44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/19/22 7:15:48 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, put quite simply, the member is wrong. When close to half a billion dollars a day in international trade is impacted, when a downtown is seized with blockades and so forth, and when the interim chief in Ottawa talks about how the use of the Emergencies Act has been of great benefit, I would suggest that the member is wrong.
Does the member not realize that the vast majority of Canadians recognizes the importance of re-establishing order for the residents of Ottawa, and that showing the rest of Canada that the federal government, in working with the municipality and the province, can enforce the rule of law is an important aspect of a democracy?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 12:09:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
I am against invoking the Emergencies Act.
I commend the work of the police officers, who have shown remarkable composure and professionalism. I hope this illegal occupation will end without violence.
Many protesters have made the reasonable choice to leave. However, a fractious group is still refusing to go home. It is possible they are extremists. They are the ones who came to occupy, not to protest. It is to be expected that they will be difficult to remove, but none of this justifies using the Emergencies Act.
To invoke and enforce the act, two things must first be demonstrated. First, that there is a dangerous and urgent situation. Second, that it is impossible to deal with the situation under existing laws. I do not believe this to be the case.
Faced with such a situation, I think it is important to distinguish between an exception, in other words, something that only occurs once and will not reoccur, and a precedent, which is something that is expected to happen again. I do not think we should make a precedent out of an exceptional situation.
I personally believe that invoking the Emergencies Act is the direct result of a terrible lack of vision and leadership. With that in mind, the question that remains is this: How did we get to where we are today?
We all knew that the truckers were coming. We all knew that, once they were here, it would be difficult to remove them. Did all of us really know that? No. The Prime Minister said that the right to protest was important, and I agree. I also agree that everyone should be able to express themselves freely. That was before the protest became an occupation.
Throughout the first week of the occupation, the Prime Minister was quick to lecture us, saying that he could not direct the police, that the police had to submit their requests and that it was the police's job to control the situation. That is why the police chief asked for 1,800 additional officers, but he got only a few dozen. That is when the occupation became really entrenched. Was it a lack of vision on the part of the Prime Minister, carelessness, flippancy or a lack of leadership? Who knows.
To understand the situation—and I propose that we discuss it in order to explain it—it is worth noting that this ill-advised decision is a logical extension of previous decisions, which were all equally clumsy.
The current Liberal government was elected in 2015 on promises for a better future, one where transparency would be a priority and where Canada would reclaim its place on the international stage. That was in 2015, and the Liberals were saying that Canada was back.
It was definitely a breath of fresh air and there was hope for better days. The Prime Minister met with world leaders and graced the front pages of celebrity magazines. The whole world admired his youthful good looks and colourful socks.
Hope appealed to Canadians, but all was not well. In January 2017, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner began an investigation into the Trudeau family's vacation on the Aga Khan's private island, and that investigation resulted in a reprimand from the commissioner.
It was the first time a prime minister had been reprimanded by a Conflict of Interest and Ethics commissioner. The first Trudeau report, because there would be others, was shameful for a prime minister—
605 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 3:52:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would agree with the hon. member. We realized, and the police forces across the country made us realize, that there were some gaps in their ability to be able to act. Tracking and stopping the money was one of the key elements that was missing, as was designating spaces to be able to enforce protection and enabling tow trucks to take action. To address the use of trucks as instruments in the blockades was also a gap in our ability to use existing laws.
87 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 4:51:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member raised a very interesting point. She said that as of Monday there was nothing that stopped different police forces from working together. As a matter of fact, that is not entirely true. Unless they are sworn officers in Ontario, they cannot enforce the law in Ontario. I am sure Ottawa is extremely grateful for the resources that came from the SQ in Quebec, but until the Emergencies Act was put into place so that they could enforce the law in Ontario, those police officers would not have been allowed to do that. I wonder if the member can comment on that.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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 6:21:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I was caught by some surprise to hear that if the House had only passed the Conservative resolution from last week, this would all be finished. I suppose we can believe in fairies, but that is one of the more preposterous statements made by any member here.
Is the hon. member prepared to substitute her views and decision-making for Chief Bell's view that the resources provided by this legislation for the regulation and prohibition of public assembly are welcome, that the designation and securing of places where blockades are prohibited is welcome, that directing persons to render essential services to relieve impacts on Canada's economy is welcome, that authorizing and directing financial institutions to render essential services is welcome, that measures enabling the RCMP to enforce municipal laws is welcome? Is she prepared to substitute her judgment for Chief Bell's?
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 8:16:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the confused messaging coming from the member is unbelievable. He sits here to deny support for the Prime Minister's use of the Emergencies Act to enforce the law and to have broader powers to ensure those who commit a criminal offence are held accountable. He somehow wants to rewrite the history of what has happened.
The government is acting with restraint within the charter, and the member should stand up for law and order. People in this country who disagree with the government do not get to then violently attempt to harass and intimidate to get change in that government. If they want a change in the government, they can vote. That is how we make change in democracies, not through harassment and violence.
127 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:46:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have three points of clarification. First, today, a blockade exists in Surrey, B.C. Second, the declaration order, notwithstanding the submissions from the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, is not about entrusting the Prime Minister with emergency powers. It is about empowering police, who operate independently, to enforce the law. Third, lawful protest is permitted pursuant to this order and is always permitted under the charter. It is only protests that breach peace that would be prevented.
I am going to put this to the member very squarely. Members of his party have talked about law and order and have said it is founded on a law and order premise. Can we at least agree on one thing? When it gets to the point after 22 days that members of the public in Ottawa are taking matters into their own hands because they are so frustrated with the lack of enforcement, we have a problem that needs to be addressed with powers, including increased powers such as the ones the interim chief, Steve Bell, has welcomed to empower enforcement.
184 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:44:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I very much appreciated the hon. member expressing clearly that he did not support illegal activities, but I wonder how he can gloss over the very frequent intimidation of businesses in Ottawa that were attempting to enforce mask mandates, or how he can endorse incidents like the one where one of my staff members was prevented from boarding the train to go home until he removed his mask.
This was not, by and large, a peaceful protest in downtown Ottawa. How is the member able to ignore the intimidation that resulted in the closure of over half the businesses in downtown Ottawa?
104 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
