Posted by [EMAIL PROTECTED] : From: NDP Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Russ Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Ipperwash Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:32:07 -0500 : Bill 3, An Act to provide for a public inquiry to discover the truth about events at Ipperwash Provincial Park leading to the death of Dudley George / Projet de loi 3, Loi prvoyant une enqute publique pour dcouvrir la vrit sur les vnements qui se sont produits au parc provincial Ipperwash et qui ont conduit au dcs de Dudley George. Following is a transcript of the NDP MPP speeches: Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak firmly and clearly in support of this bill and the proposition contained within it. I can tell you that Gilles Bisson, our member responsible for native affairs, as well as Howard Hampton, our leader, will be addressing the bill as well. It's been an incredible history of events: four years and counting, Dudley George shot down, murdered, in Ipperwash and a succession of not just allegations but bits and pieces of evidence which point to and raise the clear spectre of direct government involvement--this government, this Premier, this Premier's advisers and at least one of this Premier's backbenchers as well as, perhaps, the Attorney General and Solicitor General of the day being directly involved, politicizing the role of the Ontario Provincial Police; Marcel Beaubien, the member for now Lambton-Kent-Middlesex, and the comments attributed to him, If they're not out of the park something has to be done, and the other now notorious comment, Get the fucking Indians out of the park, as well as a Premier who has stonewalled and resisted any fair and thorough inquiry into what was the murder of a peaceful and gentle-- Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I realize the member may be quoting something, but I don't think we use that type of language in this House. The Acting Speaker: There is nothing out of order with the language. It may be inappropriate but that's up to the member. Mr Kormos: It is regrettable that native persons, First Nations persons, would be spoken of in that context and with that level of disdain and repugnant language. I regret having to refer to it, but the fact remains that it's a statement that has clearly been identified as having been made. Let's not ignore the realities here. Let's understand that this has not only been an injustice, a grave injustice, of course, to Dudley George and to his family, but a grave injustice to the First Nations people of this province and of this country and a grave injustice to the community, the members of this province and of this country, all of us as residents or citizens. The Premier has very skilfully avoided attendance at examinations for discovery so that he can be compelled to give evidence under oath. Every indication is there that he will continue to use every legal means to the point of pettifoggery to avoid appearance for the purpose of examination for discovery. Dudley George, his family, First Nations people and the people of this province deserve nothing less, and the call today is for nothing less than a public inquiry with the full disclosure of the course of events that led to the murder of Dudley George, and a clear result indicting those who will be found or could be found or may be found to be responsible for those unconscionable actions some four years ago. Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): First of all, as the critic for native affairs for the NDP caucus, I want to say outright and at this point that our caucus will be supporting this bill put forward by the honourable member, for a lot of reasons that were spoken to a little earlier and will be spoken to. But I want to say that we support to the utmost what he is trying to do here. Quite frankly, what we have seen over the past four years is a government that on every occasion has tried to duck out from its responsibility on this whole matter. I'm not going to go through all the events that led to the unfortunate death, or I should say murder, of Dudley George. But it is fairly clear from the evidence as we see it, and as I think any fair-minded person would see it, that the police were basically influenced by the provincial government. The Mike Harris government--Mr Beaubien, Mr Harris himself and other members of his government--had their hands all over this thing. It was out of character for the Ontario Provincial Police to move in the way they did the night Dudley George was killed. We know, because the OPP were under directives from our government previously, that in no case and at no time should the OPP react the way they did. I know from talking to OPP officers since then that they felt a great amount of pressure on the part of the government on this particular issue. It was stated earlier, in the comments made by the Harris government in regard to