SoVote

Feb/20/22 7:11:32 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise again on the same point of order. It is important that the member actually say for the record that he retracts the comments. He did not do that. He just attempted to continue to say it in a different way. He needs to say, “I retract the comments”.

54 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/20/22 7:11:46 a.m.
Watch

The point of order was pretty clear that he could retract and get back into it. The hon. member for Brantford—Brant has the floor.

26 words

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/20/22 7:11:55 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious I offended the delicate ears of my friend opposite. I retract the statement.

18 words

All Topics

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Feb/20/22 7:12:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I again have a point of order. The member has not taken the Deputy Speaker's advice on two occasions now. Rather than answer the question, he is now attempting to engage in debate. The Deputy Speaker has an obligation to enforce the rules of this House, and I would encourage him to do so.

57 words

All Topics

Mr. John Brassard

Feb/20/22 7:12:37 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. The hon. member did retract it. He said it clearly. I think if you check with the Table, you will find that.

32 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/20/22 7:12:46 a.m.
Watch

I did hear him retract it. I think the other member was standing at the same time. I will ask the member to clarify, and then we will continue.

29 words

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/20/22 7:13:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, to make it abundantly clear, for the second time, I retract that statement. Blockades are already in violation of the Criminal Code, provincial highway acts and any number of municipal bylaws and court injunctions. This was and still remains the purview of the police. They had all the tools necessary. The legal authority for the government to invoke this act is currently being challenged by both the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Constitution Foundation. They argue that the high legal threshold has not been met. They acknowledge that, in the language used by the government, they see no civil liberty violation because the act is still subject to the charter. The talking points the Liberals extensively use argue that just because a process is supposed to obey the charter, it means that it will. By that logic, the mere fact that the charter exists should mean there will never be charter violations. This is simply not true. The Prime Minister now has carte blanche to do what he wants to, not only to the people who participated in the blockades and the convoy, but also to anyone merely suspected of being involved in sharing supplies. This is a dangerous precedent. The Prime Minister is normalizing the use of emergency powers. The most disturbing aspect of the act is the broad sweeping banking measures. Banks now have the authority to freeze bank accounts without court order. The Prime Minister now has the broad discretion to seriously mess with the finances of anyone ever suspected of being involved in the protests anywhere in Canada. Let me conclude with the following: There was no emergency that endangered the lives of Canadians or threatened the sovereignty of Canada. This was political overreach. This was a political emergency, not a national one. The Prime Minister's unjustified invocation of the act is deeply problematic and will have lasting consequences. The public's trust in our democratic and financial institutions has been seriously diminished. Invoking the act proves that the Prime Minister's absolute, unreserved incompetence made such an extreme measure necessary.

350 words

All Topics

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

Feb/20/22 7:15:12 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the member opposite is defending the foreign-funded groups illegally occupying our city, illegally blocking our critical economic infrastructure and openly floating the rule of law. These foreign-funded groups have made a mockery of our law and have held our men and women in uniform in contempt. Does the member not agree with the interim Ottawa police chief, who said that this Emergencies Act provided the police with the resources they needed to handle the situation? Senator—

85 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/20/22 7:16:04 a.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Brantford—Brant.

7 words

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/20/22 7:16:07 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I was not entirely clear with the member. We are a party of law and order. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Larry Brock: Mr. Speaker, listen to the laughter. There is such disrespect for this particular member. I am trying to answer a question, and I have to be bothered by heckling and laughter. It speaks volumes to their character. In any event, I have made it abundantly clear that we disagreed with some of the tactics used by the organizers of this protest. As a lawyer, I follow and hold sacrosanct our charter rights of protest and assembly. This was a failed leadership exercise by the Prime Minister and, by extension, the former chief of Ottawa Police Service, who has now resigned. He had all the tools necessary under the Criminal Code, provincial statutes, municipal bylaws and court injunctions. Failed—

146 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/20/22 7:17:05 a.m.
Watch

We will continue with questions and comments. The hon. member for Repentigny.

12 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Feb/20/22 7:17:14 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Brantford—Brant for his speech. He just answered my question when he said that there was no legal vacuum. Everything was in place. I will ask the following question instead. What lessons can be learned from what happened over the past month?

50 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/20/22 7:17:44 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there are many lessons to be learned and I hope we decide that a national inquiry should be undertaken forthwith to look at the obvious levels of failed leadership and the decisions that were made. Most importantly, it comes down to looking at the litany of emergencies, the protests, the demonstrations, the blockades, the world events that have impacted Canada and how effectively police agencies and politicians across this great nation have effectively dealt with that without imposing this draconian piece of legislation that has not been used—

91 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/20/22 7:18:31 a.m.
Watch

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Windsor West.

