44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/19/22 2:19:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think there are a ton of nice people outside who are protesting because this illegal protest brought out two years of frustrations. I could have been out there in the protest just as well as they could have. We are all fed up with this. We have all been through a difficult time, but we have to do what we have to do, and that is to respect each other.
There are some extremists out there who are here to cause nothing but trouble, and when we look at the signs saying, “Down with our Prime Minister,” and hear the kinds of threats he has been receiving from many folks across the country, that is very unfair. I would not want any prime minister of any party to have to experience what he and his family are going through.
144 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 2:24:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to start by sharing a story. One of the earliest photos I remember of myself and my grandparents is from the mid- to late eighties. For background, my grandparents immigrated to Canada after World War II from Ukraine, and my grandmother survived the Holodomor, the famine genocide in 1932-33 when Joseph Stalin closed Ukraine's borders and confiscated all food to destroy millions of Ukrainians for opposing his rule. My grandfather risked his life on many occasions, because he was peacefully advocating for a free and democratic Ukraine.
In that photo I was mentioning, I am about nine or 10 years old and I am standing in front of the Ontario legislature, known as Queen's Park, along with my grandparents. At the time, we were asking that Canada and the international community stand up for the people of Ukraine and other countries that had been conquered by the Soviet Union, because their freedoms were being violated. People could be arrested for not speaking Russian, for holding a different political view or for suggesting that Ukraine should be a democracy or free.
That day, with my grandparents in front of Queen's Park, we were protesting for the freedom of millions of people. We actually did so on many occasions after that, and I have done so many times in my life. Despite the horrors my grandmother lived through, despite the horrors my grandfather's family was still living through back home, and despite the hurt, trauma and anger, on that day, and many other days afterward, my grandparents protested for freedom, but they always did so while respecting the freedoms of other Canadians.
I am sick of COVID restrictions, and so are many of my constituents. They have voiced that in many ways. They have sent me letters, they have sent emails, they have called me and I have spoken with them. Some of them have protested. I have always taken the time to listen and try to understand their perspectives. Often, constituents help me understand issues better. They offer solutions and they point out better ways for government to proceed, and I welcome that. That is what makes me a better representative, and that is how we make our country better, but those constituents I am talking about, just like my grandparents, have voiced their concerns while respecting the freedom of others.
Peaceful protest is the right of every Canadian. We have the right to be heard, to communicate our views and to say anything we want, as long as we abide by the law, because the law protects the freedoms of others. These blockades are not respecting the rights and freedoms of others. They are violating the law and doing harm to so many Canadians in many ways.
They have threatened the safety of Canadians and the welfare of our communities. We have heard stories throughout this debate about what this has done to the people of Ottawa. They have done great harm to our economy and the livelihoods of so many Canadians, especially with the blockades at the border crossings. They risk impacting our economy in the years to come by undermining the confidence of our trading partners, who we are trying to convince that Canada is a good place to invest. Canada is a great place to trade with, yet our borders are being blockaded and trade is being prevented from happening. They have undermined the rule of law and they risk undermining confidence in our laws and institutions, which are designed to protect our rights and freedoms.
These blockades and occupations are having tremendous consequences for our economy and for our democracy, and that is why these blockades have to end.
I believe the Emergencies Act powers are needed to stop the blockades, and I want to share why. It is abundantly clear that we do not have to be law enforcement experts to know that local law enforcement has been unable to enforce the law and clear the blockades, especially here in Ottawa. That is very clear.
Let us talk about what the Emergencies Act does, and then why I believe it is necessary. What does the Emergencies Act actually do? This is not the War Measures Act. This is not calling in the military. To suggest those things is not to be truthful with Canadians. What the Emergencies Act actually does is allow the RCMP to enforce local and municipal laws, which it previously could not. It allows the federal government to mobilize essential services such as tow trucks. That is what my colleagues have spoken about. It provides new authorities to law enforcement to prohibit blockades and keep essential infrastructure open, such as border crossings. It provides powers to stop the flow of money that is supporting illegal activity such as the blockades.
