Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Paul Battershill - no date set
.
A date has still not been set for a disciplinary hearing for suspended Victoria police chief Paul Battershill.
Victoria News - May 27, 2008
Mayor Alan Lowe said earlier this month he expected to set a hearing date within 30 days after handing Battershill a summary of findings from an RCMP investigation into an unspecified public trust complaint against him May 8.
Lowe said Monday the hearing has been delayed because Battershill has asked the Office of the Police Complaint Commssioner for information not contained in the summary. As chair of the police board, Lowe is required to serve as discipline authority for complaints involving the chief.
Deputy police complaint commissioner Bruce Brown said there is no deadline for the hearing to be scheduled. But Battershill's information request should not cause a delay.
"I guess you could say it's still in process right now," said Brown.
The discipline hearing will not be public. Only Lowe, Battershill and his counsel and a representative from the OPCC will be permitted.
"We're not required to attend but we often do attend disciplinary proceeding just to observe or monitor the process," said Brown.
If either Battershill or the OPCC disagrees with the outcome, a public hearing would then be convened.
Battershill has been suspended with pay since October 2007. Lowe has only said the complaint, which is not criminal in nature, relates to a "personnel matter."
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/victorianews/news/19267624.html
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Chief Constable Paul Battershill
Chief Battershill joined the Vancouver Police Department in 1977
following completion of a B.Sc. in Clinical Biochemistry at UBC.
During a 22 year career in Vancouver, Paul worked in a variety
of operational roles including patrol, traffic, investigations,
surveillance and emergency response.
In the 1980’s Paul served as the elected president of police
labor organizations at a municipal, provincial and national level.
During the late 1980’s and early 1990’s Chief Battershill was the
leader of the Vancouver Regional Emergency Response Teams.
In 1993 Paul served as a member of the Justice Oppal Royal Commission of Inquiry into Policing in British Columbia.
In 1996 AND 1997 Paul was one of the founding Directors of the E-COMM Corporation which
established a multi-jurisdictional dispatch centre for police, fire and ambulance.
In 1999 Chief Battershill was appointed as Chief Constable of the City of Victoria.
In 2002 and 2003 Paul was elected as Chair of the RCMP Forensic Laboratory Services Advisory. Group tasked largely with implementing DNA technology at a national level.
In 2004 Paul was appointed as the Chief Investigator for the study of the use of TASERS in
British Columbia.
www.cacole.ca/Resource%20Library/Conferences/2007%20Conference/CACOLE%20Conference%202007%20Biographies.pdf
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
A date has still not been set for a disciplinary hearing for suspended Victoria police chief Paul Battershill.
Victoria News - May 27, 2008
Mayor Alan Lowe said earlier this month he expected to set a hearing date within 30 days after handing Battershill a summary of findings from an RCMP investigation into an unspecified public trust complaint against him May 8.
Lowe said Monday the hearing has been delayed because Battershill has asked the Office of the Police Complaint Commssioner for information not contained in the summary. As chair of the police board, Lowe is required to serve as discipline authority for complaints involving the chief.
Deputy police complaint commissioner Bruce Brown said there is no deadline for the hearing to be scheduled. But Battershill's information request should not cause a delay.
"I guess you could say it's still in process right now," said Brown.
The discipline hearing will not be public. Only Lowe, Battershill and his counsel and a representative from the OPCC will be permitted.
"We're not required to attend but we often do attend disciplinary proceeding just to observe or monitor the process," said Brown.
If either Battershill or the OPCC disagrees with the outcome, a public hearing would then be convened.
Battershill has been suspended with pay since October 2007. Lowe has only said the complaint, which is not criminal in nature, relates to a "personnel matter."
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/victorianews/news/19267624.html
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Chief Constable Paul Battershill
Chief Battershill joined the Vancouver Police Department in 1977
following completion of a B.Sc. in Clinical Biochemistry at UBC.
During a 22 year career in Vancouver, Paul worked in a variety
of operational roles including patrol, traffic, investigations,
surveillance and emergency response.
