Time to Arm Cenotaph Guard? (split from Domestic Terrorism)

[cupper]

McDonalds food is not something worth dying for. :dunno:

 

[The_Falcon]

Or, maybe Garda. This took place recently on the Danforth.

Off-duty guard grabbing food kills 2 at McDonald's
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/28/2-killed-at-east-end-mcdonalds

That would be the incident I was referring to earlier.

 

[tomahawk6]

Task the RCMP to mount guard.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Task the RCMP to mount guard.

If the RCMP has been in for over 36 months then we'll have $82'000 a year security guards.

 

[mariomike]

Task the RCMP to mount guard.

Assuming the officers are on OT, it may not be much cheaper than using city police on Paid Duty.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

You could train reg and reserve MP to guard them, that way you increase capacity in the military rather than handing money over to the police. Now if the police get the money from another budget, then fine.

 

[dapaterson]

You could train reg and reserve MP to guard them, that way you increase capacity in the military rather than handing money over to the police. Now if the police get the money from another budget, then fine.

Why does the CAF need a "guard public spaces in Canada" capability?

 

[mariomike]

You could train reg and reserve MP to guard them, that way you increase capacity in the military rather than handing money over to the police. Now if the police get the money from another budget, then fine.

Sounds like turf jurisdiction may be involved.

"As for why DND wouldn’t use military police to guard the sentries, Ottawa Police say it’s because of jurisdiction and protocols within the military."
http://www.923jackfm.com/2015/03/12/ottawa-police-offices-may-guard-the-sentries-at-the-national-war-memorial/

 

[Jed]

I agree with your observations on how things transpire around the Cenotaph.  I make my comments so they will plant the seeds that there are other more economical and expedient ways of providing personal protection for our troops than:

a. Full LEO visible presence;
b. Troops with full Battle Rattle;
c. Expensive Overwatch by LEO or CAF assets; and
d. Nothing new here, puff your chest out and put on your mean face.

Looks like to me we will take the low risk approach (the typical Canadian way) and opt for COA d.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Sounds like turf jurisdiction may be involved.

The magic of federalism:  it seems that it's almost always about who's grass is being cut by whom, isn't it?

 

[Tibbson]

Sounds like turf jurisdiction may be involved.

"As for why DND wouldn’t use military police to guard the sentries, Ottawa Police say it’s because of jurisdiction and protocols within the military."
http://www.923jackfm.com/2015/03/12/ottawa-police-offices-may-guard-the-sentries-at-the-national-war-memorial/

Yes, that is exactly what it is.  Policing wise it's Ottawa police jurisdiction, plain and simple.  Even for such functions as Remembrance Day, while there is a limited MP presence, its only because they are paired with Ottawa PD and/or RCMP, at the request of those departments, to augment their own pers.  The protocols within the Military that the article speaks of is that essentially, given the jurisdiction issues, it's not a job for the MPs.  Ultimately it's the government that determines the course of action and it is not their will to have CAF pers providing armed security services like this in Canada. 

 

[Tibbson]

The magic of federalism:  it seems that it's almost always about who's grass is being cut by whom, isn't it?

There are legal arguments to be made as well when one reads the relevant sections of the NDA to see where MPs get their authorities and peace officer status.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I remember reading somewhere a reservist who is off duty (ie not signed in) but on DND property including a bystander in the presence of a DND function such as a parade is subject to the NDA. If that's true it seems weird they would fall under the NDA but a military police officer wouldn't have jurisdiction.

Didn't some kind of new MP head quarters or command group spring into existence?  Tasking MPs with this duty seems like a perfect solution.  I'm sure it's cheaper tasking MPs to do this job than paying cops over time to do it.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I remember reading somewhere a reservist who is off duty (ie not signed in) but on DND property including a bystander in the presence of a DND function such as a parade is subject to the NDA. If that's true it seems weird they would fall under the NDA but a military police officer wouldn't have jurisdiction.

Everybody (military, civilian, citizen, non-citizen, tourist, illegal . . . well, perhaps excluding accredited foreign diplomatic representatives) are subject to the National Defence Act just like any other piece of Canadian legislation.  Whether it has any bearing on them is another matter.  What you may be semi-remembering are the circumstances when reservists are subject to the "Code of Service Discipline", which is only a part of the NDA.

What the law says:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-5/page-21.html#h-39

60. (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:

(c) an officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force when the officer or non-commissioned member is
(i) undergoing drill or training, whether in uniform or not,
(ii) in uniform,
(iii) on duty,
(iv) [Repealed, 1998, c. 35, s. 19]
(v) called out under Part VI in aid of the civil power,
(vi) called out on service,
(vii) placed on active service,
(viii) in or on any vessel, vehicle or aircraft of the Canadian Forces or in or on any defence establishment or work for defence,
(ix) serving with any unit or other element of the regular force or the special force, or
(x) present, whether in uniform or not, at any drill or training of a unit or other element of the Canadian Forces;

A simple explanation from a Forces site.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs-military-law/code-of-service-discipline.page

When am I subject to the CSD?

If you are a member of the Regular Force you are always subject to the CSD, both inside and outside Canada. If you are a member of the Reserve Force, you are subject to the CSD:
•while undergoing drill or training (whether you are in uniform or not)
•whenever you are in uniform
•while on any military duty
•24 hours a day, 7 days a week during any period of full time service (Class "B" or "C" service)
•whenever you are present on defence property
•whenever you are in a vehicle, ship or aircraft of the CF.

The jurisdiction or powers of military police is another matter and may not be exclusively contained in the NDA.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Yes, that is exactly what it is.  Policing wise it's Ottawa police jurisdiction, plain and simple.  Even for such functions as Remembrance Day, while there is a limited MP presence, its only because they are paired with Ottawa PD and/or RCMP, at the request of those departments, to augment their own pers.  The protocols within the Military that the article speaks of is that essentially, given the jurisdiction issues, it's not a job for the MPs.  Ultimately it's the government that determines the course of action and it is not their will to have CAF pers providing armed security services like this in Canada.

An MOU would rectify that would it not if agreed upon should the GoC decide to change tack?

 

[Tibbson]

I remember reading somewhere a reservist who is off duty (ie not signed in) but on DND property including a bystander in the presence of a DND function such as a parade is subject to the NDA. If that's true it seems weird they would fall under the NDA but a military police officer wouldn't have jurisdiction.

Didn't some kind of new MP head quarters or command group spring into existence?  Tasking MPs with this duty seems like a perfect solution.  I'm sure it's cheaper tasking MPs to do this job than paying cops over time to do it.

Actually off duty reservists are not strictly subject to the Code and even when on Class B it is all still situationally dependent.  And yes, tasking MPs to do the duty is one option provided civilian authorities request them to do this duty AND the Minister wants to authorize it.  Its not as simple as the CFPM just tasking the Gp to provide the service.

 

[Tibbson]

An MOU would rectify that would it not if agreed upon should the GoC decide to change tack?

Yes, an MOU would help to address the situation however I don't think there is a need to go that far.  All that needs to be done is for the relevant civilian authorities to request the assistance with the tasking and the CAF needs to agree to carry out that tasking. 

I'm sure our resident JAG could shed more light on the topic but as I see it there would need to be three things line up for there to be an MOU.    There has to be the legal ability for the CAF to be involved and then both parties to the MOU need to agree to it (after it's picked apart by their respective legal advisors).  I'm still not convinced there is a firm legal avenue for the MPs to carry out such a duty and I'm personally positive the last thing the Government wants are armed soldiers watching civilians in a situation where they could be called upon to shoot someone.  It's much more politically palatable to have civpol carry out the duties I'm sure.

 

[Tibbson]

Everybody (military, civilian, citizen, non-citizen, tourist, illegal . . . well, perhaps excluding accredited foreign diplomatic representatives) are subject to the National Defence Act just like any other piece of Canadian legislation.  Whether it has any bearing on them is another matter.  What you may be semi-remembering are the circumstances when reservists are subject to the "Code of Service Discipline", which is only a part of the NDA.

I really don't see where it says that "everyone" is subject to the NDA.  The section clearly outlines the conditions whereby reserve force members are subject to the CSD.  The only time civilians are subject to the Code is when they are formally accompanying the CAF on an overseas deployment.  For example an RCMP member in or even the PSP pers in KAF were subject to the NDA while some Canadian citizen who is employed by KBR would not be.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I really don't see where it says that "everyone" is subject to the NDA.  The section clearly outlines the conditions whereby reserve force members are subject to the CSD.  The only time civilians are subject to the Code is when they are formally accompanying the CAF on an overseas deployment.  For example an RCMP member in or even the PSP pers in KAF were subject to the NDA while some Canadian citizen who is employed by KBR would not be.

The Code of Service Discipline is but only one part (Part III of 8 parts) of the National Defence Act.  There are elements of the NDA and regulations made under the act that are specifically applicable to non-military persons (i.e civilians) even if they are not subject to the CSD.  I thought my comment about "everyone is subject to the NDA" was clear in separating the specific CSD part of the act from the wider application of the NDA to everyone, just as "everyone in Canada" is subject to the provisions of every piece of Canadian legislation.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Having been involved in regulatory change and have had the Act I regulate fundamental change, this government would make the changes to the NDA in a heartbeat if they felt it served their purpose to have military guard the sentries. It would be an easy sell I suspect as the new section would be specific to the area. The average voter does not give a damm abut jurisdictional squabbles.