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 January 19th, 2006 25

2
  1                        Appearances
  2  Derry Millar      )             Commission Counsel
  3  Susan Vella        )
  4  Donald Worme, Q. C )    (np)
  5  Katherine Hensel  )    (np)
  6  Megan Ferrier     )    (np)
  7  Murray Klippenstein )   (np)     The Estate of Dudley 
  8  Vilko Zbogar       )            George and George
  9  Andrew Orkin       )  (np)      Family Group
 10  Basil Alexander    ) (np)
 11  
 12  Peter Rosenthal  )              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  )              Point First Nation
 20  Colleen Johnson  )   (np)
 21  Kim Twohig       )              Government of Ontario
 22  Walter Myrka     )   (np)
 23  Susan Freeborn   )   (np)
 24  Michelle Pong    )   (np)
 25  Lynette D'Souza  )   (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    )   (np)       The Honourable Michael
  7  Bill Hourigan    )   (np)       Harris
  8  Jennifer McAleer )
  9   
 10  Ian Smith        )   (np)       Robert Runciman
 11  Alice Mrozek     )
 12  
 13  Harvey T. Strosberg, Q.C.)
                               (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       )            Ontario Provincial 
 22  Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) (np)       Ontario Provincial Police
 23  Leslie Kaufman     ) (np)
 24  
 25

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

5
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd) 
  2  Mark Fredrick    )   (np)       Christopher Hodgson
  3  Craig Mills      )   (np)
  4  Megan Mackey     )   (np)
  5  Peter Lauwers    )   (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

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 7 4 Opening Comments 5 6 Marcel Beaubien, Resumed 7 Continued Cross-Examination by Ms. Susan Vella 13 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Certificate of Transcript 306 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-1025 Document Number 12000049. Letter to 4 Marcel Beaubien from constituent, 5 August 02/'95. 24 6 P-1026 Document Number 12000055. Letter from 7 Marcel Beaubien to constituent in 8 response to letter of August 02/'95; 9 August 14/'95. 25 10 P-1027 Document Number 12000060. Handwritten 11 note re. Ken Williams, Town of Bosanquet, 12 August 20/'95. 53 13 P-1028 Document Number 12000061. Handwritten 14 note re. Bosanquet Township, 15 August 22/'95. 60 16 P-1029 Document Number 3000824. Handwritten 17 Notes, Sept. 05/'95. 97 18 P-1030 Document Number 12000069. Letter from 19 Marcel Beaubien to Bill King attaching 20 letter from constituent (with 21 handwritten notes). September 06/'95. 167 22 23 24 25

1 LIST OF EXHIBITS (cont'd) 2 Exhibit No. Description Page No. 3 P-1031 Document Number 12000070. Fax 4 message from Jeff Bangs to Marcel 5 Beaubien attaching Minister's note 6 for Ron Vrancart re. Occupation of 7 Ipperwash Provincial Park, September 8 06, 1995. 172 9 P-1032 Document Number 12000074. Letter 10 from Marcel Beaubien to Dennis Martel, 11 September 07/'95. 246 12 P-1033 Document Number 12000073. Memorandum 13 to PC Caucus Members from Marnie Corbold, 14 attaching OPP Press Release, September 15 07, 1995. 248 16 P-1034 Document Number 12000076. Beaubien 17 Constituency Office telephone call notes, 18 September 08/'95. 256 19 P-1035 Document Number 12000077. Memorandum to 20 PC Caucus Members from Marnie Corbold 21 attaching: 1. OPP News Release dated 22 Sept.08/95; 2.Historical Backgrounder; 23 3. Special Investigations Unit Update; 24 September 08, 1995. 257 25

1 LIST OF EXHIBITS (cont'd) 2 Exhibit No. Description Page No. 3 P-1036 Document Number 12000086. Handwritten 4 Memorandum re: Ipperwash Problem, 5 September 11, 1995. 261 6 P-1037 Document Number 12000094. Letter from 7 Carol McKenzie to Marcel Beaubien re. 8 Meeting with Solicitor General, 9 September 12, 1995. 276 10 P-1038 Document Numbers 12000097, 12000105, 11 12000101, 12000108. Letters to Marcel 12 Beaubien from residents, September 1995. 279 13 P-1039 Document Number 12000113. Letter to 14 Charles Harnick. Enclosing letter of 15 Complaint re. derogatory comments about 16 Aboriginal people at Ipperwash by OPP 17 officer visiting local schools, 18 September 18, 1995. 289 19 P-1040 Document Number 1010732. Memo to 20 Runciman, Harnick, Hodgson and 21 Cunningham from Marcel Beaubien re. 22 Native Issues Ipperwash, Feb.05/ '96. 290 23 24 25

1 --- Upon commencing at 9:01 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: Good 7 morning, Mr. Sandler. 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: Good morning. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 10 morning, everybody. 11 MR. MARK SANDLER: Before Ms. Vella 12 continues with Mr. Beaubien, I've been asked to make a 13 Public Service announcement. 14 As you know, Commissioner, on -- on 15 January the 26th and 27th of next week there'll be a Part 16 II session of the OPP that will focus on First Nations 17 policing and Aboriginal police relations. And it will 18 include presentations by OPP Commissioner Gwen Boniface 19 and others. 20 This will be a multi-media presentation as 21 you know and as well, I could indicate that there'll be 22 lots of opportunity for -- for the parties to ask 23 questions and stimulate discussion about what is 24 currently happening in relation to these issues of 25 importance.

1 The session will also include a discussion 2 of -- of the new framework for police preparedness for 3 Aboriginal critical incidents that has been introduced. 4 I should indicate as well that this is as 5 you know, the first of two (2) special presentations to 6 the Inquiry relevant to your policy and research mandate. 7 And the second presentation will be by the Chiefs of 8 Ontario in the early spring and we look forward to that 9 as well. 10 This event that is being conducted next 11 week is open to all parties with standing at the Inquiry, 12 but also to all members of the community and to the 13 general public, and it will be open, of course, to the 14 media as well. 15 And I'm advised that the electronic pool 16 feed will be available for the event. 17 I do want to advise the parties of another 18 event that is related to the session next Thursday and 19 Friday and that is, that next Wednesday evening, January 20 the 25th, all parties with standing at Part I and Part II 21 at this Inquiry, together with all of their counsel are 22 invited to a feast that'll be conducted by way of an 23 opening to the event that will transpire on Thursday. 24 The feast will take place at the Hillside 25 School, Indian Lane, at Kettle Point. And I will

1 circulate instructions to those who do not know where the 2 Hillside School is. 3 The reception for the feast will be at 4 6:00 p.m. with the opening ceremony and dinner at 6:30. 5 And -- and I want to heartily invite all of the parties 6 here together with all of their counsel to attend. 7 It's going to be catered locally by Kettle 8 Point and I understand it will be quite a feast. And it 9 will be a wonderful opportunity for all of us to meet and 10 -- and talk in an -- in an informal setting. 11 The only request that I have of all 12 parties and their counsel is to advise me as soon as you 13 can by e-mail whether tomorrow or at the very latest on 14 Monday as to how many people you expect to be coming on 15 behalf of your respective parties because I have to tell 16 the caterer and -- and so that is of some importance. 17 And I hope everybody will come. I think 18 it'll be a wonderful evening to start off the events on 19 Thursday. Thank you, Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much, Mr. Sandler. Thank you very much. I know a 22 lot of work has gone into it. Thank you very, very much. 23 Ms. Vella...? 24 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Good morning, 25 Commissioner.

1 MARCEL BEAUBIEN, Resumed 2 3 CONTINUED EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 4 Q: Good morning, Mr. Beaubien. 5 A: Good morning. And by the way it's 6 thirty-eight (38) kilometres for direct -- 7 Q: Precisely? 8 A: Precisely. 9 Q: From here to Petrolia? 10 A: From my place of residence to here. 11 Q: Thank you. We were exploring 12 yesterday your interactions with respect to the Camp 13 Ipperwash matter in the summer of 1995. I just want to 14 see if we can put a little more precision with respect to 15 dates and events. 16 And I wonder if you would -- you'll see I 17 placed in front of you an excerpt from Exhibit P-410. 18 And these are the -- some of the handwritten notes of 19 John Carson who, as you know, was the Incident Commander. 20 And the first reference is June the 20th, 21 1995. Now, do you recollect today having any discussion 22 with Mr. Carson in relation to the Ipperwash matters in 23 or around June 1995? 24 A: I don't recollect the -- the exact 25 date but we did have some discussion.

1 Q: All right. And -- 2 A: So, and I would, you know, if -- I 3 would go by his notes. If it says June 28 I would accept 4 that -- or June 20th, I would accept that. 5 Q: Well, to be fair this seems to be 6 notes of a meeting that was held with other police 7 officers; that you'll see partway down there's a 8 reference to MP Marcel Beaubien, PC, updates. 9 And that -- that may refresh your memory 10 as to whether or not at or prior to the 20th of June you 11 had some sort of update or received some sort of update 12 from Mr. Carson or another police officer in relation to 13 Ipperwash. 14 A: I can't recall. 15 Q: All right. 16 A: But also for the record since we -- 17 we seem to be concerned with an awful lot of 18 technicalities I'm an MPP, not an MP. In the notes it 19 shows that I am an MP as opposed to an -- 20 Q: That's fair enough. Okay. All 21 right. Now, on July the 29th, 1995, the barracks or 22 built-up area of Camp Ipperwash became occupied by a 23 number of members of the Stoney Point Group. 24 Now, were you aware of that event? 25 A: What date was that?

1 Q: July 29th? 2 A: Could you just pose the question 3 again? I -- 4 Q: Certainly. I was asking whether or 5 not you were aware of the event, that is the takeover of 6 the barracks or built-up of Camp Ipperwash which occurred 7 on or about July 29th? 8 A: Yeah. Yeah, I -- you know, I became 9 aware probably through the media at first. 10 Q: All right. And did you receive any 11 inquiries or concerns from your constituents relating 12 specifically to the takeover of the barracks? 13 A: Oh, we did receive calls but, you 14 know. And again I -- we provided a lot of documentations 15 to the calls that were coming into the office. They're 16 all recorded or written down. 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: So, there were a number of calls, 19 yes. 20 Q: All right. Then do you -- and -- and 21 I should note that those logs and letters are part of the 22 Supertext database. 23 But do you recall what the nature of the 24 inquiries or communications were that you received from 25 your constituents in the aftermath of the takeover of the

1 barracks? 2 A: Well, I think generally speaking, I 3 think people were concerned first of all part of the Base 4 had been occupied a couple years prior to this and now 5 the entire Base had been taken over and I think the 6 concern was, okay what's next. 7 Q: All right. 8 A: I think that would be the general 9 discussion that I had with the constituents in the area. 10 Q: And as a result, did you make 11 inquiries of your -- of the -- of the OPP in relation to 12 what was going on and -- and -- with that event? 13 A: No, with regards to the Base, because 14 it was a Federal matter, we did get some calls and -- and 15 I don't want to deny that I did not contact the police. 16 But it certainly was not a major concern 17 at that particular point in time because I felt it was -- 18 it came under the Federal jurisdiction as opposed to the 19 Provincial jurisdiction. 20 Q: Fair enough. And what was the 21 purpose of contacting the police? First of all was it on 22 behalf of your constituents, or of certain constituents? 23 A: Like I said, I can't recall, you 24 know. 25 Q: Do you recall having a meeting on

1 July 31st with -- at the Ipperwash Park gate with Mr. 2 Kobayashi, Mr. Matheson and Mr. Carson? 3 A: Yes I recall meeting. As to what we 4 discussed I -- I can't really recall to be honest with 5 you. 6 Q: Do you have a general sense of what 7 you discussed? 8 A: No. 9 Q: All right. Perhaps -- 10 A: I don't have any notes at all with 11 regards to that meeting. 12 Q: All right. Perhaps you would -- but 13 you don't deny that it occurred? 14 A: No. 15 Q: Okay. Perhaps you would go again to 16 the extract from John Carson's handwritten notes, Exhibit 17 P-410. And now I'm looking at, initially, page 16, 18 towards the bottom there's a notation at 11:50. 19 First of all, at the very bottom there 20 seems to be a reference to Wade Lacroix. 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: And it says: 23 "Met with Marcel Beaubien. Supports -- 24 supportive of police action." 25 Does that refresh your memory first of all

1 as to whether you likely had a conversation with Sergeant 2 -- Staff Sergeant Lacroix? 3 A: Like I said I'm not going to deny 4 talking to Wade Lacroix at any time because I did talk to 5 him quite often. I cannot recall the time and I 6 certainly cannot recall, you know, the discussion we had 7 at that particular point in time. 8 Q: All right. And the purpose of 9 putting these extracts to you is to see if it doesn't 10 refresh your memory at all. So, let's move onto page 17, 11 it's a note of the same date, July 31, 1995. And you'll 12 see at 15:30 towards the bottom of that entry: 13 "Met with Marcel Beaubien, MPP. He has 14 requested information from Solicitor 15 General and Attorney General re. 16 problem with Natives, with Ipperwash, 17 et cetera. 18 Brief on issues re. Ipperwash and 19 potential [and I think it's meant to 20 say occupation] potential with respect 21 to Ipperwash Park. 22 Working with MNR, public safety." 23 Now do you recall, at this time, making 24 inquiries of the Solicitor General and the Attorney 25 General with respect, I take it, to the -- the takeover

1 of the barracks in that situation? 2 A: I can't re -- you know, I can't 3 specifically recall but I think if we look at the record 4 there's letters and faxes sent to the Solicitor General 5 and the Attorney General. Whether they're around that 6 particular period of time I can't recall but I certainly 7 made contact with both those ministries including MNR 8 concerning the situation in the area. 9 Q: And we looked, yesterday, at a letter 10 dated July 31st to the Attorney General with a copy to 11 the Solicitor General. Do you think that that was the 12 extent of your contact? 13 A: That would probably be consistent 14 with this. 15 Q: All right. Do you recall what you -- 16 what briefing you received if any, on the issues 17 regarding Ipperwash and the possible impact on the Park 18 or the implications for the Park? 19 A: I cannot specific -- specifically 20 recall but I'm sure they assured me that the level of 21 policing was proper. And as I said yesterday I was 22 trying to diffuse the situation because I mean there was 23 talk in the community that people would arm themselves 24 and look after their own property and that created an 25 awful lot of concern with -- with me.

1 So I'm, you know, I'm trying to keep 2 things calmed down on both sides of the issue. And 3 there's no doubt that once I hear from constituents that 4 they're willing to arm themselves to defend their 5 property and their possessions and themselves it creates 6 -- gives me an awful lot of concern. 7 Q: And is it likely that you gave that 8 information to the OPP in and around this time? 9 A: I would definitely have passed that 10 on. 11 Q: All right. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: Then perhaps we could go the same -- 16 the same exhibit, 410, and it's a notation on page 29. 17 And you'll see there's in the middle an entry dated 18 August 8th, 1995. It looks like it's at 09:00. 19 And it reads -- appears to read as 20 follows: 21 "A letter to Minister from MPP Beaubien 22 re. Concerns policing West Ipperwash 23 meeting Friday, August 11, 1995." 24 And it says: 25 "Point number 7. Law enforcement non-

1 existent. OPP not interested to get 2 involved." 3 Now -- and it -- it appears to be 4 telephone conversation between John Carson and Chief 5 Superintendent -- sorry, Superintendent Parkin. Did you 6 know Superintendent Parkin at this time? 7 A: I can't exactly recall when I met him 8 but I met him around that period of time. 9 Q: And it -- perhaps you would go to at 10 the same time Tab 6 of the Commission Counsel brief and 11 keep that extract out. And this is the July 31 letter 12 from yourself to Charles Harnick Exhibit P-534. And we 13 looked at that yesterday and I simply draw your attention 14 to point number 7, law enforcement is basically non- 15 existent and the OPP does not seem too keen in getting 16 involved. 17 Now, it appears that that is a -- that 18 there's a reference to that point in the August 8th, 19 notation. So is it likely that you shared this letter 20 with the OPP? 21 A: It's possible. I, you know, I can't 22 recall but certainly it's possible. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: Because I, you know, if I have 25 concerns with the occurrences in the -- in the riding,

1 and as I said I'm trying to diffuse the situation, and if 2 I feel that there's some pertinent information in my 3 personal opinion that is worth passing on I'd probably 4 pass it on. And this letter was not, you know, some 5 innocuous document it was passed around to the mayor of 6 the town of Bosanquet, -- 7 Q: All -- 8 A: -- to the president of the West 9 Ipperwash Property Owner and some different Ministries. 10 Q: All right. And so it's likely that 11 you also shared a copy of it or at least the contents at 12 minimum with the OPP in or -- 13 A: That certainly is possible, yes. I 14 would not deny that, yeah. 15 Q: -- in or around the -- the beginning 16 of August 1995? 17 A: That's correct, yes. 18 Q: All right. And that you had a 19 specific discussion with Superintendent Parkin or someone 20 else at the OPP regarding in particular, this item with 21 respect to the concern raised by your constituents as to 22 the perceived lack of law enforcement. 23 A: Yeah. Your assumption I think is 24 correct, but I would -- to the best of my recollection 25 what I would suggest is that if I shared this information

1 it would not have been shared directly with Parkin or 2 Carson but it would have been shared with Lacroix -- 3 Q: Lacroix -- 4 A: -- who probably relayed the message 5 to these individuals. 6 Q: Okay. But, that -- that would have 7 been your practice in the summer -- 8 A: That's -- 9 Q: -- of 1995. 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: Staff Sergeant Lacroix was your first 12 point of contact? 13 A: That's correct. 14 Q: Thank you. I wonder if you would 15 next go to Tab 7 in the Commission Counsel brief, and 16 this is a letter dated August 2, 1995, Inquiry Document 17 Number 12000049. And is this a letter that you received 18 in or around August the 9th, it would appear from -- 19 A: Well -- 20 Q: -- one of your constituents. 21 A: Yes. It's stamped by our office in 22 the top right hand corner, received August the 9th, 1999 23 or '95, so, yes, we would have received that at the 24 constituency office. 25 Q: And is it fair to say that the

1 contents of this letter was reflective of the concerns 2 that you were receiving with respect to the West 3 Ipperwash situation? 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 A: Yeah, I would hear those -- that type 8 of comments from the different individuals at different 9 times. 10 Q: And is the one of the letters that 11 gave rise to your concern that you -- that -- that some 12 of the constituents were at least reporting that they 13 were willing to arm themselves? 14 A: That would be one letter and, like I 15 said, I heard it verbally from different individuals 16 also. 17 Q: I'd like to make this the next 18 exhibit, please. 19 THE REGISTRAR: P-1025. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1025: Document Number 12000049. 23 Letter to Marcel Beaubien 24 from constituent, August 25 02/'95.

1 2 THE WITNESS: It would appear this letter 3 was from a veteran, by the looks of it. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: All right. And if you go to Tab 8, 7 this is Inquiry Document Number 1200055. It's a letter 8 dated August 14, 1995 from yourself and it seems to be a 9 response to the prior -- previous exhibit, the letter of 10 August 2nd, 1995; is that right? 11 A: I think that's a fair assumption. 12 Q: And I'd like to make this the next 13 exhibit. 14 THE REGISTRAR: P-1026, Your Honour. 15 16 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1026: Document Number 12000055. 17 Letter from Marcel Beaubien 18 to constituent in response to 19 letter of August 02/'95; 20 August 14/'95. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 23 Q: Now, in this letter, you indicate, 24 and I'm quoting from it in the middle paragraph: 25 "I have met with the Attorney General,

1 the Solicitor General, the Ministry of 2 Natural Resources, representatives from 3 the Ontario Provincial Police, the Camp 4 manager at Ipperwash and Pinery Parks, 5 the West Ipperwash Property Owners' 6 Association and many other concerned 7 residents." 8 And I guess the first question that I have 9 from this is, do you recall actually having a meeting 10 with the Attorney General, the Solicitor General and the 11 Minister of Natural Resources at -- by this time? 12 A: This is where you probably can rap me 13 along -- or hit me on the fingers. English was not my 14 best language or my best subject at school. 15 English is my second language and I should 16 have probably have meant the representative of the 17 Solicitor General or the Minister of Natural, because I 18 contacted their Ministries but not the Ministers 19 directly. 20 Q: Okay. 21 A: So, if that offends people, I'm sorry 22 and I apologize for that, but basically it should have 23 been the Ministries. 24 Q: Well, this is the opportunity for us 25 to clarify these matters.

1 A: But, also understand that when you're 2 talking to people, to constituents, they do not 3 understand -- a lot of them do not understand the inner 4 workings of the political system. 5 Q: Yes. 6 A: So, if I were to say a representative 7 of the Solicitor General -- it's the same thing when I 8 call my lawyer's office. I say, I may call my lawyer's 9 office, but I end up talking to the secretary at times. 10 And that's the way people -- 11 Q: I can't imagine that. 12 A: No? Well, usually it happens. So, I 13 know that the language may not be specific, but -- 14 Q: Yes. 15 A: -- basically the intent is that I had 16 been in touch with the different Ministries. 17 Q: All right. So, that's what you were 18 intending -- 19 A: That's right. 20 Q: -- to convey by that? 21 A: That's right. 22 Q: Fair enough. 23 A: I wanted to convey to the people or 24 to this individual and I think that letter was probably 25 sent to other individuals, that I was in touch with the

1 different Ministries trying to decide -- to get some 2 information back from Queen's Park, in order that I could 3 pass it on. 4 Q: All right. And the third paragraphs 5 reads in part: 6 "A proposal will be presented to the 7 above Ministries on August 15, 1995. I 8 sympathize with your situation, but I 9 am sure you will agree that the only 10 long term solution to this dilemma is a 11 negotiated one." 12 Now did you have a particular proposal 13 which you then presented? 14 A: I can't recall with regards to that 15 and whether I submitted something or they told me that 16 the different Ministries were getting together to come up 17 with some information. I can't recall. 18 But again, I would like to empha -- 19 emphasize the fact that I believe from day 1 that the 20 long term solution to this issue and certainly the 21 solution to this issue was a negotiated one. 22 Q: All right. 23 A: And that dates back to August the 24 14th, 1995. It's on the record. 25 Q: And with respect to negotiated one,

1 and negotiated as between whom? 2 A: Well, all the parties that involved. 3 You know, I don't think you can resolve anything and if 4 it's going to be a one-way avenue. I think in order to 5 negotiate anything, whether it's two (2) people, three 6 (3) people, or four (4) groups, I think you have to have 7 them all at the table and you have to find some common 8 ground. 9 And you may not be able to satisfy 10 everybody but I -- I think most people are fairly 11 reasonable that you usually can come up to some type of 12 understanding. 13 Q: All right. Now, you also indicate 14 that you had met with representatives from the Ontario 15 Provincial Police in relation to these issues. 16 And do you recall having a meeting with 17 representatives of the Ontario Provincial Police on or 18 about August 11, 1995? 19 A: I know there was a meeting but I 20 can't recall the date. I think it's in the notes here. 21 I think it refers that we met in my constituency office. 22 Q: All right. And if you look at, just 23 to assist, Exhibit P-410 which is the extracts from the 24 handwritten notes of John Carson. I'll take you there 25 first, page 30, and you'll see there's a notation Friday,

1 August 11, 1995. 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: I believe it says: 4 "Attend meeting 10:00 a.m. Petrolia 5 with Superintendent Parkin, Inspector 6 Linton, Staff Sergeant Lacroix. 7 Discuss Ipperwash base, West Ipperwash 8 and Walpole." 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: And then if you go next to your -- 11 sorry. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: Perhaps, the Registrar can put 16 Exhibit 17 P-499 before the Witness. And it's Inquiry Document 18 2003790. And these are handwritten notes of Tony Parkin. 19 A: Any particular page that you want to 20 go to or -- 21 Q: August 11 entry. Oh I'm sorry, 22 you've got the whole exhibit there. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

1 A: I have it here. 2 Q: Do you have it there? 3 A: Yeah. It starts with, eight o'clock, 4 travel to Petrolia? 5 Q: Right. And does that refresh your 6 memory with respect to whether you had a meeting then? 7 A: Oh, I think we have it on the record 8 that we had a meeting -- 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: -- and subsequent to that meeting I - 11 - if I recall, I think I did send a letter to, you know, 12 I stand to be corrected, but I think it was the Solicitor 13 General or the Attorney General's office. 14 I think, where I mention about a meeting 15 with Carson I think, Linton and Parkin -- 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: -- and Lacroix. 18 Q: All right. I wonder, Mr. Registrar, 19 would you retrieve Exhibit 499 for me? 20 A: 499. Yeah. 21 Q: Actually it's okay you can -- you can 22 leave it -- leave it with the Witness. Go ahead. 23 A: Okay. Thank you. 24 Q: All right. So, we're on the same 25 page now, we have the same document. And you'll see at

1 the ten o'clock there's a reference: 2 "Met with Lambton area MPP Marcel 3 Beaubien. He understood --" 4 A: Just a minute. I've got to find the 5 page. I got -- I lost my page here. 6 Q: Oh, I'm sorry. 7 A: Okay. I'm back on. Thank you. 8 Q: It should be this August 11 entry. 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: And the next line: 11 "He understood OPP position relating to 12 Ipperwash Base." 13 And do --- do you recall what it was, the 14 OPP position was as relayed to you at that meeting? 15 A: If I -- to the best of my 16 recollection, if I recall, there was an agreement between 17 the Federal Government and the OPP with regards to 18 policing the Army Camp Base, and I think basically they 19 probably briefed me as to what the responsibility was. I 20 think that's -- to the best of my recollection. 21 Q: And -- and what was the context for 22 that discussion concerning the policing of the Base? 23 A: Well, I was receiving a lot of 24 complaints from area residents that if there was an 25 occurrence that the police would be chasing the

1 individuals and as soon as they got to the Army Base gate 2 that the police chase would stop there. 3 And that created an awful lot of 4 frustration with the people because they felt that the 5 law was not being upheld. And it was just like living in 6 a third world that all of a sudden you got to this area 7 and nothing happens. 8 Q: All right. So, you were conveying 9 that frustration from the -- the residents. And did you 10 receive a response from the police with respect to their 11 practices at that time? 12 A: No, I think probably at that 13 briefing, again to the best of my recollection, was they 14 probably explained to me what their role was and what 15 their responsibility, and -- and what that was I can't 16 recall. I'm sorry. 17 Q: All right. Now, the -- the last 18 bullet indicates on this ten o'clock entry: 19 "No complaints about policing or OPP." 20 What was that about? Do you recall? 21 A: I don't know. You probably should 22 have -- should ask Mr. Parkin because I didn't write 23 that. I -- 24 Q: No, I -- 25 A: -- I don't know.

1 Q: I appreciate. 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Just trying to refresh -- 4 A: I don't know. 5 Q: -- your memory about the contents of 6 this meeting. And you've already indicated that you 7 would be contacting the Solicitor General and the 8 Attorney General and the Ministry of Natural Resources 9 for direction? 10 A: Well, yeah. And to pass on the -- 11 the concerns that I was receiving from my constituents 12 because I felt it was important. You -- you know, we got 13 realize that, you know, this is not 2005 it was 1995, and 14 the situation was pretty tense in the area. 15 I mean, you know, the -- the area is 16 crawling with police. I'm sure there was all kinds of 17 intelligence going on. People were living in fear. 18 People were being intimidated. People were being 19 harassed. People were being chased on the beach. 20 So, it was not a beach -- what you would 21 call a nice Sunday afternoon beach party. So, the area 22 was quite tense and -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner. 24 THE WITNESS: -- so consequently -- 25 excuse me.

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I think -- I think that 2 the Witness -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The Witness 4 is talking -- 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- the Witness hasn't 6 finished his answer -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I -- I 8 understand but I've risen and I've signalled I've risen. 9 I'm not sure a hand in my face is the best way to -- to 10 stop me. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No -- 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Sorry, I was just -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Sorry -- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- trying to be subtle. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But, I didn't -- 16 well, it wasn't very subtle. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, though but -- 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But, I do -- but I 19 am concerned about the evidence so I can only rise and 20 signal it and then I can just sit and wait for the 21 evidence -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Hmm hmm. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- that I'm 24 concerned about to unfold I suppose. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.

1 Thank you, Mr. Falconer. You have an objection? 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. And it's got 3 nothing to do with Ms. Vella's question. Of course we 4 are going to hear from this gentleman exactly what 5 community concerns he heard at the time because that's 6 part of the narrative that relates to his evidence. 7 I appreciate that and I don't mean to 8 interrupt him or mean him any disrespect. 9 But when it comes to information that he's 10 heard of or heard by way of hearsay, by way of 11 complaints, with great respect, I think it's important to 12 distinguish that from him saying people were being 13 harassed as statement of facts, people were being 14 vandalized as statement of facts, et cetera, et cetera, 15 because of course that's very different; that suggests he 16 observed these things. 17 And with great respect I think it's very 18 important that we have -- he may have, but we need that 19 distinction, with great respect. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 21 Mr. Falconer. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: And I think that -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He -- 24 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- of course Mr. 25 Falconer wasn't here yesterday to hear yesterday to hear

1 it -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He made that 3 distinction yesterday, Mr. Falconer. 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: He -- he most certainly 5 did. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I -- I listened 7 to the evidence yesterday and -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 9 Mr. Falconer. That's -- 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We can clarify again -- 11 THE WITNESS: I -- I'll -- I'll put it on 12 the record right now. I never experienced any of the -- 13 those occurrences personally. These are all reports from 14 my constituents. 15 The only time that my staff was 16 intimidated was when two (2) young natives came to my 17 constituency office sometime later in the fall with 18 bandanas on their faces and walked into the office. 19 I subsequently meant -- now, they were 20 told to remove their bandana -- bandanas by one of the 21 young ladies that worked in the office. I subsequently 22 met with these individuals and I told them I did not 23 appreciate them walking in my office with bandanas on; 24 that I would meet with them at any time. 25 That's the only time that my staff direct

1 -- indirectly myself, experienced any of -- any 2 harassment. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So, 4 everything else is something that has been told you by 5 someone else? 6 THE WITNESS: Told to me, I want to make 7 that very clear. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 11 Q: Thank you. And we were -- I had 12 asked you a question about one of the points recorded by 13 Superintendent Parkin concerning -- suggesting that you 14 would be seeking direction and position from the 15 Solicitor General, the Attorney General and the Minister 16 of Natural Resources. 17 And was that in relation to the concerns 18 that you relayed about the policing or the apparent lack 19 of policing of the Army Camp Base by the OPP? 20 A: No, I -- to be honest with you, I 21 can't really recall the gist of that. It's a discussion 22 I had with the officers and they probably have notes. I 23 don't know, we didn't take any notes at that time. 24 But, we seem to be in agreement that, you 25 know, whether it related to the Army Base Camp or -- but

1 I can't recall. 2 Q: All right. 3 A: I just can't recall. 4 Q: Okay, fair enough. Thank you. And 5 we heard a little -- evidence from John Carson on May 6 12th, 2005 about his recollection of this meeting and he 7 testified that he recalled that the issues discussed 8 related to Walpole Island, West Ipperwash and the 9 Military Base it -- itself. 10 Is that consistent with your recollection? 11 A: That's correct, because I don't know 12 if I had met with the three (3) chiefs from the Sarnia 13 Reserve, the Walpole Island and Kettle and Stony prior to 14 this or after, but I did meet with Chief Gilbert who was 15 the Chief at Walpole Island, Ray Rogers who was the Chief 16 in Sarnia and Tom Bressette. 17 We had a meeting in my constituency office 18 and there is -- there is some documentation that alludes 19 to that, but I can't remember whether it was prior to 20 this or after that. 21 Q: All right. Now, just while you've 22 mentioned it, what was the purpose of that meeting? 23 A: Well again, like I said, I was trying 24 to diffuse the situation and I believe in trying to get 25 the story from both sides of the equation.