In the 1980’s Paul served as the elected president of police
labor organizations at a municipal, provincial and national level.
During the late 1980’s and early 1990’s Chief Battershill was the
leader of the Vancouver Regional Emergency Response Teams.
In 1993 Paul served as a member of the Justice Oppal Royal Commission of Inquiry into Policing in British Columbia.
In 1996 AND 1997 Paul was one of the founding Directors of the E-COMM Corporation which
established a multi-jurisdictional dispatch centre for police, fire and ambulance.
In 1999 Chief Battershill was appointed as Chief Constable of the City of Victoria.
In 2002 and 2003 Paul was elected as Chair of the RCMP Forensic Laboratory Services Advisory. Group tasked largely with implementing DNA technology at a national level.
In 2004 Paul was appointed as the Chief Investigator for the study of the use of TASERS in
British Columbia.
www.cacole.ca/Resource%20Library/Conferences/2007%20Conference/CACOLE%20Conference%202007%20Biographies.pdf
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Comments:
<< Home
GOVERNMENT REFUSES TO RELEASE KPMG REPORT INTO ACTIVITIES OF BRIAN KIERAN, JAMIE ELMHIRST AND ERIK BORNMANN
Hansard Debates
May 27, 2008
C. James: Is the Premier confident that the report dealt with all the issues regarding Mr. Taylor's dealings with Pilothouse?
Hon. G. Campbell: Again, let's review the facts. We received a third-party e-mail. We have reviewed, and KPMG has reviewed, all of the issues that arise out of that e-mail as was initially said it would be. It has been done. The report is now subject to a Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy review. When that review is complete, it will be released.
C. James: As we know, we canvassed yesterday the fact that an FOI report sat for four years before it was released. So my question is to the Premier: do we have to wait four years for the release of this report?
Hon. G. Campbell: I can't say to the Leader of the Opposition how long it will take for the release of the report.
The Freedom of Information Act is the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The professional public service reviews the information in a report. There are third parties who are covered in the report who will clearly have to be contacted and are being contacted with regard to the release of the information that they freely gave to KPMG. That report will be released. If there is concern about the extent of the release, there can be an appeal to the freedom-of-information and protection-of-privacy commissioner.
I think it's important we recognize…. The challenge of the law is always to provide as much information as possible while we protect individuals' privacy. That is why it sometimes takes some time to take these reports to their final conclusion. I am sure that everyone is working as expeditiously as possible for the release of that report.
C. James: To the Premier: is the Premier giving encouragement to release this report, as he said in the first place? Although only a summary came out, has the Premier given his encouragement for this report to be released?
Hon. G. Campbell: It has always been the government's intention to release the report as quickly as possible. We said it was going to be subject to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy. A summary report was provided by KPMG. So their conclusions would be clear and public. That happened a number of months ago now.
The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is quite explicit about how these reports have to be handled. They are being handled in that way. It's in the government's interests and the public's interests to have that report completely available under the auspices of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act as quickly as possible.
C. James: It's now been almost eight months. Does the Premier feel that's a reasonable amount of time for the public to have to wait for this report to be released?
Hansard Debates
May 27, 2008
C. James: Is the Premier confident that the report dealt with all the issues regarding Mr. Taylor's dealings with Pilothouse?
Hon. G. Campbell: Again, let's review the facts. We received a third-party e-mail. We have reviewed, and KPMG has reviewed, all of the issues that arise out of that e-mail as was initially said it would be. It has been done. The report is now subject to a Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy review. When that review is complete, it will be released.
C. James: As we know, we canvassed yesterday the fact that an FOI report sat for four years before it was released. So my question is to the Premier: do we have to wait four years for the release of this report?
Hon. G. Campbell: I can't say to the Leader of the Opposition how long it will take for the release of the report.
The Freedom of Information Act is the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The professional public service reviews the information in a report. There are third parties who are covered in the report who will clearly have to be contacted and are being contacted with regard to the release of the information that they freely gave to KPMG. That report will be released. If there is concern about the extent of the release, there can be an appeal to the freedom-of-information and protection-of-privacy commissioner.
