Pubdate: Thu, 24 Nov 2005
Source: NOW Magazine (CN ON)
Copyright: 2005 NOW Communications Inc.
Contact:  http://www.nowtoronto.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/282
Author: Mike Smith

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.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman