Written submission to the legislative Special Committee on Reforming the B.C. Police Act

Establishing trustworthy conflict responders

Source: Shutterstock

As provided on March 17, 2021

Committee members,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.

The establishment of the Special Committee appears to be the recognition again of the pressing need for real and deep changes to policing in this province.

Policing has been studied repeatedly in this country, yet little fundamental change of culture or practice has resulted. I am confident that I am not the only person sharing this judgment with you.

I look forward to supporting your committee in any way possible to help clarify the current issues and to find successful strategies for moving forward.

Submission context

As I considered the content of my submission, several questions arose that I found troubling:

• Why is it that we again need a Special Legislative Committee to seek answers for policing’s problems?

• Where is the leadership, motivation and competencies within policing to meet our society’s transforming needs?

• Why does policing so clearly not display this capacity?

These questions point to fundamental and foundational matters regarding the state of policing in this province that lie underneath the committee’s mandate. In my view these systemic issues need to be recognized and addressed. Therefore, I will strive to shed some light on them in this submission.

I think it is a fair opening statement that our relative safe and peaceful society in British Columbia is not guaranteed. If we are to maintain stability in a dynamically evolving society, policing in British Columbia needs to continuously adapt its understandings and practices in a timely manner. Such service delivery changes are dependent on a police culture that is skilled, strong in leadership and has professional integrity. Policing is a calling. Pride and ownership of one’s calling is what produces dedication, excellence and advancement.

Success does not come simply from words in a statute, dictates from government bureaucracy, or attacks from critics. I am confident many voices have made submissions to the committee pointing at deficiencies in policing and offering their suggested remedies. From my experience, most of those folks are very well-intended, yet they often have no understanding of what policing involves at that complex and dynamic front line face-to-face reality in the midst of crisis.

I answered the call to the profession of policing. I served the public for 40 years as a police officer in Vancouver. I was always intensely proud of serving the public in the role of a police officer. I did not always hold that equal level of sentiment for the police culture or police organizations in which I worked or came into contact.

I delivered services to every part of the city, worked in many specialized areas, and held a number of ranks. I was the Vancouver Police Union president for 8 years. I experienced a lot, learned a lot, saw a lot shortcomings, advocated for changes, and became involved in changes.

In time I came to realize that many changes did not resolve things. Solutions were often built on faulty factual, political or emotional foundations. At times even obvious assumptions were later found to be incorrect. And so, several times our solutions failed and even at times created unintended negative consequences. Today I appreciate that the real issues sometimes were deeper and more complicated than I could perceive or understand at the time. Though let down by some of the reforms I participated in over the years, there is much to learn from their shortcomings. And so, I have reflections I wish to share with you.

This submission will express my views largely at a broader systemic level, which is where I now see change as essential. I have provided links to several writings of mine as a component of this submission and they provide greater detail and references to literature in support of the overall shifts that I offer.

Oversight of police and other considerations

I would like to begin with focusing on the committee’s first topic area regarding

… reforms related to oversight, transparency, governance, funding, training, education and other considerations to modernize and sustain policing in the province.

I will speak specifically to three topics; police responsibility and accountability for complaints regarding potential professional misconduct, leadership culture, and rationalization of the service delivery structure.

Perhaps you may recall that when the committee was formed last year, I sent a writing, titled, The Erosion of Truth and Principle: An assessment of the conflictual conduct of the B.C. Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner in recent years and how this informs necessary changes to the B.C. Police Act. It contains several specific recommendations for changes to the Police Act in respect of the conduct review system. I assume that it’s early sending likely excluded it as a proper submission, and so I am providing the link to that paper now: https://www.johndehaas.ca/post/the-erosion-of-truth-and-principle

As that document is extensive and a part of this submission, I will not repeat its detailed contents in this text.

As I note in that extensive examination, I had considerable influence in the creation of the current Police Act. I was the Vancouver Police Union President during the period of the Oppal Commission of Inquiry into Policing, as well as during the years afterwards in which the conclusions and recommendations of the Inquiry were translated into law. During this period, I also represented the B.C. Federation of Police Officers on behalf of the municipal police departments in the province. I was engaged in countless discussions with key parties throughout the development and implementation of the Act. Later, as an Inspector, I spoke several times to a committee of the legislature, chaired by John Nuraney, tasked to review the Police Act that had been implemented based on the Oppal Commission recommendations.

