1

1 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 October 31st, 2005 25

2

1 Appearances 2 Derry Millar ) Commission Counsel 3 Susan Vella ) (np) 4 Donald Worme, Q. C ) 5 Katherine Hensel ) (np) 6 Megan Ferrier ) (np) 7 Murray Klippenstein ) (np) The Estate of Dudley 8 Vilko Zbogar ) (np) George and George 9 Andrew Orkin ) (np) Family Group 10 Basil Alexander ) 11 12 Peter Rosenthal ) (np) Aazhoodena and George 13 Jackie Esmonde ) Family Group 14 15 Anthony Ross ) Residents of 16 Cameron Neil ) Aazhoodena (Army Camp) 17 Kevin Scullion ) (np) 18 William Henderson ) (np) Kettle Point & Stony 19 Jonathon George ) (np) Point First Nation 20 Colleen Johnson ) (np) 21 22 Kim Twohig ) (np) Government of Ontario 23 Walter Myrka ) 24 Susan Freeborn ) (np) 25 Michelle Pong ) (np)

3

1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Janet Clermont ) Municipality of 3 David Nash ) (np) Lambton Shores 4 Nora Simpson ) (np) Student-at-law 5 6 Peter Downard ) The Honourable Michael 7 Bill Hourigan ) (np) Harris 8 Jennifer McAleer ) 9 10 Ian Smith ) (np) Robert Runciman 11 Alice Mrozek ) 12 13 Harvey Stosberg ) (np) Charles Harnick 14 Jacqueline Horvat ) 15 16 Douglas Sulman, Q.C. ) Marcel Beaubien 17 Mary Jane Moynahan )(np) 18 Dave Jacklin ) (np) 19 Trevor Hinnegan ) 20 21 Mark Sandler ) (np) Ontario Provincial 22 Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) (np) Police 23 Leslie Kaufman ) 24 25

4

1 APPEARANCES (CONT'D) 2 Ian Roland ) (np) Ontario Provincial 3 Karen Jones ) Police Association & 4 Debra Newell ) (np) K. Deane 5 Ian McGilp ) (np) 6 Annie Leeks ) (np) 7 Jennifer Gleitman ) (np) 8 Robyn Trask ) 9 10 Julian Falconer ) (np) Aboriginal Legal 11 Brian Eyolfson ) (np) Services of Toronto 12 Kimberly Murray ) (np) 13 Julian Roy ) 14 Clem Nabigon ) (np) 15 Adriel Weaver ) (np) Student-at-Law 16 17 Al J.C. O'Marra ) (np) Office of the Chief 18 Robert Ash, Q.C. ) (np) Coroner 19 20 William Horton ) Chiefs of Ontario 21 Matthew Horner ) 22 Kathleen Lickers ) (np) 23 24 25

5

1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 3 Mark Fredrick ) (np) Christopher Hodgson 4 Craig Mills ) (np) 5 Megan Mackey ) (np) 6 Erin Tully ) 7 8 David Roebuck ) (np) Debbie Hutton 9 Anna Perschy ) 10 Melissa Panjer ) 11 Adam Goodman ) (np) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

6

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 7 4 5 RONALD JOHN VRANCART, Resumed 6 Cross-Examination by Mr. Anthony Ross 9 7 Cross-Examination by Mr. Matthew Horner 39 8 Cross-Examination by Mr. Julian Roy 52 9 Cross-Examination by Mr. Walter Myrka 90 10 Re-Direct Examination by Mr. Donald Worme 108 11 12 DAVID MORAN, Sworn 13 Examination-In-Chief by Mr. Donald Worme 110 14 15 Certificate of Transcript 230 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

7

1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-921 Document number 3001382. Minister's 4 Note from Ron Vrancart re. Update on 5 reopening of Ipperwash Provincial Park, 6 May 22/96. 105 7 P-922 Seventeen (17) page document, The Common 8 Sense Revolution, May 1994. 118 9 P-923 Curriculum Vitae of Mr. David Moran. 118 10 P-924 Document; Bringing Common Sense to 11 Community Development. 126 12 P-925 A Voice For The North; A report of the 13 Mike Harris Northern Focus Tour, 14 January 1995. 128 15 P-926 Document number 1012561 Mr. David Moran's 16 handwritten notes, undated. 219 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

8

1 --- Upon commencing at 10:33 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session, the Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 7 MR. DONALD WORME: Good morning, 8 Commissioner. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 10 morning. Good morning. 11 MR. DONALD WORME: Commissioner, Mr. 12 Vrancart, of course, is still on the stand. I just 13 wanted to say for the record that counsel for the Kettle 14 and Stony Point First Nation, that is Mr. Henderson and 15 Mr. George are not going to be here today. However, 16 their tasks will be covered off by -- by Mr. Horner. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: By Mr. 18 Horton. 19 MR. DONALD WORME: Mr. Horton and -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 MR. DONALD WORME: -- yes. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 23 very much. Ready to go? 24 I think if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Ross is 25 up first this morning. Nice to see you again, Mr. Ross.

9

1 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you Mr. 2 Commissioner. 3 4 RONALD JOHN VRANCART, Resumed 5 6 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 7 Q: Good morning, Mr. Vrancart. 8 A: Good morning. 9 Q: My name is Anthony Ross and I 10 represent the individuals who now reside at Aazhoodena. 11 Now, sir, I was not here last week when 12 you were giving testimony. However, I've had the 13 opportunity to review your evidence and there are one (1) 14 or two (2) issues -- one (1) or two (2) questions that I 15 must ask you. 16 And I will indicate that my examination 17 will be more of an in-filling type, recognizing that 18 Commission Counsel, Mr. Worme, has covered it very well 19 in direct. And I note from the cross-examination of Ms. 20 Tuck-Jackson that there is a lot that you do not 21 remember, recognizing it's over ten (10) years ago. 22 Now, sir, is it fair to say that your role 23 as far as the Ipperwash matter is concerned was quite 24 minimal? 25 A: I think so.

10

1 Q: Yes. 2 A: And really, the role of your 3 department between the 4th of -- the 4th of September 4 1995 when the occupation occurred, and the 6th when 5 Dudley George was killed was really about political 6 rather than an in-the-field nature. 7 A: I'm not sure that I would say that. 8 I think our folks at the Park were quite involved 9 throughout those dates. 10 Les Kobayashi was on the ground, on the 11 front line, in a support role with the -- with the 12 Provincial Police and he -- and he reported to -- to his 13 superior in London. 14 Q: You see, that's the point. I mean it 15 -- it -- as I -- as I review your evidence, you indicate 16 that the position of the Department was that what was 17 happening in -- at Ipperwash was a police matter. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: So, if it is a police matter, why 20 would your people have to be involved? 21 A: Well, because it was happening in our 22 Park and -- and the police requested, I presume, they 23 requested our involvement. When Mr. Kobayashi, for 24 instance, served the notice of trespass or attempted to 25 serve the notice of trespass, I'm sure he didn't do that

11

1 of his accord. 2 Q: You're -- you're saying that he -- 3 you presume, and you're sure he didn't do it, do you know 4 that for sure or is that you're -- what you believe 5 should have happened? 6 A: It's what I believe did happen. 7 Q: What you believe did happen, but you 8 cannot say that that happened, can you? 9 A: No. I was not on -- I was not 10 onsite. 11 Q: Fine, well then perhaps you'll just 12 restrict your answers to what you know. I find it a 13 little confusing when you start telling me what you 14 think. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Okay. So, this was, as you put it, a 17 police matter as far as the field work was concerned? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Yeah. Now, in your evidence, you 20 indicated to Mr. Worme that your Department was concerned 21 about the interests of the stakeholders; do you recall 22 that word, the stakeholders? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Okay. And as far as these 25 stakeholders are concerned, who did you classify as the

12

1 stakeholders? 2 A: The stakeholders in the Park? 3 Q: Well, as far as the entire incident 4 was concerned. 5 A: Well, it would have been everybody 6 that was involved; it would have been -- it would have 7 been the Ontario Government, it would have been the 8 Ministry of Natural Resources, it would have been the 9 OPP, it would have been the community, it would have been 10 the First Nation. 11 Q: Which community are you talking 12 about? 13 A: The broader -- the broader community 14 in and around Ipperwash Park. 15 Q: Yes. And as far as the First Nation 16 is concerned, as I read your evidence you all -- you also 17 made reference to the fact that the individuals who 18 occupied the Park did so without the blessing of the -- 19 of the Band, of their Band. 20 Do you recall that? 21 A: I think the word I actually used was 22 the blessing of their community. 23 Q: Okay, fine. Now, the blessing of 24 their community. Where -- what did you mean by their 25 community when you spoke about the blessing of their

13

1 community? 2 A: I -- I think what I really meant was 3 the blessing of their Band Council. 4 Q: Of their Band Council? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Now, did anybody tell you that as far 7 as the Band council is concerned, the authority was on 8 the land known as Kettle Point? 9 A: I think I knew that, yes. 10 Q: Okay. And if it is that they have 11 got authority on Kettle Point why would anybody need 12 their blessing to go off the land? 13 A: I wasn't suggesting that they needed 14 their blessing to go off the land. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's a bit 16 -- yes, Mr. Downard? 17 MR. PETER DOWNARD: Thank you. I don't 18 understand this -- for the purposes of the Indian Act 19 sanctioned Band role, that Band had authority at the 20 Kettle Point land and at the Stoney Point land. So, I 21 understand the assumption of the question. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 23 what the question's assumption is either. 24 Yes, Mr. Ross. 25 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I hate to correct Mr.

14

1 Downard. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. No. 3 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: But as far as their 4 land was concerned, it was the Kettle Point land, I went 5 through it with the Chief, I went through it with others 6 that as far as the elections were concerned, only people 7 residing on Kettle Point around 1993 to 1995, 1996, until 8 the court date decision were allowed to vote. So, people 9 residing off the Reserve were not voting in Kettle Point 10 elections. Just to correct Mr. Downard. 11 So, you see, Mr. Commissioner, if this 12 Witness is stating the view that the Chief and Council 13 from Kettle Point had authority on Kettle Point and at 14 Stoney Point I welcome it. It depends on now where is 15 Stoney Point, whether or not it is the Army Camp and the 16 Park and the -- the cottagers. So, that's what I'm 17 getting at. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 20 Q: So, Mr. Vrancart do you -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 22 exactly what you're getting to. Now you have Mr. Horton 23 -- we'll sort of... 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

15

1 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, Mr. 2 Commissioner, Mr. Horton has as usual been quite helpful. 3 And we just try to stay away from legal arguments and 4 just stick with what this witness knows. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 8 Q: So, coming back to you, Mr. Vrancart. 9 The stakeholders as indicated included the Kettle Point 10 First Nation? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And how -- how would the Kettle Point 13 First Nation be a recognized she is a stakeholder as far 14 as the occupation of the Army Camp was concerned? 15 A: Some -- some of the occupiers came 16 from that First Nation. 17 Q: I see. So, if they had come from 18 another First Nation would your position be different? 19 A: Would my position with respect to 20 that other First Nation be different? 21 Q: Yes. 22 A: No. I would have considered them to 23 be a stakeholder as well then. 24 Q: Were you aware that some of the 25 occupiers were from First Nations other than Kettle

16

1 Point? 2 A: No, I wasn't. 3 Q: I see. And you also indicated, sir, 4 that the Ministry of Natural Resources has a long history 5 of working with Aboriginal people in Ontario? 6 A: That's correct. 7 Q: Yeah. Now would you agree with me 8 that of all of the departments, the Government 9 departments in the Province of Ontario, the one which 10 will have the most interaction with First Nations would 11 be the Ministry of Natural Resources? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And would you agree with me, sir, 14 that that is because -- that is fed, really, by the fact 15 that First Nations generally believe they've got a right 16 to hunt on unoccupied Crown lands? 17 A: That would be partly it, yes. 18 Q: And they've got Aboriginal rights 19 with respect to fishing? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And the hunting and fishing would be 22 predominantly in areas under the mandate of the Ministry 23 of Natural Resources? 24 A: That's correct. 25 Q: And as such there is substantial

17

1 interaction between the First Nations members and the 2 employees of that department, Ministry of Natural 3 Resources? 4 A: Yes -- correct. 5 Q: And sir, with respect to this long 6 and -- this long working relationship, over the full 7 extent of the Province of Ontario, is it fair to say that 8 no First Nation members have been employees of the 9 department have reached management level? 10 A: I'm not sure that I can categorically 11 agree with that. 12 Q: That's fine. Then perhaps you can 13 tell me from you recollection any First Nation members in 14 the province of Ontario who reached management level 15 within your department, Ministry of Natural Resources? 16 A: The one (1) individual -- the most 17 senior First Nations person that I can think of that 18 would have worked, perhaps not as a manager, but 19 certainly in a manager's office supporting that manager 20 in undertaking his duties would have been Charles Fox in 21 Thunder Bay, who at the time I believe was the Chief of 22 the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation. 23 Q: But, it was in his capacity of Chief 24 of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation that he was working with the 25 Ministry?

18

1 A: No, he -- he was working, as Charles 2 Fox -- 3 Q: All right. 4 A: -- and was working as a native 5 advisor in the Assistant Deputy Minister for Northern 6 Ontario's office in Thunder Bay. 7 Q: And would you agree with me that -- 8 with the high level of interaction between the Ministry 9 of Natural Resources and the First Nations that their -- 10 the -- the First Nation representation at senior levels 11 have been very low? 12 A: Yes, I would agree with that. 13 Q: In your evidence when you were 14 speaking -- when you were giving evidence and responding 15 to questions from Mr. -- Mr. Worme, you indicated that 16 when the Bob Rae government was in power in Ontario there 17 were attempts to work with First Nations on a government- 18 to-government basis? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And this government-to-government 21 basis, I mean, how did that impact things like natural 22 resources? 23 A: I -- I think the -- the main subject 24 area that -- that arose as a result of the Bob Rae 25 direction to work with First Nations more on a

19

1 government-to-government basis was attempts to define 2 projects within the scope of the Ministry of Natural 3 Resources that could be worked on in a part -- on a 4 partnership basis and often this was called co-management 5 of -- of the resource base. 6 Q: And when you say, "co-management of 7 the resource base" am I to understand that at one (1) 8 stage during the Bob Rae period that the Government of 9 Ontario was prepared to consider co-management of the 10 entire resource base covered by Ministry of Resources 11 with First Nations? 12 A: I don't recall that. 13 Q: No, I'm asking, I'm asking you. 14 A: You're asking me if the Bob Rae 15 government --- 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: -- had considered that? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: No. 20 Q: I see. So, this government-to- 21 government dealings were really on low-level matters? 22 A: I -- I don't know that I would say 23 they were on low-level matters. They were -- they were 24 on issues that arose in the normal course of the working 25 relationship between the Ministry of Natural Resources

20

1 and various First Nations. 2 Q: You see, the purpose for my going to 3 that -- those questions, Mr. Vrancart, is that at the 4 conclusion of your direct evidence Mr. Don Worme asked 5 you whether or not there was a recommendation that you -- 6 you could make which, if implemented, would have avoided 7 this problem. 8 And your indication was that if the 9 Government of Canada had returned the lands that were 10 taken in 1942 that this problem would not have occurred? 11 A: Correct. 12 Q: Now, what about the Province of 13 Ontario? I mean, what could the Province of Ontario have 14 done in your view? 15 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Commissioner, I'm 16 having difficulty with the question. It's very broad and 17 I -- I frankly don't understand the question and I don't 18 see how this Witness can understand it either. 19 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: May I respond please, 20 Mr. Commissioner? 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What are you 22 -- what do you mean, Mr. Ross? 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, Mr. 24 Commissioner, this Witness as Deputy Minister of Natural 25 Resources, the one with the most interaction with the

21

1 First Nations is taking a position that this problem at 2 Ipperwash -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 4 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: -- could have been 5 avoided if the Government of Canada had just returned the 6 lands, okay? 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's not 8 taking a position. He made a recommendation at the end 9 of -- 10 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: He made a 11 recommendation -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- his 13 testimony. Yes. 14 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: And I just wondered if 15 he was prepared to go a little further with that 16 recommendation. 17 The thing is, the Federal Government isn't 18 here and we understand that. We also understand that 19 they promised to return the land and it wasn't returned. 20 But, I represent a group of people -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 22 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: -- who consider that 23 it is more than just the lands that were taken by the 24 Federal Government that are at issue. 25 It was the land that were set aside as --

22

1 as IR 43. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, you're 3 not to ask this witness questions that he may have some 4 information about or know something about. I mean, he's 5 no longer working for the Government of Ontario as I 6 understand it. 7 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: That is true, Mr. 8 Commissioner -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So I'm not 10 too sure what -- 11 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I don't want to be 12 argumentative on this. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. 14 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I recognize that. The 15 incident happened in 1993. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: This individual worked 18 for the Government -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He was a 20 deputy at the MNR at that time. 21 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Deputy at MNR. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: And he was there for 24 years after and I'm just trying to find out whether or 25 not it was ever considered by the Government or by his

23

1 department -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well ask him 3 what he knows and his department and -- 4 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Sure. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- his 6 Ministry. I'm not sure what he can say about -- 7 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- the 9 Government of Ontario in general. 10 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think 12 that's the essence of Mr. Myrka's objection. 13 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, I can be -- I 14 can just narrow it, Mr. Commissioner. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 17 Q: So, tell me now, Mr. Vrancart, did 18 your Department ever consider a review of the lands which 19 -- which were classified as the Ipperwash Provincial Park 20 in terms of whether or not these lands should be returned 21 to the First Nations? 22 A: We looked into the title and we were 23 assured that -- that we had solid title to those lands 24 and did not proceed any further. 25 Q: I see. And I take it that regardless

24

1 to the claims that were made by the First Nation members, 2 your Department just took the position that you had the 3 deed and that you were prepared to rely on that deed? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: I see. So, that if at any time later 6 this deed is brought into question, it's a matter that 7 your Department will obviously -- you would have gone 8 back and reviewed the circumstances? 9 A: I'm sure -- I'm sure that the 10 Ministry would go back and review the circumstances if it 11 was brought forward in the context of -- of a formal land 12 claim. 13 Q: And tell me further, Mr. Vrancart, in 14 response to a question from Mr. Don Worme, there was 15 mention that there was an emergency planning for 16 Aboriginal Emergencies Interministerial Committee. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Do you know when that Committee was 19 set up? 20 A: I don't know. I don't know the 21 specific date, no. 22 Q: Would that have been long before the 23 Ipperwash incident? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And did it remain -- is it -- up to

25

1 when you left Government, was it still a standing 2 Committee? 3 A: It may have been, I don't recall. 4 Q: I see. Now, do you know if any other 5 group in Canada which had that status that the Department 6 of -- the Ministry of Natural Resources had some special 7 committee set up to deal with them and their problems? 8 A: It wasn't actually a committee of the 9 Ministry of Natural Resources. It was an 10 Interministerial Committee that was established by the 11 Ontario Native Affairs Secretariat? 12 Q: Yes. 13 A: And I don't know whether any other 14 Province in the country would have a similar sort of 15 Committee. 16 Q: And could you tell me how many First 17 Nation members were on this Committee? 18 A: As far as I know there were none. 19 Q: I see. Would it be fair to say that 20 this was a Committee that was intended to manage First 21 Nations individuals? 22 A: It was -- it was set up in response 23 to a number of previous events where First Nations had 24 actually blockaded roads in this province, including 25 provincial highways and that's why it got its name as the

26

1 Blockade Committee. 2 Q: I see. And how many of these 3 blockades had occurred in your -- during your term? 4 A: I can only recall of a couple. 5 Q: Yes, I see. And did anybody ever try 6 to understand what was the underlying concern? 7 Why was it that these First Nations people 8 found it necessary to start blockading? 9 A: Yes. In -- in each of those 10 situations discussions and negotiations took place and 11 commitments and undertakings were made to resolve the 12 issues to the satisfaction of the First Nations. 13 Q: And is it fair to say that there's -- 14 perhaps you can tell me your experience. 15 In dealing with First Nations was it your 16 experience that they -- that, by and large, the 17 membership had the view that there was some ownership 18 entitlement to the lands other than reserve lands? 19 A: I'm not sure that they felt that way 20 with respect to ownership of the lands, but they 21 certainly felt that they had rights with respect to 22 hunting and fishing. 23 Q: And all of this was outside the -- 24 the reserve? 25 A: Yes.

27

1 Q: And was there a view of your 2 department, during your term, with respect to the First 3 Nations considering and wanting to assert those rights? 4 A: A review of...? 5 Q: Was there a view? Did your 6 department have a view on the -- on -- on the positions 7 of the First Nations groups about their rights to hunt 8 and fish? 9 A: Yes, we -- we had a view and our view 10 -- our view was that they had both Aboriginal and treaty 11 rights to hunt and fish. 12 Q: Now, sir, there were some comparisons 13 that were -- that you -- you were asked to draw with 14 respect to the occupation at Serpent Mounds and that at 15 Ipperwash. 16 With Serpent Mounds the park was closed, 17 wasn't it, at the time? 18 Sorry, with Serpent Mounds the park was 19 open at the time of the -- the blockade? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: Am I correct? 22 A: That's correct. 23 Q: And with Ipperwash the Park was 24 closed? 25 A: That's correct.

28

1 Q: And at Serpent Mounds there was a 2 need to evacuate people because the park was open and 3 there was a blockade? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: And at Ipperwash there was no need to 6 evacuate anyone because the Park was closed? 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: And at Serpent Mounds there was a 9 need to find somebody to refund park visitors and -- and 10 there was this raincheck process? 11 A: Correct. 12 Q: And it was not necessary at 13 Ipperwash? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: So the department was open where the 16 -- where your department had to go through the processes 17 that I just mentioned; the police weren't involved? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Do you know whether or not the police 20 brought in the TRU team? 21 A: To the best of my knowledge, that 22 didn't happen. 23 Q: Do you know if they brought in the 24 ERT team? 25 A: No.

29

1 Q: But over at Ipperwash both teams were 2 brought in? 3 A: Apparently. 4 Q: Yeah. And is it fair to say that 5 over at Serpent Mounds the concerns that your department 6 would have had would be for the campers, correct? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And for your staff? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And for your assets? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And over at Ipperwash there were no 13 campers at that time? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And your staff was being reassigned? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: So it was really a matter of the 18 assets which was the concern? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: And as far as the assets were 21 concerned the main idea was to ensure that the pipes 22 didn't freeze? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: And you had lots of time to worry 25 about that?

30

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: So, then where there are the campers 3 and your staff and the assets, the guys with the guns, 4 the ERT and the TRU teams were not brought in. On the 5 other hand, where it was just a question of the assets 6 the TRU team and ERT were brought in; and that is a fact, 7 correct? 8 A: Could -- could you -- could you just 9 run that by me again? 10 Q: I will. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm having a 12 hard time following you now. I'm having a hard time with 13 these questions. 14 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, the Witness 15 indicated that he wanted me to repeat, so I will repeat. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I'm 17 not sure if repeating is going to help. 18 MR. WALTER MYRKA: The concern that I 19 have and -- and it may make the question somewhat unfair, 20 is simply this: I understood the Witness to say that he 21 didn't know whether the TRU Team or the ERT Team were 22 brought in at Serpent Mounds. 23 And if that's what the Witness said that 24 was my understanding that the question that Mr. Ross is 25 putting to the Witness assumes that those teams were, in

31

1 fact, not brought in at Serpent Mounds. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 3 if that's -- do you have any difficulty with this 4 question, Mr. Worme. I'm not -- 5 MR. DONALD WORME: I think it would be 6 fair if -- if Mr. Ross perhaps put it directly to the 7 Witness as to whether or not he understood the use of 8 these teams in previous instances and perhaps that might 9 ally -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 11 that his answers are going to be helpful. He didn't have 12 anything to do with the decision to bring in the TRU Team 13 or the ERT Team. So I'm not just sure what help his 14 answers are going to be to me. 15 MR. DONALD WORME: And -- and I agree 16 with that position, Mr. Commissioner I -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I just don't 18 know how that's going to be helpful in any way at this 19 time. Are you with us, Mr. Ross? Can you hear our 20 bantering. I'm not sure how this witness' answer to 21 those questions are helpful. 22 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I heard quite clearly, 23 Mr. Commissioner, and I will just leave that alone. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 25 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I think the record

32

1 will speak for itself. We know what happened. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 3 Yes, we do. Well, we know what we've heard so far but 4 this witness doesn't have any evidence to help us as far 5 as I can see on that point. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I forgot to 10 ask you before you began, by the way, how long you 11 estimated you might be because you weren't here last 12 week. So I really would just like a rough idea. 13 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Perhaps maximum ten 14 (10) minutes from now. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 16 That's fine. That you, Mr. Ross. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 19 Q: So, Mr. Vrancart, between the 4th and 20 the 6th of September, 1995 I take it that, from your 21 department's perspective when you were there, the 22 situation that existed at Ipperwash had no urgency to it 23 and was something that, with time, you were hoping would 24 resolve itself? 25 A: Yes.

