Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act - Thursday, July 29, 2021
Thursday, July 29, 2021
Hansard — Reforming the Police Act Blues — Thursday, July 29, 2021, p.m.

Hansard Blues

Special Committee on

Reforming the Police Act

Draft Report of Proceedings

2nd Session, 42nd Parliament
Thursday, July 29, 2021
Victoria

The committee met at 3:04 p.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Welcome, everybody. My name is Doug Routley, and I'm the MLA for Nanaimo–North Cowichan and the Chair of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act, an all-party committee of the Legislative Assembly.

I would like to acknowledge that I am joining today's meeting from the traditional territories of the Malahat First Nation.

I would like to welcome all those listening and participating to this meeting.

[3:05 p.m.]

Our committee is undertaking a broad consultation with respect to policing and related systemic issues in B.C. We are taking a phased approach to this work and are meeting with a number of organizations and individuals to discuss the ideas and experiences they put forward in written submissions earlier this year.

We are also hoping to learn more about British Columbians' perspectives on policing, including hearing from those working on the front line of several fields, including policing, public safety, health care and social services. Interested individuals can fill out a survey to share their views with the committee. Further details are available on our website at www.leg.bc.ca/cmt/rpa. The deadline to complete the survey is 5 p.m. on Friday, September 3.

For today's meeting, we will be hearing three presentations. To assist our presenters, we do have a timer available, which can be seen when you're in gallery view.

All our audio from our meetings is broadcast live on our website. A complete transcript will also be posted there.

I'll now ask members of the committee to introduce themselves. I will begin with my friend MLA Kirkpatrick.

K. Kirkpatrick: Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm Karin Kirkpatrick. I'm the MLA for West Vancouver–Capilano.

It is located on the beautiful and traditional territory of the Squamish, Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for joining us. Look forward to the presentation.

My name is Dan Davies. I'm the MLA for Peace River North.

I'm coming to you from the sunny and warm territory of the Dane-zaa.

H. Sandhu: Hello, everyone. I am Harwinder Sandhu, the MLA for Vernon-Monashee.

Today I'm coming to you from the unceded and traditional territory of the Okanagan Indian Nation.

Thank you for joining us.

G. Begg: Hi, everyone. I'm Garry Begg. I'm the MLA for Surrey-Guildford.

I'm coming to you today from the traditional territories of the Coast Salish people, including the Kwantlen, the Kwikwetlem and the Semiahmoo First Nations.

R. Singh: I'm Rachna Singh, the MLA for Surrey–Green Timbers.

I am joining you from the shared territories of the Kwantlen, Kwikwetlem, Katzie and Semiahmoo First Nations.

A. Olsen: Hello. My name is Adam Olsen. I'm the MLA for Saanich North and the Islands. I am a few seconds away from being in front of my computer to turn it and the video on.

I'm coming to you today from my home office in the W̱SÁNEĆ territory.

D. Routley (Chair): Thanks, everyone.

For our guests, there are a couple more members who will join us as we proceed here. They'll introduce themselves then.

Assisting our committee today, very ably, are Karan Riarh and Mai Nguyen of the Parliamentary Committees Office and Dwight Schmidt from Hansard Services. We thank them very much.

With that, I'll now introduce Deputy Commissioner Dwayne McDonald, Assistant Commissioner Eric Stubbs and Chief Superintendent Jeanette Theisen from the B.C. RCMP.

Take it away. Thank you.

Presentations on Police Act

B.C. RCMP

D. McDonald: Thank you. Good afternoon. As noted, my name is Deputy Commissioner Dwayne McDonald. I'm the commanding officer for the British Columbia Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

I'm joined by my colleagues assistant commissioner Eric Stubbs and criminal operations officer for core policing and chief superintendent Jeanette Theisen of the operations strategy branch. We're pleased to represent the RCMP as British Columbia's provincial police service and to provide our perspectives on issues and opportunities related to the modernization of the B.C. Police Act.

Before we start, I would like to acknowledge that our headquarters building here in Green Timbers sits on the unceded territories of the Semiahmoo, the Katzie and the Kwantlen First Nations.

We made a fulsome written submission to the special committee in April of this year. It addresses the vast complexities of policing in British Columbia, provides a number of recommendations and includes a detailed overview of our organization, which is made up of over 10,000 employees who respond to over one million calls for service each year.

Today, being mindful of the time, we will address four key issues that you have identified for focus during our presentation: policing in partnership with Indigenous communities, a trauma-informed approach to policing practice, working alongside mental health partners and systemic racism.

[3:10 p.m.]

E. Stubbs: In our written submission, we've described in detail our Indigenous policing program and our work in over 200 Indigenous communities across the province. I'd like to take some time to talk in plain terms about our challenges and suggest a number of recommendations for this committee's consideration.

Our employees who dedicate themselves to our Indigenous policing program do exceptional work. This includes 117 First Nation policing officers working within the community tripartite agreements as well as the front-line officers responding to calls in every community we serve. But as much as it is important for me to credit our employees who work tirelessly to keep Indigenous communities safe, I will state that we have a lot of work ahead of us. This special committee has heard from numerous Indigenous groups who have said as much — that there remains a significant gap in the area of trust and collaboration between police and some Indigenous communities.

The following are some factors that contribute to our complex and challenging relationships with the Indigenous population.

First and foremost is the tragic legacy of the Canadian residential school system, including our past participation in it. Although our commissioners have offered apologies in 2004 and 2014, that legacy remains, and it has bred understandable distrust of the RCMP across the country.

With that baseline of distrust present, integrating our officers in First Nations communities — in particular in very isolated locations — is challenging. Our employees must quickly learn a new culture and forge relationships, with minimal supports, all while keeping the community safe. Meanwhile, one incident perceived to be an excessive use of force, a poor or biased investigation or any host of other factors can harm relations in an instant.

I have found that one of the most crucial ways to gain trust in Indigenous communities is time. Trust and respect are slowly earned with each interaction. But our employees transfer in and out of many communities on a regular basis. Sometimes there is simply not enough time.

In recent years, we have been called on to enforce court injunction orders for many resource-based industry projects. In most situations, the B.C. RCMP's measured approach has been successful in facilitating protests that are lawful, peaceful and safe. However, this work has put us in conflict with some Indigenous communities and groups who are not supportive of a particular project.

Another challenge is in the urban settings. We frequently respond to calls for service involving vulnerable people. When these individuals are Indigenous and don't live in their First Nation community, they often face barriers in that they cannot easily access assistance from their distant home communities. With most funding directed to community tripartite agreements, there is very little direct funding or strategies in urban environments for police to work with these individuals towards a positive path addressing their unique needs.

Finally, the criminal justice system. A person's entrance into the criminal justice system starts with a call for service, followed by police attendance. We investigate the offence and recommend charges to Crown counsel. The process includes many layers, including Crown charge approval, bail hearings, court appearances and trials, all before jail sentences are applied. When we talk about systemic racism, we must consider whether the current criminal justice system is properly structured for Indigenous Peoples and how it might be negatively impacting our abilities to foster positive relationships.

The B.C. RCMP offers a number of recommendations for the consideration of the special committee. These recommendations are in alignment with the goals of reconciliation, the principles of UNDRIP, the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the final report of the MMIWG inquiry and the B.C. First Nations justice strategy.

Invest heavily in a First Nations policing program that does not just fund police officers for Indigenous communities but accounts for specific resources, programs and strategies in the urban environment.

Invest in localized training in each of our Indigenous policing communities so our police officers can experience and understand the uniqueness of each specific community that they are asked to serve. Funding needs to account for the delivery of that education and the ability to compensate Elders or locals to present this important training.

[3:15 p.m.]

While there are numerous Indigenous courts throughout B.C., an examination of the level of resources dedicated to these courts needs to be conducted. More court time, restorative justice programs and resources that would serve as alternatives to incarceration need to be included.

Finally, explore the establishment of a provincially recognized advisory group made up of police and Indigenous leaders. This group would advise at the ministerial level on matters related to consultation strategies, relationship-building and reconciliation, specifically where Indigenous rights, title and other issues intersect with government initiatives or court orders that require police operations or interventions.

