the, the council is going to be responsible for the financing, and did receive recommendations from the board, so I admit to, I'll admit to even confusion on things that I thought were clarified, but the board members have to be qualified by regulation. We do have a flexibility in terms of the size of the board. Council will have appointments–in most cases, majority appointments to the board–and they'll be training board conduct. So we are conscious of the nature of smaller communities and their need.

But we think we've got a good enough balance, although I–you know, we're going to hear from a lot of presenters, so we'll keep an open mind. But I did want to point out that, that we have canvassed a lot of jurisdictions and a lot of experiences to what has gone wrong with boards and civilian-type boards, and we've tried to, in the act, deal with those, those issues, particularly in weighing–and we're going to hear from other people who are not going to be happy–with weighing some of the appointments of the boards towards the councils. So–because there are variations, right?

You could have all the members of a board appointed by the minister, all the members appointed by the council, a variation on that theme. So I–I guess I'm just going on, aren't I? Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Robichaud, did you wish to comment, sir? Mr. Robichaud: Yes, since, since you made a statement and not a question, I'll return with a question. You, you've said here today that, that if given the choice to the municipalities that, whether or not, you know, they were voluntary, we wouldn't have any police commissions.

I guess my question is, is that if we've had such a strong voice from the municipalities that have their own police services in response to the issue around the voluntary nature of having police commissions, why we wouldn't be strongly listening to that statement from the small municipal police departments and the municipalities that currently have their own, because, really, that's what we're talking about here. We're talking about the municipalities that have their own police services–which are few and far between in this province; for the most part, it's the mounted police–

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 so why would we not listen very strongly to those statements by those municipalities? * (19:00) Mr. Chomiak: Yes, thank you, and I–that's a, that's a valid question and I, I guess I'd, I'd counter we have 12–12 police entities in the province, and you're right. But both the RCMP, nationally and provincially, in all jurisdictions are grappling with the issue of governance of police, and the issue of confidence in the police.

Unfortunately, I think it's an issue and all governments, all entities, all police services, all communities, are trying to grapple with the issue of–we all want to support the police, but there, there are, there is a gap and there are concerns, and I suppose the governance issue is one way of trying to ameliorate those concerns. Mr. Chairperson: Any further comments, sir? Thank you very much for your presentation this evening, Mr. Robichaud. Floor Comment: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairperson: Are there any additional out-of- town presenters that would like to make a, a presentation here this evening?

Then we'll return back to the top of the list, and we have, we'll call David M. Sanders, private citizen. Good evening, sir. Please come forward. Do you have a written presentation for committee members, sir? Just give us a moment and we'll distribute to committee members and I'll give you the signal to proceed. Please proceed, Mr. Sanders. Mr. David M. Sanders (Private Citizen): Thank you, Mr. Chair, honourable minister and members of the committee. I'm appearing this evening as a private citizen and a lawyer in private practice, solely for the purpose of providing occasional pro bono work in the community.

I wish to speak in support of Bill 16, as far as it goes, and particularly the following provisions: first and foremost, the creation of an independent investigation unit to deal with police use of fatal force, with incidents involving serious injuries and with any other alleged criminal incidents that the unit chooses to investigate.

This has been a serious shortcoming in our system, where such incidents have been investigated by the Professional Standards Unit of the police force itse lf which, course, chooses to investigate some and not others, and the only appeal from that, I think, in the past has been to the honourable minister, who presumably would prefer to have someone else deal with these matters first. And I think this is a very important matter, and particularly the requirement that the unit monitor any alleged criminal incidents, even the less serious ones, and have the ability to intervene if they think necessary.

Secondly, and I think it's very important, the requirement that the City of Winnipeg, at least, establish a police board which will appoint the chief of the municipal police service, will hold the chief accountable for carrying out his or her responsibilities, will establish priorities and objectives for the police service, ensuring that community needs and values are reflected in the policing priorities, objectives, programs and strategies, and recommend the annual budget for the police service and then allocate the funds that City Council decides to provide when it establishes the total annual budget of the police service.

Perhaps the minister may wish to comment further but certainly my reading of the bill is that council is, of course, responsible for raising taxes and must have control over the total budget of the police service and should set it, having received advice from the board and others, but having allocated a total budget and agreeing to raise certain funds for the police service, the intent is that the police board, at least in the case of the City of Winnipeg, will have some clout and will have the ability to allocate those funds which are provided to the police service under the municipal budget.

And I believe that's the intent because, I seem to recall, when we discussed this at one of the consultation sessions I suggested that compromise, one which, I think, works well in cases where you have delegation of authority.

And that's what this is: this is delegation of this minister's authority with regard to police matters, and I think it work–could work well and does work well in many situations, and all that the members of the committee need to do is to look to Crown corporations or other bodies with some degree of independence for which the elected government is responsible for the total budget but certainly they are delegated authority to work within that budget.

And, thirdly, and I think it's very important, the establishment of a Manitoba police commission, whose duties will include advising the minister on regulations dealing with the conduct of police officers and standards fo r police services and officers. This, I think, will involve a great deal of

14 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 work and it's very important, and, lest I forget, not the least of which will be policies with regard to the use of force. There is an ongoing debate within this country and, I presume, around the world as to what the policy should be. From what I've seen, the policy followed by the City of Wi nnipeg most recently is not the same as those of others, and I think this is something the police commission should look at very closely and very soon.