33

1 Q: There was some method of working 2 through of this, whether it's going to be court 3 injunctions, but there was going to be a process that was 4 going to be put in place which would move this along as - 5 - towards the resolution route? 6 A: That was my view, yes. 7 Q: And that was your view after the 8 meetings which was the early meeting on the 6th, the 9 cabinet meeting and the third meeting on the 6th around - 10 - around September 1995? 11 A: Yes. I continued to maintain that 12 view. 13 Q: And that was your view up until when 14 you left your office that day? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: But by the next morning you heard 17 that Dudley George had been shot; that someone had been 18 shot? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Yeah. Would it be fair to say that 21 the circumstances which would have led to the shooting, 22 even just -- even if nobody was hurt, just the firing of 23 guns, would that have been a substantial departure from 24 what you had anticipated at the end of business on the 25 6th of September.

34

1 A: Oh, yes, I was shocked. 2 Q: Sure. But as far as government is 3 concerned, government was not directing the police? 4 A: Correct. 5 Q: And you -- you can say that because 6 not only was your department involved, also the Attorney 7 General's department, the Solicitor General's department 8 and the representatives from the Premier's office at 9 those meetings? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Okay. So then as far as whatever 12 happened out in the field, it is something that the 13 police, in full, has got to respond to, as opposed to 14 your department? 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Again, I'm 16 not sure that that's a question -- 17 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, it is -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- for this 19 Witness. 20 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: -- Mr. Commissioner, 21 the broad work is that this individual -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He can't say 23 who answers. All he can say is what he -- what he can 24 do. 25 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Okay, thank you very

35

1 much. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think we 3 know where you're going. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: So from your perspective of the -- 7 from the depar -- from your department's perspective, 8 they would have had no direction as far as the police 9 action was concerned? 10 A: Correct. 11 Q: Now, Mr. Vrancart, one of the issues 12 that came up in direct testimony was the fact that the 13 group who occupied the range and then the barracks and 14 later the Park, did so without the support of the Chief 15 and council at Kettle Point? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: It also came up in your responses to 18 the examination of Ms. Anna Perschy that the -- there -- 19 there was no support from the Chief and Council. 20 A: It came -- it came up -- 21 Q: In examination by Ms. Anna Perschy. 22 A: Oh, yes. 23 Q: Would it have made any difference if 24 there was the support of Chief and Council? 25

36

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Again, Mr. 4 Ross, before you answer it, I'm having difficulty 5 understanding what you mean. Would what have made any 6 difference? 7 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Would it 9 have made any difference, I'm not sure what -- 10 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Mr. Commissioner, the 11 point is they're claiming that there was a trespass. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 13 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: There was a trespass. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 15 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Yes, Mr. Commissioner. 16 The evidence is that they considered it a trespass -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 18 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: -- to occupy the Park. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 20 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: And one of the 21 rationales is that there was no approval of Chief and 22 Council. And I'm just asking him if it's his view -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Would the 24 trespass issue have been any different if there had 25 been --

37

1 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Yes -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, that - 3 - that's a much more specific question. 4 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, I -- I -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I don't 6 think -- 7 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you -- thank 8 you, for the wording, Mr. Commissioner. I'll adopt it. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 12 Q: In your view, Mr. Vrancart, would the 13 trespass issue have been any different whether or not 14 there was the blessing of Chief and Council? 15 A: Probably not. 16 Q: I see. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: Mr. Vrancart, finally, having worked 21 in the Ministry of Natural Resources for a substantial 22 period of time -- 23 A: I worked there for twenty-three (23) 24 years. 25 Q: Yes. And having understood the

38

1 interrelationship between the Ministry of Natural 2 Resources and the First Nations, and now if you stand 3 back and look at it as an outsider would you be of the 4 view that a better co-management relationship between the 5 Ministry and the First Nations with respect to the 6 natural resources of the Province could be helpful? 7 A: Yes, I would think it would be 8 helpful. 9 Q: Thank you very much. Those are my 10 questions. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 12 Mr. Ross. 13 I think Mr. Horton or Mr. Horner...? 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 18 morning. I would -- could I ask you again to give me 19 some estimate of how long you might be? 20 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: I estimated about a 21 half an hour, I think. I think it will probably be in 22 that neighbourhood -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That -- for 24 both of the interests that you're representing at this 25 moment?

39

1 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: Yes 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 3 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: Yes. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 5 6 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MATTHEW HORNER: 7 Q: Good morning, Mr. Vrancart. 8 A: Good morning. 9 Q: My name is Matthew Horner and I 10 represent the Chiefs of Ontario, and this morning I'm 11 also acting as agent for the Kettle and Stony Point Band. 12 Mr. Vrancart in your -- just -- in your 13 testimony with Mr. Ross just -- just now, you -- you 14 mentioned that the Ministry of Natural Resources is a -- 15 one of their -- the components of their -- of their work 16 is the conservation area, the area of conservation? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And in pursuing that part of their 19 mandate, the Ministry of Natural Resources has occasion 20 to have many interactions with First Nation peoples and 21 the concept of Aboriginal rights? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And as deputy minister, you would 24 have been made aware of such issues as they arose? 25 A: Not all of them. Probably the -- the

40

1 ones that field staff felt were likely to become issues. 2 Q: And it is -- is it fair to say that - 3 - that conflict between the Ministry of Natural Resources 4 and First Nation peoples occurred quite frequently? 5 A: Certainly from time to time, yes. 6 Q: And you would have been made aware of 7 many of those conflicts? 8 A: Once again, those that might have 9 become issues. 10 Q: Mr. Vrancart, in your -- in working 11 for the Ministry did you have occasion to become familiar 12 with the -- the organization known as the Ontario 13 Federation of Anglers and Hunters? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And did these organizations make -- 16 did this organization make representations on a regular 17 basis to Government on MNR issues? 18 A: Yes, they did. 19 Q: And this generally involved 20 conservation issues -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- relating to hunting and fishing? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And would they make submission -- and 25 they made submissions relating to Aboriginal rights

41

1 issues? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And what position did this 4 organization in particular adopt with respect to 5 Aboriginal rights? 6 A: I can't recall what their precise 7 position was, but generally my recollection is that they 8 -- they would take -- take the view that -- that wherever 9 -- wherever possible that -- that resource, the fishing 10 and hunting resource was a resource that should be made 11 available to all of the people of Ontario. 12 Q: Would it be fair to characterize 13 their position as being one that did not view Aboriginal 14 peoples as having special rights? 15 A: I think that's fair. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: In your earlier testimony you talked 20 about the spring of 1995, as Deputy Minister, preparing 21 for a change in government in the lead-up to the June 22 1995 provincial general election? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And in so doing you would have 25 followed the -- the platforms of the various political

42

1 parties? 2 A: Yes, we did. 3 Q: And in particular, you as Deputy 4 Minister of Natural Resources would have followed and 5 examined the -- the policies that would have impacted the 6 work of the -- of MNR? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: In examining these policies did you 9 observe the Conservative Government adopting positions 10 that were consistent with the views of the Ontario 11 Federation of Anglers and Hunters? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Again, I'm 13 not sure that that's a question that this Witness is 14 qualified to answer or is... 15 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: He was -- this 16 Witness was -- has testified that he was following the 17 political campaign -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It -- 19 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: -- and he -- he was 20 aware of diff -- various issues that -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 22 asking him for conclusions, as it were. No, I think you 23 can ask him what he observed or what he -- I mean you're 24 asking really -- 25 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: All right.

43

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 2 really asking him for political opinions. That's his -- 3 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: Well, I'm not asking 4 him for his political opinion -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, but 6 you're asking him to analyse political positions, I 7 think. 8 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: The... 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you ask 13 him what the position was and then it's for us to draw 14 the conclusions, that's what I mean. 15 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: Yes, I understand. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what 17 I mean. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. MATTHEW HORNER: 20 Q: Mr. Vrancart, did you, in examining 21 the -- the policies of the various parties and examining 22 the policies of -- of the Conservative Party of Ontario, 23 did you observe that that Party's position with respect 24 to hunting and fishing and Aboriginal rights was one that 25 espoused a view of no special rights?

44

1 A: I don't recall a specific focus of 2 our review of the various political party platforms was 3 to make a determination of the extent to which we might 4 have to cut our various programs. 5 But I don't recall, you know, making an 6 observation about any of the political parties' views 7 with respect to Aboriginal hunting and fishing rights. 8 Q: And in observing the political 9 campaign as you testified you did, do you recall noting 10 that a particular emphasis was being placed by the 11 Conservative party on attracting this -- this 12 constituency represented by the Ontario Federation of 13 Anglers and Hunters? 14 A: I believe -- I believe, that yes, 15 they -- that they saw the hunters and fishers of this 16 Province as -- as -- as potential votes as I'm sure did 17 the other two (2) parties. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I hope 22 you're not going to go much farther down the road of 23 political campaigns and so on, because I don't think it's 24 really -- I mean, as far as you've gone has been fine but 25 I really don't think you should go much farther.

45

1 Certainly not with this Witness again. A 2 Deputy Minister at the time. It's suppose to be not 3 political and so on but I mean, you can ask him what he 4 knows and what he saw and what he heard and that's what 5 you've been asking him so far. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. MATTHEW HORNER: 8 Q: The -- once the -- the election 9 occurred and the new Government was elected, was the new 10 Government's position with respect to Aboriginal rights 11 made apparent to you in your briefings with you, with the 12 Minister? 13 A: No, it wasn't. 14 Q: Did you receive any briefings 15 regarding the new Government's policies towards non- 16 Aboriginal sport hunters and fishermen? 17 A: Yes. There was -- there was some -- 18 some clear direction with respect to the Fish and 19 Wildlife program that was -- that came from their --- 20 from their election platform. 21 Q: And would those policies have -- in 22 reviewing those policies with the new Minister, did you - 23 - did they take into account the concept of Aboriginal 24 rights? 25 A: I -- I'm sure, you know, during the

46

1 briefing of -- of the a new Minister on the Fish and 2 Wildlife program we would have brought his attention to 3 issues in the Province surrounding Aboriginal hunting and 4 fishing. 5 Q: Did the new Government, and -- and 6 your minister in particular who you were briefing, 7 express any interest in learning from you, about how the 8 Ministry dealt with issues affecting First Nation 9 peoples? 10 A: I -- I know that -- that during the 11 briefing we would have made it clear to the new minister 12 that our working relationship at the grass roots level 13 with First Nations was -- was very good and that in most 14 cases we were able to, and did, resolve issues on a daily 15 basis working out the issues with -- with First Nations 16 people. 17 However, sometimes these issues got up 18 into the political levels of both the First Nations and 19 the Government and that our ability to resolve issues at 20 that level did not seem to be quite as good. 21 Q: So, would you have briefed the 22 minister that -- that these issues were a delicate issue 23 to be dealt with? 24 A: The -- the briefing was that yes, 25 these were delicate issues but, by and far, the largest

47

1 majority of them get resolved on a day to day basis at 2 the local level and if we can keep them at the local 3 level, and not allow them to move up into the political 4 side of either the First nations or the Government, many 5 of these issues would be resolved. 6 Q: Did you raise the issue of the 7 interim enforcement policy with the Minister? 8 A: We would have briefed the Minister on 9 the interim enforcement policy and how it worked, yes. 10 Q: And was that a policy that the 11 Minister was -- did the Minister express any opinions on 12 that policy? 13 A: My recollection was that it was 14 presented to him for his information. I don't recall 15 that he had a response to it. 16 Q: Now, turning to the events 17 surrounding September 4th, 5th and 6th. You've stated in 18 your evidence that from the outset your advice to the 19 Minister was to stay out of the spotlight on this issue? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And I took from your evidence that 22 this was a -- a political calculation on your part; that 23 this would not be a good issue for the Minister to be 24 seen as leading? 25 A: At a small 'p' political, yes. A

48

1 small 'p' political, yes. 2 Q: Small 'p' political. 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: It would -- it could affect his 5 ability to work in other areas? 6 A: Correct. 7 Q: And when you say, "small 'p' 8 political," these decisions on communication, on whether 9 to -- to take the lead on an issue or not, are generally 10 political decisions; correct? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: They're about messaging? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And did you foresee that the 15 Minister's involvement in this situation could 16 potentially highlight tensions between the Ministry and 17 the First Nations peoples? 18 A: It possibly could, yes. 19 Q: It could upset that delicate balance 20 that you spoke of with the Minister? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And so for that reason, you didn't 23 want the Minister to be seen at the centre of this 24 conflict? 25 A: It would be preferable that he

49

1 wouldn't be. 2 Q: You were concerned that it could 3 highlight tensions that already existed between the 4 Ministry and the First Nations peoples? 5 A: I don't think I analysed it to the 6 extent that I would have concluded that this possibly 7 could result in a highlighting of any tensions that 8 existed. 9 It was just my general sense that it would 10 be better for him not to involve himself and -- and to 11 potentially heighten any issues that might exist out 12 there. 13 Q: But ultimately there was a decision 14 made that the Minister of Natural Resources would take 15 the lead on this issue? 16 A: For a part of the issue, yes. 17 Q: And was it your understanding that 18 this -- that the Minister taking the lead on this issue 19 was a position supported by the Premier's 20 representatives? 21 A: Yes, that's my understanding. 22 Q: And -- and that is why the Minister 23 agreed to take the lead on this? 24 A: That's right. 25

50

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: And given that -- a moment's 4 indulgence. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: And so the decision was made by the 9 Government to be seen to be taking a strong position 10 against the occupiers by putting the Minister of Natural 11 Resources in front of the issue? 12 A: I think the decision was made by the 13 Government to have the Minister of Natural Resources as 14 its spokesperson at that point in time. I don't think it 15 was necessarily a decision to make a forceful showing, if 16 that's your question. 17 Q: You made the decision. You were of 18 the opinion that the OPP and not the Minister of Natural 19 Resources should take the lead on this issue; is that 20 correct? 21 A: That was -- that was my view, yes. 22 Q: And your view was that that would be 23 a preferable approach because it would minimize the -- 24 the presence of the Government and the Ministry in what 25 could be a conflictual situation?

51

1 A: Well, it was that together with my 2 assessment that this was beyond the capacity of the 3 Ministry of Natural Resources to manage. 4 Q: And yet the Premier's office 5 ultimately took the view that a government minister 6 should take the lead on this? 7 A: Should be the spokesperson for a 8 period of time. 9 Q: Thank you, Mr. Vrancart, those are 10 all my questions. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 12 Thank you very much. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 17 morning, Mr. Roy. 18 MR. JULIAN ROY: Good morning, Mr. 19 Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 21 estimate was three-quarters (3/4's) of an hour, is that 22 still reasonably accurate? 23 MR. JULIAN ROY: Thereabouts. 24 Thereabouts. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.

52

1 MR. JULIAN ROY: I don't think I would be 2 finished before our ordinary break -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, let's 4 start and see where we go. 5 MR. JULIAN ROY: I'm happy to start. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 7 MR. JULIAN ROY: Thank you. 8 9 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 10 Q: Good --good morning, Mr. Vrancart. 11 A: Good morning. 12 Q: My name is Julian Roy and I'm one (1) 13 of the counsel for Aboriginal Legal Services Toronto. 14 And I want to focus what time I have on -- on issues 15 pertaining to possible recommendations that might flow 16 out of this Inquiry. 17 You understand, of course, that that's 18 part of Commissioner Linden's mandate, is to consider 19 possible recommendations? 20 A: Yes, I do. 21 Q: Okay. Now, I take it you would be 22 generally aware, from your civil service experience, your 23 considerable experience, that it's not uncommon for there 24 to be sort of a -- a debriefing session following an 25 incident such as this, among Ministry officials, correct?

53

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And your expectation would be that, 3 after the Ipperwash incident, there would be various 4 debriefing sessions that would go on among the various 5 ministries that would be involved, correct? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: And it was your expectation and 8 understanding that the Ministry of Natural Resources also 9 had a debriefing type of process, correct? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: It wouldn't surprise you that that 12 occurred? 13 A: No, not at all. 14 Q: No. And it won't surprise you then 15 that we've heard evidence that there was at least two (2) 16 debriefing sessions and then subsequently a report that 17 came out of that. 18 Were you aware of those things? 19 A: I'm not sure what you're specifically 20 referring to. 21 Q: All right. I'm not going to take you 22 to the documents because I have some -- some questions of 23 a more general nature that don't require us to go there. 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: I take it that the point of -- of the

54

1 debriefing process that -- that we're discussing is so 2 that individual experience or individual lessons learned 3 at the ground level get transmitted within the 4 organization as a whole, correct? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And you would agree that that's -- 7 that's critical for that type of process to occur within 8 an organization, correct? 9 A: Yes, yes. 10 Q: And an organization such as the 11 Ministry is not going to want to just go through the 12 motions when they do a debriefing, they're going to want 13 to take it seriously, correct? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: And given that the outcome of a 16 debriefing process could be things such as policy change 17 in terms of how a ministry might deal with a situation 18 like this, that that type of policy direction would come 19 from your level or at the ADM level? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: We can't really expect the Mr. 22 Kobayashi's of the world to draft new policies on how we 23 deal with incidents throughout the province, can we? 24 A: No. 25 Q: No. Now, you've already given

55

1 evidence that the OPP, or at least you understood that 2 the OPP was the lead government agency in terms of 3 dealing with the occupation, correct? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And the OPP -- or the MNR rather, had 6 more of a supporting function; is that correct? 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: Now I'm wondering, we -- we've heard 9 some evidence that Chief Superintendent Coles raised an 10 issue regarding information flow out of the OPP command 11 center and up through the MNR chain of command. All 12 right? 13 Did he raise a concern about that? I'm 14 just advising you that. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: All right. And were you aware of 17 this evidence at all before giving your evidence at this 18 Inquiry? 19 A: No. I -- I'd never heard that as a - 20 - expressed as a concern. 21 Q: All right. Now just -- just to 22 elaborate on -- on it a little bit. The part -- the 23 concern that Chief Superintendent Coles raised was that 24 police information regarding police operational matters 25 was being transmitted up through MNR bureaucracy to

56

1 senior levels of the MNR bureaucracy? 2 A: Okay. 3 Q: All right. And I take it, given your 4 answer just before, that you were never made aware that 5 Chief Superintendent Coles ever expressed a concern such 6 as that? 7 A: I didn't know that he had expressed 8 that concern. 9 Q: Okay. Were you aware that anybody 10 else within the OPP or the Solicitor General had raised 11 that concern? 12 A: Yes. My recollection is that Ron 13 Fox, at one of the meetings that I attended at the 14 Solicitor General's office, had expressed a concern with 15 respect to MNR, but my interpretation of it at the time 16 was that the concern was that, at these meetings, MNR 17 seemed to know about what was going on in the Park before 18 he did. 19 Q: I see. So it wasn't a matter of -- 20 of information that the MNR, Mr. Kobayashi being briefed 21 at the command center and that information flowing 22 perhaps too quickly up the MNR bureaucracy? 23 A: I think that's what the issue was, 24 yes. 25 Q: All right. So was it not your

57

1 understanding, then, that the concern about information 2 flow arose from a concern about MNR staff learning things 3 from the OPP, as opposed to learning things on their own? 4 A: I didn't understand that to be the 5 issue. I thought -- the issue in my mind was that the 6 chain of command for the OPP was quite lengthy and by the 7 time messages moved up that chain of command, the much 8 shorter chain of command that the Ministry of Natural 9 Resources had, which was from Les Kobayashi to Peter 10 Allen, my Executive Assistant to me, that we had 11 information available to us at these meetings that was 12 not available to Mr. Fox. 13 Q: So as you understood the concern, it 14 was more about the length of the chain of command rather 15 than the nature of the information? 16 A: That was my understanding, yes. 17 Q: So you were not sensitive to the 18 notion that there may be sensitivity surrounding 19 operational information in terms of how far it should be 20 transmitted from the command center? 21 A: No. That was -- that was never 22 brought to my attention. 23 Q: All right. Now, if a senior OPP 24 officer raised a concern about sensitivity surrounding 25 information leaving the command center, you would regard

58

1 that as something that was significant for the MNR? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And that's because the OPP, in a 4 situation such as an occupation or protest, were going to 5 have to work very closely with the OPP, correct? 6 A: They were going to have to work very 7 closely with the Ministry of Natural Resources. 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And you don't want both agencies, 11 sort of, tripping over one another for -- 12 A: Precisely. 13 Q: -- information, correct? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: I'm just wondering -- just a little 16 bit of a digression, did you -- do you recall being 17 briefed by Mr. Allen or anybody else from the MNR 18 regarding the presence or potential presence of automatic 19 gunfire within the Park, prior to the shooting of Mr. 20 George? 21 A: No. I was -- I -- I was not -- I was 22 not briefed on that, although, subsequently, it -- it 23 came to my attention that Peter Sturdy had reported that 24 he had been told by the OPP that there had been gunfire 25 in the Park.

59

1 Q: All right. Now I want to focus on -- 2 I want to make sure, in terms of your evidence, that we 3 focus on prior to the -- the shooting of Mr. George. 4 Were you ever part of a briefing where 5 Minister Hodgson or any of Minister Hodgson's staff were 6 briefed on the presence of automatic gunfire in the Park? 7 Again, focussing prior to the shooting? 8 A: Yeah, I can't recall. 9 Q: And -- and you would expect that that 10 would be something given the nature of that type of 11 information, that you might recall something like that? 12 A: I think so. 13 Q: So, if Minister Hodgson or his staff 14 were briefed on the presence of automatic gunfire prior 15 to the shooting, that didn't come through the avenue of 16 the Deputy Minster, did it? 17 A: I can't say for sure, but I don't 18 recall that. 19 Q: Thank you. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: Now, I want to get back to the -- to 24 -- I want to end the digression and get back to -- to the 25 recommendation issue. And in particular, assuming that

60

1 the concern raised by Chief Superintendent Coles about 2 the sensitivity in information and how far up it should 3 travel the chain of command, assuming that that concern 4 is a valid one, you would agree with me that that's 5 something that might affect how the MNR might approach 6 contingency planning concerning an occupation or protest? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And in particular, it might affect 9 things such as reporting relationships involving MNR 10 staff? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And that would be something that 13 would have to be dealt with at the ADM level or at the 14 deputy Minister level, correct? 15 A: Yes, I would think so. 16 Q: Now, Mr. Sturdy has already testified 17 that he doesn't recall any changes in training or policy 18 or contingency planning that would address sensitivities 19 regarding OPP operational information following the 20 Ipperwash incident. 21 Is that consistent with your recollection? 22 A: Yes. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

61

1 Q: Without trying to be presumptuous, 2 assuming that -- that Commissioner Linden might be 3 concerned about that issue, I want to try and pick your 4 brain a little bit about how the MNR might approach 5 contingency planning in -- in reporting relationships in 6 a way that might avoid, or might allow the OPP to 7 exclusively control police operational information as it 8 flows out of the command centre. 9 I want to try and pick your brain as to 10 how we might achieve that. 11 I'm wondering if you might have any -- I 12 hate to put you on the spot, but I'm wondering if you 13 might have any views on how that might be done? 14 A: Well, I think it is a good point and 15 -- and although I'm sure that, you know, the debriefings 16 that you referred to would have identified that as an 17 issue. The -- the -- this type of an event is so rare 18 that the likelihood of it happening again is -- is fairly 19 minimal. 20 So, if the issue has not been addressed up 21 until now, it's probably for that reason. 22 Q: Right, can I just -- 23 A: Neverthe -- 24 Q: Can I just stop you and ask you -- 25 A: Yes.

62

1 Q: -- one (1) thing. I can accept from 2 you that these types of incidents are rare, but you'd 3 agree with me the stakes are very high when they do 4 happen -- 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: -- correct? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And we want to make sure that we do 9 it right when it does happen, correct? 10 A: Yes, I have no problem with the 11 question or with the premise of the question. 12 Q: All right. Could you continue with 13 your answer then, please? 14 A: I think there would certainly be room 15 for improvement. And I think the appropriate -- the 16 appropriate was to -- to approach this would be for the 17 OPP to develop guidelines that could be shared with 18 Ministries such as the Ministry of Natural Resources 19 regarding how communications are to flow in such 20 incidents as well as guidelines with respect to what the 21 chain or command is or should be and who should be 22 providing leadership at various levels with respect to 23 these communications. 24 Q: So as I -- if I can understand your 25 evidence, is what you're saying, that really it's the --

63

1 the onus is on the OPP because they are the ones that we 2 would expect have the expertise on what information 3 should flow up and what should remain within the command 4 centre? 5 A: That would be my view, yes. 6 Q: All right. So -- and -- and as far 7 as you were concerned you would have been open to that 8 type of direction from the OPP, had you received it? 9 A: Would have been open to that kind of 10 direction and would have participated with them in 11 developing whatever procedures and protocols would be 12 necessary. 13 Q: All right. Now, we've talked about - 14 - a little bit about debriefing processes within your 15 ministry and generally within the Government. You're not 16 aware that there was any type of debriefing process that 17 would include the number of ministries that were involved 18 in this incident? 19 A: No, I'm not aware of one. 20 Q: Given what you and I have just been 21 discussing, would you agree with me that that type of 22 process might be important? 23 A: Yes. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

64

1 2 Q: I want to ask you some questions 3 about this expression, 'nerve center'. We've heard 4 reference to it in some of the documents? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And -- and I understand that you had 7 some involvement in the creation of the nerve centre? 8 A: I was invited to be a part of the 9 nerve centre, yes. It was not a term that I would have 10 selected. 11 Q: All right. I have copies of Exhibit 12 P-657, Mr. Commissioner, that I can provide to -- to you 13 and I've already provided one to -- to -- I think I've 14 already circulated them among Counsel, but I can provide 15 one to you and to the Witness if that's all right. 16 This is -- this is the -- the notes of 17 Julie Jai. These are the notes of Julie Jai regarding 18 the September 7th IMC meeting. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 MR. JULIAN ROY: Now, Mr. Vrancart, we've 23 heard -- we've heard evidence that you attended the 24 meeting of the Interministerial Committee on September 25 7th in the morning, in the mid morning, after the

65

1 shooting? 2 A: Yes, I attended for a short period of 3 time, is my recollection. 4 Q: All right. And we've also heard 5 evidence that Mr. Taman and Ms. Todres were there as 6 well? 7 A: My recollection is that Mr. Taman was 8 there. I'm not sure I recall whether Ms. -- Ms. Todres 9 was there. 10 Q: All right. And you do recall, 11 though, that there were numerous other professional civil 12 servants that were present at that meeting? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Including many from ONAS? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Now, was it your understanding that 17 up to -- up to the time of the shooting that it was the 18 Interministerial Committee that was primarily charged 19 with the function of coordinating the response of the 20 various ministries? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: And your understanding, of course, 23 was that the IMC included both professional civil 24 servants and also political staff from the various 25 ministries?