J. Theisen: I'm going to touch on the trauma-informed approach to policing practice, which was first highlighted for our organization by way of the recent national examination of handling of sexual assault investigations and through recommendations from the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls inquiry. We define a trauma-informed approach as one that is tied to client service. Police employees must understand how their actions can and do impact our clients who have, or are experiencing, trauma. This includes not only victims but also witnesses and persons accused.

Since around 2019, the B.C. RCMP has engaged in a provincially driven advisory committee exploring the implementation of a trauma-informed approach to policing practice. The B.C. RCMP supports the program and are working on initiatives, including eight- and two-hour courses for our employees. We are early in our implementation of the trauma-informed approach and have much more to do. It is important to also recognize that implementation comes with added human resourcing costs, as engaging community-based medical and welfare organizations and agencies in support of our clients adds time to the traditional investigative process.

There has been increased scrutiny of police involvement with vulnerable members of our population. This includes those experiencing mental health crises, those with addictions and those experiencing homelessness. Police are often called upon to address social issues beyond our role, or when no crime has been committed. Still, in many cases, a police response remains necessary to ensure public safety. In particular, this is true in cases where individuals are in the midst of a crisis and pose risks of harm and injury to themselves or others. We simply cannot abdicate our responsibility in this area.

Our employees work closely with health authorities and social service partners whenever possible. Much of the work, and initiatives, comes out of partnerships with local agencies forged by detachments. Several detachments have one or more police officer resources dedicated to partnered work with their local health authority. This allows for proactive work with community members, diverting individuals to the health and social services they need in advance of any crisis occurring.

Our ability to forge community partnerships is very much contingent upon community funding, access to resources and the willingness of health and welfare agencies and groups to partner with us. No two communities are alike, and many across the province lack funding to support basic and innovative mental health and social service resources. In many small communities, police have taken on additional responsibilities to fill the gap.

Between 2018 and 2020, the B.C. RCMP has seen a 9 percent increase in mental health–related occurrences. Last year there were approximately 69,500 such files in our jurisdictions across the province, over 14,000 of which required our employees to make an apprehension under the B.C. Mental Health Act. This represents an 18 percent increase in such apprehensions since 2018. Over time, we have been stretched thin, attempting to meet both our regular mandate and aspects of the health system. This situation is not sustainable.

The B.C. RCMP makes the following recommendations to support collaborative work between police and mental health partners. Explore formalizing and funding a multiministry collaborative approach to managing community-based social issues that include mental health, homelessness, addictions and poverty. Under this mandate, create localized, integrated ministerial and police groups to work together to address intersectional social issues in a manner that is flexible to the unique needs of individual communities. Also, streamline and simplify legislation within the Mental Health Act related to the requirements for the involvement of police relative to the apprehension of clients experiencing a mental health crisis.

[3:20 p.m.]

D. McDonald: We acknowledge the presence of systemic racism in many aspects of Canadian society, including the justice system and the RCMP. We know that organizational cultures, policies, directives, practices or procedures can sometimes exclude, displace or marginalize some racialized groups or create unfair barriers for them to access opportunities. It is to everyone's benefit for us to address these systemic issues in our society, including within the realm of policing practice.

The RCMP has explored our role in systemic racism in Canada, and our organization has implemented solutions in many areas, including developing diversity and inclusion training, updating internal and external policies, embracing legislation around street checks, and other initiatives under the RCMP's Vision150 program. This is just the beginning. We have more to do.

I'm excited today to be able to tell you about some recent developments in this area, specific to the collection of disaggregated race-based data. Since the summer of 2020 the RCMP has been working with Statistics Canada and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police on methodology for data collection. We anticipate a pilot project to occur this fall that will involve one of our detachments in British Columbia.

Implementing a process of collecting, analyzing and reporting race-based data raises significant ethical considerations. There are legislative requirements and privacy issues to consider, as some individuals may not want the police to collect information about their race. We have found that absent authorizing legislation, police are hard-pressed to consistently collect such data from the public. Further, relying on a police officer's mere perception of race creates a margin of error.

It is important to note that there will be considerable costs associated with the implementation of a large-scale strategy in this area. Analysis of race-based data requires the application of a unique and specific skill set. In the future, databases will need to be changed to allow for the collection of information in broad circumstances. For now, to keep this manageable, our pilot will focus on the use of force and officer perception of race as the primary variables.

The B.C. RCMP make the following recommendations in this area. Introduction of provincial legislation, methodology and associated necessary funding and resources for the collection of non-aggregated race-based data that can be consistently and impartially applied across police agencies in British Columbia. Considerations could be made around aligning processes with a national government approach or the RCMP approach currently underway. Second, provide joint funding and resources to police and community partners to ensure that culturally sensitive training, specific to each community, is delivered to all officers.

As we have discussed today, and as was expressed in our written submissions, we believe that a collaborative approach amongst police, communities, social interest groups and other agencies, including those related to health and mental health, is critical to resolving many of the issues facing our province. As the special committee deliberates on all we have had to say, we are hopeful that you will consider the value in not only defining police and their role in the justice system but also investing in police and their important work in the community. Thank you for your time, and we look forward to answering your questions.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you very much, to all of you, for the presentation. Now I would open the floor to members for questions. I see we've also been joined by two other MLAs.

MLA Glumac, could you introduce yourself?

R. Glumac: Hi. This is Rick Glumac. I'm the MLA for Port Moody–Coquitlam.

I am on the traditional territory of the Coast Salish peoples.

D. Routley (Chair): And MLA Halford is with us.

T. Halford: Hi. MLA Trevor Halford, MLA for Surrey–White Rock.

I'm joining you from the traditional territory of Semiahmoo.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you, members. Now I'll ask for questions.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Thanks again for your presentation. Again, very informative, and good to see you presenting some forward-looking strategies, recommendations and such. I do have two questions.

First question. You touched briefly on the restorative justice programs. I'm sure MLA Kirkpatrick would probably ask this. Actually, she's going to be angry that I probably took her question.

[3:25 p.m.]

We've been hearing quite a bit about restorative justice programs, actually, since the start of our witness testimony that we've been hearing. We understand that there are pros and cons around the program. I'm just wondering if you can take a minute or two and go a little deeper on ways that the province and the RCMP can expand this program across the province so that it's available in more communities, and on some of the challenges that might be faced with restorative justice programs across the province.

E. Stubbs: Thank you for the question. "Restorative justice," when you look at just the name of it, gives an indication that there's hope for a better path than going to courts and to jail. It's such an important program to focus on.

I can tell you that in my experience…. I've worked in eight different locations, small, medium and large, across the province and have experience with restorative justice programs of different types in those communities. I can tell you one of the biggest challenges is funding, making sure that the proper funds are in place for those programs. A lot of them are volunteers. When you rely on volunteers to deliver such an important program, people move, get distracted with other life issues, and the program falters. That consistency of having full-time restorative justice workers — not only the coordinator but other employees to help deliver the program properly — is crucial.

The one problem that we've experienced over the years, as well, is that it is fairly rigid. In the program, as it's laid out, there are specific parameters, qualifiers, to get into the program, how it develops and how you step through it — A, B, C, D, until the end. If you miss those steps, a lot of times it collapses.

For me, the flexibility within those programs is key, given the community that you're in — Indigenous community, large urban setting, small town and whatnot. I think that flexibility is needed, particularly in Indigenous communities where, depending on the community, they deal with conflict in different ways.

To have a program that has to go A, B, C, D to get to the end may not work for that community. Every community would have to show what you want it to do to make sure that it meets the standard to get through that particular offence that has been committed. Allowing that flexibility, I think, for those individual communities is key.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Thank you, and I certainly hear the piece…. I'm the former chair of our local restorative justice, and funding, obviously, is always the challenge. We took the big leap, and we actually hired a full-time executive director, which certainly changed the direction of the local program here. Her number one job was fundraising, not necessarily delivering restorative justice. I'm very thankful for all the volunteers across the province, and I'm sure we'll be talking lots more on this program over the coming months as well.

