1 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 February 14th, 2006 25

2
  1                        Appearances
  2  Derry Millar      )             Commission Counsel
  3  Susan Vella        )    (np)
  4  Donald Worme, Q. C )   
  5  Katherine Hensel  )    (np)
  6  Megan Ferrier     )
  7  Murray Klippenstein )            The Estate of Dudley 
  8  Vilko Zbogar       )            George and George
  9  Andrew Orkin       )  (np)      Family Group
 10  Basil Alexander    )
 11  
 12  Peter Rosenthal  )              Aazhoodena and George
 13  Jackie Esmonde   )              Family Group
 14  
 15  Anthony Ross     )   (np)       Residents of
 16  Cameron Neil     )              Aazhoodena (Army Camp)
 17  Kevin Scullion   )
 18  William Henderson )              Kettle Point & Stony
 19  Jonathon George  )   (np)       Point First Nation
 20  Colleen Johnson  )   (np)
 21  Kim Twohig       )              Government of Ontario
 22  Walter Myrka     )   (np)
 23  Susan Freeborn   )   (np)
 24  Michelle Pong    )   (np)
 25  Lynette D'Souza  )   (np)

3
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd)
  2  Janet Clermont   )              Municipality of 
  3  David Nash       )   (np)       Lambton Shores
  4  Nora Simpson     )   (np)       Student-at-law
  5  
  6  Peter Downard    )              The Honourable Michael
  7  Bill Hourigan    )              Harris
  8  Jennifer McAleer )
  9   
 10  Ian Smith        )              Robert Runciman
 11  Alice Mrozek     )
 12  
 13  Harvey T. Strosberg, Q.C.)
                               (np)   Charles Harnick
 14  Jacqueline Horvat )
 15  
 16  Douglas Sulman, Q.C. )           Marcel Beaubien
 17  Mary Jane Moynahan    )  (np)
 18  Dave Jacklin          )  (np)
 19  Trevor Hinnegan     )
 20  
 21  Mark Sandler       )            Ontario Provincial 
 22  Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) (np)       Ontario Provincial Police
 23  Leslie Kaufman     ) (np)
 24  
 25

4
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd) 
  2  Ian Roland       )   (np)       Ontario Provincial 
  3  Karen Jones      )   (np)       Police Association &
  4  Debra Newell     )   (np)       K. Deane
  5  Ian McGilp       )   (np)
  6  Annie Leeks      )   (np)
  7  Jennifer Gleitman )
  8  Robyn Trask      )
  9  Caroline Swerdlyk )   (np)
 10  
 11  Julian Falconer  )              Aboriginal Legal
 12  Brian Eyolfson   )   (np)       Services of Toronto
 13  Kimberly Murray   )   (np)
 14  Julian Roy       )
 15  Clem Nabigon     )   (np)
 16  Linda Chen       )   (np)
 17  Chris Darnay     )   (np)
 18  Adriel Weaver     )   (np) Student-at-Law
 19  
 20  Al J.C. O'Marra  )              Office of the Chief
 21  Robert Ash, Q.C. )    (np)       Coroner
 22  
 23  William Horton   )              Chiefs of Ontario
 24  Matthew Horner   )
 25  Kathleen Lickers )   (np)

5
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd) 
  2  Mark Fredrick    )   (np)       Christopher Hodgson
  3  Craig Mills      )   (np)
  4  Megan Mackey     )   (np)
  5  Peter Lauwers    )   (np)
  6  Erin Tully       )   (np)
  7  Michelle Fernando )
  8  Maanit Zemel     )   (np)
  9  
 10  David Roebuck    )   (np)       Debbie Hutton
 11  Anna Perschy     )
 12  Melissa Panjer   )
 13  Adam Goodman     )   (np)
 14  
 15  
 16  
 17  
 18  
 19  
 20  
 21  
 22  
 23  
 24  
 25

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 7 4 5 Michael Dean Harris, Sworn 6 Examination-In-Chief by Mr. Derry Millar 8 7 Cross-Examination by Mr. Ian Smith 209 8 Cross-Examination by Mr. Douglas Sulman 218 9 Cross-Examination by Ms. Anna Perschy 230 10 11 12 13 14 Certificate of Transcript 241 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-1074 Michael Harris' Parliamentary History, 4 Legislative Assembly. 9 5 P-1075 Diagram of floor plan of Premier's Office, 6 Premier's Boardroom, Council Chamber, EA's 7 Office, reception, hallway and washroom, 8 marked by witness, Mr. Michael Harris, 9 February 14/'06. 132 10 P-1076 Premier Michael Harris' Detailed 11 itinerary, Thursday, Sept. 07/'95. 174 12 P-1077 Document Number 1001298. Transcript 13 from "The World Tonight" with quotes 14 from Mike Harris and Ovide Mercredi, 15 Sept. 07/'95. 181 16 P-1078 Document Number 1012530. Memo re. 17 Draft letter from Premier re. Ipperwash, 18 October 10/'95. 195 19 P-1079 Cabinet Submission, "Approaches to an 20 Aboriginal Policy Framework" ONAS, 21 December 07/'95. 202 22 P-1080 Cabinet Minutes No: 5-24A/95, December 23 13 202 24 25

1 --- Upon commencing at 9:00 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session, the Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 7 morning. 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Good morning, 9 Commissioner. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 11 morning, everybody. 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Our next witness is 13 Mr. Michael Harris. 14 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Mr. Harris. 15 MR. MICHAEL HARRIS: Good morning. 16 17 MICHAEL DEAN HARRIS, Sworn 18 19 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF MR. DERRY MILLAR: 20 Q: Thank you. Mr. Harris, if I could 21 ask you to turn to Tab 1 of the book of documents that's 22 in front of you and that is a copy of the Legislative 23 Assembly history, your parliamentary history, as a member 24 of the Provincial Parliament. 25 Do you recognize that, sir?

1 A: That's what it looks like but I'll 2 put my glasses on to make sure. 3 Q: Okay. 4 A: Yes. I would ask that that be marked 5 the next exhibit, Commissioner. It will be P-1074. 6 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, sir. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1074: Michael Harris' Parliamentary 9 History, Legislative 10 Assembly. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 13 Q: And I understand, Mr. Harris, you 14 were first elected as an MPP in 1981 in the riding of 15 Nipissing? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And prior to your election as an MPP 18 you were a, among other things, a teacher? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And you worked in a family owned 21 tourist and ski resort business? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And from 1975 to 1981 you were a 24 school trustee on the Nipissing Board of Education? 25 A: That's correct.

1 Q: And as an MPP I understand from 2 September 12th, 1983, to February 8th, 1985, you were the 3 Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of the 4 Environment? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: From February 8th, 1985, to June 7 26th, 1985, you were the Minister of Natural Resources? 8 A: That's correct. 9 Q: And as well during that period from 10 May 17th, 1985 to June 26th, 1985 you were the Minister 11 of Energy? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: And as well, when the Government 14 changed in 1985 you became the Opposition House Leader 15 and held that position from September 19, 1985 to April 16 7, 1986. 17 A: That's correct. I don't think I was 18 House Leader right away but shortly after that period of 19 time. 20 Q: And during that period of time after 21 the change of Government, you were the critic for Natural 22 Resources from September '85 to August '96? 23 A: It sounds correct. Whereabouts are 24 you in the -- on the page? 25 Q: If you look, Mr. Harris, at page --

1 A: 2? 2 Q: 2. 3 A: Oh, I got you. Members standing -- 4 Q: Parliament 33. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: You were a Member of a number of 7 standing committees; ii that -- 8 A: Yeah. Sounds correct, right. 9 Q: And in May of 1990 you became the 10 Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party. 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: On June 6th, 1985 your Party won the 13 election and you became the Premier elect. 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: And you were sworn in as Premier of 16 the Province of Ontario June 26, 1995? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: And prior to becoming Premier on June 19 26th, 1995, had you dealt with Aboriginal issues while in 20 Government for opposition? 21 A: We -- we certainly had talked about 22 them in -- in developing policy for the PC Party of 23 Ontario. Certainly I was involved in my riding. We had 24 two (2) recognized Bands within my riding or on the edge 25 of the riding Docese (phonetic) and Nipissing Number 10

1 Band of Ojibways and so I had a number of -- of meetings 2 both with -- with officials and with individuals that 3 were there. 4 I had certainly some responsibility in my 5 very short time as Minister of Natural Resources and 6 would have had -- had, in a number of these roles as 7 critic and committees, have had some dealings and some 8 briefings and certainly awareness. 9 Q: Okay. And prior to being elected as 10 an MPP in 1981, while in North Bay did you have any 11 dealings with Aboriginal issues? 12 A: The educational issues as trustee and 13 chairman of the -- the Board, the Nipissing Board of 14 Education. We had voluntarily had representation from 15 Nipissing Number 10 Band, of Ojibways on our Board. 16 That was -- it wasn't a requirement and as 17 I recall there was some controversy with the -- with the 18 Separate School Board that would not agree to a point. 19 But we always had representation, Mr. McLeod and a Mr. 20 Couchie I think during my time as Chairman of the Board. 21 Q: And what period of time were you 22 Chair of the Board? 23 A: I was Chairman from about '80 -- 24 sorry, '70. I was elected in '81, '77 to '81, the last - 25 - last four (4) years. I was a Trustee for six (6) years

1 and Chairman for two (2) -- or for four (4) sorry. 2 Chairman for four (4) years. 3 Q: For four (4). And I would ask you to 4 turn to Tab 4, it's Exhibit P-922, it's entitled, The 5 Common Sense Revolution, May 1994. And this was a copy 6 of the document taken off of the Progressive Conservative 7 website and do you recognize this document? 8 A: Yes. It looks like the -- the 9 campaign document that we -- 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: -- released in May of 1994 and 12 campaigned on through that -- excuse me, '95 election. 13 Q: And how was this document developed, 14 sir? 15 A: This was developed over a period of - 16 - of I would say a number of years in Opposition; a 17 number of policy position papers that we had taken in 18 Opposition, the various critics had developed, the Caucus 19 had developed, the Party had developed, a number of Town 20 Hall meetings from across the Province from non Party 21 members as well as -- as Party members and then it would 22 be brought together. 23 It wouldn't be necessarily inclusive of -- 24 of all the positions we had taken but it would be those 25 that we were prepared to campaign on in the 1995

1 election. 2 Q: And as you said you did campaign on 3 it in the 1995 election? 4 A: We did. 5 Q: And it became the blueprint for your 6 government? 7 A: Yes, I would say it was -- it was the 8 key document in -- in a number of key policy areas for 9 our government, particularly in the -- the initial 10 stages. 11 Q: And you would agree with me that this 12 document is an economics centered document? 13 A: Yes, it is. 14 Q: And at page 3 of the document it sets 15 out the five (5) key areas dealt within the document; 16 first to cut provincial taxes, secondly to cut government 17 spending, third, cut government barriers to job creation 18 investment and economic growth, fourthly to cut the size 19 of the government, and fifthly balance the budget. 20 That was your -- five (5) of the goals 21 that you had? 22 A: That's correct. 23 Q: And would you agree with me, Mr. 24 Harris, that The Common Sense Revolution does not address 25 Aboriginal issues?

1 A: No, I -- I agree, it does not. 2 Q: And if I could take you to Tab 6 this 3 is a copy of P-925. 4 A: I don't know what P-925 means but 5 that's... 6 Q: P-925 just -- I'm doing that for the 7 record, that's the exhibit number, sir. 8 A: Okay. And if we don't do that we 9 lose track of what's being referred to. 10 Q: I hear you. It's Exhibit P-925. 11 This is a document entitled, A Voice for The North, a 12 Report of the Mike Northern Focus Tour January 1995. And 13 these are some extracts that we were provided by your 14 counsel Mr. Downard with respect to this document. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: And can you tell us what was this 17 document? 18 A: Can I tell you, sorry, what? 19 Q: What was the document? What was the 20 purpose of this document and how was it -- how it was -- 21 A: This would have been a campaign 22 document as well, following after the release of The -- 23 The Common Sense Revolution, as you indicated primarily 24 an economic document. And I take the -- the feeling of - 25 - of the campaign team and the collective decision was

1 that would be the -- the key points of the campaign. 2 This reflects a -- a tour of Northern 3 Ontario, a listening tour so to speak, a compilation of 4 some of the things that we heard, and where we were 5 prepared to -- to make commitments, commitments that we 6 would campaign on in the upcoming campaign. 7 Q: And was this a document that was 8 distributed to the public? 9 A: Yes, it was made available to the 10 public. 11 Q: And when you say that you had input 12 from groups can you tell us what -- what was the range of 13 the groups that you consulted with? 14 A: I think everybody was invited. I'm - 15 - my recollection doesn't go back to the -- to the 16 formats but certainly we would have heard from 17 municipalities, we would have heard from those who -- who 18 had grievances if you like with the Government or 19 government policy. Those are normally the ones that 20 would come to -- to an open house or those that wanted to 21 express a view on -- on changes. 22 Normally if people felt things were going 23 swimmingly well they -- they were not as inclined to -- 24 to attend Opposition meetings or those kinds of events. 25 Q: And if I could take you to the second

1 page of Exhibit P-925 and it's page 10 of the document 2 but it's the second page of the -- at Tab 4. Under 3 Native Issues, the first paragraph reads: 4 "There is drawing anger and resentment 5 over Queen's Park's handling of Native 6 land claims in Northern Ontario. Non 7 Natives voice concern and consternation 8 that land claim negotiations are 9 conducted behind closed doors. 10 With most of Ontario under some form of 11 land claim resource company said they 12 were worried about the potential impact 13 of settlements and property rights and 14 long term development. 15 In many cases Northern focus found that 16 Queen's Park was alienating non- 17 Natives. People believe that two (2) 18 systems conservation law are being 19 created. One for Natives and another 20 for non-Natives." 21 And was that a position that you took back 22 in January 1995? 23 A: This is a statement of what we heard 24 in -- in the -- as we travelled through Northern Ontario 25 that -- that exactly, as it states that -- that we heard

1 growing anger. 2 We heard resentment and concern 3 particularly over the lack of inclusiveness in any of the 4 discussions and -- and the process. And concerns, you 5 know, what the outcomes might be because they were not 6 involved. 7 Q: And on the third -- fourth page of 8 that document under, Commitments. it reads: 9 "Native rights must be respected 10 [excuse me]. A Mike Harris Government 11 will balance the interests of Natives 12 and non-Native Ontarians by ensuring 13 that all stakeholders are represented 14 in Native land claims negotiations. 15 Native rights must be respected but 16 land claims negotiations cannot be the 17 exclusive preserve of Provincial 18 bureaucrats and Native Band leaders. 19 By the same token a balance must be 20 struck between Native hunting and 21 fishing rights and the priorities of 22 conservation with equal treatment for 23 all Ontarians." 24 What did you mean by the non-Native groups 25 participating in land claim negotiations?

1 A: We heard a lot of concerns from -- 2 from municipalities, from tourist operators, from non- 3 Native hunters and anglers, from trappers, from resource 4 companies, that -- that negotiations seemed to be taking 5 place behind closed doors and they weren't involved and 6 they felt that they should be involved. 7 And -- and our commitment was that we 8 would -- would have more involvement from non-Natives so 9 they would be aware of what positions were being taken. 10 We couldn't speak for the Federal 11 Government but certainly for the Provincial Government on 12 any -- any proposed settlements of -- of the land claims 13 or any -- resolving any of these issues. 14 Q: And on hunting and fishing rights, 15 you were aware back in 1995 of the constitutionally 16 protected rights of Aboriginal people? 17 A: Absolutely. 18 Q: And what were you referring to with 19 respect to the equal treatment for all Ontarians with 20 respect to Native hunting and fishing rights? 21 A: Well, there were some parts of the 22 Province, some water, some -- some Natives who had rights 23 for hunting and fishing. The definition -- there was 24 still a number court cases ongoing of -- of -- for 25 personal use, for ceremonial use versus commercial use

1 was still -- these issues seemed to be still going 2 through -- through the courts and being determined. 3 What seemed to be our understanding was 4 that the Government of Ontario through the Ministry of 5 Natural Resources had primary responsibility for 6 conservation and that had a duty in fact, to make sure 7 that these resources were -- were protected. 8 So it's a fine balancing act to -- to have 9 conservation as a paramount jurisdiction for the Ministry 10 of Natural Resources nd then to balance the 11 Constitutional and Treaty rights of Natives to hunt and 12 fish as opposed then to -- to those who did not have 13 those Treaty rights and -- and their rights to hunt and 14 fish, and that was always the balancing act, and not 15 easy. 16 Q: And at Tab 5 of the binder in front 17 of you, there is a copy of Exhibit P-924. The document - 18 - it's -- if you turn back one (1) Tab, Mr. Harris, to 19 Tab 4. 20 A: Tab 4, yes. 21 Q: It's the next -- it's -- 22 A: Tab 4 -- 23 Q: -- excuse me, Tab 5. 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: And it's a document entitled,

1 Bringing Common Sense to Community Development. And tell 2 us what this document was? 3 A: Well, this document, I believe, was 4 also a companion piece to -- to the Common Sense 5 Revolution so -- and dealt with planning a local 6 government. The GTA was certainly under discussion at 7 that time and this also talks about Native Canadian 8 communities and -- and working with -- with Native 9 peoples. 10 Q: And I understand that this document 11 wasn't distributed to the public; is that correct? 12 A: I don't believe it was. I think it 13 was something that was -- that was developed but I don't 14 believe it was -- ended up being part of a campaign 15 document. 16 Q: And after you became Premier in 1995, 17 I understand that David Lindsey became your principal 18 secretary and Chief of Staff? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: And what was Mr. Lindsey's role? Can 21 you just describe that briefly? 22 A: Well, he had responsibility for my 23 office, staffing the office, hiring those individuals 24 that -- that -- that would work within the office, so he 25 -- he was in charge.

1 Q: And Mitch Patten, he was the deputy 2 principal secretary, as I understand it? 3 A: In '95, yes. 4 Q: And what was his role? 5 A: His role would -- would be second to 6 David Lindsey and to work with -- with Mr. Lindsey in the 7 hiring and the supervising of -- of staff. 8 Q: And Guy Giorno was a policy advisor, 9 and what was his role? 10 A: That -- to advise on -- on policy; 11 any issues that -- that were being developed by the 12 Government, response to any other issues that were -- 13 that were out there. 14 So just general policy or even more longer 15 term thinking, I would suggest, throne speech, that -- 16 that type of area. 17 Q: So that Mr. Giorno dealt with the -- 18 the longer term issues as you went forward in your 19 government? 20 A: Yes. That would -- that would be my 21 view, and liasoning with the -- the various Ministries 22 and certainly in -- in this period of time, developing 23 the throne speech, developing legislative agenda, those 24 types of policy issues. 25 Q: And Paul Rhodes was your media

1 advisor? 2 A: That's correct. 3 Q: And Mr. Scott Munnoch was your tour 4 director? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: And I take it as tour director, his 7 job was to organize your visits around the Province when 8 you did them. 9 A: Right, and all those logistics. 10 Q: And then Deb Hutton. As I understand 11 it, she was also an assistant and she was an assistant in 12 the area of issues management; is that -- 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: -- correct? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And can you tell us what Ms. Hutton's 17 role was? 18 A: Ms. Hutton would be involved more in 19 the day to day issues; any -- any issues that were -- 20 were external, if you like, to the Government so that 21 were issues of the day, what was in the media, what were 22 the opposition parties asking for; anything that -- that 23 would -- initiatives of the Government that may have been 24 controversial; so that type of shorter term -- issues 25 management if you like, briefing me on those issues,

1 briefing David Lindsey and the rest of the staff on those 2 issues. 3 Q: And in the summer of 1995, after your 4 election, did you have regularly scheduled meetings with 5 your senior staff? 6 A: Well, the normal practice would have 7 been on working days to have a -- a morning meeting with 8 the senior staff. 9 Sometimes they may have not taken place. 10 I may have had other activities or breakfast meetings or 11 outside engagements. 12 But normally there would be a meeting. If 13 I was on the road or involved in other activities 14 normally there would be a -- some form of a briefing 15 often with -- most often with Deb Hutton and at other 16 times perhaps with other members of the staff. 17 Q: And the individuals that I've just 18 referred to, would they fall what's under the rubric of 19 senior staff? Were they your senior staff? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And what about Mr. Bill King? He 22 was, as I understand it, the Caucus Liaison? 23 A: That's correct. Mr. Bill King was -- 24 began with me in 1981 as -- running my constituency 25 office in North Bay; that was the first involvement by

1 Mr. King I think in politics. Up to that time he was a 2 reporter. 3 He moved to me with Toronto -- into 4 Toronto when I was Parliamentary Assistant to the 5 Minister of -- of the Environment and when I became 6 Premier he took on the role as Caucus Liaison, I believe 7 working for and being paid out of the Caucus budget. So 8 he was the liaison with members of -- of Caucus to the 9 Premier's Office. 10 Q: And can you tell us what was your 11 understanding of what, as the liaison, he was supposed to 12 do in 1995? 13 A: Well, he would have two (2) primary 14 roles; one (1) to keep me informed if -- if there were 15 issues that Caucus members had that he felt needed to be 16 brought to my attention, certainly liaisoning with Caucus 17 members, trying to get them answers. 18 A lot of it would be the -- so that Caucus 19 understood what -- what the Government was doing and how 20 those positions may affect their riding, and responding 21 to -- to queries from members about issues that would 22 affect him in their riding. I think that would be the 23 large part of his job. 24 Q: And if a member of -- a member of -- 25 a backbencher or a member of Caucus who wanted to contact

1 you, the Premier, how would that member do that -- 2 A: Normally I -- 3 Q: -- back in 1995? 4 A: Yeah, I believe they would -- they 5 would do that by contacting Mr. King. Mr. King would 6 then make an assessment of that request, usually would 7 pass that on to -- to one (1) of the other members of the 8 senior staff and they would either get the answer or in 9 some cases arrange a meeting. 10 Q: And did Mr. King attend your senior 11 staff meetings in the mornings that you've told us about? 12 A: No, he didn't. 13 Q: And did you have a regular time when 14 you'd meet with Mr. King? 15 A: Normally it would be before Caucus 16 meetings so that which -- when the House was in session 17 was every Tuesday morning. So normally I would get 18 either a written briefing or Mr. King would brief me 19 personally or he'd brief one (1) of the members of staff 20 who would brief me going into Caucus. 21 Q: And over the summer of 1995 before 22 September 4th do you recall how many Caucus meetings you 23 had after June 26th? 24 A: I don't but we wouldn't have had -- 25 had many, maybe -- I think we had a Caucus retreat

1 following the election so I don't think it would have 2 been more than two (2), certainly not more than three 3 (3). The regular Caucus meetings wouldn't have started 4 until we got into the session in the Legislature. 5 Q: Okay. And on the Civil Service side 6 the senior civil servant when you were elected in 1995, 7 or the summer of 1995, was Rita Burak? 8 A: She was the Deputy Secretary of 9 Cabinet and then the senior bureaucrat. 10 Q: And she would report to you? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And the Civil -- Civil Service 13 reported up through Ms. Burak to you? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And the Civil Service did not report 16 up through the political side of your staff to you? 17 A: No, they did not. 18 Q: And after you became Premier would 19 you agree with me that major decisions in relation to the 20 operation of the Government that you headed were made by 21 you and your senior staff? 22 A: Certainly the -- the major political 23 decisions. I -- I think that's -- that's fair as it 24 pertained to -- to government issues. 25 Q: And in fact it was often called, The

1 Centre, your office and your senior staff? 2 A: Yeah, I -- I believe that's correct 3 and I -- I think it would be the same for -- for any 4 government. 5 Q: And when your government -- you took 6 over the government as Premier on June 26th, 1995, were 7 the priorities that you set for yourself the ones that 8 were set out in The Common Sense Revolution? 9 A: Primarily, other than any issues that 10 may have come up. 11 Q: And what was your policy if any with 12 respect to Aboriginal people and First Nations when you 13 became the Government in -- at the end of June 1995? 14 A: They -- certainly -- initially I 15 don't recall that either than -- than how The Common 16 Sense Revolution and the economic policies would affect 17 Ontarians and -- and certainly that would include -- a 18 number of these initiatives in policy would include 19 native Ontarians both on reserve and off reserve but 20 there was nothing specific on -- on the narrow area of -- 21 of what you would call Aboriginal issues. 22 Q: And was your government in favour in 23 the summer of 1995, for example of co-management 24 activities of resources with First Nations? 25 A: We didn't discuss those. I think we

1 would have looked at those on a -- on a case by case 2 basis. 3 Q: And when you became Premier in June 4 1995, as you said a few moments ago you were aware of 5 Section 35 of the Constitution and its recognition of 6 existing Aboriginal and treaty rights? 7 A: Yes, and I -- I think we stated that 8 in a number of documents that -- that certainly the 9 northern focus. 10 Q: And did you or your government take 11 the position in the summer of 1995 that Aboriginal people 12 did not have any special rights? 13 A: No, we were well aware of special 14 rights. We were aware -- I was certainly aware as MPP 15 for Nipissing aware in the very short time as Minister of 16 Natural Resources, aware in Opposition of -- of special 17 rights and constitutional rights. 18 Q: And did you ever instruct your staff 19 that your position was that Aboriginal people have no 20 special rights or constitutionally protected rights? 21 A: Absolutely not. 22 Q: And the -- we heard from Elaine 23 Todres, Dr. Elaine Todres, who was the Deputy Minister -- 24 Deputy Solicitor General in the summer of 1995 and she 25 testified that she attended a meeting early in the

1 mandate with Ministers Runciman and Hodgson and she 2 thought Mr. Vrancart who was the Deputy Minister of 3 Natural Resources with the Chiefs of Ontario. 4 And it was her evidence that the purpose 5 of the meeting was to inform the Chiefs of Ontario that 6 there would be a new approach and a new policy in the 7 current framework, with respect to Aboriginal issues was 8 no longer in place. 9 Is that --- now, at the same time Mr. 10 Runciman and Mr. Hodgson did not recall that meeting 11 having taken place at the time that Ms. Todres put it, 12 But her understanding was that there was going to be a 13 different policy in the summer that she thought was early 14 in the mandate with respect to Aboriginal issues. 15 A: I -- I have no knowledge of that. 16 Nope. 17 Q: No knowledge of that. And Mr. 18 Vrancart testified that it was his understanding that 19 your government was not in favour of co-management 20 activities with First Nations? 21 A: I -- I don't recall the issue being 22 brought forward to me so I don't know what was taking 23 place at the Ministerial or -- or at other -- other 24 levels. So I guess the definition of co-management -- I 25 -- I can't comment on it at that particular point in

1 time. 2 I think we were involved during the period 3 of our Government of number of initiatives of co- 4 management including in my own riding. 5 Q: So there wasn't, from your 6 perspective, a policy against the co-management of 7 resources with First Nations? 8 A: I -- I don't think there was a 9 position for or against. I don't recall it being 10 discussed. 11 Q: And at Tab 3 of the book that's in 12 front of you, there's a copy of a document, it's Exhibit 13 P-643, it's Inquiry Document 1007239. 14 And Mr. Harris, 5 -- 15 A: Sorry. P? 16 Q: P-643. 17 A: Right. 18 Q: It's Tab -- 19 A: Tab 3? 20 Q: -- 3. And if you go to the back, 21 sir, there's a -- it's five (5) pages in from the back, 22 there's a document entitled, Statement of Political 23 Relationship. 24 A: This is dated August 1992? 25 Q: Yes. The doc -- you're looking at

1 the right document but if I could take you to the back of 2 the document -- 3 A: Okay. 4 Q: -- and move forward five (5) pages, 5 sir. 6 A: Back and forward five (5). Okay. 7 Q: And you've got the right page and one 8 (1) page back, sir. 9 A: Statement of Political Relationship-- 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: -- Tribal Council Ontario, Appendix-- 12 Q: Yes. 13 A: -- the document? 14 Q: And the document that's in front of 15 you is a document signed on August the 6th, 1991 between 16 then Premier Rae and Mr. Wildman who was the Minister 17 Responsible for Native Affairs and the Chiefs of Ontario. 18 And it's with respect to the relationship between the 19 First Nations and the Government of Ontario as of August 20 the 6th, 1991. 21 When you were elected Premier, were you 22 familiar with this document? 23 A: I don't believe so. 24 Q: And did you become aware of this 25 document at any time over the summer of 1995?