66

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And we've heard evidence, and I'm 3 wondering if you could confirm this for us, that at the 4 meeting of September 7th that you and Mr. Taman dictated 5 a major restructuring as to how this coordinating 6 function that the IMC had been performing, how that was 7 going to be -- how that was going to be done from 8 September 7th onwards? 9 A: Yes, basically, the message was that 10 -- that they were now to be in a support role and 11 supporting -- supporting the three (3) Deputy Ministers. 12 Q: Yes. And if you look at -- on -- on 13 the exhibit that I've provided you, Exhibit P-657, and 14 that's Inquiry Document Number 1011834, Mr. Commissioner. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 18 Q: "LT" is quoted, and we've heard that 19 that's Larry Taman -- is quoted as saying that: 20 "Has position Blockades Committee as 21 advisory?" 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And that's consistent with that -- 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: -- supportive role that you've just

67

1 discussed? 2 And there's a reference there to "nerve 3 centre?" 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Right next to your -- your initials: 6 "RV - Nerve centre to be established?" 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And it was your understanding that 9 this nerve centre was going to be taking over this 10 coordinating role that the IMC was -- had been pursuing 11 up to that point? 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: And if you look at -- at the second 14 page of the exhibit, about halfway down the page? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: There's another reference to "LT" and 17 then there's three (3) points underneath. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And the three (3) points are -- or -- 20 next to it, it says "goals", do you see that? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And the three (3) goals are: 23 "Accurate information flow, Number 1. 24 Number 2. Consistent messaging. 25 Number 3. Clear focus for decision

68

1 making." 2 Do you see that? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And those three (3) things were what 5 the nerve center was going to be accomplishing in the 6 aftermath to the incident, correct? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Now, we've heard evidence that that - 9 - this meeting that you attended happened quite early in 10 the day on September 7th. 11 Is that consistent with your recollection? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And we've heard evidence that -- that 14 there was a lot going on in terms of the demands on 15 Government to respond to what had happened? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And we take from the fact that one of 18 the first things that you do is engage in this 19 restructuring process and repositioning of the 20 Interministerial Committee that there was some urgency to 21 doing that? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And the urgency comes from the fact 24 that these three (3) goals that Mr. Taman is explaining, 25 that there was some difficulty in terms of the IMC

69

1 actually achieving those goals? 2 A: Partly, yes. 3 Q: Yeah. And that the nerve center was 4 -- was thought to be -- to have the potential to do a 5 better job at doing those three (3) things? 6 A: Partly, yes. 7 Q: Now, if you look at -- in addition to 8 changing -- repositioning the IMC, if you look at the 9 bottom of the first page of -- of Exhibit P-657. The 10 bottom sentence on that page: 11 "Blockade Committee will remain an 12 official center. Political staff input 13 will be through the command center." 14 Do you see that? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: So, in addition to repositioning the 17 IMC, one of the other things that happens is the 18 political staff is removed from the IMC, correct? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: And if you look at page -- at the top 21 of page 3 of the exhibit, there's further confirmation of 22 that on the second line: 23 "Blockades group to be public servants 24 only." 25 Do you see that?

70

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And then if you look at the next 3 line: 4 "DM's to manage the political 5 interface." 6 Do you see that? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And what that meant was that the 9 Deputy Minister, you, Mr. Taman and Ms. Todres, were 10 going to be dealing with interactions with politicians 11 and political staff -- 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: -- from then on forward, correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And that's not what had been 16 happening prior to you repositioning the IMC, correct? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: I want to ask you a little bit more 19 about the constitution of this nerve center. If you go 20 to page 2 of the document. If you look about two-thirds 21 (2/3's) of the way down under the three (3) points that 22 I'd taken to you earlier. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: It says: 25 "Nerve center for Elaine Todres office

71

1 with LT and RV." 2 That's you and Mr. Taman, correct? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And then it says, the next line: 5 "And ministers and PO." 6 Do you see that? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: So, in addition to the three (3) 9 Deputies, the responsible Ministers are going to be part 10 of the nerve center, correct? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And also PO is Premier's office, 13 correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And if you go back to page 1, about 16 halfway down the line, or halfway down the page, rather. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: There's again reference to Elaine 19 Todres is in charge of the nerve center. 20 A: Correct. 21 Q: And then if you skip a line and go -- 22 there's a reference to Ron Fox. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: "Ron Fox contact for operational 25 perspective."

72

1 Do you see that? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: So, you understood that Ron Fox was 4 going to be the person who would be communicating from 5 the command center to the nerve center, correct? 6 A: From the -- from the command center 7 to the nerve center or from -- 8 Q: Let me rephrase it. 9 A: Pardon me? 10 Q: Let me -- let me -- 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: -- rephrase it in terms of the 13 language in the actual exhibit. You see that operational 14 perspective? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: You understood that to mean the 17 perspective of the OPP on the ground, correct? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: So, you understood the reference to 20 Ron Fox, as you recall that meant that Ron Fox was going 21 to be handling the communications from the command 22 center, the OPP command center, to the nerve center, 23 correct? 24 A: I think I may have thought of it more 25 in terms of the flow of information going in the other

73

1 direction from the nerve center to the OPP. 2 Q: I see. So, you understood that the 3 nerve centre with the Ministers and the Deputy Ministers 4 and the Premier's office were going to be sending 5 information down to the OPP command centre? 6 A: I assumed that from the meetings of 7 the nerve centre, if there were instructions or 8 information to be passed on to the OPP, that the conduit 9 would be through Ron Fox. 10 Q: Okay. And in your mind at the time, 11 what kind of information was going to be passed down from 12 the Ministers and the Premier's office down to the OPP 13 command centre? 14 A: I can't recall precisely what kinds 15 of information would have flowed from -- from the nerve 16 centre down to the OPP at this point in time. 17 I think -- I think the concern, of course, 18 was that following the death of -- of Dudley George that 19 the issue be contained and -- and that it not become a 20 bigger issue than it already was. 21 Q: And that would require some direction 22 from the Ministers and the Premier's office down to the 23 command -- the command centre of the OPP, correct? 24 A: It possibly could, yes. 25 Q: And that issue was important enough

74

1 that -- that a measure was taken to actually appoint Ron 2 Fox to perform that function? 3 A: I'm not sure that it was -- was an 4 appointment as so much as an understanding that that was 5 the role that he would perform. 6 Q: All right. Let me move on a little 7 bit to -- to another area. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Should we 9 take a break now? 10 MR. JULIAN ROY: We can. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If we could 12 take a morning break now. 13 MR. JULIAN ROY: I'm in your hands. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, you're 15 going to be a few more minutes, I presume? 16 MR. JULIAN ROY: I am. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 18 think this would be a good morning break. 19 MR. JULIAN ROY: Thank you very much, Mr. 20 Commissioner. 21 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 22 for fifteen (15) minutes. 23 24 --- Upon recessing at 11:51 a.m. 25 --- Upon resuming at 12:06 p.m.

75

1 2 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 3 resumed. Please be seated. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Carry on. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 10 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Vrancart. I want 11 to ask you some questions about -- some more general 12 questions about the role of a deputy minister within the 13 civil service -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: -- and move on from there. Now, 16 would you agree with me that -- that part of a deputy 17 minister's traditional role is to act, sort of, as a 18 buffer between professional civil servants beneath him or 19 her and politicians and political staff on the other 20 side? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And that's -- quite often, it's 23 reflected in the actual geography of the way an office is 24 set up within a ministry, correct? 25 A: Yes.

76

1 Q: And we can take from that that this 2 separation or the deputy minister's role of maintaining 3 the separation, acting as a buffer, is a very significant 4 aspect of his or her duties, correct? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And you don't get to become a deputy 7 minister without having a lot of experience in dealing 8 with this buffering function that the DM is going to 9 have, correct? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: That's part of what prepares you to 12 act as the buffer, correct? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And it goes without saying that 15 people lower -- at lower levels of the civil service are 16 not going to be versed in that function of being a buffer 17 between politicians and civil servants, are they? 18 A: Not normally. 19 Q: Many -- most often, lower level civil 20 servants will have no contact with politicians, correct? 21 A: Generally that's true. 22 Q: So we can't really expect them to 23 have the experience to do that, correct? 24 A: Correct. 25

77

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: Now, in a case where there's a First 4 Nation occupation or protest, you've told us that those 5 are exceedingly rare in Ontario, correct? 6 A: I -- I don't think they are 7 necessarily exceedingly rare. What I was referring to is 8 one where there's a fatality, is exceedingly rare. 9 Q: All right. Well, they don't happen 10 every day; is that correct? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: And when they do happen they attract 13 a lot of attention from the surrounding community, 14 correct? 15 A: Yes, they do. 16 Q: And they attract a lot of attention 17 from the media, correct? 18 A: Usually, yes. 19 Q: And -- and what flows from both those 20 two (2) things is that quite often politicians and their 21 staff, whether it be the local MP or a ministry that's 22 involved, will also get an interest in the situation, 23 correct? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And in those circum -- it's in those

78

1 circumstances where there's a higher risk of -- of there 2 being political pressure on how a civil servant does 3 their job, correct? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And I'm going to suggest to you -- 6 I've taken you a little bit through these -- these two 7 (2) models of -- of handling or coordinating a 8 government's response to, in this case, the Ipperwash 9 incident, you have the IMC model on one (1) side and the 10 nerve centre model on the other side. 11 I'm going to suggest to you that the nerve 12 centre model, which is run by the Deputy Ministers, that 13 isolates political staff from ordinary civil servants, is 14 a better way of doing business than the IMC committee 15 model? 16 A: You would like me to comment on that? 17 Q: I'm going to suggest that to you and 18 I'm going to ask you for your response. 19 A: I -- I would -- in -- given this 20 situation I would agree with that, yes. 21 Q: Given what -- what we've just gone 22 through in terms of -- of how these types of incidents, 23 First Nations occupations and protests, are precisely the 24 types of incidents where the danger of political pressure 25 on civil servants is enhanced.

79

1 Isn't it better that -- that -- that that 2 model, the nerve centre model, is what we ought to be 3 looking at in dealing with these situations in the 4 future? 5 A: I guess my view on that would be 6 that, for the large majority of these types of issues, 7 they are quite capable of being managed through the 8 Interministerial model, but the Interministerial model 9 should not include political staff. 10 Q: I see. So whatever model we pick 11 what we should do is we should be very careful about 12 segregating political staff from ordinary civil servants, 13 correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And if we're going to have contact 16 between those two (2) groups we ought to have it go 17 through the Deputy Minister, correct? 18 A: I think that would be appropriate, 19 yes. 20 Q: Now, without being critical of you in 21 any way, you -- you've testified that you, as Deputy 22 Minister for the Ministry of Natural Resources, had very 23 little knowledge about the statement of political 24 relationship that the Rae government had -- had signed? 25 A: I was generally aware of it, but I

80

1 didn't know it in intimate detail. 2 Q: Yes. And again, I'm not being 3 critical of you for that. As a Deputy Minister for the 4 Ministry of Natural Resources you would have tremendous 5 responsibilities on your shoulders to manage that one (1) 6 portfolio, correct? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And you would have to have a very 9 breadth of knowledge to deal with that position, correct? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And it would be very difficult for 12 you, as a deputy minister, to do justice to the -- to 13 being a deputy minister for the MNR as well as for Native 14 Affairs, correct? 15 A: I don't know that I can agree with 16 that. 17 Q: All right. So you -- you feel that 18 you could have performed both functions? 19 A: The situation in the Ontario 20 Government today is precisely that. The Deputy Minister 21 of Natural Resources is also the Deputy Minister of ONAS. 22 Q: Yes, I understand that. 23 A: So it's possible. 24 Q: Okay. You take it as being possible 25 just because that's the way it's structured today,

81

1 correct? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Okay. And you -- do you have any 4 precise knowledge as to how that situation functions or 5 is that just an assumption that you made? 6 A: I don't have any precise knowledge. 7 The -- it's not hard to make that assumption; the 8 operational responsibilities with respect to ONAS are -- 9 are not that -- that wide ranging. 10 Q: I see. Now you've told us that, in 11 terms of what you heard from Mr. Taman at the Premier's 12 meeting, you heard him discussing issues surrounding the 13 injunction, correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And what he was talking about was the 16 legal technical aspects of -- of an injunction, correct? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And you don't really recall much else 19 in terms of what he was advancing at the Premier's 20 meeting? 21 A: I -- I know that -- with respect to 22 the injunction? 23 Q: Yeah. Well with respect to anything. 24 A: Well I -- the main message that I 25 recall Larry Taman advancing to the politicians was that

82

1 they needed to remember that there was a need to, and a 2 need to be seen to be not directing the operations of the 3 police. 4 And as far as the injunction was 5 concerned, he was of the view that an injunction was -- 6 was required -- he expressed a preference and I just 7 can't recall which of the two (2) types of injunctions 8 that were under discussion was his preference. 9 Q: All right. In terms of those two (2) 10 aspects of what you recall Mr. Taman advancing at the 11 meeting, Number 1, the not directing the police 12 operations and Number 2, the issue surrounding the 13 injunction, what you understood that he was doing is he 14 was advancing the perspective of the Attorney General 15 portfolio, correct? 16 A: Yes, correct. 17 Q: And what you don't recall him doing 18 was advancing the perspective of the Native Affairs' 19 portfolio. 20 A: No. I don't recall that. 21 Q: Did you know that he was the Deputy 22 Minister responsible for Native Affairs at this time? 23 A: Yes. Yes. 24 Q: I want to ask you a little about -- 25 about the issue of notes and -- and record keeping at

83

1 meetings such as the meetings that you've been giving 2 evidence about. And I recall your evidence is that you - 3 - you do not have notes of briefings that you may have 4 had with Mr. Hodgson, correct? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: You don't have notes of briefings you 7 may have received from Mr. Allen, correct? 8 A: That's correct. 9 Q: You don't have notes of the Premier's 10 meeting, correct? 11 A: Correct. 12 Q: Now one of the reasons why you told 13 us you didn't have notes at any of those meetings or 14 briefings was that it was your expectation that there 15 would be other people, assistants or secretaries that 16 would be present taking notes, correct? 17 A: Correct. 18 Q: For example, if you're getting a 19 briefing from an executive assistant, either the 20 executive assistant or the executive assistant's 21 secretary or assistant would be taking notes, correct? 22 A: Normally, if I was getting a briefing 23 from my executive assistant, it would -- it would be the 24 two (2) of us. 25 Q: Yes.

84

1 A: It would be verbal. 2 Q: Yes. 3 A: I would not keep notes. Presumably 4 my executive assistant would have notes that were the 5 basis of the briefing. 6 Q: All right. So the executive 7 assistant would come to the briefing with some notes of 8 some kind? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And then he would probably leave -- 11 he or she would leave the -- the meeting with action 12 items, correct? 13 A: Correct. 14 Q: So would there -- there would be some 15 -- while it not be a verbatim record of what happened, 16 there would be some paper that flows out of that 17 briefing, correct? 18 A: There may or may not be, depending on 19 -- on -- on the issue and how extensive the instructions 20 were. 21 Q: So if the issue was an issue that had 22 a lot of profile and had a lot of concern attached to it, 23 we would expect that would be a situation where there 24 would be more likely to be notes, correct? 25 A: If -- if -- if the instruction was

85

1 simple and straight forward and, you know, followed the 2 recommendations that -- that were being provided by -- by 3 the executive assistant, I'm -- I'm not sure that there 4 would be a record of that. 5 The -- but the next stop for the executive 6 assistant would be to go and make whatever was agreed 7 upon, happen. 8 Q: All right. And -- and we could 9 potentially follow the paper trail that would flow from 10 that, correct? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Now in terms of a -- we dealt -- that 13 deals with a briefing between -- from your executive 14 assistant to you. 15 In terms of a briefing of your minister, 16 it would be your expectation that there would be some 17 types of note taking that would occur in that context, 18 correct? 19 A: Yes, normally in that context the 20 Minister's executive assistant and the deputy Minister's 21 executive assistant would be in attendance, and they 22 would keep notes. 23 Q: All right. And you can't really 24 recall a situation where you attended and briefed a 25 minister where there wasn't somebody, such as the

86

1 executive assistant, taking notes of what was happening, 2 correct? 3 A: Oh there were times when the Minister 4 and I would -- would meet on our own. 5 Q: Yes. 6 A: And there would be nobody there to -- 7 to take -- to take notes. 8 Q: And what -- 9 A: But I don't recall -- I don't recall 10 that happening during the Ipperwash incident. 11 Q: All right. So to the extent that you 12 did brief the Minister during the relevant periods that 13 we've been talking about, it would be your expectation 14 that there would be notes that arise from those meetings? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Now, you would agree with me that 17 it's even more likely that there would be notes where you 18 have a meeting where there's a number of ministers and 19 their executive assistants, correct? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: In fact it would almost be automatic 22 that there would be notes in a situation like that, 23 correct? 24 A: You would think so, yes. 25 Q: And in terms of the Premier's dining

87

1 room meeting, are you able to identify for us the kinds 2 of people, perhaps by category or by name, who you would 3 expect, in your experience, would be taking notes of 4 those meetings? 5 A: I would have expected the minister's 6 executive assistants to -- to be keeping notes. 7 Q: All right. And I just can't recall, 8 this may be repetitive, was -- was your executive 9 assistant present at that meeting? 10 A: No. 11 Q: But your recollection was that Mr. 12 Taman's EA was present; correct? 13 A: I don't recall that. 14 Q: Okay. What about Ms. Todres? 15 A: And I don't recall that either. 16 Q: All right. And there were assistants 17 to the various ministers that were present, correct? 18 A: The Ministers' executive assistants, 19 I believe, were all available, all there. 20 Q: And there's a number of them, 21 correct? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: At least three (3), correct? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And amongst those three (3) we would

88

1 be certain that there would be notes that would be 2 prepared in connection with that meeting, correct? 3 A: I would have thought so, yes. 4 Q: Now, in terms of -- of -- we've dealt 5 with the taking of the notes. I want to ask you a little 6 bit about the retaining of the notes in circumstances 7 such as that. 8 It would be your expectation that -- that 9 notes that would be prepared in a meeting like that, you 10 wouldn't just throw them in the garbage the very next 11 day, would you? 12 A: I guess there are many different ways 13 that people take notes. I have seen people that, you 14 know, keep them on the back of piece of paper and shove 15 them into their -- inside of their coat pocket, others 16 who keep elaborate books and -- and -- and others that 17 just jot down notes on a pad and use it to -- to remind 18 themselves of actions to be taken and -- and then when 19 they're finished with -- with that material, it ends up 20 in the waste paper basket. 21 Q: All right. So you don't have any 22 recollection as to how -- in what format the notes were 23 being kept at that meeting? 24 A: No idea. 25 Q: Okay. If I can just look at my notes

89

1 for five (5) seconds, Mr. Commissioner, I think I'm 2 finished. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 4 Mr. Roy. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 7 Q: Let me ask you -- let me ask you 8 this: In a situation where there's an allegation of -- 9 of impropriety in connection with a meeting involving 10 ministers and deputy ministers, you would expect in those 11 circumstances that notes would be preserved, if they were 12 made? 13 A: An impropriety? 14 Q: Yes. 15 A: Could you give me an example of 16 what -- 17 Q: Well, for example, an impropriety 18 such as improper direction of -- of police in terms of 19 handling an incident. 20 If there was an allegation such as that 21 made, you would expect that notes would be retained, 22 correct? 23 A: If -- if the -- if the meeting 24 between the minister and the Deputy Minister was 25 specifically on that narrow issue, the -- and -- and if

90

1 the executive assistants were -- were in attendance they 2 -- they probably would have kept a note. Whether or not 3 it was retained or not I -- I don't know. 4 Q: All right. I think those are my 5 question. Thank you very much, Mr. Vrancart. 6 MR. JULIAN ROY: Thank you very much, 7 Mr. Commissioner. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 9 Do you have any questions, Mr. Myrka? 10 Yes. 11 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Commissioner, I 12 anticipate being half an hour or so. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 18 Q: Good morning, Mr. Vrancart. During 19 Mr. Roy's questioning of you you referred to the current 20 situation concerning the organization of ONAS and you 21 indicated that as you understand the current situation it 22 is that the Deputy Minister of MNR is also the Deputy of 23 ONAS? 24 A: That's correct. 25 Q: Okay. Was that ever the situation

91

1 while you were -- during your tenure at MNR or is it 2 something new? 3 A: Well, of course when -- when the 4 Deputy Minister is the Deputy of both MNR and ONAS that 5 means that the Minister is the Minister responsible for 6 MNR and the Minister responsible for ONAS. 7 My recollection is during the Bob Rae 8 government that Bud Wildman was the Minister of Natural 9 Resources and also the Minister responsible for ONAS and 10 -- but -- but back in that day the -- the senior person 11 that was responsible for ONAS was not a deputy minister, 12 it was somebody with another title that reported to -- to 13 the Minister. 14 Q: So, Mr. Vrancart, there was a short 15 period of time that you were Deputy Minister during the 16 Bob Rae government I take it ONAS never reported to you 17 at that time? 18 A: No, it did not. 19 Q: Okay. And in responding to questions 20 about this dual -- this dual portfolio in the sense of 21 either the Deputy or the Minister being one (1) and the 22 same, the Minister or Deputy of both the Ministries such 23 as MNR as well as ONAS, I understood you to say that the 24 operational requirements of ONAS were not far ranging and 25 that you therefore did not see this as a difficulty.

92

1 Is that correct? 2 A: Correct. 3 Q: Can you assist us? Can you explain 4 that a little further? 5 A: Well, ONAS is a very small component 6 of the Ontario Government. It is probably the size of a 7 small branch or a large section of the Government and I - 8 - I don't know what it's current staff would be, but it's 9 unlikely that it would have more than forty (40) or fifty 10 (50) staff in it all told. 11 And the -- the operational demands of -- 12 of an organizational unit of that size, particularly 13 where it's being managed by a person of the calibre or 14 status of an Assistant Deputy Minister -- 15 Q: Hmm hmm. 16 A: -- would be fairly minimal. Most of 17 the issues would be dealt with at the Assistant Deputy 18 Minister level and it would be the rare issue that would 19 -- would come to the Deputy Minister's desk. 20 Q: Okay. Now, Mr. Roy also took you to 21 the dining room meeting and you indicated in your 22 evidence that -- and you agreed with his suggestion that 23 Larry Taman the Deputy Attorney General in the statements 24 that he made was advancing the perspectives of the 25 Attorney General portfolio?

93

1 A: That's what I said. 2 Q: Okay. And did I understand you to 3 say that you did not recall him specifically advancing 4 anything that you would describe as the Native Affairs 5 portfolio? 6 A: It was hard to tell, of course, you 7 know, when he was speaking as the Deputy responsible for 8 the Attor -- you know, the Attorney General's ministry 9 versus -- versus ONAS but -- and in addition to that my - 10 - my recollection is that there, or their may have been 11 somebody there from ONAS who would have been capable of - 12 - of representing ONAS' interests, if required. 13 Q: Okay. Are you aware of anyone at 14 ONAS expressing the view or the sentiment or disagreeing 15 with the notion that politicians and government should 16 not direct police operational activities? 17 A: Anybody disagreeing with that? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: No. 20 Q: Okay. And that, indeed, is what Mr. 21 Taman was advocating at that meeting in the Premier's 22 dining room? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: Okay. And Mr. Taman was also 25 speaking to the issue of obtaining an injunction?