My second question, Chair, and my final question. Again, really over the last few days that we've been hearing from different folks, we've been hearing lots around the tiered policing model. In fact, I believe that one of my colleagues has shared a document with you — I know it has been shared with this committee — on the three-tiered approach to public safety in British Columbia. We've been hearing a lot about this just this past week, from numerous organizations, around this policing model. I'm just wondering what your take, from the provincial standpoint, is on this tiered policing model.

D. McDonald: Thank you for the question. I'll start, and then I will turn it over to Eric, who, I believe, has actually seen the document that you're referring to. I think it's not lost on all of us that policing is expensive. It's becoming increasingly more expensive and draws probably one of the heaviest budget lines in any community. Not only that, but police resources are becoming more and more scarce, and police agencies — RCMP and other — are oftentimes challenged to provide resources sufficient to meet all of the needs that a community might like.

[3:30 p.m.]

As we look at economies of scale, we will look at effective and efficient methods in delivering public safety to a community. I think there is room to utilize, whether we call it tiered policing or augmenting policing services…. We can still have that community engagement from a public safety level, at perhaps a lower level of training but not a lower level of service, that doesn't require a fully trained and operational police officer to deliver but can work hand in hand and in concert with the police to provide a greater scope of service in the community.

E. Stubbs: What you're referring to, MLA Davies, I believe is sort of a model where…. I think what you've heard from a number of public groups and other police chiefs that have spoken is that police increasingly spend a lot of our time on non-criminal-type complaints. This is related a lot to homelessness, addictions, mental health issues and whatnot.

While there might be some crime that is committed within those groups, the primary reason for that crime is to feed an addiction or, because they are homeless, survival crime. We spend a tremendous amount of time on this. What other model is possible to address these issues so we can focus on community safety? For example, the Lower Mainland gang conflict — that should be our priority.

A proposal of having a two-tiered policing system, one where you have a group of police officers who have specialized training, who have to work with a number of other ministries, a number of NGOs or social service providers in a community, and it's mandated. You must do that, get together, find out what the main issues in your community are and proactively go out and work with that vulnerable population.

Then, separately, you have a group of police officers — we'll call them the Criminal Code police officers — who go after those offences in the community that really need that attention, those criminal investigations, bringing charges to Crown counsel for consideration.

That really has merit. That extra training that those police officers would get, making those positive relationships with Ministry of Children and Family Development, with the school districts, with the chambers of commerce, with those NGOs — it really has merit. It would really focus that group of people in that community on what ails that community and where the vulnerable population is at.

Now, of course, you have different sizes of community. A smaller community…. Let's say Vanderhoof. What could Vanderhoof do? Well, you could have a police officer dedicated in Vanderhoof, with lesser resources, of course, but they could still make a difference in that community. Obviously, if you go down into Vancouver, Surrey, Kamloops or Kelowna, you'd have more resources and more opportunities to help. But you'd have more people to help as well.

It's compelling, and it's something I think deserves some consideration.

A. Olsen: Thank you for your presentation today. I would like to acknowledge and thank you and raise my hands up to you for, first, acknowledging the role of the RCMP in residential schools — as a child of residential school survivors, it's an important acknowledgment — and as well, for being able to, with clarity, acknowledge systemic racism within the institutions of our governance structures.

I can tell you that you did so today with clarity that other of your colleague organizations were not able to achieve — that clarity. I think it speaks to us and to British Columbians when you're able to actually just acknowledge this, and then we can move towards finding ways to improve relationships or to improve policing.

I just really wanted to acknowledge that. I think as hard as we can be on the RCMP for whatever reason, it's important to acknowledge when you do what you did today. So thank you.

I have a couple of questions. I've got a mix of policing services within my riding. There's an Indigenous policing component as well, an RCMP Indigenous policing component. Right at the very beginning, you acknowledged the officer movement within different detachments. I really appreciate that trust comes with more time investment.

[3:35 p.m.]

One of the challenges that's been consistently articulated to me was that an Indigenous community would like to see a specific officer continue to police their communities, and the RCMP unilaterally makes a decision, somewhere within the division, here, that no, that police officer is going to go somewhere else. It wasn't a decision from the police officer. It was a decision to redeploy somewhere else.

On one hand, you've kind of framed it as, "It's unfortunate that these officers are moving," and I know of instances in which those officers were moved, rather than…. So can you maybe talk about, for us, what goes into those kinds of decisions? There is a situation where that trust that you're talking about is broken, perhaps unnecessarily with someone being redeployed sooner than is needed or is wanted by the nations.

D. McDonald: Thank you for that question. Again, I'll start, and then I'll turn it over to Eric.

It is a challenging situation at times for our officers that are deployed in those communities. Oftentimes, there are several reasons for moving an officer. In many cases, the community in which they are posted is either what we would term a limited-duration post or an isolated post, based on, for lack of a better term, the remoteness of the location.

They are typically time in and time out, based on the specific requirements in that community. Oftentimes, if there are only one, two or three officers, that individual is basically working seven days a week, 24 hours a day, and it becomes very challenging on that individual and their families if they're there. So those postings, limited-duration and isolated-duration posts, have a specific time where the officer is transferred out. Now, there are mechanisms for them to stay, should they desire to stay and should the community want them to stay.

Another reason for transfer out, oftentimes, is promotion. Certainly, when that occurs, there are limited opportunities for us to hold the individual back. We recognize that there are benefits to transferring officers in and out, but we do know that there are challenges as well.

Then in the worst-case scenario, an individual can be moved out of a community if there is an incident that has tarnished the trust in the community with that officer or if there is something of a disciplinary nature that needs to take place.

Perhaps I'll turn it over to Eric to comment further.

E. Stubbs: Yeah. Sir, I think you've covered that off fairly well.

I will say I really like it when we have this problem, where someone's leaving and the Indigenous community doesn't want that person to, because that means something has occurred positively. It in trust…. Likely a positive relationship has occurred, so that is always great to hear when that happens.

However, as Dwayne said, we do have policies, like, it's a two year. It's a three year. It's a four year. We do extend them, and we will extend them a number of times. But I will say this. I think when there is that willingness to stay even longer, we should consider that more. I think we need to look at those policies, perhaps relax them a little bit more and make sure that they're staying for the right reasons.

When I say that, it's not something that we're holding them back on or they feel compelled that they want to stay, their family's happy. If the conditions are there where it's the right thing to do, then I think we need to maybe take just a harder look at the reasons for why they have to leave.

A. Olsen: Yeah. I think to characterize a lot of what we heard from Indigenous nations was — and we heard it yesterday, I believe — a real, strong desire to build relationships with the police.

For one reason or another, we've also run into a number of stories from Indigenous nations where they believe that there was kind of a deliberate attempt to break up the relationship. It was getting too cozy. It was getting too close. I don't know if that's a myth or if that's just what the perception is.

I think I would strongly agree and hope that you can find a way to articulate that that's what the new policy is, because from the experience that I've had sitting at the table, here, listening to Indigenous nations, there isn't any one of them, I think, that has said to us: "We want a less good relationship with the police." In fact, they've always lamented that it's not where it needs to be.

[3:40 p.m.]

I'm just wondering what you do in the B.C. division here to support your commanding officers within the divisions to become, I think, better advocates for the RCMP and for those relationships with Indigenous nations. We heard, I think, far too many instances where there are no relationships or there is no community consultation committee that's been established and really a lack of effort to develop those relationships. What is the RCMP doing to kick-start those in areas that they don't exist?

D. McDonald: Well, currently…. Just to preface my comments, I would agree with you wholeheartedly. I think policing works best when there is a strong relationship, not only with the community at large but with key leaders in that community. I think it's the relationship that not only carries public safety through the day, but when we do face challenging times in a community, based on an incident or otherwise, it's the relationships that will see us through those times, as partnerships.

The RCMP in British Columbia are implementing the reconciliation strategic plan where we are expanding culturally appropriate and restorative justice practices, dealing with conflict within communities, dealing with building relationships. We will be reaching out to our detachment commanders and to our members to teach them better strategies, better philosophies, with which to police those communities.