1 A: I don't recall it being discussed, 2 no. 3 Q: And so in the summer of 1995 you 4 don't recall a discussion about the Statement of 5 Political Relationship? 6 A: I don't recall it, no. 7 Q: And once you became the Premier, were 8 you given any briefings on Aboriginal issues? 9 A: I don't recall briefings in the -- if 10 you're talking about the summer of 1995. 11 Q: I'm talking about the summer of 1995. 12 A: It's -- it's possible. I think when 13 we took over the Government, I received briefings on -- 14 on a number of issues and there were certainly a number 15 of briefing books and there could easily have been 16 information that was made available to me that I may not 17 have read through. 18 I think at that point I would have been 19 more focussed on -- on the commitments of the Common 20 Sense Revolution and the -- the preparation of the Throne 21 Speech, the Legislative agenda. The initial focus of the 22 Government was certainly more on the $2 billion worth of 23 -- of cuts in spending that we endeavoured to make in 24 that first year. 25 Q: And so your focus was on economic

1 issues that you recall it? 2 A: Yes, yes. 3 Q: And at Tab 11 there's a copy of a 4 document which -- it's Exhibit P-937, Mr. Harris. It's 5 Inquiry Document 3001720. 6 Now this is a document, a memorandum to 7 Mr. Larry Taman who was then the Deputy Attorney General, 8 dated August the 4th, 1995 from Michele Fordyce in the 9 Ontario Native Affairs Secretariat and attached to it is 10 a briefing. 11 And do you recall ever seeing this -- the 12 document attached to Exhibit P-937, sir? 13 A: Cert -- not -- in the summer of '95? 14 Q: Yes, sir. 15 A: No, I do not. 16 Q: And the letter from -- the 17 memorandum, if I could take you back to the letter. The 18 letter refers to a briefing of the Premier's staff to 19 take place on August the 11th and it -- in paragraph 2, 20 the letter says: 21 "We are informed that there is an 22 interest in a briefing that would 23 address: 24 A) The issues of entitlement to 25 provincial programs and services by

1 Aboriginal people; 2 B) Land claim negotiations; and 3 C) Access to resources. 4 I understand that the need for an 5 overview briefing became pressing as a 6 result of the statement made by Premier 7 Harris on July 26th on the government's 8 principle --position on the agreement 9 in principle regarding the TAA." 10 And do you recall making an important 11 statement in July 26th, 1995 regarding the TAA? 12 A: No, I don't. 13 Q: And do you know what -- do you recall 14 what TAA stands for? 15 A: I do not. 16 Q: Would it be the Temagami Anishnaabek 17 Agreement, do you? 18 A: The initials fit. 19 Q: But -- 20 A: I don't know. 21 Q: -- does that assist you? 22 A: I don't recall at all. 23 Q: But was it an issue -- was the issue 24 of entitlement to provincial programs and services by 25 Aboriginal people issue, land claim negotiations and

1 access to resources, an issue that was important to your 2 staff and -- at the beginning of August 1995? 3 A: You'd have to ask the staff that. I 4 don't think it was -- was something that was on my radar 5 screen or on the politicians' radar screen. 6 I think there were a couple of briefings, 7 as I understand, after the fact, that were requested by - 8 - by my staff. And certainly any of the -- the changes 9 that we were making and commitments in the Common Sense 10 Revolution, particularly in the area of entitlement 11 programs, welfare programs. 12 I think we would want to have an 13 understanding of how they would have affected the First 14 Nations across the Province, so this could all be 15 background and information that was -- that was required 16 for preparation of the Throne Speech for plans for 17 implementation for how we were dealing with our budgetary 18 issues. 19 Q: If I could ask -- I would ask you to 20 turn to Tab 14 and this is a memorandum to Rita Burak 21 dated August 10, 1995. 22 And it's from Mr. Larry Taman. It's 23 Exhibit P-642 and attached to it is a document briefing 24 on Aboriginal issues for Premier's office staff dated 25 August 11, 1995.

1 And it's my understanding that, Mr. 2 Harris, that this was the -- the briefing that was 3 provided to -- the document provided to Mr. Giorno and 4 Ms. Hutton at the briefing on August 11th, 1995. 5 And do you recall seeing the document, 6 briefing on Aboriginal affairs, back in the summer of 7 1995? 8 A: No, I don't recall, but it could have 9 been made available to me, but I don't recall that. 10 Q: Do you recall having been briefed by 11 Mr. Giorno or Ms. Hutton with respect to Aboriginal 12 issues in -- in and around August 11th, 1995 or shortly 13 thereafter? 14 A: I don't recall that, but it's 15 possible. 16 Q: And you will -- and the letter from 17 Mr. Taman to Rita Burak, it says in the second paragraph: 18 "The intent of the presentation is to 19 speak to the history, complexity and 20 policy flexibility of the Aboriginal 21 files and to address the three (3) 22 general interests of issues to the -- 23 issues of interest to the Premier's 24 staff: 25 A) Aboriginal entitlements to

1 provincial programs and services. 2 B) The status of land claim 3 negotiations and; 4 C) Access to resources. 5 It is my expectation that after our 6 review of these issues, we should 7 proceed to a practical approach in 8 support of the Government's overall 9 direction. 10 ONAS is ready to prevent a crisis 11 approach to potential flashpoints. 12 Ensure consistent messaging inside and 13 outside government and manage 14 expectations in both the Aboriginal and 15 non-Aboriginal communities." 16 The -- have you made a decision in the 17 summer of 1995, in August 1995, as to the direction that 18 your government was going to take with respect to 19 Aboriginal issues? 20 A: No, I don't recall any discussion on 21 -- on those issues. There -- there could very well have 22 briefings on the status of -- of any -- any outstanding 23 issues, certainly of -- of any outstanding land claims, 24 any ongoing negotiations, but I don't recall us taking 25 any position that would be with regards to any of the

1 issues, not to my recollection. 2 Q: And on this issue if I could take you 3 to Tab 16, it's the last document with respect to this 4 issue. It's a copy, Mr. Harris, of a document entitled, 5 Additional Information on Aboriginal Affairs for 6 Premier's Office Staff. 7 It's dated August 23rd, 1995. It's 8 Exhibit P-705,, Inquiry Document 3001721, and do you 9 recall seeing this document in August 1995 or early 10 September 1995, sir? 11 A: I -- I do not recall but it -- it may 12 have been made available to me. 13 Q: And do you recall receiving any 14 briefing from anyone in your staff, Mr. Giorno, Ms. 15 Hutton, or anyone else with respect to Aboriginal issues 16 in or around August 23rd, 1995? 17 A: No, I don't recall specific to that. 18 I know that -- that my office, and probably led by Mr. 19 Giorno, were reviewing every budget of every Ministry and 20 -- right down to the line items and -- in preparation for 21 reductions in overall government spending that we had 22 committed to. 23 And so I would expect that we would be 24 looking at the Native Secretariat. We'd be looking at 25 the -- all spending in every Ministry and that would

1 include dealing with those in Aboriginal programs. 2 Q: And that was one of Mr. Giorno's 3 responsibilities during the summer of 1995? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: And was it also the responsibility of 6 Ms. Hutton? 7 A: I don't think it was as much on Ms. 8 Hutton's radar screen other than I think her -- her 9 opinion could have been sought as to whether any changes 10 that we were making would -- would -- what would be the 11 impacts. 12 With that - when -- when you're cutting 13 back spending there's -- there's normally a reaction from 14 various parties, Ministries and bureaucracies and -- and 15 transfer agencies, so I think it would be reasonable that 16 she would be consulted at some point too. 17 Q: And she was -- Mr. Giorno was -- 18 looked after long-term policy and Ms. Hutton was short -- 19 A: Well, I -- 20 Q: -- shorter term -- 21 A: -- I would say if you're -- 22 Q: -- issues? 23 A: -- you're -- you're splitting the 24 roles that would be -- that would be my understanding but 25 that doesn't mean that they might not have each chatted

1 about each other's areas of responsibility. 2 Q: No, I think you misunderstood. One 3 of the issues that Ms. Hutton was responsible was for 4 immediate short-term issues? 5 A: Yes, yes. 6 Q: And as you said, that if there was to 7 be cuts that would be perhaps become a -- an immediate 8 short-term issue? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And she would be interested in that 11 in her role? 12 A: Absolutely. 13 Q: And in the summer of 1995 were you 14 aware of the existence of the Interministerial Committee 15 for Aboriginal Emergencies? 16 A: I don't believe so. 17 Q: And at Tab 7 of the book in front of 18 you, Mr. Harris, there's a copy of a document. It's 19 Exhibit P-303 and it's a briefing note for Mr. Charles 20 Harnick, Minister Responsible for Native Affairs, and it 21 sets out procedures for dealing with Aboriginal 22 emergencies. 23 Have you seen this document before, sir, 24 in the summer of 1995 before September 4th? 25 A: No, I don't believe so.

1 Q: And had anyone drawn -- and at Tab 8 2 there's an appendix to this document. It's P-498, 3 Inquiry Document 1012232 and the guidelines for 4 responding. It's an appendix to the briefing note from 5 Mr. Harnick. 6 Have you seen this document, the document 7 at Tab 8, sir? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Were you aware that your office was a 10 -- one of the offices to be represented on the Aboriginal 11 Emergencies Committee? 12 A: No, I wasn't. 13 Q: Were you aware, if you turn at Tab 8, 14 sir, to paragraph 11, excuse me, at paragraph 10, that 15 the objects of the Committee were: 16 "To guide provincial reaction to any 17 Aboriginal blockade; act as a clearing 18 house for information regarding any 19 blockade and ensure the timely exchange 20 of information; formulate any 21 provincial negotiating position on 22 substantive issues as such is required, 23 and negotiate removal of any blockade." 24 Were you aware, prior to September 4th, 25 1995, that that was the objective of the Committee?

1 A: No, I was not. 2 Q: And in paragraph 11, it sets out the 3 powers of the Committee, including: 4 "A) To define the problems; 5 B) To agree to a negotiating agenda 6 with all parties; 7 C) Make decisions on third party 8 intervention; 9 D) Appoint a facilitator/negotiator; 10 E) Involve the Indian Commission of 11 Ontario; 12 F) Second Ontario Public Services -- 13 Servants, excuse me, on an emergency 14 basis and 15 G) Recommend that legal action be 16 taken." 17 Prior to September 4th, 1995, were you 18 aware that those were the powers of the Interministerial 19 Committee? 20 A: No, I wasn't aware of anything to do 21 -- even the existence of the Committee. 22 Q: And up to September 6th, 1995, was 23 anyone in your office specifically assigned 24 responsibility for Aboriginal issues? 25 A: I'm sorry, up until when?

1 Q: September 6th, 1995? 2 A: I don't know, not aware of it. 3 Q: Now, when you became Premier in June 4 of 1995, what was your understanding of the relationship 5 between the Government and the Ontario Provincial Police? 6 A: Well, we provided their budget -- 7 Q: And that -- 8 A: -- to the -- through the Ministry of 9 Solicitor General. They're -- the Solicitor General was 10 responsible and for -- for those policies and for -- for 11 the budget, that would include the Ontario Provincial 12 Police. 13 We were well aware that there was a 14 separation between the political arm of -- of government 15 and the police. 16 Q: And when you say, "we were well aware 17 there was a separation between the political arm of 18 government and the police", what do you mean by that, 19 sir? 20 A: That -- that policy, setting of laws, 21 the regulatory process, those policy decisions were the 22 purview of the politicians; that -- that the police would 23 have their own authority and as to how they would uphold 24 those laws and how they would deal with it and that there 25 was a separation there.

1 And we were certainly well aware, I think, 2 that was one of the fundamental tenets of democracy that 3 -- that made Canada so attractive to -- to so many 4 immigrants to the country. So we understood that. 5 Q: and what was your basis of the 6 understanding -- basis of your understanding as to the 7 separation between the politicians and Ontario Provincial 8 Police with respect to operational matters? 9 A: That politicians, including the 10 Solicitor General would have no involvement in -- 11 Q: And -- 12 A: -- any operational decisions. 13 Q: And where did you gain that 14 understanding, sir? 15 A: Well, I think I knew that growing up. 16 I think I knew that from school. I think I knew that as 17 a teacher. I think I knew that certainly as an MPP from 18 1981 on and certainly reinforced, I would suggest, as a 19 time -- as short time as it was, as Ministry of Natural 20 Resources in 1985. 21 Q: And how would you define an 22 operational matter back in 1995? How would have define 23 it? 24 A: I'm not sure that -- that I recall 25 sitting down defining it.

1 Q: Today, how would you -- what's your 2 understanding of what's operational as opposed to policy? 3 A: Well any -- any -- any situation that 4 -- that required intervention by the OPP, Ontario 5 Provincial Police, I think it would apply to all police, 6 municipality to police force and certainly Federal 7 Government to RCMP, that there would be no involvement in 8 -- in any operational matters, any of -- how the OPP 9 conducted their affairs or investigations. 10 Q: And how they carried out a response 11 to an occupation? 12 A: Absolutely. 13 Q: And prior to the events of September 14 1995, were you briefed by anyone with respect to the OPP 15 and its relation to Government? 16 A: I may have. I don't recall 17 specifically but I -- I may have. But I was certainly 18 well aware. 19 Q: And at Tab 2 there's a document, Mr. 20 Harris, it's a copy of a document that's Exhibit P-578, 21 and this is a document produced by, we understand, a 22 lawyer in the Ministry of the Solicitor General in 1991 23 and Ministerial control and the Ontario Provincial 24 Police, a discussion paper. 25 And while you were the Premier or while

1 you were in -- an MPP from the period 1991 until you 2 retired, have you seen this document, sir? 3 A: I don't recall seeing the document, 4 no. 5 Q: And have you had the opportunity to 6 review this document in preparation of coming to the 7 Inquiry? 8 A: I -- I did some time ago read it, 9 yes. 10 Q: And at page 23 and following, pages 11 23, 24, 25 and 26, there's a -- it sets out the 12 Ministerial responsibility and in case, the Minister of 13 the Solicitor General and the responsibility of the 14 Solicitor General. 15 And would you agree that these pages under 16 Ministerial Responsibility, do you agree they accurately 17 set out your understanding of what the role of the 18 Minister is? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And did you have the opportunity to 21 look at -- on pages 26 and 27 and 28, the responsibility 22 of the Deputy Minister and the Commissioner of the OPP? 23 A: I've reviewed it in the past. I will 24 review it again if you like. 25 Q: And do you agree that they accurately

1 set out their responsibilities as you understood them? 2 A: I believe they do. I believe so. 3 Q: Now, in the summer of 1995, did you 4 become aware of issues with respect to Camp Ipperwash, 5 the Army Camp located outside of Forest? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: And how did you become aware of those 8 issues, sir? 9 A: I believe primarily through 10 clippings. I was aware there was an ongoing dispute, if 11 you like, with Camp Ipperwash, with the Federal 12 Government. And that was -- would have been in clipping 13 packages that were provided to me on a daily basis from 14 across the Province. 15 I don't recall it being -- being an issue 16 that I was directly briefed on by any of the staff, but 17 if I was it was not an issue that was of a high priority 18 to us. It was viewed primarily as a federal issue 19 dealing with Camp Ipperwash. 20 Q: And as the Premier -- Premiers before 21 you, and I presume Premiers after you, on a regular 22 basis, on a regular basis, did you receive clippings as 23 to -- newspaper clippings or extracts from clippings on a 24 daily -- on a regular basis? 25 A: Yes, on a daily basis. Perhaps on

1 the weekend it might have been a -- a whole bunch of them 2 on Monday morning but usually on a daily basis received 3 clippings from -- from major papers; also perhaps on a 4 weekly basis regional clippings, perhaps included 5 weeklies. 6 Q: And this was -- was this process -- 7 was this something you started or was it something in 8 place when you became Premier? 9 A: No, it was in place and -- and I 10 believe still is in place. I think today there's 11 probably as much emphasis on electronic stories as well, 12 scripts of radio newscasts plus newspaper clippings. 13 Q: Now, from your -- the clippings that 14 you read other than that there was an issue with respect 15 to what you thought the Federal Government and the Army 16 Camp, did you have any knowledge of any of the 17 particulars of the -- of the issue with respect to the 18 Army Camp, sir? 19 A: I can't recall how much information I 20 had or had assimilated at the time. I -- I -- there was 21 a general awareness, I believe, that -- that the 22 campgrounds had been taken over if you like, I'm not sure 23 what the process was during the Second World War; that 24 they had subsequently never been returned and there was a 25 commitment to return them to -- to the Natives that --

1 that had ownership of those lands before the Second World 2 War before the Federal Government used it as a training 3 ground. 4 And generally I would say that we had -- 5 we had sympathy as to, in 1995 some forty (40) years 6 later that these lands had not been returned. 7 Q: Actually almost fifty (50) years. 8 A: Fifty (50) years. Yeah, right. 9 Q: And prior to the election campaign in 10 1995 did you know Mr. Marcel Beaubien, sir? 11 A: I don't believe so. I -- I may have 12 run into him but he was not known to me other than when 13 he became a candidate for the Party and then as -- as 14 elected. 15 Q: And as you're aware he was elected as 16 a member of the Government in 1995 and was a member of 17 your Caucus although not in your Cabinet. 18 Can you -- what was your understanding of 19 the role of an MPP such as Mr. Beaubien in 1995? 20 A: Well, he would have two (2) roles. 21 One, as a contributor to Caucus discussions on -- on 22 government policy, on legislative initiatives that we'd 23 be taking. And -- and so we'd be seeking all Caucus 24 members' input on implementation of -- of The Common 25 Sense Revolution, development of the throne speech,

1 development of our initial budgetary positions. 2 The perhaps most important role was to 3 represent their constituents. And so reflect their 4 constituents' views in any discussions that we had on -- 5 on provincial policy issues but also to express views of 6 constituents in -- in an individual nature in dealings 7 with government. 8 So that -- that was viewed as a very 9 important role and in the summer of '95 we'd be expecting 10 Mr. Beaubien to finding office space, setting up office, 11 hiring staff, starting to meet with constituents. 12 Q: And between June 8th, 1995, and 13 September 4th, 1995, did you meet with Mr. Beaubien other 14 than in a large group such as a caucus? 15 A: I don't recall meeting with him, no. 16 Q: And do you recall speaking to him on 17 the telephone? 18 A: I don't believe so. 19 Q: And did you have any discussions at 20 caucus or in other large groups with Mr. Beaubien about 21 the issue -- the issues in the Ipperwash area? 22 A: I don't recall any caucus discussion. 23 I -- I -- it's possible, passing in the aisle, at a 24 meeting, that Mr. Beaubien raised concerns. It's 25 possible Mr. King relayed concerns to me, informally.

1 And I was aware from clippings that there 2 were concerns from residents in the area and concerns 3 from the -- from Native groups over -- over the lack of - 4 - in how long it was taking, the lack of action on the 5 Federal Government in -- in getting the Park -- 6 Q: With respect to the Army Camp, you 7 mean? 8 A: The Army Camp, or sorry, the Army 9 Camp, yeah. 10 Q: And at Tab 9, there's a copy of a 11 letter from Mr. Beaubien. It's Exhibit P-543, Inquiry 12 document 1000918. It's dated July 31, 1995 and it's from 13 Mr. Beaubien to Mr. Harnick with copies to Mr. Dailey, 14 the then -- the president of the West Ipperwash Property 15 Owners' Association, Mr. Thomas the Mayor of the Town of 16 Bosanquet, and Mr. Runciman. 17 Have you ever, prior to getting for these 18 proceedings, have you ever seen -- did you see this 19 letter in the summer of 1995, sir? 20 A: I did not see it in 1995, no. 21 Q: Did anyone draw its contents to your 22 attention? 23 A: I don't recall that, no. 24 Q: And this letter principally deals 25 with the issue of the West Ipperwash beach litigation.

1 There was litigation between the First Nation and certain 2 cottage owners with respect to West Ipperwash, which is 3 to the west of the Provincial Park. 4 Were you aware of that problem in the 5 summer of 1995? 6 A: I was aware, and it was certainly -- 7 certainly in the -- in the clippings and I can't -- and I 8 have reviewed those clippings, obviously, subsequent. 9 So they were available to me and I believe 10 I was aware there was -- there was some concerns, but 11 whether it -- I don't believe it came from this letter. 12 I don't recall this letter. 13 Q: Okay. And at Tab 10 there's a copy 14 of Exhibit P-506. It's the minutes of an 15 Interministerial Committee meeting, August the 2nd 1995, 16 and it's a -- deals with a IMC meeting on August 2nd, 17 '95. 18 In the summer of 1995, did you see these 19 meeting notes? 20 A: No. 21 Q: And I note it's noted that Mr. Brett 22 -- Brent Laschinger attended this meeting on August the 23 2nd, 1995, substituting for Deb Hutton. 24 And Mr. Brent Laschinger, as I understand 25 it, was Ms. Hutton's assistant or worked with Ms. Hutton?

1 A: That's correct. 2 Q: And were you aware that Mr. 3 Laschinger attended this meeting for Ms. Hutton with 4 respect to the issues at the Army Camp? 5 A: I was not aware. 6 Q: And I then take it from that that no 7 one briefed you with respect to that meeting on August 8 the 2nd. 9 A: No, no one did. 10 Q: And at Tab 12, excuse me, at Tab 15 11 there's a copy, Mr. Harris, of Exhibit P-418, Inquiry -- 12 A: Sorry, which Tab? 13 Q: At Tab 15. 14 A: 15. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 A: Okay. 19 Q: Inquiry Document 1012239. And this 20 is actually a copy of the letter that went to the 21 Ministry of Natural Resources but if you turn in three 22 (3) pages, sir, there's a copy of a letter dated August 23 14, 1995 from Mr. Beaubien to Mr. Harnick with copies to 24 Mr. Newman, Mr. Runciman, Mr. Simzer in the Solicitor 25 General's Department and Mr. Hodgson.

1 And in 1995, did you see this letter, sir? 2 A: I did not. 3 Q: Did anyone tell you about the letter? 4 A: I don't believe so. 5 Q: Did anyone tell you that Mr. Beaubien 6 was meeting with senior members of the Ontario Provincial 7 Police? 8 A: No. 9 Q: And if you had known that Mr. 10 Beaubien was meeting with Mr. -- Superintendent Park, 11 Inspector Linton, Inspector Carson and Staff Sergeant 12 Wade Lacroix, would that have caused you any concern in 13 the summer of 1995? 14 A: Well, I didn't know that he was 15 meeting. It wouldn't concern me if -- if an MPP was 16 meeting local representatives of -- of the OPP if it was 17 to seek information or relay information of concern from 18 his constituents or seek information. 19 I think that would be an MPP's 20 responsibility. 21 Q: And this letter, with respect, deals 22 with the -- again, the West Ipperwash Beach situation in 23 part and with respect to -- as Mr. Beaubien puts it, he's 24 not concerned with the takeover of Ipperwash -- Camp 25 Ipperwash Army Camp, as it's a Federal matter, and I'm

1 referring to the third paragraph of this letter, Mr. 2 Harris. 3 A: Right. 4 Q: What does concern us is Ipperwash -- 5 Ipperwash Provincial Park, a campground owned and 6 operated by the Ministry of Natural Resources. The OPP 7 are providing twenty-four (24) hour protection and I'm 8 sure that you were aware additional police protection had 9 been provided on the site. 10 Were you aware in August of 1995 that 11 there was a concern with respect to the Ipperwash 12 Provincial Park? 13 A: No. 14 Q: Were you aware in the summer -- 15 summer of 1995 and August of 1995, where Ipperwash 16 Provincial Park was located in relation to the Army Camp? 17 A: No, I was not. 18 Q: And when did you become aware of the 19 relationship between the Provincial Park and the Army 20 Camp? 21 A: It would have been some time after 22 the occupation of September the 4th, so. 23 Q: And what were you advised -- were you 24 advised with respect to the physical relationship between 25 the Provincial Park and the Army Camp?

1 A: Well, I was advised probably 2 September 5th or 6th, but between that period of the 5th 3 and the 6th that -- that the Park was adjacent to the 4 Army Camp. 5 Q: And were you told that the Park was 6 at the north end of the Army Camp along Lake Huron? 7 A: I may have been. What I recall being 8 told was that -- that the lands abutted the -- the Army 9 Camp property and that they were -- were side by side. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Would this 14 be a good point to take a break, or do you want to a 15 little longer. 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Anytime is fine, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, this 18 is as good a time as any, we'll take the morning break 19 now. 20 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 21 for fifteen (15) minutes. 22 23 --- Upon recessing at 10:13 a.m. 24 --- Upon resuming at 10:30 a.m. 25

1 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 2 resumed, please be seated. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 7 Q: Mr. Harris, we were referring, before 8 the break, to Exhibit P-418 which is the letter from Mr. 9 Beaubien to Mr. Harnick. And while the letter refers to, 10 at the bottom of the first page, the representatives from 11 the OPP and Mr. Beaubien having reached the consensus, 12 the evidence that the Commissioner has heard from the OPP 13 officers is that they had A) never seen this letter and 14 B) didn't agree with its contents. 15 But the question I have for you is: I 16 appreciate that you had not seen -- you did not see this 17 letter in the summer of 1995, but Mr. Beaubien on page 2 18 at paragraph number 3 states: 19 "Ministries involved have to give the 20 OPP clear guidelines for law 21 enforcement." 22 And do you agree with that statement that 23 the ministries have the power to give the OPP clear 24 guidelines for law enforcement? 25 A: No, I don't.

1 Q: And in the summer of 1995 was there 2 any training or briefing of MPP's as to the relation 3 between MPP's and the police, be it provincial police or 4 municipal police? Was that part of the briefing a new 5 member would get? 6 A: I -- I don't know. I wasn't involved 7 in any of those briefings. 8 Q: Okay. Do you think that might be a 9 good idea? 10 A: I believe it would be. 11 Q: And during the period of time that 12 you were Premier, did you institute that type of a 13 briefing, that you recall? 14 A: I -- I don't recall. 15 Q: In August 1996 and prior to September 16 4th, 1996, had you ever met or spoken to Inspector John 17 Carson of the Ontario Provincial Police? 18 A: Not to the best of my knowledge. I 19 certainly never met with, may have seen him at, you know, 20 an official event or something, but I -- I wouldn't know 21 that. 22 Q: And -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. Millar, 24 I think you said '96 and I think you meant '95. 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I meant '95. Excuse

1 me. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. Yes. 3 4 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 5 Q: And -- 6 A: I -- I don't recall ever meeting with 7 him. 8 Q: And what about inspector Dale Linton? 9 He was one (1) of the -- he was the night-time Incident 10 Commander at Ipperwash in September 1995. 11 Prior to September 4th, 1995, had you ever 12 met Inspector Dale Linton? 13 A: Not to the best of my knowledge, no. 14 Q: Detective Sergeant Mark Wright, who 15 was a participant at -- for the OPP? He was at Ipperwash 16 in September of 1995. 17 A: No, I did not. 18 Q: Staff Sergeant Wade Lacroix, who was 19 the head of the Petrolia Detachment of the Ontario 20 Provincial Police? 21 A: No. 22 Q: Prior to September 4th, had you met 23 Inspector Ron Fox? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Sergeant Scott Patrick?

