A 'big bill' for tow trucks, 'threat to democracy': What we learned from top RCMP officials' convoy commission testimony

A pair of RCMP officials, including Commissioner Brenda Lucki, were in the hot seat at the Public Order Emergency Commission on Tuesday, testifying about the federal police forces' involvement in handling the "Freedom Convoy" protests and the federal government's invocation of the Emergencies Act.

Lucki told the commission about the role she played liaising with other police officials including former Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly, as well as about the responsibility she had to gather information from police across the country and brief federal ministers. During her testimony, she also made a bit of an aside, in advocating for codifying in writing rules around what constitutes political interference, to avoid future controversies.

Appearing next to her was Deputy Commissioner Mike Duheme, who is responsible for the RCMP's federal policing program, which includes investigating matters of national security and conducting protective policing, which is the kind of security Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other high-level officials receive.

Duheme told the commission that his responsibility throughout the protests was to ensure that Lucki had the right information to brief deputy ministers and cabinet members, and to co-ordinate the requests for additional resources, all of which the RCMP met, the commission heard.

Tuesday's hearing also included discussion over Trudeau's national security adviser asking for a threat assessment of the protests on the day the Emergencies Act was invoked.

Here's a roundup of the key takeaways and notable moments from Tuesday's RCMP-focused hearing.

QUICK LOSS OF CONFIDENCE IN OTTAWA POLICE

One of the areas explored at length during Tuesday's hearing was the RCMP's interactions with the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) throughout the protests.

The commission heard the RCMP's perspective on the frustration Ottawa felt over the number of officers the RCMP had offered up to help police the protests, and on their reaction when the OPS seemed to go around the OPP and directly to the RCMP to ask for help.

One element that was crystalized on Tuesday was how quickly federal officials went from having confidence in the local police forces' ability to handle the incoming protest, to learning that the OPS did not have an operational plan to end what at that point was quickly becoming an occupation of downtown Ottawa.

At the start of the protests, Duheme told the commission that RCMP intelligence officers were aware of the OPP "Hendon" reports that assessed the size, scope and potential threat the convoy posed, but that despite this, they still viewed the event as one Ottawa police could handle.

"I was of the opinion that they had everything in hand," Duheme said.

Though, one week into the protests, his boss Lucki made it clear in a text to her OPP counterpart—as the commission has already heard—that the federal government had lost confidence in OPS' ability to handle the protests. 

Lucki was asked on Tuesday what was it in her interactions that prompted her to have this view, which she called in an inference based on the impatience she heard. Here's some of what Lucki said:

"Well, we always got the same question each and every day: 'When is this going to end? How is it going to end?' And we really couldn't answer that. And, of course, early on, we weren't intimately involved with what was going on… But people from the outside looking in weren't seeing any decrease in the activity. They were seeing the opposite. They were seeing increase in activity from the protest groups and more people getting involved… People were wondering if there was ever going to be an end to this, because they hadn’t seen any outwardly enforcement action."

Lucki also noted Tuesday that amid calls that came "quite often" for the RCMP to take over the police response, "there was a bit of education" that had to be given to deputy ministers and cabinet ministers that their role was not to overtake, but to assist.

'A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY': PM ADVISER

One of the more notable bits of evidence raised on Tuesday came in documentation the witnesses were questioned on: a request for a threat assessment to be conducted coming from Trudeau's National Security and Intelligence Adviser Jody Thomas.

In an email, Thomas made a request that was ultimately directed to the RCMP's executive director of intelligence and international policing, Adriana Poloz, seeking an assessment of "the threat of these blockades. The characters involved. The weapons. The motivation."

"Clearly this isn't just about COVID and is a threat to democracy and rule of law… It's a very short fuse," she wrote on Feb. 14, the day the Emergencies Act was invoked.

In addition to this email shedding some light on the perspective a top Trudeau adviser had at the time, the commission lawyer who raised it was curious how it happened that the prime minister's top national security adviser wanted an assessment but didn't go through either Lucki or Duheme to get it.

Duheme said that while it is not necessarily how it should work, "it happens based on some relationships that are built."

"Preferably, there should be one stop for all requests that come in, so we can have at least an idea of what's going out," he said, noting that he couldn’t recall whether he had been briefed on the assessment once it was compiled.