I think it's a change, just philosophically a change. Sometimes, particularly in the past, the philosophy was that the police need to be in the community but somewhat distinct and separate so that their decisions aren't compromised or they're not biased or they're not influenced in the negative. Where much, I think, we've learned through trial and error — unfortunately, sometimes, more error — that it's a strong relationship that will solidify public safety.

We are engaged in a significant amount of training. We are certainly encouraging and, in many cases, putting it in our annual performance plans at the detachment level that we want to see that community engagement, community involvement, whether it's through a committee or consultation, whether it's through specific bodies in the community. We need to do better in that regard.

A. Olsen: One more question, Mr. Chair, if I may.

Sorry, Eric.

E. Stubbs: I was just going to add…. For our detachment commanders and the 117 First Nations policing officers, I can tell you it's our expectation that they engage with leaders within their communities — obviously, city halls, and chief and council in Indigenous communities. That has to occur.

Sometimes, though, we do have rotations. We have new commanders come in, and it takes them a while to get it. But they have to get it. You have to engage with those communities. Through our district officers in the north, the south, the Island and here in the Lower Mainland, we want to hold our commanders responsible for ensuring that those connections and that collaboration takes place.

A. Olsen: Can I ask one more question, Mr. Chair?

Thank you. I appreciate that. I just ask the question as to what the B.C. command is doing to support their commanding officers to become, I think, better partners in the community.

What role does the command of the division here in B.C. play in terms of listening to the information that they're getting from their commanding officers about what is in the best interest of the community as opposed to what is in the best interest of the force? I've run into and sat with leaders from across the province who've complained that the advice has been given. "We need certain outcomes for our community." Then the decision was made…. As it's always put, the decision has been made somewhere else that we're going to do something other than what the local advice is.

So what are you doing as the commanding officers of our division to become more receptive to what's needed and the advice that's coming from the community up, from the grassroots up?

D. McDonald: Well, first I would say that, yeah, definitely, in terms of responsibility for that, the buck stops here with the senior team. We hold responsibility — the good, bad and the ugly — for those decisions.

[3:45 p.m.]

But I can say that our firm commitment is to provide a community-specific police service throughout the province. We are dedicated and committed to policing those communities in a manner that they need. It does us no good to come in with, for lack of a better term, a pre-planned playbook on how to police a community. I think it begins with, as we've said before, the relationship with the detachment commander and the community to determine what those needs are.

If those needs can't be met or there are limitations to the needs that the detachment planner has — whether it's resourcing, whether it's funding, whether it's access to programs — and those needs are brought up to us, then it's our responsibility to meet them and to break down any barriers that may exist in terms of providing that service. I think the stronger that relationship, the more key it is in meeting those needs, will give us significant success in policing.

E. Stubbs: I would say this, as well, to the question. Certainly there are some topics…. It's a bit of the broad topic. Do we direct, as a senior team, specific things in every community or detachment, how they should operate? Depending on the topic, the answer is yes, because we need that. But I can tell you that there is a lot of flexibility for detachment commanders to understand what that community is all about and build a strategic plan, priorities and agreements with city halls and with chief and councils that meets their needs, because they are so unique.

We certainly can't be rigid and say: "What we do in Surrey is what we're going to do in Tsay Keh Dene." That's just not doable. Now, there are certain things — violence in relationships, how to investigate sexual assault — where we are going to be very rigid. But in general, that flexibility is there.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you very much. And it wasn't MLA Davies that took my question. It was actually MLA Olsen that took my question. Initially, I was going to ask about these rotations, but I did just want to reiterate the message and what we've been hearing consistently — that that is a concern for communities, and having that trust broken and having to rebuild relationships. So I'm just reiterating that that is a message that we've heard over and over.

I wanted to ask Chief Superintendent Theisen…. You talked about the trauma-informed approach. I've worked with victim services units before that were embedded with police and did training with officers and detectives on trauma-informed approach. How would that be integrated into the RCMP? Is that through training? How would that become the approach?

J. Theisen: That's part of what we've been looking at. Really, it started with a springboard from the review of sexual assault investigations at a national level, where we had a really good, hard look at how we were, first off, treating victims of sexual assault, which then followed with MMIWG and the commissioner. I was deeply involved with MMIWG. We heard a lot about the trauma-informed approach.

Over time, there's been that socialization of: we need to change the way our policies and procedures are around how we treat, as I said, not only victims but the people that are accused. So it's an assimilation. It's a constant talking about it. It's having FILUs — the family information liaison unit — that helped us try and recover from post-MMIWG, that continued to be big in our communities. It's really dealing with folks like yourself that are victim services that tell us: "Hey, you know, next time, maybe you should let that social worker in." Or: "Maybe grandma should come in." We have changed so much in that regard.

But what I will say is one thing that we do need to be better, not only B.C. RCMP or RCMP but through the court service as well, is…. When we do a charge approval and Crown counsel lays that charge, it's really important that not only the RCMP have trauma-informed training but Crown, and even…. Now we can actually give evidence behind a screen, for example.

So it's a long process that we need to get better and better at, but I don't believe it's just the police. It's our other colleagues out there who need to be working in concert with us and helping all those vulnerable, even the homeless. We just need to keep talking about it.

That would be what I have to say.

[3:50 p.m.]

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you. Yeah. I see it as being just a part of the culture. Even from that first contact with someone that an officer has, the ability to view that person through that lens is just such an important….

I understand, also, with policing, that you are expected to now be mental health professionals and first-aid attendants. I mean, there's a lot of expectation on the work that you're doing and that skill set that you're bringing to it.

One of the things that you had mentioned is that shifting…. I don't remember exactly what the recommendation was here, but it was the shifting of…. Police getting back to that policing piece and being able to use your resources better. You're not there to be that mental health professional. You're not there to play those other roles. My understanding from the recommendations was, then, to really take a look at that. It's not defund but reallocate so that you're doing the work you should be doing and you're not spread so thin.

You had said in the recommendations to develop a provincially mandated, standardized service delivery model to help address staffing levels, equipment and training. You touched on that a little bit, I think, when we were talking about shifting resources between smaller locations and larger locations.

Can you just give me a little bit more information on what that service delivery model would look like? Is it just what you had talked about with the reallocation of resources between communities based on their need or something along different lines?

D. McDonald: If I may, it is a very challenging question.

I don't believe that police agencies within the province, including the RCMP, not only as the provincial police force but also in our various contracts in municipalities and different communities, as well as our municipal counterparts…. There is no one agreed-upon standard of what a base police resource model looks like, certainly one that encompasses everything, from the number of officers to support staff funding, what services are encompassed in that.

For example, as the provincial police service, as we operate, what exactly does that bring to bear on any particular community, small or large? What's the minimum number of officers who are required? What services…? Does that include police service dogs? Does it include traffic? Does it include community liaison? Does it include detectives, drug…? All of those things are right now, as yet, an undefined package. It's up to, in many cases, what a particular community is able to or willing to fund.

In many cases…. There are some communities that, just by the nature of size, aren't able to access a certain level of police resources. Oftentimes, on a yearly basis, police agencies are going to council with requests for resources and funding and consistently going back to the table with repeated asks. So it would be of great assistance, I believe, for there to be….

It would require much research and consultation and development with all the partners to develop a model that says: "Okay. Here is the base level of policing that is required for the community. This is how we'll achieve equitable funding for that. This is how it will be implemented." Then, if there's room on top of that for further services, it would be up to the council and the police agency and the community partners to deliver.

I think we need to take the guesswork out of it and the inequity out of what our current service delivery looks like.

K. Kirkpatrick: Great. Thank you very much. That was helpful.

R. Glumac: Just one question. Thank you for your presentation. You mentioned that you're dedicated and committed to the needs of the communities. In regards to First Nations communities, I'm curious. Have you undertaken any efforts to hire locally from within the community?

[3:55 p.m.]

E. Stubbs: In terms of our recruiting strategy, obviously, when we try to recruit from, say, Indigenous communities…. We actively try to do that and try to get them interested in our industry and to go to Depot.