94

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And I take it your not aware of 3 anyone at -- at ONAS expressing the view or a view in 4 opposition to the obtaining of an injunction? 5 A: No. 6 Q: Okay. Now Mr. Roy also asked you 7 about the issue of sensitive police operational 8 information such as that which might be emanating on the 9 ground from the police command center. 10 And if I understand your evidence, you 11 were not familiar with the specific concerns voiced by 12 Chief Superintendent Coles? 13 A: No, I was not. 14 Q: Okay. And did anyone report to you, 15 that you can recall, on the meeting that -- that he had 16 with Les Kobayashi, for example, on September 7th or 17 thereabouts? 18 A: I don't -- I don't recall that. 19 Q: Okay. And would you agree, Mr. 20 Vrancart, with the suggestion that if police, such as the 21 OPP, were concerned about the information that was 22 passing to MNR staff who had been invited to the command 23 center to attend meetings there, that if there was such a 24 concern, the simplest way of dealing with it would be to 25 voice those concerns to the MNR representatives who were

95

1 there? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And do you have any reason to -- to 4 think that if MNR representatives such as Mr. Kobayashi 5 had been told about those concerns, that Mr. Kobayashi 6 would not have tried to address the -- the police 7 concerns in a way that everyone at the command center 8 would be content with? 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. Myrka, 10 you're -- you're asking a question or making a statement? 11 That was a very, very difficult question to follow. 12 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Okay. All right. 13 Well perhaps I'll just move on, Commissioner. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 17 Q: Mr. Ross, in his questions to you 18 earlier this morning, spoke of MNR's role at the police 19 command center once the -- the occupation had occurred. 20 Now I understood you to say that MNR was there in part 21 because they own the Park; is that fair? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Okay. And would you agree with me 24 that the Park was a significant public resource? 25 A: Yes.

96

1 Q: And it was there to be enjoyed by, 2 literally, thousands -- 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: -- of members of the public? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Okay. And you were concerned, once 7 the occupation occurred, about the safety of the 8 community? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And you were concerned about the 11 safety of your staff? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And indeed you were concerned about 14 the safety of OPP as well? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And one of the useful roles that 17 could be fulfilled by MNR staff would be to provide 18 assistance to the OPP, in a logistical sense; everything 19 from the provision of helicopters, if necessary? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: To the provision of food, that -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- sort of thing? And also 24 accommodation? 25 A: Yes.

97

1 Q: And that might also include operation 2 or, sorry, information about the local and geographic 3 features within Ipperwash Provincial Park that police 4 might need to know, if only to ensure their own safety, 5 is that -- 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: -- correct? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Okay. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Now, earlier in your evidence with 14 Mr. Worme and also, I think, with Mr. Downard, you 15 described that you were aware of the peaceful occupation 16 that occurred at Serpent Mounds Provincial Park on the 17 same Labour Day weekend as the occupation at Ipperwash? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. I just have some follow up 20 questions that perhaps you can assist us with concerning 21 Serpent Mounds. 22 Now, you described the -- the rain checks 23 that Minister Hodgson authorised for the day users of the 24 Park? 25 A: It was for the campers.

98

1 Q: For the campers, okay. So do I 2 understand correctly there are parts of the Park that are 3 side -- that are set aside for camping by members of the 4 public? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Okay. And as in Ipperwash, there 7 might also be day use areas as well? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Now, the burial mounds found at 10 Serpent Mounds, I understand that there are -- they are 11 thousands of years old. 12 Is -- is that your understanding or do you 13 know? 14 A: That's my understanding. 15 Q: Okay. Now, as far as you understood 16 the situation at Serpent Mounds Park, before the 17 occupation there, it was possible to operate a Provincial 18 Park at that site notwithstanding that within the same 19 Park there existed sacred burial sites, that is sacred to 20 the people of the Hiawatha First Nation? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: Okay. In other words, it was 23 possible to acknowledge the existence of burial grounds 24 and to protect them in accordance with the wishes of the 25 affected First Nation community without, at the same

99

1 time, having to curtail other activities in the Park? 2 A: That's correct. 3 Q: Okay. And as far as you were aware, 4 the public was welcome to visit the Park and to enjoy 5 it's recreational and other opportunities, as well as to 6 visit the burial sites? 7 A: I have to tell you that I'm not 8 familiar enough with -- with that Park and how that Park 9 interpreted the -- the burial sites. 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: But it's quite conceivable that -- 12 that the public would have been welcomed, should the 13 First Nations have agreed to that. 14 Q: Hmm hmm. And your understanding is 15 that the occupation that occurred there on the Labour Day 16 weekend, that was about harvesting rights? 17 It had nothing to do with the burial 18 mounds at the Park? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Okay. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: Now, in your evidence earlier, you 25 talked about the -- what happens and what procedure is to

100

1 be adopted, if and when human remains are found in a 2 Provincial Park? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And you referred, if I recall 5 correctly, to the Cemeteries Act and to the procedure 6 that that legislation provides. 7 Do you recall that? 8 A: No, I don't. 9 Q: Okay. All right. Are you familiar 10 at all with the details of how the process works under 11 that legislation? 12 A: I was. I can't recall it in detail 13 now. 14 Q: Okay. And do you recall that part of 15 that process would include steps to secure the location 16 in some way, so that the remains were protected? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And that the location of the remains 19 could be properly recorded? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Okay. And that the remains would not 22 be disturbed, pending an appropriate investigation? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Okay. And that an investigation 25 might include archeological enquires that might assist in

101

1 determining whether the remains represented a First 2 Nations burial site? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Okay. And do you also understand the 5 procedure would involve consultation with local First 6 Nations in the area? 7 A: The procedure under the Cemeteries 8 Act or -- 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: I -- I don't recall whether that is 11 part of the procedure under the Cemeteries Act or not. 12 Q: Okay. And do you know if that 13 happened regardless of whether it was under the 14 Cemeteries Act? 15 A: It would have happened as a matter of 16 course by the Park Superintendent. The Park 17 Superintendent generally would not deal with a situation 18 like that without having communications with and 19 consultation with the First Nation. 20 Q: Okay. And that consultation might 21 include incorporating the First Nations' wishes 22 concerning protecting and memorializing the site where 23 the remains are found? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Okay. Mr. Vrancart, if I can ask

102

1 you to turn up in your book of documents the document at 2 Tab Number 20. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Commissioner, this is 7 Document Number 3001382 and I don't believe it's been 8 made an exhibit up until this point. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I have a 10 different document at that tab number. Did you say 11 3001382? 12 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Yes. My apologies, 13 Commissioner, my tabs are slightly different so bear with 14 me. I believe it's at your Tab 21. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 16 MR. WALTER MYRKA: It's entitled, 17 Minister's Note, under date of May 22, 1996. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 22 Q: Mr. Vrancart, do you recall seeing 23 this document at any time prior to your preparation for 24 giving testimony at this Inquiry? 25 A: Yes.

103

1 Q: Okay. And do you recall when you 2 would have seen it? 3 A: Well, I would have seen it certainly 4 on the day of -- the day that this document is dated or 5 the day before to approve it prior to it going to the 6 Minister's Office. 7 Q: Okay. And in the first paragraph 8 there there's reference to Mr. Girman? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Can you tell us what you recall of 11 who he was and what he was hired to do? 12 A: Well, we're now eight (8) months on 13 from the occupation at Ipperwash Provincial Park and many 14 of the issues at Ipperwash still were unresolved. The 15 Federal Government in the meantime had entered into a 16 Memorandum of Understanding with the First Nation and 17 undertook to do a number of things none of which seemed 18 to be getting done. 19 And we were having some difficulty 20 participating in that -- in that process so we decided 21 that it would be appropriate to hire Mr. Girman to see 22 what he could do by entering into discussions with the 23 First Nations people to see how we could resolve the 24 outstanding issues around Ipperwash. 25 Q: And did those discussions take place

104

1 and can you assist us as to what Mr. Girman actually did 2 or was able to do? 3 A: Mr. Girman I believe had discussions 4 with -- with -- with the First Nations people and made 5 some progress but didn't, you know, was unable to get the 6 Federal Government to participate in the discussions or 7 to significantly advance the resolution of -- of 8 outstanding issues. 9 Q: And if I can direct you to the second 10 last paragraph on the first page. 11 There's reference there to a meeting with 12 Chief Bressette and a mutual agreement that funds be made 13 available for joint research as to whether indeed there 14 was a burial site within the Provincial Park? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Can you tell us what became of that? 17 A: I don't think I can tell you what 18 became of that because I don't think anything has come of 19 it. 20 Q: All right. 21 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Commissioner, if we 22 could make that -- that document the next exhibit? 23 THE REGISTRAR: P-921, Your Honour. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-921. 25

105

1 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-921: Document number 3001382. 2 Minister's Note from Ron 3 Vrancart re. Update on 4 reopening of Ipperwash 5 Provincial Park, May 22/96. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 8 Q: Now, Mr. Vrancart, I just want to take 9 you back for a moment to the dining room meeting on 10 September 6th. 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And I just want to ask you some 13 questions about the role play as you recall it of Deputy 14 Attorney General Taman. Now in your evidence you 15 described him more than once as being forceful. 16 Can you tell us what you meant by that by 17 using that term and what it was that in your view your 18 recollection was forceful about Mr. Taman's presentation? 19 A: He was forceful in my view because he 20 had to insert himself into the conversation. And my -- 21 my recollection was that we're only -- we're dealing with 22 a government here that's two (2) or three (3) months into 23 its mandate and still in my view are going up a pretty 24 steep learning curve with respect to its 25 responsibilities.

106

1 And -- and -- and I think he felt that it 2 was part of his job to make sure that they understood 3 this responsibility. And -- and I think as well he felt 4 that he had to be forceful to make sure that the message 5 stuck. 6 Q: In one of our documents, the -- one 7 of the adjectives used to describe him at that meeting 8 was 'eloquent' is that something that you would agree 9 with or disagree with? 10 A: Mr. Taman is one of the most eloquent 11 advocates I have ever heard at all times in all settings. 12 Q: And are you basing that in part upon 13 what he did and what he said at that meeting? 14 A: In part, yes. 15 Q: Okay. Do you recall how long he 16 spoke for? 17 A: Oh, it wouldn't have been -- it 18 wouldn't have been for long. It was in the context of, 19 you know, an ongoing conversation around this issue. So, 20 you know, he would -- he would have spoken for less than 21 a minute making that point. 22 Q: And you were asked about note taking, 23 when you were at the dining room meeting did you observe 24 anybody taking notes? 25 A: No I didn't.

107

1 Q: And at that meeting, do I take it 2 that you never saw or heard anyone that in your view was 3 acting inappropriately? 4 A: No. 5 Q: And you never saw anybody behaving at 6 anything but what you would have seen as being in a 7 professional manner? 8 A: Correct. 9 Q: And you don't recall anybody using 10 inappropriate language of any kind? 11 A: No. 12 Q: Mr. Vrancart, have you ever heard 13 anyone using inappropriate language in the context of 14 discussing the events of September 4 through 7, 1995? 15 A: No. 16 Q: Okay. And you -- I recall your 17 evidence you have never heard anyone using words to the 18 effect of, Get those f'ing Indians out of the Park? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Okay. And you never heard anyone 21 saying words to the effect of, "Use guns if you have to?" 22 A: No. 23 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Thank you, 24 Commissioner, those are my questions. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you,

108

1 Mr. Myrka. 2 Mr. Worme, do you have any re- 3 examination? 4 MR. DONALD WORME: Only -- only one (1) 5 question, Mr. Commissioner. 6 7 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DONALD WORME: 8 Q: Mr. Vrancart, Julie Jai testified 9 that she had briefed Minister Hodgson as he then was 10 during the summer of 1995 on Aboriginal issues. 11 And the only thing I wanted to ask you is 12 whether or not you were present for such briefings or do 13 you recall? 14 A: I don't remember being present for 15 those -- for those briefings. 16 MR. DONALD WORME: That's the only 17 question I have in re-examine, Mr. Commissioner. I'd 18 like to thank Mr. Vrancart for attending here and for his 19 testimony. 20 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I would like 22 to also thank you, Mr. Vrancart, for coming and giving us 23 your evidence. Thank you very much. 24 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 25

109

1 (WITNESS STANDS DOWN) 2 3 MR. DONALD WORME: Given the hour, Mr. 4 Commissioner, I wonder if it might be appropriate to 5 perhaps take our lunch break now and we can start Mr. 6 Moran immediately upon recommencing. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 8 Thank you very much. 9 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 10 adjourned until 2:05. 11 12 --- Upon recessing at 12:50 p.m. 13 --- Upon resuming at 2:06 p.m. 14 15 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 16 resumed, please be seated. 17 MR. DONALD WORME: Good afternoon, 18 Commissioner. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 20 afternoon. 21 MR. DONALD WORME: Commissioner, the 22 Inquiry would call as the next witness, David Moran. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 24 MR. DONALD WORME: Good afternoon, Mr. 25 Moran.

110

1 MR. DAVID MORAN: Thank you. Nice being 2 here, Your Honour. 3 THE REGISTRAR: And would you give us 4 your name in fill for the record. 5 MR. DAVID MORAN: My name is David Moran. 6 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you. 7 8 DAVID MORAN, Sworn 9 10 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR. DONALD WORME: 11 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Moran. Mr. Moran 12 you were good enough to provide us with a copy of your 13 curriculum vitae some time ago and this was, I can assure 14 you, distributed to the parties electronically on the 15 24th of October. 16 And if possible, I might just like to take 17 you briefly to that, if we may. 18 A: Sure. 19 Q: Do you have that in front of you? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: Well you'd know it off by heart -- 24 A: I agree with familiar with it. 25 Q: -- so maybe I don't need to ask you

111

1 this. Let me ask you this, simply, that at this point in 2 time, that is from April 2003 up until today's date, you 3 are the director of corporate communications at 4 Communicor Group Inc. 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And as I understand it, sir, that is 7 a company that is involved in providing advice on 8 organizational communications on marketing, branding, 9 media relations, those sorts of things? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And among many of the -- many of the 12 clients, they include clients like and Weyerhaeuser and 13 other large organizations, including the Ministry of 14 Municipal Affairs and Housing? 15 A: We are a member -- we're on the 16 government's advertising review board's approved list of 17 firms that are deemed to be qualified to provide 18 communications advice to any government ministry and so 19 we've worked for a number of government ministries in the 20 past, and continue to do so now. 21 Q: And part of the experience that 22 qualifies you for that is the fact that you had been 23 involved, at least in 2001, until you commenced with 24 Communicor in April 2003, your own communications 25 consulting company?

112

1 A: Yes, sorry. 2 Q: Prior to being involved in -- with 3 your own private company in the private sector, providing 4 communications advice, Mr. Moran, you had some experience 5 with other companies, as I understand? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: And I wonder if you could tell us, 8 briefly, you know -- obviously you'll know that I want to 9 come ultimately to your duties with the Attorney General 10 of Ontario. 11 A: From -- you want me to review from 12 '99 to 2003? 13 Q: If you could just fill that in for -- 14 A: Sure. 15 Q: -- us please. 16 A: When I left government, I joined a 17 public relations firm called Communique PR (phonetic). 18 Subsequent to Communique, I went and worked at a larger 19 public relations firm entitled Weber Shandwick Worldwide. 20 And then after Weber Shandwick then that's 21 when I went out on my own. 22 Q: And you, prior to that, were the 23 Chief of Staff for the Attorney General of Ontario from 24 1995 until 1999. 25 A: And Minister Responsible for Native

113

1 Affairs. 2 Q: And that was one in the same person? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And the name of that individual? 5 A: Charles Harnick. 6 Q: All right. I want to get into the -- 7 the particulars in terms of the responsibilities of that 8 position. However, before we do that I wonder if you 9 could just fill us in, sir, with respect to your 10 educational background. 11 A: I'm a graduate with honors in both 12 history and political science from the University of 13 Western Ontario. 14 Q: And you're presently here having 15 taken time out from studies you're currently involved in. 16 A: Yes, I'm currently taking my Masters 17 in Business Administration. 18 Q: At Royal Roads University. 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And you anticipate being -- receiving 21 your -- your designation when, sir? 22 A: 2007. I just started this past 23 spring. 24 Q: All right. We certainly appreciate 25 your being here. Prior to your serving as Chief of Staff

114

1 to Minister Charles Harnick, you were in service to him 2 before that? 3 A: Yes. I spent five (5) years working 4 for Mr. Harnick in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as 5 his executive assistant. 6 Q: And what was -- what was Mr. 7 Harnick's position during that period from 1990 to 1995? 8 A: He was the Conservative Critic for 9 the Ministries of the Attorney General and Native 10 Affairs. 11 Q: And as his executive assistant what 12 was your responsibilities? 13 A: My primary role as an executive 14 assistant was ensuring that he was prepared for debates 15 and questions in the Legislature and dealing with any 16 media that focused on the activities of a backbench MPP. 17 Q: And so I take it, and you'll correct 18 if I'm wrong, but I take it that part of those duties 19 meant research in the various issues that you would 20 provide briefing notes or speaking notes to Mr. Harnick? 21 A: Yes, in part. We had a research 22 department that was our primary research resource. But, 23 I was the primary conduit to both the research team and, 24 for instance, the Legislative library. So, I was exposed 25 to issues affecting both ministries for some years.

115

1 Q: All right. And when you say that Mr. 2 Harnick was the opposition critic, perhaps you've already 3 indicated but, what was he the opposition critic in 4 relation to? 5 A: Oh, sorry. The Ministry of the 6 Attorney General and the Ministry Responsible for Native 7 Affairs. 8 Q: And insofar as your other duties, did 9 that entail any political advising? 10 A: Oh, yes. I was his chief political 11 advisor both from 1990 to '95 and from '95 to '98. 12 Q: I take it that you would have been 13 the executive assistant to Mr. Harnick during the course 14 of the campaign that led up to the election of the 15 Conservative Government in 1995? 16 A: I -- I was but that wasn't 17 necessarily the -- the course. I was selected by Mr. 18 Harnick to lead his campaign but several executive 19 assistants in a similar situation did not do the same 20 thing. 21 Q: Let's maybe just talk a little bit 22 about that. I want you to turn to a document contained 23 among the loose documents in the binder in front of you, 24 sir. These were distributed electronically I understand. 25 And -- and the first document I want to

116

1 refer you to and it would appear to be a document that 2 comes off of the internet. It's entitled, Common Sense 3 Revolution. It's -- would appear to be seventeen (17) 4 pages in total. 5 Do you have that in front of you? 6 A: Yes, sir. 7 Q: I take it that you're familiar with 8 this document? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And what can you tell us about that? 11 Again, just generally, and I don't intend to take you 12 through the specifics of it. It is as I say, appears to 13 be some seventeen (17) pages in total. 14 A: It was a -- a campaign document that 15 we had launched almost two (2) years prior to the 16 election. From 1990 to 1995, they -- the progressive 17 Conservatives spent the bulk of their time consulting 18 with various communities and Mr. Harris was actively 19 travelling around the Province trying to solicit input 20 from various groups and communities and what changes were 21 needed in terms of the policies of the Provincial 22 Government. 23 After he'd done this -- this consultation, 24 he launched the -- he released this campaign document 25 which was a blueprint for how he would govern if he

117

1 became elected. 2 The purpose of this was to try to make it 3 his open as possible to the people of Ontario; here's 4 where our policies were, here's where -- what our 5 intentions were so that there was some level of certainty 6 for the electorate. 7 Q: And insofar as this document which 8 was meant to provide, as you put it, some certainty of -- 9 for the electorate, it's dated May of 1994 and you'll 10 agree with me that it contains no references to 11 Aboriginal people or Aboriginal issues? 12 A: It was written to apply to all people 13 of Ontario. What it is, is a -- it's an economic -- 14 economic document that is -- focusses on means to bring, 15 you know, as Mr. Harris had said, hope, opportunity and 16 prosperity to the people of Ontario. 17 As a result of his consultation, the 18 primary message that he had heard from all audiences that 19 -- was that we really needed to get Ontario's economy 20 going. In terms of priorities of the new Government, the 21 economy was our -- our single and greatest priority. 22 MR. DONALD WORME: Commissioner, I wonder 23 if we could have that document perhaps marked as the next 24 exhibit, please? 25 THE REGISTRAR: P-922, Your Honour.

118

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 2 3 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-922: Seventeen (17) page document, 4 The Common Sense Revolution, 5 May 1994. 6 7 THE WITNESS: Don, I should say that in 8 terms of The Commonsense Revolution and stuff, this is my 9 understanding of it. I'm sure that either Mr. Harris or 10 his direct staff would be able to speak to it in much 11 more detail and eloquence than -- than me. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 14 Q: I appreciate that as well. 15 I've neglected to ask that Mr. Moran's 16 curriculum vitae be marked as an exhibit, and perhaps we 17 can do that? 18 THE REGISTRAR: P-923. 19 20 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-923: Curriculum Vitae of Mr. David 21 Moran. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 24 Q: Turning nextly, sir, there's a 25 document in front of you which again has been distributed

119

1 electronically. 2 It appears to be entitled, Bringing 3 Commonsense to Community Development. Do you see that in 4 front of you? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And under the highlights, if you -- 7 if you refer in that document to page 4 and 5, well that 8 is the page that is copied within the document. The 9 first page I've copied in there -- 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: -- is actually page 4 which is 12 entitled, Highlights? 13 A: Hmm hmm. 14 Q: And I take it you've had a chance to 15 review these before you came in here to testify today? 16 A: Yes, and I've seen them before as 17 well. 18 Q: And you'll see that among the 19 highlights is, and I quote: 20 "To promote and encourage economic 21 development in native communities." 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Do you see that? 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: "Ensure that all stakeholders are

120

1 represented in lands claims 2 negotiations." 3 A: Hmm hmm. 4 Q: And just carrying on, 5 "Strike a balance between native 6 hunting and fishing rights and 7 Ontario's conservative priorities. 8 Insist on the same conservation rules 9 for all Ontario -- all Ontarians 10 [pardon me]." 11 And nextly: 12 "Work with native leaders to reflect 13 Aboriginal concerns and include the 14 native viewpoint in governing 15 policies." 16 I just want to ask you generally, again I 17 recognize your earlier testimony that you didn't develop 18 these platforms, but they'd come out of a process of 19 consultation, and is that consistent with what your 20 understanding was? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And if you refer to page 15 of that - 23 - of that same document which is the third copied page 24 in. 25 A: Fifteen (15)?

121

1 Q: The heading at the top of the page 2 is, Native Canadian Communities. Are you with me on 3 that, Mr. Moran? 4 A: Yes. Thank you. 5 Q: It simply goes on to indicate that -- 6 and I'm going to quote here: 7 "While Canadian history and law both 8 mark this group as unique we are 9 committed to integrating the rights and 10 needs of all Ontarians in our policies 11 in this area. That's what the 12 commonsense revolution is all about." 13 And I'm going to suggest to you that the 14 remainder of that document articulates the need to 15 balance the interests of natives and non-natives and 16 involve local, that is non-Aboriginal communities in any 17 negotiations of -- respecting land claims or hunting and 18 fishing issues. 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: You'd agree with that? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And again the same question as I 23 asked you earlier, does this reflect the understanding 24 that -- that you were working within following the 25 consultation that you told us eventually became the

122

1 blueprint entitled, The Commonsense Revolution? 2 A: Hmm hmm. 3 Q: I -- I'm sorry, that's -- 4 A: Yeah, isn't that out of sequen -- I 5 think the -- the Common Sense Revolution came before the, 6 Bringing Commonsense to Community Development. 7 Q: All right. Thank you for that 8 clarification, but in any event this then does reflect 9 the understanding that you had that it was developed as a 10 result then -- 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: -- of the -- of The Commonsense 13 Revolution? 14 A: Well, it -- this provided greater 15 detail in terms of issues that were not covered in The 16 Commonsense Revolution document. Similar to the -- the - 17 - A Voice for the North, that's another document that 18 provides some greater detail in terms of the results of 19 consultation with northern communities and this is 20 communities as a whole. 21 Q: All right. And I -- I note that 22 there isn't a date on this document, that is the Bringing 23 Common Sense to Community Development. 24 Do you know when this would have been -- 25 been developed?

123

1 A: I can't recall. I do know that it 2 came after The -- The Commonsense Revolution, but -- 3 Q: And certainly then this would have 4 been part of the campaign material that was developed? 5 A: Oh -- 6 Q: It isn't government policy? 7 A: No, it was the policy of the 8 Conservatives in 1994 -- 9 Q: And perhaps I'm jumping ahead a 10 little bit, but do you know whether or not the -- the 11 general thoughts that are contained within this document, 12 were they ever imported and -- and become part of the 13 policy of Mr. Harris' government? 14 A: We'd have to go through them one (1) 15 at a time, but you -- you know in a general sense I could 16 say probably in part, but if you want to go through each 17 -- each one individually I could tell you which ones 18 were. 19 Q: And I'm not sure that's -- that 20 that's necessary for us just at this moment. 21 A: Okay. 22 Q: But, if you can indicate in a general 23 fashion whether or not that was so. I think you did -- 24 A: Oh, sure. 25 Q: -- and that's probably sufficient.