1 I know they had concerns and we were 2 looking at some -- maybe I was naive in trying to -- 3 trying to find some answers to this situation, but if you 4 don't try, you don't succeed, so I felt it was worth a 5 try. 6 Q: All right. Now, perhaps you could go 7 next to Tab 9. We reviewed this letter yesterday in 8 part. But it's the letter dated August 14, 1995, from 9 yourself to the Honourable Charles Harnick with copies 10 to, amongst others, Robert Runciman and Christopher 11 Hodgson. Inquiry Document 12000057. 12 Now... 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: It's Exhibit P-418. In any event, 17 did -- did you send this -- this letter to the Honourable 18 Harnick with copies as shown? 19 A: I'm sure I did, yes. 20 Q: All right. And it appears to 21 reference the meeting that we've just been referring to, 22 the August 11th, 1995 meeting with Tony Parkin, Dale 23 Linton, John Carson and it says Wade Lacroix -- Lacroix. 24 A: Yeah, that would be a fair 25 assumption. I think that's consistent with the notes

1 that you've provided me with this morning. 2 Q: And is this the direction or does 3 this represent the direction that you indicated you would 4 be seeking? 5 A: It's probably fair that we had 6 discussed these issues and let's say... 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 A: I would imagine that's probably some 11 of the issues that we had discussed during that meeting. 12 Q: All right. My question was whether 13 you indicated, at least, that in the August 11th meeting 14 you advised that you would be seeking direction from 15 certain Ministers and I'm asking whether this was the 16 form of seeking direction that you referred to? 17 A: Well, seeking direction. I'm seeking 18 some -- you got to realize that I'm basically by myself 19 in -- in this area and dealing with the issue and not 20 getting any direction from anybody. 21 I don't consider myself an expert in 22 dealing in Native affairs or in situations where there's 23 a fair amount of unrest. So, consequently, I'm trying to 24 seek as much information and input as I can from wherever 25 I can.

1 And basically I'm grasping here. I'm 2 looking -- you know, give me something. 3 Q: Give you something in terms of 4 information and direction -- 5 A: That's right. 6 Q: -- back from the Government to take-- 7 A: So, that I can relay back to my 8 constituents. Because you got to -- you -- you must 9 realize that by this time, there's probably a -- you 10 know, calls are coming by -- probably a hundred (100) 11 calls a day coming into the constituency office. 12 Not that I mind the calls, but people are 13 asking for -- for answers and I don't really have 14 anything to give them. And I personally feel that 15 somebody somewhere must have something to give me so that 16 I can pass it on. 17 Q: All right. 18 A: And like I said, I'm trying to keep 19 things there -- you know, calmed down. 20 Q: Fair enough. And with respect to 21 this letter, you've indicated on the bottom of the first 22 page that -- that you had reached a consensus on certain 23 points, four (4) points, with representatives from the 24 OPP. 25 And my first question is: Was that your

1 understanding -- did these four (4) points reflect what 2 you understood to be a consensus reached at the August 3 11th meeting? 4 A: Some people may differ with me but I 5 -- I felt that we were looking for information with 6 dealing with these four (4) -- four (4) particular 7 points, yes. 8 Q: Now, John Carson testified that he 9 did not agree with the suggestion that -- in the letter 10 under Number 3, page 2, that there was consensus reached 11 with the OPP that the Ministries involved have to give 12 the OPP clear guidelines for law enforcement. 13 Now, does that alter your recollection at 14 all about that meeting, or the consensus that you 15 described? 16 A: No, it doesn't. And the exact -- why 17 that is -- that bullet is there, I have really no 18 recollection. But I would imagine that we had discussion 19 with regards to law enforcement on the Army Base. 20 We're -- probably talk about the 21 Provincial Park. I have no idea what -- what we were 22 looking for there. And if he's -- not in agreement with 23 me, well I guess I can't disagree with him. 24 I basically, like I said, I'm trying to -- 25 to get some information as to what we do you, you know,

1 with this and what do we do with that? 2 Q: Well, you indicated that one of the 3 topics of discussion at the August 11th meeting was you 4 bringing to the attention of the OPP, the perception of 5 the local residents that the police would not go onto the 6 Army Base. 7 Does that refresh your memory at all with 8 respect to this? 9 A: Well, there's no doubt there was all 10 kinds of statements made by different individuals and I 11 think even the police admitted that they would not go on 12 the Base. 13 So, you know, it becomes factual. So -- 14 but, as to what the intent was with regards to that 15 particular point, I cannot recall. 16 Q: All right. 17 A: I'm certainly not suggesting to any 18 Ministry that they should tell them on how to enforce the 19 law, but I may be asking as to what is the policy. But 20 with regards to the operational, I'm certainly not asking 21 any question with regards to that. 22 But with regards to the policy, that's 23 probably what I'm trying to -- to seek from the 24 Government on this. 25 Q: All right.

1 A: But I never did get a reply anyway, 2 so. 3 Q: That was my next question. And Mr. 4 Harnick testified on November 24th that -- that he 5 believes he referred the letter to ONAS for a response. 6 Do you recall receiving a response of any 7 kind, whether it be from ONAS or any other Ministry of 8 the Government? 9 A: No, I don't think so. 10 Q: All right. 11 A: I don't recall that. 12 Q: Now, the last paragraph of the letter 13 reads in part: 14 "As detailed to Ministers Hodgson, 15 Harnick and Runciman, we will take the 16 following position until further 17 instruction is received from the 18 Ministries. 19 We will be legally prepared to uphold 20 Ipperwash Park. Enforcement is a short 21 term solution and we need the 22 Ministries to give clear guidelines to 23 the OPP for enforcement. 24 We would like a negotiated settlement, 25 failing that, a clear stand on what are

1 Provincial matters and that the law 2 will be upheld. This is an opportune 3 time if the elective First Nation 4 officials are supportive in upholding 5 the law." 6 Now first of all, who are you referring to 7 when you use the term 'we' as in 'we will take the 8 following position' and 'we will be legally prepared to 9 uphold Ipperwash Park', et cetera? 10 A: Well, you know, I -- we had a -- I 11 had a meeting with these three (3) or four (4) 12 individuals, so I imagine that I'm speaking on their 13 behalf and maybe I shouldn't be speaking on their behalf, 14 but that's basically, I would imagine that's consequently 15 to the meeting we had. 16 Q: All right. 17 A: That's why, you know, the letter went 18 out. 19 Q: And when you say as -- when you 20 reference or state it as "detailed to Ministers Hodgson, 21 Harnick and Runciman", what were you referring to? 22 A: That's probably notes and faxes or 23 telephone calls that I sent to those Ministries. 24 Q: All right. And you indicate -- 25 A: And, you know, I would point out that

1 when I sent that letter, I didn't circulate it to the 2 three (3) individuals that were in the office. They may 3 not have agreed with exact -- the exact word because, 4 like I said, my French, or pardon me, my English here is 5 not -- may not be the best. 6 But that was basically the recollection or 7 putting a letter together after meeting with these 8 individuals. 9 Q: So, you've indicated that you did not 10 provide a copy of a draft of this letter to the officers 11 who participated in the meeting for their review? 12 A: I don't recall that I did, no. 13 Q: All right. Now, is it possible -- 14 well, let me look at that -- if you look at page 1, third 15 paragraph, you make the reference: 16 "We are concerned with the takeover of 17 the camp Ipperwash." 18 A: We are not concerned. 19 Q: Sorry. 20 "we are not concerned..." 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: Excuse me. 23 "...with the take over of the Camp 24 Ipperwash Army Camp. 25 Do you recall who the 'we' referred to

1 there was? 2 A: I guess, you know, you're asking me 3 something that was written ten (10) years ago. I would 4 imagine that -- well, the Camp had been taken over for a 5 couple of years by that time and I'm sure that, you know, 6 most people were, you know, willing to live with that. 7 Q: All right. Back over on the last 8 page, you indicate in the last paragraph: 9 "failing that..." 10 That is, failing a negotiated settlement, 11 I take it. 12 "...a clear stand on what are 13 Provincial matters and that the law 14 will be upheld." 15 What were you referencing there? 16 A: Again, I would imagine we're probably 17 -- and I'm only -- and I shouldn't probably assume, but 18 I'm only assuming that we were talking about the 19 Provincial Park. 20 Q: Now, why didn't you copy any of the 21 OPP officers who were in attendance at this meeting with 22 this letter? 23 A: Good question. Don't know. 24 Q: All right. 25

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: And did you have any followup or 4 discussions whatsoever with the Ministers or Ministries 5 involved or Mr. Newman or Mr. Simzer with respect to the 6 points you raise in this letter? 7 A: I don't even recall who Mr. Simzer is 8 and why he received a copy. There must have been a 9 reason, but I can't recall that. 10 No -- well, I'm sure that on an ongoing 11 basis that was discussing the general situation at 12 Ipperwash, but that's it. With regards to the specific 13 points, no. 14 Q: Do you recall whether or not there 15 was an issue raised with you concerning any uncertainty 16 concerning -- with respect to the jurisdiction of the OPP 17 to enter the Army Base? 18 A: Again, I can't recall, but I'm sure 19 that, you know, the subject matter, because, you know -- 20 you know, and I don't want to guess. I can't recall. 21 Q: Did you speak with any Military 22 personnel with respect to the law enforcement issues that 23 your constituents raised with you? 24 A: Military personnel? 25 Q: Yes, from the Army Camp.

1 A: No. They had left town by then. 2 Q: Sorry? 3 A: They had left town by then. 4 Q: Okay, I appreciate that. But -- 5 A: No. 6 Q: All right. 7 A: No. Again, when it came to the Army 8 Base, I felt it was the Federal issue and I basically 9 steered away from it. 10 Q: Okay. Next go to Tab 10, please. 11 It's Exhibit P-418. And this a copy of the same letter, 12 the August 14th letter, but if you keep proceeding in 13 that production you'll see attached is a letter from 14 Mayor Fred Thomas dated August 14, 1995, to the 15 Honourable David Collenette, then Minister of National 16 Defence. 17 Now -- and you are shown as having 18 received a copy. I take it you received a copy? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: And you passed it along did you to 21 the Attorney General? 22 A: I would imagine so, yes. 23 Q: All right. Can I ask why you -- you 24 chose to send this letter on to the Attorney General? 25 A: Well, again like I said I -- I viewed

1 myself as the pipeline between my constituents and 2 Queen's Park and I figure that if the -- the municipality 3 where this occurrence is occurring has some concerns, I 4 felt that I should pass it on to Queen's Park just to 5 keep them informed. 6 Q: And item 2 of this letter references 7 an incident that apparently occurred at the Army Camp in 8 which two (2) individuals were killed in a motor vehicle 9 accident. And an issue came up with respect to the town's 10 ability to secure insurance as a result -- or sorry, 11 their intent to sue the town for damages resulting from 12 the accident. 13 Did you have any discussions with the 14 mayor about this incident or are you just simply 15 passing -- 16 A: Well, you know being a former 17 insurance broker I'm sure we probably talked about it. 18 Q: Okay. Did he ask for your assistance 19 in this respect? 20 A: Not that I recall. 21 Q: All right. Next go to Tab 13. 22 A: I should -- I should say, not that I 23 recall with regards to this particular incident, I was in 24 touch with the -- not only the mayor but the council and 25 the administrator of that community on an ongoing basis.

1 So, you know, I'm sure they sought my assistance on 2 different issues but with regards to this particular one 3 I don't recall. 4 Q: Okay. Fair enough. If you would 5 proceed then please to Tab 13 Inquiry Document Number 6 12000060. It's -- it's a handwritten entry dated August 7 20, 1995. 8 First of all, do you recognize this 9 document? 10 A: Well, that's my handwriting. 11 Q: All right. And do you -- do you know 12 where this note -- where it came from? 13 A: Well, probably what I would assume is 14 that Ken Williams who was the -- 15 Q: I'm sorry I -- I -- my -- my question 16 was a little more -- 17 A: Oh. 18 Q: -- technical than that. Was this 19 part of your DayTimer or did you have a -- a log or what 20 was this -- 21 A: Yeah. We had log. Every staff in 22 the office had a log so that when a call in they would 23 record the date and sometimes the time and a brief note 24 as to who called, the phone number, and what the subject 25 matter was. I don't want to say they were 100 percent

1 accurate but it gave you a pretty good direction of what 2 was going on. 3 Q: All right. 4 A: And I also had one on my desk myself. 5 Q: And does this -- did this reflect the 6 -- the contents of a telephone conversation you had with 7 Ken Williams on August the 20th? 8 A: Yeah. I would imagine that Ken is 9 telling me certain things and I'm writing it down as he's 10 -- he's speaking to me. 11 Q: All right. And it would be your 12 practice to make these notes contemporaneous? 13 A: That's right. 14 Q: Thank you. Next exhibit please? 15 THE REGISTRAR: P-1027, Your Honour. 16 17 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1027: Document Number 12000060. 18 Handwritten note re. Ken 19 Williams, Town of Bosanquet, 20 August 20/'95. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 23 Q: All right. And do you have any 24 recollection as to what Mr. Williams told you in the 25 course of this conversation?

1 A: Well, I'll stand by what I wrote down 2 and I'll read it for the record. It says: 3 "Boaters came ashore for a picnic. 4 Natives pulled in on beach, pulled 5 umbrellas out and coolers and put them 6 in their car, in their car trunks. 7 Confrontation occurred between the 8 Natives and families on beach. Young 9 children were present. Natives threw 10 bottles at the boat and apparently one 11 native pointed a gun at one of the 12 boaters." 13 And that was on August the 20th, 1995, and 14 that's relayed to me by Mr. Williams. As to where he got 15 the information you would have to ask Mr. Williams. 16 Q: All right. And at the bottom of this 17 note is the word or the phrase dissident Natives'. Do 18 you recall what gave rise to you writing that down? 19 A: That is my writing and I don't know 20 why it's there. 21 Q: Okay. Did you likely pass along this 22 information to anyone within the Ontario Provincial 23 Police? 24 A: I don't know if I passed the note 25 but --

1 Q: It's -- 2 A: -- you know, whether I talked about 3 this particular situation, I don't know. 4 Q: All right. 5 A: But I would pass on, generally 6 speaking, some of the incidents that were occurring that 7 were related to me by constituents. 8 Q: Did you also have a practice of -- of 9 relaying this type of incident to anyone within 10 government at this time? 11 A: I would because, you know, if 12 somebody points a gun at somebody I -- that gives me some 13 concerns. You know, I -- whether it's factual or not, I 14 don't know. But if somebody is willing to -- to relay to 15 me that, you know, the -- I don't think I would 16 appreciate having a gun pointed at me. So, it -- it 17 gives me some concern. 18 Q: So, in other words it was the type of 19 thing that -- that you would likely have relayed onto the 20 Government? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: And do you recall whom within 23 government you -- you were making these types of -- or 24 passing along these types of reports to? 25 A: Well, by this time it's August the

1 20th; probably I would say MNR would be my best guess. 2 Q: All right. 3 A: Because as you heard, MNR was the 4 lead Ministry at this point in time. Whatever that 5 means. 6 Q: Well, I think -- I think there's some 7 -- I don't know that -- that we've made facts in that 8 respect but there's been some evidence. 9 All right. And did you take any other 10 followup action in relation to this event? 11 A: No. I would -- again, you know, 12 these things -- these reports will be in my book and as I 13 said, we've provided all the information in the books 14 from the constituency office, so it's on the record. 15 Q: And if you go then next to Tab 14. 16 It's Inquiry Document Number 12000061, dated August 22, 17 1995. It's a handwritten document; do you recognize that 18 handwriting? 19 A: That is my handwriting, yes. 20 Q: All right. And what -- what were you 21 rec -- what -- what were you told here? 22 A: Well, I think at that particular 23 point in time, it's not quite clear at the top of the 24 letter, but I think it says "Ken Williams, Fred Thomas, 25 Garry Vance and Dave Pugh"; I think they were councillors

1 for the municipality of Bosanquet at that time. 2 And I think, again to the best of my 3 recollection, we had a meeting at the municipal office in 4 Thedford at that time. 5 Q: Okay. 6 A: And basically the note is self- 7 explanatory, that basically they would be relaying to me 8 some of the comments they're hearing from the residents 9 in the area and I'm jotting down basically as we -- as we 10 meet and speak. 11 Q: All right. Then one of the items 12 noted here, first point: 13 "People are scared to be at their homes 14 and cottages. Do you withhold taxes?" 15 Do you recall what that was about? 16 A: Well, I -- you know, I can't remember 17 exactly when people were evacuated from the area. But if 18 I recall there was a couple of hundred (200) people 19 evacuated that were not able to live on their property 20 for a number of days. 21 And I'm sure that they were probably 22 receiv -- or getting calls at the municipal office 23 whether they would have to pay their taxes. To the best 24 of my recollection that's probably the gist of the 25 discussion we had.

1 Q: All right. 2 A: Because they were not -- they were 3 not able to enjoy the -- you know, they did not have the 4 enjoyment of their property. So in other words, if I 5 cannot enjoy my property, why should I pay taxes. 6 I would imagine that's probably what the 7 discussion that they had with some of their taxpayers. 8 Q: So, I -- I gather the purpose of this 9 meeting was to give the town officials an opportunity to 10 relay concerns they had heard from their constituents? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: And was there any -- did you indicate 13 that you would take any action as -- as a result of 14 receiving these concerns as -- as outlined in this 15 document? 16 A: No. I would, you know, again pass on 17 that -- that information to Queens Park or to, you know, 18 different Ministries again. 19 Q: All right. And I note the second 20 last -- or the last point -- or second last point: 21 "More police visibility. Patrolling 22 beach and road." 23 Now, do you recall what that was in 24 reference to? 25 A: They're probably suggesting that

1 there should be more police visibility and more 2 patrolling on the beach and -- and the road. I would 3 imagine that's probably what they're referring. 4 Q: And the second point: 5 "OPP did not do anything with regards 6 to the incident on Sunday. Check with 7 Wade." 8 Is that a note to yourself to -- 9 A: That's a note to myself. And again, 10 you know, I think it's kind of nice to have the channels 11 open with police so that you can find out if -- if this 12 is factual or, you know, whether it's not factual. 13 So -- and I can't recall what the incident 14 was. Maybe it relates to this incident on the tab we 15 talked about, on Tab 13, I don't know. 16 But we met on the 22nd and this was the 17 20th, so it's probably fair to assume that it relates to 18 that particular incident. 19 Q: And is it likely -- and the Wade that 20 you've referring to is Staff Sergeant Lacroix? 21 A: That's right. 22 Q: And is it likely that you had a 23 conversation with him to relay the contents of the 24 meeting with the town officials as reflected in this 25 document?

1 A: I'm sure I did. 2 Q: I'd like to make this the next 3 exhibit, please. 4 THE REGISTRAR: P-1028, Your Honour. 5 6 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1028: Document Number 12000061. 7 Handwritten note re. 8 Bosanquet Township, August 9 22/'95. 10 11 THE WITNESS: And then, for the record, I 12 think basically it probably refers to that, because the 13 next paragraph it says: 14 "People pull in by boat on beach and 15 they are not aware of the possible 16 problem it could cause". 17 So, it probably refers to the incidents on 18 Tab 13. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 21 Q: All right. Now, do you recall, over 22 the course of the summer of 1995, having any other key 23 discussions or any key -- that you haven't told us about, 24 with John Carson? 25 A: I'm sure I would have. I, you know,

1 as to the time and place and date -- 2 Q: I'm asking for your specific 3 recollection of any key conversations that we haven't 4 reviewed. 5 A: In August? 6 Q: July, August -- June, July, August of 7 1995. 8 A: I can't recall. I mean, I'm sorry, 9 but I -- 10 Q: No, that's -- 11 A: -- I'm not going to deny that I did 12 not, but I cannot recall. 13 Q: All right. Or with -- do you have 14 any specific recollection of any other key conversations 15 with Tony Parkin? 16 A: No, because I met a few times, twice 17 I think, with Inspector Carson, and I think only once 18 with Parkin, I think. 19 Q: All right, over this timeframe? 20 A: That's right, yeah. 21 Q: How about Dale Linton? Had you met 22 with -- 23 A: I think the only time I met with Dale 24 Linton was in the office, in my constituency office, and 25 the night that I received the call to be in Forest.

1 Q: And -- all right. And you're 2 referring to the August 11th meeting? 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: And I know that you've indicated had 5 ongoing discussions with Wade Lacroix. You've relayed 6 what you can with respect to those conversations? 7 A: Basically we had an open -- I felt we 8 had a pretty good pipeline going both ways. I -- you 9 know, he could not tell me an awful of information, and I 10 realized that and I didn't expect him to tell me that. 11 But at least I could relay to my 12 constituents that I was -- that I had contacted the OPP 13 and they were assuring me -- assuring me of certain 14 situation, whether it was the proper level of policing or 15 whatever, but I felt that it helped to diffuse the 16 situation with the constituents of the area. 17 Q: All right. And do you recall having 18 any conversations with any other member of the Ontario 19 Provincial Police force over June to August of 1995, with 20 respect to any of the Ipperwash matters? 21 A: Well, I did have a conversation with 22 -- I can't remember exactly, I think it was Chris Coles. 23 I can't remember what his title was, but I think he was 24 the superintendent for the southwest region, but I stand 25 to be corrected on that.

1 Q: And do you recall what that 2 conversation was about? 3 A: Not specifically. We met at the OPP 4 Detachment in Grand Bend and I can't recall the date, but 5 we probably talked about policing issues in the -- in the 6 area. 7 Q: Do you recall specifically whether 8 that was prior to September of 1995? 9 A: No, I can't recall. 10 Q: All right. In hindsight, do you have 11 any concerns about your interactions with the Ontario 12 Provincial Police over the summer of 1995 with respect to 13 the Ipperwash related matters? And I'm referring to West 14 Ipperwash -- 15 A: Not at all. 16 Q: -- and Army Camp Base, et cetera. 17 A: Not at all. 18 Q: And why not? 19 A: Well, I felt that I was elected to 20 represent the people at the area. We had a major 21 situation and I say major situation in -- in the riding. 22 I don't think that Queen's Park appreciated the 23 seriousness of the issue; that's my personal feeling or 24 personal opinion. I was not getting an awful lot of 25 information from Queen's Park or direction, contrary to

1 popular beliefs. 2 And the only source of information that I 3 could relay was my interaction with the OPP. I didn't 4 expect them to tell me anything about their operational, 5 their intelligence, their -- you know, and what they were 6 doing. 7 But I certainly expected them to tell me 8 that we had the proper level of policing; that people 9 were -- you know, when people are concerned to make sure 10 that -- people are taxpayers, they expect to be 11 protected. They expect to be able to enjoy -- the 12 enjoyment of the property. 13 So, I think it was important to have that 14 interaction with the police, with the different police 15 officers at that time. 16 Q: All right. And you said that it was 17 your opinion that Queens Park didn't appear to be taking 18 them -- this matter seriously over the course of the 19 summer of 1995. 20 Can you just tell me what the basis of 21 that opinion or view was? 22 A: Well, again -- we'll have to go back 23 to when we were elected in 1995. You had 1.3 million 24 people on welfare in the Province of Ontario. I think we 25 had ten and half million people. You had one million

1 people unemployed, you had a deficit of $11 billion. 2 The Sarnia Lambton area had lost ten 3 thousand (10,000) highly paid jobs through downsizing the 4 chemical valley which impacted the entire county. 5 The economic situation in -- and for those 6 that live in Toronto, there weren't too many construction 7 cranes downtown Toronto or in Toronto in those days, if 8 you recall. 9 So, I can see where -- and plus the fact 10 we campaign on -- on -- basically on a platform that was 11 an economic platform. And I can see where Toronto would 12 be or Queens Park would be preoccupied with the large 13 economic situation in Ontario. 14 Now, we had a lowly backbencher in Lambton 15 that's screaming and hollering that we've got a serious 16 situation in Lambton. But rest assured that I lived in 17 Toronto in those days also and I'd lived in Petrolia, and 18 as I said yesterday, the situation at Ipperwash did not 19 impact on me personally in Toronto or Petrolia, because 20 we were far enough. 21 So, this situation impacted on 22 approximately or maybe at best, ten thousand (10,000) 23 people in the area. You know, we're looking at an impact 24 of somewhat financially for the -- to the -- for the 25 business sector in Forest.

1 But basically we're looking at the area in 2 the Ipperwash area. So, when I say ten thousand (10,000) 3 people I'm probably stretching it but we'll say that, so 4 which is, you know, maybe 15 percent of my riding. 5 So, you know, again, my personal opinion 6 was that I'm not getting anything. I don't seem to be 7 getting a sympatic -- sympathetic ear from anybody at 8 Queens Park; not only the political side, but the 9 bureaucratic side. Because I think the bureaucratic side 10 should have been more aware of the situation than the 11 political side because you've got to realize the 12 political side had only been there for a couple of 13 months. 14 So, I'm not getting an awful lot. So, 15 when I say that Queens Park did not appreciate the 16 situation, that's how -- that's where I base my -- my 17 opinion. 18 Q: All right. 19 A: Or I form my opinion. 20 Q: And we hear -- we've heard evidence 21 that there was a meeting of a committee called the 22 Interministerial Committee or is sometimes referred to as 23 the Blockades Committee on August the 2nd at which the 24 issue of the Provincial Park, Ipperwash Park was raised. 25 Did you -- were you aware that there was

1 such a committee and that it was meeting -- 2 A: They probably told me they were 3 meeting but that's about it. As to what type -- type of 4 committee, who sat on the committee or what the committee 5 discussed, I was not privy to any of that information. 6 Q: All right. So, you weren't familiar 7 with the structure or organization of the 8 Interministerial Committee? 9 A: Not at all. 10 Q: Or the purpose? 11 A: No. 12 Q: And you weren't reported -- you 13 didn't receive any report as to the outcome of that 14 discussion? 15 A: No. Like I said, communication was 16 basically a one-way direction. 17 Q: From you to the Queens Park? 18 A: It was a one-way pipeline. Well, 19 with a little bit of trickle down effect once in a while 20 coming down. 21 Q: All right. But that was your 22 impression? 23 A: That's right. 24 Q: Now, we've heard evidence that the 25 Ontario Provincial Police prepared a contingency plan to

1 respond in the event that Ipperwash Park became occupied 2 and that it was known as Project Maple. 3 Did you have any knowledge of this plan, 4 either its existence and/or content? 5 A: I learned about Project Maple -- I 6 think I was sitting in the House, there was a question 7 from the Opposition through the Freedom of Information, 8 they had accessed some information; that's the first time 9 I heard about Project Maple. 10 And to be honest with you, I didn't have 11 any problem with that because I would consider that an 12 operational issue, and so I can see why that information 13 would not be passed on to me. 14 Q: All right. And when you -- when you 15 say it was -- your first knowledge was -- was in the 16 House, this is, I take it, after the events of September 17 the 6th? 18 A: Oh, this is way after. This is 19 probably late -- probably late '95, early '96. 20 Q: All right. And when you say that you 21 assume it was an operational issue were you in fact made 22 privy to the contents of this -- 23 A: Absolutely not. 24 Q: All right. Now, we also have heard 25 evidence that there was a briefing at the London

1 Detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police on September 2 the 1st, 1995, which included some staff from the 3 Ministry of Natural Resources. 4 Were you apprised of that meeting in or 5 around that time? 6 A: No, I was not. 7 Q: Or at any time prior to September the 8 7th? 9 A: I was never apprised of it. 10 Q: All right. And we've also heard 11 evidence that the OPP had some information as of 12 September the 1st suggesting that there was a real 13 possibility that the Ipperwash Park could be occupied 14 over the Labour Day weekend. 15 Did you receive any of that information or 16 any indication of that possibility from the OPP? 17 A: Not from the OPP, but I think I -- 18 and again I stand to be corrected, but maybe around that 19 time I started hearing that from my constituents. There 20 was a rumour. 21 Q: What was the rumour? 22 A: About the -- the possibility of the 23 Provincial Park being taken, but I can't remember exactly 24 when. But I certainly did not get that from the OPP. 25 Q: All right. You didn't get a heads-up

1 from Staff Sergeant Lacroix about any of these matters? 2 A: Not that I recall. 3 Q: Did you get a heads-up from the MNR 4 with respect to any of these matters? 5 A: I think Les Kobayashi mentioned it to 6 me, but again I can't remember at what time. 7 Q: Mentioned what to you? 8 A: That there was a possibility that the 9 Park might taken over -- 10 Q: And is -- 11 A: -- but I can't recall when. 12 Q: -- is it likely that you would have 13 passed on that information to any of your constituents in 14 advance of September 4th? 15 A: Oh, I'm sure I probably would have, 16 yeah. 17 Q: And to what end? 18 A: You know I don't see any 19 documentation to -- to that -- to that effect, so I can't 20 tell you. 21 Q: All right. In retrospect do you 22 think that you should have been given the heads-up by the 23 OPP about this possibility? 24 A: No, I don't think so because I think 25 basically -- I mean, I was aware there was intelligence

1 in the area; that they were monitoring the area. You 2 know, like I said it's up to them to deal with the 3 situation as they see fit. 4 It's -- it's an issue that I, you know, I 5 heard through the rumour mill but on what was going to 6 happen and what they were going to do it was their 7 responsibility. It's not my concern. 8 Q: All right. We've also heard evidence 9 that the OPP had undercover officers posing as campers in 10 the Park over the course of August and the Labour Day 11 weekend. 12 Did you know anything about that? 13 A: Well, I was aware that there was 14 intelligence around. I mean, I heard it from people 15 around and I seen it myself when I visited Les Kobayashi 16 with the monitoring equipment at the Pinery. The Pinery 17 was monitored also. 18 Q: And -- 19 A: And I can't tell you exactly what day 20 that was but, I mean, I knew there were officers over 21 there. I think Les told me that there were some officers 22 living on the premises plus the fact there were 23 monitoring equipment throughout the Park. 24 Q: All right. And this -- you don't 25 recall the exact time, but it would have been prior to

1 September the 4th? 2 A: I can't recall. I can't recall. 3 Q: Now, is that the type of information 4 you would have relayed in turn to your constituents? 5 A: I don't know whether I would have 6 relayed that to my constituents. I probably would keep 7 that fairly close to my chest I think. 8 Q: And why is that? 9 A: Well, I -- I probably would assure my 10 constituents that the situation is being monitored, but I 11 don't know whether I would pass on, you know, -- you know 12 what type of monitoring is going on. 13 Again, like I said, I'm trying to keep 14 things calm and cool as -- as much as I possibly can and 15 to the best of my abilities. I felt that maybe I should 16 keep some of that information to myself. 17 Q: Okay. When did you find out that the 18 Park had in fact become occupied? 19 A: Probably, I think, the morning after. 20 Q: The 5th? Monday the -- 21 A: I think so, yeah. 22 Q: -- or Tuesday the 5th? 23 A: Yeah. I think so, yeah. Yeah. 24 Q: Do you recall where you -- where you 25 were when you received the information?

1 A: No. And I can't recall who gave me 2 the first heads up. I just can't recall. 3 Q: All right. What was your reaction to 4 learning of that news? 5 A: Well, my personal reaction was, I 6 guess, there was no, you know, really no position for me, 7 personally, because, like I said, it did not impact on me 8 personally. 9 But, I know that we re -- again the calls 10 went up exponentially and the people in the area were 11 really concerned. 12 Q: You mean the calls from your -- 13 A: Constituents. 14 Q: Constituents -- 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: -- to your office? 17 A: That's right. 18 Q: Went up exponentially? 19 A: That's right. 20 Q: All right. Do you have a sense as to 21 the volume of calls that you received -- 22 A: Well, we provided documentation. 23 Again, you know, if somebody wants to count the number of 24 calls, I've never counted them. I would say hundred 25 (100) calls a day was not -- would have been the norm, or

1 more. 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: And, but, you know, it's on the 4 record. 5 Q: No, I appreciate it -- 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: -- I just want a general sense -- 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: -- of your recollection. 10 A: But, as to the exact number, but I 11 would say, you know, hundred (100) to a hundred and fifty 12 (150) calls would probably be a fair -- a fair estimate. 13 Q: All right. And were you surprised at 14 the fact that the Park had been -- had become occupied? 15 A: Yeah, somewhat, because, you know, I 16 had been assured that things were being monitored from a 17 policing point of view when, you know, that there was a 18 rumour mill going around that the Park could be taken 19 over, but there was no concrete evidence that, you know, 20 it would happen. 21 So, yeah, I was somewhat surprised. Not 22 shocked, but surprised. 23 Q: All right. And did you learn about 24 the details of how the occupation commenced? 25 A: Oh, I think I did learn that, I

1 think, subsequent to, probably, again, talking to Wade 2 Lacroix and probably some of the residents. Now where 3 they got their information, whether it's secondhand or 4 not, but -- but I did, yes. 5 Q: And that would have been over the 6 course of the 5th? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And what did you -- just tell us what 9 -- how -- what your understanding was by -- about how the 10 occupation commenced? 11 A: Well, basically a group of people, 12 again, you know, I can't remember exactly what time, 13 whether it was later on in the day, came into the area 14 and I -- I got it on the record... 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 A: If you... 19 Q: Sorry, what are you referring to? 20 A: I'm referring -- this is for 21 documentation that -- that was on the civil suit, the 22 Superior Court of Justice and there was a transcript... 23 Q: Is this your examination for 24 discovery? 25 A: That's right, yeah.

1 Q: And you're using that to refresh your 2 memory, are you? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: You don't have a recollection today? 5 A: Well, you know, I thought I could be 6 more specific but I can recall that -- now, whether it 7 was in discussion with officers -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 9 minute -- 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Sorry, there is -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just one 12 moment -- 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- an objection or a 14 comment. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- Mr. 16 Beaubien. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I -- with respect, 18 I think a witness ought to first give his recollection 19 and if someone wants to -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- refresh him from 22 previous evidence. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I think 24 that -- 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I think Ms. Vella

1 knows that. I... 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: My impression was that 3 the transcript was put away and that we were going to now 4 get his recollection; is that right? 5 THE WITNESS: Okay. Well, we'll put it 6 away. And my recollection was -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: If the transcript 8 is the way in, by him first reading it then that's -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, he -- 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- my concern. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well -- 12 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't read it. I 13 got some -- something else. I couldn't find the exact 14 point. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 17 Q: It seemed apparent to me that you 18 didn't find the -- the page you were looking for; is 19 that -- 20 A: That's right. 21 Q: -- fair? 22 A: That's right. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: But the best of my recollection was 25 that some of the police officers felt -- were concerned

1 about their safety and that's why they left. 2 Q: Okay. Did you have any concerns 3 about the way the police had handled the situation at the 4 point of entry and then leaving? 5 A: Well, not concern how they handled 6 the situation, but the whole situation gave me a lot of 7 concern, because I had been assured by the police that 8 the area was properly policed and monitored. 9 I had been telling my constituents that 10 for a couple of weeks, and then all of a sudden an 11 occurrence occurs and police officers leave because they 12 fear for their safety. 13 All of a sudden it puts me in a somewhat - 14 - not a very good light with my constituents because, you 15 know, they're telling me, Well, you've been assuring us 16 that people should feel safe because the proper level of 17 policing is there, but this occurs and police are 18 concerned about their safety. 19 So, it was a tough one to rationalize. So 20 yes, it did -- did cause me some concern. 21 Q: All right. And just to be clear, 22 from whom did you -- or what was the basis of your 23 impression that the -- the police left because they were 24 fearful? 25 A: I think they said that themselves.

1 Q: Do you recall who? 2 A: No, I can't recall. 3 Q: All right. And is it fair to say 4 that it was important to you, as the local MPP, then, to 5 be perceived as being active on this issue? 6 A: Yeah. I felt that, you know, I'm 7 elected to represent the people in this area and that I 8 didn't think my role was to go to Toronto and hide. 9 Q: And what -- what did you think your 10 role was as -- over the next two (2) days, the 5th and 11 6th of September? 12 A: Try to keep things calm as -- as much 13 as I possibly could because the -- the situation was 14 quite tense, very tense. You must realize that, you 15 know, people could not go to their homes, roads were 16 blockaded in the area. In order to go from one (1) 17 destination to the other you had to take detours. There 18 were fires on the road. 19 And people were nervous. People were 20 afraid. And like I said I think there's a couple of 21 letters that people are referring that they're willing to 22 arm themselves, to protect themselves. 23 As a -- as a representative of the people 24 for -- of Lambton, yes, it did give me an awful lot of 25 concern.

1 Q: And you said that the -- the roads 2 were blockaded in and around the Park. Do you recall who 3 -- whose blockades they were? 4 A: The -- well, the OPP blockaded 5 certain, you know, certain areas where you could not 6 drive. 7 Q: Now, what was the basis of your -- of 8 your impression that the level of anxiety or tension was 9 high over the next few days? 10 A: Well, when you have grown up people 11 that call you and they're crying and they're, you know, 12 they have to have appointments with their doctors to calm 13 them down. You know, and I talked to these people, I 14 seen them. Their homes are being vandalized and they 15 can't live. 16 I mean we, you know, we had somewhat of an 17 -- I don't know what you'd call it but a -- a centre at - 18 - in this facility for -- for the people to come and live 19 here for -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just stop 21 for a minute. 22 Mr. Ross, are you on your way up here? 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Yes -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just stop 25 for a minute.

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I was going to clarify. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I know 3 you were but just -- 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Sure. 5 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Only -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you want 7 to stay nearby, Mr. Ross, just in case? 8 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, I'll hear the 9 clarification. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Give Ms. 11 Vella a chance and then if you still have an objection -- 12 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Sure. Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- make it. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 16 Q: You -- you made some statements with 17 respect to homes being vandalized and -- and people going 18 to doctors' appointments. Now, did you have any direct 19 knowledge of this? 20 A: Yeah. From talking to people. 21 Q: Your knowledge was based on the 22 reports by others? 23 A: No. 24 Q: By -- by the people? 25 A: By the people, directly to me.

1 Q: Did you take any steps to validate 2 these -- these reports? 3 A: Well, I would think when -- well, 4 I've seen people crying in front of me so I've seen it 5 with my own eyes. When somebody tells me that they're 6 seeing their doctor to get some tranquillizers and I 7 think, you know, I would imagine that I have to take them 8 at face value. 9 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I shall withdraw. 10 Thank you. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: All right. Thank you, 12 sir. Not everyone thinks so. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 15 Q: All right. Well -- 16 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: I just think it -- 17 it should be made clear whether this evidence is about 18 September 4th, 5th, and 6th or after the 4th, 5th, and 19 6th. Just, some of the evidence is -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, some of 21 it is merging from before, during, and after. 22 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: -- in that sense. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, now I do want the 24 record to be clear. My intention was to direct you to 25 the -- the 5th and 6th. We're not going beyond those

1 dates. Now -- 2 THE WITNESS: Around that time, the -- 3 the 5th and 6th that I'm talking about, you know? 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: Was it? 7 A: Hmm hmm. 8 Q: All right. 9 A: And further down, after. Not only 10 the 6th, but I think you have to go, you know -- 11 Q: All right. 12 A: -- well into September. 13 Q: You received reports of this nature 14 on the 5th and the 6th; is that right? 15 A: And thereafter. 16 Q: And thereafter? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: All right. Now, who is your first 19 point of contact, if you will, with the OPP, over the 20 course of the 5th and the 6th? 21 A: I always felt that I should talk to 22 Wade Lacroix because I'd been in discussions with him 23 throughout. 24 As I said yesterday, I knew him 25 personally, and I'm -- I know that he relayed or relayed

1 the information that he obtained from somebody else, but 2 I felt -- I felt comfortable with that. 3 Q: All right. And how frequent were 4 your conversations with the Staff Sergeant, over the 5th 5 and 6th, about this matter? 6 A: Well, we probably had a few 7 discussions. I can't remember how many, but I'm sure we 8 had a few. 9 Q: All right. 10 A: I mean, we have to realize that 11 somebody, by this time, has lost -- there's a life, that 12 it's lost. 13 Q: Sorry, we're -- 14 A: You know this -- 15 Q: We are -- let me very clear. I'm 16 talking about the events leading -- 17 A: Oh, okay. 18 Q: -- to the evening of September the -- 19 A: Oh, I'm sorry. 20 Q: -- 6th. 21 A: Okay, I'm sorry. 22 Q: So can we confine the comments to -- 23 A: Yeah, okay. 24 Q: -- the 5th and the 6th up to the 25 evening.

85
  1                 A:   Okay.
  2                 Q:   All right.  So did you speak with
  3  Staff Sergeant Lacroix --
  4                 A:   Oh yes.
  5                 Q:   -- over that time period?
  6                 A:   Yes.
  7                 Q:   On the 5th?
  8                 A:   Oh, I'm sure on the 5th and on the
  9  6th, yes.
 10                 Q:   All right.  And did you attend at the
 11  Forest OPP Detachment, at all, on the 4th, 5th or the
 12  6th.
 13                 A:   One day, I think it was the 5th,
 14  around 6:30, if I recall.
 15                 Q:   That's the meeting that you had in a
 16  trailer.  I believe that may have been -- well, let me
 17  ask you this.  How many times did you meet at the OPP
 18  Detachment at Forest?
 19                 A:   Once.  
 20                 Q:   All right.
 21                 A:   But let me make this very clear --
 22                 Q:   Yes.
 23                 A:   -- because I don't write books and
 24  movies, but I was in the Thedford area which is
 25  approximately ten (10) miles from here and I received a

1 call from my office -- 2 Q: Well -- 3 A: -- late in the afternoon, from my 4 constituency office, that they wanted me to be at the 5 Forest Detachment. The call came in as the Forest 6 Detachment. 7 Q: All right. 8 A: That is factual. So -- and I think, 9 if I recall, I was supposed to be -- to meet there at 10 6:30. I could be -- but thereabouts. 11 So I did attend that meeting. Upon 12 arriving at the -- 13 Q: Well, I just am going to hold you 14 there for a moment. Now, is it possible that this 15 meeting occurred on the 6th as opposed to the 5th? 16 A: Well, you know... 17 Q: And perhaps I could take you to Tab 18 17 because I don't want to jump ahead and -- 19 A: Okay, no, but -- 20 Q: -- or behind in any chronology. So 21 let's look at Tab -- 22 A: September 5th. 23 Q: -- 17. 24 A: Yeah, you're correct. 25 Q: This is the typed logs --

1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: -- from the Ontario Provincial 3 Police, Exhibit P-426. And if you proceed, please, to 4 page 69 and the entry at 18:42, which would be 6:42 p.m. 5 in the evening, this is an entry from September the 6th. 6 And it refers meet -- to a meeting with 7 Inspector Linton, Inspector Carson, Les Kobayashi and a 8 number of parliaments -- of course, that should be 9 Provincial Parliament. 10 "Marcel Beaubien, meeting in the 11 command." 12 Is this the meeting that you're referring 13 to? 14 A: That's the meeting I'm referring to. 15 Q: And if -- do you dispute the date of 16 the meeting; that's fair? 17 A: No, I do not. 18 Q: All right, so I wonder if we can put 19 that meeting to the side -- 20 A: Sure. 21 Q: -- for a moment. 22 A: Sure. 23 Q: Had -- on the 5th, did you attend at 24 the Forest OPP Detachment? 25 A: On the 5th?

1 Q: On the 5th? 2 A: Well, for that meeting, which is the 3 5th. 4 Q: I think we just established that that 5 was an entry for the 6th. 6 You're -- you're looking at a September 7 6th entry, you can take it from -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The meeting 9 that we're speaking of now is September the 6th. 10 OBJ MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But, Mr. 11 Commissioner, I appreciate what My Friend is trying to 12 do, but I do have a concern with respect, and now I'm 13 objecting to the question. 14 It's this: There is no problem with 15 seeking to refresh a witness' memory. It is entirely 16 conceivable that the witness either has a different 17 recollection or has an additional recollection. 18 And we lose that once we start cross- 19 examining the witness into simply getting him to accept 20 that this note is the only reflection of a meeting. 21 My objection, right now, is just making it 22 worse. But my simple point is we have to be careful and 23 defer, to some extent, to what the witness recalls. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I 25 understand, Mr. Falconer. I think Ms. Vella's trying to

1 be careful. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, and I 3 accept that she is. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, it's 5 very important now, Mr. Beaubien, that we try to be 6 precise. 7 THE WITNESS: Okay. Well let me -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Take your 9 time. 10 THE WITNESS: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Take your 12 time and wait until you hear the question and we have to 13 be precise. 14 THE WITNESS: If I may back -- 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Let me -- 16 THE WITNESS: -- track. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: May I ask you one question -- 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: -- first? How many times did you 22 attend at the Forest Detachment at a meeting involving 23 Inspector Carson, Inspector Linton and Les Kobayashi? 24 A: Once. 25 Q: Thank you. Do you have a

1 recollection, today, as to whether that was the 5th or 2 the 6th? 3 A: Well, to -- to be exactly sure, the 4 night of the shooting was what, the 5th? 5 Q: The 6th. 6 A: The 6th. I would say, to the best of 7 my recollection, it was prior to the shooting. I would 8 say it was the 6th but it says the 5th. 9 Q: No. The -- the doc -- you're 10 confused by the document I put in front of you. It 11 doesn't say the 5th. The first page of the production is 12 the 5th but it proceeds -- 13 A: Okay. So I would say the 6th. 14 Q: All right. 15 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: That -- just so we 16 clarify the -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He thought 18 he was referring to a document that was dated September 19 the 5th -- 20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- and it 22 was the 6th. 23 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: The document that 24 he's referred to is Tab 17 and at the top it says -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: September

1 6th. 2 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- September 5th. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: oh, I'm 4 sorry. 5 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: So that's the 6 problem. 7 THE WITNESS: Yeah, and that's what's 8 confusing me. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, okay. 10 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: It's not a -- maybe 11 that's helpful to clarify that at the top it says, 12 "Morning 05 September" if you look at -- 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That's right. 14 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- 17. And I think 15 it's not as large an issue, it's simply the fact that 16 that's what it says at the top of the page he was 17 referred to. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 19 Mr. Sulman. 20 MS. SUSAN VELLA: The production includes 21 logged notes from the 5th and the 6th. 22 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: And unfortunately 23 there not -- as we get to the 6th in the second pages, 24 it's certainly not counsel's fault, they just aren't 25 marked that way in the way they were produced by the

1 Provincial Police. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 3 We have to make sure we it straight, and I think we're 4 trying, so. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: And with that recollection then, did 8 you or did you not also attend at the Forest OPP 9 Detachment on the 5th, the prior day? 10 A: I -- I might have but I don't recall. 11 Q: All right. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Vella, 13 perhaps this would be a good time to take a break if 14 you -- 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It probably would be 16 and I thank you for that. Let's take the morning break. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's take a 18 break. 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 20 for fifteen (15) minutes. 21 22 --- Upon recessing at 10:30 a.m. 23 --- Upon resuming at 10:49 a.m. 24 25 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now

1 resumed. Please be seated. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 4 Q: Mr. Beaubien, I appreciate that these 5 events occurred more than ten (10) years ago, and so what 6 we're asking is your best recollection and then I'll take 7 you to the documents to see whether or not that assists 8 with your recollection when necessary. So, just -- 9 A: Okay, that's fair. 10 Q: All right. So let's move squarely to 11 Tuesday, September the 5th, 1995. 12 Do you recall whether or not you likely 13 spoke with Staff Sergeant Lacroix in the morning of the 14 5th? 15 A: I don't recall but I'm not going to 16 deny that I did speak to him. 17 Q: Would that be a logi -- been a 18 logical thing for you to have done? 19 A: I prob -- you know, yes, because I -- 20 I talk to him quite often, so I'm not going to deny that 21 I did not talk to him on September the 5th. 22 Q: And would you kindly go to -- I take 23 it you -- you don't have any specific recollection at 24 this time? 25 A: No.

1 Q: Would you go to Tab 20 please, 2 Inquiry Document Number 3000824? 3 A: This is Tab 20? 4 Q: Tab 20 of Commission Counsel's 5 documents. It seems to be -- are you at Tab 20 there? 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: All right. And the document you have 8 in front of you, I think is, actually it's 12000068. Is 9 that right, in the top right-hand corner? There's been 10 redactions to that document? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: All right. I also -- I'm referring 13 to a duplicate copy of that document, 3000824, because it 14 doesn't have the redactions. And... 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Okay. First of all, do you recognize 19 the handwriting on the 12000068 document? 20 A: That's my handwriting. 21 Q: All right. And -- 22 A: Oh, on the first page, yes. 23 Q: -- is this an excerpt from your -- 24 your log that you kept at your desk? 25 A: It would be.

1 Q: All right. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Could My Friend 3 just assist with the document because my -- for some 4 reason my -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry -- 6 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- Mr. 8 Falconer, I can't hear you, but I presume Ms. Vella can. 9 That's -- 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I -- it's fine. He 11 would like me to repeat the Inquiry Document number. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The actual document 13 is -- what it is -- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: A description of the 15 document, I'm sorry. It's an excerpt from Mr. Beaubien's 16 daybook, constituency book, with handwriting with a 17 number of notations dated September 5. All right. 18 Commissioner, I'd like to make the Inquiry 19 Document Number 3000824 the exhibit. And this is the 20 unredacted version however we will ask that the private 21 individuals' names and phone numbers be redacted. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 24 Q: There are two (2) names however which 25 should not be redacted and the first -- the second entry,

1 Mr. Beaubien, should read, "Wade Lacroix -- Lacroix." 2 And it says: 3 "Until [sorry] units stayed outside the 4 Park," 5 Do you see that entry? 6 A: Yes. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: All right. All right. Mr. Clerk -- 11 Registrar, could you please -- or Mr. Clerk, I guess 12 would you kindly give a copy of 3000824 to the Witness so 13 that he can follow the unredacted version? 14 I just want to advise -- 15 A: Thank you. 16 Q: -- My Friends that the second entry 17 where there's a blacked out name, that's Wade Lacroix. 18 Perhaps you could make the -- and if you look at the 19 Inquiry Document prefaced with the "3" then you'll see 20 the name. And the last -- the last entry is Chris Coles, 21 Chief Superintendent. 22 In any event, can you verify the document 23 before you, 3000824, is a copy of -- of your excerpt from 24 your constituency office book? 25 A: That's correct.

1 Q: And it has your handwriting on page 2 1? 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: And that's the document I'd like to 5 be made the next exhibit but with the redactions of the 6 personal information. 7 THE REGISTRAR: P-1029, Your Honour. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 9 10 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1029: Document Number 3000824. 11 Handwritten Notes, Sept. 12 05/95. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 15 Q: All right. Now, does this refresh 16 your memory at all with respect to whether or not you had 17 a conversation on September the 5th with Wade Lacroix in 18 which the following was discussed? You -- 19 A: Okay. Like I said I did not deny, 20 but it certainly would prove that I did have a 21 conversation with Staff Sergeant Lacroix the -- September 22 the 5th. 23 Q: All right. And then you make the 24 following notations: 25 "Unit stayed outside the Park. Going

1 for court order to evict. Four (4) 2 emergency response team. Six (6) 3 officers." 4 A: No, there's sixty (60) officers. 5 Q: Sixty (60), excuse me. 6 "Sixty (60) officers..." 7 Thank you. 8 "...two (2) teams on twenty-four (24) 9 hours a day. No danger to individuals 10 [brackets](thirty (30) men) [dash] - 11 MNR going for Court Order." 12 Now, did you have a conversation with 13 Staff Sergeant Lacroix in which this -- these -- this 14 matter was discussed? 15 A: Yeah, I would surmise that in my 16 discussion or in the call that I had with him at that 17 time, he was informing me of this particular -- he's 18 passing on this information. 19 Q: All right. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: And I'd like to refer you next to an 24 excerpt from a transcript of a telephone log that was 25 maintained by the Ontario Provincial Police, and it's

1 Exhibit P-444A and I'm referring to Tab 4. 2 I have a copy of the transcript for the 3 Witness and the Commissioner. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: And this -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 11 Q: -- reflects a transcript of a 12 telephone conversation which occurred on September 5th, 13 1995, commencing at 8:20:42 a.m. And it's described, 14 John Carson and unknown Staff Sergeant who has 15 subsequently been identified as Wade Lacroix, Mr. 16 Beaubien. 17 And if you look at the bottom of the first 18 page, I'm just going to read an excerpt. Male -- the 19 male, we understand, is Wade Lacroix. 20 "I just received a phone call from the 21 MPP, quite irate, not at us. 22 CARSON: Right. 23 LACROIX: Ah, he's going to call here. 24 CARSON: You're being recorded, by the 25 way. We're on recorded lines here.

100

1 LACROIX: Okay. 2 CARSON: Okay. 3 LACROIX: He wants me to brief him. 4 He's going to call the Premier and say 5 this is ridiculous. 6 CARSON: Yes. 7 LACROIX: And I want something done. 8 CARSON: Well, okay. And so that you 9 know, we have four (4) ERT teams 10 [that's the Emergency Response Team]. 11 Two (2) were on the ground all night 12 and two (2) new ones are in there now. 13 LACROIX: Okay. 14 CARSON: We're just trying to contain 15 it. 16 LACROIX: Okay. 17 CARSON: And our objective here is to 18 contain and negotiate a peaceful 19 resolution with this, whatever that may 20 be. 21 LACROIX: Okay. 22 CARSON: And we have adequate 23 resources at this time to address all 24 public concerns. 25 LACROIX: Okay.

101

1 CARSON: No one in the community is -- 2 is in danger of anything, in our 3 estimation and we will maintain the 4 level of service as long as it 5 required. 6 LACROIX: Okay. 7 CARSON: Okay. 8 LACROIX: We'll address we're going 9 for an injunction. 10 CARSON: Yes, Natural Resources are 11 addressing that as we speak." 12 And then he carries on to relay more 13 information. 14 Now, do you recall -- does that help you 15 at all in recalling whether or not you had an initial 16 conversation with Wade Lacroix sometime before 8:20 in 17 the morning on the 5th and then a call back at which you 18 received the information reflected in your note? 19 A: Well, it's quite obvious, I had the 20 conversation with Lacroix, but as to what time I can't 21 recall. 22 Q: All right. You don't dispute the -- 23 this record. 24 A: No. 25 Q: And --

102

1 A: But if I -- if I may interject, 2 sorry. On the second page it says he wants to be brief - 3 - he wants me to brief him and he's going to call the 4 Premier and say that this is ridiculous. 5 Now, you got to realize this is somebody 6 else saying this, of who, on that call -- I didn't have 7 Mike Harris' cell phone number, so when I'm talking, you 8 know, when I -- when he's talking about the Premier, I 9 tell you, you know, he's probably referring to Premier's 10 office here. 11 Q: And -- 12 OBJ MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I object to 13 that. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The Witness has to 16 be -- with respect, the Witness has to be discouraged 17 from climbing into the mind, now, of other witnesses, 18 especially on key the evidence. 19 So, I'm not objecting to My Friend's 20 question but if some kind of caution could be expressed 21 to the Witness. It -- 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yeah, I'm sorry, go 23 ahead. 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I think, My 25 Friend, that's my point.

103

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, yeah, I must say, 2 Commissioner, I was about to followup with an appropriate 3 question that would have -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- I believe, responded 6 to that concern. And I can indicate that we'll be here a 7 long time if -- if I'm going to be interrupted with 8 respect to what question I might ask next. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It would 10 help, Mr. Falconer, if you just waited and see if the 11 concern you have -- but I realize sometimes if you wait 12 it may be too late. 13 But it would be helpful if you tried to 14 wait and see what Ms. Vella's doing. 15 Yes, Ms. Vella...? 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: The first -- the first question and 20 I -- I -- it would be helpful if you would wait for my 21 questions and -- and then you can give your evidence in 22 response to those questions. So perhaps -- 23 A: I apologize. 24 Q: Not at all. We -- let's start with 25 the first page and it appears to have been Sergeant

104

1 Lacroix's impression that you called him first thing, on 2 September the 5th, you conveyed at least to him, that you 3 were angry or irate. 4 Is that a fair characterization of your 5 disposition in the morning of the 5th? 6 A: I don't know if I was angry or irate, 7 but I'm sure I was frustrated. 8 Q: All right. 9 A: I mean, I don't know what the 10 difference is between the three (3) of them but -- 11 Q: I want to hear your -- your words and 12 I'm giving you an opportunity -- 13 A: I would say probably frustrated more 14 than anything else. 15 Q: And frustrated, why? 16 A: Well, you know, because, you know, 17 people feel -- you know, again, my constituents are 18 calling, you know, the perception is that nothing is 19 being done and rightly or wrongly, you know, I have to 20 deal with that. 21 Q: And on the second page, Staff 22 Sergeant Lacroix indicates the following -- he and I -- 23 from the context, I anticipate he's referring to you: 24 "He wants me to brief him. He's going 25 to call the Premier and say this is

105

1 ridiculous." 2 Now, my question to you, and I -- I urge 3 you not to speculate, did you say to the Staff Sergeant 4 anything to the effect that you were intending to call 5 the Premier after you are briefed by him, by Sergeant 6 Lacroix. 7 A: No, I don't recall that. 8 Q: All right. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: And -- all right, thank you. Is it - 13 - do you recall telling Staff Sergeant Lacroix that you 14 intended to call the Premier's office? 15 A: No. I don't recall that. 16 Q: All right. Did you in fact call the 17 Premier or the Premier's office that morning? 18 A: Again, you know, we could check with 19 our telephone bills which -- to see if there was a call 20 to the Premier's office, but I don't recall that. 21 Q: All right. Now, perhaps you would go 22 to Tab 17. This is an excerpt from the logs taken from 23 the command post on the Ontario Provincial Police in 24 Forest. 25 And the first page you'll see is a

106

1 notation, September 5, 1995. If you move to the second 2 page it reflects the contents of a meeting at 9:25 a.m. 3 on September 5, 1995 including John Carson, Mark Wright 4 and others. 5 And you are not present at this meeting 6 according to this note. Is that consistent with your 7 recollection? 8 A: That would be consistent, yes. 9 Q: And over at page 25 of this document, 10 it -- it's Exhibit P-426. Top paragraph, I'll read the 11 paragraph to you: 12 "John Carson discussed issue about 13 injunctions -- injunction. Stated that 14 the party the injunction is against has 15 the option to appear. 16 Doubtful it will happen today. Advised 17 that Staff Sergeant Lacroix has been in 18 contact with Marcel Beaubien, local 19 Member of Parliament. He is updating 20 the Premier on the situation." 21 My question to you is: Do you recall 22 telling Staff Sergeant Lacroix that you were going to be 23 updating the Premier or the Premier's office or anyone on 24 behalf of the Premier? 25 A: I don't recall that.

107

1 Q: All right. Was it your intention to 2 do that? 3 A: Probably. 4 Q: And what would be the purpose of -- 5 of doing that? 6 A: Again, it, you know, I want to be 7 consistent. I'm trying to pass on as much information to 8 the parties involved as I can. 9 Q: All right. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 A: And if I may add, I'm sure that by 14 the time they received the information from me, that they 15 were probably aware of the situation through their own 16 channels. 17 Q: And perhaps I could -- is that a 18 matter that you're purely speculating on, or do you have 19 a basis for that? 20 A: I don't have any evidence to that, 21 but I'm -- just to make sure. 22 Basically, the reason I'm passing the 23 information is just that I want to make sure that, down 24 the road, that nobody comes down, Well, we weren't aware 25 of this. I'm passing as much as -- information, all the

108

1 information that I have to the proper channels. 2 Q: Oh -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But Mr. 4 Beaubien, you don't know what others have done or haven't 5 done, so it's better -- 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- if you 8 don't comment on them. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 11 Q: All right. And I do appreciate that 12 you advise -- testify as to what you know you did -- 13 A: Hmm hmm. 14 Q: -- what your intentions were, what 15 you were told. All right. Perhaps we could go to Tab 16 18, then, please. 17 And this is Exhibit P-953, Inquiry 18 document 1006195. It appears to be a fax transmission 19 cover sheet to Bill King, office of the Premier, from 20 Marcel Beaubien. 21 And the date of the fax, and time of the 22 fax transmission at the top is September 5, 1995 at 1:07 23 p.m. Now, does that -- and behind it is a document 24 entitled, Press Release, September 5, 1995. 25 Now, first of all, do you recognize this

109

1 document? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: All right. And did you, in fact, 4 cause the press release attached to be faxed to the 5 office of the Premier at around 1:00 p.m. on September 6 the 5th? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Can you tell me, first of all, with 9 respect to the -- what was the purpose of transmitting 10 this press release to the office of the Premier? 11 A: Well, as I said previously, I'd been 12 passing on a fair amount of information that I'm 13 receiving from my constituents and I'm not getting 14 anything back from Queen's Park. And there's no doubt 15 that I am getting frustrated, because, you know, I can't 16 keep passing on the same lines to the constituents day in 17 and day out. 18 So I guess that probably shows my level of 19 frustration. 20 Q: All right. Perhaps you can just help 21 me, then. What was the purpose of -- first of all, was 22 this press release something you had already issued? 23 A: No, it never -- was never issued. 24 Q: All right. So why would you send 25 this, then, to the office of the Premier?

110

1 A: Well, basically I'm giving him a 2 heads up that here's a press release that's going to go 3 out. And, you know, when you -- you give somewhat of a 4 quote/unquote, I guess, "ultimatum", to somebody in the 5 Premier's office, they may not like it. 6 But I felt that, hey, I got to get some 7 attention here, I -- I -- I'm on a deserted island here, 8 by myself, and I need some help. 9 Q: All right. And I note that the 10 comment on the front of the fax transmission sheet reads 11 as follows: 12 "Bill, I am going to issue the attached 13 memo to the press at 3:00 p.m. today, 14 unless I hear from Queen's Park." 15 And that's your handwriting and -- 16 A: That's not my handwriting, but I did 17 sign it. 18 Q: You did sign it? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: All right. Thank you. And so was 21 this your way of trying to get the Premier's attention? 22 A: Well, yes, or the Premier's office 23 attention. 24 Q: All right. And did it work? 25 A: Well, I did get a reply, I -- because

111

1 the press release never went out. So at least I got 2 something. I didn't get much, but I did get a little 3 bit. 4 Q: Well, what was the response to this 5 fax? 6 A: I can't exactly, you know, I can't 7 recall, per se. I, you know, you'll have to prompt me 8 somewhere but I can't recall, you know, off the top of my 9 head what the -- I think that I was briefed as to what 10 they were doing with the injunction and -- and something 11 along that nature. 12 Q: And who -- who provided you with that 13 information? 14 A: Bill King. 15 Q: And was that by way of a 16 conversation, or a letter, or do you recall? 17 A: I think it was a conversation on the 18 phone. 19 Q: All right. And if you would look 20 next at Tab 19, it's Exhibit P-961 but it appears to be a 21 duplicate copy of the press release that was attached to 22 the prior exhibit P-953, but there is handwriting on this 23 one. Do you recognize the handwriting? 24 A: That's my handwriting. 25 Q: And what does this reflect, the

112

1 handwriting? 2 A: That probably reflects the 3 conversation I had with Bill King after he called me. 4 Q: All right. And what -- does this 5 assist in -- in refreshing your memory as to what Mr. 6 King reported to you? 7 A: Yes, it does now. It says if I may 8 read it, it says: 9 "MNR -- it's an MNR issue, not an 10 Indian issue. It's a Provincial Park 11 issue. Premier's [something] following 12 closely. Police is the..." 13 Q: And it says: 14 A: "...is there to assist [I think]..." 15 Q: Hmm hmm. 16 A: "...uphold the law. No [something] 17 involvement." 18 I'm sorry, but it's cut off on -- at the - 19 - on -- on the edge of the -- 20 Q: And do -- do you have any 21 recollection today of -- of you being apprised of these 22 matters? 23 A: Well, I can't, you know, recall the 24 conversation but I, you know, I'll stand by the 25 documentation there and my writing.

113

1 Q: All right. And you indicated that 2 you did not issue the press release. Why didn't you 3 issue it? 4 A: Why didn't I? I did not, because I 5 live to my word that if I did hear from him prior to 6 three o'clock that I would not issue it and he called me, 7 I don't know what time, but it must have been before 8 three o'clock. 9 Q: All right. Were you prepared to 10 issue this press release in the event that you had not 11 received a reply? 12 A: Yeah. It probably would have gone 13 out, yes. 14 Q: All right. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: In the course of this telephone 19 conversation with Bill King, that likely occurred 20 somewhere between 1:00 and 3:00 p.m on September the 5th, 21 did you have any discussion around the appropriate 22 protocol in terms of MPP contact with the OPP? 23 A: No, not that I can recall. 24 Q: Did you tell Mr. King that you were 25 in contact with Staff -- Staff Sergeant Lacroix?

114

1 A: I can't recall. 2 Q: Was this your first conversation with 3 Mr. King since the occupation of the Park began? 4 A: I don't think so, but I can't recall. 5 Q: Did you tell Mr. King that you saw 6 the occupation as a challenge to the Government's 7 authority? 8 A: Not that I can recall. 9 Q: Or that the Government was being 10 tested, in your view? 11 A: Not that I can recall. 12 Q: Did you make any suggestions as to 13 what you thought should be done by the Government in 14 relation -- or in response to the occupation? 15 A: Not that I can recall. 16 Q: Or make any suggestions about what 17 you thought the police should do -- 18 A: No. 19 Q: -- in response to the occupation? 20 A: With regards to what the police 21 should do, absolutely not. 22 Q: Okay. Did you pass along any 23 information with respect to the level of the policing 24 activities, as has been described to you by Staff 25 Sergeant Lacroix?

