APEC – Commission Interim Report
In all, 23,000 people were accredited to the APEC conference in Vancouver. This figure included 8,600 delegates and media representatives; more than 3,000 police officers; 1,000 volunteers; 130 ACCO employees; Department of National Defence employees; and suppliers such as hotel staff. The Vancouver conference was the culmination of a series of events across Canada throughout 1997. Not surprisingly, a complex organizational and planning structure was put in place.
5.1. Department of Foreign Affairs
5.1.1. Overall Responsibility
Planning began in the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade in 1996. Two divisions were set up within the Department: one to handle substantive matters, and the other to manage logistics.
The senior Canadian government official charged with overall responsibility for the planning and production of the APEC conference was an Assistant Deputy Minister in the Department of Foreign Affairs, Leonard J. Edwards. His formal title was Senior Official for APEC. He had responsibilities for both substantive and logistical issues. At the time he gave evidence in August 1999, Mr. Edwards was the Canadian Ambassador to Japan.
On the substantive side, Mr. Edwards chaired the 1997 senior officials' meetings. As he described it, this involved coordinating among several government ministries the preparation of Canadian positions and articulating them at the senior officials' meetings. He also prepared for the ministerial meetings that culminated in two ministerial meetings in Vancouver (Trade and Foreign Ministers) which were followed by the leaders' meeting on November 25.
On the logistical side, Mr. Edwards oversaw the work of ACCO, which reported to him.
5.1.2. Logistical Responsibility
ACCO was responsible for logistical arrangements for all events that were part of Canada's APEC year. Mr. Edwards recruited Robert Vanderloo to be ACCO's Executive Director in April 1996. Prior to taking up this position Mr. Vanderloo had been Director of the Asia Pacific Task Force (Team Canada Visit) at the Department of Foreign Affairs. At the time he gave evidence in September 1999, he was Canadian Ambassador to Portugal.
ACCO began with two offices, one in Ottawa and one in Vancouver. The Ottawa office took responsibility for government liaison, sponsorship, administration, staffing, budgeting, and contact with foreign delegations. The Vancouver office was headed by Mary McNeil, as Deputy to Mr. Vanderloo. According to Ms. McNeil, the focus of the Vancouver office was "sheer logistics" including accommodation, accreditation, transportation, communication, site selection, and conference facility preparations.
The two offices merged in September 1997, when Mr. Vanderloo moved to Vancouver.
5.1.3. Relationships with the Prime Minister
Mr. Edwards and Mr. Vanderloo were both asked what their relationship was with Prime Minister Chrétien and with the Prime Minister's Office in the months leading up to the APEC conference.
Mr. Edwards said he was responsible for working directly with the Prime Minister on substantive issues involved in the leaders' meeting. He did not report to either the Privy Council Office or the Prime Minister's Office. Mr. Edwards was responsible for preparing the Prime Minister for his meetings with APEC leaders. He met with the Prime Minister twice in Ottawa and then once in Vancouver to go over the contents of a briefing book he had prepared for him. Mr. Edwards met once or twice with Jean Carle, Director of Operations, and Jean Pelletier, Chief of Staff in the Prime Minister's Office and, on occasion, with James C. Bartleman, who he described as the Prime Minister's Foreign Policy Advisor in the Privy Council Office.
Mr. Vanderloo said that ACCO consulted with the Prime Minister's Office on all issues relating to events where the Prime Minister would participate. The Prime Minister's Office was on ACCO's mailing list of senior government officials and departments for weekly updates on logistical issues. Mr. Vanderloo's only contact with the Prime Minister's Office was Mr. Carle. He said he had five or six meetings with Mr. Carle and also spoke with him on the telephone. Ms. McNeil said that the designation of Mr. Carle as a liaison person allowed ACCO to be sure that they were providing the Prime Minister with an atmosphere he would be comfortable with as host of the APEC leaders.
5.2. Police
5.2.1. Magnitude of the Policing Task
The APEC assignment was "the largest security event that would be undertaken by policing in the City of Vancouver" according to Vancouver Police Department (VPD) Deputy Chief Brian J. McGuinness. RCMP Supt. Wayne May acknowledged that "this APEC planning was really the largest planning event that the RCMP had undertaken." He said between 2,200 and 2,300 RCMP officers were involved – the majority from British Columbia and up to 180 from elsewhere – plus several hundred VPD members.