I have kept my interest in oversight of police professional conduct. I have studied the field further and considered what has occurred since the creation of the OPCC and later the IIO. In particular, my initial research interest was to determine what aspects of civilian involvement were important for public confidence in the police; whether it was complaint management, investigation, adjudication, appeal, policy, governance, or some other function. My assumption was that spending tax money on all of these functions was likely wasteful, as surely some aspects would have bearing and some less so or none.

I am providing a link to a second research document, titled, A Real or a Philosophic Role in Citizen-Police Conflicts: The Impacts of Civilian Involvement in Police Conduct Review on Confidence in the Police. It is:

https://www.johndehaas.ca/post/a-real-or-a-philosophic-role-in-citizen-police-conflicts

This writing speaks to civilian involvement in both of the very different governance and conduct review functions. I once believed that what was needed for the public to have confidence in the police was obvious. I was very surprised by what the evidence in the available literature informs. I am confident you will find the research and conclusions of interest.

Regarding police public trust conduct and accountability for it, I offer the committee the following three observations:

• The committee may again seek to adjust the Act in the belief that altering words can create an unassailable system. It did not in the past and it will not. I have come to see that the problem is not the car; it is the driver. People run the system. Principled and ethical administration are the bases for an effective and just application of performance review systems. Just as police officers every day in every encounter need to wisely, ethically and empathically interpret and apply statutory provisions as a tool to maintaining a just, equitable and stable civil society, so must a professional conduct review process be administered. What is done with the words is what matters. Much abuse of what has been written has occurred over the last years.

I have also come to wonder over a few things. When did we lose faith in police personnel who have been meticulously selected for character and integrity? Why do we question whether they know right from wrong, or possess the courage to hold themselves to account? How did we come to believe that the people hired at the OPCC and IIO would somehow be fairer, more ethical, more principled, more insightful, have greater investigative skills, or hold greater wisdom than career police supervisors and managers? How did we come to just believe that somehow these civilian government personnel would have perfect integrity; absent of bias, agendas or self-interest? From what I have seen over the years, there is ample evidence of individuals in the police oversight bodies in this province acting quite poorly. And where is their accountability? Fine-tuning language in the Act will not change the character of its administrators.

• Alternatively, the committee may create greater exterior civilian involvement and control in the hope that this will quiet allegations of police misconducts and of out-of-touch police culture. It will not. Our current mainstream culture has come to define events of concern as necessarily blameworthy; having victims, perpetrators and malfeasance. This generates emotions, accusations, sensationalism, and claims of injustice. People are complex. Cultural lenses are complex. More exterior control cannot change the current social lens.

As well, civilians do not know the answers regarding policing or police conduct either, and most often marginally understand the problems. Within the policing profession there undoubtedly are those that do grasp both the issues and appropriate conduct. They need to be supported, nurtured, empowered, and brought to the fore.

• A compelling course of action available to the committee at this time is to assume the leadership role that is necessary to significantly disrupt the status quo and point a different way forward.

After a long career in policing, from my perspective, I perceive that deep changes today are required in three key systemic aspects of policing in this province;

Professionalization

Policing must become ‘professionalized’. This means that the major responsibility for the setting of and abidance with professional conduct standards lies with the police themselves. As with doctors, nurses, lawyers, and many other professions, police must own their profession. I am fully aware that unlike most other professions, the public has unique rights relative to policing as police are mandated to deal with citizens at times without their consent. This is particularly in respect to search, seizure, apprehension, and use of force. The issue then is ensuring that transparency of complainant processing is present, that administrative rules negate conflicts of interest, and that an exterior authority as a final level of appeal is readily available for significant matters.