I think it's important we recognize…. The challenge of the law is always to provide as much information as possible while we protect individuals' privacy. That is why it sometimes takes some time to take these reports to their final conclusion. I am sure that everyone is working as expeditiously as possible for the release of that report.
C. James: To the Premier: is the Premier giving encouragement to release this report, as he said in the first place? Although only a summary came out, has the Premier given his encouragement for this report to be released?
Hon. G. Campbell: It has always been the government's intention to release the report as quickly as possible. We said it was going to be subject to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy. A summary report was provided by KPMG. So their conclusions would be clear and public. That happened a number of months ago now.
The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is quite explicit about how these reports have to be handled. They are being handled in that way. It's in the government's interests and the public's interests to have that report completely available under the auspices of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act as quickly as possible.
C. James: It's now been almost eight months. Does the Premier feel that's a reasonable amount of time for the public to have to wait for this report to be released?
# posted by 
: May 27, 2008 at 11:21 a.m.
: May 27, 2008 at 11:21 a.m.
Express Collision Shop Said,
Question Period. Campbell has some explaining. Bring in David Baines.
Question Period. Campbell has some explaining. Bring in David Baines.
# posted by : May 27, 2008 at 1:57 p.m.
: May 27, 2008 at 1:57 p.m.
Battershill has an amazing resume when you do searches on him. A famous SWAT commando and on the other hand a strong advocate for the homeless, drug addicted and prostitutes. Then a national union leader and on the other hand a management leader. Then on a royal commission. They've sure damaged his reputation but this guy isn't going to have any trouble working anywhere in the world.
# posted by : May 27, 2008 at 8:23 p.m.
: May 27, 2008 at 8:23 p.m.
.
Anonymous 8:23,
Thank you so much for this tribute to Victoria's former Chief Constable.
You've helped to make up for the poor job I've done, on searching out Battershill's background (computer troubles and still feeling a bit shakey).
Could I ask a favour: if you have 2 or 3 URLs handy, would you send them too?
I'd really like to do a profile of this man. Certainly none of the newspapers or periodicals have done so, that I know of, and it seems very odd to maintain a prickly silence.
Many thanks, if you can.
Anon 11:21, many thanks for your contribution as well.
Ecs: you too, as always.
.
Anonymous 8:23,
Thank you so much for this tribute to Victoria's former Chief Constable.
You've helped to make up for the poor job I've done, on searching out Battershill's background (computer troubles and still feeling a bit shakey).
Could I ask a favour: if you have 2 or 3 URLs handy, would you send them too?
I'd really like to do a profile of this man. Certainly none of the newspapers or periodicals have done so, that I know of, and it seems very odd to maintain a prickly silence.
Many thanks, if you can.
Anon 11:21, many thanks for your contribution as well.
Ecs: you too, as always.
.
www.cacole.ca/Resource%20Library/Conferences/2007%20Conference/CACOLE%20Conference%202007%20Biographies.pdf
# posted by : May 27, 2008 at 9:34 p.m.
: May 27, 2008 at 9:34 p.m.
Re: The exchange between Ms. James and Mr. Campbell in the Ledge....
Look.
I'm getting sick and tired of these 'tangential' questions that come in as softballs.
Instead, why not ask him, straight up, what the criterion are for putting it through the FOIR process.
Then, based on what he says go after him relentlessly and get him on the record with specifics.
If this type of done had been last Spring with the privilege 'protocols' we would be a lot farther ahead now.
I mean, heckfire, look at all the stuff Joy McPhail left us from five(!) years ago because she went right after these people, doggedly, when she had so little (and so few resources) to work with.
Sheesh.
.
Look.
I'm getting sick and tired of these 'tangential' questions that come in as softballs.
Instead, why not ask him, straight up, what the criterion are for putting it through the FOIR process.
Then, based on what he says go after him relentlessly and get him on the record with specifics.