124

1 A: Well, the issues affecting Native 2 Affairs specifically, it's similar to other areas that 3 the Government was dealing with, were not fully 4 articulated at the time, and we -- we really needed to do 5 some more homework. We needed to work with a number of 6 native leaders to -- to really define how best to 7 implement the general guidelines and produce. 8 So, once we -- the Government was elected 9 we went out and consulted with various organizations, 10 such as the Chiefs of Ontario, to help define how best to 11 bring the idea of -- of hope, opportunity, and prosperity 12 to natives as well. And what we -- we ended up 13 developing was a policy called, The Aboriginal Policy 14 Framework. 15 And within that framework there was one 16 (1) issue in particular called the -- sorry, I just want 17 to make sure the -- Building Aboriginal Economies. And 18 part of that Building Aboriginal Economies was really as 19 a focus of -- of how to improve the economic well being 20 of native communities. 21 So, that's how -- more in relation to the 22 economic policies. Now, with regard to land claim 23 policies, Mr. Harrison and -- and Mr. Harnick were of 24 firm belief that -- that there had to be a more open way 25 to involve all parties in land claim disputes.

125

1 We were of the opinion that for a 2 government to come in and negotiate with the First 3 Nations without involving the local community created 4 unnecessary tensions. And that a more holistic, lasting 5 way to negotiate land claims was to involve everyone 6 directly affected. 7 You know, now, of course, they -- the non 8 Native community was not -- they didn't have an official 9 role in terms of the land claim negotiation because that 10 was going on in a, you know, a party to party basis or a 11 government to government basis. 12 But we made a conscious effort throughout 13 all land claim negotiations to make sure that they -- the 14 non Native community was better informed of the process, 15 the information it involved and exactly what was going 16 on, with the hope that after the settlement was a 17 breached --was agreed to that the people that were going 18 to actually have to live with it on the ground would have 19 to get along. 20 And so it was a conscious effort on our 21 behalf in terms of how to make it much more practical and 22 real for the people in the local communities. 23 Q: Okay. Thank you for that. I'm going 24 to just interrupt you briefly. I want to have this 25 document marked as the next exhibit please. The,

126

1 "Bringing Common Sense to Community Development." It 2 should be P-924. 3 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, sir. 4 5 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-924: Document; Bringing Common 6 Sense to Community 7 Development. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 10 Q: Mr. Moran, you've referred earlier to 11 the document, A Voice For The North, and that's dated 12 January of 1995, report of the Mike Harris Northern Focus 13 Tour. 14 Do you have that in front of you? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: And at page 2 of that, under the 17 heading, Native Issues, again, I'll just quote the 18 paragraph there, which reads as follows: 19 "There's growing anger and resentment 20 over Queen's Park's handling of Native 21 claims in Northern Ontario. Non 22 Natives voiced a concern and 23 consternation that land claims 24 negotiations are conducted behind 25 closed doors."

127

1 And it carries on: 2 "Northern focus found that Queen's Park 3 was alienating non Natives. People 4 believe that two (2) systems of 5 conservation law are being created. 6 One for Natives and another for non 7 Natives." 8 A: I think it's important to note also 9 on that document on the next page, is that the Native 10 Canadians who spoke with us were most concerned with lack 11 of economic and community development programs. 12 And that was really the focus of where our 13 efforts were for the next five (5) years. 14 Q: On the creation of economic 15 opportunities? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. And if I can just 18 continue, at page 4 of that same document, you see 19 underneath, "Our Commitments," at the top of the page, 20 that is the last photocopied page of the document and it 21 reads: 22 "The Mike Harris government will 23 balance the interest of Native and non 24 Native Ontarians by ensuring that all 25 stakeholders are represented in Native

128

1 land claims negotiations. 2 Native rights must be respected but 3 land claim negotiations cannot be the 4 exclusive preserve of Provincial 5 bureaucrats and Native Band leaders." 6 A: All right. I think that -- that an 7 important thing to note in that is that it's my 8 understanding, and I don't know whether it's changed 9 since but, certainly, when -- when I left government, 10 that Mr. Harris' government, led by Mr. Harnick in terms 11 of land claims, had been more successful in addressing a 12 number of land claims than any previous government before 13 it. 14 More land claims had been solved by Mr. 15 Harris than had previously been attempted. So the new 16 policy, when put into affect in terms of involving all 17 parties in a more direct way in the dispute resolution 18 system, seemed to work. 19 Q: If we can have that marked as the 20 next exhibit please. 21 THE REGISTRAR: P-925, Your Honor. 22 23 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-925: A Voice For The North; A 24 report of the Mike Harris 25 Northern Focus Tour, January,

129

1 1995. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 4 Q: You also knew that -- that Premier 5 Harris had been involved and had a very keen interest in 6 the area of resource management? 7 A: Well Mr. Harris -- I -- I was aware 8 that Mr. Harris was -- previously served as Minister of 9 Natural Resources and his knowledge on -- on issues 10 relating to natural resources and native affairs, 11 certainly in 1995, was greater than mine. 12 Q: And it came from that experience, as 13 you understood it? 14 A: Yeah, well, also he grew up in a -- 15 in a community that was much more exposed to native 16 issues than I did. 17 Q: And that would be the Riding -- the 18 Riding that you -- 19 A: Oh, he's from North Bay and I'm from 20 -- I live in North Toronto. 21 Q: All right. Moving past the election, 22 then, of Mr. Harris' government when they -- when he took 23 over the reins of government, as it were, during the 24 first initial period of that, we understand that there 25 was a -- a rather steep learning curve to be -- to be

130

1 accomplished. 2 And can you tell us how that -- how 3 information was -- was passed on, how it was that the 4 Ministry understood what their obligations, 5 responsibilities would be and how they would be 6 interacting with the other arms of government? 7 A: Sure. The -- the briefing started 8 off at a very elementary stage in terms of a briefing 9 from the Premier's office and Cabinet office on here's 10 how political staff and the civil service will interact, 11 here's what the relationship is, here's what your job is, 12 basically, in terms of roles and responsibility and 13 here's what the civil service's job is. 14 And then so, while they were giving us the 15 -- the Provincial Government's operations 101, we were 16 also being briefed on the issues that were directly 17 affecting the Ministries that we were assigned to. 18 Q: And who would be doing these 19 briefings for -- for you and the others within the 20 Ministry? 21 A: In terms of -- of the briefings that 22 we got, we -- we had been -- the civil service is a very 23 hierarchal organization with a clear chain of command. 24 And we were asked, very directly, to 25 respect that chain of command and that information

131

1 flowing to the Minister's office, and from the Minister's 2 office to the civil service were to be all funnelled 3 through the deputy Minister's office. 4 So while, for instance, if we were being 5 briefed on a particular court case, the lawyer 6 responsible for the actual Court case would be present in 7 the room, the briefings -- all briefings for the Minister 8 would be run by the Deputy Attorney General. 9 Q: And the Deputy Attorney General was? 10 A: Larry Taman. 11 Q: So he's be responsible for doing the 12 briefings with the Minister? 13 A: Yeah. I -- certainly at that time, 14 and for most of the time subsequent to that, the Attorney 15 General would not be briefed, the deputy insisted on 16 being present for all policy briefings that the Minister 17 had. 18 Q: So in that initial period, there was 19 no time when the Minister would have been briefed by 20 anyone other than Mr. Taman? 21 A: Unless it was being briefed on a 22 political issue which I would have been briefing him on 23 where the civil service wouldn't have had a role. 24 Q: And would you be always briefed in 25 the presence of the Minister or were there occasions when

132

1 you might be briefed apart from him? 2 A: Well, the Minister wasn't present at 3 the meeting between the deputy -- the cabinet secretary 4 in the Premier's office and the kind of the government 5 101; he'd had his phone briefing on that one. 6 But in terms of issue of policy impacting 7 on the areas within the Ministry, no, I can't imagine a 8 situation where I would have been briefed on an issue 9 where the deputy wasn't there. 10 Q: And given the dual responsibilities, 11 or the dual ministries that Mr. Harnick was responsible 12 for, I take it that he would be briefed in each of these 13 areas separately? 14 A: Do you mean we'd have different 15 briefings for the Ministry of Native Affairs, versus the 16 Attorney General? 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: All right. We've heard some 20 evidence, Mr. Moran, that Julie Jai -- do you -- do you 21 know Julia Jai, first of all? 22 A: Yes, sir. 23 Q: And that she was the Chair of the 24 Interministerial Committee on Aboriginal Emergencies; you 25 were aware of that?

133

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: That she had provided a briefing 3 pursuant -- on -- about Crown obligations, rather, under 4 Section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982? 5 Were you present for that briefing or do 6 you know whether such briefing occurred? 7 A: I don't recall. I -- I assume yes, 8 like it would have been one (1) of the things that we 9 were briefed on, but I -- I don't recall that meeting in 10 particular. 11 Q: And is there anything today, Mr. 12 Moran, that sticks out in your mind about any kind of 13 briefing that the Ministry would have received, relative 14 to Section 35? 15 A: Well, for us as a whole, Section 35 16 would have been part of the issues that we had been 17 briefed on because it's assumed for new ministers and new 18 political staff that their knowledge level is non- 19 existent, I think. The -- the Civil Service would be 20 able to best speak to that, but really it's -- they bring 21 us forward from a very embryonic stage. 22 I don't recall a briefing in particular on 23 Section 35, but I -- I -- I would assume that a -- of 24 course that that was one (1) of the things that we were 25 briefed on.

134

1 Q: All right. What about briefings with 2 respect to outstanding land claims in the province? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And what can you tell us about that? 5 A: Well, we were briefed on -- on all 6 active land claim negotiations, trying to find out what 7 the issues are, who -- we met with all the negotiators 8 and they reviewed with us what the status were, what the 9 issues were, what the expected outcomes were, so it was, 10 you know, quite ongoing, vigorous. 11 The -- the land claim negotiations is the 12 -- is the first and primary role of the Ministry of -- of 13 Native Affairs and so that was the -- the focus of what 14 we were being briefed on and what was being discussed. 15 Q: And can you recall who was in charge 16 of providing those briefings? Would -- would that be Ms. 17 Jai for example? 18 A: Land claims? 19 Q: Yeah. 20 A: No, she would not have been involved 21 in those. The -- you see the problem with ONAS at the 22 time, just from a staffing standpoint, was that the 23 secretary of ONAS who was the defacto head of it, the 24 equivalent of a deputy minister, that position was absent 25 -- vacant, sorry. And so while -- bless you, sir.

135

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Excuse me. 2 THE WITNESS: While they -- in the normal 3 course, like once that position was filled, often the 4 secretary would lead the briefing -- the -- because that 5 position was vacant the Deputy Attorney General was kind 6 of performing those two (2) tasks. 7 So, the Deputy Attorney General would be 8 involved in it as would have been the Acting Head of 9 ONAS, Yan Lazor, and then whoever was the negotiator 10 involved in leading that particular claim. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 13 Q: Okay. And - and perhaps I should ask 14 you this: Do you recall whether it was Yan Lazor and the 15 negotiators that provided this briefing or -- or can you 16 recall? 17 A: Yan and the negotiators would have 18 provided all briefings on land claims to the Minister. 19 Q: Okay. And aside from the briefings 20 on land claims, what other sort of issues was the 21 Minister briefed on, again focussing on Aboriginal issues 22 or Aboriginal matters? 23 A: There was a number of lawsuits that 24 were outstanding, numerous that were involved and I 25 think, you know, Mr. Taman would be the most appropriate

136

1 person to remember the details because the Native Affairs 2 Secretariat was involved somewhat in the litigation, but 3 it's my recollection that the Ministry of the Attorney 4 General had primary responsibility for all litigation 5 involved with Native Affairs. 6 Q: And in the first couple of months of 7 -- of being in government, do you know how many such 8 briefings your minister would have received? 9 A: The briefings were ongoing. So I 10 could only give you a -- a guess. I would guess 11 somewhere in between thirty (30) and fifty (50). 12 Q: Perhaps I could just ask you to refer 13 to Tab Number 1 in that Book of Documents in front of 14 you. It's a document that's entitled, Statement of 15 Political Relationship, which we've had some testimony 16 here to describe that to us as something of a guideline 17 that was adopted under a previous regime to deal with -- 18 a guideline to deal with negotiating the Aboriginal 19 aspirations to self government. 20 Does that -- does that fit with your 21 understanding? 22 A: Yes, that's my recollection. 23 Q: I should indicate for the record that 24 is P-643 in these proceedings. I take it that you had a 25 chance to look at this as well, before you've been here?

137

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And might you have seen that in -- 3 during your time in government? 4 A: In government? 5 Q: Yeah. 6 A: I don't believe so. I saw it in my 7 time in the opposition. I don't really -- it -- it -- 8 this was a policy of the former government and whether it 9 was the Ontario Native Affairs Secretariat or the 10 Ministry of the Attorney General, there was an 11 understanding between the previous administration and 12 this administration is -- I think it's the way the -- 13 that it always occurs, in terms of government, that -- 14 I'm saying that this wasn't something that was new to our 15 government. 16 We weren't privy to a lot of the policy 17 decisions or documents that the previous government dealt 18 with. When we came in it was kind of -- the civil 19 service looked to us and said, Okay, so what are the 20 policies. 21 So it wouldn't have been something that we 22 really had dealt with a great deal. 23 Q: And in any event there would have 24 been a need for -- for this government to develop its own 25 policies on these issues, consistent with the -- the

138

1 platform documents -- 2 A: Yes, which we did. 3 Q: -- that you've already talked about a 4 little bit earlier. 5 A: Yeah, but I didn't really get into 6 the -- the -- I spoke about the equivalent to the common 7 sense resolution and the land claim policy. But in terms 8 of the statement of political relationship, the 9 Progressive Conservative government's response to 10 equivalent of that was a document called, The Memorandum 11 of Understanding, and what we had done was with the 12 Chiefs of Ontario created a Memorandum of Understanding 13 of how the two (2) peoples would interact. 14 And it was kind of a -- similar to this 15 was the framework for how we would co-exist. 16 Q: And I recognize that that's some time 17 ago, Mr. Moran, but can you tell us, even in a general 18 sense, what the nature of that Memorandum of 19 Understanding meant to spell out, in terms of that 20 relationship? 21 A: Well, basically, it was -- I'm 22 surprised that you've got the -- the -- the NDP's polices 23 but you don't have the Progressive Conservative's, 24 frankly. 25 Q: And -- and I apologize for that. I,

139

1 you know, I agree with you, it's surprising that that is 2 so. 3 A: It -- basically what it said is that 4 we would be dealing with First Nation issues on a 5 government to government basis and that we would respect, 6 basically, Section 35 of the Constitution and Rights of 7 Natives and so forth. 8 I'm sorry, it's been almost ten (10) years 9 for this one so I -- my memory's a little spotty. 10 Q: I appreciate that. And you did say 11 something about ensuring that there was access by Native 12 communities to the prosperity aspect or the economic 13 opportunity aspect that you've described a little bit 14 earlier in terms of those -- 15 A: Well in terms of that -- the 16 economical development policy, so I was not able to find 17 -- little on that. 18 The -- there was four (4) components of 19 our economic policy as it related to the First Nations. 20 It was breaking down barriers to economic growth, it was 21 improving access to capital, it was facilitating access 22 to government grants and, finally, involving the -- the 23 private sector in a much more real and direct way with 24 the First Nations so that they had access to both the 25 entrepreneurial expertise of the private sector and the -

140

1 - the non-native community was better informed of the 2 opportunities on First Nations. 3 So, one (1) of the things that we did for 4 instance was we brought forward economic advisors that 5 went out and worked with numerous First Nations around 6 the Province to try and foster economic growth and 7 development. 8 Q: We understand -- pardon me -- Mr. 9 Moran, that when each minister was appointed to Cabinet 10 he or she would then receive a briefing binder from the 11 Premier's office. 12 Can you tell us about that, please? 13 A: Well, in the same way I'm -- they 14 were kind of parallel documents in some sense. All -- 15 the Civil Service had prepared briefing notes for itself 16 on the policies by the various parties and how they would 17 respond to it -- how they would implement it so that they 18 had a -- a binder that was prepared for the Liberal 19 Government -- should the Liberals get elected, should the 20 NDP get re-elected or should the Progressive 21 Conservatives get re-elected. So kind of a summary of 22 all the campaign commitments. 23 And similar in terms of -- on the -- the 24 political side of it, we were provided with, excuse me, a 25 binder which outlined; here's the promises that we have

141

1 made to the people of Ontario, so that we were conscious 2 of the commitments that we had made. 3 Q: All right. I can tell you that we've 4 attempted to obtain copies of these binders, but they 5 appear to be nonexistent. 6 Can you tell us with respect to the 7 binders that would have been provided to your minister 8 whether or not there were any provisions dealing 9 specifically with Aboriginal issues? 10 A: Oh, I'm sure that in a similar way 11 that I was provided with earlier the -- the campaign 12 documents that we discussed earlier were part of the 13 binder. 14 Q: You also know, Mr. Moran, that one 15 (1) of the things of keen interest to -- to this 16 Commission of Inquiry is the relationship between 17 government and law enforcement. 18 As part of the briefings that you've told 19 us your Minister received I take it every one in your 20 presence, yes? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: That there might have been a briefing 23 in this respect as well? 24 A: With -- working for the Attorney 25 General, the issue of political involvement in criminal

142

1 cases was something that we were briefed with very 2 extensively. You know, we -- the issues were reviewed 3 with us in a -- in a broad, general sense by the Deputy 4 Attorney General and then in detail by the Assistant 5 Deputy Minister for the Criminal Law Division. And that 6 and all my staff would have received a similar briefing 7 in terms of the issues surrounding the separation of 8 political involvement and criminal matters. 9 Q: And again, I appreciate it's been 10 some time ago, but is there anything from those briefings 11 insofar as that relationship, that sticks out in your 12 mind such that you can tell us about it today? 13 A: We were provided with very clear 14 direction and instruction that matters relating to both 15 criminal matters in particular, and generally matters 16 that were before the court were something that political 17 staff were not to be involved in. 18 Q: And what about law enforcement or 19 policing specifically? Do you recall anything insofar as 20 these briefings that touched on that? 21 A: It wasn't quite the focus of what -- 22 what -- like because ours was a much more practical way 23 in terms of dealing with Crown attorneys in the Criminal 24 Law Division and cases that were ongoing through that 25 extent.

143

1 They -- but yes there was an element of 2 focus on that -- that police have discretion in terms of 3 any -- criminal matters that are ongoing and basically 4 that it was inappropriate to almost even speak to a 5 police officer, certainly on issues that -- that they 6 were dealing with. 7 You know, like there was, in a practical 8 sense, issues that we did speak with police officers 9 about, but not regarding any criminal matters. It was 10 more a -- a -- policy questions. 11 The -- the focus of the Ministry -- the 12 Attorney General, and the Ministry of the Attorney 13 General from a -- the Minister's standpoint is much more 14 focussed on issues dealing with the justice system and 15 its operations in terms of, you know, whether it's 16 properly resourced and issues along those lines, rather 17 than issues that are -- are dealing with individual cases 18 unless that case was a civil matter that was directly -- 19 that they -- where the Provincial Government was a party 20 to the suit. 21 You know, private lawsuits were the 22 matters of private individuals. 23 Q: I want to ask you to turn your mind 24 nextly, Mr. Moran, to the organizational aspect of the 25 Provincial Government in the relationship between the

144

1 civil service and the political arm of government. All 2 right? 3 A: Okay. 4 Q: And if you can describe for us the 5 reporting relationships as between the Premier's office, 6 cabinet office and the ministers, deputy ministers, civil 7 service and political staffers. 8 Is that something you can help us with? 9 A: Sure. Well, the Premier was the head 10 of the Government. And he appointed a secretary to 11 cabinet. And the secretary at cabinet was primarily 12 responsible for hiring the Deputy Ministers of all the 13 Ministries. 14 That, in a practical the -- the Deputy 15 Ministers were -- I think the Premier was a little more 16 involved than -- than completely hands off. But it's my 17 understanding that the Premier left the hiring of the 18 Deputy Ministers almost entirely up to the Secretary of 19 Cabinet. 20 As it was always my understanding that 21 there was a -- a view that -- that the operations of the 22 civil service were the responsibility of the civil 23 service and that on the political side we would staff our 24 own. 25 So, each -- the secretary of cabinet --

145

1 each Deputy Minister reported to the Secretary of 2 Cabinet. Each Deputy Minister had a bureaucracy that 3 reported through -- through them. The Deputy Ministers 4 were responsible for hiring and firing the staff within 5 their responsibility. 6 Concurrently the Premier appointed 7 individuals to Cabinet and then the Premier had set up a 8 -- a screening process whereby political staff were 9 vetted, both in terms of confidence and a number of other 10 issues, and then once that they were kind of ranked in 11 that particular vein, then the Minister could hire the -- 12 the political staff that they saw fit. 13 In an operational sense how the government 14 work was very much as a mirror image in that they -- they 15 -- civil service was set up on one side and the political 16 staff mirrored it on the other side. Both, you know, 17 they referred to it commonly, inside government, as the 18 four (4) corners of government, with the line Ministries 19 and the Deputies and Cabinet office and the line 20 Ministries through the Ministers and the Premier's 21 office. 22 And that was the -- the -- how in a 23 practical sense the Government operated. 24 Q: And just so as I understand, civil 25 servants would report up that chain of command to the

146

1 Deputy Minister who was overall responsible for the 2 administration of that Ministry? 3 A: Yes. It was, you know, it was, you 4 know, matters of staffing and any sort of HR relationship 5 where it was inappropriate for a -- an elected official 6 to become involved in those issues. 7 Q: And as a political staffer you would 8 be reporting to both your Ministers as well as the -- the 9 Cabinet Secretary is that -- 10 A: Oh no. The Cabinet Secretary, there 11 was quite some distance in between me and the Cabinet 12 Secretary. I reported, you know, in a direct line to the 13 Minister who had hired me in a kind of dotted line to the 14 Premier's office. 15 Q: Thank you for that. 16 A: But, you know, like the Minister 17 reported in a very direct line to the Premier's office as 18 well. 19 Q: Of course. And instructions to civil 20 servants then, you -- you've just indicated would be 21 inappropriate for the Minister to be involved directly in 22 that. Is that what I understood you to be saying? 23 A: Yes. Other than the Deputy Minister. 24 They -- we were asked to respect their chain of command 25 and it's something that we tried to do. In terms of

147

1 funneling it through the appropriate channels. 2 Q: Now, as I understand it, that that 3 relationship may well involve, as a government becomes 4 more experienced in governing, if I can -- if I can put 5 it that way? 6 A: You became more familiar with 7 individuals and the different departments and it was -- 8 became a little more relaxed in a -- in a practical sense 9 of seeking out information and -- and stuff like that. 10 But, you know, even after five (5) years, 11 if -- if the Minister had made a particular decision 12 about any issue relating to the ministry, then as a 13 matter of courtesy the deputy would have been informed 14 directly. 15 It was his job to make sure that whatever 16 decisions the Minister had made, that they were 17 implemented, and so if he was not part of that process, 18 then there could be no assurance that things actually got 19 done. 20 Q: So any kind of political decisions 21 that were made, that wouldn't come out of your office to 22 the civil service, it wouldn't come out of your 23 Minister's office, it would make its way to the 24 bureaucracy through the deputy minister? 25 A: Yeah, usually.

148

1 Q: Okay. 2 A: Yeah, or, you know, the secretary of 3 ONAS, if that was what was happening at the time. 4 Q: All right. What about instructions 5 from the Premier's office; how would those be handled? 6 A: Typically, it wasn't the normal 7 course for the Premier's office to provide any direction 8 to line ministry. 9 It would have been a rarity for the 10 Premier's office to even, you know, interact directly 11 with a line ministry. It wasn't my experience that that 12 happened a very -- very often. 13 You know, sometimes, should they have -- 14 the Ministry of the Attorney General was a little 15 different because sometimes if someone needed legal 16 advice on a, you know, they would approach the Deputy 17 Attorney General directly where I was informed of what 18 was going on. 19 But that was really quite a rarity and not 20 something that was the normal course. Usually any sort 21 of request for information, which was how things normally 22 operated, or direction the -- the flow of information 23 would have been the -- the appropriate point of contact 24 for the Premier's office to provide direction to a line 25 ministry was they would do it concurrently through

149

1 cabinet office and through the political staff so that 2 the direction was travelling both ways through the food 3 chain. 4 Q: All right. You told us earlier that 5 -- that aside from having a direct reporting obligation 6 to your minister you also had a dotted line, I think -- 7 think was the word you used, reporting line to the 8 principle's secretary of the Premier? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Was -- 11 A: We were very clear on -- on the fact 12 that I knew who my bosses was -- my boss' boss was, so I 13 was very conscious of -- of the need to provide 14 assistance to the Premier's staff. 15 Q: And you're aware that the Premier's 16 executive assistant is one Debra Hutton, or was, at that 17 point in time? 18 A: I don't believe that's -- I don't 19 believe her name's Debra. I think it's Debbie. 20 Q: Debbie, pardon me. 21 A: That's all right. 22 Q: Thank you for that. What would her 23 reporting obligation be or what would that line reporting 24 be for her? 25 A: Well she reported directly to the

150

1 principle secretary, a fellow by the name of David 2 Lindsay, and David Lindsay reported directly to the 3 Premier. 4 And I believe that there was a number of - 5 - of -- Debbie was one of maybe four (4) at that level. 6 You know, I think the -- I think the -- going on memory, 7 I believe the -- the principle secretary had about four 8 (4) senior staff; Debbie was one of them. 9 Q: Okay. We've heard that the secretary 10 of cabinet was a person by the name of Rita Burak. 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And she would be responsible for some 13 interface with the deputy ministers? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And can you tell us about that, 16 please? 17 A: Well, in the same way that cabinet 18 worked every Wednesday morning, most Wednesday mornings, 19 cabinet met where the Premier met with his ministers. 20 Monday mornings, the Secretary of Cabinet met with her 21 primary lines we were supporting, the Deputy Ministers, 22 to discuss issues reflecting the -- relating to the 23 operations government. 24 Q: And is -- are those the kinds of 25 meetings that you would be in attendance at?

