10 years after shooting, the debate over securing Parliament Hill continues

Ten years after a gunman died in a hail of bullets in Parliament's Centre Block, security on Parliament Hill is noticeably different — but the debate over how to safeguard Canada's national legislature is still going strong.

The National Police Federation (NPF), the union that represents the RCMP, has been highly critical of the decision to end the RCMP's responsibility for policing the grounds outside the Parliament buildings.

The NPF has paid for ads in bus shelters across Ottawa asking passengers if they feel safe and suggesting governments ought to "bring back the RCMP to the Hill."

Today marks the tenth anniversary of the Parliament Hill shootings, when a gunman killed ceremonial guard Cpl. Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial and then stormed Centre Block. A review conducted after that attack found that limited communication between multiple police forces in Ottawa created an atmosphere of confusion.

The shooting led to a shakeup in Parliament Hill security. The RCMP was replaced by the newly created Parliamentary Protective Service (PPS), an armed independent security force responsible for protecting the grounds and the Parliament buildings themselves.

Despite its independence, the PPS is overseen by a director who must be an RCMP officer. That director reports to the Speakers of both houses of Parliament and, on operational matters, to the RCMP commissioner. 

Before the PPS was created, the House of Commons and the Senate each had their own protective services responsible for security inside their respective buildings.

An Ontario Provincial Police report on security on Parliament Hill drafted in the wake of the shootings concluded that security on the Hill needed to be simplified.

"The working relationship between the House of Commons Security Service, the Senate Protective Services and the RCMP is inadequate," that report said. "All three agencies work as separate entities, with limited interaction or sharing of information."

The three agencies also used different radio systems, making communication "a major issue during this incident," said the OPP report.

While putting the PPS in sole charge of security both inside and outside of the buildings on Parliament Hill eliminated some of that siloing, the NPF continues to insist the PPS is not fit for purpose. The union says it wants to see the RCMP made responsible for security inside parliamentary precinct buildings and on the grounds.

The NPF points out that the PPS is a security service, not a police force. Its members are not trained as police officers and they do not have the power to arrest people. PPS members are armed and can detain individuals but they must call on Ottawa police to make arrests.

Dennis Miller, vice president of the NPF, told CBC News the PPS also doesn't take part in intelligence-sharing arrangements among police forces, something he said compromises security on the Hill.

"They've been trained as, for lack of other terms, security guards. They hold a post," he said. "There's no training in relation to bodyguarding, there's no training in relation to individual protection."