(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
April 22, 1998)
AG fumbled
auxiliary officer issue
By Leo Knight
THE
flap created last week when Attorney General Ujjal Dosanjh
ordered the disarming of the province's volunteer police
auxiliaries and reserves seems to be mired in confusion and
posturing which virtually guarantees the citizens of B.C. will
be the big losers.
The
RCMP auxiliary and Vancouver city's reserve programs both began
in the early '70s, ostensibly to augment the regular forces with
volunteers to perform routine tasks freeing up officers for more
urgent duties.
During
my time as a police officer, I had occasion to work with both
forces and their respective programs.
Initially,
reserve officers did not carry firearms in spite of the fact
they were frequently on duty with regular members in patrol
situations. In other words they were placed in "harm's
way" without the protection of sidearms.
In
the mid-'80s the RCMP armed the members of their auxiliary
program, something that occurred in Vancouver in the latter part
of the '70s.
It's
important to bear in mind that the volunteer officers wear
essentially the same uniform as regular officers with the
exception of a small shoulder flash below the main crest
indicating their reserve or auxiliary status.
Both
programs were designed with a basic training package and a spate
of follow-up training courses to ensure the members were up to
date with changes in the law, policies and methods.
Conditional
to remaining in the program, once accepted, was the proviso that
each volunteer spend a minimum number of shifts working
alongside regular officers, taking calls and providing
on-the-spot backup.
Dosanjh
was quoted in the Vancouver Sun as saying, "these
auxiliaries were never intended to be out there with guns. These
people do a tremendous amount of work and we value their
contribution. Their main work is community policing and I hope
they continue to do that.
But
I wouldn't want a police auxiliary confronted with a dangerous
situation where we are putting them and the public in harm's
way."
Once
again, this attorney general has demonstrated he doesn't know
what he's talking about.
Considering
a condition of their engagement required they spend a specified
minimum amount of time in police cars on patrol, doesn't that by
definition ensure they are put "in harm's way?"
Saying
their main work is community policing again shows his lack of
understanding of what is going on in policing today.
The
community policing concept we know today had its genesis in the
latter part of the 1980s. It didn't really gain any form of
widespread use and acceptance until the early '90s, at least
half a decade after the RCMP auxiliaries were armed and more
than a decade following the Vancouver Police Department's
decision to allow their reserves to carry firearms while on
patrol with regular members.
The
upshot of the decision to disarm the auxiliaries was the
inevitable withdrawal of their services.
Essentially,
they are saying they're barely distinguishable from a regular
officer.
When
they perform their functions they are on the street engaged in a
variety of tasks, not too mention their mandated shifts with
patrol officers.
They
don't believe violent criminals will discriminate between them
and regular officers because of a small shoulder flash.
A
reasonable argument.
While
the AG's officials will be examining this whole issue, with a
report due by September, Dosanjh seems to have jumped the gun by
ordering the disarming. One has to wonder why the decision was
made in this knee-jerk fashion prior to the study being
completed. It certainly presupposes what the study will find at
the very least. Or, perhaps, more to the point, it tells those
conducting the study what to find.
Equally,
the political spin has left the public believing the auxiliaries
have constant, unimpeded access to firearms, similar to that of
a regular officer. This is untrue.
A
reserve or auxiliary officer is issued a weapon from a secure,
central storage locker only when they are going on the specific
type of duty that requires the carrying of a sidearm.
The
issuance of the weapon is done by the authority of the ranking
supervisor on duty at the time. Reserves cannot take a gun
whenever they want one.
Additionally,
in VPD, the guns provided are the .38 Special revolvers the new
automatic pistols replaced for the regular officers.
This
past weekend Vancouver's reserve officers refused to do the
traffic control duties they normally perform at the Vancouver
Sun Run and the weekend events at GM Place.
This
required the city to pony up almost $50,000 in overtime costs to
ensure the duties were covered.
This
money did not come out of a provincial fund in spite of the fact
it was the AG's decision to remove the weapons. The money came
from the regular overtime budget of the police department. Now
this is serious if this situation continues for much longer. The
police budget has already been curtailed as a result of the
free-spending going on in Victoria.
Clearly,
the management of the various police agencies cannot refuse to
provide the services the reserves did. To continue to use the
overtime budget to fund these activities will ensure the things
the budget was meant to pay for will be severely limited.
When
that happens the basic service to the public will have to be
curtailed. This is inevitable.
Once
again, the public will suffer. I'm not suggesting everything
should remain as they have evolved over the years. Certainly,
some concerns relating to specific duties and training needed to
be addressed.
But
to make the decision and announce it as done by Dosanjh has
accomplished nothing positive.
Chalk up one more bonehead move to this government.
-30-