44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 17, 2022 10:00AM
- Feb/17/22 11:36:27 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we agree that the act should not apply in Quebec because there is no way to do that, and we were prepared to support the motion moved by the Bloc Québécois yesterday in that regard, before the Liberals blocked it.
What made me uncomfortable about the Bloc Québécois leader's speech was when he made some questionable historical associations involving us by bringing up some painful memories and the trauma caused by the use of the War Measures Act in Quebec. There is no comparison between the Emergencies Act and what happened some 50 years ago. Even columnist Hélène Buzzetti, who could never be accused of being insensitive to Quebec's views, has said that the two are not at all comparable.
I therefore invite the leader of the Bloc Québécois to look at the provisions of the act in an intellectually honest way and to make the necessary distinctions.
170 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 1:28:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would first like to say that I hold the Liberal government responsible for letting convoys organized by the far right take over Parliament and illegally occupy downtown.
I would like to look at this from another angle. The War Measures Act is a painful and traumatizing event stamped in the collective memory of Quebeckers. However, it cannot be compared to the Emergencies Act, which was drafted by Mulroney's Conservative government.
There are huge differences: fundamental rights and freedoms are protected, its application is time-limited, and members can call for a vote at any time to put an end to the application of the act.
Do these guarantees as to the authority given to all parliamentarians to exercise vigilance reassure my colleague?
126 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:26:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with my distinguished colleague from Elmwood—Transcona.
This is an exceptional, unprecedented and extremely concerning situation that has ramifications for the health of our democracy and the future of political debate and vitality in Canada and at the federal level.
The first thing I would like to point out is what and who we are dealing with. We are not dealing with ordinary protesters. I can say this from experience, because it is no secret that I have participated in many protests for various causes in the past as a student, union representative and MP.
There are surely many people of good faith among these protesters. They are tired and exasperated and cannot stand any more health and vaccine mandates. We understand that because after two years, we are all fed up.
However, the convoy has been infiltrated by members of the far right. What is more, most of the convoy organizers use extreme right-wing rhetoric and are openly affiliated with the far right. It is not a rumour or hearsay, since they wrote in black and white that if they do not get what they want, they will overthrow the government and replace it with a provisional government in collaboration with the Senate and the Governor General. These people are anti‑Parliament, anti‑public health and anti‑democracy, and they are threatening to overthrow an elected government by force.
I would remind the House that these people have received public support from the interim leader of the Conservative Party and her finance critic, who is now a leadership candidate for that same party. I think that one day, the Conservative Party will have to answer to Canadians for its actions and its place in history.
These protests are largely being funded by foreign sources, including the United States and Donald Trump supporters. Let us not forget that Donald Trump provoked and continues to defend the assault on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Some protesters here actually said they wanted this to be Canada's January 6.
Some of these protesters openly identify themselves as white supremacists, make racist comments and unabashedly wave Nazi or Confederate flags. Let us not forget that the Confederates are the Americans who fought to preserve the right to own slaves. These are the symbols some people have been waving throughout this long illegal occupation of downtown Ottawa.
Protesters are traumatizing and verbally abusing local residents. Some minorities and racialized people, including people of Asian origin, have been spat on and had insults shouted at them. Journalists are being targeted by protesters, who are behaving like bullies rather than legitimate protesters.
While we may not have all the relevant information on the Ottawa protesters yet, there is no doubt that this is the same movement, with the same intentions, supporting the same cause. People are organizing in the same manner. Let us not forget the arsenal of weapons seized in Coutts, Alberta, including assault rifles, bulletproof vests and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
The current situation is not the same as when people protest to protect our public health care system, for example. The situation we have been experiencing in Ottawa for the last three weeks is altogether different, and it is becoming unbearable for local residents. Some locals even took it upon themselves to block roadways to prevent additional trucks and big rigs from getting downtown.
This clearly illustrates the Liberal government's inaction. If the situation has deteriorated to the point where the Emergencies Act needs to be invoked, it is because the Liberal government did nothing. The government's lack of leadership is clearly to blame for the dangerous and awful situation we are in.
If we are responsible parliamentarians, we will analyze the bill before us. I initially had reservations, and, as the leader of the NDP said today, we will support it reluctantly; we are not happy about it, and we do not like it. However, there are some important safeguards.