Under these powers, the government is doing a few things. It is providing direction so accounts that are supporting blockades can be frozen, and vehicle insurance is revoked.
It is broadening Canada's anti-money-laundering and terrorist financing rules so that they can cover crowdfunding platforms such as cryptocurrency. Originally, the blockades were being funded through conventional means, and then they went to cryptocurrency. Why? Because that is harder to track. The government wants to make sure it can track that and stop that. It provides the ability to authorize banks to cease providing financial services when a person is using their account to fund illegal activity.
These are the kinds of things that the Emergencies Act is doing.
Experts have said that it is critical to clear the blockades. It is critical that we have the RCMP able to enforce local law, because the act provides the ability for multiple law enforcement agencies to come together really quickly, as we are seeing right now in Ottawa on the street.
The act provides the ability to compel tow truck drivers to tow vehicles. We need to be able to do that to clear these blockades, and we were not able to before.
It provides the ability to ensure that certain infrastructure can remain open, such as border crossings, and to ensure that the people who are blockading know that they will face penalties. If they know that their accounts will be frozen, they know they will face a penalty and that there is a consequence to their illegal behaviour. That is important.
It is an important measure to enforce the law, to ensure that we stop the blockades, and to ensure that money supporting the blockades ceases to flow.
These are all things that are under the Emergencies Act. This is what the Emergencies Act is doing. These are the specific steps.
There is no doubt that these measures I have just mentioned have helped to clear the blockades at the borders and in Ottawa. We do not have to take my word for it. Chief Bell in Ottawa, and multiple police chiefs and security experts, have repeatedly said today and in recent days that we would not be able to clear the blockades if it were not for the measures in the Emergencies Act. The Emergencies Act powers are clearly needed to enforce the law, to stop the blockades and to protect Canadians' freedoms.
Some have said that this is overreach: that this is the War Measures Act. Let us be clear. This does not involve the military. In fact, the military cannot be called in under this act. It is a completely separate act called the National Defence Act, which is required if we want to call in the military. That is the first point.
The second point is that the declaration is for a limited time. It is for 30 days, and I know the government would really like to be able to remove its invocation even sooner than that if it can. The scope of these measures is geographically targeted. It is about specific infrastructure. It is about specific locations we are trying to protect, and the act is always subject to the Charter of Rights. We cannot argue that this is a violation of people's rights or freedoms if the Charter of Rights is supreme to the act. Everything that happens under the act must be subservient to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is where our freedoms and rights are enshrined and protected. It conforms with that. It protects our rights.
We are having this debate in Parliament because it is required in the act, so there is that accountability mechanism. There will be a parliamentary committee struck to provide oversight. When the measures expire, the act requires a public inquiry to examine its invocation. There is a lot of transparency and a lot of accountability, so that Canadians and MPs can assess the implementation of the act and make sure it was done for the right reasons and in the right way.
I started my remarks by talking about my grandparents and how they taught me to advocate for freedom but always to respect the freedom of others, to respect the freedoms of Canadians, while doing so. These blockades have not done that. They have threatened the safety of Canadians and the welfare of communities. They have done massive harm to our economy, hundreds of millions of dollars every day, and harm to the livelihoods of Canadians. People have lost their jobs. They have lost their businesses. These blockades risk impacting our economy in the years to come by undermining the confidence of our trading partners, especially the U.S. They have undermined the rule of law. They risk undermining confidence in our laws and institutions, which are here to protect our freedoms and our rights. These blockades, and these occupations, are not respecting the freedoms of Canadians.
I support the invocation of the Emergencies Act in this case. We cannot allow these illegal and dangerous blockades to continue. I believe it is necessary to keep Canadians safe, to protect our economy in the short and long term and to restore public order.
It is limited in time, its scope is proportionate and it is subject to oversight and accountability by MPs of all parties.
Just as my grandfather or grandmother would have said if they were here, it is what is necessary to protect our economy, our democracy and our freedom.
1729 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:42:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill.