its decision to send the police in and to kick the [expletive] Indians out of the park, and the influence by the local member. But I'll leave that for another part of the debate. What bothers me in this debate is not only what has happened to Dudley George, as far as the murder of an innocent human being who was trying to advocate for what was rightfully a very important issue for that community, but how the government has since handled this whole issue. Can you imagine what would happen in a democracy if a person was charged with murder and ducked out from being subpoenaed for discovery, ducked out from going to court, and at every turn basically ducked out from the due process of law? Can you imagine if you were put in that situation? If one of you in the gallery was charged with what should be charged in this case and didn't go to court, what would happen to you? They'd pick you off the street, drag you into court and put you in jail to make sure you testified to what you had done; you couldn't get away. But on three occasions, now, this government has wiggled out of its responsibility when it came to discovery. First, the former Attorney General, Mr Harnick, was supposed to go to discovery in, I believe, September of this year and didn't show up--all kinds of legal wrangling. We know the Attorney General was involved in this process. I suspect that one of the reasons the Attorney General didn't run for re-election had a lot to do with what happened in this whole issue. The second issue is what happened to the Solicitor General of the day. He too was served for discovery. Can you imagine what would happen if a citizen of this province got served for discovery and didn't show up time after time? Well, what happened was that the Solicitor General, the former top cop in the province of Ontario, got subpoenaed on this issue and didn't show. He used his lawyers to find all kinds of reasons why they can't do it on that day and why they shouldn't go. Then the Premier, the head of the cabinet, the head of the government of the province of Ontario, who is quoted as having said, Get the [expletive] Indians out of the park, didn't show for his discovery, and instead spends millions of taxpayers' dollars to defend himself against an action he took. I find that quite extraordinary. If any other citizen of this province was put in the position that this government is, I suggest they wouldn't have gotten away with it as long as they have. The second thing I find quite appalling this morning is the apparent silence of the government in this debate. If the government and government backbenchers feel so strongly that, as I suspect, they're going to vote against this bill, I would think that they would get up and say to the George family and other people watching today why they are going to vote against this bill. Look them straight in the face and say, We believe, for the following reasons ... and explain why you're not going to vote for this bill. I find the silence of the government, skipping the rotation in debate this morning, quite amazing. I ask the government members to do the right thing for once. A person has been murdered, plain and simple, and justice has to be given. Up to now, justice has not been given because this government has been running away from its responsibility. I ask the government members to do what's right and to allow this bill to pass so we can have a full public inquiry into the issues. If they think they're innocent, then they've got nothing to hide. Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to take part in this debate today, because there are a number of things that the government needs to realize and that the government members need to realize. The first thing everyone needs to realize is that this issue is not going to go away. All the delaying tactics, trying to switch lawyers in midstream--again what I would term a delaying tactic in this context--are not going to work. The truth is going to come out. Whether an inquiry eventually is called here in the province of Ontario or whether an inquiry is called by the federal government, the people who want the truth to come out, who believe that there has to be accountability, are not going to go away. To the government members, who I suspect will vote to a one against this bill, I would say to you that at some point this will have to have a public airing. There will have to be public accountability on these issues. The government and government members make much of trying to say that there can't be an inquiry because some of these matters are still before the court. I want to spend some time pointing out exactly all the issues that could be subject to a public inquiry now, could have been subject to a public inquiry some time ago, without in any way affecting the guilt or innocence of a particular party. Let me point out some of the questions that need to be answered and some of the questions that