Editor:
I am trying to "come to grips" with the discussion that has been continuing for some time (years, actually!), but that has recently, with the release of Wally Oppal's "Pickton" report, achieved a higher profile - the issue of a regionalized police force in the Lower Mainland, versus continuing the current - what I would describe as - more balkanized approach in place at present.
I read the remarks by Delta police Chief Jim Cessford, and additional earlier comments that Cessford has published advocating "establishing regional specialized police forces," and what I see is continuing and actually growing confusion - and even more "balkanization" and "fragmentation."
Mayor Lois Jackson's admonition that "the community would lose the local department's no call too small policy" with the advent of regionalization "when police officers live in the community where they work" does not have to be - and probably is not - an outgrowth of regionalization of our policing model, at all. Differently than Jackson asserts police officers working in a larger metropolitan, regionalized administration can and do (in other jurisdictions throughout the world) "know our kids" and "people in the houses."
That effect can be and is duplicated employing a regionalized administrative and practice model. Jackson's contention that, "This whole question is not good for our people" is patronizing, incorrect and, frankly, sounds as if it is speaking to a fear of confronting and understanding simple change.
Cessford talks about a regional force achieving "little advantage for smaller communities." He says "it's not cheaper" and he's probably correct about this, although an assessment of costs depends immensely on how those costs are measured, and the measurement of the costs attendant to a policing model is a complicated process that absolutely must look at much more than the costs of police cars and officers' salaries.
Social outcomes and the costs to a community that accompany those outcomes must be a part of the assessment approach. It is here that the continuing insistence on continuing the current balkanized administration and delivery of policing services in the Lower Mainland begins to fail.
Cessford tells us that "research has shown" that a regionalized policing model in a setting like the Lower Mainland "does not result in better policing." It would be interesting to see that research. The counter argument to Cessford's suggestion is that research does not exist - at least not in any disciplined and peer reviewed context.
"The other" issue in all of this discussion is that Delta does not exist in a vacuum, despite the wishes of some of the community leaders and others out here that it should. As with any changing circumstances, people and communities have the option of confronting and becoming involved in shaping those changes - for the better.
Differently, communities can drag their feet, dig in their heels and say, "No," and eventually be overwhelmed by the forces that propel needed and different and new approaches to managing issues and interests.
Delta is a part of a much larger municipal entity - the Lower Mainland - and it would be good to more appropriately recognize that in the context of the debate on this issue. "No," is unlikely to be the best answer in this discussion.
We should also recognize that a "regionalized" approach to the delivery of policing services in a metropolitan milieu is not at all a "new" idea. As someone mentioned to me in discussion of this matter, "This is not rocket science here."
Regionalized, metropolitan police forces exist all over the world, and they have for many years - successfully - also successfully addressing some of the concerns that Jackson and Cessford voice in their comments. "Disciplined" research and an examination of this matter as it addresses concerns in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia will certainly tell us that. It is highly unlikely that it will advise us differently.
Jackson says we are "going to have a dialogue in Delta on regionalization and policing." Let's make sure that dialogue is informed and managed to ensure that is free from bias and assumptions and ill-informed opinion. And let's get a move on...
Firth Bateman
