Skip to main content

British Columbia Surrey leaders must do more to justify plan to replace RCMP, Premier John Horgan says

B.C. Premier John Horgan says Surrey’s city leaders need to make a better case to residents to justify plans to replace the RCMP with a new municipal police force.

Public consultations were to begin Thursday, but the province’s second-largest city has yet to release a detailed report, submitted this week to the province, on how the new force will work.

On Thursday, Mr. Horgan said his Public Safety Minister had just begun to review the report, prepared by a policing transition team ahead of a decision on whether to launch the new force by next July.

Story continues below advertisement

Public will get a say after all in creation of new Surrey, B.C., police force – after plan is sent to province

“I would argue, and I have made the case to [Surrey Mayor Doug McCallum], that the public needs to have a clear understanding why there would be a requirement to change, what the cost of that change will be and will there be diminishment or improvement in the delivery of services to people,” the Premier said in Surrey.

“I can’t answer those basic questions because I don’t know, and if I can’t, I assume that the public can’t either.”

At issue is a commitment by Mr. McCallum to replace the RCMP, which has provided policing on contract since the 1950s. During the municipal election campaign last fall, he argued that a new municipal force could provide more responsive policing for Surrey than the Mounties.

The plan has become controversial, with some, including the city’s board of trade, opposed to the idea. Some city councillors have demanded greater transparency on the contents of the plan.

The Premier said Mr. McCallum and council have every right to review and decide how they are going to conduct business for the city.

“Mayor McCallum has been consistent in his message on this – I give him full credit for that," he said. "But now we have to take a look at the details, and the public will have to make a decision, and the province, of course, will have to make a decision on what’s in the best interest in protecting the people in this community.”

Surrey city councillors have been briefed on the plan in an in-camera meeting, and one said the contents will be shocking to city residents.

Story continues below advertisement

Linda Annis, the last, lone member of the Surrey First party that dominated the city’s politics for a decade, said she can’t talk about what she heard except to say: “I think there are a number of key details that would shock our community when it comes to the numbers and the size of the proposed Surrey force.”

Given that city taxpayers paid for the report, Ms. Annis said in a statement, they are entitled to see the document so they can raise questions about the contents.

“Frankly, all of this secrecy and behind-closed-doors decision-making flies in the face of full transparency, something you’d expect from any police department. I want complete transparency and public consultation where people have all the facts and can ask serious questions,” she said.

Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworth said Thursday that he will take his time deciding whether to allow Surrey to proceed with its policing plan.

“Surrey’s proposal for an independent police department is a statutory process that deals with many complex issues, so it will be important not to rush this," he said in a statement

He also said he has told Mr. McCallum that the report, in some form, should be made available to the public in the coming weeks.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. McCallum did not address that issue in a statement this week, only confirming that the report was completed and had been sent to Victoria. According to the statement, the mayor will have no other comment on the matter.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter