Tim Hudak's Silence on the G20 Abuses

It is hardly surprising that Tim Hudak, leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, is keeping silent even when conservative elements of Canadian society are demanding that Dalton McGuinty call a full and independent inquiry into the G20 abuses of peaceful protesters. The usually voluble youngster who was mentored by Mike Harris knows better than to risk offending his core supporters who, of course, include the majority of police associations.

Nonetheless, it is perhaps worthwhile remembering where the sympathies of this self-proclaimed defender of 'Ontario's families and seniors' (have you ever heard him give a speech where he doesn't mention at least one of those two groups?) lie. As a guest columnist for the Toronto Sun on July 5, 2010, this would-be premier wrote the following. (I have put in bold some of the key parts.) Not once does he express anything but unwavering support for the police. Not once does he express the least bit of concern over the egregious violations of Charter Rights committed by the police. Apparently Mr. Hudak's sympathies for Ontario families and seniors have some very real limits:

The downtown core of Toronto was turned into a conflict zone by a group of lawless hooligans a little more than a week ago.

These reckless thugs were not in Toronto to protest a legitimate political cause. Instead they are part of a circuit of criminals who travel to international summits with one goal in mind — to destroy property, incite mayhem and terrorize law-abiding citizens.

Sadly, in the wake of the violence, a number of usual-suspect special interest groups are attempting to pin blame, not on the hooligans, but instead on our police services or the federal government.

But it wasn’t frontline police officers who spent a weekend smashing in storefront windows, and it wasn’t federal government officials who torched police cars.

Instead these were the acts of violent anarchists, with a long history of using “peaceful” protest marches at international summits as cover for reckless acts of extreme violence.

That is why I oppose the orchestrated attempt by these activists to demonize our police services in the wake of the G20 violence. I proudly stand behind the men and women of our police services that were faced with a daunting and difficult task of protecting the public against these professional vandals and hooligans.

After a week of silence on the G20, I hope Dalton McGuinty will join me in clearly supporting our men and women in uniform.

McGuinty should also have the courage to finally explain why his government passed a secret law to expand police powers during the G20 summit. I believe the public would have understood the necessity of these new powers to contain the violent thugs, but that does not mean McGuinty had the right to hide these new powers from the public.

We all know Ontario’s police officers have two fundamental responsibilities:
First, they are expected to preserve order and protect law-abiding families and businesses from criminal activity.

Second, they are expected to bring those responsible for criminal acts to justice.

It is on this second responsibility that we should now focus our attention.

We must make sure the thugs and hooligans who trashed downtown Toronto are held accountable for their crimes. The right to speak must never be confused with the right to vandalize property that tarnishes the reputation of our city and province.

The McGuinty government must do everything in its power to ensure the criminals behind this violence are caught, tried to the fullest extent of the law and held personally financially responsible for the cost of the damage they have caused.

In addition, the authorities should co-operate with any resident or business that wishes to pursue a civil action against the individuals and groups responsible for this violence.

In the meantime, the senior levels of government should establish a fund to compensate small business owners for property damages and the interruption of business caused by repairing the damages.

The hooligans behind the G20 violence gave our city a black eye on the world stage. We must not let special interest sideshows distract our attention from holding these criminals accountable for the harm they caused.

Now is the time for us to reclaim the reputation of our city and make it clear to the world that in Toronto, law-abiding citizens get protected, criminals get punished, and justice always gets done.


It is hoped that the perceptive reader will see the irony of some of Hudak's comments, especially those talking about criminals getting punished and justice getting done.

Message to Premiers and Prime Ministers: Even the Right is Demanding a G20 Inquiry

Politicians should know they are in trouble when even the more conservative elements of society, traditionally unquestioning supporters of the police and their tactics, begin to demand a full public inquiry into the massive abuse of people and their Charter Rights that took place during Toronto's G20 Summit. For example, The National Post has published an editorial calling for an inquiry. The Toronto Sun's Joe Warmington writes very critically about the police misbehaviour. The Globe and Mail has solid coverage of the report by the Canadian Civil Liberties Union demanding an inquiry. A more politically balanced paper, The Ottawa Citizen, baldly states that McGuinty is wrong to oppose an inquiry, as does The Toronto Star.

Despite the facile denials by both Premier McGuinty and Federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews of the need for such an inquiry, a consensus seems to be emerging that it is the only way to clear the miasma of suspicion and cynicism that has engulfed Canadians over what transpired last June. The graphic video footage seen by so many clearly reveals that our complacent assumptions about Canadian rights and freedoms are little more than quaint notions, easily suspended at the whim of our political leaders and their underlings.

Only a full inquiry can begin the healing process.

A New and Damning G20 Report

As reported in The Toronto Star, a 59-page report by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and National Union of Public and General Employees, set to be released today, calls for a full-scale enquiry into the abuse perpetrated by the authorities during last summer's G20 Summit in Toronto.

During three days of hearings last November which the police refused to take part in (no surprise there), a strong picture emerged from the testimony of dozens of witnesses who were physically abused and/or had their Charter rights taken away from them (a Kafkaesque and oxymoronic situation if there ever was one in Canada) of large-scale malfeasance on the part of the police, aided, abetted, and emboldened by both the McGuinty and Harper Governments.

Despite the damning nature of this report, despite the compelling video evidence to be found on YouTube and last Friday's fifth estate, and despite the fact that Ontario Ombudsman has said that “the most massive compromise of civil liberties in Canadian history” had occurred during the G20 weekend,
my dark suspicion is that governments will continue to deny responsibility for what they wrought, police chiefs will continue to mouth platitudes about prosecuting where evidence warrants, officers will continue to go unpunished, and the scars of that weekend will continue to haunt the Canadian psyche for a long time to come.