An appreciation of the magnitude of the undertaking can be gained from Supt. May's testimony:
Q: Perhaps if you could just explain to Mr. Hughes the – the general size of the event, and where the UBC site fit into that, to give some perspective?
A: Okay. The planning for APEC involved 18 economies, 18 large economies, members of APEC. Attach to that the number of leaders, there'd be 18 leaders visiting, together with their spouses, although not all came, together with Ministers of Foreign Affairs, and other ministers. So all in all, we were planning for in the vicinity of 75 Internationally Protected People, 12 of whom were at a very maximum level of security. There were a number of major sites around the City of Vancouver, including the University of British Columbia, the Vancouver Trade & Convention Centre, BC Place. There were, I believe, eight or nine hotels that were accommodating the leaders, and those who were receiving protection. The airport was also a major site. We were responsible for providing security to the (Internationally Protected Persons) IPPs from the time they landed in Victoria – or in Vancouver, until the time that they left....It was – it involved a very complex logistical challenge in driving these protected people from various parts of the city to their meeting places back to their residences. Roads were closed in the city. Approximately 90 motorcycles were utilized to provide escort service. Some roads were closed completely and secured with . . . Police Officers and auxiliary Members. Of the timing of the events, the protocol involved in the heads of delegation arriving at certain times in certain order was – was a significant challenge to us, as well. As was securing some of the very large sites that we had in this area.
5.2.2. RCMP and VPD Roles
Both the RCMP and VPD had policing roles at the APEC conference. The VPD has day to day responsibility for policing throughout the City of Vancouver, with the exception of the UBC campus, the University Endowment Lands, and the Greater Vancouver Regional District Pacific Spirit Park, which are under RCMP jurisdiction. Most significantly, the RCMP had jurisdiction over and responsibility for the 75 Internationally Protected Persons attending the APEC conference from the time they landed in Vancouver until their departure.
Insp. Murray Day held the position of APEC Policy Coordinator for the VPD. He described his responsibilities as the coordination of planning for security and traffic matters in assisting the RCMP with the APEC conference. Consistent with what Insp. Day said, the RCMP held overall responsibility for security at the APEC conference though in many respects they held joint command with the VPD.
From the opening of the conference on November 19 and onwards there was, at RCMP Headquarters at 37th Avenue and Heather Street in Vancouver, what Insp. Day called a "joint command" with the over-all commanders for the week including members of each force. Throughout Vancouver, at all the events that took place between November 19 and November 24, there were joint site commanders from each force. However, at UBC on November 25 and the preceding days, the RCMP site commander designated for that location was solely in command. VPD inspectors were on site to liaise with the RCMP site commander with respect to the VPD members serving on the Quick Response Teams and the VPD Crowd Control Unit, both of which were present on the UBC campus on November 25.
Ms. McNeil, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Vanderloo and Mr. Carle all acknowledged that responsibility for security rested with the RCMP. "Their mandate", said Ms. McNeil, "was to provide security for all of the IPPs."
Although this Commission has jurisdiction over the RCMP, it has no jurisdiction over the VPD.
5.2.3. Police and the Planning Organization
ACCO had its Vancouver premises on the 11th and 12th floors at 1125 Howe Street. Ms. McNeil testified that approximately 13 RCMP and VPD officers occupied one half of the 9th floor of the same building. She said that the RCMP and the VPD were considered to be the Security Directorate for the ACCO planning team headed by Mr. Vanderloo, with herself as Deputy.
As members of the Security Directorate, Supt. May of the RCMP and Insp. Day of the VPD were located in the ninth floor offices and were included in all ACCO directors' meetings. RCMP officers located on the 9th floor in addition to Supt. May included Insp. Bill Dingwall, Sgt. Peter S. Koleyak and Cst. Donald C. Merkel. VPD officers located there included Sgts. Douglas Huffsmith and Al Niedtner and Cst. Joanne E. Boyle. All officers located at Howe Street were invited to the weekly ACCO staff meetings held to discuss issues and keep staff up to date on developments.
ACCO also established a coordinating committee which met monthly to bring together all parties involved in the organization of the APEC conference, including representatives from the various sites involved in the APEC conference and the provincial government. Supt. May or his deputy, Insp. Dingwall, attended these monthly meetings. Four sub-committees reported to the coordinating committee – Operations, Communications, Business, and Special Events – and the RCMP had a representative on each of these sub-committees.
