BԪַ

Skip to content

Mayor-premier policing deal BԪַirrelevantBԪַ to Surrey court case: lawyer

It doesnBԪַt matter whether Locke and Eby struck an agreement on policing transition, judge hears
web1_240509-sul-judicialreviewfive-statue_1
The provincial governmentBԪַs lawyer in the Surrey policing feud made his case today in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver. (Black Press Media file)

A B.C. Supreme Court judge was told Thursday (May 2) itBԪַs BԪַirrelevantBԪַ whether Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke and Premier David Eby struck a deal on the cityBԪַs policing transition before Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworth issued his edict July 19, 2023 that the RCMP must be replaced by the Surrey Police Service.

Justice Kevin Loo is presiding over the City of SurreyBԪַs petition for a judicial review aimed at quashing that order in a five-day hearing that began April 29 in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver. He heard evidence on the second day of the hearing about a deal reached between Locke and Eby, contained in an affidavit from a political advisor and note-taker for the mayor, before Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworth

On Thursday (May 2), lawyer Trevor Bant, representing the provincial government, told Loo that BԪַI donBԪַt propose to deal with the mayorBԪַs affidavit in any way,BԪַ he said, adding BԪַthe respondentBԪַs position is that virtually all of the statements attributed to the premier and the minister in the mayorBԪַs affidavit are inaccurate, taken out of context or both.BԪַ

He told Loo he wonBԪַt tender a BԪַtit-for-tatBԪַ reply.

BԪַItBԪַs irrelevant, in my submission on the judicial review component of the proceedings. The submission IBԪַll make there is that itBԪַs really quite irrelevant whether the premier and the mayor entered into some kind of deal about the timing of a vote. ItBԪַs not germane to the legal issues that are before you.BԪַ

Bant said BԪַthereBԪַs no evidence whatsoeverBԪַ that Farnworth BԪַwas thinking about anything other than public safety. The City can certainly challenge the reasonableness of the ministerBԪַs conclusions, but not for sincerity.BԪַ

He noted that a ministry analysis of a strategy to keep RCMP and restaff the Surrey detachment was BԪַambitious but feasible only when considered in isolation of the RCMP resourcing pressures across the province.BԪַ

A report from the City of Surrey, Bant said, concluded that while neither keeping the RCMP as SurreyBԪַs police of jurisdiction or continuing with the transition to the Surrey Police Service are BԪַstraightforwardBԪַ options, BԪַboth options are feasible.BԪַ

Bant said redactions were applied by the City of Surrey before it was given to the minister that included a summary where BԪַthe conclusion is really that both options are feasible. Where a council decision to maintain the RCMP is feasible with conditions (and) continuing the transition to the SPS is also feasible with conditions.BԪַ

BԪַNeither pathway is straightforward and each requires fundamental conditions to be met by other parties in order to be successful,BԪַ Bant told the court.

BԪַThe conclusion of this report, the CityBԪַs own report that both options are feasible, neither option is straightforward, but both are feasible,BԪַ he reiterated.

Bant told the judge some BԪַcandidBԪַ sections suggest that BԪַthis report was probably never meant to be seen by the minister.BԪַ

Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke announced in November 2023 the City would challenge the BԪַconstitutionalityBԪַ of FarnworthBԪַs order.

Bant said this issue was BԪַthe simplest, in my submission.BԪַ

BԪַBy the way of overview on the constitutional issues,BԪַ he began, the CityBԪַs argument is contrary to the lawBԪַs BԪַmeaning and scope.BԪַ

BԪַNotwithstanding the creativity and the very able submissions that have been made on behalf of the City, it really is a radical expression of freedom of expression that would convert our representative democracy into a direct democracy in which voters have that very literal right to get what they vote for.

BԪַThe legislation has not restricted anyone from expressing themselves, including by voting, and thatBԪַs really dispositive of the constitutional argument.BԪַ



About the Author: Tom Zytaruk

I write unvarnished opinion columns and unbiased news reports for the Surrey Now-Leader.
Read more



(or

BԪַ

) document.head.appendChild(flippScript); window.flippxp = window.flippxp || {run: []}; window.flippxp.run.push(function() { window.flippxp.registerSlot("#flipp-ux-slot-ssdaw212", "Black Press Media Standard", 1281409, [312035]); }); }