Dr. Charles Ungerleider proposed the concept of a professional college to the Oppal Commission. At that time the Commission was intently looking for an exclusive review process for conduct pertaining to ‘the execution of public trust duties.’ I was strongly and vocally opposed to a college as I was convinced that the ‘public interest’ inherent in these duties meant extensive ‘exterior’ ownership was paramount. My stance contributed to the trajectory towards creating the OPCC. Recently, I have discussed police professionalism again with Dr. Angelo Caravaggio, who has worked for the Ontario police chiefs and also is a strong advocate for a College of Policing. He informed me of Justice Tulloch’s recommendation for a college of policing in Ontario in 2017 and again in his recent 2019 report which stated that,

Serious consideration should be given to establishing a College of Policing in Ontario as the professional body for policing… For many people, policing is a calling in the same way many doctors are called to medicine and teachers are called to teaching. Policing should be seen as a distinguished profession.

I am now persuaded that professionalization, with thoughtfully integrated public accountabilities, is the way forward. I was recently asked for my thoughts on accountability for BC Conservation Officers, and in my writing explore ideas on how an internal process can be constructed to have appropriate transparency, and ultimately exterior appeal for the assurance of proper and thorough process. I am confident that professionalism and public accountability can be constructed in a new model for policing.

Leadership

From my 40-year career in policing, I view policing as having developed competencies in various service delivery command roles, including critical incident, public order, major investigation, and front-line operations. Police management also does well at administration. However, police management has not evolved to truly understand organizational or professional leadership.

I have come to understand that the fundamental function of police organizations is to be reactive to disorder and to secure the status quo. This is generally antithetical to any creative inquiry. As well, changes to the shape of the status quo are regularly determined by laws, courts, political bodies, public inquiries, to name but a few obvious ones. The police follow rather than lead. Significant change is not undertaken by the police. Though the education standard for senior managers is upgrading to becoming the holding of any Master’s degree, this does not translate into obtaining leadership skills or the creation of a culture of police leaders. Yet it is still a positive step to be exposed to academia and critical thinking. All significant changes to policing have come from and remain at this time with external forces.

Therefore, it is for the provincial government to mandate the development of a strong, skilled, and ethical police leadership culture. Effective leadership is required for the paradigm shifts in policing practice that are necessary in Canada today and in the future. As a prime example, major change is needed in respect to policing our marginalized populations. In regards to this, I am providing a link to a third research paper, titled, On the Front Line of Social Conflict: Canadian Police and the Severely Marginalized. It is:

https://www.johndehaas.ca/post/police-and-the-severely-marginalized

Within this writing also is a helpful examination of entrenched police practices and police resistance to change. It underscores the need at this time for exterior directives.

Rationalization

Policing in the province has endured many serious multi-jurisdiction events, such as serial murderers Clifford Olson and Robert Pickton. We have and continue to experience regional and province-wide gang violence. We have had two Stanley Cup riots requiring multi-jurisdiction resources. These ‘regional’ issues are met with a fractured police service. And we wait for the overdue cataclysmic earth quake. There is no sense, only history and small politics, to the complexity of stand-alone departments and structures of this core ‘essential’ service. We pay the cost in victims, in disorder, in deaths, and in tax dollars better spent elsewhere.

Well over forty years ago when I entered the police academy the talk was of imminent regionalization of policing. Back then I wrote a paper outlining a plan in which such a service could be incrementally created over several years in Greater Vancouver. It may still be in the Justice Institute library. And nothing has happened.

It is time for the provincial legislature to take hold of its constitutional responsibility for policing; including its organizational structure, staffing levels and funding model. A police service that is rationally constructed to address public safety realities will assuredly look very different. One longstanding objection has been that municipalities currently pay the bill. There are other funding models available, and I suggest the education system model provides a potential solution for funding a service that ought not simply be defined by municipal boundaries.

The literature makes clear, as noted above, that significant evolution has virtually never come from within policing in western countries. It is apparently not the nature within the police role in our society to think outside the box, when the job is to keep everything in the box.

Yet, adaption is essential in an ever more dynamic reality in which policing delivers service. Therefore, the burden and the opportunity to move policing forward in British Columbia and to better public safety outcomes today rests with the provincial government. The committee is in a unique and exciting position to recommend rationalizing the police service, professionalizing it, and initiating a new leadership culture.

Racism within policing and police involvement with complex social issues

This next component of my submission speaks to the committee’s topic areas of ‘racism’ and ‘complex social issues’.