1 A: No. 2 Q: Superintendent Tony Parkin? 3 A: No. 4 Q: Superintendent Chief Coles, Chris 5 Coles? 6 A: Not to the best of my knowledge. The 7 -- the higher up you go I may have met on functions or 8 ceremonial engagements or these kinds of events, but that 9 would be all. 10 Q: You didn't have any -- any dealings-- 11 A: No dealings with them, no. 12 Q: -- or telephone calls with them? 13 A: No. 14 Q: And Commissioner Thomas O'Grady? Now 15 Mr. O'Grady believes he attended your -- 16 A: Swearing in? 17 Q: -- he attended the swearing in. 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: But do you recall meeting with him, 20 other than -- 21 A: No. 22 Q: -- him attending your swearing in? 23 A: No, I don't. 24 Q: Prior to September 4th, 1995, were 25 you aware that Ontario Provincial Police officers were

1 seconded to the Ministry of the Attorney General -- 2 Solicitor General? 3 A: No, I wasn't. 4 Q: And when did you become aware of 5 that, sir? 6 A: I don't know exactly, but I believe 7 some time in 1996. 8 Q: And how did you become aware of that, 9 sir? 10 A: I think it was part of either a 11 briefing for Question Period on the basis of a story that 12 had -- that appeared in the paper, that -- I can't 13 remember which paper but it was -- it was part of -- part 14 of, I think, Question Period briefing that was brought to 15 my attention. 16 Q: And I would ask you to go to Tab 17 17 of the book in front of you. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: This is a -- what is known as Project 20 Maple, it's a copy of Exhibit P-424, it's dated September 21 1995. 22 Up to and including the end of September 23 1995, had you ever seen a copy of Project Maple? 24 A: Not to the best of my knowledge. 25 Q: And in the summer of 1995, did you

1 know of the existence of a non-chaired Provincial Police 2 operation known as Project Maple? 3 A: I did not. 4 Q: And at any time while you were 5 Premier, were you provided with a copy of Exhibit P-424? 6 A: I may have been, in preparation for - 7 - for this Inquiry. Possibly, I may have been in 8 preparation for preparing to testify at the law suit. 9 Q: But other than in preparation -- 10 A: I don't -- I don't recall. 11 Q: Now, in 1995, did you keep a diary? 12 A: No. 13 Q: Did you keep notes? 14 A: No. 15 Q: And was that the course of -- that 16 you followed throughout your career as Premier? 17 A: Much to the chagrin of a number of 18 potential book writers and historians, that is true. 19 Q: And what about memorandums to file on 20 issues that you -- did you make memorandums for files, to 21 file on issues from time to time? 22 A: No, I didn't have any of my own 23 files. The -- I would have had files in the constituency 24 office and my secretary would have had files. 25 Anything to deal with -- with Premier's

1 office, Cabinet office, I think files would have been 2 kept by the various staff members to whatever extent that 3 would be. 4 Q: But you as -- 5 A: I didn't. 6 Q: -- Premier didn't have your own 7 personal notes, or diary, or files? 8 A: I did not. 9 Q: And how did you stay on top of 10 issues? 11 A: Well, I was briefed most days and I 12 would have a briefing book that I would review in any 13 spare time that I had. 14 Most of that would have been in 15 preparation for Question Period, for media scrums or 16 events, it would be a -- a briefing that day or in 17 advance of the media event or a scrum, speaking 18 opportunities where there was a potential for media, I'd 19 be briefed at that -- 20 Q: You would be briefed -- 21 A: -- point on issues. 22 Q: -- briefed by your senior staff? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And now, if I could take you to 25 September 4th, 1995, and that was Labour Day, September

1 4th, 1995, and can you recall what you did on Labour Day, 2 September 4th, 1995? 3 A: I was in my -- in North Bay 4 constituency; flew to Toronto. I attended the Canadian 5 Open golf event, I believe it was at Ancaster, played 6 golf, had dinner and went home. 7 Q: And at Tab 18 of the black book in 8 front of you, is a copy of Exhibit P-964 and it's 9 entitled, Monday, September 4, 1995 Detailed Itinerary, 10 and is that your itinerary of September -- for September 11 4th, 1995? 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: And were these types of itineraries 14 created for each day? 15 A: Yes. I think there was a weekly 16 itinerary and -- and certainly this whole process evolved 17 over my time in office, but I -- I usually had a daily 18 itinerary as well. 19 Q: And then at Tab 19, there's a copy of 20 Exhibit P-965 and it's a geek at a Glance. 21 Is that your weekly itinerary for the week 22 of September 4th, 1995? 23 A: I believe it is, yes. 24 Q: And when did you learn, Mr. Harris, 25 about the occupation of the Ipperwash Provincial Park?

1 A: I believe in a phone call from Ms. 2 Hutton either the evening of -- of September the 4th, 3 probably to my residence or first thing in the morning, 4 September the 5th. 5 And I apologize, I can't -- I'm not sure 6 that I know for sure which one of those it was. 7 Q: And -- 8 A: Maybe both. 9 Q: So you might have spoken to her on 10 the evening of September 4th and the morning of September 11 5th? 12 A: And the morning of the 5th. 13 Q: By telephone? 14 A: Certainly the 4th would have been by 15 telephone. The 5th we certainly were scheduled to have a 16 staff meeting so it could have been at a face to face 17 briefing with staff or by phone or both. 18 Q: Okay. And what do you recall being 19 told whether it was on the evening of September 4th or 20 the morning of September 5th? 21 A: I recall being told of -- that the 22 Ipperwash Provincial Park had been occupied, taken over, 23 if you like, by a group. I'm not sure I knew at the 24 time, but became known as -- as I think the Stoney 25 Pointers that was a similar group, if not the same, that

67
  1  were involved in -- in taking over Camp Ipperwash.
  2                 That I'm not sure very much more than that
  3  on the 4th that there would -- I would get more
  4  information on the 5th.  So that evening of the 4th,
  5  morning of the 5th, that there would be a meeting that --
  6  that Ms. Hutton would attend on behalf of the Premier's
  7  Office involving the various Ministries and they would
  8  find out more information, I guess; how it happened and
  9  what the status was.
 10                 So I think it was fairly sketchy at the
 11  initial stage.
 12                 Q:   And was it the practice of you and
 13  Ms. Hutton earlier in your mandate in 1995 for Ms. Hutton
 14  to call you on a regular basis in the evening to update
 15  you?
 16                 A:   Yes.  And I think on the -- the 4th
 17  was a holiday mind you so, but normally if I on an event
 18  like the 4th where I was -- was out at a private --
 19  essentially private time and not in communication it
 20  would not be abnormal for her to call me at the end of
 21  the day and brief me on -- on any issues of that day.
 22                 And certainly on a working day it would be
 23  very normal.
 24                 Q:   And you indicated that you learned
 25  that the occupiers were called Stoney Pointers, were you

1 advised by anyone that the Army Camp was Stoney Point -- 2 called Stoney Point? 3 A: I don't recall that at the time. I 4 mean I -- 5 Q: You've learned that since? 6 A: I -- I have a better understanding 7 now, yes. 8 Q: And your itinerary, Exhibit P-965, 9 shows that there was a staff meeting at 9:00 a.m. on the 10 morning of Tuesday, September the 5th, and did you attend 11 this staff meeting on Tuesday, September the 5th? 12 A: I can't say for sure but I -- I see 13 no reason why I wouldn't have. The -- I believe I was 14 leaving that day sometime after 10:00 -- 10:30, something 15 like to attend to a second event in conjunction with the 16 Canadian Open so I believe I did. If I didn't I 17 certainly was involved by phone in -- in briefings. 18 Q: And do you recall who attended the 19 staff meeting on the morning of September the 5th? 20 A: I do not but normal attendance was -- 21 was the senior staff. 22 Q: That would have been the individuals 23 we talked -- Mr. Lindsey, Mr. Giorno, Mr. Rhodes and Ms. 24 Hutton? 25 A: Right. And -- and they may not have

1 all attended every meeting but they -- they -- would have 2 been a scheduled meeting that they were all invited to 3 and I -- I don't see any reason why they wouldn't have 4 unless they were off somewhere else or sick or something 5 else more -- more important. 6 And I -- I'm not aware of anything that 7 day that would take them away from that meeting. 8 Q: And can you recall anything else 9 being told you about the occupation on -- at the staff 10 meeting on the morning of September the 5th? 11 A: No, I think whatever knowledge I had 12 either came from, as I indicated, the -- the evening 13 before or that morning. I was aware that Ms. Hutton 14 would be attending a meeting with -- with officials and - 15 - and -- from other Ministries and would be gaining 16 information on -- on what the status was. 17 Q: And were you told that the Park was 18 closed for the season on Labour Day? 19 A: I believe I was told that; certainly 20 that -- that I think it was scheduled for overnight 21 campers to be closed, available for day use after that, 22 but that it -- because of the -- the occupation that it 23 was closed. 24 Q: That -- were you told that normally 25 it would close for overnight camping on -- at the -- on

1 that -- 2 A: I believe I was. 3 Q: And were you told anything about the 4 Ontario Provincial Police? 5 A: Sorry? 6 Q: Were you told anything about the 7 Ontario Provincial Police in relation to the Park on the 8 morning of September 5th or the evening of September -- 9 A: I -- I don't recall being given very 10 much information at that point in time. I -- I would 11 have been told whatever information that Ms. Hutton had 12 but I don't think she had a lot of information at that 13 point until she attended the Interministerial Committee 14 Meeting. 15 I wasn't sure I knew that's what it was 16 called at the time but I knew that -- that she would be 17 the one attending and gaining information to find out 18 what happened, to get the status and what was the game 19 plan. 20 Q: Were you told that the OPP had been 21 in the Park and had left the Park? 22 A: I -- I don't believe I was told on 23 the morning. I certainly would have been told that in 24 the evening of the 5th. 25 Q: And when you learned that, did that

1 concern you? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And why did that concern you? 4 A: Well, at -- at this point, and I 5 believe it was probably the evening of the 5th after Ms. 6 Hutton had attended the meeting and received more 7 information, it concerned me that -- that the Ministry of 8 Natural Resources officials were no longer attending to 9 and in control of the Park. 10 It concerned me that there was an 11 occupation in the Park by -- by what became known I guess 12 as -- as the -- the Stoney Pointers. 13 It concerned me that -- that the OPP were 14 there and they had to leave the Park or felt compelled to 15 leave the Park. We were concerned about safety. 16 There had, at this point in time I would 17 have recollected the -- the stories over the summer of 18 concern of residents, of the potential escalation. 19 I think at this point in time between the 20 evening of the 5th, and again I can't tell you how much I 21 -- I received there versus the 6th, but that this was, I 22 believe it was relayed to me that this was an action that 23 was not supported or condoned by Chief Bressette; that 24 this was a splinter group, if you like, they were acting 25 independently on their own.

1 Q: And when -- who told you about the 2 position of Chief Bressette, do you recall? 3 A: I believe it would have been in a 4 briefing from Ms. Hutton on the evening of the 5th or the 5 morning of the 6th. 6 Q: On the morning of the 5th, prior to 7 the IMC meeting, did you have any view on the occupation 8 of the Park? 9 A: I think I was developing a view, from 10 briefings from Ms. Hutton, that -- that the -- that the 11 occupation was -- there was no question over ownership of 12 the Park, belonging to the government of Ontario, 13 entrusted to the Ministry of Natural Resources, that the 14 occupation was illegal in that sense. 15 That was our understanding, that it was 16 not an occupation that was supported by the -- by the 17 Chief and that we felt this occupation should end, as 18 soon as possible. 19 Q: and that was your view on the morning 20 of the 5th as well? 21 A: I -- 22 Q: I'm just trying to -- I know it's 23 difficult -- 24 A: No, I would say by the evening of the 25 5th.

1 Q: Okay. 2 A: That would be a -- sorry, I thought 3 you were at the evening. 4 Q: I was at the morning, but that -- but 5 what you've just said -- 6 A: Evening of the 5th, morning of the 7 6th. 8 Q: 6th. 9 A: Hmm hmm. 10 Q: Okay. And what information, if any, 11 were you given on the 5th or the morning of the 6th, 12 about the history of the Army Camp? 13 A: I can't recall. I -- I was aware, 14 certainly before the occupation on the 4th, that the Army 15 Camp was an issue, that is was land that -- that was 16 taken over by the Federal government during the Second 17 World War and that it was to be given back and this was a 18 slow process, taking longer that it should have; that 19 likely would have been reinforced. 20 Q: And what were you told, if anything, 21 as to why the occupiers were in the Park? 22 A: Well, I -- I don't believe any reason 23 was given. There was certainly -- I don't recall any 24 reason being given and the assumption that I think we all 25 had was it was a -- a -- an escalation, if you like, of

1 activity by the -- the occupiers to draw attention to the 2 fact that -- that they had -- how long it was taking to 3 get the Camp back from the Federal Government. 4 We did not see this at the time as -- as 5 an action that was -- that was aimed at the Provincial 6 Government doing anything. 7 Q: And on the morning of the 5th, or on 8 the September 5th, were you advised that the occupiers 9 felt that the Park was their land? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Or that there was a burial ground in 12 the Park? 13 A: There may have been reference to -- 14 to a potential burial ground, but that was not given as a 15 reason for the occupation. And I recall, certainly right 16 through until the -- until the 6th, that -- that there 17 was really no -- no claim, if you like, by the occupiers 18 of the Park, of the land, of burial grounds. 19 And so I -- that's what led to the 20 assumption that -- that it could only be related to Camp 21 Ipperwash. 22 Q: And when you say a claim, do you mean 23 a legal claim, a filed claim with the government? 24 A: Or any statement of claim or anything 25 that the occupiers had said to -- to any of the -- the

1 officials on the ground. 2 Q: And on September the 5th, was it 3 drawn to your attention, or on the morning of September 4 the 6th, that the OPP had been -- had received 5 information that there might be a takeover of the Park? 6 A: Yes. Sometime on the 5th, evening of 7 the 5th or morning of the 6th, that information came 8 forward. 9 Q: And on the morning of the 5th, what 10 action, if any, did you believe needed to be taken with 11 respect to the Park? 12 A: I think on the morning of the 5th was 13 -- was more find out what happened and what the status is 14 and -- and was more of a -- an information gathering 15 session that -- that Ms. Hutton would go to. 16 I don't think that -- that on the morning 17 of the 5th that anybody was looking at any action. 18 Q: And on the morning of the 5th, at 19 your meeting, was there any discussion, that you can 20 recall, with respect to an injunction? 21 A: There may have been but I -- I don't 22 recall that. I recall that more on the evening of the 23 5th and the morning of the 6th. 24 Q: Okay. We'll come back to that. What 25 about on the morning of the 5th, was there any discussion

1 about the Ontario Provincial Police practice with respect 2 to protests, blockades and occupation? 3 A: There may have been but I -- I don't 4 recall. 5 Q: Did you know what the Ontario 6 Provincial Police practice was on the morning of the 5th? 7 A: With respect to Ipperwash Provincial 8 Park? 9 Q: With respect, generally, to 10 occupations and blockades. 11 A: Just in general terms. 12 Q: And what was your understanding? 13 A: That if it was -- was -- I guess it 14 depended on -- on the situation that -- that took place. 15 That -- and I can't tell you whether it was on the 5th of 16 the morning or in the evening that -- that I learned that 17 the OPP position was that they would take no action on an 18 occupation unless there was a safety threat or a threat 19 to -- to life until the -- an injunction was obtained. 20 Q: And was that -- who provided that 21 information? 22 A: I believe Ms. Hutton would have 23 provided that on the evening of the 5th. 24 Q: And on the morning of September the 25 5th, what knowledge, if you -- if any, did you have about

1 Gustafsen Lake in British Columbia? 2 A: Well I was aware that -- that a 3 protest was taking place and a -- and an occupation, 4 aware of the news reports, aware of concern over safety. 5 Q: Was that discussed on the morning of 6 September 5th with Ms. Hutton and your -- 7 A: It may have been, but I don't recall 8 whether it was the morning or the evening of the 5th or 9 the morning of the 6th. 10 Q: Was OKA discussed the morning of 11 September the 5th? 12 A: It may have been but I -- my 13 recollection is whether it was the morning or the evening 14 -- OKA -- I mean certainly by the 6th OKA was discussed. 15 The issue of -- of what took place at OKA and what was 16 taking place in -- in British Columbia was known to us. 17 Q: What were you -- on the morning of 18 September the 5th, what were you told would happen at the 19 meeting that Ms. Hutton was going to attend? 20 A: I don't recall specifics but I 21 believe I would have been briefed, that she would attend 22 the meeting where all the officials of the various 23 Ministries would be there. 24 And she would get a briefing on -- on what 25 the status was, what happened, how it happened, and any

1 action that was being taken or contemplated being taken, 2 and report back. 3 Q: And at a meeting such as the IMC 4 meeting that was going to take place in the morning of 5 September 5th, did Ms. Hutton give you any information as 6 to what the role of the IMC was, do you recall -- before 7 she went to the meeting? 8 A: No, I don't -- I don't recall that, 9 no. 10 Q: Now, did you give Ms. Hutton any 11 specific instructions when she attended the meeting? 12 A: I don't recall giving any specific 13 instructions, no. 14 Q: And could Ms. Hutton, at a meeting 15 such as the meeting of -- in the morning of September 16 5th, 1995, speak on your behalf? 17 A: She could certainly speak on my 18 behalf and on behalf of -- of the -- of the Premier's 19 office. I mean, at this point in time she would have 20 more information than any of us would have on -- on the 21 situation at Ipperwash and I'm sure she -- she would 22 certainly be authorized to give her opinion, based on the 23 facts presented to her. 24 Q: And so could she speak on your behalf 25 without specific instructions? I take it that she could.

1 A: I think at that -- that kind of a 2 meeting, I wouldn't have any hesitation, you know. I had 3 that much confidence in her, if that's -- that's what 4 you're -- the question is. 5 Q: Well, what I'm -- the question really 6 is, you know, if she went to a meeting and said the 7 Premier wants this or the Premier's position is that, 8 could she do that, back in September 1995? 9 A: I would have confidence that she 10 could do that and -- and she would know that that was 11 either my position or that would be the position of -- of 12 our office. 13 Q: Based on her knowledge and experience 14 with you. 15 A: Based on, yeah, about five (5) years 16 of working together. 17 Q: And you and Ms. Hutton had worked 18 together for about five (5) years at this point? 19 A: Yes, sir. 20 Q: And on the morning of September the 21 5th, when Ms. Hutton went off to the IMC meeting to get 22 information, what did you expect the response of the 23 Government would be to the occupation, or did you have 24 any expectations -- 25 A: I -- I don't know what expectations I

1 had then versus -- versus later that evening. Certainly, 2 more information would have been gathered at that meeting 3 and throughout -- throughout the day. 4 And I was -- I was not available 5 throughout the day, so I guess the idea would be that I'd 6 -- by the time I came back Tuesday night, that it was all 7 over and the occupiers left and they made their point, 8 they -- taking a long time for the Federal Government to 9 give them their camp back, and we would probably support 10 them in that. 11 Q: And -- 12 A: That would be the ideal, I don't know 13 whether I expected that would happen, but... 14 Q: And after the senior management 15 meeting, I under -- from what you've said earlier, you, 16 ultimately, went to -- back to the Canadian Open? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: To an event? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And if I could ask you to turn to 21 page -- Tab 20, it's a copy of Exhibit P-966, Mr. Harris, 22 Inquiry document 3000690. 23 A: Sorry, which Tab? 24 Q: Tab 20, sir. 25 A: 20, yeah.

1 Q: It's the next Tab. Yours is the 2 wrong way around, I see. But this is a, as I understand 3 it, a copy of your itinerary for September the 5th, 1995? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And it shows the senior staff meeting 6 at 9:00, another meeting at 9:30 and then from 10:00 to 7 8:00, private time, which I take it was the attendance at 8 the Canadian Open event? 9 A: Yes, that's correct. 10 Q: And there -- Mr. Harris, there have 11 been a number of comments recorded by participants at the 12 IMC meeting as having been said by Ms. Hutton and 13 attributed to you, and I'm going to ask you about those, 14 or some of them. 15 First, did you say anything to Ms. Hutton, 16 prior to the meeting, about Serpent Mounds; do you recall 17 that? 18 A: I don't recall. This prior -- this 19 is -- would be prior to the meeting on -- 20 Q: On September the 5th. 21 A: September the 5th? I don't recall 22 that. 23 Q: And were you aware of, on the morning 24 of September the 5th, 1995, of an issue with respect to 25 Serpent Mounds Provincial Park?

1 A: I was aware sometime through this 2 period, I don't know whether it was the morning of the 3 5th or the evening of the 5th. 4 Q: And what did you understand, if 5 anything, as to what had happened at Serpent Mounds? 6 A: Well, I think the -- the questions 7 were raised, I believe by Ms. Hutton, as to this -- the - 8 - the calling of the Interministerial Committee. I think 9 she was new to this process, that the Interministerial -- 10 there -- there was a situation at Serpent Mounds. 11 As I understood, it was -- was explained 12 to Ms. Hutton and then to me, it was quite different from 13 -- from the Ipperwash situation in that ownership of the 14 Park at Serpent Mounds was actually laid with the -- with 15 the Native Band; that the -- the protest there was one of 16 -- authorized by the Chief and the Band; that there was a 17 lease re-negotiation with this -- with Serpent Mounds; 18 that they were handing out pamphlets in a peaceful way; 19 that they expressed a view they were concerned about 20 policy of the Government over, I think, one (1) of the 21 treaty decisions; and that that was -- that was the 22 extent of it. 23 And I -- I think it was explained to Ms. 24 Hutton, when she was trying to define and understand the 25 role of the Interministerial Committee, why the Committee

1 was not called together for this, it was not viewed as a 2 barricading or an occupation, and that was explained to 3 me as well. 4 Q: And had you asked her, prior to her 5 going to the committee meeting, why the Committee didn't 6 meet to discuss Serpent Mounds? 7 A: I -- if -- if I had been briefed on - 8 - on September 5th in the morning before she went to the 9 meeting, I may have, or we may have both said, You know, 10 let's find out then what happened there and make sure we 11 have an understanding of that. 12 And certainly the explanation that was 13 given to me, and I believe it would have been the evening 14 of the 5th, morning of the 6th, was it was a completely 15 different situation. I think that was satisfactory to 16 both Ms. Hutton and to me. 17 Q: And prior to Ms. Hutton attending on 18 the -- IMC meeting on the morning of September 5th, did 19 you tell Ms. Hutton that you were 'hawkish' on this issue 20 and felt that you were being tested on this issue? 21 A: No. 22 Q: And would you be concerned -- were 23 you concerned -- excuse me. Did you learn that on 24 September 5th or September 6th that Ms. Hutton -- it was 25 attributed to Ms. Hutton that you were 'hawkish' on this

1 issue and felt that you were being tested? 2 A: No. 3 Q: Would you be -- would you have been 4 concerned if you had learned that; that she had said 5 that? 6 A: I guess it would depend on the 7 connotation and in -- and in what -- how she -- what was 8 being discussed, if -- and what one's definition of 9 hawkish is. It's not a word I use. I don't recall ever 10 having used it. I don't recall having seen it in 11 connection with the Government until years after the -- 12 in 1995, the events of September. 13 So I -- I can't speak to that connotation. 14 I mean, if -- if it was to describe I wanted the 15 occupation to end as soon as possible, and in that 16 position I felt I was concurring with the -- if not the - 17 - everybody else's views, certainly the majority view, 18 and I think I concurred in -- in that. If that's 19 somebody's definition of hawkish then -- then I think it 20 would be appropriate. 21 If it was an ex parte injunction versus -- 22 versus an injunction with notice, if that was viewed as 23 hawkish then I would agree with the adjective in that 24 case, but I -- I have no idea of the context. I don't 25 know if it was said and I don't know in what context it

1 was said and in response to what. 2 Q: Well, it was said at the -- at the 3 IMC meeting on the morning of September 5th when this was 4 being -- the issue was being discussed that -- reported 5 that Ms. Hutton said the Premier was hawkish and that the 6 -- we're being tested. 7 A: Probably a question appropriately 8 directed to Ms. Hutton then. 9 Q: But, from your perspective, you did 10 not discuss that with her on the morning of September the 11 5th, that you recall? 12 A: No. No. 13 Q: And it was reported that you wanted 14 an emergency injunction, doesn't want to wait two (2) 15 weeks. 16 Did that topic come up with Ms. Hutton 17 prior to attendance at the IMC meeting on the morning of 18 September 5th? 19 A: I -- I doubt it. I think at that 20 point and time I don't recall whether it was the morning 21 of the 5th or the evening of the 5th but whether I knew 22 the difference between -- or what an ex parte injunction 23 was. 24 But at some point in time it was explained 25 to me so when it was explained to me, I -- I think I

1 would have concurred that -- that ending the occupation 2 quickly was the right approach to take. 3 That would be the general approach when I 4 put into context of other events that had taken place 5 around the country. I believe that was -- was the right 6 approach. But I don't recall any finality on that -- 7 that decision until the 6th. 8 Q: And do you recall on the morning of 9 September the 5th speaking to Ms. Hutton prior to her 10 attending at the IMC meeting of the morning of September 11 the 5th about the fact that the Government had to clear 12 ownership of the property and maybe the Government should 13 act? 14 A: I don't know whether it was the 15 morning of the 5th or later but at -- at no point in any 16 of the briefings was I told that we did not have clear 17 title and ownership to the Park, that that was not in 18 question. 19 Q: And it was reported that -- that Ms. 20 Hutton said at the morning on the IMC meeting, the 21 morning of September the 5th, 'The Premier wants to deal 22 with the group as if they were non Aboriginals.' 23 Would you have said anything to Ms. Hutton 24 that you wanted to deal with the group as if they were 25 non Aboriginals or anything from which you can infer

1 that? 2 A: I -- I -- perhaps something that she 3 could infer that, if -- if it was an illegal occupation 4 and it did not deal with any Constitutional Rights or -- 5 or any other rights, then -- then it was my view and it 6 is my view today that any -- any illegal activity, then 7 yes, that Native Ontarians should be treated the same as 8 non Native Ontarians. 9 Q: At the time on the morning of 10 September 5th, is it fair to say, Mr. Harris, that you 11 did not know whether there was any Constitutional issues 12 or land title issues involved in this dispute? 13 A: I -- I can't tell you whether on the 14 morning of the 5th or evening of the 5th when -- when 15 that was definitively talked about. But I -- I can tell 16 you at no time was I given information that -- that 17 ownership of the Park was in doubt either by the Ministry 18 of Natural Resources or the Attorney General or by Chief 19 Bressette and -- and the Band. 20 Q: And that -- did you discuss with her 21 on the morning of September 5th prior to her attending 22 the meeting that this Government treats Aboriginal and 23 non Aboriginal people the same? 24 A: I -- I don't recall that discussion 25 but that would be my view if you're dealing with an

1 occupation that we viewed was illegal or breaking the 2 law. 3 Q: And that it was not a Native issue 4 but a law and order issue? Did you discuss that with 5 her? 6 A: I -- I don't believe that was 7 discussed in the morning but that certainly became my 8 view as I -- more and more information was given to me. 9 Q: And if she expressed that view on the 10 morning of September the 5th, was she speaking on your 11 behalf? 12 A: She wouldn't be speaking on my 13 behalf, but I think she would be -- if I had the same 14 information she had at the time and -- and subsequently 15 it was given to me, I think she would be you know, 16 accurately reflecting my reaction. 17 Q: And so the relationship that you had 18 with Ms. Hutton and others in your senior staff, was that 19 they could based on the information they had, extrapolate 20 to what the position you might have with respect to the 21 issue at hand? 22 A: Yes. I had a great deal of 23 confidence in the staff and the -- that would be my 24 position. 25 Q: And -- and getting back to another

1 statement attributed: 2 "This will set the tone of how we deal 3 with these issues over the next four 4 (4) years." 5 That's attributed to Ms. Hutton at that 6 meeting. 7 Did you discuss that issue with her the 8 morning of September the 5th? 9 A: I don't believe so. 10 Q: That you wanted to move decisively? 11 Did you discuss that with her before the morning of 12 September the 5th? 13 A: I -- 14 Q: On the morning of September the 5th? 15 A: I -- I don't believe so. I... 16 Q: Was that something that she, if it's 17 correctly attributed to her, which the evidence is, that 18 she said that, that it was something that you wanted done 19 on the morning of September the 5th? 20 A: Well, again, I'm not sure how much 21 information I had the morning of the 5th. I can tell you 22 that by the evening of the 5th, morning of the 6th, that 23 was certainly my view that we should take action, it 24 should be clear what that action is. 25 It should be decisive and that taking no

1 action was, in fact, a mistake and I believe that to this 2 day. 3 Q: And you wanted a proactive approach 4 to addressing the occupation of the Park; do you recall 5 that -- discussing that with her the morning of the 5th? 6 A: I don't recall discussing it the 7 morning of the 5th, but that was certainly the view of 8 our government and I think the consensus, if not the 9 unanimous view of -- of the officials of the various 10 Ministries, that -- that ending the occupation as quickly 11 and peacefully as we could, was in the -- the best 12 interests, and the safety, of -- of all those concerned 13 in -- including the occupiers. 14 Q: During the -- on September the 5th, 15 the morning of September the 5th, what did you want to 16 establish, if anything, with respect to your government's 17 response to the occupation? 18 A: Well again, it would depend on how 19 much information that -- that I had at that point in 20 time. I think the primary concern was safety. The 21 second was finding out, gaining information, what was the 22 status, what was the situation, what did the -- the 23 experts have to say? What was the situation on the site? 24 Was everybody safe, was everybody -- was there any threat 25 of safety, particularly in the short term?