The only other comment that I have with regard to the bill itself is that I believe that the new Winnipeg police board should include members who are representative of our very diverse community and, of course, the objective is that the board is to ensure the community needs and values are reflected in the priorities of the department. And, given that, I would suggest that

section 30(1), sub c be amended to change the minimum number of members for the City of Winnipeg board fro m the seven that appears now to at least, at least 13 persons, because it is most important that there by a broad range of representation from the larger community, both to make the board and the police service more effective, and also to restore confidence in the community that the, the voices of the various segments of our society are heard and are considered in police matters. There's reference earlier to

section 76, in which regulations can be made by the minister dealing with police conduct, and that will be important. However, the main point that I wanted to make tonight, starting on page 3, is what the bill doesn't do. And I am most concerned that while Bill 16 deals with the matter of alleged police criminal offences, it simply doesn't address the totally unacceptable manner in which alleged non-criminal offences, or misconduct, or service defaults, and other breaches of discipline are largely dismissed, or disregarded, or ignored.

And I will hasten to say I'm speaking solely from my experience with the City of Winnipeg and I'm not commenting on any other police force when I make these remarks. And you'll note in the consultation's paper that non-criminal complaints are to be dealt with, as they are now, by police services. That is, investigate themselves, or, the Law Enforcement Review Agency, LERA.

And you'll see in bill–section 28(5) of this bill that the proposed new Winnipeg police board–not commission, please correct that–that the pro–proposed new Winnipeg police board would have no role with respect to the discipline or personal conduct of any police officer. So

section 76 of Bill 16, as I mentioned, does allow for the making of regulations, but that certainly doesn't deal with the actual investigation or the actual decision in dealing with actual incidents. So apart from any such future regulations that may have some beneficial effect, alleged non- criminal misconduct by police officers are to be handled as they are now, by either the police service itself, or by LERA.

Based on my limited but, I think, instructive experience in representing many of the Critical Mass cyclists, who had very serious complaints about their treatment by members of the Winnipeg Police Service on a number of occasions in 2006–that's three years ago now–the present arrangements simply do not work. Many complaints were dutifully filed with LERA, but the commissioner, in all this time, will not deal with them until, as he says, after certain criminal charges which have been laid against some of the cyclists are disposed of.

So more than three years after the event we are still awaiting the court's decision on the charges which are against the cyclists, but there has been no action by LERA on the complaints against the police. Now the act does say that, of course, that if there's a criminal charge ag ainst the police, then the courts will deal with it and LERA should hold off. That's not the case here. We're talking about charges against the complainants. The cyclists could have filed complaints with either the police service's Professional Standards Unit or LERA, but not both.

The LERA statute and the C ity of Winnipeg Police Service Regulation By-law No. 7610/2000 both state that a complainant must choose only one investigator and, having done so, that's it. Choosing the Professional Standards Unit, the City of Winnipeg was not promising. In fact, one cyclist did complain that an officer be charged with assault and had all the video evidence to demonstrate it, and it was summarily dismissed by the Professional Standards Unit and, other than coming to the minister, there was no place to go.

However, because the police chose to charge some of the cyclists with criminal o ffences, the police have, in fact, rendered themselves immune to investigation by LERA all this time. The cyclists have had the benefit of a great deal of photographic and video evidence and the courage to pursue these matters–despite harassment by those that they filed complaints against–and it is no surprise to me that most other

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 15 would-be complainants in the city of Winnipeg simply give up over time. * (19:10) Within the community I find many seem to accept that the Winnipeg police are accountable to no one, and in support of that, I'm attaching a number of things, one of which is the presentation I made three years ago to executive policy committee at Winnipeg City Council in which I argued for the re-establishment of a police commission able to provide effective civilian oversight of law enforcement in our city because none of City Council, it's committees, LERA or the police service were willing to deal with the many complaints lodged with regard to the behaviour of the police at the Critical Mass events.

I even had city councillor– legal counsel censoring my presentations for fear I might talk about the event in a public meeting at City Hall. I'll skip over some of the matters I've attached here but, with respect to LERA, there is an excerpt from the LERA commissioner's 2007 annual report, who, I'm sad to say, he displays his personal bias regarding this particular issue where he referred to the Critical Mass cyclists as being engaged in an illegal demonstration. That was not the charge, that was not the case, and here he's refusing to investigate further, and yet he says that in his report.

I provide the excerpts from The Law Enforcement Review Act, including the sections which deal with whether or not the commissioner may proceed where a criminal charge is involved and some correspondence with the LERA commissioner and with the Minister of Justice regarding the failure of LERA to deal with these matters, and concluding with a March 18th letter from the LERA commissioner, which really reveals his complete misunderstanding of the matter, in which he states he has no authority over complaints against police of a criminal nature, which is not the case here.

We have complaints against police of a matter which is within the LERA complaints list which are in the legislation for non-criminal offences or misconduct, a long list of matters which are of great concern to citizens in our community and which no one will investigate. Finally, I have included some e-mails with the deputy chief of police in which I was asking someone at City Hall to take responsibility for intervening with the manner in which the police were dealing with what was essentially an expression of a political opinion.

This was essentially taking the pos–the colour of political oppression, the behaviour of the police department in dealing with the cyclists, and response to the deputy chief was to suggest that I should, of course, await the workings of the legal process and not jump to any conclusions as to what the police were doing, and I should know better.

And I've included with a letter three years later regarding two of the police officers who were involved who were witnesses to this particular case with the cyclist and who in fact are facing criminal charges as we speak with regard to the falsification of evidence and indeed attempted murder. Perhaps, if the deputy chief of police could be bothered to investigate complaints back in 2006, those police officers might not have run afoul of the law as they appear to or have alleged to have done more recently.

I do think it's very important that this bill be passed, but I would urge the minister and the members of the, the committee and House to deal with the second part and deal with it soon, perhaps through the vehicle of the Manitoba Police Commission initially because it is a whole area which is of great concern to the community and which is not being dealt with within the city of Winnipeg in satisfactory manner.