151

1 A: Never. They were strictly a Civil 2 Service focussed meeting. 3 Q: Has it been you experience that there 4 would be any political staffers to attend these sorts of 5 Cabinet meetings? 6 A: It's my understanding that on -- on 7 the rare occasion the Secretary would invite a political 8 -- a particular political staffer to the meeting to make 9 a brief representation on a specific issue and that would 10 be it, but it would be very much as a -- as a visiting 11 guest to impart a particular piece of information and 12 that would be it. 13 It was just very much a meeting of her and 14 her staff. 15 Q: All right. You've described the 16 Civil Service as being very hierarchical? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Would you say process oriented? Is 19 that something that would meet with how you might 20 characterize the -- 21 A: Yes, it was -- 22 Q: -- the Civil Service? 23 A: -- a definite process involve -- 24 they're -- they're very regimented in terms of how things 25 happen and how things take place. There's -- they have a

152

1 policy on everything. 2 Q: Is there a distinction as between 3 your observations of the Civil Service and -- and your 4 life as a political staffer and others who would have 5 been in the same positions as you? 6 A: Well, it's a learning curve in terms 7 of -- of how the Civil Service operates that everyone 8 goes through. I think it's similar to a large -- a 9 number of large organizations. They have a, you know, a 10 process and procedures for getting things done and Civil 11 Service had that and quite a lot of polices and 12 procedures on their operations. 13 Q: But -- but the fact of the matter is 14 -- is that the Civil Service must bow to the political 15 objectives of the government, is it not? 16 A: I wouldn't use those words, the -- 17 the Civil Service, I believe I said to you last week, is 18 by nature inert, in that they -- they're -- they're 19 responsible for the operations and the -- the new 20 government comes in or a government -- whatever 21 government's in power is responsible for defining the -- 22 the policies of the government and how they are going to 23 be -- or what direction the government's going to proceed 24 in. 25 Q: Okay. And insofar as accomplishing

153

1 that objective, were you provided or do you know other 2 political staffers were provided with any specific 3 instructions as to how they would carry that out? 4 A: Well, we -- you know, as I said, you 5 know, when we were going through our orientation of -- of 6 Government 101 we were also instructed -- see the 7 previous government had developed a reputation for being 8 kind of unprofessional in the way that it interacted with 9 the Civil Service. 10 This reputation was exacerbated by the 11 fact that, you know, quite a few people's opinion the 12 previous government had tried to politicize the Civil 13 Service by appointing senior political individuals to the 14 senior positions in the Civil Service, for instance, 15 David Agnew, the Premier's principle secretary under Bob 16 Rae, had been appointed to this -- as the Secretary of 17 Cabinet which a lot of people viewed as -- as an improper 18 involvement of political role versus the professional 19 Civil Service. 20 So given that background we were provided 21 with very -- very -- we were provided with instructions 22 in terms of -- of our level of professionalism in terms 23 of dealing with the Civil Service. And my minister, 24 particularly, was quite adamant that -- that his staff 25 would be appropriately dressed and would deal with the

154

1 Civil Service in a very professional manner. 2 Q: Do you know whether or not the 3 Premier's office staff attended that -- 4 A: Oh, yes. 5 Q: -- same kind of a briefing? They 6 would have received similar instructions? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: What about on the Civil Service side. 9 Would they have, to your knowledge, and again I don't 10 expect you to get into the minds, but do you know whether 11 or not they would have received similar briefings in 12 terms of what their interactions would be with political 13 staffers? 14 A: I don't know but the difference is, 15 is that, like, for the most part the senior civil service 16 have been dealing with political staff for years. 17 You know, as I heard Mr. Vrancart say 18 earlier, been with the -- the Ministry of MNR for twenty- 19 three (23) years, he had experience dealing with 20 political staff. 21 Q: Thank you. Let's turn to the office 22 that you worked for, that is the office of the Attorney 23 General. 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: And can describe that office, what

155

1 it's role is? Again, just in very general terms. 2 A: Well, is the political office within 3 the ministry, we were responsible for policy development 4 and implementation of the policies of the Ministry of the 5 Attorney General and the Ministry of Native Affairs. 6 We were responsible for any communications 7 that either the two (2) Ministries made, either publicly 8 or to the media. 9 And we were responsible for any sort of 10 legislative issue that impacted on either of the two (2) 11 Ministries. 12 Then we're also -- you know, in a similar 13 vein, we were responsible for making sure that -- that 14 the Minster was -- we were his primary conduit to both 15 the political -- the Premier's office, other elected 16 officials for the civil service. 17 Q: Okay. And the relationship as 18 between the Attorney General's office and his or her 19 civil servants and other ministries? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: What can you tell us about -- about 22 those relationships? 23 A: They have a -- like, for instance, 24 the -- the Ministry op -- related to the Ministry of 25 Solicitor General?

156

1 Q: Yes. 2 A: Well, I would have dealt with the 3 political staff within the Ministry of the Solicitor 4 General, whereas I -- it would never occur to me, it 5 would have been inappropriate for me to contact someone 6 from the Ministry of the Solicitor General. 7 Any requests for information that I had, 8 for instance, about the Solicitor General would have been 9 through the political arm of the office and then through 10 the civil service side of the deputy Attorney General's 11 office. 12 Q: Okay. And the Minister of -- pardon 13 me, the -- the role of the Attorney General is as the 14 chief law officer of the -- the government of Ontario? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Right. And in that capacity, the 17 role is to do what? 18 A: Well, he's primarily responsible for 19 the administration of justice, so we -- we dealt with 20 guys like the -- the heads of court and -- sorry. 21 Q: Commissioner Linden? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Right. 24 A: So, Commissioner Linden was someone 25 that we dealt with when we were -- when we were there.

157

1 His primary responsibility was to make sure both the 2 integrity of -- of the justice system was intact, that it 3 was properly functioning in the same way that the laws of 4 the government of Ontario were upheld. 5 Q: And what about the provision of legal 6 advice to -- to other Ministers. Was there-- was there a 7 role in that -- 8 A: Well, each -- 9 Q: -- in that -- 10 A: -- Ministry had a, in effect, a 11 department of a Ministry of the Attorney General working 12 in those Ministries that provided ongoing advice to the 13 different Ministries. 14 Similar, Mr. Harnick provided legal advice 15 to Cabinet so he, ultimately, was responsible for all the 16 legal actions, the legal advice that the Government of 17 Ontario is receiving. 18 Q: And responsible, as well, for the 19 prosecution, I think you told us earlier, of -- 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: -- matters before the Courts? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And you -- 24 A: We -- you know, we also were 25 responsible for another of program deliveries like the

158

1 Can We Support Plan and other things like that. 2 Various administrative bodies, I -- the 3 Assessment Review Board, the Special Investigations Unit, 4 some other organizations such as that. 5 Q: Thank you. I want to turn you now to 6 1995 and in particular to August of 1995. Let me ask you 7 firstly: You were aware that there was a -- a matter to 8 be dealt with at Camp Ipperwash, that is, at the Army 9 Base. 10 A: Yes. I'd been briefed on the 11 situation at -- I don't think it was -- in August I was 12 briefed on the -- by the -- the Interministerial 13 Committee on issues going on at Camp Ipperwash. I don't 14 think that as a stand alone issue prior to it being 15 brought forward that that was one of the issues that we 16 were -- that we were briefed on. 17 Q: I put in front of you, Mr. Moran, as 18 part of those loose documents, there should be a document 19 in there which comes under the letterhead of one Marcel 20 Beaubien. It's marked as P-534 in these proceedings. 21 Do -- did you see that letter? 22 A: I'm not sure which one you're 23 referring to. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

159

1 A: Thank you. 2 Q: First of all I guess I simply want to 3 ask you whether or not you've had 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is this the 5 one that's dated July 31st? 6 MR. DONALD WORME: Dated July 31, 1995. 7 Thank you, Commissioner. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 11 Q: Have you seen that document before 12 today? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And might you have seen that back in 15 and around the date that it was written -- 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: -- towards the end of July '95? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Is that when you would have received 20 a briefing -- and now you'll see that this deals with 21 West Ipperwash, it doesn't deal with Camp Ipperwash? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And what do you know about -- about 24 what is reported in here, or what can you recall for us 25 today, if anything?

160

1 A: About the facts in that letter? 2 Q: Yeah. 3 A: Oh I can't remember any of the -- the 4 details of Mr. Beaubien's letter. I can remember that, I 5 believe, that this would have been something -- 6 correspondence from MPP's some were a -- a higher 7 priority than a number of -- of issues. 8 But correspondence it was generally 9 assigned to someone in the civil service to respond to if 10 it was questions about facts impacting the Ministry. So, 11 and as would have been the case with this, I -- I would 12 assume that I would have passed it onto the officials 13 within the Native Affairs Sect -- Secretariat. 14 Q: And do you know what reaction if 15 anything, there was by government insofar as the concerns 16 that Mr. Beaubien lays out here? 17 Are you aware of anything? 18 A: Of the Government's response to any 19 of the concerns? 20 Q: Yeah. Was there a formal response 21 insofar as you're aware? 22 A: I can't imagine there wasn't, 23 frankly. You know, a normal course that when we receive 24 correspondence, we replied. So, I -- I would have 25 assumed that we had -- now anyone's that ever written the

161

1 Government would be aware that their time in terms of the 2 turnaround on correspondence it's really not that great. 3 Something we tried to address later. But, 4 I can't imagine that we -- we wouldn't have responded to 5 it. At the same time 6 Q: You weren't -- pardon me. You 7 weren't responsible for any response though or even 8 drafting a response for Minister Harnick? 9 A: I didn't do correspondence. 10 Q: Okay. 11 A: The -- this may have been an issue. 12 One of the issues where the Min -- we would have got -- 13 been provided with a briefing note outlining here's what 14 the facts are in terms of the situation involved so that 15 the Minister could have spoken with it. 16 See I -- you know, Mr. Harnick was a 17 Member of the Legislative Assembly and as such interacted 18 with other elective officials on an ongoing basis. So, 19 it was always our goal to make sure that both in terms of 20 -- of local issues such as this and government issues, 21 that he was well informed. 22 Q: Thank you. Prior to August of 1995, 23 were you aware of a -- of the matter at Camp Ipperwash? 24 A: Not to the best of my knowledge. Can 25 I ask you a quick question?

162

1 Q: Yes. 2 A: Seeing as you've marked this, do you 3 want me to hand it back or am I done with this? 4 A: Yeah, you can just leave it right 5 there actually -- 6 A: Oh, okay. 7 Q: -- and then -- and it will be put 8 back. 9 A: I just didn't want to walk off with 10 your stuff. 11 Q: We won't let you do that. Thank you. 12 Do you recall whether or not you -- you or 13 your minister might have received a briefing from the 14 Interministerial Committee on Aboriginal Emergencies 15 following -- or pardon me prior to August 1st of 1995? 16 A: Prior to August 1st? 17 Q: Yeah. 18 A: I believe we were re -- given an 19 overview of here's what the Committee is in a -- in a 20 general sense, but I can't recall any details surrounding 21 it. 22 Q: If I can just refer you to Tab Number 23 4 of the book of documents in front of you, Mr. Moran. 24 Those are the meeting minutes of August 2nd, 1995 of this 25 Committee?

163

1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: They're marked as Exhibit 503 in this 3 -- in these proceedings? 4 And firstly let me just ask you if you 5 recognize the document. 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: You -- you would have attended at 8 this meeting or you would have received a copy of this 9 and I note that you aren't on the delivery sheet at 10 least. 11 A: Hmm hmm. 12 Q: And nor do I see you on the expected 13 attendees on the -- I guess that would be the -- the 14 agenda page? 15 A: Well -- well -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. DONALD WORME: Oh, pardon me, there 18 you are there. 19 THE WITNESS: No, I... 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 21 THE WITNESS: That's me. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: His name 23 appears on that list, Mr. Worme. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME:

164

1 Q: So you -- you would have attended at 2 this meeting? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And what can you recall about this 5 meeting? 6 A: We reviewed the general issues that 7 were going on in the area. We were informed in a general 8 sense of the issues that were causing frustration at the 9 community level and the frustration that -- I think that 10 both the native and the non-native community were dealing 11 -- had been facing for the last fifty (50) years with 12 regard to Camp Ipperwash. And it was our -- our 13 understanding that -- that the germ of the frustration 14 centred around matters impacting the Camp. 15 We were not informed in any way of any 16 issues that were directly involving the Provincial 17 Government. 18 Q: I'm just going to ask you if you 19 might lift that microphone in front of you so that your 20 voice carries. I see that some of My Friends here might 21 be having some -- some trouble, just hearing -- 22 A: Sorry. 23 Q: -- hearing all of what you have to 24 tell us. 25 A: Is that better?

165

1 Q: Very much so. If I can ask you to 2 turn to Tab Number 3, that is Exhibit P-646, and it 3 appeared to be an e-mail from Julie Jai: 4 "Re. Possible Emergency at Ipperwash." 5 It's dated Tuesday, August 1st at 5:41. 6 It first of all starts out by simply 7 indicating that there will be an Emergency Committee 8 meeting tomorrow at 3:30? 9 A: Hmm hmm. 10 Q: And that would be the meeting that 11 you've just told us you were in attendance at and it 12 seemed that the documents would confirm that. 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: And it goes on in the -- at the top 15 of the next paragraph simply to indicate that the MNR is 16 worried because of rumours that the dissident group which 17 forcefully -- forcibly rather -- entered Camp Ipperwash 18 will take over Ipperwash Provincial Park. Do you see? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And if you go down to the third 21 paragraph just below that it starts: 22 "I have brief Janina Korol as well as 23 David Moran who was in her office when 24 I called here. David will contact the 25 Premier's office to advise them of the

166

1 situation although we do not feel that 2 it is necessary for them to attend the 3 meeting." 4 Do you recall being briefed now by -- 5 A: Oh, at this briefing? 6 Q: Yeah. 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: Okay. 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And can you -- can you recall what 11 that briefing was about or whether it was anything 12 different than what we've seen from the minutes of that 13 meeting from the following day; the document we've 14 already looked at? 15 A: Well, the one that you just had me 16 looking at? 17 Q: Yeah. 18 A: It was our understanding coming out 19 of the meeting that there was no issues that were 20 primarily the focus of the Provincial Government and that 21 they -- that with regard to the situation that the OPP 22 was looking into it. 23 I vaguely recall that officials at ONAS 24 had been charged with reaching out to the local First 25 Nations to see if they could determine what those -- what

167

1 the issues were and what was, I believe, the bottom of 2 it. And I don't recall the results of that in any way or 3 -- or anything. 4 And it could have been the -- they were -- 5 whether the Federal Government was contacted to -- to 6 determine what the status of Camp Ipperwash would have 7 been the logical thing to do, but I couldn't say for 8 certain that the Federal Government was contacted. 9 But I think everyone's impression upon 10 leaving the meeting was that the OPP had the situation 11 under control, that due diligence was being conducted and 12 it really wasn't that -- a big issue at that time. 13 Q: All right. And the notation in there 14 that you would contact the Premier's office to advise of 15 the situation, did you follow up on that? 16 A: I can't remember but I -- I would 17 assume that I had. 18 Q: And -- 19 A: I try to live up to my commitments. 20 Q: And I just take it from that answer 21 that obviously, if you don't recall, then you don't 22 recall any particulars of any briefing that you think you 23 might have done, that seems -- 24 A: The normal course for a situation 25 like that would be -- would have been for me to contact

168

1 the Premier's office and to inform them that there was a 2 potential issue and -- 3 Q: And to your -- 4 A: -- provide them with an overview and, 5 if at the same time, I would have -- like, you'd expect 6 the lines of communication would go both ways and that -- 7 that the appropriate person in cabinet office, who was 8 responsible for issues, would have been informed through 9 the civil service. 10 Q: Thank you. 11 A: Like the whole idea was that -- that 12 information travelled up through both streams, both sides 13 of government. 14 Q: The Interministerial Committee, 15 you've told us you received some briefing initially on 16 just what the nature and role of it would have been. 17 A: Hmm hmm. 18 Q: What's your understanding of that? 19 A: There's a briefing note in here that 20 goes over it pretty good. Do you know what tab that's 21 at, because I'll -- 22 Q: That is -- yes, at Tab number 2. 23 A: If I can just highlight a -- a couple 24 of points here in terms of my understanding, because I 25 think they -- the note articulates it's pretty well.

169

1 Q: Just before you get into it, I just 2 want to indicate that that is P-303. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: And the appendix of that is 498, P- 7 498. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: Just give me one second, Don, I... 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: While he's 13 looking do you want to mention the document number, or is 14 that not necessary? 15 MR. DONALD WORME: The document number is 16 1011557, Commissioner. 17 THE WITNESS: To put them -- the -- the 18 role of the Committee in perspective, they -- the native 19 affairs secretariat was primarily responsible for land 20 claim negotiations. 21 Secondly, they were responsible for 22 providing advice on issues affecting native affairs with 23 all the line ministries that directly delivered these 24 programs. 25 So, for instance, the Ministry of Health

170

1 delivered a program called the Health and Wellness 2 Program and it would be our role to provide them with 3 certain cultural issues, sensitive advice in terms of 4 the -- the delivery of that program. 5 They -- they -- the Government, as a 6 whole, provided, I believe, in the neighbourhood of $400 7 million funding to Native programs that were all 8 delivered by whichever line ministry was -- was our kind 9 of role as a co-ordinating body. 10 Similar with this committee was 11 responsible for involving all effected line ministries in 12 a coordinating role so that, you know, there was a sense 13 of communication in between all the line ministries. 14 Despite the various attempts, government really does 15 operate as a number of different siloed ministries and 16 our job was to try and share information. 17 You know, so in the same way that -- that 18 the ministry, if the -- of -- responsible for Native 19 Affairs didn't provide the Ontario Health and Wellness 20 program, we were not responsible for any program that the 21 line ministry had responsibility for. So that's what 22 that refers in terms of, we did the co-ordination, 23 whoever was directly responsible on the ground provided 24 the actual service. 25 Now in terms of the committee, we

171

1 developed recommendations on how to deal with a 2 particular issue and then took the particular advice. 3 So, the primary role of the committee was to try and make 4 the -- to address the situation so that it was mitigated. 5 And the briefing note clearly outlines: 6 "That the principles guiding the 7 response to emergencies are the 8 prevention of violence, property damage 9 and personal injury, timely lifting of 10 the block -- blockade through 11 negotiations and that no substantive 12 negotiation is to occur [in terms of 13 the -- the bigger issues impacting 14 Native Affairs]." 15 So, you know, in a very practical sense 16 what this was meant to be was that until, for instance, 17 the occupation of the Park had been ceased that we would 18 not begin to actually negotiate issues around the land 19 claim of the Park or anything like that. 20 Q: Okay. Thank you. All right. Going 21 back to the meeting of August 2nd of 1995, again you've 22 had an opportunity to refresh your memory by looking at 23 the minutes which are located under Tab -- pardon me, Tab 24 4. 25 A: Yeah.

172

1 Q: We've earlier identified that as P- 2 503. And as a result of the information that was 3 conveyed at that meeting, Mr. Moran, what did you learn 4 about this -- what was your impression on leaving that 5 meeting? 6 A: That -- well to be -- to be very 7 direct, it was our understanding that the dithering by 8 the Federal Government has -- was creating a problem with 9 respect to the Provincial Park and that the First Nation 10 -- the First Nations not the -- the Native community in 11 the area, was frustrated by the lack of -- of action with 12 regard to the transfer of the Park to the rightful 13 owners. 14 We were educated in terms of 15 Q: Just let me -- me interrupt you 16 briefly and I apologize for this. But you said they were 17 frustrated with the absence of transfer of the Park? 18 A: Oh, no. Sorry, sorry. The camp. 19 Q: The camp, right. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: Mr. Ross wasn't happy with that but - 22 - yes, go ahead. 23 A: And so we were educated about how the 24 Province came into possession of the Provincial Park. 25 The issues around how the Federal Government came into

173

1 possession of the camp. We were also educated about the 2 -- the two (2) sections of the First Nations community 3 related to the -- I want to make sure I get it right, the 4 -- the Stoney Pointers and the -- the Kettle Point Indian 5 Reserve. 6 So the difference is between the two (2) 7 communities. 8 Q: And just on that note, we've heard 9 the word dissident used in relation to at least certain 10 of those groups. 11 Is that a word that you might have heard 12 employed at that time? 13 A: Yes. But I don't know whether -- I 14 don't think that, in my mind, that dissidents didn't -- 15 it didn't necessarily reflect to the entire Stoney Point 16 community; that there was individuals within the Stoney 17 Point community who were more excised about the situation 18 than other individuals of the community. 19 I don't think that it would be fair -- in 20 terms of my understanding, you'd have to have the person 21 that wrote this to -- to articulate it. But it was my 22 understanding that -- that not everyone was a dissident. 23 Q: All right. In terms of specific 24 actions -- let me -- let me just back up first. You were 25 at least informed or educated on the fact that there were

174

1 -- there was a distinction between Stoney Pointers and -- 2 A: And the First Nation, yes. 3 Q: -- and the First Nation? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: All right. 6 A: You know, this -- the reason why I -- 7 you know part of the -- part of the education in terms of 8 -- of the Native Affairs Secretariat that, you know, I 9 had been going through and the Minister had been going 10 through was, you know, issues affecting native affairs in 11 terms of -- of status Indians and First Nations and Metis 12 and all the, you know, the different classifications, I 13 guess you could say, as defined by the -- the Federal 14 Government in terms of the different native communities. 15 So, I think that there was certainly at 16 the time, and still, there was a little lack of 17 understanding in terms of the First Nations and the -- 18 the Stoney Pointers and I think that -- and there -- my 19 reason for adding this is because I think that it 20 provides a little more -- provides a fuller picture in 21 terms of that we were provided, given the impression that 22 there was a real, clear distinction in terms of the -- 23 the First Nation versus the -- the Stoney Pointers. 24 Q: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Perhaps this

175

1 would be a good point to take a break, Mr. Worme? 2 MR. DONALD WORME: Absolutely. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll take 4 an afternoon break now. 5 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 6 for fifteen (15) minutes. 7 8 --- Upon recessing at 3:33 p.m. 9 --- Upon resuming at 3:50 p.m. 10 11 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 12 resumed, please be seated. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 15 Q: Now, Mr. Moran, just before the break 16 I was asking you about the kinds of impressions that you 17 had formed with respect to the matter at the Camp 18 Ipperwash that was going on following your meeting of 19 August the 2nd of 1995. 20 You've indicated that there were certain 21 frustrations that were being expressed relative to the 22 Federal Government's failure to do certain things. 23 A: Hmm hmm. 24 Q: That there was a distinction as 25 between the Stoney Point Group and the First Nation, I

176

1 think, is the way that you put it? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: What about with respect to the 4 activities, the conduct of the Stoney Pointers or the 5 Stoney Point Group; did you hear anything about that? 6 A: At that time? 7 Q: Yes. 8 A: No, I -- at that time I don't recall 9 that -- it's an interesting question in terms of the 10 timing. 11 We were made aware that -- in effect, that 12 they had taken over the Camp Ipperwash, but I -- I don't 13 think that the -- that that -- had that -- could you 14 remind me whether that takeover had taken place at that 15 time? I don't think so. 16 Q: The takeover of -- of -- 17 A: Camp Ipperwash. 18 Q: Of Camp Ipperwash? Well, we've had 19 evidence that it occurred on the 29th of July of 1995. 20 A: Oh, okay. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 22 THE WITNESS: So then -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The Camp 24 occurred some -- well, I'm not sure. 25 MR. DONALD WORME: Well, the barracks

177

1 proper, I'm referring to. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 3 what he's referring to. Are you referring to Camp or the 4 barracks? They're different things. 5 THE WITNESS: Well, it's my understanding 6 that at one (1) point in time that the dissidents took 7 over Camp Ipperwash. I can't recall exactly when that 8 takeover took place. I can recall being briefed on the 9 issue of the takeover of Camp Ipperwash. 10 Logically, the more I think about it the 11 more it's -- it's likely that that takeover had taken 12 place prior to my briefing in the beginning of August. 13 So yes, I -- I would assume that I was briefed on the 14 issues in terms of the -- the takeover. It was on -- 15 just -- on that vein it was our understanding that -- 16 that the -- the Stoney Pointers had valid title to the 17 Camp and that was -- the only issue in dispute was 18 timing. 19 It's my understanding that the issue 20 holding up the transfer was the Federal Government's 21 unwillingness. There -- there -- they needed to clean up 22 the Park, I mean, the Camp, before it was transferred, 23 whether it was polluted or there was hazardous waste on - 24 - in the Camp that needed to take place before the 25 transfer.