1 And that if there was, that -- that they 2 would take the appropriate action. I -- I was not aware, 3 on the morning of the 5th that anything beyond the 4 occupation of the Park or that there was any -- any 5 safety issues. 6 It was, by the time I left, I guess, for 7 the Canadian Open event, I probably to this point 8 including the evening of the 4th, and the morning of the 9 5th, spent a total of five (5) or ten (10) minutes on 10 this issue. 11 Q: So that the -- the amount of time 12 that you had spent with Ms. Hutton, whether it was on the 13 4th or the 5th was prior to the morning of the 5th was a 14 short period of time. 15 A: I think certainly on this issue. 16 There would have been many other issues. It was not 17 viewed as -- as an issue that was going to cause my 18 involvement, otherwise I wouldn't have gone off to try 19 and hit the ball as far as Fred Couples. 20 I think that was the day that I played 21 with him at the Canadian Open. 22 Q: And on the morning of September the 23 5th, who did you see as being responsible within your 24 government for dealing with this issue? 25 Was there a particular Ministry?

1 A: Well, the two (2) Ministries 2 involved. Ministry of Natural Resources were the ones 3 that -- that had stewardship of the Park in question and 4 -- and the OPP had the responsibility for safety of -- of 5 those concerned. 6 And I did not, certainly on the morning of 7 the 5th, receive any information that -- that -- that 8 there was an immediate danger or a safety issue. 9 Q: Now, the meeting of the 10 Interministerial Committee meeting lasted from 11 approximately 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on September the 12 5th. And during the day when you were -- after eleven 13 o'clock, did you receive a telephone call from Ms. 14 Hutton? 15 A: No. 16 Q: And did you carry a cell phone in 17 1995? 18 A: No. I think the only phone was one 19 maybe that was available in the vehicle, but as strange 20 as it seems today, with technology, I didn't have a 21 portable cell phone at that time. 22 Q: And did the security person who 23 attended -- travelled with you have a phone, a cell 24 phone? 25 A: I -- I believe they did.

1 Q: And would Ms. Hutton have had that 2 number? 3 A: She would have. 4 Q: And do you recall receiving a call 5 through the security person line? 6 A: I do not. 7 Q: And after you returned on September 8 the 5th from the event of the Canadian Open, do you 9 recall today when that was over, sir? 10 A: I don't, but it included -- I think 11 there was a dinner afterwards, so it would have been 12 8:00, 9:00, 9:30, 10:00 sometimes, depending on how 13 quickly everything was wrapped up. 14 Q: And can you tell us, did you receive 15 a report? I think you said earlier that you thought you 16 did receive a report from Ms. Hutton the evening of 17 September the 5th or the morning of September the 6th. 18 Can you help us, was it the evening of September the 5th 19 or the morning of September the 6th, do you recall -- 20 A: I -- I don't recall but it -- it's 21 not -- not improbable that it would have been both. 22 Q: And -- 23 A: There was a meeting on the morning of 24 the 6th with my staff, scheduled, excuse me, before 25 Cabinet. That meeting would have dealt with all kinds of

1 issues in the Cabinet agenda so it's -- it's very likely 2 that -- that my main information would have come the 3 evening of the 5th in a briefing, that would have been by 4 telephone from Ms. Hutton to me. 5 Q: And can you tell us what she reported 6 to you on the evening of September 5th? 7 A: Well, my recollection, at this point, 8 was that I was aware of the discussions that had taken 9 place at the Interministerial Committee Meeting. 10 Certainly, by now, I was aware that and 11 reinforced that -- that the -- this occupation -- there 12 had been rumours that the occupation was -- may have been 13 taking place; that the Ministry of Natural Resources had 14 -- had heard these rumours. 15 I -- I knew nothing of that before the 16 4th, 5th, 6th, period; that -- that there were OPP 17 presence in the Park, that the occupiers, physically, 18 either through intimidation or -- or threats, the OPP 19 left the Park, the MNR staff left the Park and the 20 occupiers, if you like, were in control of the Park at 21 that point in time. 22 I would have learned that a number of 23 options had been -- been discussed, that a number of 24 questions would have been asked at the Interministerial 25 Committee Meeting and reported back to me, you know, on

1 the events, how it happened. 2 There would have been questions and I had 3 questions that were -- were either raised with Ms. Hutton 4 or the next day as to how this happened, if advance 5 notice had been given or was it taken seriously that -- 6 that this would occur. Should it have been taken 7 seriously? 8 These are the kinds of questions that I 9 think Ms. Hutton would have wanted to obtain and I would 10 want the -- the answers to. So how much occurred the 11 evening of the 5th, I'm not sure. 12 But those types of things, I believe, 13 would have been discussed and the options of -- of 14 treating this as -- as trespass, should the OPP treat it 15 as trespass, that the OPP view was that it -- it would 16 require an injunction before they would take any action. 17 And I believe there was discussion then of 18 -- as well, of ex parte versus injunction with notice and 19 I would have had some briefing or debriefing from Ms. 20 Hutton on that. 21 Q: That would -- on -- and you believe 22 that was the evening of September -- 23 A: I believe it would have been the 24 evening of the 5th. If it wasn't, it would have been in 25 the morning of the -- of the 6th, before Cabinet and

1 before the next Interministerial meeting. 2 Q: And were you told what the 3 recommendation of the Interministerial Committee was on 4 September the 5th? 5 A: I -- my understanding was that there 6 was a consensus that -- that an injunction should be 7 sought, that the lawyers were to report back the next day 8 with information on injunction and probably information 9 on ex parte versus a regular injunction, and that, 10 indeed, was the subject of -- of, I think, discussion the 11 next morning. 12 I knew there were other options that were 13 discussed, including do nothing, and -- but I think the 14 consensus was that -- that an injunction should be 15 sought. 16 Q: And what was your position on the 17 evening of September the 5th -- 18 A: I -- 19 Q: -- if you had a position with respect 20 to an injunction? 21 A: Well, I concurred with that. The -- 22 the -- again, between the evening of the 5th and the 23 morning of the 6th and then the -- the meeting that 24 became known as the -- the dining room meeting, which I 25 always find interesting because I don't -- not sure I

1 ever recall eating in this room, but it was a -- a small 2 boardroom; that -- that the consensus was that we should 3 move as quickly as possible to end the occupation before 4 it could escalate, that at the current time it was not -- 5 there was not a threat to -- to safety, that it was 6 contained within the -- the Provincial Park and the 7 sooner this occupation could -- could be dealt with and 8 ended, that you would minimize a possibility that it 9 could escalate. 10 And so then to debate around ex parte 11 versus injunction with notice. 12 Q: And that was, when you're talking 13 about this portion of your -- of what you've just said, 14 is dealing with the dining room meeting that happened -- 15 A: That was the major discussion of the 16 dining room meeting, an update on the -- the events and a 17 briefing of the situation on the ground. But I believe 18 on the 5th that -- that the preference would have been 19 for whatever -- obtain the injunction as soon as 20 possible. 21 I concurred with that view. I believe 22 that was Ms. Hutton's view and I believe that was the 23 consensus of the group. 24 But, certainly, it would have been my view 25 and Ms. Hutton's view and we would concur with that, but

1 we needed to get information from -- from the lawyers at 2 this point in time. 3 Certainly, she and I were just 4 understanding what ex parte meant and what were the 5 implications of that. So that was -- was -- decision was 6 really left for the next day. 7 Q: And were you told, on the evening of 8 September 5th, that the OPP had -- had police officers in 9 the Park during August 1995? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Were you told about comments made by 12 Inspector Ron Fox at the meeting, that an Aboriginal 13 occupation is not the same as any other occupation; did 14 Ms. Hutton relay that to you? 15 A: I don't recall. 16 Q: That Mr. Fox said at the meeting that 17 there are treaties and land claims that affect First 18 Nations issues; do you recall being told about that? 19 A: No, I don't, but it would have been 20 redundant, I think the whole world knew that. 21 Q: And that it was the park closed for 22 the season; you knew that? 23 A: I knew it was closed to overnight 24 camping. I think I was told that it was a Park that was 25 normally available for day use through September to

1 Thanksgiving, I think. 2 Q: And that it was Mr. Fox's view that 3 they should move slowly; were you told that? 4 A: I was told that there -- I don't 5 think I was told anything of Mr. Fox's view, but I was 6 told that one of the options was to -- to move slowly, 7 that that had been discussed and was not the consensus of 8 the -- of the group. 9 Q: And were you told on September 5th by 10 Ms. Hutton that -- who Mr. Fox, Ron Fox was? Did she 11 mention that name or...? 12 A: No. 13 Q: Did she mention to you that -- 14 whether or not there were OPP officers at the meeting on 15 September the 5th? 16 A: No, and I -- and I -- I mean -- 17 Q: Pardon me? 18 A: I mean I subsequently know that she 19 had no idea there were OPP officers there, nor did I. 20 Q: And at Tab 28 of the book of -- 21 A: By --by the way, nor do I believe 22 there were OPP officers there. They were -- 23 Q: And why do you say that, sir? 24 A: Well, I don't think I was -- attended 25 any of these meetings as a teacher but that was my

100

1 training. I had a certificate. 2 I had been seconded by the people of 3 Ontario to -- to take the position of Premier and as I 4 understand it, two (2) OPP officers, I understood this in 5 -- you know, in '96 two (2) OPP officers had been 6 seconded to the Ministry as civil servants, as liaison 7 and -- and to give advice in these areas. 8 And -- and certainly at any meeting I 9 attended, any meeting that I understand Ms. Hutton 10 attended and reported to me at no time did -- did they 11 act as OPP officers. 12 Q: And we'll come back to that but the 13 -- but on September 5th did you ask if there had been any 14 information received from the Ontario Provincial Police? 15 A: Yes. Yes. 16 Q: Did you ask -- 17 A: I -- I believe I would have. I think 18 that would have been the most logical part of the 19 briefing. What are the views of the OPP? Are there any 20 concerns about safety? Is this occupation -- is that it? 21 It's an occupation of the Park. Are there concerns about 22 others getting in at some point in the evening or the 23 morning of the -- the 6th? 24 I was certainly given information that 25 this occupation was not supported by the Chief, not

101

1 supported by -- by the Band officially. I was given 2 information there was no way the OPP could secure the 3 Park, that access to the Park could easily be gained 4 unbeknownst to -- to the OPP. 5 There was a concern about weapons. There 6 was a concern about warriors. There was concern about 7 outsiders, the potential for taking over this occupation 8 that -- that would be beyond the control of the 9 occupiers. 10 I mean, these were all the concerns by the 11 meeting of the 6th that were -- that were in play and 12 that people were considering. 13 So how much was known on the evening of 14 the 5th versus the 6th, I can't tell you but certainly 15 this -- this -- whatever information was discussed at the 16 Interministerial Committee Meeting of the 5th, if it was 17 along those lines would have been relayed to me by Ms. 18 Hutton. 19 Q: Who raised the issue of warriors or 20 outsiders taking over the occupation, -- 21 A: Hmm hmm. 22 Q: -- whether it was on the 5th or the 23 6th? 24 A: I can't tell you who raised the issue 25 but I know it was raised. I think we were well aware

102

1 that -- that this was the -- what had been reported had 2 occurred at Oka. 3 This was reported as what occurred at 4 Gustafsen, Lake Gustafsen and I know that -- that it was 5 something that -- that had been briefed but nobody could 6 guarantee this -- this couldn't happen because this was 7 not a secure area. They couldn't secure it. 8 Q: Because of the access between the 9 Army Camp and the Provincial Park? 10 A: That's right. 11 Q: And at Tab 28 there's a copy of 12 Exhibit P-509. It's Inquiry Document 1012281. 13 A: Sorry, which tab? 14 Q: It's Tab 28, sir. 15 A: Yeah. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: And the -- this is a copy of the 20 minutes of the meeting of the IMC -- Interministerial 21 Committee Meeting on September the 5th, 1995. 22 And on September 5th or September 6th did 23 you see -- receive a copy of these minutes, sir, or see 24 them? 25 A: I don't recall seeing the minutes,

103

1 no. 2 Q: And on the evening of September the 3 5th did you discuss with Ms. Hutton a -- the appointment 4 of a negotiator or someone to go talk to the -- the 5 occupiers? 6 A: I don't recall that being -- being 7 brought up, no. 8 Q: And did you ask Ms. Hutton do you 9 recall what do these people want? Why are they there? 10 A: I either re -- asked or -- and -- and 11 the question was responded to or I was -- was given the 12 information without asking, that nobody knew that they 13 were not saying what they wanted. 14 So that -- that at this point in time, 15 certainly on the evening of the 5th, and I believe also 16 in the -- in the meeting of the 6th, that there had been 17 no demands, if you like, from the occupiers of what they 18 wanted. 19 Q: And did you consider or ask Ms. 20 Hutton about what was being done to talk to the 21 occupiers? 22 A: I -- I don't recall specifically, but 23 I believe that would have been discussed. 24 Q: And do you recall anything about -- 25 anything about an issue of a negotiator?

104

1 A: No, I don't recall that being brought 2 forward as -- as an option or if you're talking a 3 negotiator other than -- than the OPP on the ground, I 4 don't think that was brought up as an option or suggested 5 or... 6 Q: And did you bring it up? 7 A: No. 8 Q: And in the evening of September -- 9 A: At least I don't recall. I mean -- 10 Q: The evening of September the 5th or 11 the morning of September the 6th, did you learn anything 12 with respect to a burial -- a claim in relation to a 13 burial ground in the Park? 14 A: No. 15 Q: And when did you learn about a claim 16 that there was a burial ground in the Park? 17 A: Well, I think there -- there was some 18 discussion at the meeting of the 6th, and I can't recall 19 who brought it up, because I -- I think there was a 20 frustration that -- that there were no demands. 21 It was -- it was -- they were occupying 22 the Park and they were -- they were going to occupy it. 23 We felt that -- that the most likely scenario, in the 24 absence of anybody saying anything or claiming anything, 25 was that it was a frustration over the -- the Camp

105

1 Ipperwash and the Federal Government. 2 And I -- I think somebody said, Well is 3 there a land claim? No. Is there a burial ground? 4 These are the -- the normal kind of things, and I recall 5 somebody saying that, Well, maybe there is -- is it a 6 burial ground issue? 7 But I don't recall anybody believing that 8 that was being articulated or that it was -- that it was 9 any kind of a -- a claim from any spokesperson. And I 10 think the actions that we take, talk to seek an 11 injunction would have been the same whether there was a 12 claim for a burial ground or not. 13 But there was no discussion of that. 14 There was no spokesperson where they're articulating 15 that, to the best of my knowledge. 16 Q: And on September the 5th, 1995 did 17 you have any discussions with Bill King about the 18 Ipperwash Provincial Park? 19 A: No, I don't recall discussing the 20 issue with him. 21 Q: And did you speak to Marcel Beaubien 22 about Ipperwash Provincial Park on September the 4th or 23 September the 5th? 24 A: No. 25 Q: And did Bill King bring to your

106

1 attention the documents that appear, the first document 2 if I -- if you could turn to Tab 21 of your Book of 3 Documents. It's Exhibit P-953, 1006195. 4 And it's a fax from Mr. Beaubien to Mr. 5 King sent on September the 5th, 1995 with a draft press 6 release attached and the request for a call back from Mr. 7 King by three o'clock that afternoon. 8 A: No. 9 Q: On September 5th or September 6th, 10 were these -- was this letter and a press release drawn 11 to your attention, sir? 12 A: No, it was not. 13 Q: And during the afternoon of September 14 the 5th, did Mr. King call you about Mr. Beubien's 15 proposed press release, sir? 16 A: No, he did not. 17 Q: And at Tab 22 there's another copy of 18 the press release. It's Exhibit P-961 with some 19 handwriting on it. Did you see this copy of the press 20 release? 21 A: No. 22 Q: And on the evening of September the 23 5th, did you speak to Minister Hodgson or Minister 24 Harnick or Minister Runciman with respect to what was 25 happening at Ipperwash Provincial Park?

107

1 A: No, I don't believe so. 2 Q: And the -- at the end of the day on 3 September the 5th, what did you think was going to happen 4 with respect to Ipperwash Provincial Park and the 5 response by the Government of Ontario? 6 A: That there would be a additional 7 meeting, on the morning of the 6th, of the 8 Interministerial Committee; that -- that meeting they 9 would get information on seeking an injunction and 10 opinions from the -- the legal experts as to ex parte 11 versus with notice, and -- and a -- an update, I guess, 12 on the status. 13 I did not -- I don't think anybody 14 anticipated that we -- there would be any particular 15 change in the status between the 5th to the 6th. 16 Q: Okay. And at Tab 31, there's a copy 17 of your itinerary for September 6th, 1995 and it shows -- 18 it's Exhibit P-967, Mr. Harris, and it shows the evening 19 itinerary and that there -- you were to attend a dinner 20 that evening, the evening of Wednesday, September the 21 6th -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And is that -- is this a copy of the 24 itinerary you received for the evening of September the 25 6th?

108

1 A: I believe so. 2 Q: And in the morning of -- if you turn 3 back your itinerary for the day of September the 6th. 4 A: The 6th? 5 Q: Yes, it -- 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: -- appears at Tab 19, "The week at a 8 glance," sir. 9 A: Okay. 10 Q: And the -- for Wednesday, September 11 6th it shows that between 9:00 and 1:00 there was to be a 12 Cabinet meeting, but you told us a moment ago that before 13 the Cabinet meeting you believe there was a staff 14 meeting, is that -- 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And -- 17 A: Yeah. I would have been briefed on - 18 - on the Cabinet, for sure. 19 Q: And what time, early on in the 20 mandate in September of '95, did the cabinet normally 21 start? Did they start at -- we've heard some evidence 22 that it probably started at 10:00. 23 A: I believe it started at ten o'clock. 24 Q: And so that the Cabinet entry here 25 from 9:00 to 1:00 would include, in your itinerary,

109

1 meeting with your staff before going to -- to the Cabinet 2 meeting? 3 A: I believe so. I mean, it's possible 4 it started at 9:00 but I can't -- can't answer that. 5 Q: And... 6 A: But I believe it normally started at 7 10:00. Unless, if we had a big agenda, they may have 8 started that one earlier, I'm not sure. 9 Q: And prior to your staff meeting and 10 prior to attending the Cabinet on the morning of 11 September the 6th, did you have a discussion with Charles 12 Harnick, either in person or on the telephone, about 13 Ipperwash Provincial Park? 14 A: I don't believe so. 15 Q: And did you have a discussion, either 16 in person or on the telephone with Mr. Larry Taman, who 17 was the deputy Attorney General, on the morning of the 18 6th about Ipperwash Provincial Park? 19 A: I don't believe so. 20 Q: And do you re -- did you give 21 instructions to Mr. Harnick that the -- you desired the 22 removal of the occupiers within twenty-four (24) hours 23 and that you wanted Mr. Harnick to proceed with an 24 injunction? 25 A: No, I didn't talk to Mr. Harnick

110

1 before. 2 Q: And did you say to anyone on the 3 morning of September the 6th, that you can recall, that 4 you wanted the occupiers out of the Park within twenty- 5 four (24) hours? 6 A: No. My only recollection of twenty- 7 four (24) hours was the meeting of the 6th, and perhaps 8 in briefings for the meeting of the 6th, that -- that the 9 earliest that you would possibly obtain an injunction 10 would be in twenty-four (24) hours. 11 I heard all kinds of speculation from 12 twenty-four (24) hours to two (2) weeks. And Mr. Harnick 13 may very well have been aware that through his staff and 14 through staff meetings with my staff, that -- that I 15 favoured getting the injunction as soon as possible and 16 Ms. Hutton did and that we believe that was the consensus 17 of the group. 18 Q: And would it -- back at this point, 19 early on in your mandate, would it not be unusual for 20 you, as the Premier, to speak to your Attorney General 21 about an issue such as the occupation of Ipperwash 22 Provincial Park? 23 A: I -- I'm not sure it's unusual. At 24 this stage of -- of this occupation I don't believe that 25 I felt it was required or that Mr. Harnick felt it was

111

1 required to talk to me. 2 But the Attorney General, when you're 3 starting to talk injunction, he also is the same Ministry 4 responsible for -- for Native Affairs. I wouldn't deem 5 it inappropriate for me to talk to him. 6 But I think those discussions at this 7 stage were -- were at the staff level. 8 Q: And can you tell us what you recall 9 as to what you were told at your staff meeting, on the 10 morning of September the 6th, about the Provincial Park? 11 A: Well, I've shared information that I 12 -- I felt I had, either the evening of the -- of the 5th, 13 the morning of the 6th, I don't recall how much update 14 that I received on that. 15 Whether it was received in a briefing or I 16 was aware that there was this -- this meeting to take 17 place where they would get a report back on -- from the 18 lawyers on seeking an injunction. 19 So I think we were kind of awaiting the 20 outcome of that meeting to -- and we carried on then with 21 the -- I think most of the time would have been spent on 22 the Cabinet agenda and the Cabinet briefing and the 23 Cabinet meeting. 24 Q: And you were aware that Ms. Hutton 25 was going to go to the IMC meeting at 9:30?

112

1 A: Yes, yes. 2 Q: Did you give her any instructions? 3 A: I don't recall any instructions other 4 than concurring with her any information that she had 5 gleaned and any -- any -- from the meeting on the 5th, 6 that the -- the likelihood of a peaceful solution to this 7 occupation would be if it was ended as soon as possible. 8 Q: And the -- when you say as soon as 9 possible, did you have a time frame in mind? 10 A: No. 11 Q: And the -- on the morning of 12 September the 6th, did you have any information as to the 13 position of the -- Mr. Hodgson, the Minister of Natural 14 Resources? 15 A: I -- I -- I don't recall. I think 16 Mr. Hodgson had done a -- a -- reported to the media, if 17 you like, on the -- on the 5th, the view then of the -- 18 the -- which would have come from the collective view of 19 the Interministerial Committee meeting. 20 But other than -- other than that, I don't 21 think I would know very much more. 22 Q: Were you aware that -- of the 23 position of the -- of Mr. Harnick, the Attorney General, 24 prior to the IMC meeting? 25 A: No. I -- I don't think I was aware

113

1 of individual positions. I -- I was of the belief that 2 there was a collective from the staff members that were - 3 - that were at the Interministerial Meeting and I would 4 assume that they'd been discussing going back with their 5 various officials and their Ministries and with -- to 6 some extent presumably the ministers. And certainly I 7 knew Minister Hodgson had been briefed. 8 I didn't -- I think if there had been any 9 exception or if -- if somebody had said, you know, this 10 was a consensus of the meeting however the Minister has a 11 different viewpoint I think I would have heard that and I 12 did not hear that. 13 Q: And you mentioned earlier, Mr. 14 Harris, that at some point that you had received a report 15 about gunfire. Was that at the staff meeting in the 16 morning or later in the -- 17 A: I don't recall whether it was the 18 staff meeting but it certainly was at the -- my 19 recollection at the dining room -- quote, "dining room 20 meeting" in the afternoon of the 6th and it may have been 21 -- if it was known to Ms. Hutton in the morning it may 22 have been relayed in the morning. 23 Q: But you can't recall? You -- you 24 didn't recall it at the dining room meeting? 25 A: No, I -- I don't think we spent a lot

114

1 of time on it in the morning, on the issue. 2 Q: The morning -- now, was this topic 3 discussed, the topic of the Ipperwash Provincial Park at 4 the Cabinet meeting on the morning of September the 6th? 5 A: No, I think we had a pretty full 6 agenda. In my recollection it -- it may have been a -- a 7 comment so that everybody knew. 8 There -- there may have been a one (1) or 9 two (2) minute update for the ministers because at -- at 10 this point in time there had been a decision that -- that 11 since we were all there and we were all in town and the 12 Cabinet Ministers were there that the relevant ministers 13 would -- would meet following the Interministerial 14 Committee Meeting so. 15 Q: And -- and who made that decision, 16 sir? 17 A: I -- I don't know. 18 Q: Did you make that decision? 19 A: No, I didn't make that decision. 20 Q: We're trying to find out -- 21 A: I know. 22 Q: -- but no one's -- 23 A: It seemed like a good decision by the 24 way that -- that we all await the -- the Interministerial 25 Committee Meeting, that at that point in time our staffs

115

1 would have hopefully enough information to give us on -- 2 on injunction. 3 Certainly we got an update from the 4 evening's events and reports read to us that the -- the - 5 - our fears of escalation were well founded; that -- 6 that's what was reported to us. 7 Q: At the dining room meeting? 8 A: At the dining room meeting, yeah. 9 Q: I'm just trying to take a step back 10 and try to do this step by step. I know it's difficult-- 11 A: Well -- 12 Q: -- so many years later but the -- the 13 decision to -- to have you and Mr. Harnick and Mr. 14 Hodgson and Mr. Runciman, your deputies and certain staff 15 meet after the Cabinet Meeting was you've indicated not a 16 decision made by you. 17 Do you know who made that decision? 18 A: No, I don't. I -- I -- but I -- it 19 seemed like a logical decision. We were all there. 20 Let's not take the time at the Cabinet Meeting to go 21 through all this. The -- the Interministerial Committee 22 Meeting is going on at the same time and so those that -- 23 that are involved and the relevant ministers would meet 24 after Cabinet - 25 Q: Okay.

116

1 A: -- on this issue. 2 Q: And who communicated that decision to 3 you? 4 A: I -- I don't know. 5 Q: And in the morning of -- the meeting 6 of September the 6th the -- do you recall beyond what 7 you've already told us about what Ms. Hutton may have 8 told you on the evening of the 5th or the morning of the 9 6th, anything else that she told you on the morning of 10 the 6th about the OPP operation at Ipperwash; what was 11 happening on the ground? 12 A: No, I can't tell you whether -- 13 whether -- how much was relayed to me there or was 14 gleaned at the -- the dining room meeting but as much as 15 Ms. Hutton knew I think would have been relayed to me. 16 And certainly by the -- the afternoon 17 meeting of the 6th I was -- I was well aware that -- of - 18 - I think I've shared with you the concerns that while 19 the situation was being contained that nobody could give 20 assurance and the OPP could not give assurance that it 21 could be -- that -- that there couldn't be other 22 protesters join the occupiers or -- or they couldn't 23 contain the area. 24 That was one (1) of the big concerns. 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Okay, perhaps that

117

1 would be a good time to break for lunch, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Fine. Thank 3 you. We'll break for lunch now. 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 5 adjourned until 1:15. 6 7 --- Upon recessing at 11:55 a.m. 8 --- Upon resuming at 1:15 p.m. 9 10 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 11 resumed, please be seated. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Good afternoon, 16 Commissioner. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 18 afternoon. 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Harris -- 20 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon, sir. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 23 Q: -- if we could just take a step back. 24 Before the lunch break we were talking about the Cabinet 25 meeting and then moving on to the dining room meeting.

118

1 I wanted to ask you some questions about 2 statements attributed to Ms. Hutton at the 3 Interministerial Committee Meeting on September the 6th. 4 And prior to the meeting do you recall 5 telling or telling with Ms. Hutton that you did not want 6 anyone involved other than the OPP and possibly the MNR? 7 A: I -- I think it was more concurrence 8 on my part that that was the correct way to proceed. 9 Q: And why did you think that was the 10 correct way to proceed? 11 A: Well, they were the two (2) parties 12 that -- that had an interest. The Ministry of Natural 13 Resources from the -- the ownership of the Park and -- 14 and history and the OPP were really the ones that were -- 15 were I think in contact at this stage with the -- 16 whatever contact there was with the occupiers and they 17 were also charged with containing the situation, the 18 safety of all those -- all those concerned. 19 So I don't recall there being a suggestion 20 that anybody else should be involved but I -- so I 21 concurred with that. 22 Q: Did you -- do you recall saying to 23 her or discussing with her that you did not want the 24 Chief or others involved? And by "the Chief" I mean 25 Chief Bressette?