And that is why I believe when City Council considered the matter of the appointment of a new police advisory board some, I think, 30 community organizations appeared, all of which asked the City Council to adopt an organization with some teeth and City Council ignored them entirely. There is a demand on the part of the community for better action than we've seen so far. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Sanders. Questions for the presenter? Mr. Goertzen: Well, thank you, Mr. Sanders, for your presentation. A couple of things.

Obviously, we deal with the situation in other, in other areas as well when we have an inquiry that's, that's slated criminal charges and, and the operations to the court happen before the inquiry is slated to go for, for a lot of different reasons. And that might speak to the slowness of our court process, and that's probably a whole different discussion and everybody would have their ideas on how to address that. But, in this case, you're either

16 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 talking about changing the police act or changing how LERA operates, and I'm guessing that you're looking to change the police act and have some of the issues come under the new police act in terms of non-criminal matters. But have you looked at other jurisdictions to see how they would deal with a similar case that you're involved with, whether or not there'd be that same delay, or if they have a different process that they go through that would move things more quickly. Mr. Sanders: Mr.

Chair, I haven't myself examined the various arrangements across the country, although one of the presenters following me, I believe his organization has done that and can help you with it. The–my point really is that the police act, as far as it goes, is fine, but it actually doesn't deal with the question of non-criminal offences and it's, it's a long list of them if you look through them, behaviour which is–the police service themselves will certainly say is unacceptable, and yet if somebody wishes to complain about them there's no place to go.

And I believe it's necessary that an arrangement's been made to have it happen. The Winnipeg Police Serv ice–there is a bylaw of City Council which sets up considerable detail how minor or major service defaults, they refer to them, are to be investigated by the police department and dealt with. It is not known to the public. None of my clients were aware of that process and, had they gone there, they would've been rejected at LERA and, having gone to LERA, they were certainly told they couldn't come to the city. It's been a catch-22 which leaves the citizens with their needs not met, so. Mr.

Chomiak: Thanks for the comments. I can't speak to most of the specifics you've raised for obvious reasons. I think the act that we've put together is a, is a good balance and, and a very good model for dealing with criminal matters, and I think it's probably the most extensive. I also think we've made improvements to LERA in terms of staffing that have dealt with the, with some of the concerns. Thanks for the presentation. Mr. Graydon: Thank you for your presentation. There's–I just need a bit of clarification.

If, if I understood right, you, you are in favour of the City of Winnipeg establishing a police board, and that board would then recommend an annual budget for the police service, and that allocate the funds that the City Council decides to provide, and when it establishes a total annual budget, then the police service will decide where it's spent. Is that, is that what you've said in your presentation? Mr.

Sanders: Except for the last point that, once City Council determines that the–once the City of Winnipeg council determines that the police budget should be $200 million, or whatever it is for the year, then the allocation of that $200 million among many services and requirements of the police department would then be finalized by the police board. So the board, for example, might have recommended $250 million worth of things which they think they'd like to do.

City Council, in its wisdom, may have said, well, but all we can afford–or taxpayers can afford–this year is 200 million, and we've heard you and we understand your reasoning, but that's it. Well, then the final decision as to the priorities of the community for the use of those 200 million would be determined by the board.

So there would be significant power and authority on the part of the board, which was–have, I think, half–could be pote ntially half councillors and other members of the public, but which would have the final decision on the allocation, as between community policing or new vehicles or new technology or more training or whatever the priorities would be within the community. So with the–that last point though, the final decision would be the board not the service. Mr.

Graydon: Do you see that there, there could be some disconnect between the council and the board, as the council is responsible–directly responsible–to the community, and the board doesn't have that same connect? Can you see some friction developing when the budget is not–or, or the, the direction of the council is not being exerted by the board? * (19:20) Mr. Sanders: Well, we are talking a situation where there would be a division of authority and responsibility between the council for the overall budget and the, the police board for the allocation within it.

That kind of–you refer to it as a disconnect–the kind of sharing of power among boards or senior executives or committees is not unusual. It requires communication. It requires some diplomatic skills and deft and requires the ability to resolve conflicts, but in the absence of doing that, then the role of the board in making recommendation which then, being ignored entirely, would seriously diminish the power and authority of the board to fulfill its duties to ensure that the priorities of the community are, are represented.

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 Now I appreciate that council was elected to represent the community, and it's proposed that this board would include representatives appointed by the Province as well as representatives appointed by City Council. So you already have a variety of interests there, and, in any case, all parties are responsible to ensure that the objectives of the legislation which governs them is followed too. There are competing interests, competing objectives and priorities, and, and, people are accustomed to having to work through that.

And there is, I think, perhaps, some wisdom in the police commission having a particular role in the education, training and establishing of rules of procedure and ethical conduct for the police boards in order to provide for some–to be of assistance to the boards as they're developed across the province–or those that are developed at any rate– in order that they operate effectively. I think it can work. It certainly works for our delegated boards and commissions in the province and federally and within the municipality.

The municipalities have all sorts of parks and recreation commissions and library boards, and, and it works. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Sanders. We're out of time, Mr. Lam–well, well past now. [interjection] Do we have leave of the committee, then, to allow a further question? An Honourable Member: Yes. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Lamoureux: Very quickly, in the ideal world, you mentioned 13 is the size of the board you would like to see. How would you see the makeup of it and who would actually make the appointments, in the ideal world, from your opinion? Mr.

Sanders: I didn't suggest a particular makeup. The act is suggesting that a minimum number appointed by the Province of two or three–two, I guess. Perhaps there could be more. This is a delegated responsibility from the provincial government and the, and the balance required by council. There is–and it wasn't in my presentation, but I'll underline it for the benefit of those to follow– that there is specific recognition of the importance of having First Nations representation on the police commission. If it applies there, it certainly applies in the city of Winnipeg.