In terms of where they go from there, I can tell you…. It's good if they can learn their business and the trade of being a police officer elsewhere before returning to a community. I've worked directly with some who have returned, and it goes very well when they can come back understanding their job and have that confidence and that ability to manage and live amongst the community but then have a very specific role. It can be very difficult for some. Certainly, it is something that we do see a lot of, where they do, in fact, graduate and, at one point in their career, they return to their communities. So that does occur.

It's a bit of a difficult time at this point, but we do have an auxiliary program, as well, that existed for decades in the province. It's just, unfortunately, at a point right now where it's not as active due to a number of factors that are of national concern. But that was a great opportunity to get auxiliaries from the community, train them and have them work immediately in the community alongside with us. They're an incredible, incredible resource for us in terms of understanding what's going on in that community, what everybody's all about and helping train our officers. So there's that program as well.

D. McDonald: If I might add, I think it's an excellent question. It does….

When we turn the lens back on ourselves as an organization and when we talk about systemic racism and where it raises its head currently in our organization…. We look at our recruiting practices and what that entails — whether it's driving tests, whether it's a written test or whether it's an educational background. Those, in and among themselves, can sometimes present barriers to individuals applying to the police department, specifically in Indigenous and remote Indigenous communities.

Currently we're looking at those practices. For example, rather than have a written exam to join the RCMP, can we do an oral exam so that we're not putting barriers that would prevent applicants from joining the RCMP?

I know that as a commitment, nationally, as an organization, we are endeavouring to increase our number of Indigenous applicants — successful applicants — to put back out in the field.

J. Theisen: I'll just add, as well…. I just spoke to her this morning. Our Indigenous policing service…. We actually do have a dedicated resource in the province. She travels all over and is specific to the recruitment in our Indigenous communities. I'm very proud to have her. She's very connected to a lot of the communities.

T. Halford: Thank you for the presentation.

Part of my experience, when I was younger, learning and having relationships with law enforcement, came from sports. It came from coaches. It came from volunteers. A lot of my coaches were police officers, and I can tell you that was invaluable in terms of building a relation.

I had some friends that went down a much different path, but it was sometimes those prior coaches that were RCMP that pulled them back. I think that's valuably important for the RCMP, specifically. Maybe this already exists. But if they're…. I know that volunteers, obviously, are encouraged and things like that.

Part of MLA Glumac's question is how can we promote and encourage…? If somebody is maybe new to an area and things like that, whether it's volunteering or coaching…. Maybe there are different incentives within the RCMP to get them integrated with youth sports and build on those mentorships. I'm sure there are examples of one of the three of you guys that have done this personally. I really do….

I've seen it firsthand. I've experienced it firsthand. It's just something that I hope that not only the RCMP but all other forces are considering.

D. McDonald: Well, I can guarantee you that is on our radar. It's something that we're all quite passionate about. We've all coached, some better than others. It has an incredible impact on a community, like you say.

When we go back to Peel's principles of policing — the public are the police, and the police are the public — that's exactly what it means. I don't think you can get, in many cases, a better role model than someone, a police officer, that volunteers their time. Particularly in the youth, you make a positive impact.

[4:00 p.m.]

Not only is it fun, but I think, in all fairness, we as the police get probably as much, if not more, out of it than the kids that we're coaching do. So it is highly recommended, highly supported. We are more than willing and able to allow our officers, even when they're on duty — where operations allow — to go and do that because it is such an important investment in the community.

D. Routley (Chair): Harwinder has her hand up.

H. Sandhu: Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the presenters. I really appreciated the presentation and your openness to accept what the historical system of the RCMP….

As we're talking about involving…. We heard from many presenters from the Indigenous communities that having police, an RCMP liaison from the Indigenous communities…. We have this discussion going on right now. There's no surprise that, given the history, there might be reluctance and a lack of trust among Indigenous youth and even communities.

We're talking about building bridges. I just want to know if there is any permanent outreach program for Indigenous youth. My colleagues touched upon it a little bit. If there are existing outreach programs to encourage youth from the Indigenous communities. Is there any focus or discussion happening to add more resources and to put more focus on that so we can encourage recruitment and participation from the Indigenous communities? It seems like it would be a wonderful way of building those bridges and having more Indigenous youth involved and where we can build that trust.

E. Stubbs: It's a great question — and so true.

As Jeanette mentioned, we do have a First Nations recruiter that works in the province, but to be quite frank, we need more. The percentage of Indigenous RCMP officers is not at the level that we would like. So I think we do need to increase our effort in that regard.

We do have a number of programs and outreach. Probably, I would say, our pillar program that we have for the youth is…. We have a troop of Indigenous youth from across the country that goes to Depot. They spend time there, and we expose them to the many facets that a regular recruit would be exposed to, in terms of driving and firearms and going to calls and marching and drills and whatnot. We reap the rewards of that program greatly by then having them apply and work with us.

We do that once a year. I would love to see that increased. Time and organization are factors, but it's such an important initiative that I would love to see us do more of it.

D. McDonald: Just to add to that, I think one thing that really brought it home for me…. It's similar to the coaching example. When I was the detachment commander in Surrey, we did the rowing together canoe journey.

To me, when you're looking…. I think you want our communities, particularly our First Nation communities, to see the police as human and to see them as compassionate and respectful — really just to see them as friends and people. So you take us out of the uniform. You take us out of that police car, out of that detachment environment. Put us in a canoe, or put us in a tent, in a camp, around a campfire or a barbecue. That's where you can really make the connection.

I think when you make connections such as that or when you make yourself open and vulnerable to a relationship in that regard, people see that. Then it opens up the opportunity. "You know what? Maybe policing is a career I would want to go into. At the very least, this is a police officer that I can trust so that if I do face difficulties in the community or I'm a victim of a crime, I can come to them, and I know that they will take care of me."

H. Sandhu: Thank you so much. I'm thinking of even expanding it on a regular basis, whether it's high schools or even colleges. In schools, it's like going there without the uniform. That's another…. When you see the uniform, given the history, it could be very worrisome. So that's a great idea. Thank you for sharing that.

D. Routley (Chair): I don't see any more questions. We are at the end of our time.

I would like to thank our presenters very much for helping us here. The task is, obviously, large, and your view is very key to the work that we need to do. We really do appreciate all the work that went into your submission and to your consideration of what we asked to hear about today and being responsive to that. Thank you very much.

[4:05 p.m.]

Members, I think we'll invite our next guests straight into the meeting. Okay. I think we can continue on. Thanks.

Welcome to our meeting. We're the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act, and we're very pleased to have you join us as presenters.

I'd like to introduce members of the committee to Dr. Tharuna Abbu from Care Not Cops, along with her colleague Shireen Soofi.

I'm not sure who's doing the presentation, but please go ahead.

T. Abbu: Thanks so much for having us.

My video is frozen. Can you still see and hear us okay?

D. Routley (Chair): Yes, we can hear you.

CARE NOT COPS

T. Abbu: Okay. I'll proceed, then. But let us know.

Thanks so much for having us. My name is Tharuna Abbu. This is Shireen. I'm a family doctor who works in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, and Shireen is a social worker in East Vancouver. We're here today representing Care Not Cops. Shireen may also answer questions in the Q-and-A period. The views expressed here do not represent those of our employers.

Care Not Cops is a collective that includes health care and care-based providers that believe that police cause harm and that inviting police into care-based encounters is profoundly problematic for both those accessing care and those providing care services.

In our written statement, we submitted seven recommendations to this committee. In summary, we are calling for changes to the Police Act that will allow for the reallocation of police funds towards evidence-based care. Care that is rooted in anti-oppression and led by Black, Indigenous and other racialized people, those living with severe mental health challenges and people who use drugs.

This includes ending a police-driven drug war and implementing a truly community-led decriminalization strategy for all substances. Our recommendations also centre the rights of all Indigenous People to self-determination and autonomy over culturally safe spaces and healing practices.

In our remaining time, we'll provide further context for our recommendations. First, we will critique the evidence supporting police partnerships with health care services. Second, we will highlight the successes of well-resourced and peer-led services. Lastly, we will share from our collective clinical experiences to contest the idea that police keep health care workers and patients safe.

