COPTER'S CURIOUS CABAL

The auditorium at police headquarters is a-buzz as deputants wait for
a presentation to the police services board by Trevor Harness,
retired police officer and president and CEO of Regional Air Support
and Rescue (RASAR). Every seat is filled save that belonging to Mayor
David Miller. Many may have come simply for the novelty act Regional
Air Support has taken it upon itself to fund a helicopter for Toronto
police use (plus two more for the Halton/Peel region and one to be
shared throughout southern Ontario) entirely through private donations.

Shades of True Blue? Even deeper shades, perhaps. Appropriately
enough for a group touting privately funded surveillance, RASAR
remains a mysterious entity. Though it became a charity in May 2003,
neither its financial records nor names of its directors are publicly
available. But we know from a sparse Revenue Canada document that its
assets totalled $261 at the end of last year.

In response to a query in that same document, "Give detailed
information so a reader can clearly understand what the charity
actually did to fulfill its mandate," someone filled in: "We are
still getting organized." RASAR conducted no fundraising activity in
2004. Its website gives equally little insight, but it is an
interesting study in cognitive dissonance. The text of the main page
stresses that the helicopters are a part of community-building. Or
perhaps community is a part of helicopter-building.

At any rate, RASAR is the last, best hope for the ill. "For those who
have been personally touched by a tragedy, or know someone who has
been, understanding the need for a helicopter is very clear. When a
child goes missing or Alzheimer's patient wanders off, time is
critical." Themes of wandering Alzheimer's patients recur in
Harness's live presentation to the point that he should have just
referred to them as WAPs to save time.

One also wonders at the contrast between the goals of RASAR's
community development office and its Top Gun Challenge fundraiser
event: "This exciting involves [sic] participants strapping on an
F-18 fighter jet simulator and going supersonic.... The fight is
on.... It's winner take all. And watch out for wandering Alzheimer's
patients (WAPs) in MiGs!" All right, I added that last part.

The mixed message may be a sign of confidence in just how many
problems can be solved by a single helicopter. RASAR seems to believe
copters should be purchased just on principle. Harness's presentation
opens with a tally: Canada has 1,822 commercial helicopters, 91 per
cent of them in the somewhat arcane grouping of "military and news
gathering," while only 4.5 per cent (82), he reported sadly, are
involved in law enforcement.

Harness points out that following Calgary's adoption of a copter,
break-and-enters decreased by 33 per cent. But during questions from
the board, a nonplussed Hamlin Grange gets his correlation all up in
Harness's causation. "B-and-E's went down 25 per cent in Toronto
after the [2000-2001 helicopter] pilot project," he says with typical
dry wit, "just for your education."

Calgary's police helicopter is also the first on scene at 50 per cent
of police calls which may or may not be significant, considering
there's only so much you can do from a couple hundred feet in the
air. If it's just response speed we're after, a simple tactical
missile strike could probably suffice.

While RASAR underlines the fact that the city auditor found
helicopters respond twice as fast to priority calls, it neglects to
mention that despite being in the air eight hours a day, six days a
week for six months, the 2001 chopper in T.O.'s pilot project
attended 789 priority calls: 0.6 per cent of the total. "It would...
be overly optimistic to conclude that one helicopter... would have
any sustainable impact on the level of crime," reads the audit. "In
fact, the city of Toronto did not appear to experience any crime
deterrent benefits by using a helicopter."

Toronto already has use of one through contracts with other
municipalities, and the report did agree that choppers are
time-savers in critical search-and-rescue missions. But its first
recommendation was to explore less expensive options rather than
purchase one of its own.

RASAR believes this is no longer an issue, since it would fund (and
own) the project including privately hired and trained pilots through
a projected annual pull of $10 million from individual citizens,
including $4 million from corporate donations, the single largest category.

"We must never allow corporations or wealthy individuals to fund
police services," submits Helen Armstrong of Stop the Choppers.
"Allowing such donations sets up the possibility that our police
could be beholden to private interests over ordinary citizens."

"If private individuals want to give money to cover the expenses of
policing," says deputant Roy Merrens, "they should give that money to
the board."

When asked, Harness provides the board with the names of seven
directors, mostly retired emergency services brass, notably including
former Toronto police chief William McCormack. Two of them live in
Toronto. There are seven other seats set aside for corporate members.
Harness cannot provide me with names of these, implying that their
seats have not been filled. He says that RASAR is not yet prepared to
disclose corporations it may or may not be in discussion with.

The group's written submission says fears that the privately run
helicopter will be answerable to the corporate funders are misplaced.
"Since RASAR, as the intermediary, is dealing with corporations in
raising funds, rather than the individual police service raising
funds... all of the police boards and the contributing corporations
are insulated from criticism related to the possibility of
compromise." True, perhaps. But in a way, corporations being
insulated from criticism is precisely what opponents fear.

Mayor Miller, pointedly arriving just as the item wrapped up, stated
bluntly to reporters, "The helicopter is a distraction. What we need
is more officers on the street."

It remains to be seen whether Chief Bill Blair, to whom the board
deferred the matter for report, agrees. But having repeatedly
expressed his support for community policing, he may be moved by the
written submission of U of T criminology prof Mariana Valverde:
"Helicopters are perceived on both sides as a quasi-military tool to
occupy a hostile territory. In communities where there is already a
lack of trust in police... introducing helicopters will not only not
improve safety, but will exacerbate the already negative situation."

In other words: Just a distraction? We should be so lucky.