Many years back, as an Inspector under Chief Constable Jamie Graham of the Vancouver Police Department, I was tasked to craft a comprehensive business plan relative the provision of policing services to Aboriginal and diverse populations in Vancouver, inclusive of the matter of hate crimes. I had already been actively engaged with inner city Aboriginal youth agencies while in command of the Youth Services Section. The plan I created established the Diversity and Aboriginal Policing Section, which I was then assigned to command. From my work in that assignment, I want to share some learnings that may assist the committee.

Racism in policing

Though most often not acknowledged, unconscious racism exists throughout our society. Often unconscious racist beliefs are even held by those who see themselves as victimized. Fortunately, an extremely thorough examination of racism in policing and the public was undertaken by the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission in 2003 in the Kirk Johnson matter. Based on expert evidence received, the case explains what racism in police agencies is, who is responsible, and what actions are required. After all these years I am puzzled why this case has not been the guide for police services across the country. It is available at: https://humanrights.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/2003-Johnson.pdf

For expediency, here are key highlights from the lengthy decision (I have added bolding for emphasis):

The incident that resulted in Kirk Johnson laying a complaint against Constable Michael Sanford and the Halifax Regional Police Service can be succinctly described. On 12 April 1998 Earl Fraser and Kirk Johnson were pursued on Highway 111 by Constable Sanford and stopped at a shopping plaza just off Main Street in Dartmouth. Mr. Fraser was driving Mr. Johnson’s Texas-registered 1993 black Ford Mustang. The constable asked for proof of insurance and vehicle registration and was not satisfied with the documents offered. He then ticketed the driver, and ordered the car towed. In fact Mr. Johnson’s documentation was valid under Texas law. The next day an unidentified police official determined that the seizure had been erroneous and ordered the car released. Both Mr. Fraser and Mr. Johnson are black. The central issues in this case are whether any of Constable Sanford actions on the night of 12 April constituted an act of discrimination, and whether any actions or omissions of the Halifax Regional Police amounted to discrimination against Mr. Johnson…

Kirk Johnson is one of Nova Scotia’s best-known athletes. He ranks among the top heavyweight boxers in the world and his career is followed with interest in both the local and national media… The treatment of racial minorities by the police in Canada has been a topic of controversy for the last decade at least, but especially within the last few years. It was inevitable that claims of racial profiling, made by a well-known complainant, would attract public attention… Mr. Johnson gave testimony to the effect that he had been stopped 28 times in the black Mustang while on visits to his parents over the years 1993-98, before the night in question. There was also some other evidence regarding black persons being stopped by police in the Halifax-Dartmouth area… A recent decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal which raised the issue of racial profiling by the police has made it clear that discriminatory acts by the police (or anyone) can arise from a process of subconscious stereotyping as well as from conscious decisions. Thus I must be alert at all stages of the inquiry for evidence from which such stereotyping might be inferred… The Court of Appeal agreed with the definition of racial profiling advanced by counsel for the police (at para. 7): “racial profiling involves the targeting of individual members of a particular racial group, on the basis of the supposed criminal propensity of the entire group.” The Court added that “the attitude underlying racial profiling is one that may be consciously or unconsciously held. That is, the police officer need not be an overt racist. His or her conduct may be based on subconscious racial stereotyping.” Brown deals with the criminal law but these comments about racial stereotyping are equally applicable in proceedings before human rights tribunals such as this one…

I find the complainant has established a prima facie case of discrimination, based on the unusual conduct of Constable Sanford’s vehicle in pursuing the Johnson vehicle and his denials of the same. From this action, one could infer that Constable Sanford took the action he did in order to discern more about the occupants of the vehicle, and once having discerned their race, acted on an inadmissible stereotype of black criminality in deciding to stop the vehicle…I infer that once Constable Sanford was aware of the race of the occupants of the vehicle, this fact confirmed his suspicions that something was amiss. It was an operative element in his decision-making, though mixed in with other legitimate factors. I am not required to find whether this resulted from a conscious decision on his part or resulted from a subconscious stereotype. Either way it was still a violation of the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act… The lack of courtesy towards Mr. Johnson, and the failure to make any attempt at all to investigate what the legal requirements were in an unfamiliar jurisdiction, whether through conversation with Mr. Johnson or otherwise, are examples of unprofessional behaviour from which I am entitled to infer differential treatment, and I find that this differential treatment was based principally on Mr. Johnson’s race… I find Constable Sanford did not display the reasonable tolerance and tact required of someone in his position and I infer that race was a major factor in this professional failing… I infer that the tragic lack of communication which caused Constable Sanford to fall into error was the result of the police officer’s use of a racial stereotype of black male criminality…