I wouldn't suggest coming out with a particular mix, but the principle of diversity being recognized, whether it's ethnically or by age or by geography, there are, you know, a variety of reasons why I think that we would want to have the ability to appoint a larger number of people, both the Province and the City Council.

Whether it's the size of the Board of Governors of the University of Manitoba or the Hydro board or something, a, a larger group to ensure that important interests have a voice and are seen to have a voice by the community, because that's particularly important in this case, that the community have confidence in this. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Sanders. Next presenter we have on our list is Tom Simms, Community Education Development Association. Good evening, sir. Please come forward. Do you have a written presentation, sir? Mr.

Tom Simms (Co mmunity Education Development Association): Well, it's a prop, not really a presentation, but here we go. Mr. Chairperson: Give us a moment and then we'll distribute it to committee members. Mr. Simms: Yes. Mr. Chairperson: Please proceed, Mr. Simms. Mr. Simms: Good evening. Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to speak before you this evening. I'd like to do three things tonight. I'd like to–the first thing I'd like to do, I'd like to talk about the principle of independence and accountability.

The second thing I'd like to do is talk about the principle of minority rights, and the third thing I'd like to do is make some recommendations regarding Bill 16. In terms of the principle of independence and accountability, Manitoba is one of the only provinces in Canada that does not have legislation around civilian oversight of, of police. Definitely, in terms of the big cities, Winnipeg is one of the only cities that doesn't have that kind of provision. We're out of step with the rest of the country so I really commend the Province for bringing Manitoba in step with the rest of the country.

This isn't something that's coming from the lunatic fringe. This is something that the rest of Canada has done for a long time and that Manitoba's been behind the times. So I really appreciate the provincial government taking leadership to getting us back in line and in step with the rest of Canada.

18 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 One of the things we did last June is we brought in people from the rest of Canada to talk about civilian government, the governance, best practices, and one of the people we brought in was Andrew Graham, who is with the School of Policy Studies at Queen's University, and he's done a lot of research for the national association of Canadian police boards around what is the best practices around civilian governance, police governance, and I'll talk about some of the things that he said there.

The other person we brought in was Ian Wilms who is the president of the Canadian Association of Police Boards. At the time, he was the president of the Calgary police board. Ian Wilms was vice- president of IBM and vice- president of the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, and Ian was a very strong advocate around the whole, the importance of civilian oversight of the po lice, and in Alberta they actually have nine people in Calgary, would have nine people on their police board: seven are citizens and two are elected politicians.

They really believe that there needs to be a strong voice of citizens around the governance of police. Just my little props here, these were some of the presentations that were done. We also had people from the Saskatoon police board, the Aboriginal representative from the Saskatoon police board. We also had out at the event, we had, locally here, Rick Linden, who's with the University of Manitoba, who's done a lot of work on the issue of police governance and things like that. So we're looking at what are best practices.

And the biggest thing we learned, I talk about this principle of independence and accountability. The police are not like any other bureaucratic mechanism that's around. They can take away our civil rights and so it's really important that they have independence, that they are not interfered with politically, that they're able to operate independently, and it's really important that they be held accountable.

So that's why the principle of independence and accountability is critical when we're looking at the governance of the police services and that's why all across Canada, they have civilian police boards or commissions to play that role of ensuring independence, that ther e's not undue political interference, and ensuring accountability. So it isn't just something that's pulled out of a hat. It's been a practice across the country for many years, and I'm very pleased to see that Manitoba will be getting back into line with the rest of Canada.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the issue of minority rights, and I appreciated the minister's comments that if it were left up to the local councils on a voluntary basis, there would be no police boards, and I can speak from experience. We've been part, and there' ll be a presentation after me, the Inner City Safety Coalition, a coalition of 30 inner city, Aboriginal, newcomer, community organizations, worked to try and get a civilian police board set up with the City of Winnipeg. The City of Winnipeg wanted to set up an advisory board, not a decision-making board.

They held a public meeting in July of 2007. They said all the citizens of Winnipeg, come out to this public meeting and tell us what you think about our advisory board. Well, there were over 30 delegations that came out from the inner city, from Aboriginals' organizations, from newcomer organizations, from organizations like the Manitoba association of rights, human rights and liberties, association of rights and liberties, and they unanimously, unanimously said, w e r e j e c t t h i s a d v i s o r y c o m m i t t e e .

W e w a n t a governance mechanism that has decision-making authority. * (19:30) In September, City Council held a vote on whether they'd set up a police advisory committee or a governance mechanism. And, and the mayor likes to talk about how–well, he's never got many faxes or e-mails about issues. Well, they held a public meeting. They asked anyone in Winnipeg to come out. All the groups unanimously said that they wanted to have a governance, not advisory, role. The vote at City Hall was 9-7 to oppose the establishment of a governance decision-making role, rather an advisory role.

And I, I go through this story to reinforce the minister's point, is that if it was left up to the councils, they don't want to do it. And when I talk about the issue minority rights, you had–one of the concerns we have is that, particularly Aboriginal people are overrepresented in their interaction with the police and justice system and underrepresented in decision-making roles within the police and justice system. And we think that, potentially, things like a police board that looks at governance can begin to redress some of those power relations.

And those power relations were replicated in that vote, in terms of you had white, male, suburban city councillors saying, father knows best, and that we're going to give you an advisory board, not a governance board.

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 19 And that's why I appeal to the provincial government to act on the principle of protecting minority rights because this City Council does not. They hold a public mee ting, unanimous consent amongst people from the inner city, amongst Aboriginal people that came out to make presentations that evening, that it needed to be decision making, not advisory, and because of the structure of City Council, which is a majority council is suburban coun–seats, th at there's a structural problem there to protect mi nority rights.

