44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/19/22 4:54:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to come back to the failure of local and provincial police to address the situation. I have heard it said several times that the police had the tools and resources they needed to address the situation. However, what we heard from law enforcement was that, due to errors that were made early on in the crisis, they did not feel they had the tools and resources necessary to restore social order. It was only when the federal government stepped in that we started to see social order restored.
I agree that it is up to local police to enforce the law and up to the provincial police to have their backs. When those two levels fail and cry out for help, should not the buck stop somewhere? Should not someone step in and say to the people of Ottawa and across the country who are asking for protection that we will be there for them?
159 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 6:08:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, a number of constituents have contacted me to note the contrast between the way local police responded to the occupation of Ottawa, which they saw as a kid-glove approach, and the way in which so many indigenous people in our country are policed.
Is my hon. colleague also concerned by that contrast, and would she support an independent public inquiry into the way that police have handled this situation and the way in which policing in our country is carried out?
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:50:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to the remarks by the member from Grande Prairie. I wish I would have caught the whole name of his riding. I am sure I will learn it over time.
I am a bit fascinated with the amount of time the Conservative Party is taking to talk about the NDP. I have heard members in the House talk glowingly about the legacies of Jack Layton and Tommy Douglas, reflecting back on 1970 and the vote on the War Measures Act, a vote in which the Conservative Party supported the use of that legislation, which is much more draconian than what we have in front of us today.
I wonder if my colleague could reflect on that vote. Would he vote the same way today? What does that say about his upcoming vote on the motion before us?
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:08:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, before I begin, my thoughts are with the people of Bulkley Valley, who have been shocked by the recent violence and vandalism at a work site on the Marten Forest Service Road. My thoughts go out specifically to the workers of that site who have been traumatized and the officer who was injured. I denounce these acts, and I join my constituents in demanding a full and thorough investigation to hold those responsible accountable.
I rise this evening, at this troubling and historic time in our country, to address the motion before us to confirm the use of the Emergencies Act to restore social order. I have been here in Ottawa for last three weeks. I arrived the day after the convoy did. For most of the past 22 days, I have walked through downtown Ottawa twice a day, and I have paid close attention to the convoy, the messages on the signs, the people, and the people of this city, those who live and work downtown and who have been so profoundly affected by this illegal occupation.
I believe protest is an important part of our democracy. It can give the voiceless a voice and ensure that citizens have a way to communicate the strength of their feelings, views and beliefs to their government. I have attended dozens of protests in my life, and I have a particular respect for peaceful, non-violent, civil disobedience, which has played an important in our history role in so much of our social progress, but this is not that. What we have witnessed for the past three weeks is nothing short of the occupation of the capital city of a G7 country. It is an event that I find deeply troubling for a number of reasons.
The first lies in the stated goal of the leaders of this occupation, which, as my friend from Edmonton Griesbach articulated, is to subvert our democracy and overthrow a democratically elected government.
The second reason I find this troubling is the effect the occupation has had on the people of Ottawa. Thousands of innocent people, who were already struggling in the midst of the pandemic, are unable to go to work or go about their daily lives with the peace and security they so deserve. I also think of the thousands of people across Canada who have been affected similarly by blockades at bridges and along trade corridors.
The third reason I am troubled lies in the stream of funding coming from south of the border from individuals who see fit to destabilize our country in the same vein as the attempted insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Finally, the fourth reason is the presence of extremism, evidenced by the occupation's leaders, their history, their rhetoric and their associations.
I know there are many people in northwest B.C. for whom the occupation and convoy have provided an outlet for their frustrations and anger. I ask them simply to look into who is behind this event. I considered naming the occupation leaders and some of their more troubling views here this evening, as my colleague and others have done previously in this debate, but I am not going to do that because I refuse to give them the notoriety they seem to crave.
At the centre of this crisis lies the failure of the police. If they had done their job properly from the outset and taken the threats seriously, we would not be finding ourselves where we are this evening. As the occupation dug in, I heard from many indigenous and non-indigenous constituents who were stunned by the contrast between the kid-glove approach of the Ottawa Police Service here and the way in which indigenous protesters in northwest B.C. and across Canada are policed. Many members in this place have noted that contrast, and it is something that must be addressed. It is because of the failure of local and provincial law enforcement to protect social order that we must consider this extraordinary measure before us.
I would simply ask those who are opposing this motion what the alternative is. They suggest that the Prime Minister should negotiate with those who have occupied the city, but negotiate with whom? Surely not the leaders of this occupation.
Others have suggested that the police forces have existing powers and legislation at their disposal, but what use are provisions in the Criminal Code if police are either unwilling or unable to apply them? In fact, the police have been calling out for help. They have said clearly that they are not able to deal with this situation with the powers, tools and resources at their disposal.