115

1 A: I'm probably -- I probably should. 2 It was probably discussed at some point in time, yes. 3 Q: With Mr. King? 4 A: With Mr. King and other ministers. 5 Q: If -- 6 A: Because it's a concern that my 7 constituency, you know, kept voicing, so I certainly 8 would relay that information back. 9 Q: Okay. I just want to be as precise 10 as possible. We've reviewed that you received 11 information from Staff Sergeant Lacroix with respect to 12 the level of police activity, the number of men, the 13 number of teams, et cetera. 14 Do you -- did you -- do you believe you 15 provided that information to Mr. King, on the 5th? 16 A: I -- I can't recall that. 17 Q: All right. But you think you would 18 have, at some point? 19 A: I -- I just can't recall, I'm sorry. 20 Q: All right. Fair enough. Thank you. 21 Did you receive any advice from Mr. King 22 as to whether you not you ought to release the press 23 release, Exhibit P-961? 24 A: No, I don't recall Mr. King giving -- 25 giving me any advice. Basically, he returned my call and

116

1 that was satisfactory for me. And at least he did give 2 me a little bit of information. 3 Q: All right. And you make some 4 statements in, at least -- is this a press release that 5 you drafted? 6 A: Well, one of my staff would draft it 7 and I would approve it because, as I said previously, 8 English was not my favourite subject in school, for a 9 number of reasons. 10 And I'm not a very good letter writer. So 11 usually I would write a few notes as to what I wanted 12 said in the letter, my staff wrote it and I signed the 13 letter. 14 Q: All right. Did you approve of the 15 contents of this -- 16 A: Yes, I did. 17 Q: Did you understand what it -- what 18 they said? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: All right. And you were prepared to 21 issue this, if necessary? 22 A: That's correct. 23 Q: So you were content that the -- what 24 was in the press release was accurate, from your 25 perspective?

117

1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: All right. Now, you -- you indicate, 3 in part, on the second paragraph, referencing first the 4 statement attributed to a councillor from the Kettle and 5 Stony Point Band and you say: 6 "This councillor is right. We are not 7 dealing with your decent Native 8 citizen, we are dealing with thugs." 9 Now, what was the basis of your 10 characterization? Well, first of all, who were you 11 referring to as thugs? 12 A: Well I'm, you know, basically, what 13 I'm referring to is, generally speaking, is the people 14 that are occupying the base and the Park, because I have 15 all kinds of reports, and the documentation is available 16 to everybody with the calls and who called. 17 And I'm sure that if you want to get these 18 people on the stand, you have their names and phone 19 numbers, that they were being harassed, they were being 20 intimidated, their house were being broken into. 21 So I wouldn't call that type of behaviour 22 law abiding. 23 Q: All right. So -- 24 A: You know, if you intimidate people 25 and you harass people and threaten people that, I don't

118

1 know what you call them. Some of the Federal member call 2 them, Terrorists, other people call them, Animals, some 3 call them, Hooligans. I use the word, Thugs. 4 Q: All right. And you thought that was 5 an accurate description, based on what you knew. 6 A: With the information -- based on the 7 information that I had, yes. 8 Q: You also say the following: 9 "Are we to assume, as law abiding and 10 tax paying citizens, that we have a 11 legal system in this Province and in 12 the country that is two (2) tiered? Do 13 we have a double standard with 14 enforcement of the law?" 15 Now to what, specifically, were you 16 referencing? 17 A: To the comments made by my 18 constituents. 19 Q: All right. What were you intending 20 to convey? What message were you intending to convey to 21 the public through this press release? 22 A: Basically, what I was hearing from my 23 constituents. 24 Q: Tell me what that was. 25 A: Well, basically, that the law was not

119

1 being upheld, that was a two (2) tier system, that if you 2 chase somebody and they come to the base, police -- the 3 chase stops there. 4 And if it was somebody on the other side 5 that, you know, there's no road blocks of that nature. 6 So, basically, I'm conveying what my constituents are 7 telling me. 8 Q: All right. And item -- the -- the 9 next paragraph you -- you stated: 10 "Enough is enough. Where is the 11 leadership from not only the Provincial 12 officials but the Federal officials and 13 from the First Nation itself." 14 Now, at the time that you approved this 15 press release, what was your view with respect to the 16 adequacy of the leadership demonstrated by the Provincial 17 Government? 18 A: Well, my personal opinion and 19 observation is that nobody wants to take ownership of the 20 situation at Ipperwash at that particular point in time. 21 And let me tell you that the situation did 22 not start on the 4th or the 5th and end on the 6th. It 23 started before that and went on for a long period of -- 24 of time thereafter. 25 I mean, just to try to portray that the

120

1 situation occur on the 5th and 6th, that's totally 2 inaccurate, because the level of fear and the harassment 3 kept on going way after the -- September the 6th. 4 So -- and, basically, it was -- I hate to 5 describe it as such, but it's more or less like the wild, 6 wild west, that if nobody wants to take ownership of the 7 situation, and there -- if there's no leadership, the 8 situation is not going to rectify itself. 9 You have to lead it, you have to direct it 10 and nothing is happening. 11 Q: Right. So first of all, to clarify, 12 when you say -- said that certain conduct continued after 13 the 6th, this was based, again, on reports you received 14 from your constituents; is that fair? 15 A: That's correct. 16 Q: And with respect, you made this 17 statement or approved this statement on September the 18 5th, you're indicating there were outstanding issues 19 which are relevant to the occupation which pre-dated the 20 4th? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And what were those issues? 23 A: Well, again, you know, I'm going by 24 the information that I'm given by -- by my constituents, 25 and that's why, again, that I contacted the police with

121

1 regards to some of the break ins, some of the occurrence 2 that are going on. And this is where the police 3 department or the OPP provided me with some stats of -- 4 as to what was occurring in the area. 5 In other words, how many re -- you know, 6 break-in reports were handled by the Detachment, how many 7 were solved, how many were outstanding. 8 So, at least they gave me some -- a bit of 9 information that I could work with. 10 Q: The statistics that you are referring 11 to, you say they were provided to you by the Ontario 12 Provincial Police? 13 A: That's correct. 14 Q: And do you recall who, specifically, 15 provided them? 16 A: I can't recall, no. 17 Q: And was it -- when, in relation to 18 the September the 5th; before or after? 19 A: That I can't recall. But I know that 20 they provided me with statistics, certainly after the 21 incident, on a more regular basis. 22 Q: Hmm hmm. And were these -- did these 23 statistics repres -- identify who the alleged 24 perpetrators were and who the alleged victims were? 25 A: No, no --

122

1 Q: So they were just -- 2 A: -- they were strictly numbers. 3 Q: -- general numbers -- 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: -- of occurrences in the general area 6 over a time period? 7 A: That's right. 8 Q: With no identifying -- 9 A: No. 10 Q: -- information? 11 A: No identifying information. 12 Q: All right. And then the next comment 13 is as follows in this press release: 14 "How can we negotiate with 15 irresponsible law breaking dissidents. 16 We must come to our senses and take 17 back control before something 18 irreparable happens." 19 Now, what were you intending or what 20 message were you intending to convey to the public by the 21 comment that, We must take back control? 22 What was that meant to refer to? 23 A: Well, like I said, the situation was 24 not just on a couple of days. From the time I was 25 elected in June, I could see the situation escalate,

123

1 tempers were flaring, there was more reports, and you 2 could see it escalate. 3 And as I said, if nobody take -- nobody 4 takes ownership of the situation it does not rectifies 5 itself. Somebody has to take ownership of it. 6 Q: Well, who is -- who -- who were you 7 suggesting would have to take back control? Who's -- 8 A: Us, as a society. 9 Q: Society? 10 A: Yeah, us as a society. I mean, 11 whoever; I'm talking about the Provincial leadership, I'm 12 talking about the Federal leadership, I'm talking about 13 the native leadership. 14 Q: Okay. And take back -- 15 A: It just can't go -- keep on going. 16 Q: And take back control over what, 17 specifically? 18 A: Over -- over, you know, to stabilize 19 the sit -- the area, the situation. Because it's just 20 escalating on a daily basis. 21 Q: And this is basis on -- based on 22 reports you continued to receive from your constituents? 23 A: And I think if you look at the 24 provincial statistics that you'll see that the level of 25 occurrence does increase.

124

1 Q: Occurrences generally in the area -- 2 A: That's right. 3 Q: -- but without identifying features-- 4 A: That's right. 5 Q: -- as to -- oh, okay -- perpetrators, 6 alleged perpetrators or alleged victims. All right. So 7 this is a report of the number of complaints received? 8 A: That's right. 9 Q: Okay. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Do you recall speaking to anyone else 14 in the Premier's office that day, the 5th? 15 A: Not that I can recall. 16 Q: Or to the Premier himself? 17 A: No, I -- definitely not. Definitely 18 did not and I emphasize, not, speak to the Premier 19 himself. 20 Q: What about any of the Cabinet 21 Ministers? 22 A: Didn't talk to them, either. 23 Q: All right. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

125

1 Q: All right. Do you -- did you contact 2 the office of the Minister of Natural Resources that day? 3 A: It's quite possible. 4 Q: And do you recall speaking to either 5 Peter Allen or Leslie Shimmin? 6 A: I would have spoke to Leslie Shimmin, 7 yes, if I would have contacted MNR. 8 Q: All right. And who is she; what 9 position? 10 A: I don't know what exact -- I think 11 she was an executive assistant to the Minister, but I 12 stand to be corrected on her title. 13 Q: All right. Did you know Peter Allen 14 at that time? 15 A: No, but I did meet him subsequently 16 to that. 17 Q: We heard some evidence from Peter 18 Allen that -- that he believes he may have spoken to you 19 on the 5th, and does that refresh your memory at all? 20 A: No. 21 Q: All right. 22 A: He might have. I'm not going to deny 23 that because I did meet him, whether it's on the 5th or 24 the 6th, but I did meet him, but I can't recall if it was 25 on the 5th -- did not meet him but spoke to him.

126

1 Q: All right. 2 A: I did meet him later on but -- 3 Q: Okay. 4 A: -- but I can't recall the date. 5 Q: All right. Do you recall what the 6 content of that telephone conversation was with Mr. 7 Allen, whether it happened on the 5th or the 6th? 8 A: I don't know. 9 Q: All right. What was the purpose of 10 contacting the Natural Resources Minister's office? 11 A: Well, I think by that time and I 12 stand to be corrected again because my, you know, 13 recollection of all the events on the specific date I -- 14 I, you know, I'm not totally clear on that, but I -- I 15 think the MNR was the lead ministry at that particular 16 point in time on this issue. 17 Q: All right. 18 A: And I think I had been informed of 19 that, yes, sure, because, you know, with the facts, when 20 I talked to Bill King on the 5th he told me this is an 21 MNR issue. Now, whether they had been formally appointed 22 or not, that's probably why I would have contacted MNR. 23 Q: But you don't recall the contents of 24 your conversation -- 25 A: No, I don't. I'm sorry.

127

1 Q: -- or why you called? 2 A: No. 3 Q: Did you speak to an individual by the 4 name of John Duncan on the 5th? 5 A: That's quite possible. 6 Q: And who is John Duncan? 7 A: John Duncan is the Member for, I 8 forget the riding in British Columbia, but he was the 9 Federal Member representing the area where the Lake 10 Gustafsen situation was occurring. 11 If you recall, there was some blockades, 12 some firearms that had been fired and it was a tense 13 situation, also. I think we were on -- dealing with a 14 situation somewhat similar. 15 Q: And do you recall what the 16 circumstances were that gave rise to this conversation 17 with John Duncan? 18 A: No, I -- basically, I was put in 19 touch with John Duncan. Whether he called me first or I 20 called him, I can't recall, but by -- through a mutual 21 friend and we probably talked about the situation that he 22 was facing in his area and in the situation that I was 23 dealing with in -- at the provincial level. 24 Q: And did you receive any advice from 25 Mr. Duncan as to how you should be handling your role?

128

1 A: No. No. 2 Q: Did you provide him with any advice? 3 A: No, because -- 4 Q: You -- 5 A: -- as I said, I'm not an expert in 6 these situations. 7 Q: All right. Did you do anything with 8 the information that you obtained from him? 9 A: No, I just kept it in my, you know, 10 in the back of my mind. 11 Q: All right. Now, you indicated that 12 you thought you received somewhere between a hundred 13 (100) and a hundred and fifty (150) calls that day from 14 your constituents? 15 A: Yeah. I don't know the exact number, 16 but a lot of calls. 17 Q: All right. And did you also visit 18 any of your constituents that day? 19 A: Oh, I'm sure I did, yes. 20 Q: Do you have any recollection of -- of 21 visiting constituents? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And what -- what is that? 24 A: Pardon? 25 Q: Can you tell us the circumstances of

129

1 that? 2 A: Well, I think -- I don't want to 3 mention names but some were living close by to the Outer 4 Drive Road, I think it's called. 5 Q: Outer Drive? 6 A: Yes, I think, it's east of the Army 7 Base and on the lake. And they were facing some -- they 8 had been harassed, one of the houses had been broken into 9 and I did meet with some of the people that lived in that 10 area. 11 Q: And again, is this something they 12 reported to you? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And just to be a little more precise, 15 I wonder, could we put on the screen Inquiry Document 16 Number 1002409. I think page 8 of that document should 17 be a map. Thank you. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: And you'll see -- I don't know if you 22 can see from there, but this is a map of the general 23 area. In the middle is the Ipperwash Military Camp -- 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: -- and the Ipperwash Provincial Park

130

1 is marked. And I think you might have a laser pen in 2 front of you. Do you have one? 3 A: Let's see. 4 Q: That looks like it. 5 A: But how does it work? Okay, I've 6 got -- 7 Q: That's it. That's it. 8 A: Okay. I think the area was that 9 particular area right there, right -- 10 Q: All right. 11 A: -- in front of the Army Base where 12 there's a -- I don't know how many homes but probably 13 maybe a dozen homes. 14 Q: All right. So, this is area that 15 bordered Lake Huron on immed -- immediately adjacent on 16 the east side to the Military Camp beach? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: All right. And in or around Outer 19 Drive. 20 A: Right. I think Outer Drive is this 21 particular area there. Yeah. Yeah I think that's the 22 Drive, yeah. 23 Q: Thank you. How would you describe 24 the -- the general situation at -- in and around the -- 25 the Ipperwash Park area, in terms of your impression of

131

1 the -- of the concerns of the constituents who expressed 2 same to you? 3 A: My impression was that the situation 4 was very tense, people were afraid for their safety, and 5 there was a general feeling by an awful lot of people 6 that they were not satisfied with the level of policing 7 that was provided in the area. 8 Q: Did you convey those concerns to the 9 OPP on the 5th? 10 A: Yeah, I think, you know, in -- in 11 some documentation that, you know, I followed up with 12 that and that's why, I think -- and on different 13 occasions, they reported me -- or reported to me that 14 there was an adequate compliment of police -- policing 15 and patrolling. 16 But -- but, you know, according to some of 17 the constituents they were not satisfied with the level - 18 - levels provided. 19 Q: Did you also provide the OPP with any 20 inf -- sorry. Did you have any further conversations 21 with anyone on behalf of the Ministry of Natural 22 Resources that day? 23 A: With -- 24 Q: Do you recall having any other 25 conversations with any representative from the Ministry

132

1 of Natural Resources on the 5th? 2 A: Not that I can recall. I'm not going 3 to deny that I did, but I -- I just can't recall. 4 Q: Perhaps you would go to -- for the 5 record, it's Exhibit 444A, the audio logger tapes -- logs 6 from the mobile command unit. 7 And I'd like to hand up the excerpt. It's 8 Tab 22 . One for the Commissioner and one for Mr. 9 Beaubien. 10 A: Thank you. 11 Q: This reflects the transcript of a 12 telephone -- reported telephone conversation between John 13 Carson and it says: 14 "Unknown male that we have since 15 identified or advised that that was 16 Wade Lacroix." 17 Recorded at -- on September the 5th, 1995 18 at 16:24 p.m., so at 4:24 p.m. in the afternoon. 19 And if you would go to page 181, you'll 20 see the handwritten numbers. Read a few excerpts and see 21 if -- if you could help us with them. Three (3) -- two 22 (2) -- two-thirds (2/3's) of the way down the page, page 23 181: 24 "Male: [who we know now is Lacroix] 25 Did you get a call from the Ministry

133

1 side -- or side? 2 Carson: No. 3 Lacroix: Okay. But Marcel got 4 briefed a half hour -- an hour ago. 5 Carson: Okay. 6 Lacroix: And he's going -- going to 7 get briefed again in five (5). 8 Carson: Okay. 9 Lacroix: That is not an Indian issue 10 but an MNR issue and a Provincial 11 issue. 12 Carson: Hmm hmm. 13 Lacroix: Harris is involved himself 14 and quite uptight about it. 15 Carson: Okay. 16 LACROIX: And the Ministry, I guess 17 the Solicitor General, I imagine, is to 18 do a press release momentarily or soon, 19 saying the law will be upheld, no 20 matter who is involved. 21 CARSON: Okay. 22 LACROIX: So, I would say the signal 23 is that we're going to end up the 24 victim. 25 CARSON: I would suspect."

134

1 Sorry? 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: "Evicting." 3 4 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 5 Q: "Evicting," excuse me. The 6 transcript says "victim" but we've since had it 7 corrected. It should read: 8 "So I would say the signal is that 9 we're going to end up evicting. 10 CARSON: I would suspect. 11 LACROIX: He's going to call me in the 12 morning -- 13 CARSON: Okay. 14 LACROIX: -- and tell me anything else 15 that happened. 16 CARSON: All right. 17 LACROIX: Because he was talking to 18 our Chief. 19 CARSON: Okay. 20 LACROIX: Was impressed by the Chief. 21 CARSON: Okay, oh good. 22 LACROIX: Found that he was a very up 23 front kind of guy, my kind of 24 individual. 25 CARSON: Good, good. [and]

135

1 LACROIX: I guess they had a 2 confidential talk which he didn't want 3 to share with me, because he told the 4 Chief he was being -- that he would, 5 you know, I guess the Chief told him 6 some things about his concerns. 7 CARSON: Okay. 8 LACROIX: And he's going to keep to 9 themselves. You're probably aware of 10 what those concerns are. 11 CARSON: I suspect so." 12 Now, it would appear that Staff Sergeant 13 Lacroix is purporting to relate the contents of a 14 conversation that he had with you on September the 5th. 15 Now, do you recall having a conversation 16 of that nature with him? 17 A: I don't recall it, but I'm not going 18 to deny having it. 19 Q: All right. Do you -- were you, in 20 fact, briefed by anyone in the Government with respect to 21 the issue that is not an Indian issue, but an MNR issue 22 and that the Premier was -- apparently, involved himself 23 and quite uptight about it. 24 Does that ring any bells for you? 25 A: Well, I think that would be

136

1 consistent with your Tab 19, where, you know, my own 2 writing says, It's an MNR issue, not an Indian issue, 3 it's Provincial Park, Premier's following closely. 4 So, I think that's consistent with that. 5 Q: And that's the conversation you had 6 with Bill King -- 7 A: Hmm hmm. 8 Q: -- sometime between 1:00 and 3:00 9 p.m. that day? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: All right. And that's the briefing 12 you believe you were -- that you relayed? 13 A: That's correct, yeah. 14 Q: All right. There's also indication 15 that you had a conversation with the, quote, "our Chief". 16 And I take it that the Chief would refer to Chief 17 Superintendent Chris Coles? 18 A: That's correct. 19 Q: Now, do you recall then having a 20 conversation with Chief Superintendent Coles Tuesday 21 afternoon or Tuesday, that was -- 22 A: I can't recall the exact time, but it 23 was in the -- I remember if I -- it was in the afternoon 24 and it was in the Grand Bend OPP Detachment that I met 25 with him.

137

1 And the meeting was arranged by, again, by 2 mutual friend, Tom Lawson, who was the former mayor of 3 Grand Bend. 4 Q: And tell me, who -- who, in fact, 5 arranged the meeting? 6 A: Well, I think we arranged a meeting 7 between myself and Chief Coles, but Tom Lawson's the one 8 that gave me Chief Coles' phone number. 9 So, whether I called him first or he 10 called me first, I can't recall, but we arranged a 11 meeting between ourselves. 12 Q: All right. And if you look at Tab 13 20, this was the excerpt from your day's notes, 14 constituency notes, of September 5th, and the last entry 15 reflected Chris Coles, Chief Superintendent, and had a 16 phone number. 17 A: Hmm hmm, that's correct. 18 Q: So, that's consistent -- 19 A: So, that would be consistent with 20 what is in the transcript from the OPP conversation. 21 Q: Now, can you tell me, to the best of 22 your recollection, what the purpose of your meeting with 23 the Chief Superintendent was? 24 A: Again, I can't recall what -- you 25 know, what we discussed. I'm sure we discussed the

138

1 policing situation and the Ipperwash situation, but the 2 exact discussion I can't recall. 3 Q: And do you recall -- you've indicated 4 that you believe this was an in person meeting at the 5 Grand Bend Detachment? 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: Now, did you -- how many meetings do 8 you recall having with the Chief Superintendent prior to 9 the shooting events that -- 10 A: I think that was the only one. 11 Q: All right. Did you have any meeting 12 after? 13 A: I had met him after that on -- at his 14 personal residence once, and maybe one (1) more time. I 15 can't remember, but -- 16 Q: All right. 17 A: -- past -- probably mid September, 18 later in -- in September. 19 Q: All right. Now, we've heard some 20 evidence from Chief Superintendent Coles, and he 21 testified on August the 15th that he had a telephone 22 conversation with you prior to the 6th, and that he spoke 23 to you about what the OPP was doing and -- in response to 24 the -- the occupation and -- and with respect -- or spoke 25 of the injunction.

139

1 Does that alter your recollection at all? 2 A: It doesn't, but I'm not going to 3 disagree with it because I think it's somewhat consistent 4 with the information that you have from me, that on 5 September 5th I probably talked to him. 6 Q: But you have a recollection of 7 meeting him in person. 8 A: Oh, I -- yes. And -- and again, I'm 9 not going to swear that it was on the 5th, but I did meet 10 him in person on -- and it could be after the 5th, I 11 can't recall. 12 Q: All right. In any event, we -- you 13 agree that there was discussion, at least, on the 6th? 14 A: That's right. 15 Q: And it is in accordance with what 16 you've indicated about what the police were doing? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: Can you be more specific about that? 19 A: No, because I can't recall. You 20 know, generally speaking, I'm sure that's the reason why 21 I would meet with him, but as to the exact content of the 22 discussion, I can't recall. 23 Q: Did you convey, to the Chief 24 Superintendent, the concerns that you had been apprised 25 of by your constituents about the -- the level of anxiety

140

1 and the level of policing? 2 A: Oh, I'm sure I would have, yes. I'm 3 sure that would have been part of the discussion. 4 Q: Do you recall what his reaction to 5 that was? 6 A: No. 7 Q: Do you recall whether or not you made 8 any proposals to him about what the police might do in 9 these circumstances? 10 A: Oh, I know I would not make any 11 proposal because that would not be my responsibility. 12 Q: All right. Do you recall anything 13 else about this discussion of the 5th? 14 A: No, I'm sorry. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Now, do you recall giving any 19 interviews to the media on September the 5th about the 20 occupation of the Park? 21 A: I don't recall, but I'm sure I 22 probably did because the media was calling on a daily 23 basis. I didn't call them but they certainly were 24 calling. 25 Q: Perhaps you would go to Tab 26, it's

141

1 Exhibit P-962, Inquiry Document Number 1000659? And this 2 is an article which apparently appeared in the Sarnia 3 Observer on September the 6th, 1995. 4 And it does contain some quotes which are 5 attributed to you. Now, is it likely that you spoke to 6 the Sarnia Observer on the 5th, resulting in -- in this 7 article being published the next day? 8 A: Yeah. That's probably a fair 9 assumption. 10 Q: All right. And the second paragraph 11 of the column, first column? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Reads -- and it's a quote that's 14 attributed to you: 15 "We will uphold the law no matter who 16 is involved, Lambton MPP Marcel 17 Beaubien said, [quote] 'If you are 18 there illegally you will be asked to 19 leave.' [Close quote]" 20 Now, first of all, do you recall saying 21 something to that affect? 22 A: No, I don't recall it but I think 23 that would be very consistent with the notes that I made 24 on your Tab 19. 25 Q: All right. So you don't dispute --

142

1 A: No. 2 Q: -- that -- that you had said 3 something like this? 4 A: No. 5 Q: And who are you referring to in terms 6 of the 'we'? Are you speak -- who are you representing? 7 A: "We will" -- well, the Province. 8 Q: The Province? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: Okay. And what gave rise to your 11 comments, quote: 12 "If you are there illegally you will be 13 asked to leave." 14 A: Well, by that point in time I think 15 the Park occupation was considered an illegal occupation 16 from the information that I was given from Queen's Park. 17 So consequently, if you're there 18 illegally, I think in our society -- that if we're going 19 to have somewhat of a stable society, that if you're on 20 property and you're there illegally, that hopefully the - 21 - the law will be upheld. 22 Q: Did you have any information that the 23 Government was going to ask the -- the occupiers to 24 leave? 25 A: No, not direct information, no.

143

1 Q: Indirect? 2 A: I'm saying I -- I don't know. I -- 3 probably the best answer is I don't know. 4 Q: So was this -- was this an 5 assumption on your part, that if you are there illegally 6 you'll be asked to leave? Or did you have a basis for 7 that? 8 A: Well, I think as a law abiding 9 citizen maybe it is an assumption. I, you know, and I 10 don't know. But I think if you're committing an illegal 11 act and it's against the law, that I think it's 12 reasonable to assume that, you know, you're going to be 13 asked to leave and you should leave. 14 Q: And that was your view of the 15 occupation? 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: All right. And on the second column, 18 second paragraph, there's another quote attributed to 19 you: 20 "'This is an MNR [bracket] (Ministry of 21 Natural Resources) [closed bracket] 22 issue, not a Native issue.' [end of 23 quote] Mr. Beaubien said." 24 Now, is it likely you said -- 25 A: I fol -- I follow orders very well.

144

1 So that's the information that I received from Queen's 2 Park. 3 Q: So that is the information -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- you received from Queen's Park. 6 Is it possible that the earlier 7 information was also received from Queen's Park? 8 A: It could be. It could be. I'm not 9 going to deny it but I can't recall. 10 Q: All right. Did anything else of 11 significance occur on Tuesday, September the 5th, to the 12 best of your knowledge and recollection, that you haven't 13 told us? 14 A: You know, there was so many things 15 happening that, you know, in that period of time I can't 16 recall. 17 Q: The end of that day, what was your 18 assessment, if any, of the reaction of your constituents 19 in terms of the occupation? 20 A: Well there's no doubt that their 21 level of frustration is increasing. I mean, they're 22 certainly not satisfied with the level of policing. I'm 23 sure they're not satisfied with what both the Federal and 24 Provincial Governments are doing. 25 And you know, and if I lived in the area,

145

1 maybe I would be sympathetic to the -- to their position. 2 Q: And again, this was based on reports 3 that you received from your constituents? 4 A: And talking to them directly. 5 Q: Yes. All right. And how were you 6 handling this situation? 7 A: Well, to the best of my abilities, 8 you know, and they, you know, I'm sure there's different 9 opinions on that and everybody's entitled to their 10 opinion. But I did the best I could with what I had. 11 Q: All right. 12 A: And I mean, I come in this area and I 13 met people that -- made some acquaintances and I'm 14 certainly not ashamed of the work that I did. 15 Q: Now, did you continue to receive 16 communications from your constituents on September the 17 6th? 18 A: I continued receiving communication 19 from my constituents for months thereafter. 20 Q: All right. Let's stick with the 6th. 21 What was the volume of the communications, the level of 22 communications you received on the 6th, from your 23 constituents, about the occupation, as compared with the 24 day before? 25 A: Probably, I would say again, I would

146

1 have to go back through my records, but I would say 2 probably at the same level. 3 Q: All right. And what was the general 4 tone of those communications, if you can generalize them? 5 A: Well again, you know, the harassment, 6 the threat, the law not being upheld, the frustration 7 that they felt at not being -- feeling safe in their own 8 environment; that type of comments. 9 Q: All right. So the same reports that 10 you had heard the day before? 11 A: That's right. But from different 12 individuals, I mean they were not always the same person 13 calling. I mean, you know, you -- yes, a certain 14 individual called more than once during the -- the 15 situation. 16 But, I mean, I -- I heard from a lot of 17 constituents in that -- in that area. Both Natives I 18 must add and non Natives. 19 Q: All right. Did you form any 20 opinions, on the 6th, with respect to the validity of the 21 occupation of the Park? 22 A: I don't think I had an opinion it, 23 personally. 24 Q: Okay. Did you -- all right. Had you 25 received any advice from the Government with respect to

147

1 the validity of the occupation or what the Government's 2 position was with respect to the validity of the 3 occupation? 4 A: I think the information that I 5 received was that it was an illegal occupation, that the 6 property was owned by the Province. 7 Q: Did you -- 8 A: There was no claim on the land. 9 Q: Did you question that advice? 10 A: I did question. I can't remember, 11 again, when I contacted MNR but, because, you know, there 12 was rumour mills coming on -- coming across to the 13 constituency office, so I probably contacted MNR to try 14 to get more pertinent information on that. 15 Q: And what -- what gave -- where did -- 16 what's the rumour mill that you're talking about? What 17 information did you -- were you hearing about that gave 18 you cause to question -- 19 A: Well, I think by that time, by the 20 6th, I was hearing that there might be a burial ground on 21 the -- at the Ipperwash ca -- Provincial Park. 22 So I would certainly follow up with MNR to 23 find out whether that was a valid comment or statement. 24 Q: Did you receive a response from the 25 Ministry of Natural Resources?

148

1 A: Well, not from the Minister. But I 2 think the first response that I received was that Leslie 3 Shimmin did some research and informed the office. 4 Now, I don't know if it was the same day 5 or the day after, but subsequently to the initial call, 6 that they were not aware of any burial ground, and if 7 there would be any burial ground, that they would deal 8 with it under the Cemeteries Act. 9 Q: All right. And you believe that you 10 made that inquiry on the 6th? 11 A: Hmm hmm. I think so. 12 Q: And you received a response either on 13 the 6th or the 7th? 14 A: I think we received it the same day, 15 on the phone. 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: And then I think we received a 18 briefing note from the Minister's office, later on. 19 Q: And were you content with that 20 response? 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: Did you pass along that response to 23 your constituents? 24 A: I certainly did. 25 Q: And did you pass along that response

149

1 to the police? 2 A: I'm sure we would have talked about 3 that, yes. 4 Q: The lack of validity to the burial 5 ground? 6 A: That's correct. And how we would 7 deal with it if -- if it was found -- 8 Q: If there was -- 9 A: -- that there was a burial ground. 10 Q: All right. Did you form any opinion 11 as to the quality of the police -- policing response to 12 the occupation, as of September the 6th? 13 A: Did I, personally, have -- 14 Q: Yes. 15 A: No. Because, again, like I said, the 16 issue did not impact on me, personally. It did not 17 impact on my lifestyle. It certainly impacted on the 18 lifestyle of people that lived there, so I was 19 sympathetic to the cause and to what people were going 20 through. 21 But for me, like I said, I -- I said this 22 morning I lived thirty-eight (38) kilometres away and it 23 did not impact on anybody in the town of Petrolia. 24 Q: All right. And did your -- did the - 25 - what role did you perceive that you were playing with

150

1 respect to the occupation on the 6th? 2 A: Well again, my role throughout this 3 whole thing was trying to keep the information flowing 4 both ways. I think I was trying to keep things calm and 5 make sure that everybody, you know, acted reasonably. 6 And -- and the way I thought I could achieve this is by 7 passing as much information that I could. 8 And -- and basically, pass on the 9 information to the people that the policing level was 10 adequate, even though that the perception was different. 11 I felt that it was important to -- to reassure them that, 12 according to the police, that the level of policing was 13 adequate and that their safety was -- was there. 14 Q: All right. And you indicated that 15 you detected a level of frustration amongst the 16 constituents with whom you had communications. 17 How did that level compare with -- as 18 compared to the day before? Was it... 19 A: I would say for the period the 4th, 20 5th and 6th, I would say it was probably the same and it 21 certainly escalated, I think, after that, for a period of 22 time. 23 Q: Okay. You said -- did you say 24 September the 4th? 25 A: I would say, yeah.

151

1 Q: How were you able to gauge the -- I'm 2 just wondering, because I believe you said to me the 3 first you heard of the occupation was the 5th. 4 A: Yeah, but I mean when you're talk -- 5 you're -- when you're talking about the frustration, the 6 level of frustration, generally speaking, I would think 7 if I were to monitor the phone calls we receive on the 8 4th and the 5th and the 6th, I would say there were 9 probably at the same level. 10 Q: Well -- 11 A: Maybe on the 6th they started 12 escalating and, like I said, they did -- and then they 13 kept on going for quite a period of time thereafter. 14 Q: Was your constituency office open on 15 the 4th? That was Labour Day. 16 A: I don't think so. I might have been 17 in the office myself, but the staff would not be there. 18 Q: All right. 19 A: You may have me on that. I, you 20 know, I can't remember what day -- 21 Q: Just -- 22 A: -- September the 4th was. If it was 23 Labour Day the office would not be officially open, but I 24 could be in the office and certainly there wouldn't be 25 too many calls that would be recorded. But I --

152

1 Q: All right. 2 A: -- some of the people had my cell 3 number that they could contact me, also. 4 Q: In any event, you felt the level of 5 frustration that you detected was comparable as between 6 the 5th and the 6th with the exception that maybe it 7 started to escalate on the 6th? 8 A: That's right. 9 Q: All right. Thank you. It might be 10 time, Commissioner, to -- to break for lunch. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 12 very much, Ms. Vella. We'll break for lunch now. 13 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 14 adjourned until 1:10. 15 16 --- Upon recessing at 11:56 a.m. 17 --- Upon resuming at 1:15 p.m. 18 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 20 resumed. Please be seated. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You can 25 carry on, Ms. Vella.

