23 juin 2020 | Local, Sécurité

RCMP plan to buy more armoured vehicles amid new scrutiny over policing tactics

By . Published on Jun 22, 2020 1:49pm

<

The RCMP is planning to add up to two new “Counter Assault Tactical Vehicles” to its arsenal, worrying critics who say it is a waste of taxpayer money and represents a growing militarization in policing in Canada.

The vehicles the RCMP plans to buy are “light-weight high mobility” armoured vehicles to be operated “primarily in urban areas,” according to procurement documents. The vehicles are to “discretely blend into public settings, and provide protection against small arms while remaining highly maneuverable.”

A request for industry feedback was published in late April. A contract is scheduled to be awarded in February 2021 with final delivery for summer 2023.

The purchase would add to the RCMP's stock of armoured vehicles that include 18 “Tactical Armoured Vehicles” owned since 2012 and two Cougar vehicles donated by the Department of National Defence in 2010.

These vehicles are intended to shield police officers in so-called “critical incidents,” such as armed standoffs, hostage takings and search and rescue missions.

The purchase of armoured vehicles by police in Canada has come under increasing scrutiny in wake of new protests over anti-Black racism and police violence. Halifax city council recently cancelled the purchase of an armoured tactical vehicle for its municipal police and re-allocated the $368,000 it planned to spend to the city's diversity office and for anti-racism initiatives.

Critics questioned the RCMP's plans to purchase the new vehicles.

“It shows police and politicians are failing to listen to what Canadians are saying about defunding police,” said Kevin Walby, associate professor at the University of Winnipeg's department of criminal justice.

“Each time the RCMP or other police agencies do something like buy more technology, it simply provides further evidence that police are archaic institutions that are non-responsive to real public needs and calls for justice.”

NDP MP Matthew Green said the planned purchases should be scrapped.

“It speaks to the shift away in our law enforcement, from keeping the peace as peace officers, to an extension of a paramilitary,” he said. “It's a bleeding of responsibilities between the military industrial complex and local policing.”

The existing fleet includes 18 vehicles delivered by Navistar Defence Canada in 2012 and manufactured in Mississippi. The contract was worth $15.2 million, with the cost to buy each vehicle more than $800,000.

The vehicles are essentially armoured personnel carriers refitted for civilian police. Similar vehicles were used in the Afghanistan conflict by the British military, Navistar said in 2012.

The RCMP was unable to confirm the possession of such vehicles prior to deadline last Friday. Earlier last week, when asked by iPolitics for a list of all armoured, tactical and “military-style” vehicles, a spokesperson cited “operational and security reasons” in refusing to disclose the items. iPolitics had initially asked on June 4 for a list of all RCMP vehicles excluding core vehicles such as sedans, SUVs, ATVs and motorbikes.

In 2014, the National Post reported that the RCMP's policy requires armoured vehicles to be used by emergency response team members only during critical incidents and not for crowd control. The vehicles can protect against bullets and explosives and carry a full tactical squad. They include gun ports, sentry hatches and a protected observation station.

Walby, who has researched tactical teams in Canadian policing, said armoured vehicles are primarily used by police in active shooter situations and for serving high-risk warrants, but he does not believe there are enough circumstances to justify having them.

“I would raise questions about the actual utility of them. I would raise questions about whether or not tactical members even think they are useful compared to the other fleet of vehicles that they have,” he said.

However, Mary Ann Campbell, a clinical psychologist who conducts psychological assessments of tactical team members for Saint John, N.B. police, said the vehicles are needed to protect police in special circumstances.

“It's not used for crowd control. It's not driven around as part of patrol services either. It's really used for the tactical team,” she said.

Campbell said there are “many factors that come into play” when weighing whether armoured vehicles should be used by civilian law enforcement and are representative of police militarization. Ultimately, she sees them as a “tool” for police that must be handled with care.

“The fact is, weapons and things like armoured vehicles are a part of how officers do their work,” she said. “If there's trust in the police force, there's trust in how they use this equipment — and not abuse it.”

Five RCMP armoured vehicles were deployed during the 2014 Moncton shooting that left three Mounties dead. The vehicles were also on scene during the 2014 Parliament Hill shooting. In May, an armoured vehicle was used in a drug-related search in Selkirk, Man., an operation that led to the arrest of two people and the seizure of one sawed-off shotgun, ammunition and drugs.

On June 15, an RCMP armoured vehicle and tactical team were deployed in response to a “mental health call” in Alberta Beach, Alta.

The vehicles can also sometimes be found in local parades and public events. Many local law enforcement in Canada own armoured vehicles. In one case, in Saint John, a private company donated an armoured vehicle to municipal police.

Pamela Palmater, a Mi'kmaq lawyer, Ryerson University professor and activist, said money that goes to buying and operating such vehicles is better spent on initiatives to fight poverty, support mental health and ensure clean drinking water for First Nation communities.

“We've really got to look at what are the issues here, and do we need tanks to resolve them,” she said.

Palmater added that it's often Indigenous peoples who face militarized responses from the RCMP, ones that may involve the deployment of heavily armed officers, helicopters and drones. She cited the January protests on Wet'suwet'en territory as an example.

Green said “over-investments in the militarization of police come at the expense of our ability to invest in the social determinants of health and the basic quality of life for people living in Canada.”

Sent a series of questions last week, including why more armoured vehicles were needed by the RCMP, a spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Bill Blair declined to comment, instead directing iPolitics to the agency stating such questions were operational in nature.