5.3. RCMP Planning Structure for APEC
RCMP planning for a major event, such as the APEC conference, entails an extensive organizational structure. The planning structure for APEC as it stood on April 1, 1997 was displayed in chart form and is attached as Appendix IV.
5.3.1. Federal Security Coordinator
Typically, for a major event, the RCMP Assistant Commissioner in Ottawa who is in charge of International Liaison and Protective Policy nominates a Federal Security Coordinator. That Coordinator reports back to the Assistant Commissioner who made the appointment and is involved with the federal organizers.
In the case of APEC, A/Comm. Wayne Martel appointed Supt. Wayne May to the role of Federal Security Coordinator on February 13, 1997. This gave Supt. May overall responsibility for security planning for the 1997 APEC conference. He would be responsible for the security of the visiting Internationally Protected Persons from the time they touched down in Canada until the time they left.
Supt. May had been a member of the RCMP since 1965. He had had extensive experience with VIP or Internationally Protected Person security dating back to 1967. In 1989 he began working full time in the Protective Service Division of the RCMP and had served continuously since that time in protective operations in both Ontario and British Columbia. In 1990, he completed a 12-day intensive training course on VIP protection. He had tactical troop experience, having served in that capacity in St. John's, Newfoundland and at the RCMP's Ottawa headquarters.
5.3.2. Division Operations Commander
The structure then in place called for the Commanding Officer of the division in which the event is taking place to appoint a Division Operations Commander who would report back to the Commanding Officer who made the appointment. This appointment should be made soon after the Coordinator is in place, according to RCMP A/Comm. W. P. Wawryk, who at the time of the hearing was in charge of International Liaison and Protective Policy. In the case of APEC, these appointments were made in reverse order. In July 1996, the then Commanding Officer of "E" Division, Deputy Commissioner Larry Proke, had already appointed Supt. May to the position of Division Operations Commander. When Supt. May was appointed as Federal Security Coordinator the following February, he then held the two most senior positions in the planning structure for the 1997 APEC conference.
In July 1997, A/Comm. Murray Johnston became the Commanding Officer of "E" Division, which encompasses all of British Columbia. He said that the Division Operations Commander appointment meant that the planning responsibility for the APEC conference had been delegated to Supt. May but nevertheless he was responsible for ensuring that the security operation was carried out as planned. He said "I had the overall responsibility but with competent people, I left it in their hands." Supt. May assumed a full-time role in the APEC planning structure in January 1997.
5.3.3. Deputy Division Operations Commander
Second in command to Supt. May was the Deputy Division Operations Commander. Insp. William Dingwall was named to that role in 1996. In September of that year, he attended a three-week VIP course and then immediately went full-time into his APEC work. He assumed a major planning leadership role until Supt. May's arrival on a full-time basis.
Insp. Dingwall had experience with site security. He worked in the policy centre responsible for VIP visits at Headquarters in Ottawa. After graduating magna cum laude in law in Ottawa, he was named as Officer in Charge of Complaints and Internal Investigations in British Columbia.
5.3.4. Planning Secretariat
Associated with Insp. Dingwall in the latter part of 1996 were four officers who became part of the Planning Secretariat. Included in this group were Sgt. Peter Koleyak and Cst. Don Merkel. Insp. Dingwall chaired this group, reporting to Supt. May. They were joined in the Planning Secretariat by representatives of the VPD.
5.3.5. Security Steering Committee
Supt. May appointed senior officers to head up the following sections:
- Supt. Peter Martin: Informatics;
- Supt. Vincent M. Casey: Intelligence/Investigation;
- Insp. Raymond Forsythe: Operational Support (Field Services and Tactical Response);
- Insp. Bob Stone: Administrative and Logistical Support;
- Insp. Dingwall: Sites;
- Supt. Gerald D. Green: Visits; and
- Insp. Al Mullin: Motorcades.
Those officers carried responsibilities for the overall planning of the APEC conference. The group, under Supt. May's leadership, was ultimately renamed the Security Steering Committee for APEC.
