The Cost of Not Policing The calls for cuts to policing expenditures are reaching a crescendo. A day rarely goes by where some academic, media pundit, or elected official isn’t calling for “efficiencies” to be found in police budgets, for police to stick to “core services”. I think it’s absolutely fair for elected officials to ask police leaders to be as efficient and effective in how they deliver policing to communities. As police leaders, OACP members have a responsibility to ensure maximum value for the public investments we all make in our police organizations. However, those who call on police leaders to implement cuts need to be clear on what they expect. Our police budgets are about 90 percent salaries and benefits. That doesn’t provide a lot of room for savings on the operational side of our business. So where to cut? Eliminate school resource officers? Stop proactive activities like crime prevention and assistance to victims – things the Police Services Act Mandates? Lay off officers? Fundamentally, the discussion that needs to occur about the future of policing is about the cost of NOT policing. It’s about the consequences of what happens to individuals and groups in our communities when police DON’T do things. That is a conversation that our critics don’t want to have because it moves the conversation away from the spreadsheet and onto real, live people. The reality about policing in the Province of Ontario is that the sky is not falling. We live in one of the safest place on Earth. The reason for that is that we have well-trained, accountable policing professionals who work hard to deliver the services expected of our civilian oversight bodies.

Inside:

OACP Blogs

OACP AGM Notice

Legal Matters

Update on Ontario Bills

What We’re Talking About

2015 Crime Prevention

Campaign Launched

#OACP #RealLeadership

The Economics of Policing Summit held on March 2 in Ottawa was the second high profile gathering organized by the federal government on the economic challenges facing police organizations in Canada. Comments by participants indicate that the presentations and discussions were informative and thought provoking. However positive the Summit may have been, it’s important that all policing stakeholders come away with a question that, on the surface, may sound rather odd: “What is policing?” Everyone knows what policing is all about, right? We see police officers in their vehicles responding to calls, directing traffic, walking through our malls and streets. We see them on the news dealing with crimes, collisions, and other unpleasant things. But there is a fundamental debate about what policing should be not only in the media, but in municipal council chambers, police service board offices, at in the Ontario legislature, and on Parliament Hill. That is a good thing.

What Is Policing?

Winter 2015

When I joined the OACP more than a decade ago, I received a crash course in “Policing 101”. I learned not only about the history of policing in Canada (Hello, Sir Robert Peel), the laws, regulations, and standards that govern law enforcement, and the basics of police operations, but also about the police culture and why law enforcement personnel choose to do what they do. I remember one veteran Chief telling me in 2004 that when policing becomes “just a job” rather than a “call to serve”, policing becomes just another line on a budget sheet “like the Parks and Rec department.”

Continued on the next page

Notable Tweets From the Economics of Policing Summit @OACPOfficial: “Police leaders R speaking out about the simplistic "policing is too expensive" rhetoric in Canada. What R safe communities worth? #EoPCS” @michaelgordon: "Police expenditures are not out of line when compared to other gov't spending. They haven't skyrocketed." - AD ICURS institute, SFU #EoPCS @DeputySloly: “#EoPCS Prof Brantingham "Crime is down & police budgets are up. So are deaths due to disease yet nobody is talking about closing hospitals"

Blogs on Our B2B Website The OACP’s Business-to-Business website continues to grow. It links police organizations to those companies that provide quality products and services that allow police services to deliver effective and efficient policing to all our communities. OACP members will especially want to check out vendor videos from our 2014 B2B Trade show! One of the features of the website is our “Chief Topics” section, which features bogs on contemporary policing issues as well as insight from police personnel and corporate OACP members on topics of interest. Blogs on the site include:

Seven Secrets to Success From An Unlikely Source

OPP’s Inclusion Journey

Future Shock for Policing

Collaborating for Community Safety and Well-being in Ontario Check out our latest blog from Interac Association, which highlights good news on debit card fraud. The chart below illustrates how this OACP corporate member is working with law enforcement across Canada to positively counter this type on on-line fraud.