FEDS GOT 'BIG BILL' FOR COMPELLING TOW TRUCKS

One of the powers that the Emergencies Act granted the federal government was the ability to compel those capable to render essential services to relieve the blockades with reasonable compensation.

In this case, this power was used to order tow truck drivers to move vehicles blocking roads.

Asked on Tuesday if the bill for this—compensating tow truck operators—had come in, Lucki said yes, and that it was "a big bill."

Digging into this a bit further, a commission lawyer asked Lucki if she was aware that this power under the Act gave the province the ability to hand over the costs of tow drivers to the federal government, she said yes.

"I assumed that if they had to compel tow trucks under the Emergencies Act that we would, in fact, the federal government would pay for that. But if they had the ability to get the tow trucks on their own, that it wouldn't be under the Emergencies Act, and we wouldn't be paying for it," Lucki said.

She was then asked if it would surprise her that some of the tow operators decided to go through the federal government to get paid even though they had been secured prior to the act, Lucki said she had "no idea."

"I guess it's an integrity issue."

LUCKI CHALLENGED ON HER 'OTHER TOOLS' REMARK

Documents previously submitted to the commission indicated Lucki did not believe officials had employed "all available tools" to dismantle the anti-mandate protests prior to the Emergencies Act being invoked.

In an email to Mike Jones, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino's chief of staff, dated just after midnight on Feb. 14, the day the government invoked the Act, Lucki wrote officials had other tools that had already been factored into plans to end the protests. 

In the email, Lucki also listed the "useful" powers the Act would give law enforcement, including prohibiting public assembly in a wider range of designated spaces, outlawing protesters from bringing gas and diesel into the protest zone, cellphone disruption, and giving police the power to get tow trucks into the demonstration. But despite this, she was of the view that all existing tools still had not been utilized.

This email came up several times on Tuesday, and the commission heard that while she hadn't personally consulted other police forces about the tools that might have been useful to them ahead of the invocation of the Act—citing a concern of breaching cabinet confidence—Lucki was under the impression that others within the RCMP had sought feedback.

Asked then near the end of her appearance why she didn't bring this up during high-level federal response-focused meetings being held just prior to the invocation of the Act, Lucki said that even though she didn't get a chance, because she had conveyed her views to Mendicino's top staffer, it had been passed on.

Did she think it would have carried weight if she had directly told cabinet ministers her view? Lucki said it may have, but it was only one part of the overall picture the federal government was considering in deciding to invoke the Act. In the end, she told the commission that she thought the Emergencies Act did help bring the weeks-long situation to an end.

TIME TO CODIFY WHAT CONSTITUTES POLITICAL PRESSURE?

During her testimony, Lucki was asked a general question—one she's been asked previously in connection to the Nova Scotia mass shooting—whether she felt at any point during the convoy response improper pressure or attempts to direct the national police force.

"Absolutely not," was her response. After some back and forth over how the RCMP understands the "church and state" idea of separating politics and policing, Lucki took the opportunity to advocate for codifying the expectations around what constitutes political interference, to avoid future controversies.

"I think it's time that we put something to writing that outlines what you can and cannot do from both the commissioner's perspective and the politicians, especially from a rotational point of view," Lucki said. "Politicians change… So I think it's time to clarify it, because it's been a topic of conversation."

This was in reference to the flurry of attention around allegations that the Liberals interfered in the RCMP's investigation in Nova Scotia in connection to gun policy. Federal officials, including Lucki, have strenuously denied the claims made by Nova Scotia RCMP officials. 

Asked what these kind of written guidelines would entail, Lucki pointed to an NDP private members' bill from Allistair MacGregor currently before the House of Commons that, if passed, would "clarify the scope of the directions" that ministers can give to the RCMP commissioner, "and to require that all directions be issued in writing."

The bill would also set out reporting and publishing requirements "with respect to those directions."

"It won't be difficult to do, because there's many police agencies who have examples of what needs to be put in in text to make this happen," Lucki said. "In the last six months I've had to respond to it on several occasions, and so my hope is that my replacement won't have to. So we need to clear this up."

With a file from CTV News' Spencer Van Dyk