119

1 A: I -- I don't recall that discussion 2 directly but I -- I don't recall anybody bringing to my 3 attention that -- that they thought the Chief should be 4 involved or that the Chief wanted to be involved. 5 Q: And did you have a view the morning 6 of September the 6th whether or not Chief Bressette 7 should be involved? 8 A: I -- I don't recall but I -- I mean 9 listen, I -- I would have thought if anybody could 10 resolve the occupation peacefully I would have had not 11 objection to them being involved regardless of who they 12 are. 13 Q: And do you recall discussing with 14 her, Ms. Hutton, prior to the SMC -- IMC meeting on 15 September the 6th that you did not want to get into 16 negotiations? 17 A: I recall the -- the -- that we would 18 not negotiate any -- any claims and this was -- was one 19 (1) of those things where we weren't aware of any claims 20 at that time but if -- if there were claims to be made 21 that -- that at this point nobody was empowered to 22 negotiate those. 23 The only thing they were -- they were 24 dealing with and this is why it would be left to 25 primarily the OPP was the -- ending the occupation of the

120

1 Park. 2 Q: And if -- do you recall having a 3 discussion with Ms. Hutton that you would like the Chief 4 to support us, being the Government, but to do this 5 independently doesn't -- you didn't want to go into land 6 claims? 7 I take it from what you've just said -- 8 A: Right. I -- I -- there -- there -- 9 to the best of our knowledge there were no land claims. 10 There wasn't anything to negotiate so if there were land 11 claims, if there were other issues that involved others, 12 that -- that -- it was clear that we were quite prepared 13 to negotiate those. 14 But I think it was -- was former Minister 15 Wildman who'd say we -- we -- from the NDP Government, we 16 don't negotiate across a barrier. And that's very 17 consistent with -- with our philosophy as well. 18 We -- we -- we're not going to -- there's 19 no quid pro quo, we're not going to negotiate any issues 20 that may come forward. If the occupation ends we're 21 happy to sit down and discuss and negotiate all kinds of 22 issues. 23 Q: And did you say to Ms. Hutton or 24 discuss with Ms. Hutton that you wanted to be seen as 25 having control over this; "you," being the Government?

121

1 A: Well, I -- I don't recall those 2 words. I don't know how important control was to me then 3 or is to me now. 4 I think we -- we -- the only thing I 5 recall was that -- that ending the occupation would 6 lessen the likelihood of -- of anybody being hurt, of any 7 escalation, of any violence, of any losing control of -- 8 of, you know, of -- of any other areas; control of the 9 roads, control of the -- any other land surrounding this 10 area. 11 Q: And did -- was it your position and 12 did you discuss with Ms. Hutton prior to the September 13 6th meeting that Ministers can't duck if scrummed? 14 A: The Ministers can what? 15 Q: That can't duck if scrummed. 16 A: Can't duck? 17 Q: Can't. 18 A: No, each Minister's on their own. 19 They -- there are times when Ministers will try and 20 arrive when a scrums busy with somebody else if they 21 don't want to be srummed. 22 There are times when they -- they will try 23 and avoid being scrummed. But I don't think that was -- 24 there was any hard and fast position that we had on that. 25 Q: But the -- did you discuss or if Ms.

122

1 Hutton indicated that -- to the meeting that Ministers 2 can't duck if scrummed, was she expressing your view? 3 A: No, I don't think I had a view on 4 that. 5 Q: And that you were not adverse to this 6 being a Provincial Government action; did you have any 7 discussion with her about that prior to the -- the IMC 8 meeting? 9 A: I don't know what this refers to, 10 sir. I'm sorry. 11 Q: The -- 12 A: What -- what being a Provincial 13 Government action? 14 Q: The response to the Ipperwash 15 Provincial Park occupation. 16 A: Yeah. That -- that was the response 17 of the Provincial Government, yeah. 18 Q: And that was your view -- it was a 19 Provincial Government's responsibility to respond? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And the longer they occupied the 22 Park, the more support they'll get; is that a view that 23 you discussed with her prior to the September 6th meeting 24 of the IMC? 25 A: No. I think it would be more that --

123

1 that the longer the occupation took place, the more 2 likely that -- that reinforcements could come in, others 3 could join and -- and we were -- we were concerned that 4 in other situations around this time and previous to this 5 time, that -- that others had joined occupations or 6 protests that -- that were not part of the original 7 occupation or protest and -- and often times control 8 could be lost. 9 So that -- that was a concern. 10 Q: And when you say control would be 11 lost that it -- can you tell us again what you mean by 12 that? 13 A: Well I -- clearly the Band had lost 14 control and that this -- this group -- they already had a 15 group that were dissident from the views of the Band. So 16 that -- that they -- if you took the -- the existing 17 occupiers who were in the Park, they -- the concern was 18 that others could join them. 19 That there was no control over access to 20 the -- to others joining. There's no control over being 21 able to prevent guns or ammunition or weapons to -- to 22 get into the Park. The OPP had indicated that they could 23 not secure this site. 24 So these were all issues that we were 25 conscious of and that -- that the sooner this occupation

124

1 could be resolved, the less likelihood that anybody else 2 would -- would join in. 3 Q: And when you say the OPP had 4 indicated they could not control the site, did this 5 information come from Ms. Hutton or someone else? 6 A: I believe from Ms. Hutton and I think 7 it was confirmed at the dining room meeting. 8 Q: Okay. And when it was confirmed at 9 the dining room meeting, do you recall who confirmed it? 10 How did it get to you from the OPP; that's 11 what I'm trying to find out? 12 A: Well, somebody at the dining room 13 meeting relayed -- brought us up to date on the -- the 14 status, so I don't recall who that was. 15 Q: Okay. Did you tell Ms. Hutton before 16 she went to the September 6th IMC meeting that you, being 17 Premier Harris, wanted them out in a day or two (2)? 18 A: I don't believe those words, but I -- 19 I was of the view that sooner was better than later, and 20 so as options were being considered, that -- that they 21 should bear that in mind. 22 Q: And that -- did you discuss with her 23 that the MNR, as the property owner, can ask the OPP to 24 remove the people on the morning of September 6th. 25 A: I don't recall that discussion, but I

125

1 -- I would think that the property owner would be one who 2 would make a request of the police if they'd like their 3 property back and MNR was entrusted with that property. 4 Q: And -- 5 A: I don't recall that discussion, 6 though. 7 Q: Okay. And was there a discussion 8 that -- before she went to the meeting that you were 9 prepared to speak on the issue of the Ipperwash 10 Provincial Park? 11 A: Yes. I think she had indicated -- I 12 don't know whether it was at that meeting or -- or after 13 the -- the, quote, "dining room meeting", but I think at 14 that point she had indicated that I should be prepared to 15 speak. 16 Q: And you had no difficulty with that? 17 A: No. It often happens when there's 18 issues involving different Ministries, that -- that I 19 would be designated the spokesperson if I was there and - 20 - and if I wasn't that -- designated, the likelihood is 21 that the media would want to talk to me as well, anyway, 22 so. 23 Q: And were you advised on the 6th by 24 Ms. Hutton or anyone else that Mr. Hodgson was reluctant 25 to speak on the issue?

126

1 A: I don't recall that. I -- I know 2 I've subsequently learned that he was happy to not be 3 speaking and his staff were happy that he would not be a 4 spokesman on the issue. 5 Q: And if we could move on to the 6 Cabinet meeting, you've told us that Ipperwash was not 7 discussed at the Cabinet meeting. 8 Do you recall on that day when the Cabinet 9 meeting ended, sir? 10 A: I'm sorry, I don't. 11 Q: And the Cabinet room is just down the 12 hall from your -- where is the Cabinet room in relation 13 to your office? 14 A: Yeah, it's down the hall from my 15 office. 16 Q: And after the Cabinet meeting ended, 17 how did you proceed -- did you proceed directly to the 18 dining room or the boardroom? 19 A: I -- I don't know. I don't think 20 there would have been a lot of time. 21 I -- as I recall, it was the kind of 22 meeting that could have taken place in the Cabinet room, 23 save and except there were staff in there, outside staff 24 that were in, taking papers away and usually there was 25 lunch there and whatnot.

127

1 So I think for those reasons we probably 2 moved to -- to the dining room boardroom which is not 3 very far away. 4 Q: Okay. And did you have a discussion 5 with Ms. Hutton prior to the dining room meeting 6 starting? 7 A: I could have but I don't recall 8 whether I did or not. 9 Q: Did you -- did you have any 10 discussion with anyone else, if not Ms. Hutton, with 11 anyone else with respect to Ipperwash on the way into the 12 dining room? 13 A: I don't recall. It's possible, but I 14 have no recollection of that. 15 Q: And Mr. Taman indicated in his 16 testimony that he thought that he walked down with you 17 into the dining room. 18 A: Could have. 19 Q: And -- but you -- you recall no 20 discussion with anyone about -- on the way? 21 A: No. 22 Q: Now, can you tell us -- 23 A: This -- this is all within the same 24 suite of offices, so you're going from one room to 25 another boardroom --

128

1 Q: No, I appreciate it. 2 A: Okay. 3 Q: The -- can you tell us who attended 4 the dining room meeting from your recollection? 5 A: Obviously I'm aware of more people 6 now. My recollection at the time was certainly Ministers 7 Runciman, Harnick, and Hodgson and myself would have been 8 the political Ministers. I think each one of them had a 9 staff member that was there. 10 I recall Deputy Vrancart -- and Deputys 11 Vrancart, Taman, and Deputy Solicitor General -- 12 Q: Elaine Todres? 13 A: -- Elaine Todres. I don't recall 14 other deputies. Ms. Hutton and then there were others 15 who I really didn't know. 16 Q: And when the meeting started were the 17 others introduced? Were people introduced? 18 A: No. 19 Q: And you'll find in that yellow folder 20 beside you, Mr. Harris, a picture of what we're told is 21 the -- it's labelled Premier's Boardroom and there's a 22 table drawn in the middle of it. and north is on the 23 upper part of the -- of the sketch. 24 And I wonder if you could mark on that 25 sketch where you were sitting and where you recall the

129

1 other individuals were sitting? 2 A: Hmm hmm. 3 Q: There should be a pen. 4 A: I'm not sure where I was sitting but 5 I -- if you look at the doorway from my office, if I came 6 in through the Council Chamber it is likely I would have 7 sat at that end or the -- the side closest to my office. 8 If I came in through the door from the Premier's office 9 then it is most likely I was on that side. 10 Q: And when you say -- 11 A: I don't believe I was on the far 12 side, for example. 13 Q: And what you're referring to is the 14 east side of the northeast corner of the table. Is that 15 what you're referring to? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: So could you mark your position there 18 -- on there? 19 A: I have no idea. I'm guessing I was 20 on the -- the east side. I couldn't tell you where. 21 Q: Okay. And can you tell us -- do you 22 recall where Ms. Hutton was sitting? 23 A: I do not. 24 Q: Do you recall where Mr. Hodgson was 25 sitting?

130

1 A: I do not. 2 Q: Or Mr. Harnick? 3 A: I -- I -- the best recollection I 4 have is that Mr. Harnick and Mr. -- Mr. Taman were also 5 on the same side I was on and perhaps -- 6 Q: That would be on the east side? 7 A: East side. And perhaps Ms. Todres 8 was on the south end. 9 Q: Yes? 10 A: That would be my recollection because 11 I -- my other recollection is that -- that the first one 12 I recall speaking was Ms. Todres and that's the best I 13 can tell you. 14 Q: And can you tell us what you remember 15 about the dining room meeting? 16 A: I -- my recollection is Ms. Todres 17 spoke first. 18 Q: And what did she speak of? 19 A: And -- and she talked about the -- 20 the -- I think briefly the process, the Interministerial 21 Committee, the -- the -- my best recollection was that 22 she talked about the separation from politician and 23 police -- 24 Q: Yes? 25 A: -- and the importance of that. I

131

1 recall then Mr. Taman speaking about -- and I can't tell 2 you the order from here at this point. Mr. Taman spoke 3 about the difference between an ex parte and an 4 injunction with notice. I think Mr. Harnick had a few 5 words. 6 We had a briefing and I don't know who it 7 was by on the -- the status at the Park. 8 And I think it was at that point that -- 9 so whether that was Mr. Vrancart or MNR or others I can't 10 recall but the -- the -- that was where there were 11 reports of -- of gunfire, that -- on the Tuesday night, 12 that reconfirmed that -- that the OPP believed they could 13 contain the occupiers in the Park. 14 In other words they wouldn't interfere 15 with the roads or traffic or other cottagers or other 16 property, but that they could not contain access to the 17 Park and that -- that others could -- could join in. 18 I think there was some discussion of the - 19 - the mood across the country from Gustafsen Lake and 20 possibly of Oka. That's about what I recall. 21 Q: And how long did the meeting last, 22 Mr. Harris. 23 A: I -- I think it was less than half an 24 hour, fifteen (15), twenty (20) minutes, but I don't 25 think it went over half an hour, in my recollection.

132

1 Q: And the -- could you draw, on that 2 sketch that I gave you, Mr. Harris, where you thought you 3 were sitting? 4 A: Well I -- shall I put something over 5 on this side? 6 Q: Put an 'X'. 7 A: Okay. You understand that 'X' can 8 move around there but -- 9 Q: And perhaps we'll just mark that as 10 the next exhibit. 11 A: Okay. 12 THE REGISTRAR: P-1075, Your Honour. 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you. 14 15 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1075: Diagram of floor plan of 16 Premier's Office, Premier's 17 Boardroom, Council Chamber, 18 EA's Office, reception, 19 hallway and washroom, marked 20 by witness, Mr. Michael 21 Harris, February 14/'06. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 24 Q: Now do you recall someone entering 25 the meeting after the meeting had begun?

133

1 A: No, I don't. 2 Q: And do you recall David -- was David 3 Lindsey at the meeting? 4 A: I don't recall David there. He -- he 5 -- I don't think he was at the whole meeting, he may have 6 been in and out of the meeting, but I -- my recollection, 7 I don't recall him speaking or -- or being there. 8 Q: Do -- and we've heard evidence from 9 Inspector Fox and Mr. Patrick that they came late to the 10 meeting and that Mr. Lindsey brought them to the meeting 11 and introduced Ron Fox as Inspector Fox. Do you recall 12 that? 13 A: No. And I would -- 14 Q: That was -- 15 A: -- unequivocally tell you that's not 16 true. 17 Q: That was Scott Patrick evidence. 18 A: That is not true. 19 Q: And -- 20 A: Because I would remember that. 21 Q: And do you recall anyone else, while 22 you were in the meeting, introducing Mr. Fox to the 23 meeting? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Do you recall Ms. Todres introducing

134

1 Mr. Fox to the meeting? 2 A: No, I don't. 3 Q: The -- with respect to the issue of 4 the separation between the police and the Government, do 5 you recall what Ms. Todres said beyond what you've told 6 us? 7 A: No, I don't recall the specifics but 8 it was clear she was -- she was talking about the role of 9 politicians and policy and -- and that police had 10 operational authority and -- and there was no role for 11 the politicians in directing the -- any of the operations 12 of the police. 13 Q: And do you recall if Mr. Taman spoke 14 about this issue as well, during the meeting? 15 A: I -- I don't recall him speaking on 16 that. I recall him speaking primarily on -- on the issue 17 of injunction. 18 Q: And the issue that he discussed was, 19 as you put it, an ex parte or an injunction with notice? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: Did you -- do you recall anything 22 else about the discussion? 23 A: Not a lot. I think my recollection 24 is that -- that both he and Mr. Harnick spoke on this 25 issue and that -- that gave legal opinions that -- that

135

1 both, they felt, were -- were doable, so to speak; that 2 they could prepare -- they could prepare material to take 3 to a judge to seek an injunction, both ex parte and -- 4 and with notice. 5 The timing was one where -- where the 6 earliest was -- was Thursday morning. They felt they 7 could seek an ex parte injunction. And I recall some 8 discussion that -- that it was possible; they thought it 9 was likely that it would be granted but it was possible 10 that -- that the judge would not grant the injunction ex 11 parte and would require notice. 12 Q: And what was your reaction to that? 13 A: Well, our -- our -- we made an 14 assessment, I made an assessment, I think it was the 15 collective view that -- that that event would not set the 16 process back very far and that we -- we should proceed ex 17 parte, and if we were successful, we would have an 18 injunction by the next day, we hoped. 19 If not, then it would take a little 20 longer, but it was not viewed as -- as -- that that would 21 be a waste of time, that that would -- that was worth 22 pursuing and it was very likely would be successful. 23 Q: And the -- in terms of proceeding 24 with an ex parte injunction or an injunction with notice, 25 was there anyone who disagreed with that -- did anyone

136

1 else speak beside Mr. Taman and Mr. Harnick on that 2 issue? 3 A: I don't recall any disagreement and 4 at -- at this meeting. I was aware at previous meetings 5 there may have been some discussion over the advantages, 6 one or the other, but I -- at this meeting I don't recall 7 any disagreement and I think everybody was -- was quite 8 content when we left the meeting, and left the meeting 9 that this is -- this is what the Attorney General would 10 prepare. 11 Q: And that the Attorney General would 12 prepare, you understood, an ex parte injunction -- 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: -- application. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And the person who gave the status 17 report as to what was happening on the ground, can you 18 assist us anymore as to who that was and what they said? 19 A: No, I -- I can't tell you who it was. 20 I -- I think there was both the viewpoint from the 21 Ministry of Natural Resources and from reporting, you 22 know, the OPP, on what -- what they felt the status was, 23 but who it was that gave the briefing, I don't know. 24 Q: And with respect to the report on 25 gunfire, was that a report that came from the MNR; do you

137

1 recall? 2 A: I don't recall. 3 Q: And do you recall what was said about 4 the gunfire? 5 A: Yeah, there was some debate over 6 whether it was an automatic weapon or it was rapid firing 7 semi-automatic or not, and I thought it was a moot point. 8 If there were weapons fired, there were 9 weapons fired and I don't think what kind of weapons -- I 10 recall my reaction being, what difference does it make. 11 Q: And were you told, Mr. Harris, 12 whether the gunfire that was heard was from the army camp 13 or from the Park? 14 A: I don't recall being told but I -- I 15 believe the impression we were left with, it was from the 16 Park. 17 Q: And you're aware that the army camp 18 itself was a very large area? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And -- but you understood the -- the 21 information was that it came from the Park? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And the information the OPP had was 24 that the evidence has been that the reports of gunfire 25 came from the army camp, and you don't recall anyone

138

1 telling you that at the meeting? 2 A: I don't recall that and I don't 3 recall how close the army camp -- well, I know the 4 property adjoined -- but the army camp was to the -- to 5 the Provincial Park, where they were located in the 6 Provincial Park, but my image was not that they were side 7 by side. 8 So I think the impression we had, if you 9 heard gunfire there, it would have been from that area. 10 Q: From the Park area. 11 A: Park area, yeah. 12 Q: Do you recall who was the Chair of 13 the meeting? 14 A: I've indicated I thought, because I 15 thought Ms. Todres spoke first, that perhaps she was the 16 Chair. If she wasn't, I don't recall who was. 17 Q: Because she thought -- 18 A: It sounds like a chairless meeting -- 19 Q: -- she thought -- 20 A: -- that this is a chairless meeting 21 that nobody remembers who called, but -- 22 Q: Yes, that you were -- 23 A: -- that's my recollection. 24 Q: -- the Chair of the meeting. 25 A: Yeah, I -- I think it was just a

139

1 gathering, an informal gathering, and making sure we -- 2 we all got the brief, but I certainly don't recall me 3 Chairing the meeting. 4 Q: And do you recall, were any documents 5 provided to you at the meeting, sir? 6 A: No, I don't believe they were. 7 Q: And with respect to the position 8 taken by Mr. Taman, do you recall if he was in favour of 9 a quick injunction or did he wish to move cautiously? 10 A: No, I don't recall that he had a 11 preference for one or the other but I -- I will say this, 12 he -- he, in my view, very professionally laid out the 13 slam dunk likelihood of success -- lawyers never give you 14 100 percent, in my experience -- that -- that he was more 15 certain of success with notice than he was ex parte and - 16 - and I -- I -- that was my understanding, that he was 17 relaying that to us. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: What if anything do you recall Mr. 22 Hodgson saying at the meeting while you were there? 23 A: I don't recall him saying anything. 24 Q: And what, if anything, was said at 25 the meeting about the position of Chief Bressette of the

140

1 Kettle and Stony Point First Nation? 2 A: I -- if -- if anything was said, and 3 I believe it was, it would have been that Chief Bressette 4 did not support the -- the occupiers. 5 Q: And was there a discussion at the 6 meeting as to the length of time it would take to remove 7 the occupiers? 8 A: No, the -- the -- I think there was - 9 - the only discussion I recall was the length of time it 10 would take to get the injunction, then it would be -- I 11 think there was an understanding, I don't know whether it 12 was -- how much it was discussed, the injunction would be 13 served on the occupiers and they would be asked to leave. 14 Q: And Mr. Taman testified that he 15 cautioned you about rushing in to seek an ex parte 16 injunction, that you made it clear: 17 "That while he expected us to exercise 18 professional judgment, the Government's 19 view was that they were to be removed 20 within twenty-four (24) hours." 21 Do you recall that? 22 A: No, as I said, my only reference -- 23 recollection to twenty-four (24) hours was an 24 understanding that -- that it would be possible to get an 25 injunction within twenty-four (24) hours and that I

141

1 thought that was more desirable than -- than the 2 alternative which was longer than twenty-four (24) hours, 3 whether it was -- as I say we heard estimates of -- of 4 possibly going through the weekend into the next week. 5 At one point -- I don't recall at this meeting, at one 6 point they said this thing could take two (2) weeks. 7 Q: And do you know where that came from? 8 A: I don't, no. 9 Q: And that -- was that -- that wasn't 10 discussed at this meeting, the dining room meeting? 11 A: I don't think two (2) weeks was 12 discussed but I think the likelihood that if notice had 13 to be given that -- that it could very well go into the 14 next week. 15 Q: And do you recall saying that you 16 were concerned about the length of time it was taking to 17 get the occupiers out of the Park? 18 A: I -- I don't recall saying that, but 19 I -- I certainly, at this meeting, or at a previous 20 meeting with Ms. Hutton I would have wanted to ask or 21 asked, at this meeting, for answers to what happened, how 22 the occupation took place and -- and I think I needed to 23 be prepared, the Government needed to be prepared to 24 answer -- answer questions on that. 25 So I recall asking for that type of

142

1 information and -- but I don't recall the other. 2 Q: Do you re -- were you frustrated on 3 September 6th because the matter wasn't proceeding 4 quickly enough? 5 A: The matter being the end of the 6 occupation? 7 Q: The end of the occupation. 8 A: I -- I don't think frustrated is the 9 right word. I think I felt that the sooner we could end 10 the occupation peacefully and it -- we saw no reason why 11 -- why it couldn't be ended peacefully, that the better 12 this would be; that it not escalate into anything more 13 than what it was. 14 So I don't know that frustration is the 15 right word, but I thought all steps should be taken to -- 16 to move as expeditiously as possible. 17 Q: But why was it so important to you, 18 Mr. Harris, to move expeditiously, as you say, and to 19 bring the occupation to an end when the Park was closed 20 for the season? 21 A: I think the concern that -- that I 22 understood was for the safety of all of those involved. 23 I think we had reports that -- that the OPP, I believe it 24 was at this meeting as well, were -- were wearing 25 bulletproof vests, that there was gunfire on the Tuesday

143

1 night, that Tuesday night may have been a little more 2 rowdy than Monday night; that we didn't want to see the 3 situation escalate to -- to where there may be violence 4 or there may be people hurt. 5 So I think it was my view and I believe it 6 was shared by, if not unanimously, certainly the 7 majority, that -- that the sooner this occupation could 8 be ended, the more likely it would be ended peacefully 9 with nobody being hurt, including the occupiers. 10 Q: And what discussion, if any, was 11 there at the meeting, that you recall, about the actions 12 of the OPP at Ipperwash Provincial Park? 13 A: Well, the only -- the only discussion 14 I recall was -- was, and again it could have been me 15 asking questions, it could have been others, but 16 certainly I recall wanting to understand, when I left the 17 meeting, what actions the OPP had taken, that to -- to 18 keep the Park secure in the first place and the -- what - 19 - clearly, if -- if the intent of MNR was that the 20 occupiers not come into the Park, and if it was the 21 intent of the OPP they not come into the Park, because 22 there had been rumours, then something went wrong because 23 the occupiers now had the Park and the Government did 24 not. 25 So we asked questions, how did this

144

1 happen? And -- and at least I recall me wanting answers 2 to that. And I can't recall whether those were questions 3 I asked of Ms. Hutton to find out at the Interministerial 4 Committee meeting or at this meeting, but certainly the - 5 - by the end of this meeting, those questions were asked. 6 Q: And was it at this meeting or at some 7 point did the MNR indicate to you that the OPP were not 8 as prepared as they ought to have been? 9 A: I think I had the impression, we left 10 the meeting that MNR felt that -- that they were not as 11 prepared as MNR would have liked them to have been, I 12 think -- but it wasn't -- that was my impression. 13 And I think we heard from the OPP that 14 they were as prepared as they felt they should be, but 15 clearly they were -- they were not able to maintain 16 control of the Park for the Ministry of Natural 17 Resources. 18 Q: And when you say, "we heard from the 19 OPP," how did -- how did you hear from the OPP? What was 20 the mechanism that -- 21 A: Well, somebody reported at the 22 meeting. I think, you know, I'm aware of the protocol. 23 The OPP will report up through the ranks to the Solicitor 24 General, Deputy Solicitor General and that would be 25 reported to the politicians.

145

1 So I think it would have come from the 2 Solicitor General or the deputy Solicitor General or 3 somebody in the Solicitor General's office to the meeting 4 directly, or to the Interministerial Committee Meeting, 5 and then to me. 6 Q: And do you recall if someone you 7 didn't know, Mr. Fox, spoke at the meeting while you were 8 there? 9 A: Could have been somebody I didn't 10 know; I didn't know who some of the people were. 11 Q: And the -- do you recall stating that 12 you were displeased with -- that the matter had gone on 13 as long as it had and that actions had not been taken at 14 this meeting? 15 A: No, but I -- I do want to say, I 16 asked questions about what action was taken, how did this 17 happen, how do I explain when I am asked the question to 18 -- from -- from the media? I need to be prepared to 19 answer these. 20 So I certainly wanted to be able to answer 21 what had happened, what had transpired, and why a Park 22 that belonged to the Ministry of Natural Resources was 23 now in the hands of what we deemed to be an illegal 24 occupation. 25 So I asked those questions, but I -- I do

146

1 not recall being dissatisfied with the answers or being 2 critical. 3 Q: Do you recall saying that the OPP in 4 your opinion, made mistakes, they should have done 5 something right at the time and that you were sure that 6 it would all come out in an inquiry sometime after the 7 fact? 8 A: Well, I can't imagine ever using the 9 word 'inquiry'. I -- the record will show I was not 10 quick to call inquiries. But I -- I think and I don't 11 recall saying anything like that, but it is -- it is 12 possible. 13 And asking the questions, what happened, 14 and what can I say, what can we report to the public, 15 that -- and I don't think we took any position, whether 16 the OPP were right or they were wrong or the Ministry of 17 Natural Resources were right or they were wrong; that 18 would be for others to -- to pass judgment on. 19 What I wanted to be able to make sure is 20 that I had the facts and that I could report what 21 happened as best I could because I felt I would be 22 speaking to the media on this issue. 23 Q: And as at the dining room meeting on 24 September the 6th, what was your understanding as to what 25 had happened with respect to the Park?

