The Decibel - The convoy leaders speak at the Emergencies Act inquiry

Episode Date: November 3, 2022

This week, the Emergencies Act inquiry is hearing from convoy leaders who took over Ottawa’s downtown core earlier this year while they were protesting vaccine mandates. On Wednesday, a lawyer who represented key convoy organizers during the protests told the inquiry that organizers received leaked information from police.Parliamentary reporter Marieke Walsh tells us what else we’ve learned from convoy leaders who have testified so far.Questions? Comments? Ideas? Email us at [e-mail]

Hi, I'm Maina Karaman-Wilms, and you're listening to The Decibel. Leaders of the convoy protests that occupied downtown Ottawa earlier this year are testifying this week at the Emergencies Act inquiry. And we're learning new information about what was going on behind the scenes with the protest leaders, as well as what was happening with the police. The Globe's parliamentary reporter, Marika Walsh, is back to tell us what new information we've learned from the inquiry. This is The Decibel from The Globe and Mail.

Marika, thank you so much for joining me again. Thanks so much for having me. So we're speaking to you on Wednesday afternoon, two weeks into the public inquiry into the use of the Emergencies Act. And we're finally hearing from leaders of the convoy. But before we get into the details, Marika, I just want to start with what's the atmosphere been like these last few days of the hearings? The atmosphere has maybe shifted a little bit, but the commissioner for the hearings, Paul Rouleau, is keeping it pretty strict that no matter who is in the hearings, that it needs to remain quiet. So we did see some, I would say, audience interaction on Tuesday when the first convoy leader was testifying. Just some applause or laughing, that sort of thing. But Paul Rouleau took a break and had sort of a stern moment Tuesday afternoon where he said he would

clear the room if they don't sort of get in line. So on Wednesday, it's been a lot quieter. But certainly, there are more people present during the public hearings. They appear to be convoy supporters, although there was also a substantial group of take-your-kids-to-workday students in the public hearings as well on Wednesday. And they were connected to the lawyers who were in the public hearings as well on Wednesday. And they were connected to the lawyers who were in the room. So a big array of people in that room and also some convoy supporters outside of the building itself, which is on Wellington, which is where the blockades were happening. One protester wearing a tinfoil hat and carrying a jerry can has been there most mornings.

Ah, okay. All right. So that's kind of the atmosphere, what's going on there. I want to specifically ask you about what we've heard recently then. On Wednesday, we were hearing testimony from Keith Wilson, who's a lawyer representing key leaders during the protests. What did we learn from Keith Wilson's testimony? We're learning a lot of little pieces of information that are starting to paint a better picture of what was going on behind the scenes. Critically, I think from Mr. Wilson's testimony on Wednesday, we learned what many people suspected and were alleging during the protests that the protesters were getting information leaked to them from law enforcement. He would not disclose who it was. He said he didn't know who it came from, but there were former law enforcement and former military personnel within the convoy organization, within the convoy leadership that he said was getting

information about planned police operations. And so they had that heads up. Interestingly, in the testimony on Wednesday, he said that he thought the police had caught wind of this and started testing the convoy by, you know, sending up false flags, suggesting something would happen when it didn't. And he said they learned through the testimony last week that it was actually police dysfunction that led to some of these operations not happening, not that they were testing convoy organizers. So you can see that there was certainly information flowing to the convoy organizers that they were not supposed to have. And you can imagine that that would or could

impact police operations. Wow. Okay. So this is really important stuff that's coming out now. I want to also ask you about testimony we heard on Tuesday this week, because we heard from three different convoy organizers earlier this week. And on Tuesday, we heard from Chris Barber. Can you just remind us, Marika, who is Chris Barber? Chris Barber is one of the main convoy organizers. He and another person called Bridget Belton are credited with sort of being the spark to get the convoys rolling or in sort of the genesis of the protest. It ranged anywhere from 500 to 2,500 vehicles is what I was told. Looking in the mirrors, it was incredible to see the lights behind you