178

1 I don't know whether that actually ever 2 took place or not, but that was apparently one (1) of the 3 things that the holdup was. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 6 Q: Okay. Mr. Moran, I -- I had taken 7 you to Julie Jai's e-mail, to the executive group that's 8 at -- the exhibit at Tab 3 of the book of documents in 9 front of you, that is P-646. And in there you'll recall 10 that I read to you the portion that suggested that MNR's 11 worried because of rumours that this dissident group may 12 take over the -- the Park. 13 A: Hmm hmm. 14 Q: As a result of your attendance at and 15 briefing following the meeting of August 2nd what 16 impression did you have with respect to the Park? 17 A: That the Province of Ontario had 18 clear title to the Park. I was not provided -- given the 19 impression that -- that takeover was likely. It was much 20 more of an informational briefing in that, here is a 21 situation that was going on, we're -- you know, as in the 22 normal course we're providing you with some background 23 information in terms of what's happened, but it wasn't -- 24 I didn't -- I didn't get the same sense of urgency that 25 we'd -- we'd get at later briefings, that contingency

179

1 plans were in place and that, really, things were -- were 2 fine. 3 Q: And the contingency plans that were 4 in place were in place by whom or who was responsible for 5 that? 6 A: Oh, the Ontario Provincial Police. 7 Q: I'll refer you very quickly to Tab 8 Number 5 which is the meeting note minutes of August the 9 2nd, 1995. They're marked as P-506 and I take it you've 10 had a chance to review these before coming here today? 11 A: Hmm hmm. 12 Q: And -- and does that accord with the 13 understanding and what you've just testified here to? Is 14 that consistent with your recollection? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Aside from taking this time to sort 17 of come up to speed on an issue, I take it there -- there 18 was no sense of urgency, certainly, if I understand your 19 answers correctly, with respect to the Park? 20 A: Yes, we -- I think there was a -- a 21 sense of surprise in the room that the situation had 22 taken place at Camp Ipperwash, but I don't think that 23 there was a threat within the room -- a feeling, a sense 24 of threat within the room that -- that it was likely to 25 be the same -- it was -- could happen with the Park.

180

1 Q: Aside from the -- 2 A: Erroneously, as it turns out, but -- 3 Q: Right. Aside from the -- 4 A: -- I don't want to downplay the -- 5 the importance of it because I guess it's a -- I don't 6 want to give the impression that this was not a -- a 7 matter that we thought needed to continue to be 8 monitored. You know, that this was an issue and it just 9 hadn't reached the emergency phase yet. 10 Q: Okay. Did you get any sense of the 11 value of this meeting, given the fact that it was 12 informational, as far as you were concerned; I think 13 that's what you just told us? 14 A: I -- I thought it was an important 15 meeting, that I should be -- that I -- it was justified 16 in me being there and being briefed on the issue. 17 Q: Do you recall if there were 18 subsequent meetings scheduled in terms of follow-up to 19 this? 20 A: I don't recall. I do recall that 21 none took place. 22 Q: The seniority of those that were 23 attending at the meeting, did that suggest to you 24 anything with respect to the degree of -- the degree of 25 risk in -- in terms of the overall situation?

181

1 A: It led me to believe that the issue 2 was not urgent. The seniority of the people in the room 3 was certainly below my level of seniority within the -- 4 the organization and it was below the level of seniority 5 that I had encountered to-date or would encounter for the 6 next five (5) years. 7 Q: As a result of your attendance at 8 this meeting, the information that was provided, what did 9 you do with that? 10 A: I briefed the Attorney General in 11 terms of the results of the meeting, provided him with an 12 overall, and I would imagine that I had liaised with the 13 Premier's office afterwards, as would have been the -- 14 the normal course. 15 I don't think I had any conversation with 16 any other line ministry political staff? 17 Q: When you say, you imagined that you 18 might have, I take it from that that you're not certain 19 one way or another? 20 A: I don't recall brief -- discussing 21 the matter with any other line ministries. And I don't 22 recall discussing it with the -- with the Deputy Attorney 23 General. 24 Q: Would you have been providing 25 political advice at the same time as providing a briefing

182

1 of the meeting? 2 A: Yes, it's my primary responsibility. 3 Q: All right. And can you recall today 4 what sort of advice that you might have provided? 5 A: I alerted him that it was a potential 6 issue that had to be forthcoming and that this was 7 something that we needed to keep an eye on and that he 8 should be prepared for it. 9 But at the same time, provided him with 10 the same assurances that we had received at the meeting 11 and that the situation was well in hand. 12 Q: And aside from this briefing, did you 13 take any other further steps relative to Ipperwash -- 14 A: Not that I -- 15 Q: -- at that time? 16 A: Not that I can recall. 17 Q: Do you have any knowledge of 18 communications by, or involvement of the local MPP, 19 Marcel Beaubien, in the Ipperwash situation? 20 A: Oh, at all? 21 Q: Just during this time, aside from the 22 documents that I've already referred you to? 23 A: I am aware that the Attorney General 24 had a conversation with Marcel Beaubien. I don't believe 25 I had any direct communication with the local MPP. And I

183

1 believe that I would have -- I believe that I was 2 contacted by the Premier's Office about the issues about 3 the local MPP. 4 Q: Again, I had referred you earlier to 5 the document which appears at Tab 6 of the book of 6 documents in front of you. I note that this has been 7 marked as Exhibit P-534 and that is the letter dated July 8 31st under the hand of Mr. Beaubien to your minister 9 Charles Harnick. 10 Just again, so I'm clear Mr. Moran, is 11 this a document that you can recall seeing back from that 12 date or is it something that you recall now that you've 13 had an opportunity to refresh your memory? 14 A: When I -- when I saw it I remembered 15 the letter. I didn't remember it at the time. I do 16 recall that the Minister had a conversation with the 17 local MPP about the issue. 18 Q: Do you know if this letter was raised 19 in the context of the Inter-Ministerial Committee of 20 August 2nd? 21 A: The letter in itself? 22 Q: Yeah. 23 A: I don't believe so. There was issues 24 related to the -- the local MPP and the -- in the August 25 2nd meeting --

184

1 Q: Yes. 2 A: -- or the -- the -- the later ones? 3 Q: The August 2nd meeting? 4 A: I don't recall. 5 Q: And just so we can clear it off, do 6 you know whether that was raised in any of the subsequent 7 meetings of the Inter-Ministerial Committee meeting? 8 A: Oh this letter? 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: I can't remember. The -- we did talk 11 about communicating with local officials, both 12 municipally elected and provincially elected officials. 13 But, I don't think we went over this letter in -- but I 14 can't remember. 15 Q: Just before I leave that letter. If 16 I can take you to page 2 of that at point number 7 and it 17 reads: 18 "Law enforcement is basically non- 19 existent and the OPP does not seem too 20 keen in getting involved." 21 Do you see that? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: As a result of that did you do 24 anything to reassess the -- the risk value? 25 A: No. I -- I had been provided by

185

1 instruction from the Minister that -- that in terms of 2 what was happening on the ground, that I was to rely on 3 the civil service for information. 4 Q: Okay. And if you go right to the 5 bottom of that letter, to the "PS", just underneath the 6 signature, the post script says: 7 "I have been briefed by Staff Sergeant 8 W. Lacroix of the Petrolia OPP 9 Detachment this morning." 10 And given what you've told us earlier 11 about the demarcation between the -- the Government 12 offices and the -- and the law enforcement, did that 13 cause you any kind of pause at all? 14 A: No. Because. in terms of asking 15 about general questions about safety within the 16 community, that was not out of the normal course. For 17 instance, Mr. Harnick and I, prior to his appointment as 18 Attorney General had spent a -- an evening with a police 19 officer cruising around his local community. So, that 20 understanding of basic safety levels within a community 21 was something that a local elected official would have a 22 general sense. 23 But, I think that there's a very clear 24 line between mattes of an individual case versus, for 25 instance in Mr. Harnick's case, how large a problem is

186

1 break and entering in his community and is there anything 2 on an educational or informational way that could be done 3 to address it. General staffing issues and stuff like 4 that. 5 Q: All right. Thank you for that. 6 Further to the meeting of August the 2nd, you told us 7 that you briefed your Minister, Charles Harnick, and you 8 didn't -- didn't take any further steps following that 9 meeting. 10 Are you aware if the Premier was briefed 11 about the meeting? 12 A: Not to my knowledge. 13 Q: Would -- 14 A: You know, that -- that's -- that 15 wouldn't be within my area of responsibility. 16 Q: And that was my next question. 17 Whether or not that would be something that fell to you. 18 And do you know who would have been responsible for that? 19 A: Well the individual at the meeting 20 was a fellow by the name of Brett Laschinger and he 21 reported directly to Debbie Hutton. So, I would imagine 22 that between Brett and Debbie they would have decided how 23 best to proceed with the issue. 24 Q: Okay. And what was your next 25 involvement or awareness of the situation at Ipperwash,

187

1 Mr. Moran. 2 A: After the Labour Day weekend I 3 received a call that the dissidence had taken over the 4 Park. 5 Q: And do you know who would have 6 provided you that call with that information? 7 A: I can't recall. I would imagine that 8 it would be the communications branch. But, it could 9 have been the Deputy's office. It probably was one of 10 those two (2) streams of information. It could have been 11 someone directly at -- it could have been Julie but I 12 can't remember. 13 Q: And that typically would come in the 14 form of a phone call perhaps or a letter or e-mail? 15 A: For something like that I would've 16 expected a phone call. An e-mail would have been not 17 quite urgent enough in the situation. 18 Q: And in addition to being advised that 19 there had been a move into the Park by the dissidence, as 20 you say, what other information was communicating? 21 For example, was there -- was there a 22 governmental response to this, was there an intention to 23 call the Committee back together or -- 24 A: Oh, yes. The -- the Committee would 25 be holding a meeting and that meeting was going to take

188

1 place immediately. And after that phone -- that phone 2 call I would have made a -- a phone call to the Premier's 3 office and then proceeded to the meeting. 4 I would have told the Attorney General as 5 well that the situation had taken place. 6 Q: All right. Now tell us what you can 7 about -- about the meeting, about your attendance at this 8 meeting. First of all, do you have an independent 9 recollection of this meeting? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. Carry on then. If you 12 can tell us where it was and what happened. 13 A: It was at the Native Affairs 14 Secretariat which was not located in the same building as 15 the Ministry of the Attorney General, which was where my 16 office was. 17 So, we proceeded down to their offices 18 where we had a -- a repeat briefing of the issues that 19 had been covered at the August meeting. We were provided 20 with a map of Ontario where the location of the Park was 21 outlined and we went over the relationship between the 22 Stoney Pointers and the First Nation and were provided 23 with a background of the history from 1942 to the present 24 date. 25 And then we were provided with local

189

1 updates from the various parties in the room and provided 2 an update from the MNR Staff who were on site, as well as 3 the Ministry of the Solicitor General, and so on. 4 Q: And when you say, "Ministry of the 5 Solicitor General," who was providing the voice for that 6 Ministry? 7 A: Well, it was kind of concurrent, both 8 in terms of the -- Ron Fox was providing detailed 9 information as to what was going on on the ground and 10 then Kathryn Hunt was providing some additional 11 information. 12 Q: Did you know Mr. Fox prior to that 13 meeting? 14 A: I don't think we had ever met. 15 Q: Were you at the meeting at the outset 16 or right from the beginning? 17 A: Yeah, to the best of my knowledge. 18 Q: Can you recall if there were 19 introductions that would have been provided at the 20 commencement of the meeting? 21 A: Oh yeah, yeah. We went around the 22 room and did the, Hi my name is... 23 Q: And can you recall how Mr. Fox was 24 described or introduced, or how he would have introduced 25 himself, if that was the case?

190

1 A: He was described as a -- the -- I 2 believe it's a political liaison in-between the OPP and 3 the Ministry, and it was his job to, kind of, act as that 4 information-sharing agent. 5 Q: Okay. And when you say MNR Officials 6 that were on the ground, who do you recall providing the 7 voice for -- for that -- 8 A: Well, there was two (2) guys. And I 9 get mixed up which one spoke at which, but I believe Les 10 Kobayashi, the actual General Manager of the Park, was 11 the one that -- who was leading the first Briefing. 12 Q: And we understand he appeared by 13 teleconference? 14 A: Yes, he did. 15 Q: All right. Continue. 16 A: Where he went over the -- the 17 situation on what -- what had actually taken place and 18 the -- the series of events and that. To the best of my 19 recollection they -- this actual takeover had been in 20 contrast to the Camp Ipperwash, that had been much more 21 defacto taking over the -- the Park, where it seemed like 22 force was used when they took over the Camp. 23 I got the impression that they just kind 24 of took it over and said: It's ours now, get out. 25 Q: Okay. Just getting back to the

191

1 introduction of Mr. Fox, whether he introduced himself or 2 others, were you under any, well, let me -- let me ask 3 you this: What did you understand his role to be? 4 A: To -- I understood they kind of had a 5 separate and distinct relationship, in a general sense, 6 between the OPP and the Ministry of the Solicitor 7 General; that -- that political individuals such as 8 myself or my counterpart, the Ministry of the Solicitor 9 General were not to involve themselves with matters 10 relating to law enforcement. 11 And so it was my understanding that his 12 role was to provide information to the Minister's Office 13 so they had a general sense of what was going on. 14 In a -- in a similar sense, the way that 15 it worked in -- in a practical way with the -- the 16 Ministry of the Attorney General, there's, I believe, 17 maybe Your Honour would be able to know this better, but 18 I believe there's over two hundred (200) courtrooms in 19 the Province of Ontario. 20 And the Attorney General would have been 21 responsible for any prosecutorial issue that was going on 22 in those circumstances. Now, while the -- the Minister 23 had no involvement role whatsoever in terms of what was 24 going on with that court case, he needed to -- to have a 25 general idea of what was going on in various high profile

192

1 cases so that he -- he did know that things were well in 2 hand, basically. 3 So, that, you know, that the Minister 4 seemed to be informed of the actions of his agents. So 5 then, in a similar vein, it was my understanding that the 6 role of -- of Ron Fox was to provide their Minister with 7 just a -- kind of a basic understanding; here's the 8 situation, here's the facts on the ground as it relates 9 to ongoing policing matters. 10 Q: And insofar as his being able to 11 relate that information to the Inter-Ministerial 12 Committee, do you recall any distinction as between the 13 type or the value of information he provided as compared 14 to that provided by the MNR officials? 15 A: The details of the briefing provided 16 by MNR officials was much more -- was a lot more 17 information. There was a lot more graphic information. 18 They -- MNR seemed to be much more aware of what was 19 going on in the situation than the OPP, the -- the OPP 20 seemed, in a very general sense, to say everything's 21 going fine but they really didn't know any of the details 22 of what was actually happening on the ground. 23 Q: Can you provide us with an example of 24 how you came to that impression? 25 A: Well, now I get confused in terms of

193

1 the two (2) different meetings, but there was reports of 2 vandalism, gunfire, various other, you know, lawless 3 acts. And the MNR officials were the ones that were 4 providing us with this information in terms of, you know, 5 here's what's actually happening on the ground. 6 For instance, the burning of the picnic 7 tables, for instance; that was, I believe, information 8 that we got from the park officials and not the 9 provincial police. 10 Q: Okay. Now, I appreciate that you 11 might not have a specific recollection of which meeting 12 that you had obtained this information, but that type of 13 information that you've just relayed to us, do you -- can 14 you tell us about the sense in which that was received at 15 the committee level? 16 A: Well, it certainly created a sense of 17 urgency in that there was a true sense -- and it was much 18 more escalated the next day, frankly, whereas in the next 19 day there was reports of -- the MNR was reporting that 20 there was automatic gunfire, that -- that the situation 21 was escalating rapidly. 22 The other thing of note that -- that was 23 really key in terms of the government's handling of the 24 situation, the background information was that there was 25 a real concern raised about the Pinery Provincial Park,

194

1 which was in close proximity to Ipperwash. 2 And there was also concern that -- that a 3 similar situation could arise in Pinery; that the local 4 native community was upset with issues impacting Pinery 5 Provincial Park. 6 We were also briefed that there were some 7 issues outside of London; we were informed that there was 8 a concern raised that the Mohawk Warriors could become 9 involved. And we were also told that there was a concern 10 that native members from Michigan would also join the 11 situation at the provincial park. 12 So, there was a real kind of a sense of 13 fear of escalation. On behalf of the Committee and I 14 think there was a real concern that the situation could 15 spread to other Provincial Parks. 16 I can tell you that there was a sense 17 there that we wanted to make sure that -- that it was 18 contained as best as possible into Ipperwash and that it 19 didn't -- did not spread province wide. 20 We were also -- one of the things that 21 wasn't really touched on in the August meeting that was 22 touched on more in this one, was the proximity of the 23 Park to the non Native community. 24 And that -- upon my recollection here, I 25 believe Matheson Road kind of separated the two (2) and

195

1 that there was a concern that the issues that were 2 currently contained within the Park could spill off into 3 the non Native community as well. 4 Q: Again, appreciating that -- that 5 there was some uncertainty as to where this information 6 came to the committee, pardon me, which date it came to 7 the committee, can you tell us who was passing this sort 8 of information along? 9 Are you able to attribute, for example, 10 each individual piece of information you've just told 11 us -- 12 A: Oh, no. 13 Q: -- about, to any particular 14 individual? 15 A: No. I think in part, you know, in 16 large part because most of the -- the people in the room 17 I would have only have met once or twice before. Let 18 alone, if they were from a different ministry I really 19 wouldn't put it in my first time meeting and were hearing 20 them so I can't remember exactly which information came 21 from where. 22 Q: If I can just refer you to Tab Number 23 7 of the Book of Documents in front of you. It's Inquiry 24 Document 1012561 and you'll see that there's 25 approximately four (4) photocopied pages from a coil

196

1 notebook. 2 A: Hmm hmm. 3 Q: And you recognize those as your 4 handwritten notes? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: And see where it starts. "Ipperwash," 7 at the top of the first page and that is Front Number 8 0069634? 9 A: Yes, sir. 10 Q: And is that the information that 11 would have been provided to the Interministerial 12 Committee on the 5th of September 1995? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: I appreciate this is an undated -- 15 A: No. But that's a -- that's a -- 16 that's note from me. The one thing of note here that I 17 think is -- is interesting in terms of delving into in 18 terms of a little more information is the -- the question 19 about the -- the burial ground. 20 When the issue of the burial ground came 21 up, I -- I believe -- I'm fairly certain that this is the 22 first time that any of the political staff in the room, 23 myself included, had been briefed on issues of burial 24 grounds and the significance. 25 And it was something that we discussed at

197

1 the meeting in terms of the significance in the role 2 because one of the questions that we had was valid title 3 to the Park. And when we discussed whether that a burial 4 ground was sufficient reason for the validity of the land 5 claim, we were told, No, that that was not. 6 There were, in effect, thousands of Native 7 burial grounds all across the Province of Ontario and 8 that the proper and appropriate steps, in terms of 9 burial grounds, was to properly protect the site in the 10 same way that a cemetery would be protected. But that it 11 was not a valid claim. 12 The other thing of not in terms of the 13 burial ground is, the only people that seem to know 14 anything about the burial ground was MNR and they 15 provided assurances that it was their best information 16 that there was no burial ground in the Park. 17 Q: And do you recall -- 18 A: Which is surprising, in retrospect. 19 Q: Do -- do you recall how the issue of 20 the burial [pardon me] -- the burial ground as you put it 21 or burial site, as is noted in your notes, do you -- do 22 you recall who would have raised that? 23 A: I can't remember. 24 Q: And if I can just refer you again to 25 your notes just under the notation, Burial site:

198

1 "Township seeking injunction re. 2 Matheson Drive." 3 Is that...? 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: Okay. And that's what you just told 6 us about a little bit earlier? 7 A: Yeah, but you know, quite honestly, I 8 hadn't remembered the -- the township was actually 9 seeking an injunction at the -- at this time so... 10 Q: Okay. If I can turn you to the next 11 page, Mr. Moran. 12 A: Hmm hmm. 13 Q: It looks like the notation at the top 14 of that page says: 15 "Briefing re: Injunction ex -- ex 16 parte?" 17 A: Yeah, I think incorrectly spelled. 18 Q: Do you know who would have been doing 19 that briefing? 20 A: I would imagine that -- 21 Q: I -- I take it again from that that 22 you don't have an independent recollection? 23 A: Whether that -- I'm not sure what 24 you're asking me, sorry. 25 Q: Just as to who was doing the briefing

199

1 on the injunction. 2 A: Well, the Deputy Attorney General -- 3 Q: All right. 4 A: -- would have been...You know all -- 5 all matters of legal advice really flow through the 6 Deputy Attorney General. Now, often he brought various 7 officials with him to brief the Minister, but it was his 8 primary responsibility to provide legal advice to the 9 Attorney General. 10 Q: And would that be true with respect 11 to those notations under the heading, "Options"; Criminal 12 Code, mischief, trespass, Public Lands Act? 13 Do you see those notations? 14 A: Yeah, but it's -- it's not my 15 recollection that the Attorney General was ever briefed 16 on the Criminal Code options. I think it's my -- to the 17 best of my knowledge that the committee had made a 18 recommendation in terms of following the injunction and 19 the issue that we briefed the Attorney General on was the 20 committee's recommendation and we didn't discuss the 21 options that we rejected. 22 It's a good question for him, I -- I don't 23 think he was briefed on those issues. 24 Q: Okay. If we go to the -- if we go 25 through the bottom of the -- your notations there.

200

1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: There seems to be a question there: 3 "Why are you here? Have to leave." 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: This is part of the briefing I take 6 it that you would have received and you're making notes 7 as it's going along. Is that fair? 8 A: Yeah. One (1) of the basic questions 9 that was -- basic actions that supposed to come out of 10 the meeting was someone was -- I can't remember who, but 11 someone was supposed to go and -- and -- and speak to the 12 occupiers and ask them those -- that pretty general 13 question and at the same time provide them with the 14 instruction that really they had to get out. 15 Q: And up to that point to the end of -- 16 A: I don't know whether that actually 17 happened. 18 Q: All right. 19 A: It's a question of whether anyone 20 actually had -- I believe that -- that communication did 21 occur the more that I think of it because a spokesman was 22 appointed so I -- I believe that communication did take 23 place that -- where it's general fact finding in terms of 24 why the occupation had taken place. 25 Q: All right. And if the --

201

1 A: It would have been -- it's kind of 2 like a thing that we -- I guess on reflection could have 3 been dealt with better in the August meeting in terms of 4 -- of whether the issues affecting the Camp could spill 5 over to the Provincial Park. 6 It was our understanding that it was 7 basically a reflection of the frustration surrounding the 8 Camp that -- that there wasn't any actual claim to the 9 Provincial Park, that this was all stemming from the 10 frustration that the native community was having in terms 11 of the Camp. 12 So you know that is kind of like that 13 issue of, you know, why exactly are you in the Park? I 14 think it's a reflection of our -- our -- our attitude. 15 Q: If we see just the last notation 16 under the number "4" at the bottom of that page it says, 17 "Develop Legal Options." 18 And I take it that was an outcome of the 19 meeting? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: And if we could just -- 22 A: Sort of just in terms of explaining 23 the notes that the -- the -- the lines with the numbers 24 attached to it, this is a basically the public messaging 25 that we had developed at the meeting that we were going

202

1 to use publicly. This was, if we were asked by the -- 2 the media or any other official about what -- what the 3 situation was. This is what we were going to say 4 publicly. 5 Q: And what is that last notation at the 6 bottom of the page? 7 A: Well, it says: 8 "Seven (7) of nine (9) individuals 9 building blockade." 10 Q: And what does that relate to; if you 11 can recall? 12 A: I haven't got a clue. 13 Q: And the next page; is that similarly 14 -- is that dealing with this same issue? 15 A: Not -- no, the civilian oversight? 16 No. 17 Q: And then down to the middle of the 18 page, it says "Ipperwash" again. But I take it that 19 that's a different day. Would I be right in -- 20 A: Yeah. That was the next day. 21 Q: Okay. And before we go there, let's 22 just go back to -- let's just go back to what you had 23 told us previously and that is that it seemed to you that 24 the MNR officials had better information than -- than the 25 OPP.