153

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'm about to go to a 2 document, so perhaps I'll just wait for a moment. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, no, not at all. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Here were 9 are. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 14 very much, Ron. Okay. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 18 Q: Good afternoon. 19 A: Good afternoon. 20 Q: Now, you testified this morning that 21 you communicated some of your constituents' concerns to 22 persons within the Government on the 6th? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: And I wonder if you would go, please, 25 to Tab 22 in your -- in the Commission brief of

154

1 documents, Exhibit P-952, Inquiry Document Number 2 1006196. 3 And this is a -- there's a, first of all, 4 a faxed sheet to Bill King from your office. It looks 5 like it was sent September the 6th at about 1:15 p.m. 6 enclosing a letter dated September the 6th, from yourself 7 to Mr. King and further enclosing a letter dated 8 September 5th, 1995. 9 Do you recognize those? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. I'd like to, first of 12 all, ask you what was your intent in sending the letter 13 of September 6th and the enclosed letter of September 5th 14 to Bill King? 15 A: Well, as I said this morning and 16 yesterday afternoon, I was just trying to convey the 17 seriousness of the issue and some of the comments that I 18 was receiving from some -- from some of the constituents 19 in the area. 20 Q: Why to the -- why to Bill King as 21 opposed to someone else within government? 22 A: That's a good question, but no 23 particular reason. 24 Q: All right. 25 A: I guess, if I can backtrack as --

155

1 Bill King was probably the only one that was giving me a 2 bit of information, so I -- maybe I had a level of 3 comfort with him there, so that's probably why, but 4 there's no particular reason. 5 Q: All right. Was it your expectation 6 that he would relay the contents of the enclosed letters 7 on to others within government? 8 A: I would hope so. 9 Q: And any people in particular? 10 A: Well, I'd think the Premier, I think 11 the Ministries -- Ministers responsible and certainly the 12 bureaucracy. 13 Q: All right. And going to the letter 14 dated September 5th, is that a letter that you received 15 from a constituent? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: All right. 18 A: I think it was sent by fax. 19 Q: Yes, that's right. There's a fax 20 cover sheet. All right. Now, I just want to spend a few 21 moments on your covering letter to Mr. King. 22 Now, you indicate in the third paragraph, 23 you say, quote: 24 "Bill, as we said during a campaign, 25 local solutions to local problems."

156

1 Now, what was the relevance of that 2 statement to what you were trying to achieve here? 3 A: Well I think, again, I don't know if 4 I alluded to that fact this morning or yesterday 5 afternoon, but when I said I met with constituents, both 6 native and non-natives, trying to find some common 7 grounds in order to trying to resolve this issue, I felt 8 that local solutions would be better than one imposed 9 from up, I believe, in the -- in the inverse pyramid as 10 opposed to having direction taken from Toronto. 11 I thought that if we had some solutions -- 12 resolved the situation locally, that we'd probably end up 13 with better results. 14 Q: All right. So -- and were you 15 referencing specifically solutions with respect to the 16 Ipperwash Park occupation here? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: And did you have any specific local 19 solutions in mind when you wrote this? 20 A: No, but I was trying to convey to the 21 fact that -- I don't know if it's at this particular 22 point in time, but I was advocating to appoint a 23 negotiator. 24 I don't know exactly when that comes into 25 the picture as -- as to the exact date. You know, a

157

1 negotiator was appointed later on, but I was advocating 2 for that right from the beginning. 3 Q: With whom were you advocating that 4 position? 5 A: With Bill -- with Bill King and I 6 think with, probably, with some of the Ministries. 7 Q: And what response did you get to your 8 initial suggestion, when you initially made the 9 suggestion that there might be a negotiator appointed? 10 A: Didn't get any response until later 11 on. 12 Q: All right. And in the second 13 paragraph, you are referring to the author of the 14 enclosed letter and you say: 15 "It could also be said that he agrees 16 with my suggestions of yesterday." 17 And I'm just wondering what that was 18 specifically -- what -- what suggestions had you made -- 19 A: I can't recall that. 20 Q: -- that were being -- but, they were 21 being echoed in the enclosed letter? 22 A: Yeah. But I can't recall. 23 Q: And these were suggestions you had 24 made to Bill King on the 5th? 25 A: That's correct. In the -- I think

158

1 subsequent to Tab, I think it was 19 when I was talking 2 to him. 3 Q: All right. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Now, why did you choose this 6 particular constituent's letter dated September 5th as 7 the one to transmit to the office of the Premier? 8 A: No particular reason. I would 9 imagine that in -- generally speaking it conveyed the 10 concern about law enforcement and law -- you know, that 11 the law was not being upheld in the area. 12 I think it was a -- probably a -- a good 13 representation of some of the comments I was getting. 14 Q: In your view was this a fair 15 representation of the majority of the views that you were 16 receiving? 17 A: I think generally speaking that it 18 represented pretty well what a lot of people felt in the 19 area. 20 Q: Based on what you had received? 21 A: Based on the information that I 22 received from constituents. 23 Q: Was it also the fact that this 24 individual was a lawyer that caused you to think it was a 25 good choice?

159

1 A: That might have influenced me a 2 little bit because, you know, this letter is fairly well 3 written. 4 Q: All right. Now, how would you 5 describe the -- the tone of this letter, the constituents 6 letter? 7 A: Well there's -- you know, I'm sure 8 that, you know, there's words and -- and parts of 9 sentences or sentences that I totally don't agree with, 10 but I think I generally agreed with the general tone of 11 the letter with regards to law enforcement and upholding 12 the law. 13 Q: All right. I see in the third 14 paragraph that this constituent is -- appears to be 15 characterizing the occupiers as hooligans. Was that your 16 interpretation? 17 A: Well, like I said again this morning, 18 some people were referring to them as terrorists, others 19 as hooligans, animals or thugs, so there was different 20 words used, I don't know which one is the proper one. 21 But that's the one they used and -- 22 Q: All right. As I recollect you used 23 the term 'thugs' in your press release? 24 A: That's what I used the -- but you got 25 to recall also that the press release never went out.

160

1 Q: I do appreciate that -- that 2 evidence. 3 A: But I did use the word in that press 4 release. 5 Q: All right. Is it fair to say that 6 this -- did you interpret letter as conveying a sense of 7 hostility against the occupiers? 8 A: I would imagine -- yeah, I think 9 there was some hostility towards the occupiers, yes. 10 Q: And did that cause you any concern 11 with respect to -- well, did that cause you any concern? 12 A: Well, like I said, a lot of things 13 caused me concerns, you know, with the -- with this 14 particular issue on both sides of the equation. 15 And that's why, like I said this morning, 16 that I was trying to get as much information from anybody 17 that I could in order to try to diffuse the situation and 18 stabilize it. 19 Q: All right. Then in the second 20 paragraph there seems to be a suggestion that perhaps the 21 occupiers ought to be arrested under the Trespass Laws. 22 Is that what you understood? 23 A: I'm not a lawyer and I don't know 24 what that entails, the Trespass Law. 25 Q: Well, it says:

161

1 "Under Trespass Law the occupiers can 2 be arrested. This should be done 3 immediately." 4 A: Well again, that's a policing matter 5 and, you know, that's in the hands of the police to deal 6 with that. 7 Q: All right. Did -- was -- but was 8 this -- did this reflect the general attitude or views of 9 the constituents who -- with whom you came in contact? 10 A: Well, some people felt they should be 11 arrested and you know, some more forcefully than others. 12 So there was certainly a different level of -- of 13 feeling, I guess, on what should be done with them by 14 different people. But some people were of that opinion, 15 yes. 16 Q: And you indicated that it was your 17 hope that this letter would be transmitted to the Premier 18 and the Ministers responsible? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Containing these messages? 21 A: That's right. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: And the third paragraph reads, in

162
  1  part:
  2                   "It appears that over the last few
  3                   years all levels of government have
  4                   adopted a non confrontational approach
  5                   when faced with Natives undertaking
  6                   illegal acts to enforce claims or air
  7                   grievances.  This must stop.  Each time
  8                   Natives or any other identifiable group
  9                   are seen to make gains through illegal
 10                   means with no punishment, three (3)
 11                   things happen.  
 12                   The first is that the public perceives
 13                   members of the group have special
 14                   status of the laws that supposedly bind
 15                   all of us equally and are there to
 16                   ensure the peaceful co-existence of our
 17                   society have exceptions.  The group is
 18                   above the law.
 19                   The second is that the public begins to
 20                   resent those who have the perceived --
 21                   who have the perceived special status. 
 22                   Why can that group get away with
 23                   something we cannot?  The public will
 24                   then react strongly against any group
 25                   member, rightly or wrongly.

163

1 This -- this certainly does not lend 2 itself to peaceful co-existence. 3 [Sorry] 4 The activities of a small group of 5 Natives could affect the treatment of 6 Natives across the country. Attitudes 7 will harden into a them versus us 8 mentality and solutions to problems 9 will be much harder to achieve. 10 The third consequence is that overall 11 respect for the law diminishes. There 12 is no such thing as a right without a 13 remedy, neither is there a law without 14 enforcement. If illegal acts are 15 tolerated they spread. The end result 16 is anarchy. People begin to perceive 17 the Government cannot protect them and 18 their interests. They begin to take 19 steps to protect themselves. These 20 steps can lead to tragic consequences. 21 If governments will not enforce the law 22 citizens through elected officials have 23 seen fit to live by, respect for the 24 Government and those who comprise it is 25 -- is lost."

164

1 Now, did the general attitude and view 2 that's expressed in this paragraph, that's something that 3 you perceived to be the general view of the constituents 4 you spoke with? 5 A: I certainly did, and I think the 6 record would -- will show that with the documentation 7 that we provided. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 Q: And -- 12 A: And by the way, for the record -- 13 Q: Sorry. 14 A: -- this letter was sent by the author 15 also to the Premier, to the Solicitor General, the 16 Attorney General, and the Minister of Natural Resources. 17 Q: And that was your understanding, was 18 it? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: All right. 21 A: Well, that's what it says, carbon 22 copy. So -- 23 Q: All right. 24 A: -- I wouldn't -- I'm assuming that it 25 was sent there also.

165

1 Q: Okay. But in any event, you sent it 2 to the Premier's office? 3 A: That's right. 4 Q: All right. And there seems to be 5 suggestion in here that there's a perception, at least, 6 that there's a double standard of law enforcement being 7 applied to the Park occupation. 8 Was that how you saw it? 9 A: Yeah. There was -- I was hearing 10 that from -- from constituents on an ongoing basis. 11 Q: Did you have a conversation with -- 12 with Mr. King or anyone else from the Premier's office in 13 response to this letter? 14 A: No, I did not, not that I can recall. 15 Q: Did you receive a response from 16 anyone in government to the -- either your letter or the 17 constituents' letter? 18 A: Not that I can recall. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: All right. I want to go next to Tab 23 23, please. 24 Now, this is a copy of the letter that we 25 just looked at, your covering letter dated December 6th

166

1 and further copy of the constituent's letter which we 2 just reviewed. 3 And my -- and it's Inquiry Document Number 4 12000069. 5 Now, there's handwriting on the 6 constituent's letter. Do you recognize that handwriting? 7 A: That's my handwriting. 8 Q: All right. And do you recall the 9 circumstances giving rise to these notes? 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 A: It says, in the second paragraph: 14 "Now the Park is occupied by Natives, 15 hooligans is a better word for there is 16 no respect for the law. The burning of 17 government property shown on the front 18 page of today's Sarnia Observer is 19 proof of that and I say -- beside a lot 20 were not from KP." 21 So I would imagine that's Kettle Point. 22 And then in the next paragraph I ask the question: 23 "Is this legally correct?" 24 Because you asked me, I think, about the 25 trespass law --

167

1 Q: Right. 2 A: -- and I certainly -- I might have 3 done some follow up on this, I don't know. 4 Q: Okay. 5 A: I guess I wrote down: 6 "This is a lawyer." 7 And it says, 8 "I agree with the letter as a package. 9 There may be some parts which I may not 10 support and should have mutual 11 respect." 12 Now, do you recall -- and that was, I'm 13 sorry, on the second page beside the -- the top 14 paragraph; that last comment. 15 Where -- when -- when did you make these 16 written comments? 17 A: I have no idea, I can't remember. 18 Q: All right. Let's make this the next 19 exhibit, please. 20 THE REGISTRAR: P-1030, Your Honour. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1030: Document Number 12000069. 23 Letter from Marcel Beaubien 24 to Bill King attaching letter 25 from constituent (with

168

1 handwritten notes). 2 September 06/'95. 3 4 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 5 Q: Do you recall speaking with anyone 6 else in the Premier's office, over the course of the 6th? 7 A: Not to my recollection. 8 Q: Did you have any conversations with 9 the Premier that day? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Or any of the Ministers? 12 A: Not the Premier and not the 13 Ministers; that -- I can be very emphatic on that. 14 Q: All right. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: And Mr. King testified, on November 19 16th, that his impression was that you were generally 20 calling him over this time period to convey the views and 21 feedbacks on the calls and messages you were hearing from 22 your constituents. 23 Is that a fair characterization? 24 A: Yeah, I would agree with that. 25 Q: He also testified that you conveyed a

169

1 general sense of frustration in the community that things 2 were not being resolved -- that things were not being 3 resolved. 4 A: I would agree with that. 5 Q: All right. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Now, did you advise Mr. King that you 10 were in contact with the OPP over the course of the 5th 11 and the 6th? 12 A: I might have mentioned it in passing, 13 but I can't recall. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 Q: Did Mr. King express to you anything 18 about the Premier's views in relation to the Ipperwash 19 Park occupation, aside from what you've already testified 20 about him being personal -- or at least closely 21 following it? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Did he convey the Premier's views to 24 you about the propriety of how the matter was being 25 handled by the police?

170

1 A: No. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: Did Mr. King provide you with any 6 directions or wishes on the part of the Premier to be 7 conveyed to the OPP by you? 8 A: No, absolutely not. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: Now, I think there was some evidence 13 that you testified earlier that you were aware, at least, 14 that there was talk of -- of getting an injunction? 15 A: Yeah, I think Bill mention -- if I 16 recall, on Tab 19, I think, when I talked to Bill, I 17 think -- "Following closely..." 18 No, I can't -- no, it was not a -- at that 19 particular point in time. But I was aware -- somebody 20 had made me aware that there were -- I think it might 21 have been Les Kobayashi, I'm not -- but again, I can't 22 recall who made me aware of the situation at first. 23 Q: There may have been some discussion 24 with the police as well -- 25 A: It could --

171

1 Q: -- about -- 2 A: -- have been, it could have been. 3 Q: But what -- what was your -- what -- 4 what do you recall in any event with respect to what the 5 plan surrounding an injunction were? 6 A: Well again, I'm not a lawyer but I, 7 you know, my understanding of an injunction would be some 8 type of legal papers that would be served on the 9 occupiers probably asking them to -- to leave the 10 premises. 11 Q: All right. Did you have any 12 discussion or receive any information with respect to the 13 possible timing of -- of a Court application? 14 A: No. 15 Q: Or with respect to possible 16 enforcement issues related to an injunction? 17 A: No. All I was told was that they 18 were seeking an injunction. 19 Q: All right. And who was seeking an 20 injunction? 21 A: The Government. I think it was MNR, 22 if I recall, at the time. 23 Q: All right. All right. I wonder if 24 you would go to Tab 24 next please. This is Inquiry 25 Document Number 12000070. It's a fax transmission sheet

172

1 to Marcel Beaubien from Jeff Bangs, dated September 6th. 2 And attached is a Minister's note from Ron 3 -- Ron Vrancart dated September 6th, 1995. Now, first of 4 all, do you recall receiving this -- this fax? 5 A: Well, I don't recall, but I'm sure we 6 did receive it. 7 Q: All right. I'd like to make this the 8 next exhibit please. 9 THE REGISTRAR: P-1031, Your Honour. 10 11 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1031: Document Number 12000070. 12 Fax message from Jeff Bangs 13 to Marcel Beaubien attaching 14 Minister's note for Ron 15 Vrancart re. Occupation of 16 Ipperwash Provincial Park, 17 September 06, 1995. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 20 Q: Now, did you know who Jeff Bangs was? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And what was your understanding of 23 his position? 24 A: His position at the time, I think, he 25 was the Executive Assistant to the Minister of Natural

173

1 Resources. 2 Q: All right. And do you know what 3 caused him to send you the attached Minister's note? 4 A: Well, probably with our prior 5 communication with -- through Leslie Shimmin at the MNR 6 office, that's probably how this briefing note came to 7 our attention. 8 Q: All right. And was it to provide you 9 with some information from the Government? 10 A: That's basically was giving me a 11 formal position from the -- from the Government. 12 Q: And were any restrictions attached to 13 how and to whom you could disseminate the information 14 contained in the Minister's notes of September 6th? 15 A: Not that I can recall, because I 16 would imagine that probably would be a press release that 17 would be issued to the media also. I -- 18 Q: Was that -- was that your 19 understanding of this document? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: That it was a press release? 22 A: Well, maybe -- maybe not a press 23 release but I -- it says Minister's note, but there was 24 no -- I don't recall any caveat attached to this docu -- 25 document when we received it.

174

1 Q: All right. And did you find the 2 information in the notes to be of use to you? 3 A: Well, I think by -- by September the 4 6th I had received bits and pieces from different people 5 that I was aware of the injunction. It says: 6 "The Minister of Natural Resources 7 considers the safety of Provincial Park 8 staff surrounding property owners and 9 the public to be paramount." 10 I think we were aware of that. 11 "Ipperwash Provincial Park belongs to 12 the people of Ontario. The Province 13 has clear title to the one 109 acre 14 property that the Park sits on." 15 I think it was considered an illegal 16 occupation so I was aware of that. 17 Q: Perhaps I could ask you if there was 18 anything contained in this note which you -- which was 19 new to you? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 A: No. 24 Q: All right. So, you knew that the 25 Government was seeking an injunction requiring those

175

1 illegally occupying the Ipperwash Provincial Park to 2 remove themselves? 3 A: Yes, I was. And I think if you check 4 the media, I think a lot of this information was already 5 made public. 6 Q: Did you know that there were no 7 formal land claim that had been filed for the Park 8 property? 9 A: In the research I did, I was informed 10 that there was no land claims. 11 Q: Okay. And it was the Government's 12 position that the occupiers were trespassing? 13 A: If that's the word -- is that the way 14 -- I just saw it there a minute ago. 15 Q: Seventh -- seventh item. 16 A: I would imagine that's the minister 17 briefing. So they would be trespassing, yes. 18 Q: And that the OPP is on site and, in 19 cooperation with the Ministry of Natural Resources, is 20 monitoring the situation closely and a command site has 21 been established at Forest. 22 Did you know that? 23 A: Yes, I was aware of that. 24 Q: And on the second page, second point: 25 "MNR is not aware of any Aboriginal

176

1 burial site on the property of 2 Ipperwash Provincial Park." 3 You were aware of that? 4 A: I was aware of that at that time, 5 yes. 6 Q: And did you relay this information -- 7 information in this note to your constituents, if they 8 called? 9 A: I certainly did, but they -- as I 10 just said they were probably aware of most of the 11 contents of this particular document. 12 Q: Do you recall whether or not you 13 advised any of -- of the members of the Ontario 14 Provincial Police about the contents of this document? 15 A: I don't recall. 16 Q: All right. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: All right. Do you recall having any 21 conversations on the 5th and/or 6th with Ken Williams? 22 A: I think we alluded to -- I'm sure I 23 probably did talk to him because he was the 24 Clerk/Administrator or Chief Administrating Officer for 25 the Bosanquet Township. So I'm sure I did talk to him.

177

1 Q: Okay. And what was the -- the nature 2 of those conversations? 3 A: I think, basically, he was relaying 4 some of the comments or concerns that he was hearing from 5 his constituents and relaying them back to me. And 6 basically, probably, we had a two (2) way avenue with the 7 pipeline at this point in time between Ken and myself, 8 that I would probably relay to him that I was hearing the 9 same thing from my constituents. 10 Q: All right. And similarly, did you 11 have conversations with Fred Thomas over this time 12 period? 13 A: Yeah. Fred was the mayor at the 14 time. 15 Q: All right. And what were the nature 16 of those conversations? 17 A: Probably the same as what Ken was 18 relaying to me. 19 Q: All right. Is it likely that you 20 shared with one (1) or both of those politicians the -- 21 or those individuals the -- the contents of the 22 Minister's notes? 23 A: It's quite possible. I don't want to 24 say I did, but it's quite possible. 25 Q: All right. Were you passing along

178

1 information which you received from the OPP to Mr. 2 Williams and Mr. Thomas? 3 A: Sure, when the -- when the OPP would 4 inform me they had, you know, thirty (30) or sixty (60) 5 men on the ground and the patrolling was in a certain 6 area, you know, done at so many times a day, I would 7 relay that information to, again, try to bring a level of 8 comfort to people in the area. 9 Q: All right. Now, did you attend at 10 the Forest OPP Detachment on September the 6th? 11 A: September the 6th? 12 Q: Around the 6th, yeah. 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And what were the circumstances which 15 led to your attendance? 16 A: Sometime in the afternoon I received 17 a call on my cell, I was in my car, from my constituency 18 office that I was to meet with Les Kobayashi and some of 19 the OPP officers at the Forest Detachment. 20 Q: All right. And did you attend at -- 21 at the Forest Detachment? 22 A: I certainly did. When I'm invited 23 somewhere I usually try to attend. 24 Q: Now, John Carson testified that you 25 showed up at the detachment on September the 6th

179

1 unannounced. Do you agree with that? 2 A: No, I disagree with that. And I 3 think, if we were to check our telephone records, that 4 probably -- well, though you -- you'd have to check -- I 5 don't know where the call came from, I guess I was going 6 to say. 7 Well, you could check the -- my office 8 records that they would call me on my cell at a certain 9 time in the afternoon. 10 Q: Now, once you arrived at the detach - 11 - well, first of all did you know where the Forest 12 Detachment was? 13 A: Oh, yes. 14 Q: And once you arrived at the 15 detachment where did you go? 16 A: Well, I was met by one (1) or two (2) 17 officers. And I parked my car, I think, in front of the 18 building, if I recall, and they took me into the -- into 19 the trailer, which I realized at that, you know, after I 20 walked in it was the Command Centre. 21 Q: Did you know that it was the -- did 22 you know that the -- that there was a command centre at 23 the Forest Detachment when you received the call? 24 A: Yeah. I was aware there was a 25 command centre, but I was asked to attend at the Forest

180

1 Detachment, for some reason. 2 Q: Okay. Now, who was in the trailer 3 when you arrived? 4 A: Les Kobayashi was there, I think Dale 5 Linton, there was John Carson and there was a couple of 6 other officers at the front of the trailer monitoring 7 equipment, but I don't know who they were. 8 I was also informed that they were going 9 to meet or had met, I can't remember if they had met or 10 were going to meet, with Fred Thomas and Tom Bressette 11 also. 12 Q: Okay. They told you that? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Do you remember who told you that? 15 A: I think Les Kobayashi, but I stand to 16 be corrected on that. 17 Q: Okay. Did anyone else join you 18 during the course of this meeting? 19 A: Not that I'm aware of. 20 Q: And approximately what time did you 21 arrive at the trailer? 22 A: Around 6:30, I think. 23 Q: Now, can you tell us, to the best of 24 your, first of all, your recollection, how -- 25 approximately how long this meeting occurred?

181

1 A: I would say twenty (20) minutes. 2 Q: Sorry, I didn't hear that. 3 A: Twenty (20) minutes. 4 Q: Thank you. All right. And who -- 5 who started the meeting? 6 A: Oh, I -- I can't recall. 7 Q: Do you know what the -- were you 8 advised as to what the purpose of the meeting was? 9 A: They were briefing us. They wanted 10 to brief the Mayor, the Chief and myself of what was 11 happening in the area at that particular point in time. 12 Q: All right. And when did you become 13 aware that that was the purpose? 14 A: Late -- well, when I walked in the -- 15 around 6:30. 16 Q: All right. And just to be clear, 17 Fred Thomas and Tom Bressette were not at this meeting? 18 A: No, they were not. 19 Q: All right. And can you tell me, then 20 -- can you tell us who did the talking at this meeting? 21 A: Well, I'm sure that probably 22 Inspector Carson and Les Kobayashi did most of the 23 talking. 24 Q: All right. Do you recall, first of 25 all, in a specific way, what Inspector Carson advised?

182

1 A: No. 2 Q: Do you recall in a general way? 3 A: Like I said, I think we probably 4 talked about the situation and the policing level in the 5 area, but, you know, I can't recall. 6 I'm sure that if you were to check their 7 notes, they probably took notes. I think the 8 conversation might have been even recorded so I'm sure 9 it's somewhere on the record, but I can't recall. 10 Q: Do you know whether it was recorded? 11 A: I don't know. 12 Q: All right. And do you recall, in a 13 general way, what Les Kobayashi's role in this meeting 14 was? 15 A: Again, no. No, because, you know, 16 whether he mention about the Pinery Park as a possibility 17 for a take over at that particular point in time, I don't 18 recall. 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: And I -- I don't really recall 21 anything about the -- the meeting. I mean this is ten 22 and a half (10 1/2) years ago. 23 Q: All right. Just bear with me. 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: What about Dale Linton; do you recall

183

1 him saying anything at this meeting? 2 A: No. 3 Q: Did you say anything at this meeting? 4 A: I probably said something, but I did 5 probably most -- mostly listening, because I was there to 6 be briefed. 7 Q: All right. Now, did you appreciate 8 that John Carson was the Incident Commander for this 9 occupation? 10 A: Appreciate in what way? 11 Q: Did you know. 12 A: Well, I was aware that he was the, 13 you know, that he was the -- the person responsible, that 14 he was in charge, yes. 15 Q: And were you aware as to what 16 position Dale Linton occupied in relation to the 17 occupation? 18 A: No. 19 Q: Okay. Had you previously asked for a 20 briefing with -- with the person in charge on the police 21 side? 22 A: To Mr. Carson? 23 Q: Yes. 24 A: No, I don't think so. Not to the 25 best of my recollection.

184

1 Q: All right. 2 A: Because I -- again, I, you know, I 3 was talking to Lacroix, or Sergeant Lacroix on an ongoing 4 basis, so I thought he kept me fairly well informed. 5 Q: All right. Did Sergeant Lacroix tell 6 you that -- that Inspector Carson wanted to or was 7 intending to meet with you? 8 A: No, I don't think -- I don't recall 9 that. 10 Q: All right. Do you have any other 11 recollection about what transpired at this meeting? 12 A: No. That it was pretty uneventful, 13 it was a briefing, it was fairly short and I left and 14 went on to my business and I'm sure they went on to their 15 business after. 16 Q: When you left the meeting, did you 17 have any new concerns or questions outstanding about the 18 -- the -- what -- how the police were handling the 19 matter? 20 A: Not that I recall. 21 Q: Okay. I wonder if you would go to 22 Tab 17, then. This is an excerpt from Exhibit P-426, 23 Inquiry Document Number 1002419. And I wonder if you 24 would proceed into that production to page 69. 25

185

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 A: 69? 4 Q: 69. And I -- at the top it says: 5 "Mark Wright will be briefed tonight by 6 John Carson." 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: Okay. And I can advise you, Mr. 9 Beaubien, that this is from an entry from September the 10 6th, 1995, even thought it doesn't appear at the top of 11 the page. 12 A: Okay. September the 6th, you said? 13 Q: Yes, that's right. And if you look 14 at the bottom, there's an entry, "18:42 hours." Do you 15 see that? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: So that's 6:42 p.m. 18 A: Hmm hmm. 19 Q: It reads: 20 "Inspector Linton, Inspector Carson, 21 Les Kobayashi and Member of Parliament, 22 Marcel Beaubien, meeting in command." 23 And you indicated that you thought the 24 meeting was at about 6:30 at the -- 25 A: I'm off by twelve (12) minutes.

186

1 Q: Is this -- 2 A: Yeah, that would be about it, yeah. 3 Q: All right. And if you go to page 71 4 of this entry, and it's all the same entry, it says that: 5 "Marcel Beaubien and Les Kobayashi 6 depart at 19:05." 7 So that's 7:05, meaning that the meeting 8 was just over twenty (20) minutes -- 9 A: Hmm hmm. 10 Q: -- is that -- 11 A: That would be -- 12 Q: -- consistent -- 13 A: I would agree with that, yeah. 14 Q: All right. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: All right. Now who amongst this 19 group did you know before this meeting? 20 A: At the -- at the command centre you 21 mean? 22 Q: Yes. 23 A: Well, I knew Les Kobayashi. 24 Q: Yeah. 25 A: I don't think I had met -- oh yes, I

187

1 had met Dale Linton and John Carson. 2 Q: All right. And when you attended 3 this meeting, whose interests, if any, were you 4 representing? 5 A: My constituents. 6 Q: And did you have any concerns, at the 7 outset, about the propriety of your attendance at the 8 command centre meeting with Inspector Carson? 9 A: Well, the call came in I was to be at 10 the Forest OPP Detachment. There was no mention of any 11 command centre. 12 And when I arrived at the Detachment I was 13 taken into the command centre by one of the officers. I 14 can't remember which officer, but they said, Well, no, 15 we're going to go over here. 16 So the initial call that came in was, 17 You're to meet at the Forest OPP Detachment, and then I 18 was taken to the command centre by one of the officers. 19 Q: All right. And -- 20 A: And that officer did not stay for the 21 -- for the meeting. 22 Q: All right. But did you have any 23 concerns about the propriety of -- of the meeting? 24 A: None at all. 25 Q: All right. Did you convey any

188

1 concerns or criticisms on behalf of your constituents at 2 this meeting? 3 A: I don't recall what I talked about, 4 but I'm probably -- I certainly probably mentioned that 5 the level of frustration and the concerns of the 6 constituents, I prob -- I think it would be fair to 7 assume that I talked about that, but I don't recall. 8 Q: And frustration with what? 9 A: With the whole situation. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Did you convey any concerns or 14 criticisms on behalf of the Government at this meeting? 15 A: No, I did not, that I... 16 Q: Did you advise these individuals that 17 you had prepared a draft press release? 18 A: I might have, I don't recall. 19 Q: Okay. Did you advise that you had 20 sent it to the -- to the Premier's office? 21 A: Well, it says in the -- in the scribe 22 that I did, so I'm not going to disagree with it. 23 Q: Now, for the time being I'm just 24 trying to understand your independent recollection today. 25 A: Hmm hmm.

189

1 Q: And then we'll go to the -- 2 A: I don't recall, but, you know, I'll - 3 - I'll -- I'm not going to disagree with what's there. 4 Q: All right. Well, let's look at the 5 note, then, and see if that refreshes your memory. 6 The second paragraph says as follows: 7 "Marcel Beaubien advised that he had 8 sent a fax to the Premier advising of 9 his intentions and that he wanted a 10 return phone call regarding his 11 intentions." 12 Now, does that refresh your memory, what-- 13 A: I would imagine that's probably the 14 fax that I sent to Bill King. 15 Q: Earlier that day? 16 A: That's right, yeah. 17 Q: And is it likely that you indicated 18 that you had sent it to the Premier? 19 A: Yeah, that's somebody's writing. My 20 intention -- I don't know what they mean by my 21 intentions. My intentions were there to -- I was there 22 to represent my constituents. 23 I mean, you'd have to ask the person that 24 wrote this. I -- I don't know. 25 Q: The purpose of putting this to you

190
  1  isn't to ask you to interpret --
  2                 A:   Hmm hmm.
  3                 Q:   -- but rather to see whether it
  4  refreshes your memory about what you might have said at
  5  the meeting, that's --
  6                 A:   Well, it certainly refreshes my
  7  memory that I probably was referring to the fax that I
  8  had sent to Bill King that day.
  9                 Q:   All right.  Would you have indicated
 10  that you wanted a return phone call from the Premier?
 11                 A:   Oh, from the Premier's office?  I --
 12  I might have, yes.
 13                 Q:   By the time you had this meeting, had
 14  you not received a return phone call?  We reviewed --
 15                 A:   Prob -- yes, because we received the
 16  phone call by three o'clock.
 17                 Q:   All right.  So was there -- were you
 18  expecting a further phone call?
 19                 A:   No.  No.  Like I said, somebody is
 20  writing this.  I, you know, I cannot defend that position
 21  what their, you know, what the intention is there.
 22                 Q:   No, I understand that and I'm not
 23  asking you to --
 24                 A:   Hmm hmm.
 25                 Q:   -- as I said, I'm asking you to

191

1 comment as to whether it refreshes your mind as to what 2 you said -- 3 A: That's -- 4 Q: -- and what occurred. 5 A: The -- the phone call that I was 6 expecting I had already received. 7 Q: Okay. Next paragraph. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just one (1) 9 minute. 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'm sorry. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. Carry 12 on. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 15 Q: Yes, the next paragraph: 16 "Inspector Carson advised that there is 17 a court hearing for an injunction at 18 9:00 a.m. September 7/95. Marcel 19 Beaubien aware of the -- 20 MR. MARK SANDLER: Sorry. I was, pausing 21 for a moment, I -- I'm just a little bit confused and 22 maybe it's my shortcoming, because Mr. Beaubien has said 23 that he's -- he's connecting it based upon what he's read 24 there, to a response that he received from Mr. King to 25 his fax.

