44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/19/22 5:54:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since Friday, apart from a small hiccup yesterday, I have been listening to what has been said about the protest.
I have a question about what members have been saying since this morning. Are we to understand that, from now on, every time law enforcement agencies need to join forces, coordinate and collaborate, the federal government can invoke the Emergencies Act?
That is what is happening; after three weeks, law enforcement agencies are finally coordinating their efforts.
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 7:13:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague just mentioned this, but I wanted to give her a chance to elaborate.
When there is a crisis, everyone needs to do some soul-searching to make sure that it is not too late to do the right thing.
I have to wonder whether the protesters became entrenched because they were egged on by certain politicians and also by the words of the Prime Minister, which made people feel abandoned, unimportant and shunned from society.
I would like my colleague to talk about that, but also about how everyone, on both sides of the House, has some soul-searching to do.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 7:27:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to pick up on the idea of doing some collective soul-searching. Far be it from me to be preachy here, given that I too can be something of a character at times.
Knowing that certain protesters said dangerous things that were downplayed by some people and blown out of proportion by others, I would urge everyone to beware of extremes and find a way to avoid going there as we do that soul-searching.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 8:30:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister had promised that the law would be applied in a limited way, and then he changed his mind and said that it was not possible. However, section 17(2)(c) of part II of the Emergencies Act says exactly the opposite.
If the Prime Minister had kept his word and followed the act, what would my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent and his party have thought about the invocation of the act?
77 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:19:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, one of the things my colleague said in her speech was that tow truck drivers were afraid to do their job, and that the government absolutely needed to use the Emergencies Act to compel them to do it.
That said, the Criminal Code does provide for other measures, such as court orders and even Attorney General's orders. Why were those solutions not proposed before using the nuclear option that is the Emergencies Act?
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:48:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I like that the member took the time to explain that there were people who supported the protest but in no way fit the descriptions made of them.
I also understand that when we find out that some more extremist factions are funding these groups, some soul-searching is in order.
Does the member think it possible that the fact that people who are fed up with the health measures have been described in ways that do not reflect them might ultimately have led them to support the demonstration, even though they may not have intended to do so at first?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:38:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on Friday, I listened to my colleagues for nine hours. Today, I have been listening to them all day right from 7 a.m., even though I went to bed at 3 a.m. because I was writing this speech, and even though I will be here until midnight.
I have noticed the extent to which the polarization that I see on social media has crept into the House. I had difficulty writing this speech, which says a lot, because anyone observing me even a little in the House knows that I am constantly writing.
It is difficult to find the words to avoid polarization with all these emotions present. Emotions are running high, and I am hearing a lot of heated comments in the House at present.
It was not easy to write this speech because the invocation of the Emergencies Act is a historic event that will set the bar for its invocation in the future. Therefore, it is vital that we ensure that its use will not be taken lightly in the future just because it has been taken lightly today.
Canada has experienced some very dangerous, critical and urgent situations. Almost all of my colleagues have mentioned the Oka crisis, the rail blockades in 2020, the Caledonia crisis, September 11 and COVID‑19.
I want to make one thing clear right now. I never have and never will have sympathy for extremists, on either the right or the left. I have never had sympathy for hate speech or threats. I was outraged and shocked to see Nazi and Confederate flags. I felt sick with anger. I will never minimize threats that someone may receive. I have been threatened myself after a member of Parliament spoke to the media and shared misinformation regarding a vote in committee.
All day yesterday, I responded to hundreds of emails, and every single one of them was calling on us not to enforce the Emergencies Act. I was getting emails not only from my constituents, but also from people in Calgary, Vancouver, Burnaby, Prince George, Toronto, Winnipeg, Montreal, Quebec City, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and even Ottawa. The people of Ottawa have been most affected by this situation. All that was missing were some emails from Prince Edward Island.
This legislation scares them very much, and they have the right to be listened to, to be heard and to get answers. Section 3 of the Emergencies Act states that the government must demonstrate that there is a dangerous and urgent situation that cannot be effectively dealt with ordinary laws. However, the order does not demonstrate that existing intervention powers are inadequate.
In other places, law enforcement used the tools it was supposed to use, municipal bylaws, highway traffic acts and the Criminal Code. That is what should have been done here from the start. Some might say that there was no way to predict the future or know what was going to happen.
Of course Ottawa served as an example to others, but Ottawa was indeed aware of the situation. Many of my colleagues in the House of Commons mentioned that extremist groups have been on social media for two years. They also mentioned that on social media and in the media, there was talk of a convoy 70 kilometres long. The warning went out one week before the convoy arrived, which should have been enough time to plan and figure out how to contain the situation before it got out of hand the way it did. This type of action is possible through coordination, teamwork, the creation of an emergency response team, collaboration and visionary leadership.