If this type of done had been last Spring with the privilege 'protocols' we would be a lot farther ahead now.
I mean, heckfire, look at all the stuff Joy McPhail left us from five(!) years ago because she went right after these people, doggedly, when she had so little (and so few resources) to work with.
Sheesh.
.
May 28 --new topic
BC Citizens for Public Power hare having at 2 day conference. See www.citizensforprivatepower.ca
Before these run-of-river projects ruin everything we need to get really informed. Glad you are feeling better. Cheers.
BC Citizens for Public Power hare having at 2 day conference. See www.citizensforprivatepower.ca
Before these run-of-river projects ruin everything we need to get really informed. Glad you are feeling better. Cheers.
# posted by : May 28, 2008 at 7:43 a.m.
: May 28, 2008 at 7:43 a.m.
.
RossK,
I'm 101% in agreement with you on this one. Everybody's lovely Aunt Carol just ain't cut out for this job.
Anon 11:21,
I'm glad you posted that segment from Hansard. I had been on the government site (usually so wonderfully interesting) and couldn't stay awake ... I could almost see the pocket-watch swinging before my eyes and the hypnotist droning "You are feeling sleeeeepy ..."
I guess Ms James was speaking to posterity, putting all the facts on the line. But Jeez.
Joy MacPhail is sometimes visible in the current B.C. political scene ... mostly on Thursdays (Mike Duffy Live, CTV) ... anybody know if she is open to the idea of being in the B.C. Legislature again?
To Anonymous 9:34, many thanks indeed for that Battershill URL. Btw, I couldn't get it to work but when I asked for help, another invaluable commentor accessed the pdf file and provided the copy you see posted.
That's a remarkable bio. Why wouldn't BC be proud of such a guy, and mention these things now and then?
I mean, why is that?
.
RossK,
I'm 101% in agreement with you on this one. Everybody's lovely Aunt Carol just ain't cut out for this job.
Anon 11:21,
I'm glad you posted that segment from Hansard. I had been on the government site (usually so wonderfully interesting) and couldn't stay awake ... I could almost see the pocket-watch swinging before my eyes and the hypnotist droning "You are feeling sleeeeepy ..."
I guess Ms James was speaking to posterity, putting all the facts on the line. But Jeez.
Joy MacPhail is sometimes visible in the current B.C. political scene ... mostly on Thursdays (Mike Duffy Live, CTV) ... anybody know if she is open to the idea of being in the B.C. Legislature again?
To Anonymous 9:34, many thanks indeed for that Battershill URL. Btw, I couldn't get it to work but when I asked for help, another invaluable commentor accessed the pdf file and provided the copy you see posted.
That's a remarkable bio. Why wouldn't BC be proud of such a guy, and mention these things now and then?
I mean, why is that?
.
Is there any word on Gord's , 'department of defence' plans? Awhile back there was mention of a federal lawyer sitting in at the basi/virk hearings. This could be a father-son firm. I can't recall the last name, (but the son is Nathan) the firm was hired by former PM Paul Martin, to keep an eye on the findings of the raid! That same firm represents members of hells angels!
# posted by : May 28, 2008 at 10:21 a.m.
: May 28, 2008 at 10:21 a.m.
Hi Mary,
I watched and read the debates of the premier’s office and thought Mrs. James asked very good questions of the premier, but with hardly an informative answer. The unsatisfation /frustration people are feeling around these debates are understandable because there were no answers forth coming. These frustrations should be directed at Gordon Campbell as he came across as weak, sleazy, and arrogant. Of course it would have been nice to receive some answers to dozens of important questions, but how? You can’t force the man to answer. The only way (I feel) that we will ever know what has taken place since Campbell has taken office is if he is booted out in the next election.
I say Campbell comes across as weak because if the man leading your province avoids answering questions for two days (years), you sure don’t look like the strong dictator type that he’s become.
I say Campbell come across as sleazy because may of the questions put to Campbell were about corruption, broken laws and integrity in the premiere’s office, most everything is done in secret and again with no answers.