What Is Policing? continued The calls for cuts to policing expenditures are reaching a crescendo. A day rarely goes by where some academic, media pundit, or elected official isn’t calling for “efficiencies” to be found in police budgets, for police to stick to “core services”, or for the Provincial Government to change the “unsustainable” way policing is funded. It’s absolutely fair for elected officials to ask police services to be as efficient and effective in the delivery of policing to communities. As police leaders, OACP members have a responsibility to ensure maximum value for public investments made in our police organizations. However, those who call on police leaders to implement cuts need to be clear on what they expect. Our police budgets are made up on average of 90 percent salaries and benefits. That doesn’t provide a lot of room for savings on the operational side of our business. So where to cut? Eliminate school resource officers? Stop proactive activities such as crime prevention and assistance to victims – things the Police Services Act mandates? Lay off officers? Fundamentally, the discussion that needs to occur about the future of policing is about the cost of NOT policing. It’s about the consequences of what happens to individuals and groups in our communities when police DON’T do things. That is a conversation that our critics often don’t want to have because it moves the conversation away from the spreadsheet and onto real, live people. The reality about policing in the Province of Ontario and Canada is that the sky is not falling. In fact, a 2013 report on Canadian policing costs from Simon Fraser University makes for interesting reading in this respect. Joe Couto is the Director of Government Relations and Communications for the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police

OACP Committees

Annual Committee Chairs Meeting

The OACP is pleased to host our annual Committee Chairs meeting on April 8-9, 2015 at the Hockley Valley Resort. The OACP will be providing a recap of the meeting’s events in Round-up. Stay tuned.

Welcome to the Newest OACP Committee Chairs!

Chief Kimberley Greenwood, Human Resource

Deputy Chief Chris McCord, Professional Standards

Inspector Graham Symington, Alcohol and Gaming

Inspector Shelley Rogers, Special Investigations Unit

Sergeant Laurie Blashuk & Ms. Saleha Khan, Diversity Network Steering Cttee

2

From Parliament Hill: Federal Legislation of Importance to Police Leaders

Reform to Parole Laws

The federal government will propose legislation to reform laws governing parole of convicted individuals. The proposals will include mandating that people found guilty of certain serious criminal offences serve life in prison with little or no chance of parole. The legislation would end parole for those convicted of murders involving:

Sexual assault

Kidnapping

Terrorism

A police or corrections officer

Particular brutality

Currently, persons convicted of first-degree murder face an automatic sentence of life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. The government is proposing that those convicted of the crimes listed above could voluntarily petition the public safety minister for release after serving no less than 35 years.

Anti-Terrorism Legislation

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police’s Board of Directors will be discussing Bill C-51 at their upcoming meeting on March 24

th. The proposed legislation:

Lowers the threshold for arrest

Criminalizes the promotion of terrorism

Allows CSIS to “counter-message” or disrupt suspected terrorism activities

Apply to a court for the removal of terrorist information from the Internet sites

Allow for court proceedings to be sealed

Expand Canada’s “no-fly” list

Beer & Wine in Retail Stores: Will Safety Be a Factor in the Discussion?

The debate over whether the Government of Ontario will allow beer and wine to be sold in retail stores such as convenience or grocery stores has, to this point, been a debate based on economics and consumer choice. One aspect of the debate that needs to be reinforced by police leaders is that changing the access points for beer and wine does have significant public safety concerns. According to Inspector Graham Symington (Peel RP), police will need to ensure MPPs at Queen’s Park understand issues such as training of employees who sell beer and wine and the potential increased pressure on police to respond to situations at retailers. “We’re also concerned by indications that the Ontario Government may allow grocery stores – including Big Box Stores – to sell beer and wine ‘in-store’, not in stores within the bigger retail store,” said Symington. “This raises questions about longer hours of access. It’s important that police leaders work with their elected representatives to ensure public safety is duly considered if any changes to the accessibility of beer and wine is proposed.” Ensure your police service is represented in the OACP Alcohol & Gaming Committee. Be part of the solution.

3

Notice of Annual General Meeting

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual General Meeting of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police will be held at the Delta Meadowvale Hotel and Conference Centre, 6750 Mississauga Rd, Mississauga on Wednesday, June 17

th at 1:30 pm.

The following matters will constitute the agenda:

1. Call to Order by the President 2. Appointment of the Secretary for the Annual General Meeting 3. Notice of Meeting 4. Constitution of Meeting 5. Approval of Minutes of the Annual General Meeting held June 25

th, 2014

6. President’s Report 7. Secretary/Treasurer’s Report and Audited Financial Statements for the fiscal period ending April 30

th, 2015

8. Appointment of Auditors 9. Election of Executive 10. Resolutions

11. Swearing in of New OACP Executives

12. Address by New OACP President

13. Other business as may properly come before the meeting

Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 5th day of March, 2015. By Order of the Board, Chief Charles Bordeleau, OACP, Secretary-Treasurer

Stay Connected with us!