147

1 A: My understanding was that there was 2 some hint from MNR known to the OPP that it was possible 3 that this dissident group if that's the right word, of 4 Stoney Pointers, the rumour was that they -- they were 5 planning to -- to move into the Park, that the OPP were 6 aware of that, that there was OPP presence. 7 But there were thirty (30) or forty (40) 8 protesters who -- who forced their way in with -- with 9 sticks as I understood it, baseball bats, my recollection 10 is not guns and -- and with enough numbers in force that 11 the OPP did not feel safe staying there and they -- they 12 left the Park. 13 Q: And do you recall stating at the 14 meeting that this is not an issue of Native rights and 15 words to the effect, We've tried to pacify and pander to 16 these people for too long'? 17 A: No, I don't recall those words at 18 all. But I -- I would say that -- that the occupation we 19 viewed as illegal. And not an issue of Native rights as 20 per the Constitution, as to their land claim, as to any 21 other rights that are granted under the Constitution to - 22 - to Natives. 23 This was an occupation. It was Government 24 property, it was illegal and whether it was occupied by 25 Natives or non-Natives, we should be treating that type

148

1 of action, that type of illegal activity the same. That 2 was our view. 3 Q: And do you recall saying, It's now 4 time for swift affirmative action, or words to that 5 effect? 6 A: No, because we were leaving this 7 meeting hoping to swiftly get to the courts to seek an 8 injunction; that was the action. 9 Q: Do you recall stating in the course 10 of the conversation with Larry Hammond that you would 11 have thought the police would have the First Nation 12 citizens out of the Park by this time? 13 By this time meaning September the 6t 14 A: No, I don't recall that. But I -- I 15 will say that I'm sure I asked questions of Ms. Hutton 16 and possibly myself at this meeting as to -- to what 17 actions the police took to -- to keep the occupiers out 18 of the Park if -- if one was coming and was there any 19 action that they should have taken to restore the Park to 20 the Ministry of Natural Resources. 21 The answer was pretty straightforward that 22 -- that they overwhelmed at the time and that before they 23 were -- would remove or ask the occupiers to leave, they 24 wished to have an injunction. 25 Q: And do recall stating in the course

149

1 of your conversation with Mr. Taman that in other 2 situations, the police would have gotten people out of 3 this place very quickly, or words to that effect? 4 A: No. 5 Q: And do you recall Mr. Taman telling 6 you about the OPP approach in the past and how that had 7 been a successful approach when used in conjunction with 8 an injunction and that the approach concluded dialogue 9 and negotiating with the First Nations? 10 A: Yes. And that's exactly what we felt 11 would -- would take place. 12 Q: But do you recall Mr. Taman telling 13 you that at the dining room -- 14 A: I don't recall whether Mr. Taman told 15 me that, but I recall leaving that meeting and heading 16 out that evening and going to bed that night feeling that 17 lawyers would be preparing an injunction, that we'd be in 18 Court the next morning, and that once the injunction was 19 obtained, that that was the path to a peaceful end to the 20 occupation. 21 Q: All right. And what was your 22 understanding would happen after -- assuming an 23 injunction was -- was obtained as you hoped on September 24 6th, what was your understanding of what would happen 25 after that, on September the 6th?

150

1 A: On September 6th I felt whenever the 2 objunction -- injunction was obtained, that -- that it 3 would then be served on those who were involved in the 4 illegal occupation. And they would either leave or the 5 OPP would have to take steps through negotiations or 6 otherwise, to remove protesters from the Park. 7 Q: And whose decision was it to -- who 8 did you understand would make the decisions as to how to 9 enforce the injunction? 10 A: The OPP. 11 Q: And do you recall as part of the 12 discussion relating to the police asking why you were at 13 the meeting, if there was no role for you at the meeting? 14 A: I'm sorry, who -- who made that 15 suggestion? 16 Q: At the -- it's Mr. Bangs suggested in 17 his testimony -- stated in his testimony that you 18 indicated -- he said Mr. Harris was asking why he was 19 here if he was being told there was no role for him; if 20 he didn't have a role in directing the OPP, what was he 21 being asked to do. 22 A: Absolutely not. I mean, I knew why I 23 was there. I was there to get a briefing. I was there 24 to be prepared to talk to the media about the events that 25 had happened and I was there as one of the participants

151

1 to make a decision on what type of an injunction we would 2 seek, to give the OPP the authority to end the 3 occupation. 4 Q: And do you recall stating at the 5 meeting that it was easier to avoid these situations than 6 to remove people once an occupation had begun? 7 A: I don't recall saying that, but I 8 believe that to be true. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: Was Deputy Commissioner Boose at the 13 dining room meeting? 14 A: Who? 15 Q: Boose, with the OPP. 16 A: No. I don't believe so. 17 Q: Did you know who he was at the time? 18 A: No. 19 Q: Now, was there a -- any discussion at 20 the dining room meeting about a burial ground? 21 A: I don't recall discussion there and 22 if it was, it was in passing. It was not treated with -- 23 with any -- any seriousness and it was not viewed as the 24 reason for the occupation. 25 Q: And why not?

152

1 A: Because there had been no -- no claim 2 like that made, and -- and no spokesperson for the 3 occupiers were -- were making any claim as to why they 4 were or that they were seeking something before they 5 would leave. 6 They were just there and they were 7 occupying the Park. 8 Q: Okay. And do you recall stating to 9 the meeting, as you were about to leave that, I've told 10 you how I feel about it now I expect you to get on with 11 it using your best professional judgment, or words to 12 that effect? 13 A: I don't recall saying that but I may 14 very well have said words to the effect that, Okay, we've 15 -- we're going to seek the ex parte injunction, I -- I 16 think that was -- would be -- you would use your best 17 efforts and best judgment. 18 I think there was still room for the 19 officials in the Ministry of the Attorney General to come 20 back and say, You know, we think this -- this case -- ex 21 parte is going to be too difficult for us. I think there 22 was -- there was still room for that so I said, You -- 23 you know the feeling of the room and use your best 24 professional judgment. 25 It sounds like something I might have said

153

1 but I don't recall saying it. 2 Q: And can you tell us, what was -- what 3 do you recall about the discussion about Gustafsen Lake 4 at the meeting? 5 A: Not very much other than -- than it 6 was taking place, that it over time accelerated; that 7 there were those who were joining in the protest who were 8 not from Gustafsen Lake; that -- and this -- this helped 9 I think the concerns that that was possible as well at 10 Ipperwash. 11 Q: And what were you told if anything 12 about people -- other people coming to Ipperwash, the 13 Army Camp, or the Provincial Park? 14 A: I -- I don't believe we were told 15 that they had evidence that any outsiders had come into 16 the Park or joined the occupation, but what we were told 17 was that should some want to the OPP were not in a 18 position to stop them. 19 Q: And that was why, because of the 20 access to the Park from the Army Camp? 21 A: Access from the Army Camp. I -- I 22 think maybe from the lake too. I'm not... 23 Q: Now, do you recall stating at this 24 meeting at any time, 25 "Get those fucking Indians out of the

154

1 Park and use guns if you have to"? 2 A: No. 3 Q: And do you recall stating -- saying, 4 "I want the fucking Indians out of the 5 Park"? 6 A: No, I did not say that. 7 Q: And to put this into context Mr. 8 Harnick said that he had just come into the dining room 9 when he heard the statement, 10 "I want the fucking Indians out of the 11 Park" 12 being -- spoken by you and that after you made the 13 statement the room went silent and that he felt you 14 realized your statement was inappropriate; does that 15 assist? 16 A: I'm sorry, that -- 17 Q: Does that assist you at all in 18 responding to responding to this question? 19 A: No, I -- I absolutely did not say 20 that or words to those effect or use that adjective at 21 any time during this meeting. 22 Q: And from time to time have you used 23 that adjective? 24 A: The word -- the adjective's not 25 foreign to me but not -- not the kind of language I would

155

1 use at -- at any kind of a meeting like the meeting we 2 were at, not the kind of language that I ever think is -- 3 is appropriate even if I have used it from time to time. 4 But certainly not at -- at any meeting like this. 5 Q: Was there any discussion that you can 6 recollect at this meeting about the use of force in 7 relation to the Park? 8 A: No, absolutely not. 9 Q: When you were at the meeting how 10 would you describe Mr. Hodgson's demeanour at the 11 meeting? 12 A: I don't recall Mr. Hodgson speaking 13 so I -- I would say he was listening, concurring, but I - 14 - I don't recall any contribution from Mr. Hodgson. 15 Q: While you were there did he appear 16 agitated and concerned? 17 A: I don't think so. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. Millar, 22 I'd like to take a very short break now. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Sure. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I know it's 25 a bit early, but I would like to take a very short break.

156

1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you, sir. 2 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess. 3 4 --- Upon recessing at 2:09 p.m. 5 --- Upon resuming at 2:17 p.m. 6 7 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 8 resumed. Please be seated. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 11 Q: Do you recall if Mr. Runciman said 12 anything at the -- at the dining room meeting? 13 A: I don't recall Mr. Runciman speaking. 14 Q: Do you recall using the word 15 'holocaust' in the meeting? 16 A: I do not. 17 Q: Do you know a person by the name of 18 Barbara Taylor? Back in 1995, did you know a person by 19 the name of Barbara Taylor? Barbara Taylor was an OPP 20 officer seconded to the Ministry of the Solicitor General 21 and, as I understand it, she attended the dining room 22 meeting as well. 23 Were you aware of that? 24 A: No. 25 Q: If you had known that there were

157

1 three (3) individuals who were OPP officers at the dining 2 room meeting, Mr. Harris, would you have done anything 3 differently? 4 A: It's a difficult question to answer. 5 I -- I'm not sure that I would have. I -- I went to the 6 meeting to be informed, brought up to date, to make sure 7 I asked questions to ascertain the -- the state of 8 affairs, I guess, if you like, at -- at the Park so I 9 could talk to the media about it and to seek the -- seek 10 a consensus and make sure that we were proceeding with -- 11 with an injunction. 12 I can't recall anything that I said at the 13 meeting that -- that I might not have said had there been 14 OPP officers there, save and except I have no reason to 15 understand why they would be there. 16 This was not a police meeting, it's not a 17 meeting that I would have expected them to be at. This 18 was a meeting of the officials of the various Ministries 19 and the politicians and the political staff. 20 Q: And at the end of the meeting it was 21 your understanding that an injunction would be sought the 22 next day? 23 A: Yes. And if -- if I hadn't heard 24 anything to the contrary, then the only thing that I 25 might have expected to hear to the contrary was that --

158

1 that we need more time to prepare the injunction. 2 But I was fully expecting that -- that 3 they could be ready to proceed into court first thing the 4 next morning. 5 Q: And when you were at the meeting was 6 there any discussion about proceeding that very day, on 7 September 6th, do you recall, for an injunction? 8 A: I -- I don't recall. Somebody may 9 have asked, can we get it now, can we get it tonight, can 10 we get it -- but I -- that's possible. I don't recall 11 that and certainly the indication that we had was it 12 would take -- some lawyers would be working through the 13 evening. 14 Q: To get it ready? 15 A: To get it ready for the next morning. 16 Q: And did you -- do you know, when you 17 left the meeting, was the -- did the meeting continue or 18 did the meeting end, or do you know? 19 A: I don't know. It's possible that 20 some stayed and -- and carried on. This -- this was not 21 a formal meeting that was -- begun and ended with a gavel 22 so they -- they could have carried on discussions after I 23 left. 24 Q: Do you recall, and I know only 25 lawyers ask these kinds of questions, but do you recall,

159

1 when you left the meeting, who left with you? 2 A: I do not. 3 Q: And at the meeting were you advised 4 of how many police officers were involved at Camp 5 Ipperwash -- I mean at the Ipperwash Provincial Park? 6 A: I don't recall numbers being 7 mentioned at all, no. 8 Q: Now, after you left the meeting on 9 September the 6th, do you recall, today, what time the 10 meeting ended? 11 A: No, I'm sorry, I don't. 12 Q: And do you recall, today, what you 13 did for the balance of the day? 14 A: I don't. 15 Q: In the afternoon -- 16 A: Yeah, I don't. I -- I guess 17 depending on what time the meeting ended I -- I may have 18 carried on in the office, I -- but I don't have any, you 19 know, recollection. 20 I know from reviewing, after the fact, 21 itineraries, that I had a dinner that was black tie that 22 evening, so, I may have gone home to change or I may have 23 changed in the office, I don't know. 24 Q: And your -- your itinerary for the 25 week shows that in the afternoon there's nothing written

160

1 in in terms of meetings and then the Financial Post 2 dinner that evening of September the 6th. 3 A: Correct. 4 Q: That's Exhibit P-965 and then the 5 itinerary for the evening dinner is, I believe we looked 6 at it before at Tab 31, Exhibit P-967 which appears to 7 have started at -- sometime after 7:00. 8 Is that your recollection, sir? 9 A: I -- I don't have a recollection but 10 I -- so I'm going from reading the -- is it 31? No, what 11 was that? 12 Q: The tab was 31, sir. 13 A: Oh, yeah. Okay. No, I -- I mean I 14 would go from -- from the itinerary. If it says 7:00 15 then... 16 Q: And could I ask you to turn to 17 Exhibit -- at Tab 32, it's Exhibit P-509, the meeting 18 notes of the September 6th Interministerial Committee 19 Meeting? 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: Did you see these minutes on 22 September the 6th? 23 A: No, I did not. 24 Q: And there's a note at page 3 under, 25 "Next Steps." It was agreed that under -- it's item

161

1 number 5: 2 "Next steps: It was agreed that an 3 injunction should be sought as soon as 4 possible." 5 And that was -- was that your 6 understanding when you left the meeting? 7 A: Hmm hmm. 8 Q: You -- when you left the dining room 9 meeting? 10 A: Yeah. I wasn't at this meeting. 11 Q: No, I appreciate that. 12 A: Yeah. That was my understanding, 13 yes. 14 Q: And then there's a note: 15 "Following the meeting Cabinet directed 16 MAG lawyers to apply immediately for an 17 ex parte injunction." 18 And did you, as the Premier, give an 19 instruction, at any time on September 6th, to apply 20 immediately for an ex parte injunction? 21 A: No, that would have been the 22 responsibility of the Attorney General or the Deputy 23 Attorney General. 24 Q: So that the decision was ultimately 25 made -- at the end of the Cabinet -- the dining room

162

1 meeting, the people at the meeting agreed that there 2 should be an injunction sought and the decision was then 3 -- the Attorney General or his Deputy with respect to 4 proceeding with the injunction? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: Now, on the afternoon of September 7 the 6th, or at any time on September the 6th, did you 8 speak to Marcel Beaubien? 9 A: No. 10 Q: And at Tab 45 there's a copy of 11 Exhibit P-952, Inquiry document 1006196. And this, Mr. 12 Harris, is a fax to Bill King, office of the Premier, 13 from Mr. Beaubien. And attached to it is a letter from 14 Mr. Beaubien to Mr. King dated September the 6th, and 15 attached to it is, on the -- I wonder if we could get, 16 Mr. Registrar, a copy of Exhibit P-952, the exhibit copy? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: On the copy in -- in the book, the 21 last page is missing of the letter that Mr. Beaubien 22 enclosed, and I would like to show you the exhibit, the 23 full Exhibit P-952 because it indicates that a copy of 24 the enclosure -- just so you understand, Mr. Harris, 25 we've redacted the name of the -- the person who sent the

163

1 letter but -- 2 A: This was a letter to Mr. Beaubien? 3 Q: There's a -- there's a -- yes. 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: The letter to Mr. Beaubien and -- 6 A: Right. 7 Q: -- on the last page it shows that a 8 copy was sent to you. 9 A: Okay. 10 Q: If you turn over the very last page 11 of that document. 12 A: Right, I have that. 13 Q: Do you recall seeing either the 14 letter to Mr. Beaubien from his constituency -- 15 constituent or the letter to Mr. King from Mr. Beaubien 16 on September 6th or September 7th, 1995, or at any time 17 in 1995? 18 A: I don't recall that, no. 19 Q: And if I could take you to -- I'll 20 come back to that in a moment. Do you recall Mr. King 21 telling you about this letter, the letter he -- the fax 22 he received from Mr. Beaubien? 23 A: No, I do not. 24 Q: And did you give any instructions to 25 Mr. King about Mr. Beaubien on September 4th, 5th or 6th?

164

1 A: I don't believe so. I don't believe 2 I talked to Mr. King. 3 Q: Do you know that Mr. King may have 4 said to Mr. Beaubien that you were following the 5 situation closely? 6 A: I know that from his testimony ten 7 (10) years later. 8 Q: And are you surprised that Mr. King 9 may have said that? 10 A: No, I think Mr. -- I mean, Mr. King 11 says what Mr. King said, but I would think that one of my 12 staff or somebody speaking on behalf of the -- of the 13 Premier's office would indicate to a member that we are 14 following an event in somebody's riding with the -- the 15 appropriate amount of diligence. 16 Q: And Mr. King testified that it was 17 his practice to tell members that the Premier cared very 18 much about their issues and was right on top of it, that 19 that was what he told members. 20 A: I would be disappointed if he told 21 members the Premier doesn't care about your issues and 22 really isn't concerned, so I -- that doesn't surprise me. 23 Q: And that's something you would want 24 him to say to the members? 25 A: Yes.

165

1 Q: And after the dining room meeting on 2 September the 6th, what, if anything, did you have to do 3 with Ipperwash Provincial Park on September the 6th? 4 A: I don't believe there was anything 5 else that -- that I had to do or I was involved in. 6 Q: Did anyone, in the afternoon of 7 September 6th, talk to you about the -- about the Park or 8 about the injunction? 9 A: I don't recall anyone talking to me. 10 They -- it's possible but I don't recall that. I recall 11 going to the evening event and I recall going home that 12 night, comfortable that -- that things were under 13 control, i.e., the occupiers were contained in the Park 14 and that the lawyers were well on their way and would be 15 able to proceed the next morning with the injunction. 16 Q: And at the dining room meeting, did 17 you give any instructions to anyone to pass onto the 18 Ontario Provincial Police? 19 A: Absolutely not. 20 Q: And on September 6th, other than at 21 the dining room meeting, did you speak to Inspector Ron 22 Fox? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Sergeant Scott Patrick? 25 A: No.

166

1 Q: On September the 6th, at any time, 2 did you speak to Inspector John Carson? 3 A: No. 4 Q: Did you speak to Inspector Dale 5 Linton? 6 A: No. 7 Q: To Detective Sergeant Mark Wright? 8 A: No. 9 Q: To Staff Sergeant Wade Lacroix of the 10 Petrolia Detachment? 11 A: No. 12 Q: To Superintendent Tony Parkin? 13 A: No. 14 Q: To Chief Superintendent Chris Coles? 15 A: No. 16 Q: To Commissioner Thomas O'Grady? 17 A: No. 18 Q: Did you give instructions, at any 19 time on September the 6th, to members of your staff to 20 speak to any of the police officers that I've listed? 21 A: No. 22 Q: On the evening of September the 6th 23 at 6:42 in the evening, were you aware that Mr. Beaubien 24 had visited the command post at the -- of the OPP in -- 25 in Forest?

167

1 A: No. 2 Q: And were you aware, on the 6th or 3 shortly thereafter, that Mr. Beaubien, in a meeting with 4 Inspector Linton, Inspector Carson, Inspector Carson 5 being the Incident Commander, and Inspector Linton being 6 the relief Incident Commander, Les Kobayashi from the 7 Ministry of Natural Resources, that Mr. Beaubien 8 indicated that he had sent a fax to the Premier advising 9 him of his intentions and that he wanted a return phone 10 call regarding his, meaning your, the Premier's, 11 intentions? 12 Were you aware of that at the -- 13 A: No. 14 Q: -- on the 6th or the 7th? And were 15 you aware that the -- Mr. Beaubien stated words to the 16 effect and I'm referring, for the benefit of My Friends, 17 to page 70 of Exhibit P-426. Marcel Beaubien states -- 18 A: I'm sorry, where -- 19 Q: Oh, you don't have this. 20 A: Oh, okay. All right. 21 Q: Marcel Beaubien states he doesn't 22 mind taking controversy if the situation can't be handled 23 by police services, something has to be done to handle 24 the situation. 25 John Carson states that we want it

168

1 resolved but we don't want anyone to get hurt. Wants 2 everything that could be done to stress the point of no 3 one getting hurt. John Carson also stated that we have a 4 lot of good people, two (2) teams on the ground at the 5 time. Officers doing a great job. 6 Did you have any knowledge on September 7 6th or September 7th that Mr. Beaubien was making this 8 type of statement? 9 A: No. 10 Q: And would you have been concerned if 11 you had known about the meeting of Mr. Beaubien with the 12 Incident Commanders and Mr. Kobayashi on the evening of 13 September the 6th? 14 A: I don't think I would have been 15 concerned if he was at a meeting to obtain information as 16 to -- as to what was happening. This was, what, six 17 o'clock on -- 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: I would be concerned if -- if he was 20 speculating as to actions the Government were going to 21 take or speaking on behalf of the Government as to any 22 actions we were taking. 23 I -- that would concern me. I would tend 24 to believe at that state and I was with -- is it 25 Inspector Carson? Is he an Inspector?

169

1 Q: Yes. 2 A: Yeah. I -- I think from what you 3 read to me that would reflect my view that we had 4 confidence in the OPP, that the situation was contained, 5 and we'd be in court the next morning to -- to get an 6 injunction. 7 Q: And when did you learn of the -- 8 excuse me, if I might the -- on September 6th after the 9 dining room meeting were you ever told the number of 10 police officers who were at Ipperwash Provincial Park? 11 A: I don't believe so, no. No. 12 Q: Were you ever advised -- were you 13 advised on September 6th that the Ontario Provincial 14 Police, Inspector Carson, had mad inquiries about 15 obtaining an armoured personnel carrier? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Did you subsequently learn about 18 that, sir? 19 A: Quite a time after I think, not -- I 20 -- I don't recall in '95, no. 21 Q: Not in '95. And when did you learn 22 of the death of Dudley George, sir? 23 A: I don't know whether it was the 24 evening or early morning of -- of the 7th. Early morning 25 I think of -- of the -- September the 7th.

170

1 Q: And how did you learn? 2 A: I believe Ms. Hutton called me -- 3 Q: And -- 4 A: -- at home. 5 Q: -- and what were you told had 6 happened? 7 A: That there had been an incident at 8 the Park. And again I, you know, you have to bear with 9 me, I don't know how much detail I was given that early 10 in the morning or -- or whether it was later in the 11 morning when I -- when I attended to the office but that 12 there had been an incident at the Park. 13 I was under the impression that -- that 14 the occupiers were coming out of the Park onto the road 15 and that the OPP had reacted to that to try and contain 16 them in the Park. 17 And I was given details, probably sketchy 18 but that -- I remember that somebody was driving a school 19 bus, that the OPP felt they were -- their safety was 20 being threatened, and that there had been shots fired by 21 the OPP, and that as a result of that Mr. George had been 22 shot and been killed. 23 Q: And anything else that you can 24 remember today, sir? 25 A: I -- I don't recall at that -- that

171

1 time. I would have been further briefed, you know the -- 2 that day I believe at the -- at the office. 3 Q: And do you recall a briefing on 4 September the 7th about Ipperwash? 5 A: I don't recall now, but I -- 6 certainly there would have been a -- a briefing on what 7 happened. I remember being -- being surprised because 8 this -- this was not something that had been contemplated 9 by anybody around the Interministerial Committee Meeting 10 or -- or the Cabinet meeting; that -- that things were 11 believed to be under control. 12 I was shocked later to -- to -- and I 13 can't tell you how much later that -- that of all the 14 allegations that -- that the police somehow or other 15 precipitated the confrontation and were trying to move 16 into the Park. 17 I -- that was not what was told to me was 18 going to happen and I don't believe that -- that was the 19 intent of the OPP. It certainly wasn't anybody's thought 20 that that was going to happen. 21 The -- what we were told was, be contained 22 in the Park, we'd seek an injunction, serve the 23 injunction, and -- and deal with having the occupiers out 24 of the Park in -- in that way with -- in the legal way. 25 Q: And then you say you learned sometime

172

1 later someone suggested that the OPP were going to go 2 into the Park who suggested that to you, sir? 3 A: I -- I've read it over the last ten 4 (10) years in countless articles, media reports. And -- 5 and to this day I don't believe it was the intent of the 6 OPP to go into the Park. 7 Q: And it's not something you were told 8 by the -- was it something you were told by the OPP? 9 A: I was told clearly by the OPP they 10 had no intention of going into the Park until they had an 11 injunction. 12 Q: And the -- at Tab... 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: You indicated that you had been told 17 by the OPP that they weren't going to go into the Park 18 and who told you that? 19 A: Well, I -- I -- I would have been 20 informed that that was the position of the OPP and most 21 likely by Deb Hutton, but it could have been at the 22 Interministerial meeting, too, so let me thank you for -- 23 for correcting that. 24 I don't think at any point in time was I 25 told anything by the OPP.

173

1 Q: So that -- 2 A: Directly. 3 Q: Directly you were not told anything 4 by the OPP? 5 A: No, I was not. 6 Q: And that you information came from 7 either Ms. Hutton through the Interministerial Committee 8 meetings -- 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: Or the dining room meeting? 11 A: Or the dining room meeting, yeah. 12 But that was the position of the OPP. 13 Q: And at Tab 51 there's a copy of your 14 itinerary for September the 7th, I believe. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And that does show that there would 17 be a senior staff meeting on the morning of September the 18 7th after an event that you were attending at the 19 Intercontinental Hotel? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And perhaps we could mark this as the 22 next exhibit. But I would ask, Commissioner, on the 23 exhibit copy on the last page, there are some -- last two 24 (2) pages, some phone numbers, non-government phone 25 numbers that on the exhibit copy should be -- the

174

1 telephone numbers should be redacted. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 3 THE REGISTRAR: P-1076, Your Honour. 4 5 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1076: Premier Michael Harris' 6 Detailed itinerary, Thursday, 7 Sept. 07/'95. 8 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And that's at Tab 51. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 12 Q: Now, at Tab 52, Mr. Harris, there is 13 a copy of Exhibit P-954. It's a letter -- a draft letter 14 to Marcel Beaubien from Mr. King dated September 7th. 15 It's Inquiry Document 1006197. 16 And it is a proposed response to Chief 17 Bressette with respect to a meeting to discuss the 18 situation and a -- on September 7th -- had you seen 19 Exhibit P-954? 20 A: No. 21 Q: And did Mr. King discuss his draft 22 response to Chief Bressette with you on September the 23 7th? 24 A: I don't recall that, no. 25 Q: And at Tab 53, there's a copy of

175

1 another -- it's a letter, actually, to Mr. King dated -- 2 a fax dated September 7th, 1995 enclosing a letter to Mr. 3 Martel (phonetic) from Mr. Beaubien with respect to a 4 meeting indicating that he would be pleased to meet after 5 the resolution of the current situation at Ipperwash 6 Provincial Park. 7 And did Mr. King bring this letter to your 8 attention on September the 7th? 9 A: I don't believe so. 10 Q: And at Tab 54, there's a copy, Mr. 11 Harris, of a letter. It's Exhibit P-293, Inquiry 12 document 10099 -- I believe it's 1009973. 13 It's a letter to you from Mr. Peters -- 14 Gordon Peters, Chief Gordon Peters, of the Chiefs of 15 Ontario and do you recall receiving this letter? 16 A: I would have seen this letter at some 17 point. I don't recall when. 18 Q: And there's a routing copy on the 19 front page. It's the Ministry of Natural Resources' 20 routing copy but -- in your office back on September -- 21 September 7th, 1995, what would have happened when you 22 received a letter such as this about the issue of 23 Ipperwash from someone in a position of Chief Gordon 24 Peters? 25 A: I think somebody -- a -- a letter

176

1 from -- from Chief Peters would have been brought to the 2 attention of my staff as opposed to going into a normal 3 correspondence route where sometimes these things take 4 two (2) or three (3) months to get responded to. 5 But certainly a letter from Chief Peters 6 ought to have been referred right away to my staff. 7 Q: And while we're dealing with this 8 tab, if I could take you to Tab 75, Mr. Harris, there's a 9 copy of Exhibit P-294 and -- this is a copy of the letter 10 dated September 29th, 1995 from you to Chief Gordon 11 Peters. 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And is that your response to Chief 14 Gordon Peters? 15 A: I believe so. 16 Q: And that's Inquiry Document 14000060. 17 A: I'm sorry? 18 Q: That was for the record, I was saying 19 the Inquiry Document number. 20 A: Oh, okay, all right. 21 Q: And what was the -- on September the 22 7th the Government's or your position with respect to 23 negotiations? Mr. Peters asked -- Chief Peters asked for 24 a meeting to discuss this situation with you and what was 25 the position that you and your Government took with

177

1 respect to having a meeting? 2 A: Certainly in the short term after -- 3 after the -- from September 7th through that next period, 4 we believed that the occupation should end before we got 5 into meetings to -- to discuss any substantive issues. 6 I think there was a period of -- of 7 respect for the George Family and a bereavement. 8 Following that a period of investigation 9 by the SIU. 10 Following that a period of -- of hoping 11 that we could before dealing with it, the -- the issues 12 directly related to -- to Ipperwash, either the Camp or 13 the Park or the events that -- that we could have the 14 occupation ended before we got into these -- these 15 meetings. 16 Q: And on -- and that was the position 17 that on September 7th that before you would have any 18 meetings with respect to the Park, the occupation should 19 end? 20 A: I -- I think on the 7th we were all 21 in a bit of a shock. 22 Q: I appreciate that. 23 A: And I -- and I think out of respect 24 for the George Family that -- that we were not taking any 25 actions including responded to requests.