I say Campbell comes across as arrogant because he thinks (in an dictatorial way) that he can do what ever he pleases because the people of BC either can’t or won’t get involved and he can spin his way out of anything.
Every time Mrs. James and Campbell go head to head, Mrs. James cleans up. Now, Campbell is very generous with providing plenty of ammunition for the opposition to use and will probably be his downfall.
Besides question period there is only one time in the whole year that direct questions are put to Campbell and yet again we end up unsatisfied/frustrated.
Hope your feeling better Mary
I watched and read the debates of the premier’s office and thought Mrs. James asked very good questions of the premier, but with hardly an informative answer. The unsatisfation /frustration people are feeling around these debates are understandable because there were no answers forth coming. These frustrations should be directed at Gordon Campbell as he came across as weak, sleazy, and arrogant. Of course it would have been nice to receive some answers to dozens of important questions, but how? You can’t force the man to answer. The only way (I feel) that we will ever know what has taken place since Campbell has taken office is if he is booted out in the next election.
I say Campbell comes across as weak because if the man leading your province avoids answering questions for two days (years), you sure don’t look like the strong dictator type that he’s become.
I say Campbell come across as sleazy because may of the questions put to Campbell were about corruption, broken laws and integrity in the premiere’s office, most everything is done in secret and again with no answers.
I say Campbell comes across as arrogant because he thinks (in an dictatorial way) that he can do what ever he pleases because the people of BC either can’t or won’t get involved and he can spin his way out of anything.
Every time Mrs. James and Campbell go head to head, Mrs. James cleans up. Now, Campbell is very generous with providing plenty of ammunition for the opposition to use and will probably be his downfall.
Besides question period there is only one time in the whole year that direct questions are put to Campbell and yet again we end up unsatisfied/frustrated.
Hope your feeling better Mary
# posted by : May 28, 2008 at 12:00 p.m.
: May 28, 2008 at 12:00 p.m.
I just want to make a couple of observations.
Have those of you who use hansard noticed lately that it is taking longer for the blues transcript to be finalized? And then the warning at the top about liability, that the blues are not for public copy until finalized. hmmmm....couldn't be a tactic to once again stall or delay access to public information, could it?
Usually I'm quite critical of James but I read and watched the budget estimates and although she's no Joy MacPhail she did well I thought. She was organized, thorough and she knew her stuff. Her questions were wide in scope and were inter-related. It was the Premier who tried to obscure the issues ( eg as he constantly and conveniently "confuses" federal and provincial monies) and it is he who dodged every question. His behavior said more and more as he repeatedly attempted to say less and less in ways that would approach any kind of an actual answer to a question. It was very revealing. Ms. James held up well in comparison.
It is well worth reading the Committee A Budget Estimates, Tuesday, May 27, 2008. PM. because the questions tie so many issues together - ones that we often discuss here on BC Mary's site.
But what is REALLY interesting in these budget estimates is that it becomes clearer and clearer that all roads lead back to the Prmeier's office. For instance, just before portion 1700 of the draft transcript James brings up "the complicated structure" of the climate change secretariat, the Environment Ministry and the Premier's office....where the head of the climate change secretariat is working out of the Premier's office, but "the responsibility" is sitting with the Ministry of Environment. What James calls "a very unusual process to set up".
It is this confusing "mix" that James questions - about where the ultimate accountability lies.
That is what is most revealing - the unusual structure - and it is also what is being brought to light through the questions Ms. James is asking Gordon Campbell - the unusual structure - the confusing and close "mix" between the Premier's office and the ministries. Which takes us right back to that infamous memo to cabinet from the Premier's office in the early days of the Campbell government, the memo that stated as to how the ministries would be structured and controlled through the Premier's office - including hiring and firing.
That memo, and "the controlling structure" it defined back then, is being revealed now, shown still alive and active years later through the questions James is asking of the premier.
That has important implications to BBV and the BC Rail Corruption Scandal.