Web: www.oacp.ca Facebook/Instagram: OACPOfficial Twitter: @OACPOfficial

Round-up e-newsletter (every other Friday) All Police Leaders The Daily In the News

4

Legal Matters

Ian Johnstone Partner

ijohnstone@jdclaw.ca

Ian Johnstone, a member of the OACP Police Legal Advisors Committee, looks at recent legal cases which may impact Ontario polices services.

The Need for a Nexus: Connecting Disability and Misconduct

Peel Regional Police Service and Lance Mulholland OCPC-#14-19 Background This proceeding was an appeal to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (“Commission”) by Constable Lance Mulholland (“Cst. Mulholland”), a member of the Peel Regional Police Service (the “Service”) from conviction and the penalty imposed on him by the Hearing Officer for four counts of neglect of duty and one count each of deceit, insubordination, and discreditable conduct. The charges related to Cst. Mulholland lying about visiting his ailing grandfather; failing to report for duty; attending work with alcohol in his system; failing to cooperate with a police investigation into a motor vehicle accident in which he drove his car into a ditch, and; missing shifts because he had been drinking and was determined unfit for duty. The Hearing Officer’s Decision The Hearing Officer imposed a penalty of demotion from the rank of First Class Constable to Fourth Class Constable with a progressive return to First Class Constable over two years. The Hearing Officer also affixed a number of conditions to the penalty regarding Constable Mulholland’s on-going care for substance abuse and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (“PTSD”).

Cst. Mulholland sought to vary the penalty to a forfeiture of fifteen to twenty days, arguing the penalty imposed was harsh and excessive in light of the his PTSD.

He argued that his condition resulted from witnessing several fatalities and traumatic events while employed as a police officer. As a result of his substance abuse problems with alcohol and suffering from PTSD, Cst. Mulholland attend a number of different rehabilitative facilities to receive treatment. Upon completion of these programs, a doctor wrote a letter explaining that his symptoms had subsided and he no longer met the criteria for PTSD. The doctor opined that life-long recovery was attainable. Argument The crux of Cst. Mulholland’s argument was that the Hearing Officer failed to determine an appropriate penalty by placing too much emphasis on trying to deter him from committing similar misconduct. Cst. Mulholland also argued that the Hearing Officer failed to give appropriate weight to the medical evidence stating that he had been fully rehabilitated.

Appeal to the Commission

The Commission rejected Cst. Mullholland’s argument, finding that the Hearing Officer correctly observed that there was no medical evidence indicating his disability caused the misconduct and/or prevented Cst. Mulholland from controlling his behavior. Accordingly, the Commission determined it was appropriate for the Hearing Officer to consider specific deterrence amongst the other penalty factors. It also stated that the nature of Cst. Mulholland’s misconduct was very serious, and it could have resulted in dismissal in the absence the medical evidence indicating that he had been rehabilitated. Continued on Next Page

5

Legal Matters This case supports that proposition that although disability can offer an explanation for misconduct, it cannot be an excuse. This is particularly so when there is no medical evidence to suggest that the disability caused the misconduct. While Police Services must keep the duty to accommodate in mind, it does not require that they excuse all misconduct. Regard must be given to the nature of the medical evidence adduced, and whether it establishes a nexus between the disability and misconduct.

The Medium is not the Message: The Duty to Comply with Lawful Orders

Constable Michael Amato and York Regional Police Service OCPC #14-16

Constable Michael Amato (“Cst. Amato”) was convicted on one count of insubordination for disobeying an order to remain on administrative duties. This proceeding was an appeal to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (the “Commission”) from the Hearing Officer’s conviction and penalty. Cst. Amato was a 26-year member of the York Regional Police Service (the “Service”) and worked in the Intelligence Bureau (“IB”) as a Detective Constable. The circumstances giving rise to Cst. Amato’s misconduct arose out of a team meeting where his superior, Det. Dosanjh, distributed a memo enumerating 13 work related expectations to all members of the IB (the “Memo”). He perused the expectations contained in the Memo and had each member sign a copy declaring that they had read and understood its contents. The relevant portions of the Memo stated:

7) When we are out and about we would like a minimum of two officers travelling together.

8) Also we must be informed of your whereabouts at all times. We

were told that we could be questioned at any given time about your whereabouts.

