After the attack

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 24/10/2014 (3470 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

OTTAWA — Less than 48 hours after Michael Zehaf Bibeau barged into the Centre Block with a rifle and came within metres of the prime minister and most of his cabinet, life on Parliament Hill slowly returned to normal.

While a larger-than-usual police presence blocked most entrances to the Hill, and public access is still denied, workers were back in their offices, MPs were preparing to return home for the weekend, and traffic flowed once again along Wellington Street, past the spot where the gunman parked the Toyota Corolla he used to stage his attack.

The National War Memorial where Cpl. Nathan Cirillo was slain reopened to the public Friday morning in a sombre ceremony attended by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

With the initial shock wearing off and more details of what happened now known following the release of security video that showed Zehaf Bibeau’s path onto the Hill, attention is shifting to what happens next.

What is to become of Parliament Hill and its openness? What new laws can Canadians expect as the government tries to prevent such attacks? Will this change to the national political climate?

There are more questions than answers to most of these questions, but here is a look at three areas that will change.

Politics

It was a silly mistake. A foreign news outlet, reporting on the attack in Ottawa Wednesday, posted a photo of Justin Trudeau delivering an address to the nation on the screen with the caption “prime minister of Canada.”

It was one of many errors made amid the chaos, but it was jumped on by some partisans on social media as a reason to debate which politician looked more prime ministerial that night.

The leaders themselves have stayed largely non-partisan in the days since the attacks. Speeches from all three that night and the next morning in the House of Commons mostly focused on the unity and the Canadian response. Harper even crossed the floor and hugged Trudeau and NDP Leader Tom Mulcair, prompting CTV Power Play host Don Martin to tweet “now I’ve seen everything.”

But the time will come — if it hasn’t already — when the discussion will turn to politics. Which leader handled himself better? Who had the more appropriate reaction?

How will this affect the parties in this pre-election year of perpetual campaigning where even a sneeze can be debated for its effect on the election outcome.

George W. Bush enjoyed a huge boost in his approval rating as U.S. president in the days after 9/11.

Will Harper see the same response from Canadians?

Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs, said anybody who says they know how this will play out politically “is working with an Ouija board.”

Bricker said the assumption is that the prominence of national-security issues helps Harper, particularly after Trudeau’s recent problems managing his party’s position on sending planes to fight the Islamic State in Syria. But he said there are too many unknowns and variables for anyone to accurately say this will help Harper or hurt Trudeau, the latter of whom has enjoyed a comfortable lead in most national polls for months on end.

“This could all go in some unanticipated directions,” said Bricker. “The truth is that all of this is evolving by the day and in the context of a pending election. While politics isn’t an appropriate focus at a time of national mourning, it’s only a matter of time until it rears its head.”

Legislation

Before anyone in Canada, save his family, had heard of Zehaf Bibeau, Harper was promising changes to security laws.

On Oct. 16, Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney announced intentions to amend the governing act for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to give it more power to protect the identity of its sources, and more ability to track suspected radicals both at home and overseas with what is known as the Five Eyes Spy Network, consisting of Canada, the United States, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

The bill was to have been introduced on Wednesday but was delayed by the attack. It’s unknown when it may be introduced.

A day before the shooting, and the day after Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent was killed when a suspected radical drove into him with a car near Montreal, Harper told the House of Commons to expect changes to laws to make it easier to arrest suspected terrorists.

In 2013, the government had already implemented new powers with an anti-terrorism law that allows for the preventative arrest of suspected terrorists, but the government says there are gaps in the thresholds to use that law. The day after Zehaf Bibeau’s attack, Harper defiantly told the House of Commons to expect those new powers quickly.

“Last week, our government proposed amendments to the legislation under which the Canadian Security Intelligence Service operates,” said Harper.

“In recent weeks I’ve been saying that our laws and police powers need to be strengthened in the area of surveillance, attention and arrest. They need to be much strengthened and I assure you… that work which is already underway will be expedited.”