There is no one from Linden Woods coming out in July to talk about policing, 'cause the issues around policing are most affected in the inner city. Most people in the inner city have more interaction with the police. So, I appeal to the Provi nce, I appeal to you to look at the principle of protecting minority rights in this situation. And so I guess that's why I get to the recommendations around the police services–The Police Services Act, and the one is

section 9, which talks about the membership of the, the police board for Winnipeg. And I guess the other thing I would argue, just before I get into that, is that I appreciate that this is a mandatory piece of legislation that you're talking about for police boards, 'cause I just demonstrated to you, we took all the efforts in the community to get voluntary compliance and we couldn't get it. And if you say to the City of Winnipeg, you know, why don't you have some voluntary discretion how you wanna go on this police board, we know what they're gonna to do, and it's not acceptable. So I'm getting, in terms of the, the police board, the size of the police board,

section 9–or pardon me,

section 30, clause 3, it's saying in the case of the City of Winnipeg, two members of the police board will be appointed by the Province and the other members to be appointed by City Council. So that means five members of the commission will be appointed by City Council. We implore the Province to look at the principle of protecting minority rights. We would propose that the make-up of the appointing body– 'cause there needs to be checks and balances. And it isn't just looking at this City Council or this provincial government; this is legislation for the long term.

This is good public policy that we wanna talk about. We would–I–CEDA would recommend that there be three appointments by City Council. There would be three appointments by the provincial government and that one appointment would be jointly made by the, the City Council and the Province. And we think that in the long term, that we're gonna be able to have better checks and balances in terms of the appointment process. If it goes the way it is going right now with the City appointing five and the Province appointing two, we got–we have real concerns around the checks and balances that we need to be in place there.

The other concern around the whole issue of

section 30 is

section 30, clause 4, number of council members and employees: No more than half the members of the police board will be made up of council members or employees of the municipality. What concerns me about that clause is the loose wording of it. The potential there means that the mayor could be a part of the police board. And part of the best practice research is–in the conference that we held, had major concerns about legislation that includes the mayor on the police board.

Because the principle of independence from political interference and accountability is not maintained when we have that kind of ability there. And I want to bring it to my prop. This is Ian Wilms. This guy is vice-president of the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, vice-president of the, of the IBM, has major concerns about the role of the mayor playing a role in terms of being on the commission. So we would urge you to be more specific about that, that it's council members, in terms of councillors, other legislation has. The last piece I wanted to talk about is, in your

section for the provincial police commission, you outlined that there needs to be one First Nation representative and one other Aboriginal representative on the provincial police commission, and you say that the police commission needs to reflect the gender and racial diversity of the province. We think that's important that you've done that, and the inner city coalition has asked that that be more spelled out in the legislation. What we're concerned about, from CEDA's point of view is that same kind of direction needs to be provided in the City of Winnipeg police board.

And, once again, we want to look at the issue of minority rights, the principle of minority rights, that we are not looking at specific situations here. We're talking about good public policy. We don't want it that, oh, well, maybe, there'll be a council that thinks that it's important to have an Aboriginal First Nations voice on the police board. We want that embedded in legislation. We don't want it to be left up to, maybe, the good will or preference of a board. It needs to be in legislation.

20 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 So those would be the recommendations that we would make, and we urge the provincial government to look at that principle of protecting minority rights because, in our work, to date, in the community, in working with this City Council, that isn't a principle that is honoured and we are asking that the province play that role, and we think that it's an important role to play. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for presentation, Mr. Simms. Questions for the presenter? Mr. Goertzen: Thank you, Mr. Simms, for your presentation.

I recognize that the majority of your comments were directed to the scenario of Winnipeg and the experience that you've had with the City of Winnipeg, although, you did speak in more general terms about the need for mandatory police boards, and you've heard some of the presentations already tonight from smaller communities who, who feel differently. And I'll point out to, to the community of Ste. Anne, because I live near to the community of Ste.

Anne, and there would be residents who would speak as passionately as you did tonight for the opposite, to not have police boards, because their experience has been comple tely different from what you're describing. They're exactly on the opposite side. They're saying that the police boards had–made it political and made it political interference, and so they've got a diametrically opposed position from what you did and with the same sort of passionate discussion.

I guess the question I have is your presentation, I would love to see the entire presentation that was given by Queen's University, but was there discussion or analysis in this presentation or in this report on various sizes of cities and their experiences with police boards, or was it simply looking at metropolis areas that would be equivalent to the city of Winnipeg? Floor Comment: Well, I would encourage you to go on the Web site– Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Simms. Mr. Simms: – the Canadian Association of Police Boards. They're not just big city representatives there. There are police boards from all across Canada.

They'll have more detailed information there. And this fellow, Andrew Graham, was hired by them to look at best practices of governance, and what they've come across from, and part of it was listening all across Canada, so we thought that was important things to learn. * (19:40) Was this issue of depoliticizing the oversight of the police? And I'll give you an example in Winnipeg that really is something that we need to get a more arm's-length approach there.

I mean, No. 1, it was, I think, in the fall of 2007, the mayor brought in Rudy Giuliani to talk about how we should do policing in our city and now that just isn't a value-free orientation that's coming forward from our–the ex- mayor of the New York. There's a–there's a certain value approach that was being promoted by the mayor in how policing should be done in the city. And the specific example I'll give you is: We've been working very hard to get school resource officers in local schools, and the previous police chief, Jack Ewatski, chose to take a political route in dealing with that issue.

He's in charge of 1,300 police officers. We were asking for five to set up school resource officers in the inne r city, and the, and, and the, and, and the police chief said, no, you've got to go to City Council to see if you can get a resource like that. City Council decided they would support school resource officers if the local neighbourhoods put up some money, if the school division put some money, and the, the–basically, the, the, the police don't put up any money.