I also wish to address an understandable concern of officers reading this decision. If we are to be held liable for violating the Human Rights Act on the basis of unconscious stereotypes, some might say, how can we ever be sure we are acting correctly? How can we guard against something that is not conscious? Isn’t it unfair to hold us to such a high standard? I think the answer to this question was given by Constable Christopher Regan at the inquiry. In response to a question about how to deal with racial stereotypes, he replied that you have to work at it. That simple answer is the essence of it. Recognizing the problem and developing techniques to deal with it, both at the personal and institutional level, are the key. Police pride themselves on being professionals and part of that professionalism involves rigorous training on a wide variety of matters. Learning to recognize and deal with racism is another form of training that the police must add to their repertoire in order to continue to provide quality policing services, just as learning about domestic violence became a larger part of police training in recent years. Here I think Constable Sanford was not well served by his employer, as I will detail further on…

A number of issues came up with regard to the evidence of Dr. Wanda Thomas Bernard, whom Mr. Goldberg wished to qualify as an expert witness with regard to racism in Nova Scotia, the impact of racism on individuals and communities, anti-racism training, and racial profiling by police. Dr. Bernard holds a master’s degree in social work from Dalhousie and a doctorate in sociological studies from the University of Sheffield, England. She has been a professor in the Maritime School of Social Work at Dalhousie since 1990, and was appointed director of the school in 2001. Dr Bernard has conducted research and published widely on the experiences of black people in Nova Scotia and elsewhere, their encounters with racism, their success stories, and their coping mechanisms, and on anti-racist education and diversity training. Her work on racism, violence and health has attracted major grant funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, which is another clear indication of her high stature in the scholarly community…

Dr. Bernard’s testimony on the powerful impact of negative media stereotypes of black males, both on white people and on black men themselves, was especially pertinent. She noted the strong tendencies in popular culture and film to focus on black men as criminals, pimps, uneducated persons, and uninvolved as fathers of their children. Her research has examined the “cool pose” that young black males sometimes adopt in response to these media portrayals, which in turn unintentionally helps to reinforce the stereotypes. The net effect of her testimony was that these negative stereotypes are widely diffused in our culture, so much so that they operate at a subconscious level, and that it requires a considerable amount of training to counteract them. The issue of possible subconscious stereotyping by police officers was a major focus of this inquiry, and I found Dr. Bernard’s evidence relevant and necessary to that issue… The evidence of Dr. Bernard on anti-racism training was both necessary and relevant to the inquiry and it informs my discussion of remedies later in this decision.

Dr. Bernard testified as to the sense of violation that members of minorities experience when subjected to acts of racism; she analogized it to an assault. We understand that a person who has been physically assaulted will continue to experience psychic after-effects for some period of time long after any physical injury has healed. A similar reaction can occur after a direct encounter with racism. When the act occurs at the hands of the police, contact with whom one has no control over, it is bound to create an ongoing sense of vulnerability…

Turning to institutional remedies… There was a common theme in the answers when officers testifying before the inquiry were asked about their awareness of institutional anti-racism policies and their experience of diversity training. Most replied that they had some sessions in their training at the Atlantic Police Academy but none thereafter and they were not familiar with the policies adopted by their employer. This is in direct contradiction to the commitment promised in the 1995 Halifax Police Department (as it then was) Diversity Management Policy, which Deputy Chief McNeil said was the cornerstone of Halifax Regional Police policy in this area. That policy promised that all current employees would participate in a race relations course, and that new employees would do so within twelve months of their commencement of employment. The discriminatory acts in this case might well have been avoided had existing anti-racism policies and educational opportunities been more vigorously diffused and promoted throughout the organization. There are elements of both individual and organizational responsibility involved in this case, and in that context, I think it is appropriate for me to include in my order some provisions about how the Halifax Regional Police Service can improve its educational efforts. The plan I outline below is not meant as a punitive measure, but as a process which I hope the Police Service will embrace in a cooperative rather than adversarial manner. It is meant to be an adjunct to existing management techniques for assuring quality service, but with an additional emphasis on public transparency…