The misconduct arose because Det. Dosanjh requested that Cst. Amato work the morning shift from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. because he would otherwise end up working alone. Cst. Amato agreed to do so, but later advised via Blackberry Messenger (“BBM”) that he would work his previously scheduled shift from 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Also via BBM, Det. Dosanjh instructed Cst. Amato that he would be on his own and to “just do your thing at your desk because no one else is around,” to which Cst. Amato replied “Ok”.

Appeal to Commission Cst. Amato appealed the Hearing Officer’s decision. He argued that it was unreasonable because the BBM communication instructing him to work at his desk was not a lawful order because the message did not contain the word “direct” or “order”. Accordingly, he argued there was no basis to find that the instructions conveyed were “clear” and “unequivocal”. The Commission found that an order does not have to be stated as such, and that it would be usual in this day and age to use the language suggested by Cst. Amato. There was also no issue with communicating the order via BBM because Cst. Amato did not raise any concerns, and there was no confusion or ambivalence regarding what Det. Dosanjh had instructed him to do. Conclusion This case mandates that it is the content of the order that is important and not necessarily the way in which it is delivered. So long as the senior officer clearly expresses their expectations, there is no issue with doing so via BBM or text messages. The Commission also found that common sense must prevail - simply because instructions are not specifically stated as an “order” does not mean that they should not be followed. The modern reality of policing is that officers are expected to respect orders and raise any issues if they feel their directions are uncertain or ambiguous.

Court of Appeal Ensures Fairness for Complainants in Timeliness of Complaints

Wall v. Office of the Independent Police Review Director 2014 ONCA 884

Background

On June 27, 2010, during the G20 Summit, Jason Wall (“Mr. Wall”) was walking alone near the intersection of Yonge and Gerrard Street in Toronto when two officers of the Toronto Police Services arrested him. His apparent crime was that he was wearing a bandana around his neck. He was detained in police custody for 28 hours but was released without being charged. Mr. Wall subsequently filed a complaint for investigation pursuant seeking disciplinary action against the officers. As a result of his complaint, one of the arresting officers was convicted of misconduct.

Continued on Next Page

6

Legal Matters Appeal to the Commission The grounds for appeal stemmed from the content of the Office of the Independent Police Review’s (“OIPRD”) investigative report of Mr. Wall’s complaint. Certain portions of that report indicated that the arrest may have occurred as a result of orders from higher ranking officers. Those orders are said to have directed that officers arrest anyone dressed in a certain way, which included wearing a bandana, for being disguised with the intent to commit an indictable offence. The report revealed that the orders may have been conveyed to officers at a meeting attended by the higher ranks of the Toronto Police Service, including the Chief of the Toronto Police. Upon gaining knowledge of the directive contained in the investigative report, Mr. Wall filed a follow-up complaint against the Chief of Police and any other officers involved in or having knowledge of the meeting. He chose to file a follow-up complaint because the PSA provides that the Director may refuse to deal with complaints that are filed more than six months after the facts on which they are based occurred. While his first complaint was filed on December 28, 2010 was within the six-month period, his follow-up complaint was not filed until January 25, 2012. Upon filing his follow-up complaint, the Director advised that it would not proceed because it was out of time. Mr. Wall sought judicial review of that decision, and the Divisional Court quashed the Director’s decision not to proceed. The matter was remitted the matter back to the Director for reconsideration and the OIPRD appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal. The Divisional Court Decision Molloy J. determined that the Director’s decision to refuse the follow-up complaint had to be quashed for two reasons: first, the Director treated the six-month period for filing a complaint in s.60(2) of the PSA as a strict limitation period; second, the Director breached the statutory requirement to give reasons, resulting in a breaches of procedural fairness and natural justice. Molloy J. also upheld Mr. Wall’s costs award in favour of his pro bono counsel, but reduced it from $28,000

to $20,000.

The Appeal

With respect to s. 60(2) and the six-month limitation, the Court of Appeal found that Mr. Wall was entitled to fairness in that the time limit ought not to begin to run against a complainant until the moment when the complainant knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that he had a basis for the complaint. Automatically precluding him from pursuing his complaint would have been unjust.

The Court of Appeal also upheld the Divisional Court’s finding that the OIPRD’s reasons for rejecting the complaint were insufficient. The Director only provided a “generic” statement that “taking all of the information into consideration, I have decided not to proceed with the complaint as it was made more than six months after the facts on which it is based occurred”. These reasons were not sufficient to discharge the Director’s obligation to articulate why the complaint would not be investigated, and resulted in a breach of the duty of procedural fairness. Finally, the Court of Appeal upheld the costs award in Mr. Wall’s favour.