With files from Kirsten Smith

https://ipolitics.ca/2020/06/22/rcmp-plan-to-buy-more-armoured-vehicles-amid-new-scrutiny-over-policing-tactics/

Sur le même sujet

  • Like it or not, the U.S. needs to be a key part of Canada’s next-gen jet procurement process

    13 mai 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

    Like it or not, the U.S. needs to be a key part of Canada’s next-gen jet procurement process

    ELINOR SLOAN, CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL RICK BOWMER/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Elinor Sloan, professor of international relations in the department of political science at Carleton University, is a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. For a bid to buy a plane designed to cut quickly through the skies, Ottawa's pursuit of a future-generation fighter jet has been a long and torturous slog. In 1997, Jean Chrétien's Liberal government joined the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, a U.S.-led initiative conceived as a new way for allies to work together to design, develop and produce a fifth-generation fighter aircraft. In 2006, Ottawa signed a formal memorandum of understanding that gave Canada and the other eight partner nations the exclusive right to compete for contracts to produce such aircraft and, since 2007, Canadian companies have won more than US$1.3-billion in defence contracts related to the Joint Strike Fighter. With a production line that will be operating at full capacity starting this year, and is expected to produce about 10 times as many aircraft as exist today over the next few decades, this number promises to grow substantially. Meanwhile, Canada's nearly 40-year-old fleet of fighter jets &ndash; the CF-18s &ndash; continues to age. In 2010, the Harper government shelved its plan to sole-source buy the Joint Strike Fighter to replace them after a public outcry and a damning auditor-general's report that found significant weaknesses in the process used by the Department of National Defence. Then, when the Liberals took office in 2015 and promised an open and fair competition to replace the CF-18s, it also banned the F-35 from bidding &ndash; two contradictory positions. The Trudeau government quietly dropped that ban last year, and pre-qualified four companies to bid on a contract worth at least $15-billion: Sweden's Saab Gripen, Britain's Airbus Eurofighter, the U.S.'s Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet and, yes, Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. According to letters released last week, though, the U.S. government threatened to pull the Lockheed Martin F-35 from consideration last year over Ottawa's insistence that Canada receive industrial benefits from the winning bid. In response, Ottawa relaxed its requirement on Thursday: Where bidders once had to commit to spend 100 per cent of the value of the aircraft's acquisition and sustainment in Canada, bids will now only lose points in a three-category scoring system in the review process, instead. With such exhausting twists and incompatible statements, it's little surprise that it took three and a half years of the government's four-year mandate just to get to the formal request-for-proposal stage. But there is a way out of this morass: pursuing a back-to-basics focus on why we need this aircraft and what we need it to do. To do so, we must focus on the proposed jets' promised technical capabilities, which are paramount, and rightly weighted the highest of that three-category scoring system. The second category is cost, which of course is important to any government. The third is creating and sustaining a highly skilled work force within our own borders, a goal enshrined in Canada's industrial trade benefits (ITB) policy, which requires a winning bid to guarantee it will make investments in Canada equal to the value of the contract. Each bid is scored by these three categories, weighed 60-20-20, respectively. However, the Joint Strike Fighter program, which Canada has spent millions to join, does not fit neatly into the ITB policy. In those letters last year, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin pointed out that Canada's ITB terms are inconsistent with &ndash; and indeed prohibited by &ndash; the memorandum of understanding Canada signed in 2006, which says partners cannot impose industrial compensation measures. The solution reached on Thursday allows that memorandum to be obeyed, but since Canada will still give higher grades to bids that follow its ITB policy, questions remain as to whether the playing field has really been levelled. All of this is important because of the growing competition between the major powers. Russian bombers and fighters, for example, are increasingly testing the boundaries of Canadian and U.S. airspace. More than ever, the focus needs to be interoperability with the United States, working together on NORAD and helping NATO allies in Europe. As a flying command-and-control platform, rather than a mere fighter, Canada's next-generation jet must work with the United States' most sophisticated systems, and include a seamless and secure communications capability &ndash; that is a critical and non-negotiable criterion. Indeed, as DND has said,the United States will need to certify the winning jet meets Washington's security standards. Some may question the federal government's decision to relax the ITB rules, and to grant this certification sign-off. But whatever Canada buys must be able to address threats to us and to our allies until well into the 2060s. Our relationship with the United States, both in terms of geopolitics and military technology, is crucial. Despite our trade tiff, the United States remains our most important strategic partner. Canada can either take an active part in our own security, or leave it to the United States. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-us-needs-to-be-a-key-part-of-canadas-next-gen-jet-procurement/

  • The Pilot Project Podcast: Featuring Blake McNaughton, CH-149 Cormorant pilot & former Snowbird - Skies Mag

    29 août 2023 | Local, Aérospatial

    The Pilot Project Podcast: Featuring Blake McNaughton, CH-149 Cormorant pilot & former Snowbird - Skies Mag

    In episode 21 of the Pilot Project Podcast, McNaughton shares what flying with the Canadian Forces Snowbirds is like, and much more.

  • Cyber attack hits engineering giant with contracts for military bases, power plants

    8 mars 2023 | Local, C4ISR

    Cyber attack hits engineering giant with contracts for military bases, power plants

    OTTAWA ? A Canadian engineering giant whose work involves critical military, power and transportation infrastructure across the country has been hit with a ransomware attack.

Toutes les nouvelles