Anti-racism education, or as it now sometimes called, diversity training, requires a substantial commitment in terms of money, time and energy by the organization undertaking it. It is clear that the Halifax Regional Police Service has made some progress in defining its goals and educating its workforce in this regard over the last dozen years, but it is equally clear to me that a kind of progress report or reality check is needed. There is no point in reinventing the wheel at great expense in those areas where the Police Service is doing a good job. But there are clearly areas where existing practices and policies need to be reviewed either for content or with a view to their being more fully embraced by staff; there may be other areas which have not been addressed at all. Dr. Bernard spoke of a “needs assessment” as a necessary preliminary step to adopting a program of diversity training, and I order that one be undertaken according to the time-line below. I will retain jurisdiction over the complaint for the limited purpose of ensuring that these steps are completed, and my jurisdiction will end when the final police report referred to in number 7 below is published. In creating this plan, I have tried to balance two main things: the needs of all citizens to know that their police force is making its best efforts to provide services in a non-discriminatory fashion to the public; and the needs of the police management to be able to plan for the deployment of its budgetary and human resources in an efficient fashion. That is why I have left modes of implementation largely to the police while trying to ensure that the public is kept informed about measures that are underway, and can comment, critically if need be, on the direction of policy in this area.

1. … the Halifax Regional Police Service shall engage the services of two consultants to conduct a needs assessment of its current policies and practices on anti-racism education and diversity training...

6. The Halifax Regional Police Service shall appoint one of their senior managers to have overall responsibility for complying with this process, and that person shall be identified publicly as soon as possible after the deadline for appeal of this decision has passed.

7. Three months after the publication of the consultants’ report(s), the Halifax Regional Police shall make public its response to the needs assessment, and shall indicate what steps it has taken and is planning to take in light of it…

The bottom line is that in our society racism is often unknowingly being upheld and spread. Police leaders need to scan their operational environments to identify potential biases consciously or unconsciously held by police members towards populations who they may interact with. The police organization must then proactively provide training so that staff come to recognize their own beliefs and as professionals dispense with them.

The policing of diverse populations and ‘complex social issues’

Let me begin with the statement that there is no general role for police regarding ‘complex social issues.’ The legitimate role of police towards identifiable populations, of which those with ‘complex social issues’ are some, is to assist them to have better public safety outcomes if they are experiencing significant negative ones. For example, the general ‘position and views’ of police were asked for in Vancouver when a safe injection site was first proposed. I was assigned to facilitate the Inspectors in command of the department’s various sections to determine a consensus of views. The determination of the Inspectors became clear, they had no valid general stance on such an issue. They had only a law-and-order mandate in regards to any legally established injection site. Complex social issues as they impact public safety objectives dictate the strategies, tactics and training for police.

The Diversity and Aboriginal Policing plan for the VPD recognized numerus identifiable groups with significant safety issues, including sex trade workers, drug addicts, the homeless, and the mentally ill. Other populations included the LGBT community, the urban Aboriginal population, the Jewish community, and others. The plan worked from several measurable public safety criteria relevant to policing, such as rates of victimization, rates of offending, engagement with the criminal justice system as reportees and witnesses, the provision of criminal intelligence, and level of trust in the police. For these outcomes some data was available in police databases and some would require academic research projects - which would require ethical approval from academic institutions. The strategy framework to achieve better public safety outcomes included both internal and external initiatives. Internally it included such things as educating police members on particular populations and having representation from that population visible in the department when possible. Externally it included such activities as leadership-to-leadership outreach, undertaking collaborative initiatives, and engaging directly with community members. The section did very well in building trust and increasing confidence in many communities that were experiencing significant safety issues.

The following are several examples of the type of work that was done to improve public safety outcomes.

• Drug users – Work was done in collaboration with Pivot Legal Services, VANDU and other agencies to hold several dialogue sessions with DES drug users. The objectives were to create better relationships, develop trust, bring forward differing perceptions, and look at how police and drug users might act in ways that would result in better public order, safety and health outcomes. In one of the attached documents, I speak to the need for a paradigm shift in the policing of marginalized populations. This cooperative initiative illustrates one small component of what needs to be done.