Have those of you who use hansard noticed lately that it is taking longer for the blues transcript to be finalized? And then the warning at the top about liability, that the blues are not for public copy until finalized. hmmmm....couldn't be a tactic to once again stall or delay access to public information, could it?
Usually I'm quite critical of James but I read and watched the budget estimates and although she's no Joy MacPhail she did well I thought. She was organized, thorough and she knew her stuff. Her questions were wide in scope and were inter-related. It was the Premier who tried to obscure the issues ( eg as he constantly and conveniently "confuses" federal and provincial monies) and it is he who dodged every question. His behavior said more and more as he repeatedly attempted to say less and less in ways that would approach any kind of an actual answer to a question. It was very revealing. Ms. James held up well in comparison.
It is well worth reading the Committee A Budget Estimates, Tuesday, May 27, 2008. PM. because the questions tie so many issues together - ones that we often discuss here on BC Mary's site.
But what is REALLY interesting in these budget estimates is that it becomes clearer and clearer that all roads lead back to the Prmeier's office. For instance, just before portion 1700 of the draft transcript James brings up "the complicated structure" of the climate change secretariat, the Environment Ministry and the Premier's office....where the head of the climate change secretariat is working out of the Premier's office, but "the responsibility" is sitting with the Ministry of Environment. What James calls "a very unusual process to set up".
It is this confusing "mix" that James questions - about where the ultimate accountability lies.
That is what is most revealing - the unusual structure - and it is also what is being brought to light through the questions Ms. James is asking Gordon Campbell - the unusual structure - the confusing and close "mix" between the Premier's office and the ministries. Which takes us right back to that infamous memo to cabinet from the Premier's office in the early days of the Campbell government, the memo that stated as to how the ministries would be structured and controlled through the Premier's office - including hiring and firing.
That memo, and "the controlling structure" it defined back then, is being revealed now, shown still alive and active years later through the questions James is asking of the premier.
That has important implications to BBV and the BC Rail Corruption Scandal.
# posted by : May 28, 2008 at 3:39 p.m.
: May 28, 2008 at 3:39 p.m.
"The challenge of the law is always to provide as much information as possible while we protect individuals' privacy. "
Aren't we all pleased that the Mounties report on the Taser incident at YVR respected the privacy of Mr. Dziezinki, heavens forbid that we know the name of the guy that was murdered at YVR after 29 seconds of negotiation/assessment of the situation.
Could the victim have been "somebody else?"
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Aren't we all pleased that the Mounties report on the Taser incident at YVR respected the privacy of Mr. Dziezinki, heavens forbid that we know the name of the guy that was murdered at YVR after 29 seconds of negotiation/assessment of the situation.
Could the victim have been "somebody else?"
GIVE ME A BREAK!
"Joy MacPhail is sometimes visible in the current B.C. political scene ... mostly on Thursdays (Mike Duffy Live, CTV) ... anybody know if she is open to the idea of being in the B.C. Legislature again?"
Premier Material in my book!!!
Premier Material in my book!!!
.
Very good points, Lynx!
Especially that point about how "all roads lead back to the premier's office" ... well, of course they do!
In the matter of BC Rail, he decided. And the Martyn Brown memo certified that, months before BCRail's secret agreements were signed off.
I'm looking forward to June 2nd, when the pre-trial hearings begin again.
.
Post a Comment
Very good points, Lynx!
Especially that point about how "all roads lead back to the premier's office" ... well, of course they do!
In the matter of BC Rail, he decided. And the Martyn Brown memo certified that, months before BCRail's secret agreements were signed off.
I'm looking forward to June 2nd, when the pre-trial hearings begin again.
.
<< Home
Battershill has an amazing resume when you do searches on him. A famous SWAT commando and on the other hand a strong advocate for the homeless, drug addicted and prostitutes. Then a national union leader and on the other hand a management leader. Then on a royal commission. They've sure damaged his reputation but this guy isn't going to have any trouble working anywhere in the world.
May 27, 2008