203

1 Again, I don't want to put words in your 2 mouth but is that -- 3 A: Yeah. They had much more detailed 4 information about what was going on on the ground. 5 Q: And given what you told us earlier 6 about, you know, maintaining that separation between 7 operational aspects of law enforcement, that is policing, 8 and government activity; was there any concern registered 9 either by you or anybody else at that meeting relative to 10 this information that's coming to you? 11 A: I -- I don't recall anything being 12 raised. I think there was a general sense of -- of 13 surprise that the OPP didn't seem to know what was going 14 on on the ground. 15 But, like, it never -- I don't think it 16 ever occurred to anyone that the flow of information was 17 actually two-way. 18 The one thing that I should go back on in 19 terms of the first meeting before we get onto the other 20 is one of the issues that we went, as part of the 21 education process was -- like, when we were going through 22 these options and upon reflection the idea of the options 23 was -- I don't think it should have been something the 24 political staff should have been exposed to, but when we 25 were going through them, we didn't -- there was a sense

204

1 within the -- the meeting when we were going through 2 them, it was very well, we were trying to put it into 3 situations that we'd understand so that it was -- well, 4 if someone had taken over your -- your backyard you'd 5 call the police and the police would ask them to leave. 6 Well, how come that situation isn't being 7 -- like why can't the -- the park individuals just call 8 the police and say, could you ask these guys to get out 9 of our park. 10 So it was that sort of education that was 11 the focus of the meeting. 12 Q: And do you recall who might have been 13 asking those kinds of questions? 14 A: The example that I just provided you, 15 I believe, came from the Premier's Office. 16 Q: And who specifically? 17 A: Deb Hutton. 18 Q: Right. Do you recall what response, 19 if any, Ron Fox might have had to that kind of 20 suggestion? 21 A: Well, both -- both Kathryn Hunt and 22 Ron had addressed issues, I believe at that time, about 23 well, we can't provide the police with instructions. But 24 then they provided the basic understanding that I believe 25 it was a more of a -- I can't remember the details

205

1 legally of why it was really not much of an option. 2 But it was -- we were told that really it 3 was -- Ron told us that it really wasn't enough of a -- a 4 -- given that the nature of the situation that even 5 charging them with trespassing would not provide with 6 enough strength or whatever to actually get the occupiers 7 out of the park. 8 And so what he and others were -- were 9 recommending was the pursuit of an injunction because the 10 injunction would actually provide the legal authority to 11 remove the occupiers from the park. 12 Q: Do you recall any kind of attempt by 13 Mr. Fox to explain why that was so? And again what I 14 mean why that is so, I'm referring to what you've just 15 told us earlier and that is that a simple charging with 16 trespass would not have sufficient strength I think as 17 you put it -- 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: -- to allow the -- the police to go 20 in and simply remove these folks. 21 A: That's correct. They said it would 22 kind of be -- I got the impression it would have been 23 kind of a waste of time, that the appropriate way was to 24 proceed with the injunction. 25 Q: Okay. And do you recall whether or

206

1 not the allegation that there was a burial site within 2 the Park boundaries, whether that had anything to do with 3 him providing this explanation? 4 Was that part of the explanation? 5 A: I don't remember Ron addressing the 6 issue of the burial ground at all. I do remember, I 7 believe it was ONAS officials providing the -- the 8 background and terms of here's the proper and appropriate 9 way of dealing with a burial ground should one exist. 10 Q: All right. Do you recall Mr. Fox 11 raising anything along the lines of color of right? 12 A: No. I think the -- the issue of 13 color of right came up sometime later in the -- I think 14 if we had spent a little time frankly, discussing the 15 color of right and the issues surrounding that, it would 16 have been educational for everyone in the -- the meeting. 17 Q: And insofar as the briefing, pardon 18 me, the notes that I've just -- 19 A: Can I just follow up on that, just 20 for one second? Because the thing is that it was our 21 understanding leaving the meeting that there were no -- 22 there were no Native issues really surrounding the Park 23 that yes, there was a burial ground but it was in 24 question knowing -- no one really knew. 25 They didn't think there was one there.

207

1 But even if there was one that was -- didn't give it -- 2 you know, didn't really make it into a large picture 3 Native issue. In terms of the land claim, there was no 4 land claim, none had been filed and that there was a 5 process to -- to follow should a land claim be filed. 6 And so the impression that we were given 7 was that this was strictly a law enforcement issue and 8 that other than the fact that the people who had taken 9 over the Park were Natives, that's just basically where 10 the -- the Native issues ended. And so that it was 11 strictly a law enforcement issue. 12 Q: And when you say it was "our 13 understanding" who are you referring to. 14 You mean the committee generally or the 15 political staffers which you were one? 16 A: I -- I can't really speak for 17 everyone in the committee but the Native issue such as 18 the color of right were not discussed. And the issues 19 that were native in regard to the burial ground were kind 20 of -- it's not a valid reason to takeover a Park. 21 In terms of any sort of land claim, there 22 wasn't any. So it -- it was through that opinion that, 23 you know, the focus of -- of the discussion was all on 24 law enforcement matters or ownership of matters. 25 But it certainly wasn't my impression that

208

1 -- that was the basis of the situation. 2 Q: All right. And we know from the 3 notes that I was just drawing your attention to, that the 4 possibility of an -- of ex parte injunction was part of 5 the conversation. 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Okay. Do you recall there being any 8 discussion about the timing of that, when that might 9 occur, or what the process was or how it was going to be 10 served? 11 A: Yes. Yes. My understanding that, 12 you know, an ex parte injunction could be heard within I 13 believe three (3) days and then once it was -- if the 14 injunction was granted then a -- someone from the 15 sheriff's department would be responsible for service and 16 that if issues around over service then they it became 17 OPP issues. 18 But -- so yes, they did generally go over 19 the process route of service. 20 Q: And just as we're -- as you're on the 21 issue of service, do you recall whether that day or in 22 the -- in the days subsequent, that is the 6th of 23 September of '95 whether there was any discussion in 24 those two (2) meetings about the manner of service? 25 A: Not at that time like --

209

1 Q: And -- 2 A: -- the issue was dealt with later, 3 but not at those meetings. 4 Q: And again confiding it's just -- you 5 know, or your response to those two (2) meetings do you 6 recall any discussion about potentially serving an 7 injunction by helicopter? 8 A: I believe that that's the -- the 9 judge had recommended that later after that -- when we'd 10 actually discussed -- 11 Q: And I understand that, but do you 12 recall any kind of -- 13 A: Not at those meetings. Like that was 14 -- I -- I don't recall. It was my understanding that 15 from the information we were provided by officials that a 16 sheriff could serve. 17 Q: Okay. Also during the course of that 18 meeting you had reports of -- of other things happening 19 with respect to Park assets and property? 20 A: Yes, there was various vandalism 21 taking place within the Park. 22 Q: And did you form any impressions as a 23 result of receiving that kind of information? 24 A: Well, it just -- I think the issue of 25 it being a law enforcement matter was really reinforced

210

1 in terms of the general destruction of Park property. 2 Q: Okay. You've -- you've told us and 3 you've indicated to us that -- that there was at least 4 some suggestion through -- through the Premier's office, 5 through Ms. Hutton, that maybe things might be dealt with 6 differently and again I'm -- I'm trying -- trying not to 7 suggest a response to you, but -- 8 A: I didn't say that. 9 Q: And those are -- those are my words 10 and I'm not attempting to put words in your mouth, but 11 can you tell us about what sort of statements were made 12 if you can recall with respect -- 13 A: Oh, in terms of the -- the -- the 14 government's general tone in terms of the -- its approach 15 to the issue? 16 A: Yeah. And before you answer that -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just one (1) 18 minute, Mr. Moran. Yes, Ms. Perschy? 19 MS. ANNA PERSCHY: Sorry. Excuse me. 20 Mr. Moran has -- has clarified, but I did have an 21 objection to My Friend's question. I think he 22 mischaracterized Mr. Moran's evidence. There wasn't any 23 suggestion by Ms. Hutton, he'd referred to a question 24 that he -- he recalled had been put by her and I just 25 wanted to make that clarification.

211

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 2 MR. DONALD WORME: I appreciate that 3 clarification and again I -- I tried to indicate that 4 those were my words and -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, you 6 did. 7 MR. DONALD WORME: -- and poorly chosen 8 I'm sure and I want the Witness simply to advise us what 9 it is then that was being expressed by the other 10 political staffers and -- or indeed by yourself? 11 THE WITNESS: The -- the -- the concern 12 of the Government at the time if I can be so bold as to 13 suggest it was as I'd said earlier that the possibility 14 that this could escalate and spread to other provincial 15 parks. 16 And so the government wanted to act 17 quickly in terms of trying to contain it to the local 18 area and then -- and at the same time be seen that to be 19 dealing with this in a -- in a strong manner and that we 20 didn't want to give anyone the impression that if they 21 took over a provincial park then the Province would just 22 readily negotiate away the park and that -- that was it. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 25 Q: And can you -- can you help us out in

212

1 terms of providing any sort of details as to how that 2 messaging was done within the committee? 3 Who was -- who was doing the talking? 4 A: Oh, the only person that would speak 5 on behalf of -- of the -- I guess the -- the government 6 at the time would be the senior political person in the 7 office which was Deb Hutton. 8 Q: And do you recall the words that were 9 used in advancing this message? 10 A: I -- yes. She did say that the 11 Premier was hawkish on the issue. 12 Q: All right. Beyond that can you 13 provide any further detail or elaboration? 14 A: In a -- in a general sense and the 15 only reason why I remember that so -- so well is it's 16 been reported ad nauseam and it's in so many of the 17 notes. 18 I think that the general message was that 19 the -- the Premier didn't want -- the general idea was 20 that we were a new government that had came in with a 21 very ambitious agenda and we wanted to focus our efforts 22 on implementing the campaign promises that we had made to 23 the people of Ontario. And so that was our primary 24 focus. 25 And so in terms of the issue that was

213

1 going on there, we were very conscious of -- of trying to 2 contain it and trying not to -- we didn't want that 3 situation to derail the larger agenda and, as I said, the 4 -- the larger agenda was jobs and the economy. 5 So, de-escalize it -- de-escalate, you 6 know what I mean, it was to really the focus -- 7 Q: To turn the pressure down...? 8 A: Yeah. Thank you. 9 Q: All right. Yeah, you mentioned 10 earlier that there was some suggestion of a concern of 11 threat to neighbouring Provincial Parks, Pinery Park I 12 believe you've mentioned. 13 Do you know who raised that concern or 14 what the context of that was? 15 A: I can't remember. It would have been 16 either ONAS or -- I -- I believe it was ONAS but I -- I 17 couldn't... 18 Q: All right. During the course of -- 19 of this meeting on either the 5th or the 6th, Mr. Moran, 20 do you recall Ms. Hutton leaving the meeting for the 21 purposes of seeking instructions? Or to make a phone 22 call or any such thing? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Okay. Do you recall whether in the 25 course of either of those meetings, whether there was any

214

1 sort of -- maybe let me ask you this: What was the 2 relationship as between the Chair of the Interministerial 3 Committee, Ms. Jai and Ms. Hutton? 4 A: Strained. 5 Q: And do you know why? Was there any 6 discussion about why that was so? 7 A: I think that -- that the political 8 staff in general were a little frustrated with the way 9 that the meeting had been chaired. 10 Q: And what can you tell us about that? 11 A: Well, it, in contrast to most other 12 briefings that we've been involved in, most of our 13 briefings took an hour. Almost all our briefings were 14 conducted in a way that it was an hour in length, and 15 that it was very much of, let's get to the meaty issue 16 and -- and address it. 17 The meeting really seemed to -- it was 18 poorly chaired in terms of moving things forward on the 19 agenda, and keeping things going, and really focussing on 20 the -- the heart of the -- the issue. 21 And so, I think that all of us who were 22 required to go back and brief our bosses in terms of the 23 issue, kind of felt that -- that the time just wasn't 24 well used. 25 Q: At the end of that meeting, Mr.

215

1 Moran, was there any directives, was there any 2 instruction given by anybody as to who would lead the 3 issue? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: What can you tell us about that? 6 A: Well it was decided that -- that MNR 7 would speak about matters affecting the Park and that the 8 OPP would speak on matters affecting law enforcement. 9 Q: And can you tell us how that decision 10 came about? 11 A: Sure. It -- all -- all matters of 12 communication by the Government is certainly in my 13 situation, I don't know how they did it in previous 14 Governments, but all matters of who spoke on behalf of 15 the Government were decided by the Premier's Office. 16 So, whether it was this or -- or any 17 other, and, so certainly that's how we had worked in -- 18 in opposition and it's how we worked in Government, as it 19 was done that way towards -- both ends coordinated to 20 make sure that individuals were consistent and not 21 tripping over 22 themselves. 23 Q: Was there any instruction given that 24 this was not an MNR issue? Do you recall anything like 25 that coming out of the Committee?

216

1 A: I remember that officials with MNR 2 saying, expressing that they'd really rather not speak on 3 it, but I -- I took that to be not whether it was a -- an 4 MNR issue, it was more of a, I'd rather not deal with 5 contentious issues comment. 6 Q: It was a reluctance on their part and 7 not -- there wasn't a directive given in that sense? 8 A: Oh, what do you mean, that, yeah, 9 you're going to talk about it? 10 Q: No, that you won't talk about it, 11 that this is not an MNR issue. I just wanted to ask you 12 about that first thing. 13 A: Oh, no. 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: You know, like it was -- not that I 16 recall. Like it was more of a, you know, a reluctance on 17 behalf of the Ministry of Natural Resources to be at the 18 forefront of a rather difficult situation and I think 19 that -- that from MNR's standpoint they would have much 20 preferred that the Attorney General handle the situation 21 or the Solicitor General handle the situation or just 22 about anyone other than the Ministry of Natural 23 Resources. 24 Q: And aside from what you've told us 25 about the discussion regarding the allegation of the

217

1 burial site within the Park, was there any other 2 discussion about the -- about whether the people in 3 occupation had any type of legitimate claims? 4 A: Well yes. I thought I touched on 5 that earlier when we were told that there -- there were 6 no legitimate claims or any sort of issues surrounding 7 the Park. 8 Q: And following the meeting, do you 9 recall that there was a consensus at the end of that? 10 That a particular approach would be -- would be adopted? 11 Or in terms of timing as to when something should be or 12 ought to be done? 13 A: Oh well we wanted to deal with it as 14 quickly as possible, you know, as I said earlier, in 15 terms of containment. But I -- I don't know what you're 16 referring to in terms of approach. 17 Q: Just juxtaposing that sentiment that, 18 you know, that there was some who wanted things done very 19 quickly and wanted things done as quickly as possible, 20 were there any that were expressing an opposite view? 21 That is like, you know, let's slow things 22 down here and, you know, what's the urgency? 23 Do you recall any sort of that dynamic, 24 Mr. Moran? 25 A: No. None whatsoever.

218

1 Q: Okay. 2 Q: It was my understanding that -- that 3 the consensus coming out of the committee was that there 4 was a need to get the injunction. 5 Q: Okay. Was there any discussion -- 6 A: And to do that as quickly as 7 possible. 8 Q: -- sorry, go ahead. 9 A: Sorry. 10 Q: Was there any discussion to your 11 recollection about the possibility that those in 12 occupation might be armed? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Do you recall -- 15 A: Just to put things in perspective. 16 Like -- well certainly the -- any of the political staff 17 in the room would have never been exposed to an issue 18 such as ex parte or not ex parte because all the 19 political staff were laymen. 20 So issues such as ex parte could only come 21 forward from the -- the civil servants and the counsel or 22 maybe the police officer. But I can't imagine, like, 23 they would have had to come forward from counsel from the 24 ministries. 25 Q: All right. In terms of the

219

1 discussion about potential for arms among the protesters 2 or the occupiers, what can you tell us? 3 A: It was our understanding that the 4 occupiers were armed. 5 Q: Do you know where that came from and 6 how that information was brought to the committee? 7 A: Well no. I take it back. I don't 8 think that the -- now that you say it, it's an 9 interesting contradiction. And that there were reports 10 of -- of gunfire overnight but it's my understanding 11 that, for anything that had actually been visually 12 confirmed, that -- that they weren't armed, let me just 13 check my notes, but I -- I thought that they were unarmed 14 but at the same time we were hearing gunfire. 15 And I -- you know, it would have been a 16 good question for someone at the time to have said, Well 17 are they or aren't they. 18 Q: Maybe as you're looking at -- at your 19 notes, I'd ask that that be marked as the next exhibit. 20 THE REGISTRAR: P-926, Your Honor. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-926: Document number 1012561 Mr. 23 David Moran's handwritten 24 notes, undated. 25

220

1 CONTINUED BY MR. DONALD WORME: 2 Q: And the Inquiry Document Number on 3 that is 1012561. If you look at the last page, perhaps, 4 Mr. Moran, of your notes at Tab 7. 5 A: Hmm hmm. 6 Q: Go right to the bottom of the page. 7 A: Yes, "Reports of gunshots." 8 Q: Is that what you're referring to? 9 A: Well, in the -- the second briefing 10 when the -- the people from MNR were put over the 11 conference call to the meeting that was when we had been 12 informed that there was automatic weapons fire overnight 13 and stuff like that. I don't think anyone actually saw 14 anyone with a gun. 15 Q: All right. 16 A: No. 17 Q: And -- 18 A: I -- I don't think that -- that there 19 was any thought of anyone in the room that -- then in 20 turns of an armed confrontation, that that was -- that 21 that was where the situation was heading. 22 Q: And insofar as trying to diffuse the 23 situation was there any discussion about what role the 24 OPP might play in terms of perhaps negotiating a 25 resolution on site.

221

1 A: Yeah, yeah. And there's essentially 2 some discussion about that role of the OPP because we 3 weren't -- we had a discussion -- we were a little unsure 4 of the extent of where their ability to negotiate began 5 and ended. 6 You know for instance could they negotiate 7 away title to the Park and we were told no, that they 8 could negotiate the end of the occupation, that it was -- 9 I believe it was our understanding that they were going 10 to approach the -- the occupiers and have that discussion 11 about, you know, as I said earlier about why are you here 12 and how can -- you know, you have to get out of the Park 13 and let's try and figure a way to -- to end this 14 peacefully. 15 And at the same time that that process was 16 going on, legally we were pursuing, you know, the legal 17 process so that we had some legal authority to say really 18 you have to get out of the Park. 19 Q: Was there any discussion, Mr. Moran, 20 in your recollection about the use of force in terms of 21 getting the people out of the Park? 22 A: No. The -- the -- the -- the 23 impression that I got from the -- from Ron Fox was 24 basically go out and get the injunction and we'll serve 25 the injunction and that'll be the appropriate means to

222

1 end the occupation. But until we get the injunction 2 really nothing's going to happen and we'll go and talk to 3 them, but we don't expect that the discussion would 4 actually end the occupation. 5 That what was really going to happen was 6 that we'd pursue the injunction and that presumption 7 would provide the -- the actual authority to end the 8 occupation. 9 Q: And we've had others testify that 10 that in fact was the -- one (1) of the outcomes of that 11 meeting? 12 A: I'm just glad to be consistent. 13 Q: All right. At Tab Number 8 of the 14 book of documents in front of you, that is P-509. That 15 is meeting notes from the Interministerial Committee 16 Meeting of September the 5th of '95 and I take it that 17 you had an opportunity to review that -- 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: -- before you came here today? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And that accords with your 22 recollection of the outcomes of that meeting? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Following that meeting did you -- 25 what -- what did you do?

223

1 A: Oh, I would have gone back and 2 briefed the Attorney General on the situation and it's 3 likely that concurrently I would have had a discussion 4 with the -- the Premier's office in terms of the 5 situation. 6 Q: Do you have a specific recall of 7 discussing this matter with the Premier's office? 8 A: Well, no. You know my direct contact 9 was there at the meeting in terms of issues and Ms. 10 Hutton was responsible for issues and media issues so she 11 would have been the person that had been -- would have 12 been discussing -- I just imagined that we would have 13 discussed it afterwards in terms of any further followup 14 or anything and then I would have gone back and briefed 15 the Attorney General. 16 Q: And upon briefing the Attorney 17 General did you get any instructions or tasks as a result 18 of that or did he issue any directives to your recall? 19 A: After which meeting? I can't... 20 Q: After the meeting of the 5th? 21 A: The 5th? I don't believe that's -- 22 after the meeting of the 5th was when we were trying to 23 confirm the legal options so that we could actually give 24 him some advice in terms of how to proceed. So I do 25 believe after the meeting of the 5th with him, that he

224

1 would have provided any instructions. 2 We did brief him on terms of what to say 3 if he was asked either in the legislature or by the media 4 about the situation. 5 Q: Is there anything else, Mr. Moran, 6 that you can recall that occurred on the 5th that would 7 be of interest here? 8 A: Not off the top of my head. Like, if 9 you asked me a specific question about one of the 10 issues... 11 Q: I think this would probably be a good 12 place to break for the day, Mr. Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 14 MR. DONALD WORME: I'm going to move to 15 the -- to the 6th and I think I probably have less than 16 an hour in terms of in-chief to go. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 18 And this would be a good point to break for the day. 19 Yes, Mr. Millar? 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Commissioner, I know 21 that this is a little bit unusual, but I'm trying to 22 ascertain how long we might be if -- if Mr. Worme's an 23 hour, in terms of my next witness who is coming up, and 24 I'm just trying to figure out when I should have her 25 here. And if we could ask if anyone -- I wonder if we

225

1 could canvass the parties to see if -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We will do 3 it again after, but -- 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, we'll do it 5 again, but if they could just give us -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We will do 7 sort of a preliminary run through. 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's get a 10 preliminary idea just in terms of scheduling who comes 11 up. Who thinks that they might have some 12 questions for Mr. Moran? Well, let's just get a rough 13 idea, he hasn't finished his evidence yet. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: So Mr. Downard...? 15 MR. PETER DOWNARD: Roughly an hour to 16 ninety (90) minutes. 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ms. Horvat...? 18 MS. JACQUELINE HORVAT: Twenty (20) 19 minutes. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Twenty (20) minutes 21 for Ms. Horvat on behalf of Mr. Harnick. 22 Ms. Mrozek, on behalf of Mr. Runciman...? 23 MS. ALICE MROZEK: About ten (10) 24 minutes. 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ten (10) minutes.

226

1 MS. ERIN TULLY: Ten (10) minutes. 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ten (10) minutes for 3 Mr. Hodgson. 4 Mr. Beaubien...? 5 MR. TREVOR HINNEGAN: Take ten (10) or 6 fifteen (15) minutes. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: How long was 8 that? I didn't hear that. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ten (10) or fifteen 10 (15) minutes -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ten (10) or 12 fifteen (15). 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- for Mr. Beaubien. 14 Ms. Hutton, Ms. Perschy...? 15 MS. ANNA PERSCHY: Half an hour to an 16 hour. 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: One half to an hour. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: OPP? 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The OPP? 20 MS. LESLIE KAUFMAN: Probably about twenty 21 (20) minutes. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: OPP twenty (20) 23 minutes. The OPPA? Nothing. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Nothing. 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The Province of

227

1 Ontario? 2 MR. WALTER MYRKA: About thirty (30) 3 minutes. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thirty (30) minutes. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. 6 Clermont...? 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ms. Clermont, oh. 8 MS. JANET CLERMONT: Probably ten (10) 9 minutes. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The -- Mr. 11 Alexander...? 12 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Presently two and a 13 half (2 1/2) hours for Mr. Klippenstein. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, 15 how long? 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Two and a half (2 1/2) 17 hours for Mr. Klippenstein. Mr. Klippenstein is going to 18 do it. 19 Mr. Ross...? I mean, excuse me, Ms. 20 Esmonde...? 21 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: Maybe an hour. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Ross...? 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I'll be forty (40) 24 minutes. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, I

228

1 didn't hear -- 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Forty (40) minutes for 3 the residents of Aazhoodana. 4 MR. WILLIAM HORTON: It may be that my 5 points get covered earlier, but as it sits now, I would 6 say forty-five (45) minutes to an hour. 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Forty-five (45) 8 minutes to an hour. 9 And for the Chippewa Kettle and Stony 10 Point and the Chiefs of Ontario. 11 And then Mr. Roy on behalf of ALST...? 12 MR. JULIAN ROY: I'm in the same boat as 13 Mr. Horton, I would say forty-five (45) minutes to an 14 hour -- 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Great. Thank you very 16 much, sir. 17 THE WITNESS: Derry, just so I'm -- I 18 know, does that look like we're finished tomorrow, or no? 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: We will finish you 21 tomorrow, I hope. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We hope to 23 finish you tomorrow, but if you add that up it exceeds 24 the time that we have tomorrow, so we are operating on a 25 hope and a prayer. But we hope we finish tomorrow. We

229

1 will try our best to finish tomorrow but we cannot 2 guarantee it. 3 THE WITNESS: No, no, no, that's fine. I 4 was just -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 THE WITNESS: I'll try to be a little 7 less verbose. 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you very much -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 10 very much. 11 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- Mr. Commissioner. 12 Thank you, Mr. Moran. 13 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 14 15 (WITNESS RETIRES) 16 17 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 18 adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, November the 1st, at 19 9:00 a.m. 20 21 --- Upon adjourning at 5:03 p.m. 22 23 24 25

230

1 2 3 4 Certified Correct 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ________________________ 12 Carol Geehan 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25