5.3.6. Operational Support Planning
Insp. Forsythe testified that as head of the "Operational Support" section it was his task to bring together approximately 17 different areas of responsibility that would provide service in a number of different areas, throughout the APEC conference. These included field support (air services, underwater recovery, security engineering, counter technical intrusion, major incident planning and major events, marine services, identification services, explosive disposal unit, security systems, and police service dogs); tactical response (emergency response teams, tactical teams, and a quick response team); and agency liaison (health services, biological and chemical response, and interaction with municipal and provincial agencies.)
Insp. Forsythe emphasized that he had no tactical decision making authority whatsoever. His responsibility was to ensure that those responsible for each area prepared an operational plan "identifying what they felt was going to be required of them, their ability to provide or meet that goal and then put in place some action planning on how that was going to be achieved and whatever training was going to be required to bring them up to a level to perform those tasks." It was then Insp. Forsythe's responsibility to send the operational plans to the Security Steering Committee for review and acceptance. Insp. Dingwall said it was his responsibility to review all of the operational plans for individual sites that were sent to the Security Steering Committee.
All of this planning work related to the entire APEC conference and not solely to the leaders' meeting at UBC on November 25. There was an overall operational plan produced for the APEC conference and Insp. Dingwall said he held responsibility for its preparation under the direction of Supt. May.
Supt. May said that each of the group heads contributed the individual plans that were brought together and coordinated into the main operational plan. It was finalized and distributed in early November. With further reference to his planning responsibilities and the UBC event, Supt. May said:
My responsibility was to ensure that there was a plan in place to develop – or to implement the security at UBC and that was developed through Supt. Thompsett for the site security. Supt. Trevor Thompsett, about whom more will be said in this report, was the Site Commander at UBC for the leaders' meeting held on November 25.
Supt. May's evidence about Supt. Thompsett's responsibility for development of the security plan at UBC is consistent with all the other evidence before me on that issue, including Insp. Forsythe's and Insp. Thompsett's. Earlier in his testimony Supt. May said that ultimate responsibility for the planning of strategy for dealing with demonstrations and crowds throughout the whole of APEC, including UBC, in particular, rested with Insp. Forsythe. Insp. Forsythe did not view that as his responsibility and I believe that Supt. May was mistaken because, at the same time, Supt. May said he had no knowledge of Insp. Forsythe's training and experience in crowd control and demonstrations. It is inconceivable that Supt. May, as the overall head of security, would assign such a major responsibility to one whose knowledge and experience in the area was completely unknown to him.
5.3.7. Appointment of Site Commanders
Part of the planning process involved the appointment of two Site Commanders – one from the RCMP and one from the VPD – for each location where an APEC related event would occur. The exception was the UBC site, for which Supt. Thompsett was named the sole Site Commander.
Because Site Commanders carried operational responsibility for security at events occurring at the locations to which they were each assigned, this was a most important and significant role. That certainly was the case with respect to the UBC site. Insp. Dingwall said that Supt. Thompsett's role was to "do the in-depth planning for UBC."
During the next three to four months he would deal with UBC and with the planning group.
5.3.7.1. Superintendent Thompsett
Supt. Thompsett assumed his Site Commander responsibilities in May of 1997 but he continued to hold his District Officer position located in Chilliwack. For the first six months, Supt. Thompsett made a number of trips to Vancouver to deal with his APEC responsibilities but during this period he relied heavily on his Deputy Site Commander, Sgt. Rick Anderson. Together they met their responsibility of preparing the UBC site plan which was forwarded to Insp. Dingwall's office for approval on November 4, 1997. In September and October, Supt. Thompsett was spending increasing amounts of time on his APEC duties while continuing to reside in Chilliwack and fulfilling his district responsibilities. Some time just after mid-November he came to Vancouver on a full-time basis.
Supt. Thompsett is a long serving and experienced officer with 35 years of service to his credit as of April 1999. He fulfilled assignments in Saskatchewan, Ontario, National Headquarters in Ottawa and in the 1980s was the Officer Commanding at Prince Rupert. From 1989 to 1994 he held that position at Penticton. While in Ottawa, he attended university and received a degree in law with honours. In 1994 he became the Officer Commanding of Chilliwack sub-division which was subsequently renamed as the Southwest Division. At the time of giving evidence in October 1999, Supt. Thompsett was serving as District Officer for the Southwest Division which placed him in charge of 24 detachments from Boston Bar and Manning Park through the Fraser Valley and Lower Mainland, up the Sunshine Coast to Sechelt, and along the Sea to Sky Highway to Pemberton, all of which reported to him.