I rise today with a very heavy heart to speak in support of the invocation of the Emergencies Act by our government and the motion in this House to affirm the government's decision. I want to acknowledge that I am speaking from the traditional unceded lands of the Algonquin people. I want to thank the many truckers in my riding of Scarborough—Rouge Park, and the hundreds of thousands of truckers around the world, who have helped us throughout the pandemic.
Ever since I can remember, I have gone to protests. We have been protesting the rights of Tamils on the island of Sri Lanka from the time I was maybe four or five. After the anti-Tamil pogrom in 1983, I demonstrated for weeks on end at the India consulate in Dublin, Ireland. Later in Canada in the 1980s, I protested apartheid of South Africa. In the 1990s, I protested the cuts to education in Ontario under their then premier Bob Rae. In 1995, I organized a vigil and protest right here on Parliament Hill as Tamils were being displaced in the north and east of the island.
In the 2000s, I extended legal supports to protesters at Queen's Park. I did a number of them throughout the decade. In 2009, I was right here in Ottawa and provided legal support to those who were protesting against the Tamil genocide in Sri Lanka. This has been referred to, in the last several days, as the Tamil protest. It started in early February and ended in May of 2009. This included similar protests on University Avenue in front of the U.S. consulate, and I worked with the then chief of police for the City of Toronto, now the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, to ensure those protests were peaceful.
I can recall my nephew, who was 10 years old at that time, going to many of these protests with my late father-in-law. My partner and I took our four-month-old in frigid temperatures to protest on Dundas Square in the winter of 2009. During this time, I also attended protests in Washington, New York and Geneva. I am therefore an ardent believer in the right to protest as a tool of dissent and political advocacy. I believe in the right to protest, and I also believe that children should be part of protests, but not used as shields in an illegal occupation.
Since January 29, 2022, Canada has been gripped by what started off with protesting, and has turned into illegal blockades and occupiers. Many colleagues across the aisle have talked about their interactions with the illegal blockaders. I have a great deal of respect for many of my colleagues across the aisle. They have spoken about their interactions with some truckers and other protesters, and their ability to walk through the illegal blockades and understand and empathize.
Sadly, I do not have that privilege. Many in this House do not have that privilege. Even though, as parliamentarians, we are supposed to enjoy the same level of privilege, I do not share that privilege.
They have called for the overthrow of a government and, de facto, all of us serving in this House. They brought symbols of hate, like the confederate flag, Nazi symbols and others, to the protest. They have destroyed the pride flag. They have threatened media. They have taken food from a homeless shelter. I ask my colleagues opposite to please forgive me if I do not feel the same level of confidence engaging with these so-called protesters.
I would never cast dispersions over a group based on the acts of a few, but after 23 days, many who may feel strongly about the type of hate and vitriol we see on the streets should distance themselves and condemn them, including the Conservative Party of Canada.
The impacts of these illegal blockades on Ottawa, Coutts, Emerson, Surrey and Windsor are profound. These illegal blockades are different in form and substance to the hundreds of protests we see here in Ottawa annually. That is why, after considerable consultation and engagement, our government invoked the Emergencies Act on February 14, 2022. We did so after the City of Ottawa, Windsor and others invoked emergencies in their municipalities, and after the Province of Ontario did so as well.
Ultimately, Canada is a rule of law country. In declaring a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act, we followed the law and are acting within it. There are clear conditions set out in the Emergencies Act in order for a public order emergency to be declared. Our government believes those conditions have been met.
I want to highlight the preamble of the Emergencies Act, which reads:
AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;
Any and all action our government takes will be subject to the charter, and it is the solemn responsibility of the Attorney General to ensure this. The Emergencies Act can only be invoked in specific serious circumstances that amount to a national emergency.
In order to meet the threshold for a national emergency, three conditions must be met. First, we must be in a situation that either seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and exceeds the capacity of authority of a province to deal with it, or that seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada.
Second, the capacity of the provinces and territories to handle the situation must be considered insufficient or show gaps. Third, we must conclude the situation cannot be handled adequately under any other Canadian law, including provincial and territorial laws.