So this rent-a-cop mentality–and which, I, you know, I understand for Blue Bomber games or rock concerts, you know, fee- for-service for cops makes sense, but in inner city– prevention-orientated police approach that's taken money out of inner city Neighbourhoods Alive! funds–as an organization, CEDA–I'm cuttin' a cheque to the police to pu t in prevention-orientated police services in the inner city. We find that unacceptable. So we went to the new police chief when he came in, because when he was in the North End he was a big supporter of school resource officers.

When he worked for the Province, big supporter of school resource officers. So, quietly, we went in with the superintendent of the Winnipeg School Division and members of development corporations, and we said: look, you have been a big supporter of school resource officers. You have 1,400 police officers. Winnipeg has the highest per capita number of police than any large city in Canada. Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon, Vancouver have been running these school resource officer programs for 25 years now. Why don't you take leadership and use five of

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 21 your 1,400 staff and have the police run the school resource officers, not taking them out of inner city funds for drop-in centres or schools that need to be paying for educational resources, and his comment was, he says: um, I've got political direction on how to handle that issue. I think that that's unacceptable that we hire a police chief to be in charge of 1,400 officers and five pol–preventative police services are being micromanaged by the mayor and the majority of City Council.

I don't think–why do you hire a police chief if he's got the expertise to do things? So I think that we've seen a number of cases of political interference in running a large police service and that this issue of independence and accountability is best maintained through having a, a, a police board. An Honourable Member: I've got a comment; it's not a question. It's short. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Goertzen, we're running out of time. Mr. Goertzen: Very short.

You made the point about a large urban centre, and I, I have looked at the Web sites and I've looked fo r studies that, that look between the difference of smaller municipal police forces and large municipal police forces and their experiences with boards, and there's, there's a scant amount of information out there. If you find something like that, I'd be happy, I'd, I, I would be grateful if you'd send it along to me. I'd like to see the, the difference of their experiences. Just a comment. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Simms? Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Lamoureux: Just briefly, and I'm looking for your personal opinion, Mr.

Simms, on this issue. You, you emphasize the importance of the minority– having Aboriginal represented–representation. What do you think of the idea that, that there is a position that is designated for that spot, but the appointment would be subjected to getting approval from, let's say, MKO, or the Métis federation prior to that appointment being approved. What would your opinion be of that? Mr.

Simms: Yeah, no, I think there's a range of things that need to be thought through around that, but I, I think one of the things we've talked about in the inner city safety coalition is the principle that Aboriginal people are overrepresented in their interaction with the police and justice system, and underrepresented in the decision making roles in the police and justice system.

So they–that, that can't be just left at a voluntary basis, and I appreciate the provincial commission has designated two spots, at a minimum, for an Aboriginal and First Nations rep, Métis rep, on that, and what we're saying, in moving forward, we're building good public policy. If it's good enough for the province to put it in for the provincial police commission, it's a must that it be put in for the city of Winnipeg. We can't just depend on the goodwill of City Council to ensure that that voice is at that decision-making level. It has to be there, and we urge the province to put that in this legislation. Mr.

Chomiak: Thanks for the presentation and all the work that's gone into it. The only suggestion I have is–one thing that hasn't come up is the police cadet portion of the legislation.

I actually, personally think that that's probably the most significant difference maker in this entire act because I think the potential of having a police force that reflects the diversity of the population can be greatly enhanced by virtue of the cadet program that would see, give opportunities and jobs and flexibility for people to become police officers because, frankly, the–when the reflection of the police and the population is more in ratio, I think that we'll see significant improvement.

I just want to point that out because I– notwithstanding all of the issues of governance and all of the issues of principl e and all of the issues at the end of the day, on the ground, I think people shouldn't underestimate th e impact of the police cadet program. Mr. Simms: I don't think there's–I agree with you. There isn't one silver bullet.

There's many things that need to happen, and as you've talked in the past, Minister, that it's–to change things around in our community, it isn't about policing, it's about a whole bunch of other things that need to be done, but under–one of the key foundations of those other things is how we go about doing it, and one of those things is how we redistribute power relations in our community, and it's not enough to be an adviser or a service recipient. People need to be sitting at the decision-making table around a whole range of issues and definitely around the issue of policing.

We need to be asking our question, questions at the highest level of decision making, whether it be at the governance level or within the hierarchy of the Winnipeg Police Services who's included and why,

22 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 who's excluded and why, and what are the barriers. So I would argue that the issue of who's sitting at the highest level of decision making is critical if we're looking at issues that are systemic, that issues like the cadet program can be policies that are strengthened, but people need to be sitting at the highest level of decision making, and it can't be just by good will, and we recognise the province has put that in, in terms of provincial police commission.

We would urge the province to use those very principles that they ack nowledge province-wide to be at a minimum, and I live in Winnipeg, I can't comment on what's going on in the rest of Manitoba, but to embed those principles and those designations in the City of Winnipeg, we just can't rely on the good will of politicians on Main Street to make sure that those, that committee is representative of all the voices, as a time to bring in legislation, which you are doing right now, is the opportune time to use the principles that you already have in part of the act for the province to say that those same principles are important for the City of Winnipeg.

So I agree with you about the cadet program. We also need to see that people are in at the decision- making level of how we make change in our community, and we can't leave that up to chance. It needs to be legislated. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Simms. Mr. Simms: Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Next presenters we have on the list are Allan Wise and Diane Roussin. It's my understanding that they wish to make a joint presentation. Is it the will of the committee to allow a joint presentation? Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Chairperson: Agreed.