and the long lines and watching the videos. It was approximately 25 kilometers long at some times. He's a trucker from Saskatchewan, and he had an understanding of TikTok, he says, and an understanding of social media that he used to his advantage to spur interest and momentum for the protest. But he acknowledged to the commission that even he did not expect it to get as big as it did. He called himself an internet troll and acknowledged that past comments from him on the internet were racist or anti-Muslim in sentiment. And he says that he's no longer that person and that the convoy experience actually changed his views on these. But he did acknowledge

that those were posted by him before the convoy. So that paints a bit of a picture about who he is. He and the other convoy leaders have described infighting and disorganization between the convoy leaders that sort of unraveled more, unspooled more during the actual protests in Ottawa. However, they also have detailed in documents and in testimony that even on their way to Ottawa in the convoy, they already had concerns with, for example, Pat King, who really used violent language in some videos directed at the prime minister, directed at the government. Trudeau, someone's going to make you catch a bullet one day. To the rest of this government, someone's going to f*** you, you zin. And we heard from Pat King on Wednesday afternoon.

What did he say? He was asked about those comments in the videos. And he says they were taken out of context, that they are being misconstrued. He said that the comment about the prime minister was not about somebody doing something to him or about him encouraging violence, but rather a warning that somebody who was under pressure from the COVID rules might snap. However, he also later said that he regretted making those comments and compared them to something that you would say when you were in an argument with your parents. But they have it in written testimony and in oral testimony that the convoy leaders, they decided to keep him in the fold because they wanted his following. They recognized he had a large following on Facebook, and they didn't want to lose those supporters from the convoy protests. And so they kept him in the fold. And only the day or two before the police actually moved in to clear out the protests, did they publicly

distance themselves from him. So this was all stuff that we were learning through Chris Barber's testimony earlier this week. I want to actually ask you about Chris's demeanor during his testimony on Tuesday. I guess, how did he present himself? How did he come across this week? I would just say he was very polite. He didn't really come across as he does in some of his videos that we've seen on TikTok or other platforms from during the protest when he was egging on, horn honking, for example. They've already filed a $4 million civil lawsuit against us for horns. You guys shut up over there. Am I doing my part?

One of our other colleagues, Shannon Proudfoot, has sort of characterized it as the two Chris Barbers. There was one that presented himself before the commission, and there was another one that we saw during the protests. But certainly this week, we are understanding more about the disorganization or the infighting within the organizers, the challenges that would have brought to police trying to negotiate any kind of deal or trying to even understand who controlled who to know that if they struck a deal, it would be followed. And then I think we're also seeing even more of this sort of two realities or alternate reality world that was debated during the convoy protest itself. So if you'll recall, Manika, during the protest in February, residents in Ottawa, businesses in Ottawa did not feel like they were experiencing a peaceful

protest. They did not feel safe. They did not feel like they could go about their daily lives or their daily business. And on the flip side, protesters at the time would say, what are you talking about? I'm having a great time. I'm meeting new friends. I'm hugging people I don't know. This is peaceful. This is safe. And that same argument is playing out in the public hearings now. But there's also at times contradictions that they put forward. For example, Keith Wilson on Wednesday said multiple times that he did not see violence, that he did not believe that the protests were anything but peaceful and legal. But he also acknowledged that it was too

dangerous, that the convoy leaders learned that it was too dangerous to try and strike deals and move trucks at nighttime because of what he described as the dynamics of the crowd. So he didn't go further than that, but that clearly suggests that if it's too dangerous to move trucks at nighttime, there might be some other elements going on or some tension going on that could have led to more unsettling moments. We'll be back in a moment. So let's just talk about what we learned from the police side of things. Earlier this week, we heard from former police chief Peter Sloley, Ottawa police chief, who resigned 19 days into the convoy protests. what did we learn from Slowly's testimony about how the Ottawa police handled the protest? We learned that the dysfunction and chaos and infighting of the protesters also was happening within the police. would say. There was some extremely colorful language in the documented evidence that was