Regarding police partnership programs, there's no data or evidence that supports this as an intervention that provides holistic and safe care environments. There is no data to support that partnering health care workers with police improves safety for patients, staff or communities. Moreover, these programs were created without the input of those most marginalized or vulnerable to systems of oppression.

A study from the CBC on fatal encounters with the police across Canada found that people with mental health challenges and people who use substances are far more likely to die at the hands of police. Care that involves police and policing places patients at risk of harm and death. This is especially true when accounting for systemic racism, where Black and Indigenous people are more likely to suffer harm from the police.

As previous speaker Andrew MacFarlane from VCH highlighted, programs such as the ACT and AOT teams have had immense success in keeping people out of hospital and in their home communities. He highlighted that numbers from 2020 suggested a 60 percent decrease in hospitalizations after the engagement of ACT.

However, it has not been demonstrated that police presence on these teams is responsible for these outcomes. Rather, this outcome is likely best explained by the ability of these teams to conduct outreach visits and to deliver highly specialized health care services such as nursing and social work support and the ability of staff to form lasting relationships with clients over time.

This brings us to our second point: that well-resourced and peer-led services succeed. Again, previous speakers have alluded to the dramatic, life-saving effects of supervised consumption sites and harm reduction measures. Roger Parsonage from Interior Health, who spoke to this committee on March 29, pointed out that between 2016 and 2017, the actual death rate from overdose would have been more than double what it was if not for these initiatives.

People with severe mental health conditions and people who use drugs have always known how to take care of each other. We need to look to them as experts of their own lives. This is as true of crisis response as it is of harm reduction.

[4:10 p.m.]

As Dr. Taylor, a long-term psychologist who spoke on behalf of VCH, alluded to on March 19, if other, non-police crisis response teams were available 24-7, we would call on them readily. Instead, we have accepted a manufactured reliance on the police.

Finally, we speak from our experiences working in a variety of disciplines and settings to counter the popular narrative that police presence in our workplaces will keep us safe. Rather, we know that police presence negates our ability to build trust, affirm patient autonomy and dignity, and often escalates conflict. When on site, police are not required to follow the direction of health care staff, even when called to the scene for health care–based concerns.

Police are, by design, reactive and do little to prevent worrisome situations from occurring. We believe that further clinician training in de-escalation and the presence of peers within our work spaces will result in more improved safety for workers, not the presence of lethally armed police officers.

In summary, we do not support any expansion of the Police Act that broadens the scope of police to respond to people with mental health challenges or people who use drugs. Instead we call for changes that would allow police funds to be dramatically reallocated to community-based support services. Healing for our communities relies on a bold reimagining of what care can and must look like. Thank you.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you. Okay. We'll open the floor to questions from members now.

There's been a lot of conversation at this committee about reallocation and that sort of thing. One of the questions I have about it is that if officers are not able to do the work that they're doing now, not doing the work that we think that they might be not suited to would be reallocated as well. I wonder about how many resources would actually be freed up. It might simply be a better disposition of them.

I see a question from Rachna.

R. Singh: Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much for your presentation. Especially, I would be very interested about…. You gave really good examples of what has been working in the Downtown Eastside. What you have said, as the Chair was mentioning, we have heard from a number of other community partners, especially with the mental health resources being given out to more community support services rather than the police.

One thing that we have heard is that is after hours, the police are the biggest resource for people to call. What would be your vision? What do you envision for our future? When people are in distress, in a mental health crisis, what should they be doing when the services are…? The first number that comes to your mind is the police.

S. Soofi: The first thing that comes to my mind is a program that I believe is out of Oregon where, essentially, to summarize it very quickly — I don't know if folks aren't familiar — the public can still call 911. However, after that 911 call, the calls are dispatched according to what emergency responder is most appropriate. For example, they're not all directed to either an ambulance or police. There's also another section that is particularly mental health support workers that are trained specifically to address mental health crises and are not police-oriented.

I think that would be…. One solution that comes off the top of my head is actually having mental health crisis responders that are not police, that are not armed and that can still be called at all hours of the day but that are allocated and appropriate to actually responding to mental health — there's substance use, as well, like substance use psychosis — rather than having police officers who don't have the proper training to do so.

Would you add anything else?

[4:15 p.m.]

T. Abbu: Yeah. I think the other thing I would add is that currently and historically, after hours, there are many types of disputes that are already really excellently de-escalated and managed in the community by peers — by neighbours, by friends, by family members.

That actually has a lot of power, because those folks can leverage existing relationships and a sense of community. These people are also people who use drugs and understand what that person may need. I've seen that happen a few times really quite effectively, even in a clinical setting.

S. Soofi: I think there are also groups called the Bear Clan, for example, where it's community-based and particularly Indigenous-focused and -run — responders that are community members of wherever they're responding too. So it's peers. It's also Indigenous-based and culturally responsive, and unarmed and actually much more appropriate to the work.

R. Singh: Okay. We have heard about the CAHOOTS model out of Oregon a number of times, and we are looking very closely at that one. I know MLA Glumac is very, very interested in that.

S. Soofi: Great.

R. Singh: The other one you talked about, especially the community partnerships, especially the peer partnership — we would really like some more information on that. We haven't heard much about that particular model. So if you can provide more information to us, in writing, or on how we can get more access it, that would be wonderful.

T. Abbu: For sure. We can pass that along. It's a group that started in Winnipeg, where I'm from, actually. There are lots of little groups similar to that same model that have popped up in cities across Canada, so I can certainly forward that information.

R. Singh: Wonderful. I really appreciate that. Thank you so much.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you. I think that brings me to the end of the list. I'd like to thank our guests for their presentations. We have a big job in front of us, and we certainly appreciate….

H. Sandhu: Chair. I just have a quick question.

I just want to thank Tharuna and Shireen for their amazing presentation. You touched upon many topics that we've heard, but our dilemma is the thoughts about finding that solution to ensure mental health workers' safety.

I just want to see what your thoughts are about police staying in the background, not in every situation but in complex situations or where we anticipate unpredictable behaviour given the client's situation. If you think that's not a good idea, a viable idea, then what are the other recommendations you would like to make that we should take into consideration, where we ensure the safety of mental health response team workers?

This question came…. We also had a psychiatric nurse. She said that she couldn't imagine doing her job without the presence of police. Even then, we see some unfortunate incidents and mishaps happen. What are your thoughts, and have you thought about or heard about any other approaches that are taken in other jurisdiction that as a committee, we can consider making recommendations about?

T. Abbu: We talk about this often in our group, because we work in health care settings. We talk to our colleagues pretty often, and safety is a big concern in all of the places where we've worked.

There is this narrative that you need someone with some sort of physical training or some sort of weapon around to protect you at work. I think that is somewhat of a situation that we've created that doesn't necessarily ring true. Safety can come from a lot of different things.

I think the first step is really prevention, which I think requires attention to very upstream solutions. Particularly, a lot of so-called erratic behaviour is the result of particular kinds of drugs. In an unregulated illicit market, there is only impetus for people making those drugs to make them more and more potent, change the chemical makeup of that, and people don't have any other option to go to. This is very closely linked to a legalized, regulated drug supply, because I think that would really help lessen the amount of unpredictability and help people access what they need in a much more harm-reduction-based way.

So there's the prevention piece, and similar to that is the training for doing this kind of work — outreach work, mental health service work. I think a lot of us could use a lot more training on scanning our environments, thinking about our positioning physically in a spatial situation. Where are you in position to the door, in position to the client? Can both of you readily exit?

[4:20 p.m.]

I personally have had to take a refresher course on that information, because I've had personal experiences where I have been in situations that have been unsafe for me. I've found that to be very useful, because now I think about that every time I approach any client in any room in any situation.

I think that part you can really be working quickly on, because that kind of knowledge we already have.

S. Soofi: I'd like to add, also, in response to this, that psych nurses…. So many of my colleagues have similar thoughts and feelings about that, of not being able to imagine what it's like to provide support and feel safe without a police officer.