This occupation has gone on now for three weeks. Does such a situation not call for the government to consider providing additional powers? To be honest, I find the objections of some in this House to be somewhat naive, especially from those parties that traditionally espouse law and order. We are called on now to protect the people of our country, and we must step up.
This is not to say that I am comfortable with the invocation of the Emergencies Act. I hear the voices of those who caution us that this is a dangerous precedent and that it could lead to future uses that are less appropriate, including its use against lawful demonstration. It falls to all of us in this place to ensure that this does not happen. New Democrats have been clear that we will not tolerate the inappropriate use of these additional powers by the government, and we are prepared to initiate their revocation at a moment's notice.
Turning to the larger context of this global pandemic in which we find ourselves, I want to acknowledge that, two years in, a lot of people are fed up. Some are angry and some are desperate. How could they possibly be otherwise? We must not allow ourselves to fall into thinking that these circumstances are any kind of normal. A situation that requires such broad and sweeping restrictions as have been necessary is not normal.
Over the past three weeks, I have heard from many constituents with strong feelings about the government's management of the pandemic and about the matter before us today. I want to speak directly to them now. I hear them. I hear their frustration and anger with a government and a prime minister that they feel are out of touch with the challenges they are facing. I hear their concern that the federal government has not always been transparent or explained the evidence upon which pandemic measures are based. I hear their concern that certain measures have affected small businesses, especially small tourism businesses, in ways that go beyond what the pandemic relief programs have compensated for. I hear their concern about the mental health impacts of the pandemic.
For the small number of constituents who have chosen not to get vaccinated and who stand to lose their livelihoods in a few short months, I say this: I disagree with their choice, but I empathize with their predicament. One's livelihood is a sacred thing and governments should only interfere with it in the direst of circumstances. I continue to push for the government to provide greater clarity as to whether such measures remain necessary at this juncture of the pandemic.
I hear them.
I will end with an expression of gratitude. It is gratitude for the thousands of people in northwest B.C. who have sacrificed in small and large ways out of concern for the health and well-being of their neighbours, their loved ones, the elders in our community and our seniors. It is gratitude for the health care workers who, for two years, have gone to work every day in the face of a struggling health care system and who have shown themselves to be nothing short of heroes. It is gratitude to live in a country where this debate is possible, where checks and balances exist and where democracy is strong enough to stand up against threats to the fabric of our nation.
I reject the notion that we are more divided than ever. It is the social solidarity of Canadians and our care for each other that has allowed us to reach this point with so many fewer deaths per capita than many other countries. It is this care and concern for each other that I believe lies as the basis of our freedom as a people.
When I search for strength in the face of a difficult decision in this place, my mind turns to home. It turns to Skeena and the places that inspire, ground and motivate so many. I think of the Skeena River, flowing free to the Pacific Ocean. I think of the people. They are strong, caring and good people. I am so deeply honoured to speak on their behalf.
1498 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:19:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I was referring to the police not acting quickly enough in the face of the occupation, not the government. I believe that other cities' police forces learned from the failures of the police here in Ottawa and that acting more swiftly, taking the security intelligence more seriously, could have avoided much of the disruption and unrest that has occurred over the past three weeks.
66 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:20:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is clear that when it comes to illegal protests, protests that disrupt the flow of traffic and major roadways, and those sorts of matters, enforcing the statutes and laws in the city and in the province falls to the local police authorities.
While I believe it is incumbent on the Prime Minister and, in fact, all of us in this House to listen to people with a wide range of views and to consider what they have to say, I believe that very early on it was up to the police to intervene and to uphold social order in this city and across the country.
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:21:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure if this came through in the translation, but I think I heard him say that the Emergencies Act has only been applied a few times in our history. To be clear, this is the first time that it has been applied. The War Measures Act is a very different piece of legislation. I could be mistaken there, but that is my understanding.
To his question about how these powers are applied, I want to assure him that should we support this, we will do it very reluctantly. I do not want to see these extra powers used one day longer than is necessary. We are going to be watching very carefully, holding the government accountable. We will revoke those powers at a moment's notice. I count on him to work with us in such a situation.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:07:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have asked this question of others in this House, but I wanted to convey to him the comments I have received from many constituents who have noted the stark contrast between the way in which the Ottawa police responded to the convoy and the occupation, and the way in which indigenous people in northwest B.C. and across Canada are treated by police when they are protesting.
Could the member comment on whether he shares our concern on that contrast and whether he would support an independent public inquiry that would look into the way in which policing has been done over the past number of weeks in this situation?
113 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