Conclusion

This case is important to Police Services because it highlights that the Courts willingness to ensure public complainants are treated fairly when engaged in the complaint process. Both the Divisional Court and Court of Appeal afforded Mr. Wall the opportunity to pursue his complaint, finding that s.60(2) of the PSA was not

a strict limitation period, but rather a prescriptive guideline for when complaints should be brought forward.

The Court of Appeal expressed the view that it is in the public interest to encourage both complainants and counsel to bring these proceedings forward, since parties would be less likely to do so in the event they could not recover the costs of their efforts.

7

2015 OACP Awards- Nominations are Now Open

Each year the OACP and its members recognize outstanding work of police services, campaigns, programs and individuals within the policing community in Ontario. The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police (OACP) is pleased to announce that we are now accepting nominations for the following Awards:

OACP Traffic Safety - Award of Excellence

OACP Lifetime Achievement in Traffic Safety

OACP Traffic Safety Initiative of the Year Award – Over 500

OACP Traffic Safety Initiative of the Year Award – Under 500

OACP School Resource Officer - Award of Excellence

OACP Community Safety and Crime Prevention Award - Over 500

OACP Community Safety and Crime Prevention Award - Under 500

OACP Victims Assistance Committee Award

OACP Outstanding Liquor Enforcement Award – Over 500

OACP Outstanding Liquor Enforcement Award – Under 500

OACP/OMRON Crime Prevention Media Award

OACP/OMRON Award of Excellence in Media Relations

Responsible Alcohol Service at Licensed Establishments of the Year Award

Vehicle Theft Apprehension/Detection Initiative of the Year Award

Youth Service Volunteer Award

Please visit the Awards section on the OACP website to find information about the nomination process and to download the Award Nomination Form.

http://www.oacp.on.ca/news-events/awards

Should you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact the OACP office at oacpadmin@oacp.ca.

NOMINATION DEADLINE: Friday, March 27, 2015 at 5 p.m.

The 2015 OACP Annual Meeting Partnerships Leading to Solutions

June 14-17, 2015

This year’s 64th OACP Annual Meeting in Peel Region will bring

together police leaders from across Ontario (and beyond) as well as key government, academic, business, and community leaders to address some of today’s most pressing policing issues.

Here are some of the highlights of this year’s education sessions.

Opening Ceremony and Keynote Speaker featuring CBC Commentator Rex Murphy

Cost of Public Safety and Welfare (OACP Partnership)

What will policing look like in the next 5 years? The next 10 years...and beyond?

Academic Partnerships

Community Safety Model

What Kept Me up at Night?

Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR) Collaboration

Partnerships to Proactively Reduce Injuries

Autonomous Vehicles

Don’t miss our Ice Breaker kick-off event, the Life Members and Awards luncheon, networking events, the Annual General Meeting, and our grand Closing Gala. Please visit www.oacpconference.on.ca updates and details on these and other Annual Meeting education and networking sessions.

8

Status of Government Bills of Interest to Law Enforcement (as of March 6, 2015) Bill # Title – Sponsor Details Status

31 Transportation Statute Amendment Act (Making Ontario’s Roads Safer) – Hon. S. Del Duca

Introduce increased penalties for distracted driving and driving under the influence of drugs

Standing Committee on General Government

52 Protection of Public Participation Act – Hon. M. Meilleur Allow courts to identify and deal with “strategic lawsuits” (meritless claims designed to deter opponents)

2nd

Reading

Private Members Bills of Interest to Law Enforcement (as of March 6, 2015) 2 Workplace Safety and Insurance Amendment Act

– S. Di Novo Seeks to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act to create a rebuttable presumption relating to post-traumatic stress disorder affecting emergency response workers (fire, paramedics, police).

1st Reading

24 Prohibiting Driving With Unlawful Handguns Act – M. Colle Empower police to impound motor vehicles and suspend driver’s license of an individual in possession of an unlawful handgun in their vehicle.

Standing Committee on Justice Policy

33 Safeguarding Our Communities Act (Fentanyl Patch for Patch Return Policy) – V. Fedeli

Allow for the implementation of a Province-wide fentanyl patch return policy.