I think that really comes from just not ever having had an alternative. There has never been an alternative worker and support person who's particularly there, as their job, to de-escalate. I think if that were the case, then that safety could come from a different place rather than a police officer.

Unfortunately, when there is, for example, the ACT team or the AOT team, the safety or de-escalating role is placed on the police officer as the only person who is supposed to have that as their main goal. But if we took out the police officer and replaced that with a community member who is particularly trained on de-escalation — that is their goal, and they're not a police officer — I think that situation could feel a lot different.

H. Sandhu: Thank you so much. A quick follow-up. You have great points.

The challenge in health care settings is…. In acute care settings, they have code white teams, and teams come. The other thing…. A person can have as much education dealing with mental health issues and come from a medical background and can tell, whether it's a master's or a PhD…. Given the complexity of some mental health problems or if a person is intoxicated…. There could be any scenario. No matter what approach you take, we know that it's not going to look great, and nothing can de-escalate that situation.

In those situations, I think, it becomes tricky. Coming from a health care background, and fighting violence in health care, which is rising…. Nothing makes it to the media, sadly. There have been serious incidents, and that's what prompts me to think about it every time we hear a presentation. How will we ensure the safety of health care workers? Those stories never come to the media or the news because of patient confidentiality or whatever the reasons are. This is where I try to constantly think about: what are the other reasons?

We're open to any ideas. This committee now has the opportunity to address. My reference is not to every situation or mental health response. That's when we need police, but there could be unpredictable…. There could be where we anticipate that the person has a complex mental health history, or there was a previous aggression incident. That's where that safety….

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.

S. Soofi: Particularly for the code whites…. I worked in a clinic where I was in charge of developing a code white protocol that did not involve police. In fact, when a code white is called, it calls our colleagues to address it, instead of police. That is our first line of action.

I think that is something that really could be widened throughout a lot of other authorities, where it's not necessarily…. The code white, when it's called, is recognized to be something that needs direct action, and immediately, but the immediate action is not the police. It's actually we, as co-workers, who are trained specifically to address that. Our attention is brought to that.

I think that could be, also, an alternative that could be discussed further, if there is interest.

H. Sandhu: You are absolutely right. We rarely, in acute care settings, need to call the police. In fact, I don't remember…. Maybe there are one or two incidents I can remember over the 17 years. You're right. That's where I was thinking that having code white teams or similar teams to go with mental health response teams would save a lot of potential harm or injury to these workers.

D. Routley (Chair): We are over time, but I see Trevor has his hand up.

T. Halford: I'll just be really quick.

I do completely see and accept where both of you are coming from and in such an articulate way. I do stress that there is, on us all, a bit of a liability component, in terms of protecting those that are seeking to help those that are struggling with mental health issues.

[4:25 p.m.]

I've talked to a number of front-line workers, particularly nurses, that are on leave from work due to mental health issues because of traumatic experiences that they've had to deal with firsthand. Some of them are actually very, very physical and long-lasting, damaging.

I understand where you're coming from. I just emphasize the fact that we have an obligation to protect everybody. Obviously, we need to make sure that we are also protecting those that are trying, and trained, to help those that are dealing with mental health issues. I just want to stress how important that is to me and possibly to others as well.

T. Abbu: I think we definitely share that concern for the safety of people who are working in those spaces, which includes us and others in our group.

To your point, Mr. Halford, I think, on the other side of that, we have many clients who have particular trauma related to their interactions with police. They've sustained physical injuries. That has deeply affected their ability to continue with other parts of the health….

I believe in safety for all, and that includes everybody.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you. Nice punctuation to the conversation. Appreciate that very much. Again, I'll thank you for your contribution to our work, and I hope you feel as though you have made a contribution to our province, because you have.

Thanks, Members. We'll take a five-minute recess. Back at 4:31.

The committee recessed from 4:26 p.m. to 4:33 p.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Welcome back to this meeting of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act. I'd like to welcome our final presenter of the day, Jill Parker.

Go ahead, Jill.

JILL PARKER

J. Parker: Thank you so much.

Hi. My name is Jill Parker. I'm a registered clinical counsellor and a registered social worker. I work in private practice as a trauma therapist, and many of my clients are police officers. I am also a retired police constable with 19 years of service with the Abbotsford police department.

I'd like to use this time to focus on systems and opportunities for improvement in regards to modernizing policing, including the topics of police training and education, police organization and restructuring and provincial legislation and policies as helpful tools for addressing gaps in safety and accountability.

On the topic of police training and education, I found the formal education that I brought to my policing career helped inform the paradigm through which I operated. I had an understanding of trauma, mindfulness, systems, structures, power dynamics, gender, privilege and the current and historical oppression of racialized, Indigenous and LGBTQ and two-spirit communities. This helped me to better understand why people do the things that they do and how to respond in a safe and more helpful way.

In regards to police training and education, it's important that officers have the appropriate skill set to respond to calls for service. A paradigm shift from law enforcement to community safety, support and accountability may be more appropriate.

[4:35 p.m.]

An example of modernization of a government organization would the Gove inquiry in response to the death of Matthew Vaudreuil, which modernized social work in the '90s. The outcome included the creation of a college of social work and mandated social work degrees in order to respond appropriately to child protection needs.

On the topic of police organization and restructuring, policing is a difficult job. The amount of trauma an officer faces due to the work that they are asked to do takes its toll both physically and mentally. I have lost co-workers through suicide, Sgt. Tony Herbert and Sgt. Fran Mann, in 2015. Const. John Davidson was murdered in 2017. I have friends who have medically retired early due to PTSD, and many officers have experienced early deaths due to cancer, heart attack and MS.

Research shows the average person experiences one to three critical incidents in their lifetime; whereas, a police officer, over a 20 year career, will face over 800 critical incidents. Other research shows police officers are disproportionately affected by mental illness. A recent study indicates 45 percent of officers qualify for a mental health diagnosis.

The types of stress officers experience are classified as operational, which includes the trauma of the calls that they attend, and organizational, which includes the tension resulting from characteristics of the workplace. Officers state that organizational stress is higher than operational stress, and research supports this.

Research also shows us that stress and rushed decision-making amplify implicit bias or tunnel vision and the inability to see the bigger picture. Considering officers are exposed to critical incidents at almost 800 times the general population and almost half of them need a mental health diagnosis as a result of the job, the system is failing them and the community. At times, they're being asked to make what they perceive as life-or-death decisions when the deck is stacked against them.

In relation to improving organizational structures, it may be helpful to refer to the recommendations of the Merlo and Davidson settlement. It thoroughly outlines recommendations for change and indicates that the improvements must come from the government level, as the changes are not able to be made within the police organizations due to the toxic and entrenched hierarchical, hypermasculine, paramilitary culture. The report was done on the RCMP, but I would include the relevance of it in municipal policing.

Oppal's report and the TRC both underscore the need for a radical overhaul of police systems and emphasize the need for trauma-informed and mindfulness skills to meet the service demands of our community.

Lastly, how we address gaps in safety and accountability is through provincial legislation and policies. Some positive examples include the domestic violence policy, the missing person policy and the mental health policy.

An example of a gap in addressing safety and accountability which would benefit from policy development and legislation includes sexual assault. One in ten substantiated sexual assault charges ends with a conviction, according to Stats Canada. It is inhumane to put survivors through the investigation process, the invasive collection of physical evidence and the often humiliating and traumatizing court process for a system that is most often futile and potentially harmful to survivors.

In closing, I look forward to the modernization of policing for the benefit of police officers and the communities they serve.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak. Please feel free to connect with me in the future for more ideas and insights which may be helpful. I have a lot of direct and personal experience to share that I think would be beneficial for the committee to understand. Ones that I would feel more comfortable sharing, perhaps, in a less public forum.

That's my five minutes.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you very much. We do provide that opportunity as well. If you're interested in having a meeting, we can definitely connect you with staff to arrange that.

J. Parker: I'm open to answering any questions that you may have. If there are specific things, I would let you know if I felt uncomfortable answering them.