192

1 But the evidence seems to be that the 2 response that he received to the fax was in connection to 3 the September 5th fax and not in connection with the 4 September fax which I understood he hadn't a received a 5 response on from Mr. King. So I -- I'm just a little 6 confused -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- about the evidence 9 and perhaps Ms. Vella would like to clarify that? 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes -- 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- thank 13 you, Mr. Sandler. I think that is -- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Certainly. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- not 16 clear. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you very much. 18 That -- I do appreciate that -- that comment. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 21 Q: You recall, Mr. Sandler's quite 22 right, the -- the press draft -- press release, of 23 course, that you had sent was on the -- the -- I'll just 24 check. 25

193

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: September 4 the 5th. 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, it was September 6 the 5th. I just want to go to it to make sure I don't 7 mis-speak myself. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 10 Q: You'll see on Tab 18 is -- is the 11 press release, draft press release which you sent on the 12 5th, I take it. And then -- and then at Tab 22 you sent 13 a further fax on September the 6th... 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 Q: ...containing the constituent's 18 letter? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Are you 22 going to help straighten this out, Mr. Falconer? 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm stopping and 24 not saying anything until -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, no

194

1 you've come -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Ms. Vella 3 finishes her question and then I had an issue. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I know 5 you're up at the microphone so I assume you've got 6 something to say. You don't yet? You're just -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I'm going to 8 let her finish her question. I thought I wouldn't 9 interrupt her, but it's too late, she's interrupted. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 11 I interrupted her on your behalf. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I --I didn't -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So now that 14 she's interrupted you might as well say what you have. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, my only 16 concern is this: That we're all struggling to try to -- 17 to get it right, but it's the Witness' recollection. 18 And what troubles me is that if you look 19 at the note at page 69 it simply says -- there is a 20 reference, pure and simple, to the fact that Marcel 21 Beaubien advised that he had sent a fax to the Premier 22 advising of his intentions and that he wanted a return 23 phone call regarding his intentions. 24 Now, that reference at page 69 could -- 25 and, in fact, tends to jive more with the September 5th

195

1 fax than any September 6th fax, because of the reference 2 to wanting a return call about his intentions. 3 Now -- then we hear from the Witness what 4 he interprets that to mean. And then Mr. Sandler gets up 5 and says, But I thought what you really meant, and then 6 Mr. Sandler refers to a September 6th fax. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It just seems to me 9 that we have to be very careful here. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I agree. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's the Witness' 12 recollection and -- and either one is consistent with his 13 memory. And it shouldn't be about -- and I'm not saying 14 Ms. Vella is -- it shouldn't be about my advancing the 15 position of the Witness or Mr. Sandler, it should just be 16 what the Witness thinks happened. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what 18 we're trying to do, Mr. Falconer. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I understand. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I 21 understand. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But the way it was 23 put by Mr. Sandler we end up in September 6th faxes for - 24 - for no reason other than -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you,

196

1 Mr. Falconer. 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I -- 3 MR. MARK SANDLER: I was very careful. I 4 wasn't suggesting anything. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, you 6 weren't. 7 MR. MARK SANDLER: I was -- I was 8 confused. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You were 10 just asking for clarification. 11 MR. MARK SANDLER: I was confused. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, that is the 13 inherent brilliance of Mr. Sandler's submissions. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Gentlemen, I 15 don't need this, this is not helpful. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's just 18 carry on. Carry on please, Ms. Vella. 19 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, I think -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We want to 21 make -- 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- we're only seeking 23 to clarify. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA:

197

1 Q: And I'm -- was -- my next question 2 was and is going to be: Having looked at the two (2) 3 faxes, do you recall whether, first of all, you raised 4 the fact that you had sent a fax to the Premier and if 5 so, which one you were referring to? 6 A: I don't recall. I mean, I'm only 7 going by what's over here. I mean, we're having a 8 difficulty trying to ascertain what is right here, just 9 with the documentation we have in front of me. 10 I can't go back ten and a half (10 1/2) 11 years later and recall exactly, so I'll stand by what's 12 on the record. 13 Q: Well, let me ask you a further 14 question. As of the time of this meeting, had you 15 received a response to the September 6th letter, Exhibit 16 P-952, enclosing the constituent's letter? 17 A: That's Tab 22 you're talking about? 18 Q: Correct. 19 A: I don't think so. 20 Q: All right. 21 A: I don't think they would act that 22 quickly. 23 Q: Now... 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

198

1 Q: Did you, as at -- 18:42 on 2 September the 6th, had you communicated any advice to the 3 Premier or the Premier's office with respect to an intent 4 to do something concerning the Ipperwash occupation? 5 A: Not that I'm aware of. 6 Q: All right. And I think that's 7 probably as far as we can go with that then. 8 Let's go to the next paragraph: 9 "Inspector Carson advised that there is 10 a Court Hearing for an injunction at 11 9:00 a.m., 7 September '95. Marcel 12 Beaubien aware of the situation." 13 Now, first of all, do you recall Inspector 14 Carson telling you that there was a Court Hearing date 15 for the next morning with respect to the injunction? 16 A: I don't recall it, but I'm not going 17 to deny that he didn't say it. 18 Q: All right. By the time of this 19 meeting, were you aware at least, that the Court -- that 20 the Government was going to be seeking an injunction? 21 A: Yes, I think I was. 22 Q: Over on page 70 then, please, top 23 paragraph: 24 "Marcel Beaubien wondered if there was 25 anything else that he could do.

199

1 Inspector Carson advised that things 2 are towards the Court Order so that 3 Criminal Code charges can be laid." 4 Now, first of all, did you ask if there 5 was anything that you could do? 6 A: I think it's a fair assumption that I 7 probably would ask, Is there something that I can do to 8 help, or whatever. So, I'm not going to deny making that 9 statement; I probably did. 10 Q: And what was it that you thought you 11 might be able to assist the police with? 12 A: Well, I don't know, that's why I'm 13 asking. 14 Q: Okay. Well, that's fair, but you 15 didn't have any -- 16 A: Nothing in particular -- 17 Q: -- idea -- 18 A: -- that I can recall. 19 Q: All right. And did you receive that 20 -- did you receive any information about how the police 21 planned to enforce the injunction, should it be obtained? 22 A: No. 23 Q: You don't recall that? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Okay. Next paragraph:

200

1 "Marcel Beaubien advised that property 2 owners are very concerned. They are 3 frustrated and feel that they are not 4 being treated equally. John Carson 5 states that there is not a land claim, 6 there has been no legal claim to the 7 land." 8 Now, I think you've indicated already that 9 it is likely that you expressed the concerns and 10 frustrations of your constituents, is that -- 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: -- right? All right. And did you 13 learn during this meeting, or were you advised during 14 this meeting that there was no land claim? 15 A: Oh, I'm sure they mentioned it, but I 16 think I had that information already from MNR. 17 Q: All right. And it's reported that: 18 "Les Kobayashi has had the land 19 researched. There is no burial ground 20 on the land." 21 Do you recall whether or not you heard 22 that at the meeting? 23 A: I don't recall, but I'm sure it's 24 possible that we talked -- that they talked about that. 25 Q: And you indicated that you had

201

1 already received that information? 2 A: That's right. 3 Q: Next point: 4 "Inspector Linton questioned if there 5 is anything from the Solicitor General. 6 Marcel Beaubien advised that they were 7 meeting today." 8 Now, I'm just going to pause for a moment, 9 and ask you to keep your finger on that entry, and then 10 go to Tab 25, Exhibit P-427, which is the handwritten 11 Ontario Provincial Police scribe notes; the handwritten 12 scribe notes which is the counterpart to the typed notes 13 that we're looking at. 14 But, there is a slight difference in -- 15 appears to be, at least, a slight difference in this 16 provision. 17 If you go to page 469 and the reference 18 halfway through: 19 "DL: [Dale Linton] Anything from 20 Solicitor General? 21 MB: We're meeting today." 22 So, there's a slight difference. One says 23 they were meeting today, the other says we're meeting 24 today. But in any event, first of all, did this topic 25 come up?

202

1 A: Oh, I'm sure that the question was 2 asked and it's on the record so I'm sure it did. 3 Q: Did you have any knowledge of a 4 meeting involving the Solicitor General or the -- the 5 Solicitor General's office for the 6th? 6 A: Yeah I think I might have received 7 that information. Now again, I'm not sure, but I think 8 from Bill King through a telephone conversation. 9 Q: All right. Can you -- can you help 10 us a little bit more then as to what your understanding 11 of the -- the purpose of that meeting with -- was to be? 12 A: No. No. And I wasn't given any 13 details on that. 14 Q: Were you given any report with 15 respect to the result of that meeting? 16 A: No. 17 Q: You just knew it was occurring? 18 A: I knew there was a meeting going on. 19 Q: All right. Do you know who was going 20 to be participating in it? 21 A: No. 22 Q: All right. Then the next paragraph: 23 "John Carson advised that before the 24 Park was taken over..." 25 And I'm sorry I'm back at Tab 17, the

203

1 typed version, page 70. 2 "John Carson advised that before the 3 Park was taken over, that he originally 4 had members there but had to leave for 5 safety reasons. We were outnumbered. 6 Les Kobayashi was present when the 7 Natives took over. 8 He confirmed that the officers were 9 swarmed. There was approximately 10 twenty (20) to forty (40) Natives. 11 Agreed with the decision for the 12 officers to leave." 13 Do you recall having a discussion which 14 related to the -- the -- the point of entry of the 15 occupation and the police response? 16 A: I don't recall but I'm sure they -- 17 they brought it up. 18 Q: Were you familiar with this 19 information? 20 A: No. That was new information to me. 21 Q: All right. Next John Carson states: 22 "They are using women and children and 23 it puts in a tough position. John 24 Carson advised Marcel Beaubien that he 25 understands the residents' concern --

204

1 concerns. 2 John Carson reported to Marcel Beaubien 3 that we have thirty (30) people on the 4 ground at all times having the members 5 talk to the residents to let them know 6 of our presence. 7 Foot patrols are being completed around 8 the residences, safety is important." 9 Do you remember a discussion revealing 10 that information at this meeting? 11 A: Well, I don't recall the specific 12 subject matter but I'm sure that's one issue that we 13 would have talked about. 14 Q: Now, were you aware of this 15 information prior to this meeting? 16 A: About the thirty (30) people on the 17 ground? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: I think yes, through Wade Lacroix. 20 Q: Okay. Were you aware that they were 21 being -- there foot patrols being conducted? 22 A: No. I think that was new information 23 to me. 24 Q: Next statement, as follows -- or 25 note:

205

1 "Marcel Beaubien states that he doesn't 2 mind taking controversy if situation 3 can't be handled by police services. 4 Something has to be done to handle the 5 situation." 6 Now, just leaving it there, do you re -- 7 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I just wonder -- 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 12 Q: Perhaps, you keep your finger on that 13 notation and -- and go to Tab 25, Exhibit P-427 which is 14 the handwritten logs -- scribe notes, excuse me. 15 And if you go to page 470, you'll see 16 halfway through M.B., making comments: 17 "If police services can't do it, get 18 someone who can." 19 MB: Don't mind controversy." 20 So, that's the -- the handwritten version 21 of that that presumably relates to the typed notation. 22 Does that refresh your memory at all as to whether or not 23 you spoke of not minding taking the controversy or not 24 minding controversy? 25 A: Well, I don't mind controversy at any

206

1 time. You know, I guess I've been faced with it more 2 than once in my life. But it's kind of funny that when 3 you look at the handwritten notes and the one that are 4 transcribed, how much difference there is in that short 5 period of time. And this is one (1) individual taking 6 notes and somebody else transcribing them in a 7 typewritten form. 8 I don't mind taking controversy, but I was 9 hearing from my constituents that if the police can't do 10 the work, somebody should be doing the work. 11 So I'm probably relaying that to the 12 police officer also. 13 Q: All right. So, that was a concern 14 that you had been apprised of by your constituents -- 15 A: That's right. 16 Q: -- and therefore it is -- it is -- do 17 you think it's reasonable that you would have passed 18 along that particular concern at this meeting? 19 A: Oh, I'm sure I would have, yes. 20 Q: Did you have -- 21 A: Because, if I may interject, and you 22 got to realize that one paragraph above this, that I've 23 also been assured by the police all along that the level 24 of safety is adequate. 25 But yet, which was news to me at that

207

1 briefing, I'm told that the police left the camp grounds, 2 because they feared for their safety. 3 Q: Okay. And this is where you -- 4 A: You know -- 5 Q: -- learned -- 6 A: -- it just doesn't figure joint here 7 with -- from what I'm hearing previously and all of a 8 sudden, they're fearing for their safety, but yet I'd 9 been telling my constituents, don't worry, you're safe. 10 Q: All right. So -- 11 A: So, I had a lot of problems with 12 trying to figure -- you know, putting this one together. 13 Q: Now, first of all, did you indicate 14 that you learned that the officers had feared for their 15 safety at the time of the occupation for the first time 16 at this meeting? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: All right, and did you have anything 19 in mind when you -- when you indicated that, essentially, 20 if someone -- the police services can't handle it, 21 someone else would? 22 A: No. Again, I'm referring to, you 23 know, what I'm hearing from -- from my constituents, 24 because -- and rightly and wrongly at that particular 25 point in time, I'm starting to have some doubts with

208

1 regards to the information that I'm getting, when 2 officers tell me we're fearing for our own safety. 3 And so it gives some credibility to what 4 I'm hearing from my constituents. They say, well, the 5 police can't do the work in this area. 6 Q: And what did you take from the 7 concerns or the comments you were haring that if the 8 police can't handle it, then someone else will have to? 9 A: I -- you no -- 10 Q: What were you -- 11 A: -- I don't know why. You know, I 12 heard maybe the Army should be, you know, doing it, they 13 should be looking after the base, and I heard all kinds 14 of things. 15 But, you know, I didn't have any position. 16 I don't know. 17 Q: No, I was wondering whether -- what 18 you took from -- 19 A: That's probably what I took of -- you 20 know, that the army probably should be involved. 21 Q: In any event, it's likely you 22 conveyed that notion at this meeting? 23 A: That's right. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

209

1 Q: All right. And then the next part of 2 that paragraph: 3 "John Carson states that we want it 4 resolved, but we don't want anyone to 5 get hurt. Wants everything that can be 6 done to stress the point of no one 7 getting hurt. John Carson also stated 8 that we have a lot of good people. Two 9 (2) teams on the ground at the time. 10 Officers doing a great job." 11 Now, does that assist you with respect to 12 the prior comments about if the police can't handle it, 13 someone else will? 14 A: I personally never had any problem 15 with the work that the OPP was doing. I'm sure they were 16 doing their best with the resources they had, but there's 17 no doubt, when I was informed that they feared for their 18 safety, that it raised a few question marks. 19 But I don't think I ever passed that 20 information on -- that information, with any of my 21 constituents, because I didn't think it would be wise to 22 pass that on at that particular point in time. 23 Q: I'm not understanding, passed what 24 on? 25 A: When the officers told me that they

210

1 feared for their safety in the Park, and that's why they 2 left. 3 Q: You're saying that piece of 4 information you didn't transmit back to your 5 constituents? 6 A: I did not. 7 Q: All right. But you did transmit to 8 the -- the officers at this meeting the concept that the 9 -- the constituents were concerned that if the police 10 couldn't do their job, then someone else would? 11 A: That's right. 12 Q: And my next question was: Does Mr. 13 Carson's following statement that we don't want anyone to 14 get hurt, does that assist you in understanding where -- 15 what you took from the constituents' statements? 16 A: Well, at that particular point in 17 time, we probably talk also about constituents -- 18 constituents arming themselves and I certainly didn't 19 want to see that, and I'm sure Inspector Carson did want 20 to see that. And so whether that relates to that, I 21 don't know. 22 Q: Well that -- 23 A: Because there was talk, I mean, and I 24 showed evidence, letters, that we received that people 25 were willing -- and phone calls, that people were -- were

211

1 willing to arm themselves. 2 Q: All right. So, that was a live 3 concern, to your knowledge, at the time? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: All right. At the time of this 6 meeting, I mean. 7 All right. Next -- next point. The 8 paragraph at the bottom of page 70: 9 "Dale Linton advised Marcel Beaubien 10 that we appreciate everything that he 11 has done. Marcel Beaubien talked to 12 Chief Chris Coles and suggested MNR 13 contact Chief Coles so they are aware 14 of the situation." 15 And I believe you indicated that you did 16 have a conversation with Chief Superintendent Chris 17 Coles? 18 A: Yes. And I think we alluded to that 19 prior to the break -- 20 Q: All right. 21 A: -- or to lunch. 22 Q: Did you suggest that the MNR contact 23 Chief Superintendent Coles? 24 A: I don't recall, but I'm not going to 25 deny that I might have.

212

1 Q: Next. Now, we're on page 71: 2 "John Carson brought up issue that if 3 the Park is cleared, what happens after 4 that? Marcel Beaubien is concerned 5 about the residents; stated that they 6 had a meeting and about a hundred (100) 7 or more residents turned out. They are 8 very frustrated. Instructed to contact 9 me if something occurs and he would try 10 to find out about things. Marcel 11 Beaubien curious about the -- about the 12 feelings of the Kettle Point people. 13 John Carson advised that he was keeping 14 in contact with Kettle Point to get 15 their feelings." 16 Now, did you attend at a meeting of -- of 17 about a hundred (100) or more residents, earlier that 18 week? 19 A: Not that I recall. I think, 20 basically, I'm referring to some of the constituents had 21 a meeting, they attended a meeting; that's -- that's the 22 information that I'm relaying. But I -- I don't recall 23 being at that meeting. 24 Q: Did you receive a report of such a 25 meeting?

213

1 A: A verbal report from individuals, I 2 would imagine. 3 Q: Okay. And can you tell us, first of 4 all, when that meeting occurred? 5 A: Can't recall. 6 Q: All right. Was it prior to the 7 occupation? 8 A: Can't recall. 9 Q: All right. Do you recall what -- 10 what was reported to you transpired at that meeting? 11 A: No, not specifically. 12 Q: All right. All right. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: All right. Now, after you returned, 17 or sorry, after you left -- first of all, do you recall 18 leaving this meeting with Mr. Kobayashi? 19 A: I think we left at the same time. 20 Q: And did you return that day or night 21 to the Forest Detachment or the -- the trailer? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Did you ever indicate at this 24 meeting, either expressly or implicitly, that you were 25 conveying instructions or desires from the Premier or the

214

1 Government to the police with respect to -- with respect 2 to the -- the handling of the Park occupation? 3 A: Absolutely not. I was -- I wasn't 4 getting hardly anything from Queen's Park so there was 5 not an awful lot to be conveyed. 6 Q: Did you try to influence the police 7 in their operations? 8 A: No, I don't think you would influence 9 John Carson very easily. 10 Q: But did you try? 11 A: No. I wouldn't even try. I don't 12 think I'd get very far. 13 Q: Did you suggest to the police that 14 they ought to remove the occupiers as soon as possible, 15 given the level of tension in the community? 16 A: Not to the best of my recollection. 17 All I was concerned, as long as the occupiers were 18 confined within the area of the Park itself; and if they 19 were contained in that area I felt that the police were 20 doing their job. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: Now, we heard some evidence from Les 25 Kobayashi at this Inquiry, and he testified on October

215

1 the 26th that you expressed the view that something 2 should be done by the OPP, without suggesting how, at 3 this meeting? Do you dispute that? 4 A: I don't recall that. 5 Q: All right. But do you dispute that? 6 A: Yeah. I think I would. 7 Q: All right. He also testified that 8 you were concerned that if the police weren't seen to be 9 doing something visible, that residents could become more 10 anxious and frustrated. 11 Do you recall expressing that? 12 A: Well I'm sure that, you know, I think 13 I've been fairly consistent that I was hearing this on a 14 daily basis from my constituents. 15 Now how Les relates it to somebody else, I 16 don't know. But I'm sure that I would mention to him 17 that the level of frustration and the lack of action, as 18 conveyed to me by my constituents, was of concern. 19 Q: All right. I wonder if we could put 20 Exhibit P-469 before the witness. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: And I have an extra copy for the 25 Commissioner.

216

1 THE WITNESS: Thanks, sir. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 8 Q: All right. Now this is a transcript 9 of a taped telephone conversation which occurred on 10 September the 6th at 21:41. So about two and a half (2 11 1/2) hours after your meeting at the command post 12 concluded. 13 And it is between Inspector Linton and 14 Superintendent Parkin. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Just give me a moment. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: All right. And if you go to page 12 23 of that transcript, please. And it would appear here 24 that Inspector Linton is reporting, in part, on the -- on 25 a meeting that you participated in.

217

1 And if you start at the bottom: 2 "Linton: Marcel Beaubien was in 3 tonight. He had talked to the 4 Solicitor General. 5 Parkin: Yeah. 6 Linton: And the Attorney General. 7 They were comfortable but he -- 8 Parkin: Well that's right like we -- 9 we called the Commissioner tonight. 10 Linton: Yeah. 11 Parkin: And he had been talking to 12 Runciman and that -- and they were more 13 than pleased with what the OPP was 14 doing so there's no problem there. 15 What happened, though, by that -- by 16 that information about the automatic 17 weapons going up the MNR side, they 18 went from that -- that regular type of 19 injunction to the emergency type which, 20 you know, isn't really in our favour. 21 Linton: Yeah." 22 Now did you have a conversation with 23 Inspector Linton on September the 6th, in the evening, or 24 in the evening which you indicated that you'd spoken to 25 the Solicitor General and the Attorney General?

218

1 A: I don't even recall talking directly 2 to Linton. I know he was at the meeting, but I certainly 3 dispute the fact that I talked to the Solicitor General 4 or the Attorney General that night. 5 I totally disagree with that. 6 Q: All right. And would you -- is it -- 7 would you have said that you did at the meeting? 8 A: I don't recall saying that. 9 Q: All right. Thank you. Is it 10 possible that you indicated that you had spoken to those 11 offices? 12 A: If -- if I can go back, when we look 13 at the scribe notes that were taken when I was at the 14 command centre, there's no mention of that. 15 Q: Yes. And I'm going to other -- other 16 pieces of potential evidence to see if that refreshes 17 your memory or not -- 18 A: Hmm hmm. 19 Q: -- so that we can your position, 20 that's all. Thank you. 21 Do you recall whether you -- you may have 22 raised, during the meeting, then, that you had been in 23 contact with the Attorney General and Solicitor General's 24 offices? 25 A: I can't recall.

219

1 Q: All right. If you would turn, then, 2 to Tab 25. It's Exhibit P-427 and as I've identified 3 before, this is the hand -- handwritten scribe notes of 4 the 18:42 meeting that you attended. 5 And I would like you to go to page 469; at 6 the top of that page are the following notations. 7 "MB: Is closer to private property. 8 JC: Yes. Not even a land claim. 9 There has been no legal claim to the 10 land." 11 Now, do you recall indicating at the 12 meeting or asking at the meeting whether the Park 13 occupation was more similar to occupation of private 14 property? 15 A: No, I don't recall that. 16 Q: All right. And half way through the 17 page: 18 "JC: [John Carson] T. Bressette has 19 no support for incidents at the Park." 20 Do you recall anything being said about 21 Chief Bressette's views at that meeting? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Okay. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

220

1 Q: All right. And if you would go, 2 please, then, to page 472, it's the last page for this 3 entry, at the top: 4 "MB: Premier is in constant touch. 5 Good communications." 6 Did you advise, at this meeting, that -- 7 that the Premier was in constant touch? 8 A: I think probably, subsequent to the 9 conversation I had with Bill King on the 5th of 10 September, when he told me that he Premier is following 11 closely, I probably -- I, you know, that's somebody 12 else's wording, but I would imagine maybe that -- that 13 the Premier was following this situation. 14 I might have mentioned that, yes. 15 Q: That you would have conveyed that -- 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: -- at the meeting? All right. Do 18 you remember anything else about this meeting at the 19 command post? 20 A: Not that I can recall. 21 Q: All right. Did you advise any of 22 your constituents of the fact that you'd attended a 23 meeting at the command post? 24 A: I can't recall, but I'm sure I 25 mentioned it to some individuals that I would have met

221

1 with the OPP. 2 Q: All right. And do you think you told 3 those individuals what the contents of your discussions 4 were? 5 A: I might have told them some of them, 6 some of the discussion, but I can't recall. 7 Q: Are there any parts that you wouldn't 8 have told your constituents about? 9 A: I think the part about where they 10 mention that the officers fear for their safety. I 11 probably would have kept that pretty close to my chest. 12 Q: Okay. Do you recall then what you 13 did after you left this meeting? 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 A: I didn't go home, because I had so 18 many phone calls or so many other calls to -- I think I 19 went to in the Thedford area, but I can't remember. 20 Q: All right. 21 A: I didn't get home 'til late that 22 night. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: But I mean, by late, it was probably 25 9:30, ten o'clock.

222

1 Q: All right. And do you recall then 2 what you did in the intervening hours, then, between 7:00 3 and 9:00 -- 4 A: Talk and meet with constituents. 5 Q: All right. About this issue? 6 A: About this issue. 7 Q: And what was your assessment of the 8 level of their emotions at that time? 9 A: A lot of them were at wit's end. 10 Q: Sorry? 11 A: The people were -- had had enough. 12 People were really, really frustrated. 13 Q: All right. And what, if anything, 14 did you do to try to allay their concerns? 15 A: I, again, relayed whatever 16 information I had and tried to assure them that things 17 were under control. But it was getting, you know, more 18 and more difficult, especially with some of the 19 information I had received a couple of hours prior to 20 that. 21 But I was still trying to keep the lid on 22 -- on the issue and reassure the citizens that things 23 were under control. 24 And I felt they were under control, 25 personally.

223

1 Q: All right. That the police had it 2 under control? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Now, to this point in time, the early 5 -- early evening of September the 6th, had you heard any 6 information about the existence of -- of guns in the 7 Park? 8 A: I had heard that comment on an 9 ongoing basis, probably for two (2), three (3) weeks 10 prior to that. 11 Q: And had you heard anything -- any 12 recent information about that? 13 A: Yes, it was ongoing. 14 Q: Had you heard anything from the 15 police about that? 16 A: Directly, yes. 17 Q: Do you recall what it is you heard? 18 A: No, I think it was in one (1) of my 19 discussions with Staff Sergeant Lacroix. 20 Q: All right. 21 A: But that's to the best of my 22 recollection. 23 Q: Do you recall hearing any information 24 about the possible hearing of gunfire overnight? 25 A: Yes, I heard that from constituents.

224

1 Q: All right. Did you hear that from 2 any police officers? 3 A: No. 4 Q: And do you recall what night that 5 related to? 6 A: No. 7 Q: Was it prior to the shooting, or 8 after? 9 A: Prior. And thereafter, also. 10 Q: And -- 11 A: But I didn't hear it personally. I'm 12 relaying what I heard from my constituents. 13 Q: I appreciate this was reported to 14 you? 15 A: That's right. 16 Q: All right. And had you heard any 17 information about the -- the possible existence of 18 warriors in the Park? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And what had you heard about that? 21 A: Probably, again, you know, I'm vague 22 on when, but probably shortly after the Park -- the 23 Provincial Park takeover. 24 Q: And who -- what was the source of 25 your information?

225

1 A: Again, residents. 2 Q: Did you check that out at all with 3 the police, that information? 4 A: I probably would have asked that 5 question, but I can't remember what answer I was given. 6 Q: Okay. Did you hear anything about a 7 citizen's car being damaged by a rock in and around the 8 Park area in the afternoon of -- of September the 6th? 9 A: I think I heard about it the -- the 10 following day. 11 Q: The following day? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: The 7th? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: All right. Now, you've indicated 16 that you didn't have any concerns about the way the 17 police were handling the occupation after your meeting at 18 the Command Post? 19 A: I never, you know, I -- they're 20 professionals, they're trained to do this and they're 21 telling me that they have things under control and I have 22 to take them at face value. 23 Q: All right. Did you have any views or 24 what was your assessment of how the Government had 25 handled the occupation as at the evening -- early evening

226

1 of September 6th? 2 A: Well, from my point of view, again, 3 as I alluded to the fact this morning, I think it was 4 that I don't think Queen's Park appreciated the -- and 5 I'm not pointing the finger at anybody here, but I don't 6 think they appreciated the -- the seriousness of the 7 issue because they were concerned with other issues 8 probably that they felt were, you know, were more, you 9 know, at the top of the list. 10 But, again, that's my personal feeling. 11 Q: All right. 12 A: Then and today. 13 Q: All right. Did you have any other 14 contacts with any members of the Ontario Provincial 15 Police, that you can recall, on September the 6th? 16 A: Not -- not that I recall. 17 Q: Do you recall any other contacts with 18 government officials on September the 6th? 19 A: Just what we have on the record. 20 Q: All right. What was your assessment 21 of the potential danger to the public at the end of the 22 day of September the 6th or as early -- early evening 23 September the 6th, as compared with your assessment of -- 24 from the prior day? 25 A: Well, from my own perspective, again,

227

1 like I said, I don't live in the area, I did spend an 2 awful lot of time but I thought things would -- you know, 3 the tension, certainly, I think, escalated, but I think I 4 didn't have any evidence that things were getting worse. 5 I know that the residents were certainly - 6 - the level of frustration was escalating but besides 7 that there was really no other indication to indicate 8 anything else. 9 Q: All right. 10 A: From my perspective, anyway. 11 Q: And based on the information you were 12 hearing both from the police and from your constituents; 13 is that fair? 14 A: That's -- that's correct. 15 Q: All right. 16 A: I mean there's no doubt, when I was 17 informed that the police feared for their safety that 18 gave me some mixed feelings, there's no doubt about that. 19 But, again, but it did not change my mind as to the level 20 of policing they were providing to the general public 21 outside the area. 22 Q: And just to be clear, the level of 23 fear that you indicated was expressed, that -- was that - 24 - what time period did that relate to? 25 A: Well, you know, I know this Inquiry

228

1 wants to look at two (2) days, but this thing started -- 2 Q: Well, I -- 3 A: -- from the time I was elected and 4 it's still going on. 5 Q: No, I appreciate that. I was talking 6 about a specific reference with respect to the police 7 expression that they felt fear. 8 Was that with respect to the -- prior -- 9 A: The briefing at the command centre 10 that night. 11 Q: That's when you heard it, okay? 12 A: That's right. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: That's with the takeover of the -- of 15 the Park, the Provincial Park. 16 Q: That was on the initial takeover -- 17 A: That's right 18 Q: -- of the Park? Okay. 19 Now, were you -- did you receive any 20 information that the Crowd Management Unit and/or the 21 Tactical Response Unit was going to be deployed that 22 evening? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Did you have any sense that the 25 police were going to take any such action that night?

229

1 A: No. 2 Q: When you went home that night, what, 3 if anything, did you think the police were going to be 4 doing that evening? 5 A: Nothing differently than any previous 6 evening. 7 Q: So patrolling and monitoring? 8 A: That's right. 9 Q: Anything else? 10 A: No. 11 Q: I wonder if we might take the 12 afternoon break at this time, Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's a good 14 time. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll take 17 the afternoon break. 18 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 19 for fifteen (15) minutes. 20 21 --- Upon recessing at 2:37 p.m. 22 --- Upon resuming at 2:58 p.m. 23 24 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 25 resumed. Please be seated.

