㽶Ƶֱ

Skip to content

Mayor-premier policing deal 㽶Ƶֱirrelevant㽶Ƶֱ to Surrey court case: lawyer

It doesn㽶Ƶֱt matter whether Locke and Eby struck an agreement on policing transition, judge hears
web1_240509-sul-judicialreviewfive-statue_1
The provincial government㽶Ƶֱs 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) it㽶Ƶֱs 㽶Ƶֱirrelevant㽶Ƶֱ whether Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke and Premier David Eby struck a deal on the city㽶Ƶֱs 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 Surrey㽶Ƶֱs 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 㽶ƵֱI don㽶Ƶֱt propose to deal with the mayor㽶Ƶֱs affidavit in any way,㽶Ƶֱ he said, adding 㽶Ƶֱthe respondent㽶Ƶֱs position is that virtually all of the statements attributed to the premier and the minister in the mayor㽶Ƶֱs affidavit are inaccurate, taken out of context or both.㽶Ƶֱ

He told Loo he won㽶Ƶֱt tender a 㽶Ƶֱtit-for-tat㽶Ƶֱ reply.

㽶ƵֱIt㽶Ƶֱs irrelevant, in my submission on the judicial review component of the proceedings. The submission I㽶Ƶֱll make there is that it㽶Ƶֱs really quite irrelevant whether the premier and the mayor entered into some kind of deal about the timing of a vote. It㽶Ƶֱs not germane to the legal issues that are before you.㽶Ƶֱ

Bant said 㽶Ƶֱthere㽶Ƶֱs no evidence whatsoever㽶Ƶֱ that Farnworth 㽶Ƶֱwas thinking about anything other than public safety. The City can certainly challenge the reasonableness of the minister㽶Ƶֱs conclusions, but not for sincerity.㽶Ƶֱ

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

A report from the City of Surrey, Bant said, concluded that while neither keeping the RCMP as Surrey㽶Ƶֱs police of jurisdiction or continuing with the transition to the Surrey Police Service are 㽶Ƶֱstraightforward㽶Ƶֱ options, 㽶Ƶֱboth options are feasible.㽶Ƶֱ

Bant said redactions were applied by the City of Surrey before it was given to the minister that included a summary where 㽶Ƶֱthe 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.㽶Ƶֱ

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

㽶ƵֱThe conclusion of this report, the City㽶Ƶֱs own report that both options are feasible, neither option is straightforward, but both are feasible,㽶Ƶֱ he reiterated.

Bant told the judge some 㽶Ƶֱcandid㽶Ƶֱ sections suggest that 㽶Ƶֱthis report was probably never meant to be seen by the minister.㽶Ƶֱ

Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke announced in November 2023 the City would challenge the 㽶Ƶֱconstitutionality㽶Ƶֱ of Farnworth㽶Ƶֱs order.

Bant said this issue was 㽶Ƶֱthe simplest, in my submission.㽶Ƶֱ

㽶ƵֱBy the way of overview on the constitutional issues,㽶Ƶֱ he began, the City㽶Ƶֱs argument is contrary to the law㽶Ƶֱs 㽶Ƶֱmeaning and scope.㽶Ƶֱ

㽶ƵֱNotwithstanding 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.

㽶ƵֱThe legislation has not restricted anyone from expressing themselves, including by voting, and that㽶Ƶֱs really dispositive of the constitutional argument.㽶Ƶֱ



About the Author: Tom Zytaruk

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



(or

㽶Ƶֱ

) 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]); }); }