• LGBT – This population suffers a high level of hate motivated crime - particularly assaults, under-reports to police, and has a historic lack of trust in the police. Outreach was done and a collaborative committee created with Qmmunity, a service agency in Vancouver’s West End. Funding was obtained for a series of community discussions with police over hate crimes and relations with police. Much community connection was made, information passed, and relationships fostered.

• Urban Aboriginal – This population suffers racism, high rates of victimization, high rates of offending, socio-economic inequities, homelessness, mistrust of police, and other ‘complex social issues.’ In particular, the high percentage of youth in the population, their victimization, potential gang recruitment, and weak social support were of serious concern. Outreach was done and in time connection was made with the Aboriginal Friendship Centre, a Youth Working Group with key agencies established, the death of Frank Paul collaboratively reviewed, an Aboriginal community police office jointly established, significant federal funding for a pilot youth anti-gang program and facility obtained, and the unceded land Vancouver is on recognized through placing Aboriginal art on all marked police vehicles – which became the thunderbird art donated by Susan Point. As well, a provincial grant was secured for a series of transportable panels which display the pre-contact history of local Aboriginal peoples, European contact, the diseases that decimated populations, colonization, residential schools, the movement to urban centers, and the current dire public safety issues that therefore have developed. The department has also actively sought the hiring of Aboriginal officers. Unfortunately, notwithstanding the specific analysis and recommendations relative to the urban Aboriginal population in Vancouver contained in the Oppal Report, when I proposed a similar dedicated front-line unit that would contain volunteer mixed gender Aboriginal members, I received no response from the executive.

• Religious groups – Outreach was done to Jewish community agencies and collective senior level discussions held; particularly over anti-Semitism and security. Outreach was also done to Muslim agencies and collective senior level discussions also held; including over radicalization and local expressions of it.

Closing comments

I think it is significant to again note that other professions in this province do not regularly have either commission of inquiries or legislative committees examining their structure and workings to find answers to be implemented. Policing regularly does.

From my involvement in policing for over forty years, I see several understandable reasons for this. In the end, the evolution of modern policing has simply not yet included the creation of a strong leadership culture containing a principled foundation, skills and practices. The current Special Committee can mandate the beginning of one.

Crucial to creating a leadership culture is ownership of one’s profession and accountability to it. A College of Policing provides the model to achieve this. Any ‘execution of public trust duties’ conduct review processes created by the College requires that the public interest and transparencies are thoughtfully built into it.

Policing now needs government to rationalize its structure and to grant it the capacity to meet its professional self-interest of maintaining the integrity of its services and its members. Policing is a calling. So is politics. It is a time for political leadership.

As provided April 25, 2021

Addendum: Consistent accountability of law enforcement powers.

My initial submission covers three main themes. Specifically, that policing services to the public in this province would benefit greatly by being:

• rationalized, in a manner perhaps similar to what was done for B.C. ambulance services decades ago,

• professionalized, such as has been provided through the establishment of numerous provincial professional colleges, and

• initiating a strong leadership culture, such as is maintained in various business sectors and in the military.

This addendum potentially modifies my earlier proposal for a College of Policing.

The opportunity to provide additional input to the committee has led to further reflection on the issues. In particular, I have considered further the professional conduct review model. I have finally come to realize that the concept of ‘police’ conduct review is built on outdated and limiting mental constructs. My thoughts are as follows:

Law Enforcement Powers

Enforcing laws and maintaining order are functions stipulated by law. In performing these tasks police are subject to criminal and civil accountabilities equal to any other person.

An additional concern regarding police officers is their ‘professional’ accountability for their use of unique legal powers necessary for the ‘execution of public trust duties’. These authorities pertain to necessary intrusions of an individual citizen’s physical space or of their property, irrespective of their will. These matters are commonly termed:

• Detention

• Arrest

• Search

• Seizure

• Use of force

Parties with direct interest in the execution of public trust duties

Police agencies

Unlike many other professions, policing does not provide for individual practitioner provision of service; police officers only exist as members of established police agencies. In respect to police officers’ conduct, these organizations hold responsibilities over hiring practices, training and development, and corporate culture.