Good evening, do you have a written presentation? Ms. Diane Roussin (Inner Ci ty Safety Coalition): We do. * (19:50) Mr. Chairperson: Give us a moment to distribute it to committee members, and then I'll give you the signal to proceed. I hope I pronounced your name correctly. Ms. Roussin: Roussin. Mr. Chairperson: Roussin. Thank you. Please proceed, Ms. Roussin. Ms. Roussin: Good evening, and so my name is Diane Roussin and I'm speaking here today on behalf of the Inner City Safety Coalition and I'm going to talk a little bit about who the coalition is.

I think you've heard a number of presentations tonight from the perspective of politicians, from the perspective of police members, and so the coalition is very much that of a community response to, to this legislation. And my colleague over here is going to talk about some specific recommendations that we have regarding the, the legislation but we're very happy to finally be here to look at this, to look at the act and to look at the proposed legislation.

The coalition itself has been around since 2006 but it's made up of many organizations that have had a long standing interest in looking at issues of safety in their respective communities and their neighbourhoods and I think that what this police commission board represents is a more structural response to that safety and to the relationship with the police.

You know we've, we've had a long go of, of trying to have an improved relationship with police services and that hasn't always gone very well and so we see this as being more proactive, 'cause as a community–as communities–we, we often can get together and organize and r eact to incidences and so on and so forth. And so we see this as being very much more proactive in that we can think not under stressful situations or environments and do our better thinking about what, what is better for the communities out there.

And so there are many representat–organizations that are represented on the coalition, so we were able to get 27 organizations, including a number of other coalitions to sign, or to support the, the position that we're taking here tonight and there's 14 additional organizations that are a part of the coalition that just didn't have the time to fully review. It is AGM season, and as you can im agine, everyone's racing towards June 30th here so we didn't get all the signatures, but certainly you would know many of the organizations in Winnipeg that do, that represent, you know, large groups of citizens out there.

And that what's central to a lot of our organizations is that there is community voice in many systems that we work in and so the Justice or the police is just one of those systems that, that we think that there has to be that voice there.

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 23 So, following with what we've handed out, the Inner City Safety Coalition is a coalition of inner- city resident associations of Aboriginal and newcomer-serving organizations, of community service agencies and civil liberty groups, and we're very concerned about issues related to the governance, oversight and accountability of the municipal police services. And we're particularly concerned about the need for, for this legislation regarding the police act and that it clearly outline the mandate of a civilian police commission in our province.

Winnipeg is, is one of the only major cities in Canada that doesn't have a civilian police commission to provide oversight of its police services. The mandate of a civilian police commission is related to governance and decision- making and not simply an advisory function, such as the recently established police advisory board that was put in place by Winnipeg City Council.

So a fundamental principle of best practice–best public policy practice regarding the governance of the police services to ensure police independence from political interference while at the same time holding the police accountable through an arm's- length civilian police commission. The recently established advisory boar–advisory board doesn't address this important principle and– regarding public policy governance of the police service.

So, and what you've heard already tonight, Aboriginal and racialized groups are over- represented in their interaction with police and the justice system and are underrepresented in decision- making roles in these systems.

So the coalition believes that a civilian police commission has the potential to provide a structure where we can begin to address this oppressive relationship and maybe, in addition–so, again, we were part of the process where City Council was looking at the whole notion of police commissions, police boards, and, and you know, they had the public consultations and, and we, you know, everybody came out to that and unam–unanimously said, you know, very similar things and, you know, just like you sitting here today, you know, there was 30 of us lined up back there saying the same thing over and over and over again and, and it went nowhere, you know.

And then we went down to, you know, from standing committees to Executive Policy Committee to City Council and, again, unanimous presentations on this issue and still it, it didn't go anywhere. And so, many of the groups that we represent are very marginalized from the political process. So I'm very confused when I hear presentations that talk about that, you know, the politicians are somehow better representing citizens than, than a board could. I don't personally agree with that.

I think that there's been many issues where many of our groups feel that they, they haven't been heard or represented in that political process. I think that the represent–or lack of representation that political process doesn't equal the overrepresentation of our populations in the police system or the justice system. So we really do think that structural changes are needed. We can't just rely on the good faith of police members or individuals. You know, we've tried to establish those good working relationships with the police and on a good day, it can be good, and on a bad day, we lose.

So we do think it needs to be structural. And, you know, with those structures I think that we're not looking at just one piece of the system. I think we can look at many pieces of the system. I think that we're not looking at just individual police officers and individual incidences, we're looking at more fundamental policies and more fundamental principles.

So, I think that, you know, you talked about the whole cadet corps and to me, you know, yes, we want to have more of our people in, working in the police service, but until that system can look at how it recruits, how, you know, retention issues, how it would–how its philosophy either resonates or doesn't resonate with the populations, you know, that the recruitment side is just going to be lacking until we can make more fundamental changes. So I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, who is going to make some very specific recommendations about the legislation. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Roussin. Mr.

Allan Wise (Inner Ci ty Safety Coalition): Good evening, all the committee members and the honourable minister. I would like to start by drawing your attention to the last piece of the presentation or the handouts that you've received. There are four points that we had raised with the minister through the letter of February 2nd, 2009, this year, and out of those four points, two of them have been met by the proposed legislation. And I just want to start by sort of commending the government on those, especially on the point one. We had recommended that civilian

24 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 18, 2009 police boards to be established through legislation, and we commend the government for actually allowing this to happen, and in their proposed legislation, they are making this a mandatory process.

Also, we would like to commend the government on sort of allowing the civilian police boards to be the decision makers or the authority on governance roles and including firing and hiring of the chief of police rather than simply an advisory function, and this goes to the core of the matter in terms of having institutionalized systems that would surpass and survive personalities. My colleague Tom Simms was mentioning the former chief of police, and that was one of the examples.