D. Routley (Chair): Absolutely. Thank you very much.

Right now, then, I'll open the floor to the members for questions.

I think Karin has her hand up. Do you?

K. Kirkpatrick: Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You're laughing at me, Jill, because I'm the keener here.

Thank you for your presentation. I think your background is just so interesting, having the clinical counselling and the experience in policing. I do think that, yes, your experience is probably very relevant to the work we're doing. There are probably questions we should be asking you, and we don't even know what those questions are. Thank you for the presentation.

[4:40 p.m.]

I am just curious. Does a trauma-informed approach to dealing with victims and to dealing just, in general, with the public — any interaction between an officer and someone and dealing with that from a trauma-informed perspective…? Do we need to change the way we recruit? Is training enough to allow someone to understand, really…? I'm not articulating this very well, but to have that ability to connect and understand and have that level of empathy for people, is it trainable?

J. Parker: Yeah. It's actually absolutely trainable. As a counsellor, we can train people to…. There's compassion. There's empathy. If we train people through the process of compassion, we have these mirror neurons, so we can see other people's pain, but not feel each other's pain. It's a skill set that we can develop through mindfulness. So tons of this stuff is learnable. Whereas if we have empathy, I'm going to feel your pain. Like if you stub your toe, my toe hurts, and I'm like: "Ugh."

Often, officers that are off on mental health or whatever have to learn these skill sets. These are skill sets you could bring easily into training as core skills as much as tactical. I found that my experience was tons of tactical. Yay. I know that skill set, and I'm so grateful for my education and learning that I had that other piece that I think is the other half that is missing. We need cognitive behaviour therapy so you know how our mind works, because they're going to be exposed to trauma.

I like the idea of "connect to protect," with our citizens and with each other. We're all in this together figuring this out. We can learn these skill sets. These are very learnable.

K. Kirkpatrick: If Mr. Chair doesn't mind, I'll ask a few more quick questions.

Having counselling as part of the continuing education for officers, I think…. We talked about empathy here. I've never been in policing, but I have been in these kinds of stressful situations — dealing, in the Downtown Eastside, with people and seeing the same kind of issue over and over again. You start to detach from that, and you start to build an ability to not, perhaps, be empathetic or to not feel.

So I think that police, after that trauma and, over and over again, that kind of disconnect from even their ability to approach someone in a trauma-informed manner…. Does it make sense — and this isn't in the Police Act, but just as a practice — having counselling as kind of a consistent part of supporting officers in the job that they do?

J. Parker: Absolutely. I see a lot of first responders — firefighters, paramedics and police — because it's a place where they can go to say the things that are happening. I do trauma therapy, which is like EMDR, so that if they have a really tough call, we can process the trauma so that they don't feel the charge of it.

A lot of the people that I see have this frenetic energy, because they're ready because their nervous system is ready for the next call. On their days off, they can't even stand still, or they need to take extra shifts and stuff. So that's a side effect, whereas we can learn those skills of mindfulness and how to decompress.

Also, being aware of where we're at, so we can maybe switch gears or time ourselves out for a bit, take a different type of a policing role. These things are all figureoutable.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you, Jill. I'll pass to my colleagues now.

J. Parker: Thank you so much.

D. Routley (Chair): Thanks very much. I have to say that I really appreciate those questions and those answers.

A. Olsen: Thank you, Jill, for coming today and presenting. I think that what I take away from this — I don't have a question; I just want to comment — is that we often talk about "the police." It's not very often that we talk about the human beings that are behind the badges and in the uniform.

I think that what you brought today is a recognition that while we in society want to ensure that the people who are being impacted by a police call or that need the police to come or that the police come because someone called them need to have compassion and kindness.

As well, police officers and the incredible amount of trauma that they endure as a part of a career also deserve that compassion and that kindness and the support to ensure they're able to do the job successfully and as safely as possible so they can go home at the end of the day, as well.

[4:45 p.m.]

I just wanted to acknowledge that that's what I heard from you today, and I really appreciate bringing that perspective here, because, I think, we often have just been talking about the police and not the individuals that are behind the badges. So thank you, and thank you for caring for them. I appreciate it.

J. Parker: Yeah. People come to policing because they care about people. I think about all the wonderful officers I work with. They're there because they care, and they do a really good job.

R. Singh: Thank you, Jill. I think this was a really important conversation that we were having, showing the perspective of the police officers and what they are dealing with — no doubt, the trauma in the line of work, what they see every day. The empathetic approach you are using — I really, really appreciate that.

One thing. I think a lot of things have been talked about today, but we have also heard from the populations and from the communities that have been traumatized for generations. Here we have police officers, also, who are traumatized by the work that they're doing.

What do you see? I really appreciate the empathy angle, but how do you highlight that empathy angle, definitely for the officers, but also for the communities that they are going to serve, who have had so many bad years?

When they look at the police officer, they just have this image of a strong man wearing a gun, wearing the uniform. But when we see somebody and the perceptions we have for the communities that are marginalized — people who are homeless, people who have addiction issues, mental health issues and the trauma they have gone through…. How to bring those both together and fill that gap?

J. Parker: I think about how I kind of did my policing, and lots of people didn't do it how I did it. It kind of was my background. I guess a lot of people did, but I knew why I was doing what I was doing, like the compassion and also that we're there for them. The people that we serve that are in marginalized communities, when you understand why they're where they're at, then you have the compassion and you want to help them.

When you come from it in that way and you build those relationships, then they reach out to you and they want you to help. So a lot of it is building relationships with their community supports, too, so that you're approachable, so that if they are in danger…. Marginalized communities are going to be more vulnerable a lot of the times to instances of violence or crime, and they need to have accessibility.

I don't know if that….

R. Singh: No, no. It does touch on that. We have talked a lot about building the relationships. That's what the whole focus has been in a number of conversations that we have done.

Have the police officers…? You talked about training, I know, more training. A lot of people have talked about the trauma-informed education and also about the histories, the cultures. But how much can we burden the police officers as well? There is so much burden. What do you see, because we have heard lots about the training and the education?

J. Parker: It's kind of interesting. I think about other professions, like nursing, teaching or social work or whatever. You need the type of degree, and then you have the college of whatever the thing is, whereas policing seems more like law enforcement and tactical kind of things.

Whenever something bad happens, they put a new policy and then we have to get trained on that thing. Whereas if you had, sort of, a requirement, kind of like the Gove inquiry, that you had a base skill set of things that you come in with that are necessary…. A lot of jobs have that, so kind of professionalizing it so these are the skill sets that you need.

I also read a really cool article, which I can always send your way, that describes that it's not appealing to the modern person — the type of policing that they think it is. They don't want that hypermasculine kind of stuff. They want something a little bit different, with more life balance. So how do we recruit maybe a different kind of generation of police that might look different and might have skill sets, like technical skills for computer crime?

Often, we're like a blank slate. You come in, and whatever you come with, whatever education, it's almost like they erase it, and then you start. You take the six-month program or six-week program from wherever, and they fill in those gaps, whereas someone might come in with that expertise already. Or maybe they could hire that person instead of just little courses here and there to kind of fill in those gaps.

R. Singh: I really appreciate your comments and suggestions. Thank you so much.

D. Routley (Chair): Thanks very much. It's very nice to hear from you. We really appreciate your contribution and your particular special perspective on this. Thank you very much for sharing it.

I hope members will feel that if you need follow-up, we can arrange that.

With that, I think it brings our presentation to an end. Thank you so much from every one of us.

Okay, Members, can I have a motion to move the meeting in camera? From Trevor, seconded by Dan.

Motion approved.

The committee continued in camera from 4:50 p.m. to 5:32 p.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): With that, Members, thank you for a very good meeting.

I would ask for a motion to adjourn the meeting. From Garry, seconded by Adam.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 5:32 p.m.

Top

NOTICE: This is a DRAFT transcript of proceedings in one meeting of a committee of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. This transcript is subject to corrections and will be replaced by the final, official Hansard report. Use of this transcript, other than in the legislative precinct, is not protected by parliamentary privilege, and public attribution of any of the proceedings as transcribed here could entail legal liability.