230

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 3 4 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 5 Q: Mr. Beaubien, when did you first 6 learn there had been a shooting at the Park? 7 A: At approximately four o'clock in the 8 morning. 9 Q: September the 7th? 10 A: That's right. 11 Q: From whom did you first learn? 12 A: From the Federal Member, Rosemary Ur. 13 Q: And what, if any, details did she 14 relay to you? 15 A: I'm vague on that, but I think she 16 told me that there had been a shooting and I don't know 17 whether -- I think she mentioned there was two (2) -- two 18 (2) or three (3) people that had been hurt. 19 Q: She -- did she contai -- advise as to 20 whether there had been any fatalities? 21 A: I can't recall that at that 22 particular point in time. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: I don't think she did. 25 Q: Did she describe or relay any of the

231

1 circumstances which gave rise to -- to this event? 2 A: No, because the conversation was 3 fairly brief. 4 Q: All right. And what was your 5 reaction to being told this? 6 A: Well, I was shocked and I immediately 7 got up and drove to the centre in Forest to find out what 8 had happened. 9 Q: The command centre, you mean? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. And just prior to -- to 12 that, did she advise who had been hurt? 13 A: No. Just that three (3) people had 14 been hurt. 15 Q: All right. So you drove to the -- 16 the Forest Detachment, to the trailer? 17 A: That's right, yes. 18 Q: All right. And do you -- do you 19 recall approximately what time you arrived there? 20 A: I would say 5:00, 5:30 in the 21 morning. 22 Q: Well perhaps you could go to Tab 17, 23 the typed scribe notes, Exhibit P-426, Inquiry Document 24 1002419. If you would go to page -- you'll see page 93. 25 A: Yes.

232

1 Q: And I'll indicate to you, you won't 2 see a date on the top of that document but this is from 3 September 7th, 1995. 4 And at the bottom of this document you'll 5 see the notation 6:49 a.m., and there's an indication 6 that: 7 "Dale Linton meeting with Marcel 8 Beaubien." 9 A: Oh, so I'm off by an hour, I guess. 10 Q: Well, I just -- 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: Does this sound -- 13 A: That sounds about right. It was 14 early in the morning, I can't -- I can't remember the 15 exact time. I could have received the call at five 16 o'clock, for all I know. 17 Q: All right. In any event, do you 18 recall meeting with Inspector Linton? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: And where did you meet him? 21 A: I think we met in the command centre, 22 if I recall, to the best of my recollection. 23 Q: So the trailer? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Outside of the Detachment?

233

1 A: That's right. 2 Q: All right. And was there anyone else 3 with you? 4 A: I can't remember. I think there were 5 other people, but I can't remember. I'm really vague at 6 that. 7 Q: All right. Do you recall 8 approximately how long this meeting went? 9 A: No, not very long. 10 Q: All right. 11 A: Probably tells us somewhere, but I 12 can't remember. 13 Q: Well, let's -- all right. And we'll 14 go to that in a minute. Well, let me go to that now. 15 Page 94, a continuation of the September 7th entry and it 16 indicates at the last paragraph: 17 "Marcel Beaubien leaves command trailer 18 at 7:17 hours." 19 So 7:17 a.m. Does that sound about right? 20 A: I would not dispute that, no. 21 Q: So that the meeting was about a half 22 an hour? 23 A: Hmm hmm. 24 Q: Yes? 25 A: Yes.

234

1 Q: Okay. And can you tell me what -- 2 what transpired during this meeting? 3 A: Well, I'm sure I probably wanted an 4 update as to what had happened and -- because I, you 5 know, I wanted some information because I knew that the 6 next day or that -- that morning I would, you know, the 7 flood of calls would be coming. 8 And so I wanted as much information as I 9 possibly could get, to relay to, again, to constituents 10 and to the general public. 11 Q: Did Inspector Linton explain to you 12 the -- the -- their understanding of the circumstances 13 that led up to the shooting? 14 A: I think he did. 15 Q: And what's your recollection of that? 16 A: I think my recollection was that a 17 bus and a car had driven towards a number of officers, 18 fire came out of the bus and the car, and the officers 19 returned fire, to the best of my recollection. 20 Q: What kind of fire? 21 A: Gunfire. 22 Q: All right. And did you learn at that 23 time as to whether or not there had been a fatality? 24 A: Yes, I think I was informed at -- 25 when I arrived at the centre that somebody had passed

235

1 away. 2 Q: And did you learn who it was? 3 A: I can't remember if I did at that -- 4 I think they probably told me the name, but I can't 5 recall. 6 Q: All right. Did you know whether or 7 not it was an Aboriginal person or non -- 8 A: Yes, they told me the -- the people 9 that were hurt were three (3) Aboriginals. 10 Q: Including the individual who died? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: All right. Did he tell you as to 13 whether there were any injuries by the police? 14 A: I think he mentioned that there were 15 no injuries sustained by any officers. 16 Q: Did he tell you whether -- did he 17 tell you that -- that certain officers had been deployed 18 to the area? 19 A: No. 20 Q: All right. So just the -- the story 21 started there with the bus and the car coming out? 22 A: That's right. 23 Q: As far as you can recollect? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: All right. And did you have -- did

236

1 you have any questions for him about the exchange of 2 gunfire? 3 A: I can't recall. 4 Q: Did you have any discussion with 5 respect to the extent of the other injuries? 6 A: Oh, I'm sure I probably asked, but I 7 don't think they were aware what the extent of the 8 injuries were at that particular point in time. 9 At least they didn't relay it to me. 10 Q: Did you discuss ways of de-escalating 11 the tension within the community? 12 A: Well, you know, I'd been trying for 13 quite a while and I certainly -- I knew -- I was aware 14 that this certainly was not going to help the situation. 15 So again, that's, you know, certainly 16 would be grabbing at straws as to, you know, how do we -- 17 how do we deal with this. 18 Q: All right. Do you recall whether or 19 not at the conclusion of this meeting, you attended at a 20 further meeting with another police officer? 21 A: Not to my -- like a personal meeting? 22 Q: A separate meeting with another 23 police officer. 24 A: I don't recall that. 25 Q: All right. Perhaps we could go,

237

1 then, to the scribe notes from the 6th, over to page 94, 2 starting with the 7:03 entry. 3 A: Which tab was that? 4 Q: We're still at -- I'm sorry, we're at 5 Tab 17, Exhibit P-426, September 7, 1995, 7:03 entry, so 6 page 94. 7 A: Okay. 8 Q: And the first paragraph of that entry 9 reads: 10 "Marcel Beaubien was discussing with 11 Dale Linton about having a public 12 meeting. Dale Linton advised that 13 Chris Coles had told them they would be 14 talking about having a meeting." 15 Now, do you recall a discussion around 16 whether or not a public meeting should be held? 17 A: Oh, I'm sure we -- like I said I was, 18 you know, looking for anything so I'm sure that we 19 probably talked about it. I don't recall it, but I'm 20 sure we did. 21 Q: All right. Next paragraph: 22 "Dale Linton suggested that when Marcel 23 Beaubien and Fred Thomas meet with 24 Chief Coles and Superintendent Parkin 25 that they discuss the issue of having a

238

1 public meeting." 2 Does that refresh your memory? 3 A: I don't even remember if Fred Thomas 4 and I met with Superintendent Chris Coles. 5 Q: All right. Later, further on in this 6 entry, halfway through it reads: 7 "Advised Marcel Beaubien the status of 8 the injured parties." 9 Does that coincide with your recollection? 10 A: Yeah. They probably mentioned that 11 two (2), you know, they mentioned that two (2) other 12 individuals had been hurt, but to the extent, I don't 13 think they were aware at that particular point in time. 14 Q: All right. 15 "Explained the circumstances of the 16 shooting situation to Marcel Beaubien." 17 Is that consistent with your recollection? 18 A: Yes, I would agree with that. 19 Q: "Dale Linton seized the guns of the 20 officers that were involved in 21 situation and their other equipment is 22 to be collected today." 23 Now, do you recall what that was in -- 24 with respect to? 25 A: No, I don't think he mentioned that

239

1 to me; I don't recall that. I can't see why he would 2 mention it to me; that's an operational issue, so. 3 Q: Do you recall any discussion about 4 whether or not the Special Investigations Unit was going 5 to be involved? 6 A: No. 7 Q: All right. Next paragraph: 8 "Marcel Beaubien inquiring to Dale 9 Linton when Chief Coles wants to have a 10 meeting. Dale Linton responded that 11 Chief Coles wanted Marcel Beaubien to 12 pick a time to meet. Marcel Beaubien 13 was inquiring if he could be of any 14 assistance to us. Dale Linton stated 15 that he would have to talk to Chief 16 Coles. Dale Linton advised that 17 attempt murder charges may be laid." 18 Now, do you recall any discussion around 19 attempt murder charges? 20 A: No. 21 Q: All right. Last paragraph: 22 "Marcel Beaubien advised that he would 23 go to Grand Bend to meet Chief Coles. 24 Marcel Beaubien leaves the Command 25 Trailer at 7:17 a.m."

240

1 Now, do you have any recollection about 2 having a meeting with Chief Coles in Grand Bend on the 3 7th or later? 4 A: Well, I alluded to the fact that I 5 had met with Chief Coles in Grand Bend but I couldn't 6 remember the time, so I would imagine that we've nailed 7 it now. 8 Q: Well, let -- let's be clear. 9 A: Yeah. I don't deny that. I -- I 10 know I met with the Chief in Grand Bend, so I would 11 imagine that's -- that's correct. 12 Q: Do -- how many times do you recall 13 meeting with the Chief in Grand Bend? 14 A: Once. 15 Q: Once? Okay. And do you recall -- 16 first of all, did -- do you recall -- do you recall 17 having that meeting? 18 A: Oh, yeah. 19 Q: And what was the purpose of that 20 meeting? 21 A: Well, I'm sure, like I can't recall 22 exactly what we talked about, but I'm sure that we would 23 be talking about the repercussions in dealing with the 24 situation in somebody's just lost a life and a couple of 25 people have been injured.

241

1 You know, it's a serious situation and 2 would it have given me concern? You bet it would. 3 And how do we diffuse the situation? How 4 do we deal with it? Again, I would certainly be looking 5 for advice from anybody in trying to deal because, again, 6 I'm the local provincial representative and I'm sure 7 people are going to be looking at me. 8 Q: And did Chief Superintendent Coles 9 provide you with some guidance as to how to respond to 10 your constituents and how to diffuse -- 11 A: I don't recall. 12 Q: All right. Did anyone else attend at 13 this meeting with you? 14 A: No, there was just the two (2) of us. 15 Q: Was there any discussion about having 16 a public meeting at that time? 17 A: Oh, I'm sure it's probably -- again, 18 I -- I don't recall the discussion, but I'm not going to 19 deny that it, you know, didn't come up as a subject of 20 discussion. 21 Q: I'm just -- it's important that you 22 tell me what your recollection is so -- 23 A: Yeah. I don't recall. 24 Q: All right. Do you recall whether any 25 concerns were expressed by Chief Superintendent Coles to

242

1 you about your interactions with the police over the past 2 two (2) days? 3 A: No. 4 Q: All right. Let's move onto Tab 27 5 please. And it's Inquiry Document Number 1006197, 6 Exhibit 7 P-954. 8 And it appears to be a letter from the 9 Office of the Premier dated September 7 to Marcel 10 Beaubien from Bill King and it reads: 11 "My suggested response is as follows." 12 And it's a draft response to Chief 13 Bressette. Now, first of all, can you tell me what the - 14 - what gave rise to this draft? 15 A: Well, I think we have some 16 documentation somewhere. But on the morning or afternoon 17 of September 7th, I received a call from Dennis Martel -- 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: -- who I'd met before because he had 20 initiated a meeting in London with the Southwestern 21 Ontario -- can't remember, Native Council, I think, is -- 22 is the proper name. 23 And, but anyway, on September 7th Dennis 24 had called me to invite me to attend at Kettle Point, 25 because Ovide Mercredi was coming that afternoon or late

243

1 afternoon and he was inviting me. And I didn't know what 2 I should do so I contacted Bill King and Bill King sent 3 me this fax to respond to Dennis' -- Dennis Martel's 4 invitation. 5 Q: And who did you understand Dennis 6 Martel to be acting on behalf of when he extended the 7 invitation? 8 A: Well, in my dealings with Dennis in 9 the previous couple months, I knew that he was 10 representing the Southwestern Nations -- Southwestern 11 Ontario Nations -- First Nations. 12 And I would imagine that he was probably 13 speaking or was a spokesman for Kettle Point at this 14 point in time, I don't know, I never asked. 15 Q: All right. And what was Mr. King's 16 advice with respect to whether or not you should attend 17 at this meeting? 18 A: Well the fax speaks for itself. It 19 says: 20 "Thank you very much for your --" 21 Or: 22 "Thank you so much for the kind offer I 23 received today to meet with you. As 24 your MPP I would be more than happy to 25 meet with you following a peaceful

244

1 resolution of the current situation now 2 underway at Ipperwash Provincial Park. 3 Thanking you for letting me know of 4 your desire to work in co-operation." 5 Now, this fax is addressed to Tom 6 Bressette, but I think there's correspondence here that I 7 sent this to Dennis Martel. 8 Q: Yes. And we will get to that in -- 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: -- just one minute. But can I ask 11 you: Was it -- was it your understanding that the advice 12 you were receiving from Mr. King, from the Office of the 13 Premier, that you -- you would not -- you should not be 14 having any meetings at Kettle and Stony Point until after 15 the occupation was resolved? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: Did you have any understanding as to 18 what informed that advice? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Or the rationale behind not meeting 21 with the -- 22 A: No. 23 Q: -- Chiefs or...? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Did you agree with that advice?

245

1 A: No. If there's one thing I would do 2 differently, I think -- and there's only one thing that I 3 would do differently, is that I probably would have 4 attended that meeting. 5 Q: And why is that? 6 A: Well, I think, if we look at it, the 7 Federal Government came in -- Mr. Irwin came in, you 8 know, with the documentation apparently dating back to 9 the '30's, whereby he had proof of a -- a burial ca -- or 10 a burial site at Camp Ipperwash. 11 If he was in possession of that 12 documentation, I ask why it was not divulged prior to 13 that. I'm sure he probably had it in his hands before. 14 And, in retrospect, I regret not being 15 there. But maybe it was a good thing that I wasn't there 16 because I don't know how I would have reacted if he would 17 have grandstanded after a tragic incident like a shoot -- 18 the loss of a -- of a life. 19 Q: If it would have been seen that way, 20 you mean? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: All right. If you go to Tab 29, this 23 is Inquiry Document Number -- oh, and I -- I'm sorry, we 24 should make that last -- let me just check. 25 All right. Up to Tab 29, please, Inquiry

246

1 Document Number 12000074. This appears to be a letter 2 dated September 7, 1995 from yourself to Dennis Martel. 3 A: That' correct. 4 Q: And is this the letter that you sent 5 to Mr. Martel declining the invitation to meet? 6 A: Yeah. It was a fax that I sent him, 7 yeah. 8 Q: I would like to make this the next 9 exhibit. 10 THE REGISTRAR: P-1032, Your Honour. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1032: Document Number 12000074. 14 Letter from Marcel Beaubien 15 to Dennis Martel, September 16 07/'95. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: And if we go next to Tab 30, Exhibit 20 P-955, Inquiry Document 1006198, it appears that you sent 21 a copy of that letter to Mr. King? 22 A: That's correct. 23 Q: And was that pursuant to his request? 24 A: I don't recall. 25 Q: All right. And did you also fax to

247

1 him the attached media articles? 2 A: I don't know. 3 Q: It does indicate a fax transmission 4 line at the top of page 3 of the fax: 5 "Queen's Park to take hardline against 6 Park occupiers, Beaubien." 7 A: I don't know what -- you know I don't 8 know. There's a couple of articles after that. I don't 9 know if I faxed that with that letter. I doubt it. 10 Q: Well, if you just have a look, I'm 11 just trying to assist you, the first page indicates that 12 there is four (4) pages -- 13 A: Four (4) pages? 14 Q: -- in the fax. 15 A: Well, then maybe there's four (4) 16 pages. That would be four (4) pages. I would say that 17 it probably went. 18 Q: All right. Thank you. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: I wonder if you would next go to Tab 23 28 please, Inquiry Document Number 12000073? 24 And this is a memorandum to PC Caucus 25 members from Marnie Corbold, Special Assistant Policy

248

1 dated September 7, 1995, re. Update Incident at Ipperwash 2 Provincial Park. 3 And did you receive this memorandum and 4 the attachments? 5 A: I would think we probably did. I 6 don't recall, but I'm sure we did. 7 Q: And attached is a copy of an OPP 8 press release dated September 7, 1995. Do you recall 9 reviewing that? 10 A: I'm sure we received that, yes. 11 Q: All right. I'd like to make this the 12 next exhibit please? 13 THE REGISTRAR: P-1033, Your Honour. 14 15 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1033: Document Number 12000073. 16 Memorandum to PC Caucus 17 Members from Marnie Corbold, 18 attaching OPP Press Release, 19 September 07, 1995. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 22 Q: Now, as a matter of practice when 23 would this type of communication be distributed to the 24 Caucus members? 25 A: You're asking a good question. I

249

1 imagine they were probably faxed the information. 2 Q: Yes, but what was the practice -- I'm 3 sorry. This appears to have been distributed to all 4 Caucus members -- 5 A: Hmm hmm. 6 Q: -- not just yourself and what types - 7 - what types of documents would be sent to Caucus 8 members, was it events that high public profile or what 9 types? 10 A: Well, you know, somebody's lost a 11 life and a couple of people are injured. You know, it's 12 a serious situation and I'm sure probably my colleagues 13 probably would like to be apprised of what is going on in 14 -- in the riding. 15 So, I would only conclude that it would be 16 prudent to send some type of briefing notes to each 17 constituency office or your office at Queen's Park so 18 that they're aware of the situation. 19 Q: All right. Now, did any other events 20 of significance occur in and around the Park on September 21 the 7th that came to your attention? 22 A: Oh, all hell broke loose. There were 23 so many things. Where do we start? 24 I was -- you know, like I said it was not 25 a -- it was not an interesting situation. I mean, you

250

1 know, there was burning of tires on the roads, roadblocks 2 all over the area. 3 The level of tension with the people I 4 talked to on the phone or personally was unbelievable. 5 The level of frustration, the concern for their safety 6 was certainly prevalent and I certainly heard that from 7 different individuals that, you know, we're going to arm 8 ourselves and we're going to deal with and, you know, 9 we're going to protect ourselves. 10 So, it was -- it was not a pretty sight. 11 Q: And did -- did you stay in -- in the 12 area on that day? Did you go down to the area? 13 A: I spent -- I spent a lot of time, 14 again, trying to appease people. It was difficult to 15 travel through the township because there so many 16 roadblocks but you were able to get to certain 17 destinations but you know it was -- it was challenging. 18 Q: And were you aware of -- of a march 19 that occurred from Kettle Point? 20 A: A what? 21 Q: A march? 22 A: I think I was made aware. I don't 23 recall when but... 24 Q: Okay. Did you have any discussions 25 with any Ministers or the Premier on the 7th about the

251

1 events? 2 A: Not to the best of my recollection. 3 Q: All right. Moving to September the 4 8th, then. Where were you on September the 8th? 5 A: I can't recall. 6 Q: Perhaps, you would go to... 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: Do you recall attending at a -- at 11 the Western Fair? 12 A: Yes, I was the speaker at the opening 13 of Western Fair. 14 Q: And was that on September the 8th? 15 A: I don't know. I can't recall. 16 Q: Okay. Do you recall having any 17 interactions on that occasion with respect to Ipperwash? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Can you tell us about that? 20 A: Well, at the head table, the Chief of 21 Police of London, at that time, Chief Julian Fantino was 22 present and he was sitting -- I don't know if he was 23 sitting next to me or two (2) people away from me, and 24 during the meal he asked me if I had some time after the 25 presentation.

252

1 I said, sure. And so we went to the side 2 of the room and he informed me at that time, he -- well, 3 first of all he asked me if I was aware that there was an 4 armoured vehicle or personnel vehicle -- armoured 5 personnel vehicle at -- in Forest. 6 Q: And who was this? 7 A: Chief -- 8 Q: Fantino? 9 A: -- Chief Fantino. 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: I said, no. I had heard rumours that 12 there, you know, the day before or -- that such vehicle 13 was in the area, but I was not aware of that. 14 And he said that they had a request from 15 the OPP to -- I can't remember if it was one (1) or two 16 (2) but certainly one (1), that they wanted the armoured 17 personnel vehicle in Forest. 18 And then he proceeded to explain to me why 19 that vehicle was sent. Apparently the vehicle was given 20 to them by General Motors at the time and the vehicle 21 could only use for defensive purposes, not offensive 22 purposes. 23 Q: Right, this is what he told you? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Yeah. Carry on.

253

1 A: So, you know, with all the 2 interaction I had with the police and everything else, 3 you know, I knew that they weren't telling me everything. 4 They didn't have to tell me everything, because I was not 5 interested in knowing what their operational tactics 6 were. 7 But that's how little information that I 8 had. I mean, I obtained my information, bits and pieces, 9 from different individual. 10 Q: What -- 11 A: And I was somewhat surprised that 12 nobody would apprise me officially that this type of 13 vehicle would be in the riding, because it's not a piece 14 of equipment that you see on the road on a daily basis. 15 And so I appreciated the information that was passed on 16 to me by the Chief. 17 But -- so then when I started receiving 18 calls about -- from constituents about this vehicle being 19 in the area, I acknowledged the fact, Yes, there is a 20 unit in Forest. And I explained as to what they could do 21 with the unit from the explanation that Chief Fantino had 22 given me. 23 Q: All right. If we could move to Tab 24 31. It's Exhibit P-956, Inquiry Document 1006200. It's 25 a fax to Bill King from yourself and it encloses a letter

254

1 dated September 7, 1995. Starts, "Dear Mr. Harris". 2 Now, did you send this fax? 3 A: Yes, because the constituents asked 4 me if I would ask, as the fax states, that if I could 5 pass it on to the Premier's office, which I did. 6 Q: And what was the general content of 7 this letter that you passed on? 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: It says -- it says: 12 "Just -- just a word of encouragement. 13 Keep on with your common sense. 14 You are absolutely right when you allow 15 the OPP to do their job and the Ontario 16 Government to do their job. The 17 Federal Government didn't do theirs. 18 We live [name removed and location] off 19 the Military and we are fed up with 20 babysitting the tourists. People here 21 have been harassed each week -- each 22 weekend as they have not been aware of 23 the [something] situation as they walk 24 to the beach." 25 And again there's some information

255

1 removed. 2 "And we have the area the -- the last 3 few days have given us hope that our 4 new government is really for the right 5 of people. Affectionately -- 6 affectionately [name removed]." 7 Q: Now, did this -- did you receive 8 other types of correspondence expressing this type of 9 sentiment? 10 A: Yes, we did and we received calls, 11 both for and against. 12 Q: For and against what? 13 A: Well, in support of the Government 14 and against -- you know, not supporting the government. 15 Q: All right. So there developed a 16 mixed -- mixed reactions -- 17 A: That's right, yeah. 18 Q: -- to what had happened over the 19 course of the 6th, the evening of the 6th? 20 A: Well, yeah. Around -- around the -- 21 the 7th, you know. 22 Q: All right. 23 A: Yeah, around the -- September 7th. 24 Q: And if you look next at Tab 32 it's 25 Inquiry Document 12000076 dated September 8th, 1995, at

256

1 the top there are some redactions here, but do you 2 recognize the -- this document? 3 A: Yeah. Again that's a log from one of 4 the office staff. I don't know which -- whose writing 5 that is but again one (1) notation is phoning in support 6 of the police: 7 "Take stand on land issue." 8 And then the other one has been discussing 9 the slanted report -- reporting by press. 10 "They are contacting press reminding 11 them breaking the law is the issue." 12 Q: Okay. I don't think we need to -- 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: -- read the whole document. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: But does this reflect -- 17 A: This reflects some of the calls we 18 were getting in the office on September the 8th, yes. 19 Q: All right. I'd like to make this the 20 next exhibit please? 21 THE REGISTRAR: P-1034, Your Honour. 22 23 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1034: Document Number 12000076. 24 Beaubien Constituency Office 25 telephone call notes,

257

1 September 08/'95. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 4 Q: Go next to Tab 33 please? This is 5 Inquiry Document 12000077. It's a further memorandum to 6 Caucus members, PC Caucus members, from Marnie Corbold. 7 And this one is dated September 8th, 1995, referencing 8 additional releases on the incident at Ipperwash 9 Provincial Park. 10 And it attaches or encloses an OPP news 11 release of September 8th, Solicitor -- Ministry of 12 Solicitor General and Correctional Services historical 13 backgrounder of September 8th, and it's the Special 14 Investigations Unit update release of September the 8th. 15 And did you receive this document? 16 A: I'm sure we did. 17 Q: Make this the next exhibit please? 18 THE REGISTRAR: P-1035, Your Honour. 19 20 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1035: Document Number 12000077. 21 Memorandum to PC Caucus 22 Members from Marnie Corbold 23 attaching: 1. OPP News 24 Release dated Sept.08/95; 25 2.Historical Backgrounder;

258

1 3. Special Investigations 2 Unit Update; September 08, 3 1995. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: If we go to Tab 34, please. This is 7 Exhibit P-957, Inquiry Document 12000079, fax from Bill 8 King executive assistant to the Premier to all PC Caucus 9 members, dated September 8th, enclosing the official 10 transcripts of the Premier's comments to the media 11 regarding the Native standoff at Ipperwash, and then the 12 -- the Quebec Referendum question. 13 Did you receive this? 14 A: I don't recall receiving it, but I'm 15 not going to deny not receiving it. 16 Q: All right. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: In your view were you receiving 21 sufficient information from the Government in the days 22 following September the 6th, sufficient for you to do 23 your job as the local MPP with respect to this matter? 24 A: It was my personal opinion that I was 25 not.

259

1 Q: And what further information did you 2 think you should be receiving at this time? 3 A: Well, it's -- as I said yesterday I'm 4 not an expert in dealing with Native Affairs issues and 5 it would have been nice maybe to have some better 6 communication and maybe some type of direction from 7 Queen's Park but there was none coming. 8 Q: If we go next to Tab 36, please. 9 It's Inquiry Document 12000086. This appears to be a 10 handwritten note dated September 11, 1995, addressed to 11 you. And did you receive this note? 12 A: Oh, I'm sure we did. 13 Q: And is it from a constituent? 14 A: It's from a constituent by the looks 15 of it, yeah. 16 Q: All right. Perhaps you can read it 17 to yourself and then advise whether you have any 18 recollection about what this was about. 19 A: Okay, it says, 20 "Re. Ipperwash Problem, Sunday 21 September 10th, '95 2:00 p.m. People 22 upset because OPP have pulled back. 23 Native police on patrol with warrior? 24 [question mark] in back seat. Do not 25 feel they have adequate protection."

260

1 Second point is: 2 "Informal gathering at [it's blank] I 3 was pressured into calling you on 4 Sunday." 5 Third point is; 6 "Talk of vigilante action. This is a 7 no-no." 8 And the last point is: 9 "Something [blank] and I spent time on 10 Sunday trying to calm people down and 11 will continue this afternoon and 12 tomorrow." 13 Q: Now, did you follow up on the -- the 14 information you received in this note, particularly with 15 respect to the, quote, "talk of vigilante action"? 16 A: Oh, I'm sure I would have. 17 Q: And what's your recollection of that? 18 A: Well, I don't really recall, because 19 I can't see the name here. If I would have the name in 20 my original notes I probably could recall, but just 21 looking at this I can't recall. 22 But I alluded to the fact that people were 23 very frustrated and there was talk of vigilante action. 24 Q: Hmm hmm. 25 A: And I'm sure that there was a couple

261

1 of individuals over here that do not agree with this and 2 I'm sure I would be working with them, in conjunction 3 with them, to try to diffuse the situation. 4 Q: All right, I'd like to make this the 5 next exhibit, please. 6 THE REGISTRAR: P-1036, Your Honour. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1036: Document Number 12000086. 9 Handwritten Memorandum re: 10 Ipperwash Problem, September 11 11, 1995. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 14 Q: Now, did you become aware that the 15 government had withdrawn it's application for an 16 injunction? 17 A: I became aware, but not when they did 18 it. I -- subsequent to removing it, yes. 19 Q: All right. So they didn't consult 20 you in advance? 21 A: No. 22 Q: They didn't give you a heads up? 23 A: No. 24 Q: And what was your reaction when you 25 found out?

262

1 A: Well, again, it's a legal matter. So 2 I felt that there must be a reason why they're doing it. 3 Q: Did you start -- did you receive 4 enquiries or comments from your constituents once it 5 became known that the injunction application had been 6 withdrawn? 7 A: Oh, yes, and the record will show 8 that. 9 Q: And what was the nature of those -- 10 those -- the reaction -- 11 A: Well, I, you know, I guess to 12 generalize the comments that I was receiving is that the 13 government was shirking their responsibility and not 14 upholding the law. 15 Q: And if you look at Tab 37, Exhibit P- 16 958, 1006199. This appears to be a note from you to Bill 17 King, who was with the -- the executive assistant at the 18 office of the Premier. 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And is this a note you sent to him? 21 A: That's a note that I sent to him that 22 I wrote personally. 23 Q: All right. And was this in the 24 aftermath of finding out that the injunction had not been 25 removed?

263

1 A: That would be a fair assumption. 2 Q: All right. And you say in point 3 number 2, 4 "I can take the heat but will not be 5 the fall guy." 6 Now, can you tell me what that was in 7 reference to? 8 A: Oh, I know some people, you know, it 9 all depends which political stripes you belong to, but I 10 think if you look at what I talked about yesterday and -- 11 and today, that I felt that I was not getting any help 12 from Queen's Park and I may go against the grain here, 13 Your Honour, but I will refer to a document, personal 14 document that I have. 15 But I felt that I was not getting any help 16 from Queen's Park and I was passing a fair amount of 17 information to them. 18 And what I was trying to convey was the 19 fact that, don't come back after this -- this incident 20 and tell me that you weren't aware of what was going on, 21 because I was trying to give you as much information as I 22 could. 23 They want the finger pointed at me that 24 they weren't aware of what was going on in this area. I 25 made them well aware of what was going on.

