
‘That's the $64,000 question': National Police Federation questions where Alberta will find staff for new provincial agency
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
Michael Higgins: How big a step forward is this in the actual creation of a provincial police force?
Kevin Halwa: That's unfortunately still yet to be seen. This is still a plan that has a lot more questions than it does answers, and people are starting to ask those questions.
Whether it's the Rural Municipalities of Alberta, or Alberta Municipalities, or the people actually paying the bills, a lot of the framework around it has not been explained, and rightfully so there's still some more questions.
I don't really know yet because they have not explained that very well at all. In the entirety of Canada there's only about 64,000 police officers policing all over the country. That's a very limited pool of people that are interested in doing this sort of work to begin with.
Where is the province is going to find a bunch more people to start up a new service? I don't know. That's the $64,000 question.
MH: How challenged do you expect the government to be to staff up?
KH: We can use the Surrey police transition as an example. They expected that to go very smoothly and to be staffed up very quickly. We're now in year seven, still not completely staffed up, and they were only looking for 800 there. We're looking for way more than that here to police this new agency.
Grande Prairie's also going through a transition, they're yet to be fully staffed up. Their due date is coming very quickly, March of next year, and I highly suspect that they won't be ready for March 31 and will need an extension.
MH: What will it take to draw your members away from the RCMP and embrace more permanent roots in Alberta with a change in uniform?
KH: The chance of our members moving over to a new agency is very slim. There will be some that decide to take it on as a second career after doing a full career with the Mounties. Take a pension and then take another paycheck working for somebody else, that's fine. But to get Mounties, or at least a large number of them, to leave the red serge and to go over to a new and unproven agency, is highly stretched to suspect that would happen.
That's what they believed would happen, and not what we believe, but that's what the City of Surrey believed would happened there. That's what the city of Grande Prairie decided would happen here, and they it's just not happening in the in the huge numbers that they expected it to be happening.
So to expect any different when we're talking about a provincial police service or a sheriff's service, whatever we're calling this independent agency, I'm not buying it.
MH: Let's say they do staff up, they do become operational. What's the expectation for how this provincial police service and the RCMP will coexist within the current law enforcement environment in Alberta?
KH: That's something that hasn't been laid out. We always welcome collaboration when it's genuine and in the best interest of public safety, but that being said, there's been a consistent lack of clarity and transparency around what this proposed service would actually look like.
Without a concrete plan, it's really difficult to understand how we would work together, existing with other agencies. Albertans deserve answers and not uncertainty, and so far, all of you've got is uncertainty.
MH: The RCMP is contracted to provide police services in Alberta, a contract that extends to 2032.
To what degree do you expect the build out of this new agency to draw on the financial resources that fund the RCMP contract?
KH: It's hard to say. The previous federal public safety minister has made it clear that there's full intention to renew that contract. He sent letters to every single provincial contract division in the country explaining that.
To suspect that the Mounties are going anywhere come 2032, I think it's ridiculous to think that at this point.
There's only so many ways you can split it all. I suspect the money in the province will become tight.
MH: Where do you think all of this will leave municipalities, given they're being presented with the option of contracting this new police agency as a replacement for the RCMP locally?
KH: It's been said before by municipalities that when we're talking municipal budgets, we're counting pennies, not dollars. Every nickel really does make a difference when we're talking municipalities.
So far from the municipalities that we've spoken to, they're not seeing any bigger bang for the buck when changing. There is great savings and policing with the Mounties due to the size of the operation. There's costs to be saved there and to start all over again with something else, I don't see any savings there unless you're going to start with a drastic cut in services,
MH: Where do you think this leaves relations between the RCMP and the Alberta government with just under seven years left in the contract?
KH: That's hard to say. We would know better if they were willing to speak with us more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Vancouver Sun
an hour ago
- Vancouver Sun
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .


National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. Article content While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Article content Article content Article content Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Article content Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Article content Article content Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Article content The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Article content The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. Article content Article content The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. Article content George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses.


Edmonton Journal
2 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Article content Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. Article content While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Article content Article content Article content Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Article content Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Article content 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Article content Article content Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Article content Article content The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Article content Article content The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. Article content The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. Article content The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs