John Sewell: Quickie re-hiring of chief costs needed scrutiny period

By John Sewell –

It happened so quickly that everyone except insiders was taken by surprise. It was as though the event was so contentious and important that the public was not entitled to any prior notice or any chance to mull the matter over in advance. It’s a strange way to do public business, but that’s the way the big decisions about policing are made in Toronto and other Canadian cities.

In this case, the Toronto Police Services Board announced last week that it has decided to extend the contract of Bill Blair as chief of police for a further six years. I suspect many people would not quarrel with the decision given Blair’s tenure as chief for the past four years (more on that in a moment) but the way it was done did not serve the public well.

The occasion of filling a senior public position allows the opportunity of public debate about priorities for coming years. Talking about what we want for policing in Toronto over the next few years would prove very interesting.

Some would like to see more emphasis on local policing where officers have a regular beat over a period of a few years so they get to know a community well, maybe even involving more foot patrols.

Some would like Toronto police to use the same tools used by American police forces to reduce racial profiling.

Some would ask for serious cost controls, given that 25% of our property tax dollars now are spent by police. Others might ask for less money for policing and more for crime prevention including more spending on social programs known to reduce criminal outcomes.

Others might ask for innovations in the way police deliver services in Toronto, and better ways of defining what it is that’s expected from police. Some would ask for new programs to combat youth gangs and guns. Some would ask for more and better attention to crimes of violence and sexual assault that women face.

The point is, there is a lot to talk about when it comes to policing Toronto. Currently, crime levels are lower in Toronto on a per capita basis than in any other city in Canada, so there’s no sense of crisis hanging over such a debate. Bill Blair has shown he’s perfectly capable of expressing his views clearly and well, and he could have added much focus to the debate.

Sadly, it won’t happen. The board made its decision and then announced it, and Blair has his new contract, so neither sees any need to encourage these kinds of debates. They seem to be saying, “We’ll just let policing in Toronto drift along. Best not to disturb things with public discussion.” Did Bill Blair merit re-appointment? Certainly he has been a steady hand compared to his predecessor Julian Fantino. Under Blair’s leadership rank-and-file officers seem to have coalesced into a cohesive unit, although that might be tested once new leadership for the Toronto Police Association is selected later this year.

But police expenditures have jumped considerably, from a net of $693 million in 2005 to $855 million this year, and there’s no end to the annual increases in sight. Compared to other places, the use of the Taser in Toronto has been restrained, probably more because of provincial limitations on who can use them than by police management. Mobile Crisis Intervention Teams which can help deal with people in crisis have been established in many divisions, and that removes the fear of many psychiatric survivors of being Tasered. Police chases in Toronto seem to be down, which is good, but many youth still complain about racial profiling. And too many people are being stripped searched—about one third of those arrested.

Questions have been raised about two of Blair’s initiatives, namely the effectiveness of police cameras in public places and the wisdom of putting police officers in schools, but the criticism has been restrained. One can certainly understand why Blair’s term was extended, but for the sake of better policing in Toronto there should have first been a wide-ranging debate about policing priorities.