"I have aspired to this moment for my entire life," a beaming Bill Blair pronounced on the day he was sworn in as Toronto's police chief. "I have been warned that I may require surgery to remove the smile from my face."
That was little more than half a year ago. But if Chief Blair hasn't yet had time to go under the knife, the on-the-job frustrations of the past few months have surely conducted the procedure for him.
Contending with the worst spate of gun violence in the city's recent history is enough of a challenge on its own. But adding to the chief's headaches will be the fallout from the labour dispute that mercifully appears to be drawing to a close.
The tangible effects of the standoff, as it unfolded, were limited mostly to officers wearing baseball caps and neglecting to hand out tickets -- the latter of which probably has Torontonians disappointed that a resolution has been reached. But its long-term ramifications could be more troubling.
That applies to many of the key players involved - not least David Miller, whose decision to sit idly by while the dispute festered will only reinforce his image of being weak on law-and-order issues. But that's about a mayor's political fortunes, comparatively trivial next to the health of the city's police force.
For a chief in his first year on the job, it remains an ongoing challenge to earn the trust and support of his officers. Now having to crack down on police union members who defied his orders by wearing uniforms -- and in some cases guns -- to a rally last week, Chief Blair will have a harder time proving that he's sufficiently pro-cop. And when he needs union co-operation on future efforts, he may find it tougher to get.
The biggest such effort, on a broad scale, is the shift toward community policing that Chief Blair clearly hopes will be the hallmark of his mandate. And beyond the challenge of rallying his troops behind it, he may now find it a little trickier to get the public on board.
Central to the success of getting officers more integrated in troubled communities, as Chief Blair has repeatedly reinforced, is getting those communities to view police as a friendly force rather than an intimidating one. And however misguided negative perceptions may be, the spectacle of the chief being directly disobeyed by some of his charges at last week's rally is a boon to those inclined to gripe that cops see themselves as above the law.
None of this is Chief Blair's fault, and nor is it right to blame his officers: Expecting to be paid handsomely for patrolling the country's biggest city is only reasonable. Where responsibility does lie, though, is with those higher up.
There is the police services board, inexplicably still represented largely by vice-chairman Pam McConnell -- a left-wing councillor who has done much to antagonize the police association. There is that union's leadership, more restrained under Dave Wilson than under former president Craig Bromell, but still occasionally inclined to turn a fight with the board into a fight with the force's leadership. And there is, perhaps above everyone else, the city's mayor.
Bill Blair, by many accounts, was Mr. Miller's choice for chief; the anti-crime strategies being adopted across the city are mostly the ones that the Mayor favours. And yet, even with officers having lacked a contract since the end of 2004, he failed to provide any visible leadership in working toward a healthy and happy police force.
That the dispute was technically not Mr. Miller's responsibility is beside the point. In a city in which the mayor has very few special powers beyond that of a city councillor, it's possible for him to wash his hands of nearly everything if he so chooses.
The police services board and the union will be at each other's throats. That's a given. Where the mayor should come in is by rising above the fray to provide solutions. Mr. Miller didn't, and now Chief Blair and the rest of his force might suffer for it.
