Editor:
Now that Mayor Lois Jackson has announced her Dialogue on Regionalization of Police Forces, scheduled for Wednesday, it is important to recognize the event for what it is - an exchange of very likely biased (both for and against) opinion that has yet to be supported or examined by any independent, informed and peer reviewed research protocol.
Well thought out and structured research is necessary in coming to any decision in the matter of either promoting or rejecting the both recently and long advocated regional policing model that has been suggested for the Lower Mainland.
Apart from Jackson and Delta police Chief Jim Cessford, the panelists participating in this community discussion are Wally Oppal, commissioner of the recently completed Missing Women Commission of Inquiry; Dr. Daryl Plecas, RCMP Research Chair in Crime Reduction at the University of the Fraser Valley, among other responsibilities; Vancouver police Deputy Chief Doug LePard and RCMP Assistant Commissioner Norm Lipinski.
Among the panelists, Jackson and Cessford give the appearance of relying heavily on support for their publicly stated positions opposing a regionalized police service - from Plecas.
To attempt to more fully understand Plecas' stance on this issue, it is important to note some of the characteristics of his position and of his work with the UFV - implied in the title of one of his positions with the UFV, cited above, and recorded on the UFV website.
Plecas seems to consistently have championed the status quo in discussion of this matter. One might question Plecas' objectivity as a participant in this discussion, then, given what must only be his significant relationship with the RCMP. It would not be unreasonable to suppose that the RCMP may have much to lose with any move toward a regionalization of a policing model in the Lower Mainland.
And so, we have an interesting panel assembled to discuss this matter - four people (we should assume that Lipinski is of similar mind to Jackson et al) who have publicly stated their opposition to any notion of regionalization and two who have suggested a regionalized policing model makes more sense than the current fractionalized design in place.
It is somewhat troubling to read, in an article speaking about this forum in your March 6 edition, comments made by Jackson. Jackson and Cessford ask reasonable questions (that, despite allusions, etc. to the contrary, have not been rigorously answered yet) when they raise concerns about cost and benefit analyses attending a regionalization initiative.
They stray from helpful comment, however, when they begin suggesting that "only big cities seem to benefit." Jackson compounds the error of this kind of statement when she asserts that efforts at regionalization of Ottawa and Halifax policing services have failed. In fact, the evidence appears to be quite the opposite.
Difficulties have been reported in the instance of the Halifax initiative. There were specific and identified reasons for these difficulties, however, and they seem to have been being successfully mitigated. It has not been suggested, though, that any difficulties threatened the fundamental and underlying success of the Halifax move to a regionalized police administration model.
The amalgamation of the Ottawa Carleton police services has been reported to be a resounding success, contrary to Jackson's claim. A simple Google search will unearth voluminous material discussing the amalgamation / regionalization of metropolitan police services. I have not had the opportunity to read extensively through these sources, but I am advised the preponderance speak to the success of these kinds of efforts.
If we are going to argue about this, then we need to examine the evidence in a more rigorous way than is presently the case. The debate currently is beginning to assume the ongoing characteristics of a growing "bun fight."
Interesting and perhaps a little bit aside in this discussion, it has been suggested in conversation about the controversy swirling around the topic that we all should look closely at the changing role of the RCMP in the discharge of policing responsibilities in the Lower Mainland.
Regionalization may actually already be upon us if you look at the RCMP website discussing its evolving role in the delivery of policing services. There is much discussion of "regional" responsibilities and obligations assumed by RCMP personnel. "Regionalization by stealth" is the term I have heard this "responsibility creep" described as.
We would be well advised to approach this "Mayor's Dialogue" with a healthy skepticism. At most the "dialogue" should be encouraged to recommend the accumulation of solid and reliable information on this matter - by a qualified and independent body.
It should not purport to utter recommendations that will be designed to appear to deliver and describe final positions, vis--vis some unfortunate, but likely biased, version of public policy statements.
If the "dialogue" does promote effective research that will look at this important issue appropriately and according to well established guidelines, free from bias and inappropriate emotional and vested, but not well informed, positions, it will have done good and the mayor will deserve a hearty congratulations. If it does otherwise it will have failed and the mayor will deserve the criticism that will then come her way.
Firth Bateman