After criminal, civil, and public trust matters, performance issues pertaining to police officers may generally be dealt with within the employer-employee relationship. Labour jurisprudence is robust and has space to consider the unique status or attributes of the police role.

Police profession

Police officers collectively deeply care about the career profession they have chosen. Government has provided certain vocations with professional ‘colleges’ to oversee professional aspects of performance, along with powers over licensing and conduct review. Complainants are usually recipients of services who are grieving what was provided. Policing at this time has no college model. There is no professional ownership of quality of service or a professional voice.

Governing bodies

For service levels, policy directives and conduct oversight models, police agencies are ultimately dependent on elected political direction. Governments fund policing, determine police structures, and ultimately are responsible for public order maintenance. As long as political interference stays out of specific investigative or enforcement actions, the police will have the independence to apply the law fairly to everyone.

Citizenry

The uniqueness of law enforcement conduct is that the execution of duties not only involves a police officer, police agency, and government, but also a citizen who did not necessarily agree to police intrusion. And since any individual may be subject to uninvited police enforcement, the public at large have a stake in professional police conduct.

With so many stakeholders, there is a significant complexity to designing police accountability.

Breadth of Law enforcement officers

A misperception is that police are unique in their justice system powers. Law enforcement public trust duties today are not exclusively granted to police.

Much work has been splintered off to lower paid and lesser trained job positions, such as police jail guards and bylaw officers. Such roles have been squeezed under the Police Act as ‘Special Constables’ or ‘Auxiliary Police’ for the time these individuals are performing enforcement duties.

As well, there are positions within the justice process that utilize aspects of public trust authorities. This includes such roles as Sheriffs and Corrections Officers. Then we have individuals who require some measure of public trust authorities to perform their work, such as Conservation Officers. These jobs are routinely categorized as Special Constables as well. Even the IIO’s members are in a ‘designated policing unit’ under the Police Act. The Police Act is currently stuffed full of non-police officers.

Wikipedia lays out this odd situation as;

In the province of British Columbia, for example members of the Conservation Officer Service are designated Special Constables under that province's Police Act, and are responsible for enforcing specific provincial and federal laws, including certain Criminal Code offences. Other BC Special Provincial Constables for approximately 25 other Provincial Agencies and Crown Corporations duties vary from Criminal Investigations (Fraud, Forgery, False Pretences, Identity Theft/Fraud) to Regulatory Investigations, Intelligence Gathering and Protective Services. Typical roles are Fraud Investigators (Benefits/Claims Fraud and Identity Fraud for ICBC, WorkSafeBC, Income Assistance, Childcare and Healthcare); Compliance and Enforcement Investigations regarding, Consumer Protection, Film Classification, Financial Institutions, Securities/Markets, Gaming Enforcement, Liquor, Tobacco Tax, General Revenue, Natural Resource Officer Operations, Intersection Safety Cameras, Security Programs, and SPCA; Protection and Risk Services for the Legislature, Government and Courts.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_constable

Towards one system

We currently have an extensive span of roles that are given public trust law enforcement authorities. As we tier policing to reduce costs this number will undoubtedly increase. We can either continue shoehorning everyone into the Police Act when law enforcement authorities are involved in their work, or we can create one overarching system. Such a model would capture any person who is granted authority to detain, arrest, search a person, search a person’s property, seize property, or use force to uphold their duties. Collecting roles together under one structure is similar to the centralization decades ago of service agency training at the Justice Institute of British Columbia (JIBC). An apt title might be something such as, ‘The Law Enforcement Authorities Accountability Process’.

Such a system requires carefully constructed transparency obligations, primarily towards complainants. Not all complainants want full public exposure. And, as well, an exterior appeal level is crucial for significant matters or significant outcomes. This appeal body must be truly independent, credible and empowered; with the authority to rectify process, investigative or adjudicative insufficiencies.

I would suggest that a College of Law Enforcement Officers be the appropriate body for managing the process.

What I am proposing is one singular justice enforcement code of values and conduct, one accountability process and one governing body. Rather than trying to force the new world into old forms, I suggest breaking the mold and creating a model that makes sense for present realities and trends moving forward.