The provincial government is updating the Police Act in an effort to prevent the same mess from occurring that continues to define Surrey91Ƶs policing transition to the Surrey Police Service from the Surrey RCMP.
91ƵPeople deserve to know who is protecting their homes, families and businesses when there is a change in policing in their community,91Ƶ Public Safety Minister and Solicitor General Mike Farnworth said Monday in Victoria. 91ƵThese amendments mean that the confusion caused by the City of Surrey won91Ƶt be repeated elsewhere in B.C. When passed, these amendments will ensure policing transitions proceed in a way that provides certainty for people and maintains public safety.91Ƶ
Farnworth said the legislation provides 91Ƶclarity and finality91Ƶ to Surrey residents concerning the transition. 91ƵAmendments to the Act will specify that the City of Surrey must provide policing services through a municipal police department. It also provides the authority for the solicitor general to cancel the existing agreement between the Province and the City of Surrey for the provision of RCMP services.91Ƶ
Premier David Eby said Tuesday that whether or not Surrey is moving forward to a municipal police force 91Ƶis no longer up for discussion, they are moving forward to a municipal force in Surrey and for everybody91Ƶs benefit we need to just get on with that work.91Ƶ
Farnworth said the legislation also provides, 91Ƶif necessary,91Ƶ the provincial government with the ability to appoint an administrator to 91Ƶassume the functions91Ƶ of the Surrey Police Board to oversee the SPS.
To follow the bill91Ƶs progress through the legislator, you can check out
Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke is not conceding defeat. 91ƵWe are still all in the process of reviewing it and we will continue to do that,91Ƶ she said of the legislation released Monday afternoon.
91ƵI91Ƶm going to be really clear 91Ƶ the City of Surrey has made a position, we91Ƶre not changing that position.
91ƵFirst and foremost, we91Ƶre here to protect the taxpayers of this province,91Ƶ Locke told reporters. 91ƵWe know that the cost of this transition is extraordinary.91Ƶ
Eby said Tuesday it91Ƶs 91Ƶfrustrating91Ƶ his government and Surrey aren91Ƶt on the same page. 91ƵI think there is a moment here to regroup with the city, to reset. It is very clear that the city will not be successful in any legal challenge, it91Ƶs a waste of taxpayer dollars, the Province is going in this direction, so let91Ƶs sit down, let91Ƶs move forward.91Ƶ
During her Monday presser Locke referenced an easel beside her podium displaying a 91Ƶvery conservative91Ƶ $464 million more attached to the SPS over keeping the RCMP over the next 10 years 91Ƶ not including capital costs and two-officer patrol cars. 91ƵThis is going to be a tremendous increase to taxes in Surrey,91Ƶ she warned. 91ƵThat is a minimum, an absolute minimum. That is money that should be left in the pockets of Surrey taxpayers at a time when affordability remains our number-one issue.91Ƶ
91ƵThis is going to be a tremendous increase to taxes in Surrey,91Ƶ she warned. 91ƵThat is a minimum, an absolute minimum. That is money that should be left in the pockets of Surrey taxpayers at a time when affordability remains our number-one issue.
91ƵWe will do everything always to protect our taxpayer,91Ƶ Locke said. 91ƵI will do everything always to protect our taxpayer.91Ƶ
The provincial government said it will provide Surrey with $150 million toward the cost of the transition but Locke says that91Ƶs not nearly enough. Asked if his government will provide more money to Surrey, Eby said the 91Ƶbig challenge91Ƶ is the longer the dispute is dragged out, the more expensive it gets. He said it behooves Surrey to 91Ƶsit down with the Province, not to be going to court to spend more money on lawyers on a decision that91Ƶs already been made and will not be overturned by a court.
91ƵThe mayor fought a good fight, she raised a lot of important issues,91Ƶ Eby said, but 91Ƶnow it91Ƶs time for us to sit down and sort it out.91Ƶ
91ƵThe Province has committed to Surrey that we will support them, we understand their additional costs here, we will be working with that and I91Ƶm happy to have those discussions with Surrey,91Ƶ Eby said.
On Oct. 13, the City of Surrey revealed it has filed a petition with the Supreme Court of British Columbia seeking a judicial review of Farnworth91Ƶs July 19 order to proceed with the SPS. The government has 21 days to file a response.
Asked what she thinks Monday91Ƶs development will have on Surrey91Ƶs case, Locke replied she 91Ƶcan91Ƶt speculate on anything with the courts. And again, we haven91Ƶt even really looked at the legislation so I can91Ƶt make any speculation in that regard.91Ƶ
Asked if this means checkmate for Surrey, Coun. Linda Annis replied, 91ƵI hope this means that we91Ƶre done and we91Ƶre moving forward with the transition. I do think the minister91Ƶs saying enough is enough, we need to get on with it.91Ƶ
Locke did say of the legislation that Farnworth could have made his case last December, but did not.
91ƵIt91Ƶs incredibly disappointing that this minister has taken so long to make a decision,91Ƶ she said, adding 91Ƶhe could have said a lot of what he91Ƶs saying today, he could have said it way back in December. He chose not to, so we91Ƶre in this position now.91Ƶ
Again on the $464 million cost, Locke said, 91ƵThis is going to be generational, this is going to be forever. This is going to be for my kids, my grandkids, and we need to make sure that we have protected the taxpayer in our city.91Ƶ
During a press scrum after the Legislative Assembly91Ƶs Monday sitting, when Farnworth was asked what will happen with Surrey91Ƶs court petition in light of the legislation, he replied that 91Ƶthe Province always has the ability to govern, and that91Ƶs what we91Ƶre doing. The court process, that91Ƶs up to the City of Surrey.91Ƶ
Asked when his ministry will file a formal response to Surrey91Ƶs court petition, Farnworth replied 91Ƶthat work is done by the legal services branch and they make those decisions.91Ƶ
At Monday night91Ƶs regular council meeting, Locke doubled down on Surrey council91Ƶs majority position to stick with the RCMP.
She said she91Ƶs instructed city staff to undertake a review of the policing transition, from day one to now. 91ƵI want us in Surrey to have a clear understanding of what has transpired over the last five years.91Ƶ
91ƵMy position, this council91Ƶs position, has not changed,91Ƶ Locke said. 91ƵI continue to oppose the transition because of the extraordinary cost for Surrey taxpayers that will deliver no public safety benefit.91Ƶ
Locke added it91Ƶs 91Ƶsimply not feasible91Ƶ for Farnworth to say that a police service representing just 25 per cent of frontline officers today is best positioned to be Surrey91Ƶs police of jurisdiction.
91ƵThe SPS is top-heavy and it91Ƶs failed to recruit anywhere near the number of frontline officers needed to be the police of jurisdiction in the city. Surrey Police (Service) recruitment efforts are and will continue to be destabilizing for police services throughout Metro Vancouver and around the province. Let me be very clear again 91Ƶ I will not sit on the sidelines and accept a provincial plan that will cost Surrey taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, lead to significant tax increases, and that will deliver no public safety benefit.91Ƶ