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.

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.

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

opseu 593 

Subscribe to the NDP's E-News Service at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Visit the Ontario NDP's Web Site at 
opseu 593 


NEW: All the MPP's E-MAIL address 

Never cut what you can untie. -Joubert (1754-1824)


"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:

Indian Summer:

Reply via email to