The Fifth Estate and the Shame of the G20

While I have believed in the power of the written word my entire life, sometimes images are a more potent way to convey the outrages that frequently occur in the world. Probably the best examples of this power have been in the images we have been inundated with since the upheavals in the Middle East began.

Another example is surely to be found in last night's fifth estate program, broadcast on C.B.C., showing the horrific results of having a police force, apparently unfettered by the normal rules and expectations of behaviour in a democratic society, routinely abusing people, with absolutely no regard for their Charter Rights.

Now available on the C.B.C. website, I defy even the most inveterate supporter of the police to watch the program and tell me that the police (aided and abetted by both the McGuinty and Harper Governments) did nothing wrong.

Watch This Video To See What's Wrong With Canada's Foreign Investment Review Policy

This video, from Michael Moore's website, shows the social and economic devastation that will result from the decision by Brazilian-owned Vale to close its nickel and smelter refinery in Thompson Manitoba in 2015.

After receiving approval to buy Inco, the mine's previous owner, in 2006, and after receiving a $1 billion loan from the Harper Government last fall with the promise of increasing jobs, Vale has shown what kind of corporate citizen it is upon announcing this closure, which will result in upwards of 500 job losses.

This is the most recent in a series of disastrous decisions made by Investment Canada and Industry Minister Tony Clement, and mirrors the action taken by U.S. Steel in closing its Hamilton operations shortly after being given the green light to take over the former Steel Company of Canada.

Isn't it strange that it takes a foreign national, Michael Moore, to publicize what we Canadians should all be outraged about?

Police Response to Criticism? The Best Defence is an Offence (to all of us)

Yesterday I wrote an entry detailing the frustrations of Ian Scott, head of the Ontario's Special Investigations Unit, over his inability to get the cooperation of the majority of police forces when investigating allegations of police misconduct. Today, The Star reports on the strategy these forces use to combat such criticism.

Here is an excerpt from that story:

The association representing 33,000 front-line police officers in Ontario has accused the head of the province’s police watchdog of “destroying public confidence in the criminal justice system” with a “bias against police officers.”

In a letter of complaint to the body that regulates lawyers, the Police Association of Ontario says that Special Investigations Unit boss Ian Scott, a lawyer, committed professional misconduct by telling the Star in an interview that officers being investigated for alleged crimes “get all kinds of breaks in the (criminal justice) system.”

The Law Society quickly dismissed the December 2010 complaint without an investigation, telling the Police Association there is “insufficient evidence” of misconduct to warrant even a request for a probe.

The most ironic part of the complaint made by the police against the SIU head is found in the first paragraph, accusing Scott of destroying public confidence in the criminal justice system by his assertion that police officers are not held to the same high standard when being investigated for alleged crimes.

I agree that public confidence is being undermined, but not by the SIU. It is the refusal of the police themselves to cooperate with investigations, their refusal to bring wrongdoing of fellow officers to light (e.g., exactly how many have been charged in the G20 fiasco?), and the refusal of the police chiefs in charge of them to do anything to try to alter the 'brotherhood of the badge' mentality that appears to allow corruption and abuse of authority to exist and spread.

But then again, I'm sure, in their complaint to the Law Society of Upper Canada, that they were aware of how effective 'shooting the messenger' can be.

And The Beat(ing) Goes On

I couldn't help but think of that old Sonny and Cher song this morning as I read in The Star about the inability of the SIU to do its job thanks to the refusal of the majority of Ontario police forces to co-operate with its investigations. At a time when citizen cynicism about the police is pervasive, a cynicism exacerbated by the many videos depicting police brutality and violation of Charter Rights during last summer's G20 Summit in Toronto, one could be forgiven for thinking that our security forces would be eager to rehabilitate their image, but such is not the case.

In the article, SIU head Ian Scott says that with the exception of the Hamilton and York forces and smaller services like South Simcoe, it is routine for police to refuse to co-operate with the SIU, even in the most serious of cases. Consider the following:

In a letter dated May 5, 2010, Scott questions why a police force waited to notify the SIU until an official medical report confirmed the severity of the injury to a civilian's head. The SIU director suggests to the police chief that it should have been immediately obvious, because “when the paramedics arrived, (the man)'s head was sitting in a pool of blood and (he) initially appeared unconscious. He was placed on a spine board and transported from the scene to the local hospital.”

In one case, an officer not responding to a call and with no emergency lights on was driving 74 km/h in a 50-km/h zone and struck a cyclist that ran a stop sign.

The civilian was propelled into the air, and the impact broke his skull and bones in his back, chest and neck. The cyclist was also scalped. Scott wrote that while the officer's speed did not justify a dangerous driving criminal charge, “the subject officer was exceeding the speed limit at the point of impact by 24 km/h and according to the accident reconstructionist could have avoided the accident but for his rate of speed ... I leave issues of charges under the Highway Traffic Act to your police service.”

In several other cases, Scott told the police force that witness officers, who are required to talk to the SIU, refused to answer questions; in a few cases, Scott said he would be “happy” to supply police with tape-recorded evidence of the refusals, and in one case he bluntly asked a force to charge two officers with neglect of duty. In another, involving the broken jaw of a civilian, the dispirited director said that he had already tried to address the issue with the police force but never got a reply.

Until the police drop this 'brotherhood of the badge' mentality, they can expect to continue to be looked upon with quite justifiable suspicion and distrust.