In April-May 1997, Supt. Thompsett attended a three-week VIP security training course. While stationed in Alberta and at National Headquarters earlier in his career, he had served as a member of the tactical troop at each of those locations. Just before the APEC conference he attended two one-day sessions: one reviewed scenarios that could occur at the APEC conference, and the other provided a briefing for officers designated as supervisors for the APEC conference.
5.4. RCMP Operational Structure for APEC
This completes, for the moment, my consideration of the RCMP planning structure for the APEC conference and I turn now to discuss the actual delivery of the security package for the week of APEC.
5.4.1. Command Centre and Site Commanders
Supt. May testified that during the week of APEC, "the operation unfolded under the command structure of an Operations Commander with sort of a nerve centre, which we called APEC Command, where all the information was fed into that particular nerve centre. Each one of the major planning components was also represented in the Command Centre to provide advice to the Operational Commanders." (APEC Command was officially known as Command Centre.) The Operations Commanders were two senior RCMP officers, Supt. Casey and Supt. Green, and two Deputy Chief Constables of the VPD. They were responsible for putting the security plan into operation during the event. All Site Commanders reported to them, including UBC Site Commander Supt. Thompsett.
Supt. Thompsett was the officer on site at UBC on November 25 who carried responsibility for the control and direction of all site security personnel and for the protection and security of the Internationally Protected Persons. The Commanders in Command Centre were his superiors in the command structure but they were not intimately involved in security preparations leading up to the events of November 25.
Deputy Chief McGuinness, one of the VPD Operational Commanders, had minimal involvement until he attended a briefing on November 16 or 17. His full involvement began with his command role at Command Centre at 6:00 a.m. on November 18.
Supts. Casey and Green were part of the Security Steering Committee that had planning responsibility under the direction of Supt. May. Supt. Casey headed up the "Intelligence/Investigation Division" and Supt. Green's responsibilities related to "visits." Supt. Green's responsibilities did not involve him in a substantial way in UBC security matters, but his membership on the Security Steering Committee gave him some insight into the planning process. Supt. Casey had intelligence information about possible disruptions on campus on November 25 but did not have specific responsibility for the pre-APEC security planning, although he would have had some knowledge of the subject as a result of his Steering Committee membership.
Supt. Green correctly, I believe, summed up the role of Command Centre:
And the purpose of the Command Centre was basically to coordinate all of the information that was being supplied from different places and different delegations and different sites and locations. And particularly, I guess, to monitor the big picture of what was happening. Most of the people on the sites were – were aware of what was happening at their particular site, but they may not be aware of what was happening in three or four other sites. So, we really in the Command Centre, had the big picture of what was happening, as a result of intelligence that was being supplied to us on a regular basis, you know, video presentations from our own people on site, from our Wescam and those kinds of things. So – and I guess the other issue, was if – if there were contingencies that were happening in one particular location or site that required some assistance or additional resourcing, or we were aware that the crowd was moving close to another, those kinds of things; we would have all of the information on it.
Deputy Chief McGuinness agreed that the Command Centre had an overall coordinating role with respect to police operations at UBC on November 25 but that the Site Commander had immediate control over security matters on the campus. For all intents and purposes, Supt. Thompsett was in command. Those who had given leadership in the planning for this day for close to two years were now outside the loop, other than being available in an advisory capacity. That included Supt. May and Insp. Dingwall.
5.4.2. Quick Response Teams
Staff Sgt. Hugh Stewart, whose activities on campus on November 25 are addressed later in this report, was present in his capacity as the leader of the Quick Response Teams, a group of just over 170 police officers formed to provide security services as needed and directed during the week of the APEC conference. S/Sgt. Stewart was in no doubt who had command on the ground at UBC on November 25: "everything at that site, sir, fell under the Site Commander," who he identified as Supt. Thompsett. He said "no one takes action, unless it's under the direction of the Site Commander." He was quite correct in that assessment.
5.5. Problems with the Organizational Structure
Two features of the RCMP organizational structure for the APEC conference merit attention:
- the merging in one person of the two top security planning roles; and
- the sharp division between the planning for the event on the one hand, and the actual delivery of the security package the week of the conference on the other, which meant that those who had been involved in planning for APEC security for up to two years were without a command role when it came time to put the planning into practice through the operational structure charged with delivery of the security package.