Our government believes these conditions were met, and we have tabled an explanation of the reasons for issuing this declaration, as required by this act. We also tabled, as required, a report on any consultation with the provinces with respect to the declaration. I would especially like to highlight and thank for their support the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador, as noted in the document of invoking the act to respond to this national emergency.
As members have seen, our government introduced targeted orders under the act. While the act technically applies to all of Canada, we have been very careful to tailor orders to be as focused as possible and only those places affected by blockades and illegal occupations will see any change at all.
We introduced the following six temporary measures to bring the situation under control. One, regulation and prohibition of public assemblies that lead to a breach of peace and go beyond lawful protests. Two, designating and securing places where blockades are to be prohibited. Three, directing persons to render essential services to relieve impacts of blockades on Canada's economy. Four, authorizing direct financial institutions to render essential services to relieve impact of blockades. Five, enabling the RCMP to enforce municipal laws and provincial offences. Finally, imposition of fines or imprisonment for contravention of any order or regulation made under section 19 of the Emergencies Act.
There are a number of safeguards built into this act. As required by the act, the Prime Minister met with the cabinet, as well as premiers, prior to invoking the act. After having declared the act, we tabled the declaration within two days, and Parliament has been able to debate it within seven days. In the coming days, the parliamentary committee will be struck and an inquiry will be called. The declaration lasts for 30 days and can be revoked at any time at the will of Parliament.
The situation is urgent. As interim chief of the Ottawa Police Steve Bell said yesterday that the police would not have been able to undertake the enormous operation currently taking in place in Ottawa without the temporary measures extended to it by the Emergencies Act.
We are invoking the Emergencies Act to end illegal blockades and occupations. We are invoking it to restore the rights of those who cannot safely walk the streets of downtown Ottawa and other places.
1424 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
- Feb/19/22 11:26:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have just proven that we can actually have conversations, because I just heard a question from the member without being called any names. I thank that member.
The fact of what he is referring to, when we are looking at this, is that there is nobody here saying that we approve of the blockades. It is just being said we have. When I say there are regular people out there, I have never said that everybody is regular. I am saying the majority of people out there protesting, or that were out there protesting before these new measures came in, were just absolutely normal people.
There are always going to be those people. No matter what kind of protest, there are always going to be those individuals. That is something I am very concerned with.
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:30:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, here we are this evening, debating the invoking of the Emergencies Act. It definitely is something I thought we would not be debating just three weeks ago. Like all Canadians, I expected that proper leadership would rise up and deal with this situation long ago, and of course that did not happen with the Liberal government and the Prime Minister. Instead, we are here debating this matter because of this gross lack of leadership. Instead of leadership that would bring us closer together and closer to a solution, we have a prime minister focused on inflaming the situation with reckless name-calling, provocation, division, smearing and dismissive attitude.
Before I get to my comments on the act, I want to make it clear that I strongly support the rights of all Canadians to peacefully and lawfully protest. I have never supported and will never support law-breaking in the name of protesting. Our society rests on the rule of law, and it must always be this way. There are plenty of ways to lawfully and effectively protest. I also believe protests are about having one's message heard, not destroying our economy and the lives of our fellow citizens while doing so. One only need look at the debates in this House, the media coverage, social media and the like to see that their message was heard long ago, and now it is time for the protesters to go home. It looks like they have gone. I have not looked outside recently, but I guess we will see what happens in the next few days.
However, we must remember that if people feel they are not heard, they will not listen. It is as simple as that. Protests are about being heard, not necessarily getting their way. Governments have a responsibility to listen to protesters, but no obligation to concede to their demands. Like any debate, including those in this House, we have the right to be heard, but not a right to get our desired result.
Canadians are justifiably concerned about the implementation of the Emergencies Act and how it will affect them. A lack of details about this legislation, its implementation and how it will be used is causing great angst for many, and understandably so.