His comment rankled some opposition MPs who say the leaders had promised to keep their speeches Thursday non-partisan.

Manitoba NDP MP Niki Ashton said Harper’s discussion of new legislation was nothing of the sort and she said she is afraid the government will use this week’s events to clamp down on freedoms.

“I’m concerned we’ve seen a real turn towards crime and punishment,” said Ashton.

“Those speeches were supposed to all be non-partisan and there is the prime minister making reference to legislation.”

Ashton’s comments point to the likelihood of a sharp political divide on any new laws the government may introduce.

Justice Minister Peter MacKay also hinted Friday the changes may extend beyond terrorism, saying it won’t “rule out areas where we can prevent crime” in general.

There was also a report in the National Post Friday saying the government was considering amending hate-speech laws to make it illegal for someone to post positive comments about terrorist attacks online.

Parliament Hill security

In his speech to the House of Commons Thursday, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair implored the Tories not to let Zehaf Bibeau’s rampage onto Parliament Hill turn it into a closed-off space.

“One of my favourite examples of how this parliamentary area, in and of itself, becomes a symbol of the freedom and openness of this great country of ours, Canada, is that every Wednesday at noon during good weather, we can see hundreds of people, multicoloured, doing yoga on the front lawn,” Mulcair said.

“It is a symbol of openness and freedom and the person who came here (Wednesday) with violence on his mind and in his gestures did not win. We cannot allow that openness and freedom to be rolled back either. We have to continue to defend both.”

Most Manitoba MPs told the Free Press they expect some changes to Hill security.

Conservative Candice Bergen said she hopes whatever changes come don’t keep the public out.

“We don’t want to restrict it so Canadians can’t enjoy their Parliament buildings anymore,” she said.

As of Friday, the public was still barred from visiting the grounds of Parliament Hill.

A heavy police presence was still in place, pedestrian access was limited to a single gate for those holding parliamentary security passes.

There have been at least a dozen serious security breaches on the grounds of Parliament Hill in the last half-century, ranging from the exploding of a bomb in a Centre Block bathroom in 1966 to several incidents of people driving up to the entrance of the Centre Block, evading police blockades.

In 2009, Greenpeace activists managed to get onto the roof of the West Block and unfurl a banner.

After almost every breach, there was a debate about Hill security, and almost always, changes were made.

The public can now access the building but only with a search of bags and person by X-ray machines and metal detectors.

RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson said the force has been operating according to an elevated threat level on the Hill for several years, which means more officers are on site.

In 2013, a $9-million renovation upgraded the RCMP security check-point on the west side of the Hill, and included the installation of retractable bollards and security cameras at vehicular entrances. Those cameras captured Zehaf Bibeau’s rampage.

Before those changes, the driveway Zehaf Bibeau parked next to was blocked to traffic by only a chain and an RCMP vehicle.

RCMP security spending for labour and operations on Parliament Hill has more than quadrupled since 2003 and spiked after the 2009 Greenpeace breach. A lot of that is spent on overtime.

Most debate about Hill security has pointed to the ease at which Zehaf Bibeau opened the door to the Centre Block and ran inside. It’s believed the biggest changes will involve that door.

It’s the same door that was surrounded by bulletproof glass in 2009 for the arrival of newly elected U.S. President Barack Obama.

In 2012, auditor general Michael Ferguson criticized security on the Hill, particularly because four police forces or security agencies are responsible for it. The RCMP, Ottawa city police, and Hill and Senate security forces have responsibility for various areas.

Questions were also asked this week why Hill security didn’t know to barricade the door to the building when the Ottawa police already knew a shooting had taken place so close to the Hill at the National War Memorial.

The answer may be as simple as timing.

Cpl. Cirillo was shot around 9:52 a.m. Less than two minutes later, Zehaf Bibeau was already driving towards the Centre Block in a cabinet minister’s car he had hijacked in front of the East Block.

The RCMP were in pursuit. Whether or not security inside those doors knew he was coming will certainly be a question that must be answered.

 

mia.rabson@freepress.mb.ca