Premier Dalton McGuinty has lost an opportunity to clarify the bizarre security regulations at last year’s G20 summit in Toronto by either apologizing for the secretly passed regulations or calling a broad inquiry.
Speaking last week, McGuinty declined to apologize for the regulations cabinet approved to the Ontario Public Works Protection Act that allowed police to search pedestrians in an area near the summit. The regulations caused confusion for demonstrators, particularly when police left the impression that the regulations applied to a five-metre zone near the summit’s fence. In fact, one may wonder if some police officers sincerely thought they did have the right to question pedestrians in that zone.
When commenting on the perimeter zone last year, Toronto police Chief Bill Blair said the regulations did not contain a five-metre clause but he did not clarify this point at the time because he was “trying to keep the criminals out.”
Keeping criminals out is indeed a worthy endeavour, but the chief appeared to have forgotten that our society tries to achieve this goal through clear, lawful methods.
The premier should have stressed this point last week. Instead of dealing directly with the confusion, McGuinty turned the issue over to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “It was his G20, it was his G8, it was his funding,” the premier said. True, the federal government was the host, but the province was deeply involved in security matters. It was McGuinty’s government, not Harper’s, that approved the regulatory changes under the protection act.
The premier was responding to the release of a report by Roy McMurtry, a former Ontario chief justice. The Ontario government asked McMurtry to review the protection act, but not the overall security during the summit meetings. Rightly, McMurtry criticized the regulations approved by the government. He thought they were too vague and were open to abuse.
McGuinty’s government should have called for a more complete inquiry into the summits months ago. The premier’s suggestion that the federal government consider holding an inquiry sounds more like an excuse for inaction than a seriously held position.
Perhaps McGuinty fears that an inquiry would make his government look bad; what McGuinty may not realize is that his government’s current policy already makes it look that way.
Source: http://www.therecord.com
Speaking last week, McGuinty declined to apologize for the regulations cabinet approved to the Ontario Public Works Protection Act that allowed police to search pedestrians in an area near the summit. The regulations caused confusion for demonstrators, particularly when police left the impression that the regulations applied to a five-metre zone near the summit’s fence. In fact, one may wonder if some police officers sincerely thought they did have the right to question pedestrians in that zone.
When commenting on the perimeter zone last year, Toronto police Chief Bill Blair said the regulations did not contain a five-metre clause but he did not clarify this point at the time because he was “trying to keep the criminals out.”
Keeping criminals out is indeed a worthy endeavour, but the chief appeared to have forgotten that our society tries to achieve this goal through clear, lawful methods.
The premier should have stressed this point last week. Instead of dealing directly with the confusion, McGuinty turned the issue over to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “It was his G20, it was his G8, it was his funding,” the premier said. True, the federal government was the host, but the province was deeply involved in security matters. It was McGuinty’s government, not Harper’s, that approved the regulatory changes under the protection act.
The premier was responding to the release of a report by Roy McMurtry, a former Ontario chief justice. The Ontario government asked McMurtry to review the protection act, but not the overall security during the summit meetings. Rightly, McMurtry criticized the regulations approved by the government. He thought they were too vague and were open to abuse.
McGuinty’s government should have called for a more complete inquiry into the summits months ago. The premier’s suggestion that the federal government consider holding an inquiry sounds more like an excuse for inaction than a seriously held position.
Perhaps McGuinty fears that an inquiry would make his government look bad; what McGuinty may not realize is that his government’s current policy already makes it look that way.
Source: http://www.therecord.com
No comments:
Post a Comment