5.5.1. The Dual Role: An Innovation
As explained above, the customary RCMP planning structure for major events called for both a Federal Security Co-ordinator and a Division Operations Commander. In fact, at the 1997 APEC Conference, the two roles were filled by one man, Supt. May.
It appears that the idea of combining the roles on this occasion had been formulated sometime before Supt. May's appointment as Division Operations Commander. On July 11, 1996, he wrote to Acting Commissioner Operations, "E" Division, D.J.A. Brown:
Federal Security Co-Ordinator
The participation of the Force with the Federal APEC Task Force (DFAIT) is usually through the office of the Federal Security Co-ordinator (FSC). All departmental representatives become key players with the APEC Task Force co-ordinating the planning of the total event, of which security planning is an important component. Historically the Federal Security Co-ordinator was responsible for the operational planning and control of the event, representing the Force at all meetings with the Task Force and determining the security level and nature of security resources required.
The Director, International Liaison and Protective Operations, has agreed that the Federal Security Co-ordinator (FSC) role be assumed by the Division Operations Commander (DOC) assisted by an experienced officer who would be the Deputy FSO. The Deputy FSO could then work out of the Federal Asia Pacific Task Force office, when it is established in Vancouver. The dual DOC/FSC role will permit better co-ordination of the event, be in keeping with the Commissioner's direction of delegation to the Divisions and will eliminate any friction or perception of HO members telling the Region how to go about doing their work. I believe that this innovation is a major advancement and will give the Division complete control (and accountability) over all aspects of this major project.
D/Comm. Proke had received this memorandum before he appointed Supt. May as Division Operations Commander on July 17, 1996. Clearly, he approved of the concept as did, subsequently, A/Comm. Martel. As it was described as an innovation, I assume that these roles had rarely, if ever, been merged in one person.
D/Comm. Proke said that the function of the Federal Security Co-ordinator is to design a security plan for an event and the function of the Division Operations Commander is to implement that security plan. From the way events unfolded it is apparent to me that by "implement" he meant putting the security plan in place in preparation for the event itself – not assuming responsibility for the operations side, which delivered the security package during APEC week.
The decision to move to a dual appointment mode had some implications. For instance, the Terms of Reference for the Division Operations Commander included responsibility for developing a security operational plan that would subsequently be given final approval by the Federal Security Co-ordinator. With the combining of these roles, Supt. May was charged with both developing a plan (wearing his Division Operations
Commander's hat) and then approving that same plan (wearing his Federal Security Co-ordinator's hat.)
A/Comm. Johnston testified that his own role was "an oversight position" and that Supt. May was responsible for planning for security at APEC. He agreed that the organizational chart showed that Supt. May reported to him. He was asked to explain that reporting relationship:
Superintendent May was tasked with developing the plans for APEC, from a security/police perspective, in conjunction with and working very closely with the Vancouver city police.
We developed a joint forces approach to this in view of the fact that a number of the events were going to be held in the City of Vancouver. So we had them working with us in this.
Superintendent May being tasked with developing the plans, he would brief both Deputy Proke and myself on a – on an ongoing basis as to how things were going.
And it was always just an overview of how the planning process was going, and if they were running into too many concerns, and were they able to sort through them.
And he was working very closely withHeadquarters Ottawa and our Protective Services there, to ensure that – that the plans were on track and – and covering all of the areas, the required areas.
In every sense, Supt. May held responsibility for two very important planning roles with respect to the provision of security services at the APEC conference.
5.5.2. The Split Between Planning and Delivery
A/Comm. Wawryk described the role of the Federal Security Co-ordinator, saying "he sort of builds a car and hands the keys to someone else who will drive the car". Those responsible for carrying out the security plan – the Site Commanders, serving under the Operations Commanders at Command Centre during APEC week – are the ones who will drive the car that has been built for them. The "handing over of the car keys" took place November 17-18 as described by Supt. May:
Q. And just so that we are clear, you were working in the Command Centre up until?
A. I was responsible for planning the security for APEC and once the operation started I turned that responsibility over, for the actual operation, to other people. And I was involved as – in a liaison capacity or a – troubleshooter, or whatever you want to call it.
When the conference began, responsibility for implementing the security plan was assumed by APEC Command Centre headed by RCMP Supts. Casey and Green, and two VPD Deputy Chief Constables, with the Site Commander for each conference site reporting to them.