The Prime Minister also explained to the House and in documents attached to the motion that he feared that other blockades would go up elsewhere in Canada, given the associations and the mobilization that is possible on social media. However, the act makes it clear that it must be invoked not based on hypothetical events, but on the presence of real danger.
The act is to be used when the police are unable to enforce the laws and bylaws available. Right now, I feel that the act is more of a positive move than a reasonable one. A reasonable move would have been to recognize that the problem lies primarily in Ottawa and not elsewhere in the country.
Several incidents have been cited in the House to persuade us that the Emergencies Act is necessary. On February 17, the theft of a trailer full of weapons in Peterborough was mentioned. At 1:55 p.m. that day, the member for Parkdale—High Park drew a connection between that theft and the protest that was going on at the time in Quebec City. That was on February 17. However, the trailer was found on February 16. It was wrong to couple the two together. That is misinformation. This incident cannot be used to support the invocation of the act.
On the same day, the crane truck that was parked in front of the Prime Minister's office was considered a threat. It is no longer there now, but if it was a threat, why was it not moved from the start? The Criminal Code is clear. Paragraphs 423(1)(a) to 423(1)(g) of the Criminal Code deal with such incidents, threats and intimidation. The vehicle already would have had to be moved under the existing Criminal Code and Highway Traffic Act.
Members talked about the threats in the videos. I saw those videos, and I did not like what I saw. My colleague talked about this earlier. We have known about some of these Facebook groups for two years. I cannot understand why they were not shut down in accordance with the Criminal Code.
I know of seven sections of the Criminal Code that could have been used to silence the people who made those videos and bring them to justice because what they were doing was illegal: paragraph 261(1)(a); subsection 423(1), which I talked about earlier; subsection 46(2); subsections 59(1) to 59(3), paragraphs 63(1)(a) and 63(1)(b); and subsection 72(1). There are plenty of them.
For money coming from the United States and possibly, according to sources, from extremist supremacist groups, sections 83.02, 83.03 and 83.04 of the Criminal Code cover that. Section 83.11 says that banks can freeze assets. We had all the legislative tools we needed to address the crisis before it turned into a 23-day occupation.
To sum up, all law enforcement needed was coordination and the ability to call in tow trucks. The Criminal Code covers that too. With a court order or an order from the Attorney General, the tow trucks would have had no choice but to act, and they would have been supported.
In a crisis, we must all weigh our words and our actions carefully, whether we are MPs, the Prime Minister, law enforcement officers, mayors, municipal councillors or protesters. During a crisis, we must take the time to balance our emotional and rational selves. Too much of one or the other is not a good thing. Inaction can be just as damaging as sudden or extreme action. On both sides of this issue, consultation, collaboration and coordination between the various police forces were possible without applying the Emergencies Act. It took planning and leadership.
It was possible to arrest people who threatened others without applying the Emergencies Act. It was possible to arrest the ringleaders without applying the Emergencies Act. I could go on much longer. I have another two pages of examples.
The police asked for help as far back as February 7 and 11. Leadership and consultation are what this protest needed, and that is what police forces are providing right now.
We do not need to create a precedent.
1329 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:49:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my question is this: Did the tow truck drivers go in alone? I understand that some were afraid. I understand that, hence the importance of the words “consultation” and “collaboration” with law enforcement. They both needed to work together, as they did over the past two days, even if it meant getting help from the RCMP, from Toronto and other neighbouring cities, which is what happened in the end. By working together from the start, a lot of mistakes could have been avoided.
I understand that people were afraid of getting death threats. I have been on the receiving end, and it is not pleasant.
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:51:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I always try to avoid conflating issues as much as possible.
I think there were other ways to deal with the situation we were facing, besides invoking the Emergencies Act. Doing nothing was certainly not the way to get people to leave.
44 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:52:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I was saying in my speech yesterday and today, I listened to the debate.
There is ample agreement that the situation was urgent. However, where we do not agree on the act is that there is no national crisis. This is a local crisis. That is the difference.
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:26:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I really liked my colleague's speech because he was calm and he distinguished between people who commit reprehensible acts and those who do not.
We have known about these reprehensible and the identities of the perpetrators for some time. Instead of invoking the Emergencies Act, what measures does he believe should be applied to those who were involved?
61 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:45:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, someone has their microphone switched on or there is something rubbing on a microphone which is preventing the interpreters from doing their job properly. It must be really tough to be hearing that this late at night.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:53:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is passionate, which means that he is speaking very quickly and the interpreters are having a hard time keeping up. I know that passion can be expressed in ways other than speaking quickly.
37 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