Like almost everything since the beginning of this pandemic, the lack of a coherent, long-term plan from the Liberal government has resulted in Canadians living with an unacceptable level of uncertainty. It is hurting our economy and, more importantly, it is hurting our mental health. This is not the first protest in Canada, and it will not be the last. Canadians have always cherished their right to protest peacefully. Unfortunately, not all protests start or end peacefully, and we have many laws on the books to deal with these situations.
One way or another, police have found a way to end these protests with the tools already available to them. Even now, as we debate the use of the Emergencies Act, the Liberal government has still failed to explain why existing laws are not sufficient to deal with this situation. The Emergencies Act is an important and necessary legislative tool to have on the books. However, it is only meant to be used when existing legislation is insufficient to get the job done.
This subject has generated significant mail to my offices, and I am sure to all of my colleagues' offices as well. I would like to share some of them, as I think it is important that my constituents are heard in their own words.
Leanne said in a letter to the Prime Minister, and copied it to me, “While I can understand your frustration with some of the actions of the 'freedom convoy' protests, your actions go much too far.”
Joe, in my riding, said in a letter to the Prime Minister, copied to me, “Even if you truly believe that these measures are justified now, have you considered what kind of precedent you're setting? When protestors were burning churches and committing other hate crimes last summer, would you have supported a call to freeze the bank accounts of Indigenous activists? What will you say if a future federal government bans crowdfunding by Black Lives Matter protestors?
“Do you really want to be remembered as the Prime Minister who made it 'normal' for Canadian governments to take these actions against any protest movement that they disagree with?
“Canada must remain a country where people of all viewpoints can protest freely, regardless of whether the people currently in power happen to agree with them.
“Step back, Prime Minister. You've gone too far.”
Lorne said, “I do not believe the Prime Minister when he states this will be a measured and time limited response. This is the foot in the door to allow him or any standing government to overstep their authority in order to control Canadian citizens.”
Nick said, “There is no need to escalate what is currently a civil, peaceful, legal protest, albeit with vehicles illegally parked and ticketed causing disruption to traffic, daily life and commerce in a small area. There is a practical political solution. I say: Do NOT ratify the imposition of the Emergencies Act.”
As Beau pointed out, “section 3 of the Emergencies Act spells out the circumstances under which it may be invoked. These are: a) a national emergency that seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or b) a national emergency that seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada.
“Neither of these conditions are met.... By invoking the federal Emergencies Act in the complete absence of any reasonable justification, [the Prime Minister] is setting a dangerous precedent that threatens the right of all Canadians to peaceful assembly and association or protest.”
I could go on for hours, literally, with the hundreds of letters I have received, and I have read them all. I have had only one letter, just a single letter, that supports the Liberal government's intentions. Remarkably, the Prime Minister and the Liberal government have united Canadians on this one issue: not to use the Emergencies Act like this. They should not use it now.
I am deeply concerned that using this legislation will normalize its use every time we have a few hundred protesters. This poses a direct threat to all Canadians in the future, when a government uses a hammer to deal with a fly. Once we cross this line and use the Emergencies Act, it will make it politically easier for any future government to do the same. I truly expect we will see it used again by this very government. Will it be used and abused against indigenous protests in the future? Will it be used and abused against environmental protesters in the future? Will it be used and abused against those protesting religious issues, immigration issues, race issues, global issues or taxation? I bet it will.
No matter where we sit on the political spectrum or where we sit on an issue, we ought to be united in our concern to protect the right to lawfully protest, the right to be heard.
Canadians cannot afford to build and entrench measures that silence Canadians, when democratic governments around the world should be striving to do a better job of listening to their citizens. Governments often limit activities over time, but rarely do they go the opposite way. If we lose something to the state today, we will likely not get it back any time soon.
I have listened. I have heard my constituents, and I certainly will not be voting for the use of the Emergencies Act at this time. To my colleagues in the NDP caucus, I will let them know that many NDP supporters in my riding have written to me in dismay at their party supporting this legislation. They realize the dangerous precedent this would set, and they are deeply concerned about this passing. They are concerned—
1379 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
