SoVote

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

Feb/20/22 4:22:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Ottawa Centre for some good points. I disagree with some of them, but he is debating in a strong parliamentary fashion. I disagree with some of the things he said. As mentioned, under the Emergencies Act, the key test is whether or not existing laws in Canada can solve the problems we face. In the case of Ottawa, and I have been in and out of the city since the truckers' protest began, the actions we saw in the last couple of days were a reflection not so much of the fact that we needed the Emergencies Act, but that the Ottawa police had finally started to act. At the very beginning, we could have avoided some of the challenges that we have today if the Ottawa police had taken a different approach from the onset. The member opposite is the former attorney general of Ontario. There have been many cases in Ontario where a large police presence was required, such as the G20 summit a number of years ago. It had a huge police presence and was able to contain a large crowd. I still have not received enough evidence from the government to determine that no other existing laws could have effectively dealt with the current situation.

216 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 35 - Feb/20/22

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

Feb/20/22 6:36:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I liked the points in the member's speech that focused on section 58 of the Emergencies Act. However, I disagree with the member based on the fact that adequate evidence has not been provided to the chamber to determine that no other law in Canada could deal with this. I encourage the member to look at the Emergencies Act NOA submitted by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, especially paragraph 51. It outlines: ...the Government’s precipitous invocation of the Emergencies Act appears to have been motivated by its view that the provinces have not gone far enough in addressing intraprovincial protest. However, this does not mean that the provinces lack the capacity or authority to deal with the protests.... The provinces “have all the tools they need”, according to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. It goes on to argue, “The Emergencies Act was not intended to provide the federal government a pathway to arrogate provincial powers to itself in circumstances where the provinces do not exercise those powers in the way the federal government would have.” Can the member provide any form of evidence to the chamber demonstrating that the federal government actually had to go as far as it did?

209 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 35 - Feb/20/22

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

Feb/20/22 7:52:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one of the problems I had with the member's speech is that he seemed to assume that the implications we are dealing with in respect to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its relationship to the Emergencies Act have somehow already been tested. I would encourage the hon. member to look at the Debates from April 1988, when MP Blackburn, a former NDP member from Brant, stated that Japanese Canadians who had been interned under the War Measures Act were very concerned that the Emergencies Act would not actually protect charter rights. To this day, there has been no reference to the Supreme Court on the application of the Emergencies Act. To have it on record, is the member okay with that? Second, I would hope that the member agrees that—

136 words

All Topics