need to be asked. Part of what is so puzzling about the events around Ipperwash and the fact that a government MPP was present in the command post of the Ontario Provincial Police--now, that in itself is highly unusual. It is highly unusual for an elected member who is part of the government caucus to be anywhere near a police operational effort. Not only that, but we know that there was communication--in fact there were extended communications--between that government member and representatives of the Premier's office at the time when these matters were being dealt with, again highly unusual. I would suggest that without necessarily inquiring into the guilt or innocence of a particular person, the question needs to be asked, what was a government MPP doing in the command post of the Ontario Provincial Police when these events began to transpire? That is a question that OPP officers want to have an answer to. But there are some other questions that need to be answered. We know that the Ontario Provincial Police had a protocol and guidelines for dealing with these kinds of issues with First Nations. We know that their protocol called for them to engage in activities which lessen the possibility of conflict, which would tend to move away from conflict and move towards conciliation. Yet, at Ipperwash, the OPP apparently did not act according to their own protocol. Why? What would cause the Ontario Provincial Police not to follow, not to obey their own protocol? Second, we know that in the utilization of police tactical units in the late 1980s and 1990s there were some very unfortunate accidents. This resulted in an inquiry, the Drinkwalter inquiry. Douglas Drinkwalter came forward with some recommendations on the utilization of police tactical units and those recommendations became part of the police method of operation. At Ipperwash, the OPP did not follow the Drinkwalter recommendations either. We also know that the Ontario Provincial Police have a training manual that all officers who go into the tactical units have to follow. They're trained in this. At Ipperwash, the OPP did not follow their training manual either for the utilization of tactical units. Why? What could cause the Ontario Provincial Police to not obey and follow three of their own things: protocols, training manuals and guidelines? Those are questions which should be answered by a public inquiry, can be answered by a public inquiry-- Mr Phillips has moved second reading of Bill3. All those in favour will please stand and remain standing until their name is called. Ayes Agostino, Dominic Bartolucci, Rick Bisson, Gilles Boyer, Claudette Bradley, James J. Bryant, Michael Caplan, David Christopherson, David Churley, Marilyn Cleary, John C. Colle, Mike Conway, Sean G. Cordiano, Joseph Crozier, Bruce Curling, Alvin Di Cocco, Caroline Dombrowsky, Leona Duncan, Dwight Gerretsen, John Gravelle, Michael Guzzo, Garry J. Hampton, Howard Hoy, Pat Kennedy, Gerard Kormos, Peter Kwinter, Monte Lalonde, Jean-Marc Levac, David Marchese, Rosario Martel, Shelley Martin, Tony McGuinty, Dalton Parsons, Ernie Patten, Richard Peters, Steve Phillips, Gerry Pupatello, Sandra Ramsay, David Ruprecht, Tony Sergio, Mario Smitherman, George The Acting Speaker: All those opposed will please stand and remain standing until your name is called. Nays Arnott, Ted Baird, John R. Chudleigh, Ted Clark, Brad Clement, Tony Coburn, Brian DeFaria, Carl Dunlop, Garfield Ecker, Janet Elliott, Brenda Flaherty, Jim Galt, Doug Gilchrist, Steve Gill, Raminder Hodgson, ChrisHudak, Tim Jackson, Cameron Johns, Helen Johnson, Bert Kells, Morley Klees, Frank Marland, Margaret Martiniuk, Gerry Maves, Bart Mazzilli, FrankMolinari, Tina R. Munro, JuliaMushinski, Marilyn O'Toole, John Ouellette, Jerry J. Palladini, Al Sampson, Rob Skarica, Toni Snobelen, John Spina, Joseph Sterling, Norman W. Stewart, R. Gary Stockwell, Chris Tascona, Joseph N. Tilson, David Tsubouchi, David H. Turnbull, David Wettlaufer, Wayne Wilson, Jim Wood, Bob Young, David Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 41; the nays are 46. The Acting Speaker: I declare the motion lost Subscribe to the NDP's E-News Service at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit the Ontario NDP's Web Site at http://www.ontariondp.on.ca/ opseu 593 Subscribe to the NDP's E-News Service at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit the Ontario NDP's Web Site at http://www.ontariondp.on.ca/ opseu 593 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nt.net/~savard HOMEPAGE: http://members.xoom.com/ipperwash/index.html NEW: All the MPP's E-MAIL address Never cut what you can untie. -Joubert (1754-1824) WHAT YOU ACCEPT YOU TEACH "A Nation is not conquered until the Hearts of it's women are on the ground" Fax Number 630.563.0690 Petitions On-Line: Dudley George: http://members.xoom.com/ipperwash/petition.htm Indian Summer: http://members.xoom.com/ipperwash/indiansummer.htm