Supt. May was asked to explain his role during the APEC conference itself and particularly at UBC:
A. I was intimately involved in the development and co-ordination of the APEC plan for two years, the security plan for two years. During APEC itself, I acted as a troubleshooter, advisor, go-between, liaison. If there were any problems developing that they needed my advice on, I was consulted. Particularly at the UBC on November 25th, I was in a liaison capacity.
Q. But you had no decision-making authority?
A. No, I didn't. I wasn't in the command structure at that time.
Supt. May, who had led the planning for this event for two years had no command role during the event itself. He testified that neither did Insp. Dingwall have a command role on campus on November 25.
This sharp division between the planning function and the operations function was clearly a significant contributing factor in the events that gave rise to the complaints being considered here:
- There was confusion over the authority wielded on the day of the event by officers who had been deeply involved in the planning function but were not then in the command structure.
- Important decisions were left to be made by people who had insufficient background information because they had been uninvolved in the planning process.
5.5.2.1. Confusion over roles
As would be expected, all officers in command functions and, indeed, all police officers on site to perform security duties were in uniform on November 25. In contrast, Supt. May and Insp. Dingwall appeared on campus in civilian clothes. This caused confusion for some constables who were unacquainted with these officers. This was particularly so in the case of Insp. Dingwall who projected himself on different occasions into a decision-making role. One such occurrence was in the presence of Cst. Joachim Weiss who said he had to assume that Insp. Dingwall was someone in authority. Insp. Perry Edwards, whose participation in the command structure on campus will be discussed later in this report, said he was surprised to learn that Insp. Dingwall was present on site.
S/Sgt. Andrew Bravener said of Insp. Dingwall's appearance on campus under these circumstances:
He posed a potential problem in that he went forward of the uniformed line without being marked or identified as a policeman.
Supt. May said that he was at UBC on November 25 in a liaison capacity, for consultation, and to give advice if needed. Insp. Dingwall said he was there in a similar capacity. In my judgment, however, he was mistaken in the view that he was there with authority. At one point he said he had the authority to overrule one of the Inspectors that Supt. Thompsett had recruited as one of his two Deputy Site Commanders. In another instance he cited his role as officer in charge of sites and his rank as Inspector as authority to give directions to non-commissioned police personnel at the site. In neither instance did he have that authority. Like Supt. May, he was not in the command structure at UBC on November 25.
5.5.2.2. Inadequate delivery model
Commission Counsel called six expert witnesses in the area of police planning for major events. Two of them were Chief Supt. Stephen French, the Officer in Charge of the Public Order Branch of the London Metropolitan Police Service, and Chief Insp. Michael
Caldwell, in charge of the Public Order Training Centre of that service. They explained the "Gold-Silver-Bronze Command Structure" used in the UK in security planning and delivery for events like the APEC conference. They were firm in the view that combining planning and operations under one structure produces best results. Chief Supt. French said:
A: What I would like to emphasize is that those that are planning events, those full-time planners that there are within the Metropolitan Police, are undertaking that function on behalf of those within the Command chain. It is not two separate activities. We do not have people that plan events and people that command events. The event planners are working for those within the command chain, at Gold and Silver level, in particular.
Q: What's the rationale for that?
A. Very clearly, you can't – you cannot robustly police an event, a public order event, unless those who are in the command positions have been intimately involved in the development of the plan for the event. That can not be undertaken. In –- in my view, and in as far as our procedures are concerned, by a group of people or – or individuals who are – who sit outside that command function. Those within the command function are responsible for the command of an event. And by command we don't mean what they do on the day of the event. Most of the work is, in fact, done in the planning of that event, prior to the actual event itself taking place.
I read that evidence as saying:
- Planning and commanding a public order event are not two separate activities;
- The event planners should work for those who will be in command at the time of the public order event; and
- To police effectively a public order event, those in command positions must have been intimately involved in the development of the plan for the event.
Security services to the APEC event of November 25 were delivered through a model that was totally contrary to what Chief Supt. French held to be necessary to effective policing of such an event. APEC planning and operations were carried out as two separate activities. Those who had planned the event for nearly two years stepped aside as existing RCMP policy apparently required them to do. Command was assumed by officers who came to their task late in the day with neither sufficient knowledge nor meaningful involvement in what had occurred during the planning phase. I will have more to say on this subject later in this report.