1st Reading

44 Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Clearing Vehicles of Snow and Ice) – J. Yakabuski

Amends the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit driving a motor vehicle on a highway if snow or ice has accumulated on the motor vehicle, or on a vehicle or trailer drawn by the motor vehicle, in a manner that would pose a danger to other motor vehicles on a highway.

1st Reading

46 Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Off-Road Vehicles) – B. Vanthof

Amends the Highway Traffic Act to prevent regulations made under the act from restricting permission to operate off-road vehicles on highways to vehicles that are designed to carry only a driver and no passengers.

Standing Committee on General Government

50 Highway Traffic Amendment Act (School Bus Camera System) – R. Nicholls

Amends the Highway Traffic Act to provide that a photograph of a vehicle obtained from a school bus camera system may be received as evidence in a proceeding under the Provincial Offences Act respecting an alleged offence under subsection 175(11) or (12).

Standing Committee on Justice Policy

65 Safe Roundabouts Act – M. Harris Enables the Minister of Transportation to make regulations establishing rules of the road that apply to roundabouts across the province and directs the minister to conduct a study about the safe use of roundabouts, and consult with members of the public before making any regulation.

1st Reading

To access all proposed legislation, debates, and other information from the Ontario Legislature, please visit:

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/home.do?locale=en

9

Crime Prevention Matters

OACP Partners with Insurance Bureau of Canada and Other Partners to

Launch 2015 Crime Prevention Campaign

Thank you to the many Ontario police services who helped spread the word about the OACP’s 2015 Crime Prevention Campaign! The campaign was launched on February 25, with a declaration of that day as “Protect Your Property Day” (#ProtectYourProperty). The annual crime prevention campaign focuses on a broad range of crimes that impact Ontario residents and businesses, including on-line fraud, identification theft and other cybercrimes, auto theft, break-and-enters, bullying, and elder abuse. A new crime prevention booklet is now available to members of the public though the OACP and police services. The booklet contains helpful crime prevention tips and information.

Chief Jennifer Evans and Chief William Blair delivered the clear message that while some types of property crimes such break-and-enters are down, other crimes such as on-line identification theft and fraud are increasing. Police also remain concerned about the number of crimes never reported to police.

This OACP campaign is made possible through the support of a number of partners: Accident Support Services International Ltd., CANASA (Canadian Security Association), TitlePLUS Title Insurance (a div. of LAWPRO® – Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company), Humber College – School of Social & Community Services, Interac Association, Ontario Lottery & Gaming Corporation, TRACE™ Identified, VIA Rail Canada.

A special thank you to the Insurance of Canada for their assistance in producing “Twitter flags” (left) that graphically illustrate a number of crime prevention messages.

What We’re Talking About

The OACP Board of Directors is holding it’s next meeting in Niagara Falls on April 21-22, 2015.

Among the meetings the OACP has upcoming with government and policing stakeholders are ones on the Future of Policing Advisory Committee (March24), Section 47 (accommodations) of the Police Services Act (March 8), and a civil liberties roundtable on (April 16). Watch our OACP Round-up e-newsletter and social media for all our meetings and initiatives.

Changes to the Police Services Act are coming. Community Safety and Correctional Services expect public consultations to flow from the FPAC recommendations later this summer and legislation to be introduced in 2016.

Federal, provincial, and territorial Privacy Commissioners have issues a new resource document that offers assistance to law enforcement authorities address privacy issues related to body-worn cameras. The OACP has scheduled a presentation from Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner/Ontario representatives for its April Board of Directors meeting.

The OACP has engaged in conversations with the Correctional Service of Canada on a pilot project they are launching in Ontario on May 15 regarding e-monitoring of prisoners. We have expressed concerns about the possible impact on police resources. CSC reps are making a presentation at the upcoming Board of Directors meeting.

The OACP is monitoring a Charter legal challenge alleging that level three strip searches by Toronto police discriminate against aboriginal people. The legal challenge is going ahead after a legal ruling released on January 27, 2015 by Judge Paul Perell and involving the Toronto Police Services Board and four TPS officers.

The Ontario government has released It’s Never Okay: An Action Plan to Stop Sexual Violence and Harassment (http://www.ontario.ca/home-and-community/we-can-all-help-stop-sexual-violence). The plan outlines steps to help change attitudes, provide more supports for survivors, and make workplaces and campuses safer and more responsive to complaints about sexual violence and harassment. The government has committed $41 million over three years to support the plan’s implementation.

10