264

1 Q: And did you receive any indication 2 from the government that -- that they were thinking of 3 making a scapegoat of you? 4 A: No, just a personal feeling. 5 Q: All right. 6 A: But if I refer -- and you know, you 7 can have this for the record, but this is a fax that I 8 sent -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 10 what -- 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Can I just -- yeah, I 12 don't -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 14 minute. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We didn't -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 17 what this -- 18 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We haven't received 19 notice of this document. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you know 21 what this is, Mr. Sulman? 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I don't think it -- 23 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: No, I don't. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, I don't 25 know what --

265
  1                 MR. JULIAN FALCONER:   Is it possible, Mr.
  2  Commissioner, that we could take a two (2) minute break,
  3  because the document may well be important.
  4                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   Well --
  5                 MR. JULIAN FALCONER:   Take a two (2)
  6  minute break, take a look at the document through your
  7  Counsel and then know where to go from there?
  8                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   We don't
  9  have to leave the room.  You can just --
 10                 MS. SUSAN VELLA:   I'll just have a look
 11  at it.
 12                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   That's fine. 
 13  Then Mr. --
 14                 MR. JULIAN FALCONER:   Then it will be --
 15                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   Perhaps you
 16  want to consult with Mr. Sulman?
 17                 MR. JULIAN FALCONER:   But other counsel
 18  will want to see it as well.
 19                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   Well let's
 20  just let counsel and let Commission Counsel look at it.
 21                 THE WITNESS:   It's not very long.
 22  
 23                       (BRIEF PAUSE)
 24  
 25                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   If you think

266

1 we should take a break, we will. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I -- obviously this is 6 a document we haven't seen. The witness wishes to refer 7 to it. I don't have a particular objection except that 8 we'll need to make copies for everyone so that they can 9 review it, then -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is it a long 11 document? 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, it's a very short 13 document. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So the 15 witness can refer to it and then we can have copies made 16 for everybody. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: All right. I think 18 that's fair. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is that fair 20 enough? 21 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yeah. And I should 22 indicate it's dated July 24th, 1996. And it's a fax -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is it 24 relevant in any way, Ms. Vella, do you think? 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I think -- it's -- it

267

1 pertains to what he's just said, what the witness has 2 just said. I think it's fine to make reference to the 3 document and we'll make copies to others. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you need 5 the document to say what you want to say, Mr. Beaubien? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes, but that's the 7 problem, Mr. Commissioner. 8 THE WITNESS: Sure, Your Honour, the 9 question was asked -- 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well hang on. Sorry, 11 there's an objection. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 13 this was my concern. I mean counsel, at least on behalf 14 of their respective clients, have to be in a position to 15 know whether they should be objecting or not to the 16 reference to the document. 17 Now, if we don't want to take the two (2) 18 minutes it takes to distribute copies, then maybe we can 19 all look over Ms. Vella's shoulder, at least read the one 20 page and be satisfied we can discharge our obligations. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, we'll 22 take two (2) minutes and -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you, I 24 appreciate it. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll take

268

1 two (2) minutes. 2 Yes, Mr. Rosenthal...? 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Mr. Commissioner, 4 may I make another suggestion to avoid another two (2) 5 minute break. It looked like this was the top of a pile 6 of documents that he had. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 8 don't know whether -- 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Could he -- no, of 10 course we don't know. But could it be ascertained 11 whether there are any other documents that he has that 12 have not been disclosed and could those be copied on the 13 break as well so we don't have to break again. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is there 15 anything else that your planning to use? Mr. Beaubien, 16 is there any other documents you're planning to use. 17 THE WITNESS: No. It says two (2) pages, 18 I only have the one (1) page. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well that's 20 fine. Well then let's take a minute and have you make a 21 copy. 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: He took it from the 23 top of a -- a file there -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 25 what that is. It could be a laundry list, you don't

269

1 know -- 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We'll look at the 3 documents but it's not been referred to in the evidence 4 and so -- 5 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess. 6 7 --- Upon recessing at 3:39 p.m. 8 --- Upon resuming at 3:47 p.m. 9 10 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 11 resumed. Please be seated. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Commissioner, I've had 14 an opportunity to review the -- the fax and letter that 15 Mr. Beaubien was proposing to speak to. We've 16 distributed copies to all counsel. 17 It's my -- it refers to an event that 18 occurred in 1996 and my respectful submission is not 19 relevant and I don't intend to ask any questions with 20 respect to this document. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Then let's 22 move on. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: The others have it, but 24 I don't think it's relevant to the question that I asked. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well then

270

1 let's move on. 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: There's one other item 3 that Mr. Sulman will address. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 5 Sulman? 6 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Your Honour, I take 7 no position with regard to the submissions of My Friend. 8 It's just that I want to clarify your record because 9 there was suggestion that there was another packet of 10 documents that was attached. 11 And I'm going -- I'm going to clear that 12 up for you -- for your record. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, thank 14 you very much. 15 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I hope you'll -- 16 this will be appreciated. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 18 I understand what it is, Mr. Sulman, I was advised out 19 there. 20 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Yes. But I would 21 like to get it on the record for you. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 23 put it on the record. 24 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: And it simply is a - 25 - an interim reporting letter from me to my client and,

271

1 therefore, I take the position that it's privileged. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 3 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Attached to it are 4 documents that I seek no privilege over because they're 5 transcripts of this proceeding so. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 7 We can't have every document -- 8 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Absolutely. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 Let's move on. I want everybody to know that everything 11 that's relevant is being produced. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 13 Ms. Vella is under absolutely no obligations to ask 14 questions about this document; that's fair. But -- but - 15 - and -- and other counsel will have their day. The 16 issue is this, though. A witness has said: 17 "And in dealing with this I have in 18 mind a piece of paper." 19 And he was stopped quite properly because 20 no one had seen it. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Because it's 22 irrelevant. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, but I've looked 24 at the piece of paper and it may well be that this 25 Witness finds a reference he made in July 1996 to,

272

1 overall, what he felt back in September/95. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And as a result, if 4 he thinks that there's a tie between the two (2), since 5 he obviously did when he sought to refer to it -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- he should be 8 allowed to speak. Now I'm not saying that Ms. Vella 9 should be asking -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So do you 11 want to ask him that on cross-examination? 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No. He was cut off 13 halfway through his answer. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Because he-- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's what -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: A witness 17 doesn't know what's relevant and what isn't and he 18 pulled -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, he -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- a 21 document out of his briefcase. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I've looked 23 at it and on its face, Mr. Commissioner, the linkage he 24 sought to draw -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes.

273

1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- could well be 2 reasonable in his mind. I simply don't want to cut off a 3 witness' answer. If you, in your wisdom, Mr. 4 Commissioner, think that he should be cut off, fair 5 enough. I just think he was going to say something -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- he should be 8 allowed to say it. But on the other hand you -- you may 9 feel he shouldn't. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He doesn't 11 have to refer to the document to make it complicated. He 12 wanted to say something and I believe he said it. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So, I don't 15 think he's got anything more to add on this. Did you 16 have anything more to add on this? 17 THE WITNESS: No, I'm sorry I brought it 18 up. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 20 Let's move on then. That explains it, Mr. Falconer, he's 21 sorry he brought it up. Let's move on. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 24 Q: Now, do you recall attending at a 25 public meeting on or about September the 12th, 1995 with,

274
  1  amongst others, the Solicitor General?
  2                 A:   Where was the meeting?
  3                 Q:   Sorry?
  4                 A:   Where was that meeting?
  5                 Q:   Well, do you recall there being a
  6  public meeting in the vicinity --
  7                 A:   There was a public meeting in
  8  Thedford but I don't know -- I don't think the Solicitor
  9  General was there.  I think it was the...
 10                 Q:   All right.  
 11                 A:   To the best of my recollection I
 12  don't care -- I don't think he was there.  Oh, you -- you
 13  mean maybe a meeting with -- in my office, in my
 14  constituency office?
 15                 Q:   Well, let's go to -- let's go to Tab
 16  39, Inquiry Document 12000094.
 17                 A:   Hmm hmm.
 18                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   I'm sorry,
 19  what tab was that, Ms. Vella?
 20                 MS. SUSAN VELLA:   Tab 39.
 21                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   39?
 22  
 23  CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA:   
 24                 Q:   This is a letter from Carol McKenzie
 25  at the Town of Bosanquet dated September 12, 1995 and

275

1 it's addressed to you and it says, in part: 2 "The following people have confirmed 3 their attendance at the 2:30 p.m. 4 meeting with the Solicitor General this 5 afternoon." 6 A: Now -- now I know which meeting 7 you're -- you're talking or you're referring to. 8 Q: All right. So perhaps you can expand 9 on it then? 10 A: Excuse me. If -- I requested a 11 meeting with the Solicitor General and the meeting was 12 held in my constituency office in Petrolia. The first 13 part of the meeting was with -- I can't remember if it 14 was the residents or the elected official, but there was 15 two (2) -- it was a two (2) part meeting. 16 One (1) part was with the elected 17 officials and the Clerk of the Township of Bosanquet sent 18 me a list as to whom would be representing the elected 19 official for the area. 20 The second part of the meeting was with 21 the residents of Ipperwash. And the purpose of the 22 meeting: I wanted to demonstrate to the Solicitor 23 General the seriousness of the issue, the level of the -- 24 of the tension, the frustration of the people and I 25 wanted him to see it firsthand as opposed to receiving

276

1 fax or phone calls from me or anybody else. 2 So I -- I was just trying to stress the 3 seriousness of the issue that we were dealing with. 4 Q: All right. And let's make this 5 document 12000094 the next exhibit please? 6 THE REGISTRAR: 1037, Your Honour. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1037: Document Number 12000094. 9 Letter from Carol McKenzie to 10 Marcel Beaubien re. Meeting 11 with Solicitor General, 12 September 12, 1995. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 15 Q: All right. And did the meeting 16 occur? 17 A: Yes, it did. 18 Q: And you said there were two (2) 19 parts, the first was with just the elected officials and 20 the Clerk of the town? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: And -- and was the Solicitor General 23 present? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And what transpired during that

277

1 meeting? 2 A: Well, basically, I don't recall the, 3 you know, the -- the exact discussion but I'm, you know, 4 they certainly expounded their -- their concerns, their - 5 - and the frustration that they were feeling; and that 6 was both the elected official and the residents of the 7 area. 8 Q: All right. And perhaps you could go 9 to Tab 47. This is Inquiry document 1006201, Exhibit P- 10 959. It's a fax to Bill King from yourself. And if you 11 go into this document to the fifth page you'll see -- so 12 page 5 of the fax: 13 "Town of Bosanquet press release, 18 14 September, 1995." 15 And there appears to be a report on the 16 meeting with Bob Runciman, Solicitor General, of 17 September the 12th. 18 Do you see that? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And does this short summary adequate 21 -- or accurately reflect the concerns or the issues that 22 were raised with the Solicitor General? 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

278

1 A: Yeah, I would stand by what the 2 Township of Bosanquet issued. 3 Q: Do you recall what the Solicitor 4 General's response was to -- to this presentation? 5 A: No, I don't, I'm sorry. 6 Q: Did he make any representations or 7 promises on behalf of the Government with respect to the 8 occupation? 9 A: I don't recall. 10 Q: All right. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 Q: Did you continue to receive concerns 15 from your constituents with respect to the Park 16 occupation? 17 A: Well there was concern, not only with 18 the Park occupation, but other concerns with policing, 19 with harassment and... 20 Q: And if you look at Tab -- I'm going 21 to ask you to look at a number of tabs, Tab 40, which is 22 Inquiry document 12000097, date -- date stamped September 23 17, it looks like,1995, addressed to the Honourable Ron 24 Irwin. 25 And then a letter at Tab 42 dated

279

1 September 14, 1995, Inquiry document number 12000105 2 addressed to you. 3 A letter at Tab 43 dated -- sorry, dated 4 September 16, 1995, Inquiry document 12000101 addressed 5 to you. 6 And a letter at Tab 44, Inquiry document 7 12000108 dated September 18, 1995 also addressed to you. 8 And it happens to be a response, it looks -- from you, on 9 the next page, September 22nd, 1995. 10 Now, are these all letters that you 11 received and/or sent? 12 A: Yes, these would be samples of 13 letters that we had received in the constituency office, 14 pursuant to the incident on September. 15 Q: I'd like to make this next group of 16 documents the next exhibit, please. 17 THE REGISTRAR: P-1038, Your Honour. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 THE REGISTRAR: Including Tabs 40, 42, 43 20 and 44. 21 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That's right. 22 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 24 25 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1038: Document Numbers 12000097,

280

1 12000105, 12000101, 12000108. 2 Letters to Marcel Beaubien 3 from residents, September 4 1995. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: Now, did you receive any complaints 8 or concerns from your constituents with respect to the 9 alleged racist conduct of any police officer related to 10 the Ipperwash matter, at all? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And can you tell me what the nature 13 of that -- that complaint or concerns were? 14 A: To the best of my recollection, I 15 think it was one individual who had, I think, was a 16 grandchild that was attending school in Moortown or 17 Corunna. 18 And I knew the individual because she is - 19 - she is a Native, but she was a client of mine when I 20 was in the insurance business and I grew up with her 21 also, in Bluewater, that I alluded to yesterday. 22 So I had known this individual for, God, 23 probably forty (40) years and -- it's a long time, and 24 she sent me -- I don't know if she called, she did call 25 the office, but I don't know if she called at that

281

1 particular time, but she did send me a fax with regards - 2 - and we do have a -- I think, a fax from her. 3 But to the best of my recollection, is 4 that some police officer was doing some public relation 5 work with the school and apparently a racist remark was 6 made during his presentation. 7 Q: And do you recall what the 8 presentation was in relation to? 9 A: Some school event, I can't, you know, 10 I can't recall exactly. 11 Q: Could you go to Tab 45, please, 12 Inquiry Document Number 12000113? And the first page is 13 a letter dated September 18, 1995 addressed to Charles 14 Harnick and we see that it's from Corunna, Ontario. 15 And is this the letter, or at least the 16 complaint that you're referring to? 17 A: That's correct, yes. 18 Q: And according to this -- okay it 19 says, in part: 20 "I am greatly concerned that the rel--" 21 Sorry. 22 "Enclosed you will find a letter that 23 I've asked to be placed before the 24 negotiating committees which are 25 dealing with the situations at

282

1 Ipperwash and Stoney Point. I am 2 greatly concerned that the relationship 3 between Native and non Native people is 4 being further strained by the behaviour 5 of the Ontario Provincial Police. An 6 officer is visiting the school and 7 speaking about the Native people in a 8 degrading way. 9 My nephew is eight (8) years old and he 10 is Native. I believe that he was 11 harmed by the speech and appearance of 12 the officer who visited his school. 13 I request you intervene in order to 14 stop this racist conduct by any Member 15 of the Ontario Provincial Police and 16 any other person. 17 At this time our communities need 18 healing, tolerance and acceptance. We 19 must work together to stop further 20 violence and to protect all of our 21 children." 22 And I -- I -- did you receive a copy of 23 this letter? 24 A: Yes. The -- the letter was sent, I 25 think, directly to the Attorney General office along with

283

1 the Member for Sarnia at the time. 2 But, as I said, I had known this 3 individual for a number of years and she forwarded or 4 faxed a copy of the letter that she had sent. She was 5 not living in my riding at the time. 6 Q: Okay. And the next document in this 7 tab is a handwritten document addressed to Chief 8 Bressette, Myles Bressette, Bob Antone and yourself. 9 And is this a letter from the same 10 constituent? 11 A: I can't tell by the name, but I would 12 probably assume that it was. 13 Q: Was it about the same behaviour? 14 A: It's about the same -- yeah. 15 Q: All right. And the next page is a 16 document dated September 18, 1995 to Charles Harnick. 17 A: If -- if I -- to go back, it could be 18 a different letter because the first letter it says that 19 -- it talks about: 20 "My nephew is eight (8) years old..." 21 Q: Right. 22 A: The second letter mentions that "My 23 grandson is" -- oh no, I'm sorry, "is residing" -- so it 24 could be -- I'm sorry, it could be from the same 25 individual.

284

1 Q: Well let me ask... 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: And then there's -- 6 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: I was just 7 concerned, Mr. Commissioner, that the record's getting 8 confused because of the redaction of the names. And I -- 9 I have no interest in the names but -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 11 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: -- we should be able 12 to just establish this quite easily if Commission counsel 13 could -- could use the --- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Would ask the right 15 question, he's trying to say tactfully. 16 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: No, no, no. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Okay. That's no 18 problem. 19 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: No, it's just the 20 document. No, that was not my intention, Mr. 21 Commissioner. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, but that's -- no, 23 no, that's fine, I'm making a note of this, that's no 24 problem. 25

285

1 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 2 Q: Let's try to be clear for the record. 3 A: I didn't block the names, by the way. 4 Q: How many -- how many complaints did 5 you receive about this particular behaviour that's the 6 subject of the first letter? 7 A: Again, I'm -- again, I'm vague but I 8 wouldn't be surprised that we did get two (2) or three 9 (3) calls or a combination of calls and letters, I would 10 say two (2), three (3). 11 Q: Was there more than one (1) person 12 complaining about this behaviour? 13 A: I'm -- I'm sure there was at least 14 two (2). 15 Q: All right. 16 A: But I don't know if these two (2) 17 individuals are -- are the ones. 18 Q: Fair enough. And we have a third 19 letter, as well, as part of this production, September 20 18, 1995. And the contents are -- we don't know who 21 authored this letter but it's also giving further details 22 of inappropriate behaviour. 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: As being alleged with respect to the 25 Ontario Provincial Police and the schools of Lambton

286

1 County. And in partic -- 2 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I just have 3 something that may be of assistance -- 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Sure. 5 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- so that he -- 6 that the Witness can confirm that the letters are the 7 same. Unfortunately, he's got a redacted copy. I'm not 8 sure whether I'm coming through. 9 And we all have redacted copies, but I 10 have, I think it's seven (7) or eight (8) volumes of -- 11 of letters that we produced in -- in affidavit of 12 documents and then produced in the records, but they're 13 redacted. 14 Now, if -- if it's important to the 15 Commission and for the record that Mr. Beaubien confirm 16 that those two (2) people are the same, I can produce to 17 him the -- we don't want the names of the individual on 18 the record but he could look at the -- at the documents 19 unredacted and confirm to Ms. Vella that they are the 20 same person, if you -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 22 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- if you need that. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, I -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 25 that --

287

1 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I only offer that as 2 -- after having dug through boxes and tried to find this. 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I can advise for the 4 record that we have been made privy to the unredacted 5 correspondence and letters one (1) and two (2) are 6 authored by the same person. The third letter, which I 7 was about to go into, was authored by a different person. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 9 That satisfactory for these purposes. 10 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I -- I didn't mean 11 to interrupt -- 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, that's fine. 13 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- other than to be 14 of assistance to you, Commissioner. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I appreciate that. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 18 Q: So did you receive the third letter 19 dated September 18, 1995 and part of Inquiry Document 20 Number 12000113? 21 A: We would have received a copy of that 22 letter, yes. 23 Q: All right. And as a result of 24 receiving this information what, if anything, did you do? 25 A: Well, I don't recall, but I'm sure I

288

1 passed them on to -- even though they were sent to -- to 2 the different ministers, I'm sure I passed it on to their 3 offices, also. 4 Q: Did you do anything else to follow up 5 with respect to these complaints? 6 A: Yes, I did talk to one (1) of the -- 7 one (1) of the individuals. 8 Q: All right. And -- 9 A: Personally. 10 Q: -- to what end? 11 A: To what end? Well, just to -- to 12 find out exactly what had transpired. And, as I said, 13 I've known this individual for a number of years so I 14 felt quite comfortable in discussing the issue with her 15 and she had concerns, but basically she wanted the issue 16 brought in front of the people responsible. 17 Q: And do you know -- were you apprised 18 of what the outcome of these allegations was? 19 A: No. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: I'd like to make this the next 24 exhibit please? It's Inquiry Document Number 12000113 25 and it comprises of three (3) letters.

289

1 THE REGISTRAR: P-1039, Your Honour. 2 3 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1039: Document Number 12000113. 4 Letter to Charles Harnick. 5 Enclosing letter of Complaint 6 re. derogatory comments about 7 Aboriginal people at 8 Ipperwash by OPP officer 9 visiting local schools, 10 September 18, 1995. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 13 Q: All right. I'd like to -- I'd like 14 to have a document handed up to the Witness, please, it's 15 Inquiry Document Number 1010732, and also for the 16 Commissioner. And it's a memo dated February 5, 1996 to 17 the Honourable Ministers Runciman, Harnick, Hodgson, and 18 Cunningham from Marcel Beaubien. 19 First of all, is this a document that you 20 sent, a memo that you prepared and sent to these 21 individuals? 22 A: Pardon? 23 Q: Did you send this document? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: It's your document?

290

1 A: Yes. And it's my signature. 2 Q: I'd like to -- and it's your 3 signature? I'd like to make this the next exhibit 4 please? 5 THE REGISTRAR: And the document number 6 again, please? 7 MS. SUSAN VELLA: 1010732. 8 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you. P-1040, Your 9 Honour. 10 11 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1040: Document Number 1010732. 12 Memo to Runciman, Harnick, 13 Hodgson and Cunningham from 14 Marcel Beaubien re. Native 15 Issues Ipperwash, Feb.05/ 16 '96. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: And what was the purpose of sending 20 this memorandum to those ministers? 21 A: Well, I guess the -- the first line 22 that says: 23 "Just short note to say hello and let 24 you know that I'm still around." 25 Do you sense --

291

1 Q: Were -- 2 A: Do you sense a little bit of 3 frustration? I do. And basically what I'm suggesting 4 again is, as I said all along, is I'm trying to find some 5 common ground, trying to resolve this situation. 6 So, I'm suggesting that we have a meeting 7 in Toronto to accommodate the people in Toronto, because 8 I know if you drive from Toronto to Ipperwash it's a long 9 distance, but when you drive the other way, it's not so 10 bad. 11 And I wanted the Warden of Lambton County, 12 the Mayor of the Town of Bosanquet, the Chief of Kettle 13 and Stony First Nation, the Administrative -- the Kettle 14 and Stony Point First Nation, and representative from the 15 Stoney Point occupants of the army base. 16 And I thought I -- and I guess in my naive 17 way, that I wanted to put everybody at a table to see if 18 we could achieve something, because I believed that -- 19 remember I mentioned local solution are better than 20 solutions imposed by Ottawa or Toronto? 21 That's what I was trying to achieve. 22 Q: And did this meeting ever occur? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Did you receive any response to this 25 proposal?

292

1 A: I don't think so. 2 Q: All right. Now, we -- we have heard 3 evidence, well, let me ask you this. 4 We've heard evidence that at some point in 5 time, a mediator or -- was appointed by the Province. 6 Are you aware of that? 7 A: Oh, yes. I -- I think I alluded to 8 that fact, I think it was yesterday, that I was asking 9 for -- to appoint somebody to negotiate and one 10 individual, I forget his first name, but I think his last 11 name -- Lloyd Girman, I think was the name, I think was 12 the deputy Minister responsible for Native Affairs in 13 Manitoba, was appointed but he didn't last on the job 14 very long, and I don't know why. 15 Q: All right. 16 A: But he did meet -- I know he met with 17 the Council at Kettle and Stony and certainly with the 18 Council at Bosanquet, once, anyway. Maybe twice, but I'm 19 aware of once. 20 Q: And do you recall presenting a 21 petition relating to the Ipperwash Provincial Park to the 22 House, to the Legislature? 23 A: I can't recall, but I'm sure -- well, 24 you know, we could check Hansard and find out whether I 25 did or not.

293

1 Q: I wonder if we could present this 2 document. It's Exhibit 1016, Inquiry document number 3 1001184. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: This is a document entitled, 8 "Sessional paper Number P-58: Petition relating to 9 Ipperwash Provincial Park, Mr. M. Beaubien, Lambton, 10 March 18, 1996." 11 Does that refresh your memory? 12 A: You know, I presented many petitions 13 when -- during my years at Queen's Park, but I'm 14 certainly not going to deny that the petition, but I 15 don't recall. 16 Q: Did you receive concerns from your 17 constituents about whether or not the Park was going to 18 reopen for the 1996 summer season? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And how did you address those 21 concerns? 22 A: Well, I think shortly after the 23 occupation or shortly thereafter, I think the Ministry of 24 Natural Resources, yeah, Mr. Hodgson, had stated that the 25 Park would reopen the following summer.

294

1 And I didn't think that was a reasonable 2 statement, in my personal opinion, so I went on the 3 record, went against the Minister and I said, I don't 4 think that the Provincial Park will reopen next summer. 5 I don't think we'll see the Provincial 6 Park reopen until the situation with the army base is 7 solved. 8 And the reason I felt or I took this 9 position was that the army base is comprised of 10 approximately -- approximately twenty-three (2,300), 11 twenty-four hundred (2,400) acres. 12 And the Park is, I think, it's about a 13 hundred (100) to a hundred and nine (109) acres, 14 separated by a six (6) or eight (8) foot -- foot chain 15 link fence. 16 And if we don't have the -- the army base 17 solu -- or situation resolved, how do you expect anybody 18 to resolve that little parcel of land? 19 So to me, I think until we resolve the 20 situation at the army base, the situation at the 21 Provincial Park will not be resolved. 22 I think ten and a half (10 1/2) years 23 later, I'll let the record speak for itself. 24 And I just wanted to -- I know I was going 25 against the grain, with the Minister and some time it's

295

1 not very popular, but as I told you yesterday, I have 2 always believed that I should represent the interests of 3 my constituents in Toronto as opposed to the other way 4 around. 5 Q: All right. Now, one further area I 6 wished to address with you. 7 Do you recall there being a controversy 8 raised in the media in or around November of 1996 9 concerning yourself and the Premier? 10 A: I don't know. 11 Q: Perhaps you would go to Tab 53, 12 article from the Toronto Star dated November 6th, 1996. 13 It's Exhibit P-906 Inquiry Document 3000370. 14 And if you look at this article there's a 15 suggestion that -- that you were contradicting the 16 Premier's statements to the Legislature that he was 17 unaware of any police buildup at the Park before the 18 shooting and if you look at the middle column of this 19 article halfway down: 20 "Beaubien also seemed to contradict 21 Harris's statements in the Legislature 22 that he was unaware of any police 23 buildup at the Park before the 24 shooting, [quote] 'It was quite obvious 25 to anyone in the area that there was an

296

1 OPP buildup because there were more 2 cruisers he said.' [close quote] Sure 3 this is something I would pass on 4 [bracket] (to senior Harris aide Bill 5 King)[close bracket]." 6 Now, do you recall giving that statement 7 to the -- the media? 8 A: Well, I didn't write the article but 9 I'm not -- certainly not going to dispute what I said and 10 I think this is November the 6th, 1996. 11 Q: Yes. 12 A: And I think we had the meeting with 13 the Solicitor General in my constituency office prior to 14 that unless there was a total lack of communication 15 between the Premier's office and the different 16 ministries. I -- I stand by my -- by my statement. 17 Q: All right. Thank you. Now, in terms 18 of difficulty in all your years in politics where would 19 you rank the Ipperwash crisis? 20 A: Right at the top. That's where I got 21 all the grey hair and lack of. 22 Q: Now, we have given witnesses the 23 opportunity to advise if they have any recommendations 24 aimed at preventing future situations, similar situations 25 of violence and I'd like to give you that opportunity as

297

1 well. 2 A: You're giving me the opportunity to 3 do this? 4 Q: Yes, I am. 5 A: And I certainly appreciate that. 6 Q: Is there any recommendations you 7 would like to make for the Commissioner's consideration? 8 A: As a matter of fact last night I was 9 reflecting because I find it very taxing but in front of 10 the fireplace I did -- jotted some rough notes. 11 And Your Honour, if I may impose on you? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Sure. 13 THE WITNESS: First of all, I would like 14 to thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my 15 view. I would also like to express my condolences to the 16 George family. 17 Number 2 is the tragic death probably 18 would not have occurred if the Federal Government had not 19 shirked their responsibility over the past forty (40) or 20 fifty (50) years. 21 Number 3 is without the Federal Government 22 participation with this, with all due respect, Your 23 Honour, at this table I fail to see or I should say that 24 I feel that this Inquiry is compromised because the key 25 player is not at the table.

298

1 Number 3 -- number 4. At the present time 2 in Ontario we have an Ontario Native Secretariat. As a 3 french speaking Ontarian, as a Francophone, there's five 4 hundred thousand (500,000) of us in Ontario, we have a 5 small ministry. 6 We have a voice at the table and I know 7 that's creating more bureaucracy but the natives do not. 8 As opposed to having a secretariat I think there should 9 be a ministry dealing with native affairs. 10 Number 5. There's no doubt there should 11 be more harmony between the Native community. 12 Number 6 and this is in conjunction with 13 the meeting that I had with Chief Ray Rogers, Tom 14 Bressette, and Joey Gilbert that we cannot continue 15 dealing with native affairs in the manner that we have in 16 the past. Obviously it's not working so we have to look 17 at new ways of dealing with it. 18 Regarding the Provincial Park there was no 19 land claim; I'm not aware there's any land claim today. 20 There was no mention of burial ground prior to the 21 takeover that I'm aware of. If there was a burial ground 22 why was it sold in the first place. 23 There was nothing that would justify the 24 takeover of public property. There was no outstanding 25 dispute with the Province. I was not aware of any poor

299

1 relations between the Native community and the Province 2 according to my discussion with Chief Bressette, Chief 3 Gilbert, Chief Rogers, Charlie Shawkence and other Elders 4 that I talked to. 5 The Provincial position which I supported 6 was that if there is a burial ground, we'll deal with it 7 under the Cemeteries Act. 8 Number 8. I have alluded to that until 9 the army base situation is resolved, the Park -- 10 Provincial Park issue will not be resolved. 11 A few recommendations: 12 1. Is that from my personal experience, I 13 was well aware of the time between -- of the line between 14 operational and informational discussions with the 15 police. I never told the police what to do or how to do 16 their job. 17 However, it may be helpful to have more 18 detailed information or orientation for new MPP's once 19 they're elected. 20 Secondly, there has to be better 21 communication. I personally felt that there was a lack 22 of communication or poor communication in dealing with 23 this issue. There should have been two (2) way 24 conversation or communication. 25 I don't think and I still stand by that, I

300

1 don't think that the -- not only the political arm but 2 the bureaucratic arm in Toronto took the situation in a 3 serious manner. Or they were not apprised of the 4 seriousness of it. 5 With regards to communication, there's no 6 doubt that we have to improve the level of communication 7 between local, Provincial, Federal and certainly the 8 Native community. 9 I believe it is important both -- that 10 both sides should be supported by this Inquiry. I don't 11 think there's too many people that are -- I think there's 12 an imbalance at the Inquiry, that's a personal feeling. 13 There should be two-way communications 14 between the elected officials and the police. The police 15 know their sworn obligation to act independently. 16 To recommend prohibition of communications 17 would be to throw the baby out with the bathwater. 18 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Does that conclude your 19 recommendations? 20 THE WITNESS: And that concludes my 21 recommendation. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you very much. 23 Commissioner, that concludes the examination-in-chief. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 25 very much, Mr. Beaubien.

301

1 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes? 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Would you like to 4 canvass the parties for cross-examination estimates? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think we 6 really should. We've got a couple of minutes so I think 7 we should try to do that and see where we are. We're not 8 going to start any cross-examinations obviously until 9 next week. 10 Does anybody wish to ask Mr. Beaubien any 11 questions? Surprise, surprise, surprise. 12 All right let's see where we are here. 13 Ms. McAleer, how long do you estimate? 14 MS. JENNIFER MCALEER: Approximately 15 twenty (20) to thirty (30) minutes, Your Honour. But I 16 expect I can narrow that. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 18 Horvat? 19 MS. JACQUELINE HORVAT: Ten (10) minutes. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Have you got 21 that, Ms. Vella? 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, ten (10) minutes 23 for Charles Harnick. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's hard 25 for me to hear but as long as you can.

302

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'm sorry -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- and twenty (20) to 4 thirty (30) minutes for the Honourable Michael Harris. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I can't see 6 if anybody's here for Mr. Runciman. Oh Ms. Mrozek, there 7 you are. 8 MS. ALICE MROZEK: Ten (10) minutes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ten (10) 10 minutes. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Ten (10) minutes for 12 Mr. Runciman. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: For Mr. 14 Hodgson? 15 MS. ERIN TULLY: I'll reserve ten (10) 16 minutes. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Ten (10) minutes for 18 Mr. Hodgson's counsel. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Perschy? 20 MS. ANNA PERSCHY: I'd like to reserve 21 ten (10) minutes as well. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Ten (10) minutes for 23 Ms. Hutton. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. Sandler? 25 MR. MARK SANDLER: Thirty (30) to forty-

303

1 five (45) minutes if it's in English. In French I'll be 2 a little longer. 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thirty (30) to forty- 4 five (45) minutes for the OPP. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: OPPA? 6 MS. JENNIFER GLEITMAN: I'd guess about 7 thirty (30) minutes. 8 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thirty (30) minutes for 9 the OPPA and I will indicate that the Province of Ontario 10 has indicated five (5) to ten (10) minutes. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And the 12 Municipality's not up. The Coroner's not here. 13 Mr. Zbogar? 14 MR. VILKO ZBOGAR: About two, two and a 15 half (2 1/2) hours. 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Two (2) to two and a 17 half (2 1/2) hours for the Dudley George Estate and 18 Family Group. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 20 Rosenthal? 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: About three (3) to 22 three and a half (3 1/2) hours, sir. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Three (3) to three and 24 a half (3 1/2) hours for Aazhoodena and George Family 25 Group.

304

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 2 Ross? Nice to see you here again. 3 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you, 4 Commissioner. I anticipate I could be three (3) hours. 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Three (3) hours for the 6 Residents of Aazhoodena. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Then Mr. 8 George. 9 MR. JONATHON GEORGE: Up to forty-five 10 (45) minutes. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Forty-five (45) minutes 12 for Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 14 Horner...? 15 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: I'll reserve an 16 hour. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: One (1) hour for Chiefs 18 of Ontario. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 20 Falconer...? 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Two (2) hours for 22 Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Two (2) hours for 24 Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I

305

1 presume Mr. Sulman, you'll wait and see how it goes? 2 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: That's a good 3 assumption. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. Can 5 you give me a rough estimate of what the times are, if 6 you estimate at the max and... 7 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It's thirteen (13) to-- 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Fifteen (15) 9 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- fifteen (15) hours. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Fifteen (15) 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thirteen (13 to fifteen 12 (15) hours, something like that. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So it's 14 possible that we could maybe do it in the two (2) days we 15 have, I mean -- 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That would be hoped. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: These are 18 only -- pardon me? 19 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That would be hoped. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, thank 21 you all very much. We're going to adjourn now and we'll 22 reconvene on Tuesday morning, and don't forget to vote. 23 24 (WITNESS RETIRES) 25

306

1 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 2 adjourned until Tuesday, January 24th at 10:00 a.m. 3 4 --- Upon adjourning at 4.25 p.m. 5 6 7 8 9 Certified Correct, 10 11 12 13 _________________ 14 Carol Geehan, Ms. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25