presented to the commission about how Peter slowly interacted with his senior command, including threatening to cut off somebody's genitals, including threatening to crush people who dissented. He disputed the vast majority of the examples put to him. He either said they didn't happen, he didn't recall them, or the cases were misunderstood in what his intent was. This is, I guess, Slowly's response to other police leaders talking about what was going on. I guess, what did we hear from them? Like, what were they saying about Slowly's leadership, I guess, that kind of made him respond in that way? Well, maybe we should zoom back a little bit. So what we heard overall, I think, is that the Ottawa Police Service had lost a lot of its top brass during the pandemic. They were already

starting at a disadvantage when the convoy was making its way to Ottawa. They didn't have all of the people that they usually would have, and their chiefs to deputies were both newly in their positions. And there was a lot of dysfunction in terms of the command team responsible. There was a lot of changeover and who was the responsible commander just in that three-week time. And over that course of time, Mr. Slowly's subordinates have described him as being micromanaging and improperly interfering in the proper chain of command, being aggressive, antagonistic, suggesting there was a conspiracy against him. Can I ask, I guess, so if he's denying these things, what did he have to say about these accusations?

He simply said many of them did not happen. of the comment that he would crush people who dissented, he said that he did say that, but it was only in regards to one specific area. And he didn't mean that broadly. And that also people should still feel comfortable coming to him with concerns. So you can see some challenges in that, right? You can see some challenges in how that would actually play out with a command team. So it sounds like this testimony, I mean, there's a lot of tense things that are being discussed here. I'm curious, what was Slowly's demeanor like, I guess, when he was testifying? He was mostly pretty calm, but you could tell when he was cross-examined that it became much more defensive.

And in fairness to him, the lawyer for the Ottawa Police Service, for example, was also quite combative in his questioning. So we're seeing that other police agencies are trying to put this on the Ottawa police and the Ottawa police are trying to put this on Peter slowly. And there is a lot of face saving and buck passing going around by everybody in that process. I think I saw too, like there's one point where slowly got kind of emotional during his testimony as well. Yeah, he teared up at one point when he was talking about the impact of the protesters and the protests in general on his officers. They were doing their very best under inhuman circumstances, like the city was, like the community was. It was too cold and it was too much, but they did their very best. And he also extended that. He said that the pressure and the conditions on the residents also weren't fair.

But he believes that the officers deserve a lot more credit for the fact that there was no mass violence or, you know, other casualties from this. Was there any point in his testimony in which slowly said, I don't know, maybe he thought he'd made a mistake or should have done something differently? Not really. He was actually asked at the end of his testimony on Friday if he personally could have done something different. And he was asked a few times because he struggled to answer it. And this was questioning from the commission lawyers. So certainly not a more combative questioning. And he wasn't able to answer it except to say that there has been new research out about the need for executives to have sleep during stressful situations. So that sheds a light on how willing he is to look at his own conduct, even if given the scale of the mess that happened in Ottawa,

it would be very difficult to lay all of this on one person. One of the things that Peter slowly did though say was a mistake or regret was his comment relatively early on in the protests in which he said that there was no police solution to this protest. He acknowledged that that really hurt public trust and public faith in the police. And he said that that's not what he meant. He said what he meant was that the Ottawa police on their own could not solve it. And who else is testifying soon that you're still waiting to hear from? We're still waiting to hear from a lot of people, Menaka, because we haven't even gotten to the border blockades yet. So the commission is still focused on Ottawa, and then

it will head west in terms of what it's focusing on to look at the blockades, for example, in Cootes, Alberta. And only after that will we hear from the federal officials so crucial to this final decision of why they invoked the act. So we still have a lot more to go. Marika, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me again. Thanks, Manika. Good to see you. You too. That's it for today. I'm Manika Raman-Wilms. Our producers are Madeline White, Cheryl Sutherland, and Rachel Levy-McLaughlin. David Crosby edits the show. Kasia Mihailovic is our senior producer, and Angela Pichenza is our executive editor.

Thanks so much for listening, and I'll talk to you tomorrow.