Lucki told the committee about the role she played in liaising with other police officers, including former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly, as well as the responsibility she had to gather information from police across the country and brief federal ministers. . During her testimony, she also made a minor digression, advocating for codifying written rules around what constitutes political interference to avoid future controversies. She was joined by Deputy Commissioner Mike Duheme, who is in charge of the RCMP’s federal policing program, which includes investigating national security matters and conducting protective policing, such as the security provided to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other high-ranking officials. Duheme told the committee that his responsibility throughout the protests was to ensure Lucki had the right information to brief deputy ministers and cabinet members and coordinate requests for additional resources, which the RCMP were meeting, the commission heard. Tuesday’s hearing also included discussion about Trudeau’s national security adviser asking for a threat assessment of the protests on the day he invoked the Emergency Act. Here’s a rundown of key facts and highlights from Tuesday’s hearing focused on the RCMP.
RAPID LOSS OF CONFIDENCE IN THE OTTAWA POLICE
One of the areas explored at length during Tuesday’s hearing was the RCMP’s interactions with the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) throughout the protests. The committee heard the RCMP’s perspective on Ottawa’s frustration with the number of officers the RCMP had offered to help police the protests and their reaction when the OPS appeared to go around the OPP and directly into RCMP to call for assistance. One element that crystallized Tuesday was how quickly federal officials went from trusting the ability of local police forces to handle the coming protest to learning that OPS had no operational plan to end what at the time was quickly becoming a takeover of downtown Ottawa. At the start of the protests, Duheme told the committee that RCMP intelligence officers were aware of the OPP “Hendon” reports that assessed the size, scope and potential threat posed by the convoy, but that despite this, they still viewed the event as one Ottawa police could handle. “I was of the opinion that they had everything in hand,” Duheme said. Although, a week after the protests, Luki’s boss made it clear in a text to her OPP counterpart – as the committee has already heard – that the federal government had lost confidence in the OPS’s ability to handle the protests. Lucki was asked Tuesday what it was about her interactions that prompted her to take that view, which she called a conclusion based on the impatience she heard. Here is some of what Lucki had to say: “Well, we always have the same question every day: ‘When is this going to end?’ How’s it going to end?” And we really couldn’t answer that. And, of course, early on, we weren’t intimately involved in what was going on… But people from the outside looking in didn’t see any decrease in activity. They saw an increase in activity from the protest groups and more people involved… People were wondering if this was ever going to end, because they hadn’t seen any external enforcement action.” Lucki also noted Tuesday that amid calls that came “quite often” for the RCMP to take over the police response, “there was little training” that needed to be given to deputy ministers and cabinet ministers that their role was not to overcome. but to help.
“THREAT TO DEMOCRACY”: COUNSELOR OF THE PRIME MINISTER
One of the most notable pieces of evidence presented Tuesday came in the documentation that witnesses were questioned about: a request to conduct a threat assessment from Trudeau’s national security and intelligence adviser, Jody Thomas. In an email, Thomas made a request that eventually went to the RCMP’s executive director of intelligence and international policing, Adriana Poloz, seeking an assessment of “the threat of these blockades. The characters involved. The weapons. The motive.” “Clearly this is not just about COVID and is a threat to democracy and the rule of law… It’s a very small safeguard,” he wrote on February 14, the day he invoked the emergency law. In addition to this email shedding some light on the perspective a top Trudeau adviser had at the time, the Commission lawyer who raised it wondered how it was that the prime minister’s top national security adviser wanted an assessment, but it didn’t even go through. Lucky. or Duheme to get it. Duheme said that while that’s not necessarily the way it should work, “it happens based on some relationships that are built.” “Preferably, there should be a stop for all the requests that are made so that we can have at least an idea of what’s going on,” he said, noting that he could not recall whether he had been informed of the assessment once it was drawn up.
FEDS GET ‘BIG BILL’ FOR TRAILER TRUCK ATTACKS
One of the powers the emergency law gave the federal government was the ability to compel those able to provide essential services to lift the blockades with reasonable compensation. In this case, that power was used to order tow truck drivers to move vehicles blocking roads. Asked Tuesday if the bill for that — compensating tugboat operators — had come in, Lucki said yes and that it was “a big bill.” Probing a little further, a commission lawyer asked Lucki if she knew that this power under the law gave the province the ability to turn over tow drivers’ expenses to the federal government, she said yes. “I assumed that if they had to compel the tows under the Emergency Act, the federal government would actually pay. But if they were able to take the tows themselves, it wouldn’t be subject to the Emergency Act and we wouldn’t pay for it Lucki said. Then asked if she was surprised that some of the tow operators decided to go through the federal government to get paid even though they were secured before the act, Lucki said she had “no idea.” “I guess it’s a matter of integrity.”
LUCKI CHALLENGED HER “OTHER TOOLS” REMARK.
Documents previously submitted to the committee indicated Lucki did not believe officials had used “all available tools” to quell protests against the order before invoking the emergency law. In an email to Mike Jones, chief of staff to Public Safety Secretary Marco Mendicino, dated just after midnight on Feb. 14, the day the administration invoked the law, Lucki wrote that officials had other tools that were already included in the plans to end the protests. In the email, Lucki also listed “useful” powers the law would give law enforcement, including banning public assembly in a wider range of designated spaces, banning protesters from bringing gasoline and diesel into the protest zone, jamming cell phones and giving police the power to bring tow trucks into the demonstration. However, despite this, he was of the opinion that all existing tools had not yet been used. That email appeared several times on Tuesday and the committee heard that, while he had not personally consulted with other police forces about the tools that might be useful to them before invoking the Act – citing concerns about a breach of ministerial trust council – Lucki was under the impression that others within the RCMP had asked for feedback. Asked then near the end of her appearance why she didn’t raise this during high-level meetings of federal response-focused officials held shortly before the law was invoked, Lucki said that even though she hadn’t had the chance, because she had conveyed her views to Medicino’s top executive, it had been transmitted. Did she think it would carry weight if she had told ministers directly her point of view? Lucki said it might have, but it was only part of the big picture the federal government was looking at in deciding to invoke the law. In the end, he told the committee he believed the state of emergency law helped end the weeks-long situation.
TIME TO CODE WHAT IS POLITICAL PRESSURE?
During her testimony, Lucki was asked a general question — a question she’s been asked in the past in connection with mass shootings in Nova Scotia — whether at any point during the escort’s response she felt inappropriate pressure or attempts to direct the national police. “Absolutely not,” was her reply. After some back-and-forth about how the RCMP understands the “church and state” idea of separating politics and policing, Lucki took the opportunity to advocate codifying expectations around what constitutes political interference, to avoid future disputes. “I think it’s time to write something that outlines what you can and can’t do both from the commissioner’s perspective and from the policy perspective, especially from the rotational perspective,” Lucki said. “Politicians change … So I think it’s time to clear that up, because it’s been a topic of discussion.” This was about the wave of attention surrounding allegations that the Liberals interfered with the RCMP’s investigation into Nova Scotia gun policy. Federal officials, including Lucki, have strongly denied the claims by Nova Scotia RCMP officials. Asked what such written instructions would entail, Lucki…