178

1 So I think -- I think it would have been 2 that period of time. I can't tell you how many days that 3 was or a week or two (2). And then there was a period of 4 -- as I said of SIU investigation before we -- we made a 5 decision as to -- to being to respond. 6 Q: And on September 7th, Crown lawyers 7 were in court before Mr. Justice Daudlin in Sarnia. And 8 on, to your left hand side of the table, Mr. Harris, 9 there's a copy of Exhibit P-442 -- 10 A: This one? 11 Q: -- that's -- yes, sir, the injunction 12 on September the 7th by Mr. Justice Daudlin. It's 13 Inquiry document 1000891. 14 And did -- on September 7th through or 15 September 8th or in 199 -- September 1995, did you see a 16 copy of the injunction? 17 A: I don't believe so. 18 Q: And were you advised that the 19 injunction had been granted but that its operation was -- 20 it was granted limited to Monday September 11th, and that 21 the enforcement of the injunction was stayed until noon 22 on September 11th and required the service of the 23 material with respect to the injunction on the occupiers 24 of the Park? 25 Were you told that on September the --

179

1 A: I may have been. 2 Q: Okay. And -- and this particular 3 Order provides for the dropping of the materials from a 4 helicopter. 5 Were you involved in any discussions with 6 respect to the form of service provided in this Order? 7 A: No. 8 Q: And were you aware that the Crown 9 lawyers returned to Court in London before Mr. Justice 10 Flinn, on September the 8th, and had the service 11 provision changed with respect to the helicopter? 12 A: No. 13 Q: And on September 11th, Mr. Harris, 14 the Crown lawyers appeared to be in Court and withdrew 15 the request for the injunction. 16 Did you take any part or play any part 17 with respect to that decision not to proceed with the 18 injunction application? 19 A: I believe I concurred with the -- 20 that decision. I would have been informed of that 21 decision and -- and very likely concurred with it. I 22 think I would have been informed of that. 23 Q: And I appreciate it's a long time 24 ago, but do you recall being informed or are you simply 25 using -- expected that you would.

180

1 Do you have any independent recollection 2 of that, sir? 3 A: No, I don't now, but I imagine that I 4 would have been told. 5 Q: And you said that you concurred with 6 it, and why did you -- and I take it, again, that you 7 don't have any independent recollection -- 8 A: Well -- 9 Q: -- of concurring with it, but -- 10 A: I think a very tragic event occurred 11 on the early morning or the evening -- early morning of 12 September 6th. I think there was a great deal of -- of 13 sympathy for the George family and that it wasn't 14 appropriate to be -- to be proceeding in Court at that 15 time. 16 And subsequent to that, as I said, we -- 17 we had an SIU investigation. And so at that point that 18 was -- that was the -- the view of the Government. 19 Q: Okay. And at Tab 56 there is a 20 report of -- it's Inquiry document 1001298, it's media 21 services dated September 7th, 1995, and on page 2 there's 22 a quote from you, and there had been an interview with 23 Grand Chief Ovide Mercredi. And the quote attributed to 24 you is: 25 "We are very much concerned about

181

1 safety. We're very much concerned that 2 there -- for those who are there and 3 the safety of all concerned. This is a 4 matter with the police and if Ovide 5 Mercredi wishes to discuss the removal 6 of the illegal occupation, he should do 7 so with the police." 8 And is that an accurate report of what you 9 said on September the 7th? 10 A: I'm trying to find where -- 11 Q: It's on page 2, sir, it's the second 12 item from the bottom. 13 A: Yeah. I -- I don't recall that at 14 this time but it -- it seems to make sense. 15 Q: Perhaps we could mark that the next 16 exhibit, sir? 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 18 THE REGISTRAR: P-1077, Your Honour. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1077. 20 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, sir. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1077: Document Number 1001298. 23 Transcript from "The World 24 Tonight" with quotes from 25 Mike Harris and Ovide

182

1 Mercredi, Sept. 07/'95. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 4 Q: Then at Tab 59, Mr. Harris, there's a 5 fax from Mr. King to all PC Caucus members, and it's 6 Exhibit P-957, Inquiry Document 12000079. And Mr. King 7 attaches a transcript of comments made by you on 8 September the 8th, and the Ipperwash situation is dealt 9 with in the last two (2) -- 10 A: It's the Quebec Referendum one? Is 11 that -- 12 Q: Yeah. There's first the Quebec 13 Referendum and then the last two (2) pages, sir, are a 14 transcript of your comments on the events at Ipperwash 15 Provincial Park. Do you see those? It's the last two 16 (2) pages of the document. 17 A: Last page? 18 Q: Last two (2) pages. 19 A: Yeah. Okay. I've got it now. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: What tab? 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Oh, it's -- excuse me, 22 it's Tab 59 of the list of documents, Inquiry document 23 1200000079, Exhibit P-957. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR:

183

1 Q: And does this accurately describe the 2 position that you took on September the 8th, 1995, sir? 3 A: I believe so. 4 Q: And the position of the Government on 5 September the 8th was that you were not going to discuss, 6 at least as reflected by this exhibit, the Provincial 7 Park while the occupation was on. Was that correct? 8 A: That's correct. 9 Q: And at Tab 61 -- there's a.... 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: ...copy of a -- of Exhibit P-956. 14 It's a letter from -- fax from Mr. Beaubien again to Mr. 15 King on September the 8th, together with a copy of a 16 letter dated September 7th addressed to you. 17 Do you recall Mr. King drawing this 18 document to your attention? 19 A: No, I don't. 20 Q: And if I could step back to Tab 59 21 again, Mr. Harris, the -- Mr. King's fax of September the 22 8th to the Caucus members, and the very last page of the 23 comments made by -- attributed to you? 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: And there's a question, it's the

184

1 second question from the bottom. 2 "Q: If the OPP says your involvement 3 would be helpful would you be willing 4 to do something, say something at that 5 time?" 6 And the response: 7 "So far the OPP have told me that this 8 is really a matter for the police and 9 any involvement by politicians is not 10 beneficial, so I doubt they're going to 11 ask that." 12 And when you made this statement on 13 September the 8th, had you spoken directly to the OPP? 14 A: No, I hadn't. 15 Q: And who had you -- who had told you 16 that this was the position of the OPP? Did that come on 17 September 8th? 18 A: I believe that would have been my 19 understanding of -- of their position, probably through 20 Deb Hutton. 21 Q: And -- but their position as of 22 September the 6 -- as of September the 7th, or was there 23 additional information given to you, by her, on September 24 the 8th? 25 A: I -- I can't recall, but that -- I

185

1 would suspect that that would be the case, yeah. 2 Q: Perhaps it would be appropriate time 3 for the afternoon break, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 5 very much. We'll take a break now. 6 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 7 for fifteen (15) minutes. 8 9 --- Upon recessing at 3:01 p.m. 10 --- Upon resuming at 3:19 p.m. 11 12 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 13 resumed. Please be seated. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 16 Q: Mr. Harris, if you could please turn 17 to Tab 64, sir. This is a copy of Exhibit P-958, Inquiry 18 Document 1006199. It's a fax to Mr. King from Mr. 19 Beaubien dated September 11th, 1995 and on the header it 20 says that it was sent at 6:16 p.m. 21 And the -- do you recall seeing this fax, 22 the handwritten letter from Mr. Beaubien on September 23 11th or September 12th, 1995, sir? 24 A: I do not. 25 Q: And do you recall Mr. King bringing

186

1 to your attention the concerns of -- by Mr. -- raised by 2 Mr. Beaubien in this letter? 3 A: I do not. 4 Q: And do you recall any discussion with 5 Mr. Beaubien -- I mean Mr. King, about Mr. Beaubien 6 saying that he can take the heat but will not be the fall 7 guy? 8 A: No, I don't. 9 Q: And on September 7th through the 11th 10 or 12th -- 12th, excuse me, 1995, did you have any 11 conversations with Mr. Beaubien yourself, personally? 12 A: I don't recall any. 13 Q: And the -- on September 12th, 1995 14 you had a meeting with Chief Ovide Mercredi and Chief Tom 15 Bressette? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And the -- do you recall, today, how 18 that meeting came about? 19 A: I believe it was a request of -- of 20 Mr. Mercredi. 21 Q: And was there some reluctance on the 22 part of you or your staff to meet with Mr. Mercredi? 23 A: I -- I think there was, certainly 24 initially, but, obviously, we met. 25 Q: And can you recall, today, who

187

1 attended the meeting, there was Chief Mercredi, Chief 2 Bressette, do you recall who else was at the meeting? 3 A: I don't, off the top of my head, but 4 I think there's a note here somewhere that you -- you can 5 remind me of. 6 Q: Well, I'm not certain that -- 7 A: But I remember, certainly, Chief 8 Bressette was there and -- and Mr. Mercredi was there. I 9 think there was one (1) other chief may have been there. 10 Q: Chief -- Grand Chief Charles Fox, do 11 you recall if he was there? 12 A: He could have been. 13 Q: And Mr. -- do you recall if Mr. 14 Harnick was there? We understand that he was. 15 A: I believe Mr. Harnick was there. 16 Q: And Mr. Taman? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And anyone else? Do you know if Ms. 19 Hutton was there? 20 A: I do not, but I think there would 21 have been at least one (1) staff member there from my 22 office. 23 Q: And what do you recall about the 24 meeting? 25 A: I don't recall a lot of the meeting.

188

1 I think there was -- would have been, certainly, an 2 expression of sympathy to the George family by me. I 3 think there was probably a bit of frustration as to -- to 4 really what it was that the occupiers wanted. 5 I think we would have offered to help with 6 the returning of the Park to the -- Chief Bressette and 7 to -- to the -- 8 Q: You mean the Park or the Army Camp? 9 A: Or I'm sorry, the -- the Camp, pardon 10 me. I think we would have expressed the support for 11 that. We would have certainly been willing to -- to look 12 at any claims of -- of -- I don't think there was any 13 question there of land claims because I don't think Mr. 14 Bressette, at that point, felt there was any -- any claim 15 on the land, but there was some more talk of potential 16 burial ground and we would have, I think, asked for their 17 assistance in helping us end the occupation. 18 I believe that was the -- the gist. It 19 was a cordial meeting, as I recall, and one that we were 20 all trying to -- to see if we -- we couldn't move 21 forward. 22 Q: And the -- do you recall Chief 23 Bressette raising the issue of the use of the 24 terminology, 'illegal occupation of the Park?' 25 A: No, I don't recall that.

189

1 Q: And the -- do you recall saying at 2 the meeting, at the beginning, that, Let me be very clear 3 about this, I didn't tell anybody to kill anybody. 4 Do you recall saying that? 5 A: No. 6 Q: Or words to that effect? 7 A: No. 8 Q: And were you nervous about having 9 this meeting, do you recall? 10 A: I think there was some tension around 11 the meeting. This was the first meeting of -- following, 12 you know, a very unfortunate incident. There was a fair 13 bit of tension around this. I don't think anybody was -- 14 was happy with the circumstances under which we were 15 meeting, but my recollection is that the meeting was very 16 cordial. 17 Q: And do you recall a discussion about 18 a joint inquiry into -- or a joint investigation? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Or a review of the land -- of a land 21 claim? 22 A: We -- we may have indicated 23 willingness to, if there was a land claim, but certainly, 24 at that point, there wasn't. I think we would have 25 indicated a willingness if the occupation was ended to --

190

1 to look at any claims that there may have been on the 2 Park; either that or -- or burial grounds. I think we 3 were quite prepared to do that. 4 Q: Okay. And the -- do you recall 5 saying, and Mr. Taman attributes this to you: 6 "Something went wrong. Why is somebody 7 at fault?" 8 A: I'm sorry. 9 Q: "The OPP came to me. I'll listen." 10 Do you recall anything like that? 11 A: No, but I -- I think, clearly, we all 12 knew something went wrong. 13 Q: And do you recall anything else about 14 the meeting; how long it went? Do you know how long it 15 went? 16 A: I don't think it was a long meeting, 17 but I -- I think it was, as I say, a very cordial 18 meeting. I think we were all pretty relaxed at the 19 meeting when it concluded. 20 Q: And at Tab 68 of the book in front of 21 you, Mr. Harris, is a copy of a press release. It's 22 dated September 12, 1995. It's Exhibit P-535 and it's 23 Inquiry document 1000908. And is that a press release 24 that you issued on -- or was issued by your office, on 25 your behalf, on September 12th.

191

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And it accurately sets out your pos - 3 - the position you took on September 12th? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And the -- now, after September the 6 12th, when -- when did you become aware that the Federal 7 Government had located documents that indicated that in 8 the '30's the -- there was an exchange between the 9 Provincial Government and the Federal Government with 10 respect to a burial site in the Ipperwash Provincial 11 Park? 12 A: I don't recall when that was, but it 13 was -- I think it was within a week or two (2) of -- of 14 the -- the occupation of the Park. 15 Q: And at Tab 71 there's a copy of 16 Exhibit P-948. It's a letter from Mr. Serson to Mr. 17 Taman dated September 12th, 1995 and attached to it are a 18 number of documents from 1937. 19 And were these documents, the letters from 20 1937, brought to your attention on or about September 21 12th or September 13th, 1995? 22 A: It very well could have been, yeah. 23 Q: And what was your reaction to the 24 Federal Government having provided this material on 25 September 12th, if any?

192

1 A: No, I think it was a negative view, 2 that here was a Federal Government that took Camp 3 Ipperwash lands under the auspices of requiring the lands 4 for -- for training in the Second World War and had not 5 given them back. 6 And this was the main issue that -- that 7 was causing the frustration and the concern from both the 8 Band and the -- and the dissident group, if I am using 9 the right word, the occupiers of -- of the Park, and that 10 so they hustled around to dig up something that -- that 11 was sixty (60) or seventy (70) years old. 12 I think my reaction would be, if there was 13 anything to it, if the Band felt there was anything to 14 it, if anybody felt there was anything to it, somebody 15 would have followed up on this and, to the best of our 16 knowledge, nobody had. 17 Q: I -- 18 A: I -- I saw it as a political ploy by 19 the Minister to try and divert attention from their 20 slowness and ineffectiveness at dealing with the return 21 of -- of Camp Ipperwash to the rightful owners. 22 Q: And if you had known of these letters 23 earlier on September 5th or 6th, would it have made any 24 difference to the approach you took to the Park? 25 A: I don't believe so. I think there is

193

1 a process that could have been followed in 1935 or 2 whenever this was dated. 3 Q: 1937. 4 A: '37, and it could have been followed 5 anytime right up to and including 1995. If anybody 6 legitimately felt that there was a burial ground that had 7 not been properly protected. 8 I think I was starting to get information 9 that -- that there, at some point, I don't know whether 10 it was now or later or a little earlier that -- that 11 there was an area near the, I think, the water, as I 12 recollect, that had been preserved, where there were some 13 evidence of -- of burial. 14 But there is a process for this and 15 illegal occupation or taking over the Park is not the 16 process. 17 Q: And the process that you're referring 18 to is the process under the Cemeteries Act? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And -- 21 A: And I -- I, with all due respect, I 22 think, to this date, I don't think anybody has -- has 23 followed that process. 24 Q: And did you have any discussions with 25 the Federal Government about the release of these

194

1 documents, or the Minister of -- the responsible 2 minister, Mr. Irwin, in September 1995? 3 A: No. And, more significantly, they 4 didn't have any discussion with us. 5 Q: And -- 6 A: Or with me anyway. 7 Q: With you? And in the balance of 8 September of 1995, what role, if any, did you play, Mr. 9 Harris, with respect to Ipperwash Provincial Park? 10 A: I'm sorry, in the balance of 1995? 11 Q: No, balance of September of 1995. 12 A: September of 1995. Very little. 13 Q: And at Tab 76 there's a copy of a 14 letter, it's Inquiry Document 1012530 and it's a draft 15 letter that -- it's dated October 10th, 1995 and it's -- 16 it indicates: 17 "The following is a draft letter re. 18 the Ipperwash situation which the 19 Premier is sending out. Feel free to 20 use it in your riding if the need 21 arises." 22 And is this a letter that your staff 23 prepared and distributed to other Members of the Caucus? 24 A: It -- it's certainly a letter that 25 was prepared for that purpose in -- in the event that

195

1 Members of Caucus were getting inquiries, that this was a 2 -- the position of the Government. And I'm not privy to 3 information of whether it was forwarded but that -- 4 that's the purpose of the letter. 5 Q: And attached to it is a second letter 6 where someone has indicated: 7 "Okay to forward to MPP." 8 Do you know if it was sent out, or not? 9 A: I -- I do not. 10 Q: Perhaps we could mark that the next 11 exhibit. It appears to have been sent, at least by e- 12 mail, to some individuals. 13 A: Okay. 14 THE REGISTRAR: P-1078, Your Honour. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 16 17 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1078: Document Number 1012530. 18 Memo re. Draft letter from 19 Premier re. Ipperwash, 20 October 10/'95. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 23 Q: Then at Tab 79 -- excuse me, Mr. 24 Harris. If I might -- at Tab 77, sir, there's a copy of 25 a memorandum, it's dated November 28th, 1995 from Mr.

196

1 Bangs to Ms. Hutton, Mr. Moran and Ms. Hunt. It's 2 Exhibit P-935, Inquiry Document 200505 and it relates to 3 the winterization of the Park. 4 And did you see this memorandum, sir? 5 A: I don't recall. 6 Q: And is it fair to say that Ms. 7 Hutton, in your office, was keeping track of what was 8 going on with respect to the Park, and if, as and when it 9 was necessary to talk to you, she would? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Do you recall having, in the balance 12 of 1995, any substantive discussions with Ms. Hutton in 13 October, November, December about Ipperwash Provincial 14 Park? 15 A: No, I don't. It's -- it's possible 16 that there were some discussions, I would think not 17 likely though, on whether the water systems were being 18 drained and winterized. 19 I think it would be more that -- that 20 there was no prospect of -- of violence, that -- to any 21 of the citizens or any of the people in the area; things 22 had seemed to calm down so -- in the sense that I don't 23 think there was a belief that there was. Therefore, she 24 probably did not communicate to me much, or just that 25 things were on a hold position.

197

1 Q: And at Tab 78 there's a document 2 that's addressed from Mr. Yan Lazor to Mr. David Moran. 3 It's dated December 22nd, 1995. It's Inquiry Document 4 1012163. And attached to it is a confidential list of 5 options with respect to Ipperwash Provincial Park. 6 Did you see, at any time in December 1995, 7 or January 1996, the memorandum from Mr. Lazor to Mr. 8 Moran, or the options paper that was attached to it? 9 A: I -- I don't recollect seeing it. I 10 may have been briefed on it but I don't recollect seeing 11 this document. 12 Q: And do you recall any discussions 13 with Ms. Hutton about the options for the Ipperwash 14 Provincial Park, in December or November 1995? 15 A: No, I don't. I have no recollection 16 of that. 17 Q: Excuse me. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: And at Tab 79 there's a letter and 22 it's already been marked Exhibit P-1049. I believe it 23 was Inquiry Document 1012510. It's a different copy here 24 but it's a letter from Mr. Beaubien to you, Mr. Harris, 25 and this is the MNR's copy that's in the document brief.

198

1 Do you recall receiving this letter from 2 Mr. Beaubien, on or about January 31st, 1996? 3 A: I don't, but it's possible that I 4 did. 5 Q: And Mr. Beaubien's expressing his 6 concern with respect to the slowness, the lack of 7 progress by the Government on the Ipperwash Provincial 8 Park issue? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And at Tab 80, sir, there's a copy of 11 a letter dated February 20th, 1996, Inquiry Document 12 1012213 which is your reply to -- or appears to be your 13 reply to Mr. Beaubien. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And that's Exhibit P-1050? 16 A: Yes. And if that letter was signed 17 and sent then I would have seen the -- the letter, 18 probably at that time, from Mr. Beaubien. 19 Q: So that -- at the -- for a letter 20 such as this you would -- back in January 1996 the 21 process was to provide you with the draft -- the response 22 at the same time as you received the letter? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: Now, one of the things that I asked 25 you about earlier this afternoon was -- excuse me, this

199

1 morning, was the -- your government's policy with respect 2 to the Aboriginal issues and the statement of political 3 relationship. 4 Do you recall that, sir? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And there's a yellow -- in the yellow 7 folder in front of you that's underneath the black 8 binder, Mr. Harris, there are two (2) documents; the 9 first is a Cabinet submission dated December 7th, 1995, 10 and the second is a Minute of Cabinet dated December 13, 11 1995. 12 And have you seen these documents before, 13 sir? 14 A: At this time, or have I... 15 Q: Back in 1995. 16 A: Back in '95? 17 Q: These were documents submitted to the 18 Cabinet back in 1995. Do you recall seeing them then? 19 A: I -- I don't, but if they were 20 submitted to Cabinet, and dealt with at Cabinet, then 21 these documents would have been available to me. 22 Q: And the documents were -- these are 23 documents that, Mr. Harris, you may be aware, were 24 governed by privilege, that you'll -- may not remember, 25 but you've waived that privilege --

200

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: -- that's why we have these 3 documents. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And on behalf of your government, 6 you've permitted these govern -- these documents to be 7 produced to the Inquiry? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Because normally these types of 10 documents would be kept secret, is that not the case? 11 A: I believe so, yes. 12 Q: And that's the protocol followed by 13 your predecessor and governments before -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: -- you? And document -- the document 16 dated December 7th, 1995 is a document that provides for 17 certain options to be followed with respect to Aboriginal 18 issues. And they -- the submission and recommendation is 19 signed by Mr. Taman as a deputy Minister, and Mr. Harnick 20 as the Minister responsible for Native Affairs at the 21 time. 22 And do you recall these different options 23 being discussed? 24 A: I don't but they could very well have 25 been discussed at that time and...

201

1 Q: Okay. And if you could take a moment 2 and just look at the second document. It's the Cabinet 3 meeting of December 13, 1995 and the Cabinet minute 4 number 5-24A/95. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: Sorry, December 13? 9 Q: Yes, sir. It's the shorter document. 10 A: Yeah, at the back. Okay. 11 Q: Yeah. 12 A: Got it. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: And the document they have stated is 17 December 13th 1995, aappears to be the decision made by 18 your Cabinet with respect to the policy of your 19 government in relation to Aboriginal issues, have I read 20 that correctly? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And perhaps, Commissioner, we could 23 mark the first document dated December 7th, 1995 as the 24 next exhibit, the longer one. 25 THE REGISTRAR: P-1079, Your Honour.

202

1 2 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1079: Cabinet Submission, 3 "Approaches to an Aboriginal 4 Policy Framework" ONAS, 5 December 07/'95. 6 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And the minute of 8 Cabinet dated December 13th, 1995 as the next exhibit. 9 THE REGISTRAR: P-1080, Your Honour. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 11 12 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1080: Cabinet Minutes No: 5-24A/95, 13 December 13. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. DERRY MILLAR: 16 Q: And the document, Exhibit P-1080 17 provided for work to be done by the Ontario Native 18 Affairs Secretariat with respect to a number of issues 19 and brought back to Cabinet; is that -- have I read that 20 correctly? 21 A: Sorry, we're on the second document 22 now? 23 Q: Yes, the shorter -- 24 A: Yeah. The second one? 25 Q: Yes.

203

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And the -- with respect to your 3 evidence today, Mr. Harris, is there anything else you 4 wish to add and do you have any recommendations that you 5 might wish to make to the Commissioner with respect to 6 his mandate? 7 A: Yeah, I do have a few comments, that 8 -- that, if I could, at this time, to make. 9 I think, regarding any recommendations, 10 I'd like to -- to take some time and put some thought 11 into that. There are a couple that we've -- we've -- 12 issues that we've touched on today that I think would -- 13 that I would like to reflect on and expand on and give to 14 the Commissioner -- the Commissioner at a different time. 15 And I appreciate that opportunity, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thanks. 17 THE WITNESS: First and foremost, on 18 comments I -- I, again, extend my sympathies to the -- to 19 the family of Dudley George. I want to say that it's, to 20 all involved and particularly to you, sir, Mr. 21 Commissioner, that my sincere hope the Inquiry provides 22 all of the answers that the George Family is seeking and 23 it will get to the truth surrounding Mr. George's tragic 24 death. 25 I want to say that I'm pleased that I've

204

1 had the opportunity to testify, to respond to the 2 allegations that have been made against my Government, 3 that have been made against me, and to say I'm looking 4 forward to the Commissioner's report, and to his 5 findings. 6 That I believe the death of Dudley George 7 is a regrettable tragedy and that I hope that the work of 8 this Commission will help prevent a similar tragedy from 9 every occurring in the future. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you very much, 11 Mr. Harris. 12 Mr. Commissioner, those are my questions. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 14 very much. Do you suggest that we -- we canvas the 15 parties? 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes, I do, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: At this 18 point in the Inquiry we usually ask all parties if they 19 have any questions of Mr. Harris. So if anybody has any 20 questions, I would be grateful if you would stand up and 21 indicate that you have some questions and we'll go 22 through them. 23 This will give you an idea, Mr. Harris, of 24 how long the cross-examinations might be and help us as 25 well.

205

1 In this situation we're going to start 2 with counsel on behalf of Mr. Harnick? No questions. 3 Counsel on behalf of Mr. Runciman? 4 MR. IAN SMITH: Ten (10) minutes or less. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ten (10) 6 minutes. 7 Counsel on behalf of Mr. Hodgson? I'm 8 sorry I can't hear that. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thirty (30) minutes or 10 less for counsel on behalf of -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Would you 12 mind repeating what they say -- 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I will. I apologize. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Smith on behalf of 16 Mr. Runciman, ten (10) minutes. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 18 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Counsel on behalf of 19 Mr. Hodgson, thirty (30) minutes or less. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Counsel on 21 behalf of Mr. Beaubien? 22 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Fifteen (15) minutes 23 or less. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Fifteen (15) 25 minutes or less.

206

1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Sulman said 2 fifteen (15) minutes or less. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Counsel on 4 behalf of Ms. Hutton? 5 MS. ANNA PERSCHY: Twenty (20) minutes, 6 Your Honour. 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And Ms. Perschy 8 indicates twenty (20) minutes or less on behalf of Ms. 9 Hutton. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Counsel on 11 behalf of the OPP? 12 MR. MARK SANDLER: An hour and a half, 13 though it could be less than that somewhat. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Sandler, on behalf 15 of the OPP, indicates one and a half hours or perhaps 16 less. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Nobody on 18 behalf of the OPPA? 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The Province 21 of Ontario, Ms. Twohig? No. 22 Municipality, no. 23 Coroner, no. 24 Mr. Klippenstein, on behalf of the Family 25 and the Estate of Dudley George?

207

1 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Four (4) or 2 five (5) hours. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 4 Scullion. Oh, I'm sorry. 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Rosenthal. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I keep going 7 to Scullion before Rosenthal. 8 Yes, Mr. Rosenthal? 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Four (4) or five 10 (5) hours as well, sir. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 12 Scullion? 13 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Ninety (90) minutes. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Scullion, ninety 15 (90) minutes. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 17 Henderson? 18 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Ninety (90) 19 minutes. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Henderson, ninety 21 (90) minutes, on behalf of the First Nation. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And Mr. 23 Horton? 24 MR. WILLIAM HORTON: Two and a half (2 25 1/2).