You had a chief of police who did not want community policing, who was not very community minded, and now we have a chief of police that does tend to hear the community more often and want to have those connections with the community, but who knows what's going to happen next, what the next chief of police is going to bring. So, having these forms of control or oversight institutionalized through legislation is something that we commend the government for.

There are two comments on that page that you have in front of you, No. 2 and No. 3, that we had some recommendations or one recommendation on each point that we wanted to bring to your attention. The current proposed legislation talks about a model of 5-2. You have five city point–appointments on the board and two from the province. The Inner City Safety Coalition suggests that a, the model of 3-3-1 would better serve this purpose, that you have that balanced approach.

You have three members appointed by the city, three members appointed by the province and one jointly sort of appointed by both bodies to give that representation and balanced approach to whatever decision the body would be making. * (20:00) The other one has to do with the–it's point No. 3, and it has to do with the, representation of Aboriginal groups and minority groups or racialized groups in that board.

Of course, the current model for the Province or provincial side, the commission, is asking for an Aboriginal representative plus another sort of First Nations and a member that would represent either based on sort of a gender issues or racialized groups, to have that represent– representation at the provincial level. But the city–at the city level, at the board level or at the municipal levels, that is not really clarified or according, you know, to what we have–or our understanding.

So the Inner City Safety Coalition recommends that these same provisions should be in legislation for the City of Winnipeg: at least one member of First Nations, one other Aboriginal person should be specified in the legislation for the Winnipeg police board as well as a specific provisions in the legislation should be stated to appoint members of either representing gender, ge nder issues or cultural diversity groups that are currently not represented in the model.

And just to make a quick comment about some of the things that we 've heard in the past presentations from some of our colleagues from smaller cities, I wanna go back to our first point and, again, commend the Province for really serving democracy by, by allowing a–sort of a uniform practice to be established through this legislation that would not make a difference just based on size, based on, you know, sort of community relationships in the smaller municipalities versus bigger municipalities.

Role of the governments as I understand them–and they do have a great role–is to be utilitarian: greater number of goods for the greater number of people. And another role for the government is to create that absolute minimum in law that applies to all, that uniformity, and I applaud you for that. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you much for your presentations. Questions for the presenters? Mr. Goertzen: Thank you for your presentation. Both of you, thank you for your presentation and for the work you do at the Inner City Safety Coalition.

I've had some opportunity to interact with your organization, and you do very good work on a lot of different fronts. Particular to the last point or one of the last points you made, sir, regarding the uniformity of the, of the mandatory boards. Do you have any analysis or studies on the success of, of boards in smaller municipalities where there might 1,500 or 2,000 people–just because my own experience in living in, in some of these smaller communities is that it doesn't work the way it appears to–we'd like it to work on paper. So is there any analysis you can point me to to sort of reconsider that thought?

June 18, 2009 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 25 Mr. Wise: Yes, any particular analysis I cannot point you or direct you to. However, I wanna mention that we have looked at a lot of models across Canada, and what we are looking for is a made-in-Manitoba model. So a made-in-Manitoba model should not necessarily be looking at the smaller municipalities elsewhere in Canada or even in North America to apply that model to Manitoba. We are saying this is a good start. Let's work together to come up with those models and create those models. We don't necessarily have to rely on other models.

We want a made-in-Manitoba model. Mr. Goertzen: So could a made-in-Manitoba model not take in the real experiences that people have in these smaller communities, recognizing that, that your, your, your principal focus is on, on inner city and you do a, a good job with that and I appreciate that, but the real-life experiences has been quite different, and, and a very concerned about–I think you're right. I think we do need a made-in-Manitoba model, and I don't know that uniformity makes sense because it hasn't worked.

The local police boards in some of these communities that I've lived in or that I live nearby–and there hasn't been anybody yet, and there may be yet–from Winnipeg who's come and said there shouldn't be a police board in Winnipeg. But there certainly has been people from outside of Winnipeg who have very–testified to very different experiences. And I just wonder if a made-in- Manitoba model wouldn't be more flexible? Mr. Wise: I, I would have to give you a qualified agreement on that one.

Yes, a made-in-Manitoba model would look at other examples and–but it has to be specifically studied and to see if that model applies. The examples that we have heard from other colleagues from the smaller communities, mainly, or as I heard them–I don't wanna put words in their mouth–refers to the fact that, you know, you have the smaller communities, you have people who are sitting on the boards, you know, then, you know, having coffees with the– coffee with the police officers or people you arrest; you have to run into them. I mean that's a, that's a small-community mentality that exists.

One fallacy that–not fallacy, one sort of shortcoming of that argument what I heard was the fact that, you know, just because you're elected, and my colleague alluded to this, just because you're elected it doesn't mean that you're representative. Now, in other municipalities in Manitoba, I mean, I don't know the record there, but if you look at the city of Winnipeg, the last city election, the voter turnout was only 37 percent. A lot of these councillors were elected without even being contested, having their, sort of, wards contested.

So you have the majority of them from suburban areas making judgment or rendering judgment or making decisions on policing issues in Winnipeg. Now if you want to apply that to smaller communities, the same thing would apply. I mean, not necessarily everybody who is sitting on that board is representative of the community; that might be one option, and not necessarily everybody who is sitting on the council was elected by the majority vote. So, I–as I said, I have to give you a qualified yes or a qualified agreement.

Looking into examples elsewhere definitely has its points, but, then again, with that in mind, that it has to be a made-in- Manitoba model and through experience. Mr. Lamoureux: I was just gonna–first of all, I'm really impressed with the effort that you– organization that put forward in terms of getting all these other organizations behind the, the presentation. The question I have is something I posed a little bit earl

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	39-3-ju1
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	39th 3rd hansardpdf ju1.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	bea055627cb60d531b3eb4baaa365c1c89184fa4

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).