MISTRUST OF 'SUITS' FILLS VOID BEHIND BADGE

Here's The Mentality: Us Vs. Them.

That attitude best describes the poor relations between the Toronto Police
Service and its civilian overseers, or at least, those members of the
police board who aren't eager to fire off a few thousand rounds of
ammunition every week at the shooting range, like former chair Norm Gardner.

It's the Thin Blue Line versus the civilians ? the suits ? who don't
understand life on the street, and can't be trusted with hard facts. Like
Jack Nicholson says in A Few Good Men: "You can't handle the truth!"

That mistrust is cited as a key reason for the inability of any civilian
board to get to the heart of systemic problems in the Toronto force and
actually do something about them.

Lawyer Susan Eng, former head of the Toronto Police Services Board, knows
it only too well. She describes the syndrome as: "Unless you have taken the
oath of office and entered the secret society, you can't understand us.
Unless you do our job, you can't judge us."

But not all police officers feel that way.

In fact, Eng, who had spectacular public battles over the concept of
civilian oversight with then-chief Bill McCormack more than a decade ago,
believes the problem lies with an untouchable command structure, a view
reflected in a recent hard-hitting report by Judge George Ferguson, a
retired Ontario Superior court justice.

Eng says that rank-and-file officers have similar frustrations with a rigid
military system, which bogs down in unquestioning protocol, however
dangerous, destructive and soul-destroying.

It's not as if these systemic problems haven't been identified.

The force has been studied to death, beginning more than 30 years ago when
the first of four Ontario royal commissions began to examine policing in
Ontario, followed by various city hall performance audits and, finally, the
report on the Toronto service by Ferguson.

More than 15 months ago, he concluded the "single most significant factor
causing problems for the Service is lack of supervision."

That's chilling, considering he's talking about police officers who carry guns.

There was a surreal air this week when, at a news conference with Fantino,
Ferguson explained why he believes it is important for police officers to
undergo random drug testing.

"If a police officer has a gun and he has a drug problem, the immediate
risk is to himself, the other officers and members of the public," said
Ferguson, adding he considers that particular scenario "a major risk."

Who could argue?

His investigation into police misconduct, beginning in 2001, was prompted
by the scandal into the now-defunct central command drug squad. The report
portrays a moribund military organization, in which the best and brightest
officers, often far removed from command positions, appear to be beating a
path out the door.

"The Service has acquired the reputation of being the 'training ground' for
other police services throughout Canada," says Ferguson.

Resignations are "unacceptably high," and other forces no longer even
bother to honour the "no poaching" rule.

"Go and be trained by the Toronto Police Service and then we will hire
you," is how Ferguson describes the current practice.

The backbeat to his report is the sense of rock-bottom morale.

The Toronto force, he says, "too often" resorts to "its old military
tradition," in which officers are promoted simply because they've put in
the time, with no regard for training, aptitude or ability.

The Toronto police force was founded in 1834, based on a British military
model. The force is proud of that military tradition, noting in its 1979
history, To Service and Protect, that the service has "an excellent
reputation, not only as policemen, but on any occasion when they acted as a
military body."

"Too often, individuals who are untested, untrained and without the
appropriate tools have been promoted to supervisory positions," writes
Ferguson. "In this regard, the Service has failed to ensure that those with
the highest leadership qualities" are in charge of the Toronto police force.

It's a recipe for disaster.

Or, as Ferguson puts it: "Any shortcomings in management expertise and
accountability have and will continue to expose the Service to the
potential for serious misconduct.

"Further, it will remain a major contributor to unethical behaviour."

Former chair Eng describes the force as "an antiquated paramilitary system
in which the chief is investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury" of
subordinate officers.

Ferguson also lays out an ethics problem.

"Although ethics and integrity are incorporated into the core values, they
have never been accorded a priority position in training courses provided
by the Service," he says.

His report cites other serious problems, such as the lack of autonomy for
internal affairs, the lack of whistleblower protection and the failure to
do adequate financial background checks in hiring and promoting officers.

"This is particularly troubling since it is well known that personal debt
and so-called high living are major contributors to police dishonesty,"
says Ferguson.

Is it any surprise that officers continue to be charged with alleged
corruption or that the city is rocked with descriptions of a police officer
snitching to the mob and officers running "drug depots" and gambling with
underworld heavies?

What's stunning is that this report sat on a shelf for so long.

The public was kept in the dark.

Ferguson, hired by Fantino, completed his review in January, 2003, and sent
it to the Toronto Police Service.

But Fantino failed to forward it to the Police Services Board ? the only
civilian oversight committee that polices the police ? until Feb. 26, 2004.
That's more than a year later, and it occurred only after pressure from the
board, notably Councillor Pam McConnell, who is deputy chair.

A month after that on March 26, Fantino sent his response to the report's
32 recommendations to the board. He noted that, after receiving Ferguson's
report, he "actively pursued an implementation plan to accommodate the
various recommendations," including the striking of various internal
committees.

This all took time, even as more allegations of corruption shook the force.
Finally, last Thursday, the board instructed Fantino to draft a timetable
to implement the report.

The board must be much tougher if anything is going to change, argues Eng.
"They can stamp their little feet all they want, but they are not working
hard enough on a complete structural shift."

One political observer thinks the police board, although not necessarily
all six members, is affected by the "Stockholm syndrome," in which kidnap
victims form a bond with their kidnappers.

"People are impressed with authority, as well as the sacrifices cops make,"
said the source, who asked that his name be kept out of the debate about
the police.

"You can see how something like that happens. They start to feel that they
don't want to rock the boat."

The mind boggles at the number of studies and the complexity of
recommendations. No wonder police board chair Alan Heisey was banging his
head against the wall after last Thursday's meeting.

Last week, Fantino announced he has asked Ferguson to guide the
implementation of his recommendations. The chief noted that he himself
ordered a 90-day review of the force in his first days on the job in 2000,
setting up 18 committees which came up with 500 recommendations.

That's 460 recommendations too many, according to some critics. There is a
sense that the forest is being lost for the trees. Masses of
recommendations come and go, but nobody ever has their feet held to the fire.

Toronto lawyer Jane Pepino, the first female member of the board in 1982,
understands the "we-they" rift between the police and politicians. Officers
can be paranoid, she says, feeling they are under attack from the outside.

"But civilian oversight of the police is fundamentally necessary in a
democratic society," she says. "Somebody has to be held accountable and, to
a large degree, that's the board. They are the chief executive officers."

Eng argues that oversight must go beyond the police board.

Ferguson, as good as he is, is not enough, she says.

He works out of police headquarters, collaborating closely with police
support staff on legal and administrative issues.

"By definition, his is not an external review," says Eng.

"With all due respect, we have to look at what has to be done for change on
the ground. The police should be treated the same as any other profession ?
be it law, whatever. There must be real outside checks and balances in
order to guard against corruption," says Eng.

We had better oversight in the past, says Eng, who wants the province to
reinstate the Police Complaints Commission, which investigated public
allegations against the police.

It began as a pilot project under former attorney-general Roy McMurtry in
1984 and was adopted province-wide in 1991.

The Tory government of premier Mike Harris killed the commission in 1997.

"It's wasn't perfect. There were bugs to be worked out," says Eng.

"But dust it off and put it back in place. At least it would be a start."