The case for a third security force to protect the Saskatchewan legislature appears flimsy at best.
The Saskatchewan Party government hasn’t explained why the existing security service and Regina police are unable to protect the government from whatever threats the legislature and government face.
The explanation from Minister of Corrections and Policing Christine Tell claims the need for the third police force arises from increased demonstrations at the Legislature in recent years.
Sounds more like the government wants to protect itself from the people who disagree with it.
When pressed for more information, Tell did what government often does, hid behind privacy laws.
Pressed further she exclaimed: “This is a government building. So what can I say? We’re the government.”
Tell appears to forget the Legislature is owned by the people of Saskatchewan. Nor does she or the government get the fact that limiting demonstrations at the legislature, or elsewhere, takes aim at destroying a fundamental democratic freedom of the right to protest peacefully.
Perhaps the popularity of a measure limiting protests at schools and health care facilities gave the provincial government the gall to set up a security force limiting protests at the Legislature.
Oddly, the Saskatchewan Party hasn’t yet found a way to blame the need for a third security force on Justin Trudeau and those darn Liberals.
The public needs more details on the need for a third security force: Are there threats from one of the radical political organizations? Or other threats?
Did the noisy anti-vaxxer demonstrations that caused cancellation of some Throne Speech activities lead to this? The measure seems to have lurked in government thought for some time.
One argument for the private government police force suggests the current legislative security detail, made up mostly of retired RCMP officers, hasn’t got access to intelligence from other police agencies.
That could be rectified by negotiations with those agencies. There is no need for a third force duplicating the work by the existing service and the Regina Police Service.
What is the possibility this third security force becomes politicized, serving at the whim of the premier and his cabinet? We’ve seen how fragile democracy is from the events south of the border in recent years.
More likely than not the desire for a third security force arises from a 2020 event when Tristan Durocher and other First Nations members protested a lack of suicide prevention policy by camping on the Legislature grounds for 44 days.
The government’s initial response was to ignore the requests to meet with the premier and appropriate minister.
Instead the government decided to deal with the “problem’’ by policing and demanded the Regina Police remove the camp and residents.
The Regina Police wisely realized how arrests and removal could spark violence and refused to throw them in jail.
Eventually, the province went to court, losing the lawsuit that attempted to oust the camp. Then the premier met with protesters.
The Saskatchewan Party’s third security force apparently stems from this incident
The measure reminds one of the boy who quit playing ball and took home the bat and ball when he couldn’t get his way.
Ron Walter can be reached at ronjoy@sasktel.net
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of this publication.