208

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Two and a 2 half (2 1/2)? 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Horton, two and a 4 half (2 1/2) hours on behalf of the Chiefs of Ontario. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And yes, Mr. 6 Falconer? 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Four (4) to five 8 (5) hours. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. Falconer four (4) 10 to five (5) hours, his estimate on behalf of ALST. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: How does it 12 work out in terms of our time? 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Approximately 21 14 hours. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's... 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: So, first up will be-- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well... 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: What do you want to 22 do? 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm just 24 going to ask everybody to review their times and as we've 25 done in the past these times are often estimated

209

1 excessively at the front end and often collapse. 2 I'm going to ask you to self-regulate to 3 the extent that you can and try to keep the times within 4 reason. Some of the times are excessive and we'll just 5 carry on and see what we do. We've got some time now. 6 We'll start right now. 7 I ask you, once again, I'll ask everybody, 8 as I have before, not to be repetitive. We've made great 9 efforts not to do that, but I ask you to please, if you 10 can, among yourselves, make sure that you're not 11 overlapping and being unnecessarily repetitive. 12 We'll start now with counsel on behalf of 13 Mr. Runciman. 14 MR. IAN SMITH: Thank you, Commissioner. 15 16 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. IAN SMITH: 17 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Harris. My 18 name's Ian Smith and I act for Mr. Runciman. I have just 19 a very few questions for you. 20 I want to draw your attention to the 21 meeting we've all been calling the dining room meeting, 22 and I believe it was your evidence that the meeting began 23 with a briefing from Dr. Todres about the separation of 24 roles between the Government and the OPP. 25 Do you recall that?

210

1 A: That -- that's my recollection, yes. 2 Q: And do -- do you recollect, with any 3 specificity, what she said or any detail about what she 4 said? 5 A: I -- I don't. I think she was 6 repeating things that I think were, from my impression of 7 the meeting, pretty well understood by the participants 8 and those who were in attendance at the meeting. 9 Q: And was the message she delivered a 10 clear one? Was there any ambiguity about what she was 11 saying? 12 A: I -- I don't think there was any 13 ambiguity at all. I think it was clear that -- that the 14 political side of government gave no direction to the OPP 15 on any operational decisions, and they would not take 16 political direction and ought not to be given. 17 Q: Now, you testified, I think, that you 18 don't recall Mr. Taman giving a -- a similar briefing, 19 but he testified that he did repeat those comments and -- 20 and make comments about the separation of roles. 21 Do you disagree that he might have said 22 that? 23 A: No, he -- he may very well have. 24 Q: And you've testified that before this 25 meeting you were well aware of the separation of roles?

211

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And to your knowledge, was Mr. 3 Runciman aware of that separation of roles? 4 A: To the best of my knowledge, he was. 5 Q: And did anyone at the meeting dissent 6 or disagree or object as to the statement of policy by 7 Dr. Todres? 8 A: No one. 9 Q: And I take it, from what you've said 10 to us, that it would have been very clear to everyone 11 present what the separation of roles was? 12 A: Yes, I believe so. 13 Q: Now, you have testified that you 14 understood that the people in attendance at the IMC 15 meetings had reached a consensus that an injunction ought 16 to be sought? 17 A: Yes, I -- that was my understanding. 18 Q: And is it fair to say that, really, 19 the only decision that comes out of the dining room 20 meeting was the same one; that is that an injunction 21 ought to be sought? 22 A: Exactly. 23 Q: And I take it, from what you've 24 testified today, that you didn't even decide whether or 25 not that injunction should be ex parte or with notice?

212

1 A: No, my -- my understanding was that - 2 - that first choice was ex parte and that that was what 3 the -- the lawyers for the Attorney General would be 4 working towards with -- with the caveat that -- that, as 5 they began to -- to work on that, if they felt that was 6 inappropriate, that they -- they were free to do and -- 7 and proceed with -- with an injunction with notice. 8 But my clear understanding was that the 9 feeling was we could proceed ex parte and that was what 10 they were attempting to do. 11 Q: All right. And -- and as you've just 12 indicated, this single decision that arises out of that 13 meeting is a direction to the Attorney General and 14 lawyers within his Ministry? 15 A: Yeah, and I -- I -- I don't think the 16 purpose of the meeting was to say we've got a major 17 decision here and we're seeking approval for it. 18 I think it was an agreement, it was a 19 briefing as well, of the situation and -- and more a 20 confirmation that this is -- this is the action that's 21 going to be taken. 22 Q: Do you have any recollection, Mr. 23 Harris, of Mr. Runciman expressing any opinion as to 24 whether an injunction should be sought or what kind of 25 injunction ought to be sought?

213

1 A: I do not recall Mr. Runciman's views, 2 no. 3 Q: And we've heard evidence from a 4 number of different sources that he said either nothing 5 or very little at this meeting. 6 Does that accord with your recollection? 7 A: It does. 8 Q: Do you recollect any discussion at 9 this meeting as to how the injunction ought to be 10 enforced by the police once it was obtained? 11 A: No, I don't. 12 Q: Or when it ought to be enforced once 13 it was obtained? 14 A: No, I don't recall it. 15 Q: Or any discussion as to when or how 16 the police ought to use force? 17 A: No, that was not discussed. 18 Q: Or did you hear anything where you 19 would have hoped that a Solicitor General or deputy 20 Solicitor General would step in and say that's not 21 appropriate, that's an operational matter that should be 22 left to the police? 23 A: No, I did not. 24 Q: Is it fair to say that the consensus 25 at the end of this meeting was that once an injunction

214
  1  was obtained that the means or the ways it was going to
  2  be enforced would be left to the good judgment of the
  3  police, the OPP?
  4                 A:   Yes.
  5                 Q:   Just as an aside, Mr. Harris, did you
  6  know that the OPP policy that suggested that a landowner
  7  should get an injunction when there was an occupation or
  8  blockade was a policy that pre-dated the election of your
  9  government?
 10                 A:   I don't think we discussed that, but
 11  I -- it did not seem that -- that any -- any policy was -
 12  - was changed as a result of that, so I would expect that
 13  would be, historically, the case.
 14                 Q:   And did you have some understanding
 15  of what the police were going to be doing until an
 16  injunction was obtained?
 17                 A:   Our understanding was that they would
 18  -- they would be containing the occupiers of the Park in
 19  the Park, that they would be there, there would be some
 20  police presence. 
 21                 They would -- were there to ensure that --
 22  that there was no blocking of public roadways near the --
 23  near the Park or any other private lands adjacent to the
 24  Park.
 25                 Q:   Now, as a result of anything said or

215

1 done or decided or discussed at the dining room meeting, 2 did you think that policy or that position of the police 3 was going to change; that they would contain the 4 situation until an injunction was sought? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: In other words, you thought it was -- 7 I just want to make sure I understand. 8 A: Okay. 9 Q: You've got the -- 10 A: I want to make sure. 11 Q: The position was going to stay the 12 same and that they -- 13 A: Yeah, the same position. 14 Q: -- were the same. 15 A: Absolutely. 16 Q: And nothing you said or anyone said 17 at that meeting changed their position. 18 A: No, in fact it confirmed that 19 position and the confirmation that -- that we would be 20 proceeding to seek an injunction in Court. 21 Q: Now, is it fair to say that as far as 22 you were concerned, nothing that was decided or said at 23 that dining room meeting should be taken as a direction 24 to the OPP to do anything? 25 A: It is very safe to say that.

216

1 Q: Did you know at the time of the 2 dining room meeting that anyone in the meeting was in 3 direct contact with the Incident Commander? 4 A: No. 5 Q: Did you expect, Mr. Harris, that 6 after that meeting, that anyone present in the dining 7 room meeting was going to report on the meeting directly 8 to the Incident Commander? 9 A: Well, oh, no, but I would have 10 expected that -- that the OPP would have been notified 11 through whatever chain they use. 12 I was not aware of any chain other than -- 13 than through the deputy Minister to the -- to the 14 Commissioner or the Commissioner's designate. 15 That they would have relayed the -- the 16 results of the meeting that -- that the government 17 planned to seek an injunction and were hopeful of being 18 in Court the next day. 19 That would be the report. 20 Q: And, Mr. Harris, you recollect Mr. 21 Runciman was at that meeting. 22 Do you recollect that his executive 23 assistant, Ms. Hunt, was present at that meeting -- 24 A: Yes, I believe she was. 25 Q: And do you recollect her saying

217

1 anything at that meeting? 2 A: No, I don't. 3 Q: And did you have any contact with 4 either of them, Mr. Runciman or Ms. Hunt at any other 5 time up to September 6th, 1995 on the Ipperwash file? 6 A: No, I did not. 7 Q: Thank you, Mr. Harris, those are all 8 my questions. Thank you very much. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 10 very much, Mr. Smith. Counsel -- 11 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Commissioner, I 12 believe that Mr. Lauwers is not here on behalf of Mr. 13 Hodgson so I believe Mr. Sulman has agreed to do his 14 examination now and Mr. Lauwers will do him in the 15 morning. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 17 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: The expression I 18 think is play through which is -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Play 20 through, yes. You can play through -- 21 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: -- which is one that 22 the witness may -- may be aware of. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You played 24 through before. It is an expression he would be familiar 25 with.

218

1 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I play through quite 2 often, Mr. Commissioner. 3 4 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: 5 Q: Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. 6 Harris. My name is Doug Sulman and I'll be -- I 7 represent Mr. Beaubien and I'll be asking you questions 8 on just three (3) tabs of that voluminous binder that you 9 have. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: So if we want to make it a little 12 convenient, what -- the tabs will be Tab 15, Tab 21 and 13 Tab 45. 14 A: Okay. Are you going to start with 15 15? 16 Q: Let's start with 15, sir. And My 17 Friend -- My Friend to the left will no doubt help me 18 with the -- for the record which exhibit number it is but 19 I believe it is P-418 that we're looking at. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: 23 Q: That's Tab 15, sir. 24 A: Yes, P-418. 25 Q: Right. And it is the letter of

219

1 August 14th to Charles Harnick from Marcel Beaubien. 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Okay? You have that in front of you 4 now? 5 A: I do, yeah. 6 Q: Thank you. And I understand that you 7 didn't receive this letter, that is a copy of this 8 letter, and you did not see this letter prior to 9 September 7th, 1995? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: And you did not communicate with Mr. 12 Beaubien between June 1995 and September 7th, 1995 except 13 perhaps in passing at a Caucus retreat, is that right? 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: And is it also true that you never 16 had a discussion with Mr. Beaubien about the contents of 17 this let -- particular letter or even discussed the 18 existence of the letter to this date? 19 A: I believe that's true. 20 Q: So you have no actual -- no actual 21 knowledge of this letter so if I were to ask you what Mr. 22 Beaubien may have meant by the words he used in 23 particular in this letter, sir, ten (10) years after the 24 event, I suggest to you that that would require you to 25 speculate on -- on the words and the contents of this

220

1 letter, right? 2 A: Okay. 3 Q: I mean if I asked you, you would be 4 speculating? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Okay. And you wouldn't be answering 7 from any knowledge you have? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Okay. And if I were to ask you in 10 the period, taking your mind back to it, in the period up 11 to September 1995, if during that period you had any 12 concerns about the words that Mr. Beaubien used in the 13 letter at that time, I take it that it's rather obvious 14 not having seen the letter during that period of time, 15 that you couldn't possibly have had any concerns in the 16 relevant timeframe of the Ipperwash incident? 17 A: Yeah, I didn't see the letter. 18 Q: Right. 19 A: And if I were to ask you -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 21 Have I got your question right? You're asking him if he 22 had any concerns about a letter that he didn't see? 23 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I think it's quite 24 obvious that it would require speculation. That's all 25 I'm asking.

221

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, but he 2 didn't see the letter at all. 3 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Exactly. And that's 4 what he's answering. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. I 6 just wanted to make sure I understood. 7 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. And 9 that's the period up to September what? September the 10 5th, did you say? 11 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Yes. Up to 12 September 7th. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Up to 14 September the 7th. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: 17 Q: And if I were to ask you, sir, today 18 whether you disagreed with either the words of that 19 particular letter, the tone of the letter, or even 20 sending the letter itself or whether you thought it was 21 inappropriate, what the words, tone of the letter, if I 22 were to ask you that today, then you'd be giving me your 23 answer with the benefit of hindsight and with the 24 knowledge of what occurred on September 6th, 1995, 25 correct?

222

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And if you could turn to Tab 21 for a 3 moment, sir. This document at Tab 21 is -- now there are 4 a couple of them. I hope I get them right. The exhibit 5 number's P-953 which is the first page of the tab which 6 is the fax cover letter. 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And I believe after that, we have a 9 separate -- I think we have a separate exhibit number. 10 But after that you'll see, sir, it's the press release. 11 A: Yes. 6195. 12 Q: Okay. 61 -- 13 A: The same number. 14 Q: Okay. Now, again, you didn't see 15 either one of these documents prior to September 7th, 16 1995, correct? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: And the undisputed evidence that we 19 have before this Inquiry is that this press release 20 that's attached was never issued to the public. 21 So if I ask you, ten (10) years later, 22 whether you'd approve of the issuing of such a press 23 release or the words in the -- in the unissued press 24 release, I suggest any response by you would simply be 25 speculation on your part again, ten (10) years later,

223

1 correct? 2 A: Correct. 3 Q: Let's turn to Tab 45 for a moment, 4 sir. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: Now, this Tab 45 is Exhibit -- if 9 I've got the numbers right, P -- P-952 and Tab 45 is -- 10 well, it starts with a cover letter of a fax again from 11 Mr. Beaubien to Mr. King. 12 And attached to it is a letter from Mr. 13 Beaubien to Mr. King and then again attached to that is a 14 letter from a constituent who's name has been, as you can 15 see, redacted but we've been told in the evidence that it 16 is a local lawyer in the area. 17 You've got that before you, sir? 18 A: I do. 19 Q: And this letter, in fact, is carbon 20 copied to you, if you look to the third page. 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: This is actually the 22 Exhibit -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But it 24 doesn't have the -- 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That he doesn't have,

224

1 but I -- could we perhaps give Mr. Harris back, it's P- 2 952. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 4 Unfortunately, his tab and mine do not have the second 5 page to the letter. 6 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: The two (2) most 7 important people don't have it. 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The gremlins crept in. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 MR DERRY MILLAR: Thank you, 13 Commissioner. 14 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: 19 Q: Do you now have that in front of you, 20 sir? And you can see that I was referring to -- you can 21 see where it's been redacted at the top or -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- whited out. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: But the covering letter indicates

225

1 that it's from a -- a lawyer in Mr. Beaubien's 2 constituency or a constituent of Mr. Beaubien's who was a 3 lawyer. 4 And you'll see on the second page, you've 5 been carbon copied on it as well as Mr. Runciman, Mr. 6 Harnick and Mr. Hodgson. 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Do you have that in front of you? 9 A: I do. 10 Q: Okay. And you told Mr. Millar 11 earlier today that you didn't see this document before 12 September 7th, 1995, either, correct? 13 A: That's correct. 14 Q: And do you think it was inappropriate 15 for Mr. Beaubien to send Mr. King a copy of a constituent 16 letter which the constituent had already copied to you, 17 Mr. Runciman, Mr. Harnick and Mr. Hodgson? 18 A: No. 19 Q: And if you were asked what Mr. 20 Beaubien may have been doing or thinking in sending the 21 letter to Mr. King, once again, you'd only be speculating 22 ten (10) years later, correct? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: Now, bringing you to -- more to the 25 present, sir, did you at any time between September 7th,

226

1 1995 and today, meet with Mr. Beaubien and either 2 criticise him directly or take him to task for sending 3 any of the three (3) documents that I have presented to 4 you under these tabs? 5 A: I don't recall any discussion with 6 Mr. Beaubien about any involvement in -- in the Ipperwash 7 issue. 8 Q: Okay. So, and I believe you told me 9 and you've told the Commission that you hadn't seen any 10 of these three (3) documents prior to September 7th, 11 1995, right? 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: So not having seen the three (3) 14 documents referred to, and not having been told by Bill 15 King about Marcel Beaubien's correspondence to Mr. King 16 on or before September 6th, you'd agree with me that 17 these documents could have had no impact whatsoever on 18 any decisions you made related to the Ipperwash incident 19 in the days prior to September 7th, 1995, right? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: And in fact these documents had no 22 impact whatsoever on any decision your government made, 23 the government under your direction made, in between 24 September 4th and September 7th, 1995, right? 25 A: Not to the best of my knowledge.

227

1 Q: Okay. I anticipate that in later 2 cross-examination because I get up first that you may be 3 asked for your opinion on these documents. 4 OBJ MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I object, Mr. 5 Commissioner. I -- I appreciate that My Friend may well 6 have access to some of the briefs in this room. 7 He doesn't have access to my brief and he 8 shouldn't be anticipating future cross-examinations. He 9 should ask his questions based on the evidence. 10 Anticipating questions by counsel in the future just is - 11 - it's not appropriate. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Perhaps you 13 don't need to do the prelude to the question, just ask 14 the question. 15 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Well, we'll -- we'll 16 do -- do without the windup. We'll just do the pitch. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do without 18 the windup. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: 21 Q: Sir, if you were -- if -- if I asked 22 you whether you now agree or disagree or find 23 inappropriate the letters of the press releases found at 24 Tab 15, 21, and 45, or find inappropriate or disagree 25 with any of the words or phrases contained therein.

228

1 I take it that even if you did those 2 documents -- if I asked you that today those documents 3 had no impact and played no part whatsoever in the 4 government decisions related to Ipperwash on September 5 6th, 1995? 6 A: No impact on me and to the best of my 7 knowledge no impact on the government. 8 Q: Thank you, sir. Finally, Mr. Millar 9 asked you about Mr. King. You'll remember earlier this 10 afternoon Mr. Millar asking you about Mr. King telling 11 Mr. Beaubien that -- and the words in quotation marks 12 were "that you were following the Ipperwash Park takeover 13 closely." 14 You'll recall that question? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And as I understand your evidence the 17 fact is that you were reading the clippings that were 18 provided by the clipping service in relation to this 19 incident? 20 A: I -- I -- over July and August? Is 21 that the period you're talking about? 22 Q: Well, I'm talking about the period of 23 the takeover of the Park. 24 A: Yeah? 25 Q: And so when Mr. King says, if he did,

229

1 that you were following it closely -- 2 A: Yes? 3 Q: -- he'd be correct? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: He'd be truthful. 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Okay. And it shouldn't come as a 8 surprise to anyone that the Ontario Premier was closely 9 following a takeover of an Ontario Provincial Park should 10 it? 11 A: I agree. 12 Q: In fact it almost goes without saying 13 doesn't it? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Thank you, sir. Those are my 16 questions. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 18 Mr. Beaubien. 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I believe -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. 21 Perschy... 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- Ms. Perschy is 23 prepared to proceed now. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)

230

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, 2 Ms. Perschy, I've forgotten your time estimate again. 3 What was your...? 4 MS. ANNA PERSCHY: Approximately twenty 5 (20) minutes. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 7 So that's fine. 8 9 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANNA PERSCHY: 10 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Commissioner. 11 Good afternoon, Mr. Harris. As you know my name is Anna 12 Perschy. I'm one (1) of the counsel for Deb Hutton. I 13 just have a few questions for you today. 14 You testified earlier today that Ms. 15 Hutton was one (1) of your senior staff in the Premier's 16 Office? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Ms. Hutton was also a member of your 19 staff while you were leader of the Opposition. is that 20 right? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: And I take it in that capacity she 23 also briefed you on matters as necessary when you were in 24 Opposition? 25 A: Yes, that's correct.

231

1 Q: So I take it that you received many, 2 many updates and briefings from her over the years on all 3 kinds of issues? 4 A: That's correct. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: You testified that Ms. Hutton was 9 responsible for short-term policy essentially within the 10 Premier's Office? 11 A: She -- she had many areas of 12 responsibility as -- as I recall but that was a specific 13 responsibility that -- that had been assigned to her. 14 That didn't mean she didn't do other things but the 15 issues of the day, briefing me, making me aware of -- of 16 all sides of the issue and -- and assisting me in coming 17 to -- a response and communicating that response. Those 18 would all be her -- her daily responsibilities, yes. 19 Q: Like some of the other political 20 staff within the Premier's Office she would attend 21 meetings as a representative of that office; that would 22 have been your expectation? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And you testified I believe earlier 25 today that in her role as one (1) of your senior aides

232

1 she would attend meetings as a representative of the 2 office and that she would both obtain information and 3 also give input as necessary to reflect the views of the 4 Premier's Office? 5 A: That's -- that's correct. 6 Q: Now, when Ms. Hutton would attend 7 meetings you would expect her to ask questions if she 8 felt that she needed more information in order to brief 9 you, right? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Ms. Hutton testified that one (1) of 12 her responsibilities was to decide or give input as to 13 which ministry should be a spokesperson for the 14 government where different ministries might have multiple 15 roles and -- and responsibilities. 16 Was that your understanding? You -- you 17 made some reference to -- -- 18 A: I -- I -- 19 Q: -- to her having a communications 20 role? 21 A: I believe that's correct. She may 22 have consulted with others in -- in coming to that 23 conclusion but she would have that authority. 24 Q: You testified that you were aware 25 from news clippings of concerns about the Federal

233

1 Government's delays in returning Camp Ipperwash -- 2 A: That's correct 3 Q: -- do I have that right? Now, prior 4 to the occupation in September of 1995 you hadn't heard 5 of any land claims with respect to Ipperwash Provincial 6 Park when you were in Opposition? 7 A: I had not. 8 Q: And you hadn't since you'd become 9 Premier I take it? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: And prior to the occupation you 12 hadn't heard of any longstanding frustrations with 13 respect to any issues concerning Ipperwash Provincial 14 Park either as Premier or previously when you were in 15 Opposition? 16 A: That's correct. You're -- you're 17 talking about up to September 1995? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Where there are such claims or 21 longstanding frustrations, was it your experience that 22 they would often generate public or media attention or 23 questions in the House so they might come to your 24 attention? 25 A: Yes.

234

1 Q: I just wanted to ask you a few 2 questions about some of your views generally prior to 3 September of 1995. 4 Prior to September would it have been your 5 view that occupations or blockades generally are not a 6 preferable way to get any government to do something? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And that would be true regardless of 9 whether such actions were taken by Aboriginals or non 10 Aboriginals? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: And again speaking generally would it 13 be fair to say that you would have been of the view that 14 governments should not encourage or condone that sort of 15 action? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And prior to September of 1995 would 18 you have agreed with the view that it would be preferable 19 to avoid an occupation or blockade but that if one (1) 20 does occur it would be desirable to see it come to an end 21 sooner rather than later? 22 A: I think that's fair. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25

235

1 Q: Now, you testified earlier today with 2 respect -- 3 A: If -- if I -- 4 Q: Sorry. 5 A: -- all things being equal, that's 6 fair. 7 Q: Fair enough. You testified earlier 8 today in regards to Serpent Mounds and you -- you gave 9 some detail as to how you understood that that situation 10 was different from Ipperwash Provincial Park? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: But aside from -- from that situation 13 Ms. Hutton had testified and for the benefit of My 14 Friends I'm referring to her testimony on November 21st 15 of 2005 pages 227 to 228. She had testified that your 16 government had not had to address anything comparable to 17 the occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park up to that 18 point. 19 And was that -- was that consistent with 20 your understanding? You hadn't dealt with anything like 21 this before? 22 A: No, we had not. We -- we hadn't been 23 in office that long. 24 Q: Fair enough. Ms. Hutton testified, 25 and I'm not referring to her testimony, again, on

236

1 November 21st, pages 227 to 228, that she did not see the 2 occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park as an opportunity 3 for the Government to assert itself. 4 But she did realize that others who 5 weren't involved, members of the general public, would 6 pay attention to how the Government responded to it. 7 And is that something that you recognized? 8 A: I think that's fair. 9 Q: Ms. Hutton also testified, and I'm on 10 her testimony of November 21st, pages 232 to 234, that it 11 was important that the Government make clear that it did 12 not condone the occupation and that there be a government 13 response in the form of a communications message on 14 September 5th. 15 And would that have been consistent with 16 your view that it was important for the Government to 17 have a communications response? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: You understood that the 20 Interministerial Committee, and I appreciate you may not 21 have known what it was called, but that -- that there was 22 a committee of the various Ministries that was reviewing 23 the legal options available to the Government as a 24 response, in addition to communications? 25 They were looking at the legal options

237
  1  available to them?
  2                 A:   Yes, yes.  
  3                 Q:   In that regard, we've heard evidence
  4  that Ms. Hutton never suggested, at the Interministerial
  5  Committee meetings, what action should be taken to bring
  6  about an end to the occupation.  And for the benefit of
  7  My Friends, I'm referring, for example, to Ms. Jai's
  8  evidence on September 13th, pages 92 and 93.
  9                  I take it that, prior to your getting
 10  advice about the injunction option, you had no sense of
 11  what particular action should be taken to bring about an
 12  end to the occupation.
 13                 A:   That's correct.
 14                 Q:   Now, you testified that you were
 15  advised that other than some sort of immediate threat to
 16  public safety, the OPP would require an injunction before
 17  taking action.
 18                 And I believe --
 19                 A:   I'm sorry -- what -- what was the
 20  start of your question?
 21                 Q:   Sorry.  I'm just referring to your
 22  testimony, what I understood was your testimony --
 23                 A:   Yeah.
 24                 Q:   -- earlier today, and if I've got it
 25  wrong, by all means, let me know.

238
  1                 A:   Okay.
  2                 Q:   But my understanding was that you had
  3  testified that you had been advised that the OPP would
  4  require an injunction before they took any steps, and I
  5  believe that you thought that that may have been on
  6  September 5th.
  7                 Did -- did I understand you correctly?
  8                 A:   Yes.  I -- I think I indicated the --
  9  the time lines between the morning of the 5th, the
 10  evening of the 5th, or the morning of the 6th, but I
 11  believe by the evening of the 5th I would understand
 12  that.
 13                 And -- and by that, that was to take any
 14  action to -- to deal with the occupation.  I was under
 15  the understanding that they were, in fact, prepared to
 16  take steps, that the occupation did not spread to roads
 17  or other public property or private property.
 18                 Q:   Ms. Hutton had testified that she was
 19  not advised, at the September 5th and 6th
 20  Interministerial Committee meetings, that the OPP
 21  required an injunction.  And that was on November 23rd,
 22  pages 115 to 116.
 23                 Or she thought it was important and that
 24  the Committee came to -- to a recommendation with respect
 25  to an injunction independently.

239

1 And -- and I'm wondering, could you have 2 learned that the OPP required an injunction at the dining 3 room meeting? 4 A: No. I think there was some 5 discussion that -- that it was the OPP's desire to have 6 an injunction. I think that was known before the -- the 7 dining room meeting. 8 I think I indicated in my testimony that I 9 knew that there were other options that had been 10 discussed. And -- but that it was the consensus of the - 11 - of the Interministerial Committee that the correct way 12 to proceed would be with an injunction. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: You testified that prior to September 17 of 1995 you were aware of and agreed with the idea that 18 there should be no political direction of OPP operational 19 decisions? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: And I just want to make this crystal 22 clear, did you ever ask anyone to communicate any 23 direction to the OPP regarding their operational 24 decisions concerning the Ipperwash Provincial Park 25 occupation?

240

1 A: I did not. 2 Q: And did you ever ask anyone to 3 attempt to influence the OPP with respect to their 4 operational decisions regarding Ipperwash Provincial 5 Park? 6 A: I did not. 7 Q: Finally, you testified, on a few 8 occasions, about information that would have originated 9 with the Ontario Provincial Police, both before and after 10 September 6th. 11 And you mentioned, in your testimony, your 12 understanding that information would have flowed from the 13 OPP to the Ministry of the Solicitor General, and 14 particular the deputy Minister's office as being the 15 appropriate way. 16 My question was: Did you understand that 17 any information from Ms. Hutton, with respect to OPP 18 information, would have come through the Ministry of the 19 Solicitor General? 20 A: That would have been my expectation, 21 yes. 22 Q: Thank you. Those are all of my 23 questions. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 25 very much.

241

1 I think this would be a good point to 2 adjourn for the day. 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thank you very much, 4 Commissioner. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 6 very much, we'll adjourn now until tomorrow morning at 7 nine o'clock. 8 9 (WITNESS RETIRES) 10 11 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 12 adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, February the 15th at 13 9:00 a.m. 14 15 --- Upon adjourning at 4:30 p.m. 16 17 18 Certified Correct, 19 20 21 ____________________ 22 Carol Geehan, Ms. 23 24 25