First, the act maintains fundamental freedoms. The right to legally and peacefully protest is not affected. Rights and freedoms are maintained. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is still in force. I will get back to that later. This is quite different from the analogies and conflated comparisons being raised by other political parties in the House. It is not the same thing at all.
The act comes with a time limit. There is a sunset clause. It has to be renewed after 30 days. It is therefore not indefinite. Not only are arbitrary and random arrests not possible, but fundamental freedoms are protected, the act is in force for a limited period of 30 days, and most of all, and this is important, the act can be revoked at any time by a majority vote of the members of the House. All it would take is for 20 of our colleagues to ask the Speaker to hold a vote in three days.
Since the three opposition parties have a majority, if there were any abuses committed by the police, the federal government, or the Liberal government, we could pull the plug, just like that. These safeguards are extremely reassuring and should reassure all Canadians.
This is very interesting legislation, and I would point out to my Conservative Party colleagues that what they are saying is absolutely ironic, because the Emergencies Act was brought in by the Conservative Party. It was Brian Mulroney’s government that passed this legislation in 1988. Before they get all worked up about it, perhaps they should open a history book, because this is their law. They are the ones who passed it.
Speaking of history, it makes me very uncomfortable to hear the leader of the Bloc Québécois imply that this is the War Measures Act redux. He is conflating the two acts to appeal to his base in a very unscrupulous, intellectually dishonest and flawed way. This brings back a very painful memory for all Quebeckers, the memory of the 1970 October crisis. During that period, hundreds of police officers took to the streets of Montreal to randomly arrest nearly 500 people, without cause, without any charges. This was not an attempt to restore peace, but an attempt to intimidate the public, a national emancipation movement and a civil society movement.
That is what happened in 1970, and the Bloc Québécois needs to stop conflating the two situations and comparing apples to oranges. The leader of the Bloc Québécois is very confused. These situations are nothing alike. Being arrested in the middle of the night and thrown in prison by the police is nothing like someone having their bank account frozen because they chose to participate in an illegal occupation that is infringing on the rights of the people of Ottawa. These situations are nothing alike.
Friends of my parents were arrested during the October crisis. I think it is an insult to the victims of the October crisis to compare them to the proto-fascists who have been occupying Ottawa for the past three weeks. The two cannot be lumped in together. That is just wrong. The laws are different, the circumstances are different, the demonstrators and the illegal occupation are completely different.
We agree that the law should not apply in Quebec. It will not because there are no blockades or illegal occupations in Quebec. There is no siege, so there should be no problem. The NDP supported the Bloc Québécois motion on that yesterday, but unfortunately the Conservatives blocked it.
Let me be very clear: We are not giving the Liberal government a blank cheque. We are keeping a close eye on it, we will be very vigilant, and we will use the provisions in the act that enable us to shut this down if it is abused in any way, but the people of Ottawa deserve to have their city and their peace and quiet back.
1356 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:36:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It certainly has been a little hard to keep up with the Bloc Québécois's position on this situation these last two weeks.
First they accused the government of doing nothing, of failing to act. They demanded it help the people of Ottawa. Now that Ottawa is preparing to use these tools, such as freezing bank accounts to put the financial squeeze on people participating in illegal occupations, suddenly that is not okay.
They cannot say one thing one week and another the next. Indeed, statistics show the majority of Quebeckers support this measure, clearly indicating solidarity with the people of Ottawa and a desire give them back their city as soon as possible. This has gone on long enough.
133 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:38:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
If there are people of good faith out there who want to express their opinion, that is fine. However, they have unfortunately been dragged into a movement organized by people who self-identify as being with the far right. It is clear. The connections have been made.
We have received dozens of reports from people in Ottawa who have been insulted and endured racist verbal abuse by people who were in fact displaying neo-Nazi symbols and the Confederate flag.
While most protesters are not carrying this flag, we have seen it, and the evidence is there. This illegal occupation, which is unfortunately supported by the Conservatives, does include a far-right element.
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:40:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. I expected my comments and my argument to get her attention.
We agree on the fact that this need not apply to Quebec. I agree with the members of the National Assembly of Quebec, since we do not need this in Quebec. There is no illegal occupation or siege there.
With respect to the comparison to the War Measures Act, it was people from the Bloc Québécois who made the comparison. They have to live with it.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