9 words

Windsor
West

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP)

Feb/20/22 7:18:40 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if I could put my monitor half a block behind me and zoom it, I could show the member the barricades that are still up in the Windsor area because the Ambassador Bridge blockade has now moved to city streets. Mohammed could not get to school last week and Joyce, a child, could not get to her doctor's appointment because of the blockade. The blockades have moved off Huron Church Road and are now blocking intersections. People cannot go to work and businesses are closed. What does the member say to Mohammed and Joyce who have missed school and missed a doctor's appointment? Who is responsible for that, because what has happened is not normal? The blockades are displaced and are now in one of the poorest neighbourhoods in Canada. What does he have to say to Mohammed and Joyce about their lives?

147 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Brock

Feb/20/22 7:19:33 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would tell my hon. colleague to speak to the Prime Minister. He is the who created this atmosphere of hostility, division and anger. We talk about hon. members in this House being conciliatory and needing to have open dialogue and discussion. There is none of that. None of that happens with the Prime Minister and his cabinet. That is who the member needs to talk to.

69 words

All Topics

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

Feb/20/22 7:20:10 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member of Parliament for Windsor West. Let me start by saying that we should not be having this debate today. The fact that this legislation is being contemplated, let alone invoked, is a failure of leadership at all levels of government to respond adequately to clear threats to national security and our very own democracy. These threats are posed by con men and white nationalist leaders, including Pat King, an avowed white supremacist, who was quoted as saying that “the Anglo-Saxon race” has “the strongest bloodlines” and that unless we fight back, we will be all speaking Hebrew, a man who, according to Moose Jaw Today, appeared in a video receiving support from the member of Parliament for Cypress Hills—Grasslands; B.J. Dichter, known for his Islamophobic rants during the 2019 election as a candidate for the People's Party of Canada; and James Bauder, part of Canada Unity, who produced and proposed a memorandum of understanding demanding that the Governor General and the Senate rescind public health measures or force the government to resign en masse, which is a violation of our Constitution and a direct attack on our democracy and our institutions. In addition, there is the infiltration of former security experts, military personnel and police who have been key strategists in this illegal occupation, including an intelligence expert for the Canadian centre for intelligence and security studies and a former RCMP officer who was part of the Prime Minister's security detail. This is a colossal failure of national security and the complete failure of the government to keep not only Ottawa but the whole country safe from a well-organized, well-funded extremist movement. We should not be here, but the reality is that we are here. While we are here, it is important for us to tell some hard truths about what is happening to our country and to our democracy. When I say I am concerned about the health of our democracy, I do not only mean at a surface level. Yes, I am alarmed that we were not able to meet in this place on Friday and to do our work that people elected us to do, but it goes much deeper than that. I am concerned that an illegal occupation, supported in part by anonymous foreign funding, has brought our nation's capital to its knees, while smaller occupations throughout Canada, including in Winnipeg Centre, have subjected residents to days of sonic torture and harassment. I am concerned that neighbours are turning against neighbours and even family members are turning against family members. This division is being fuelled by the current government and members of the official opposition. I am deeply concerned that instead of acting responsibly in the middle of a national crisis, some members of the official opposition are openly fanning the flames, cheering on an occupation whose leaders have expressed a desire to overthrow the democratically elected government of this country. What we have witnessed over the last weeks is not a peaceful protest nor is it even a protest. I have been a part of movements for justice, including Idle No More, that have sought to advance human rights and real reconciliation. These movements are based in love and a respect for people and mother earth. There were no guns, threats of overthrowing the government, killing police officers and messages of vile hate. There is no comparison between Idle No More and an occupation that has featured widespread harassment of residents and workers; threatening of journalists; firearms hitting Coutts, Alberta blockades; and self-appointed leaders who have spewed racist and xenophobic hate. I am also a strong supporter of public health measures, mandates which have been demonized by the official opposition members, that save lives. They have been particularly important in protecting people with disabilities, those with compromised immune systems and folks with underlying conditions. We cannot forget those who are most at risk from COVID and the omicron variant as we begin easing restrictions, nor health care workers throughout this country who have sacrificed everything to save lives. The real divide in this country is not between those who are pro-mandates and anti-mandates; It is between the wealthy elite and everyone else. We can look at what has happened during the pandemic. Essential workers have kept our communities going, serving food, taking care of seniors and loved ones, looking after our kids and healing the sick, and at the same time, some of the largest corporations have made a killing while treating these very same workers as disposable. We can take Loblaws, owned by Galen Weston, a billionaire whose family is the third richest in Canada. Loblaws saw a 26% increase in its profits, in its latest quarter, to $431 million, yet it still refuses to bring back the $2-an-hour pandemic pay increase it snatched away from its workers in June 2020. At Amazon, owned by Jeff Bezos, the third-wealthiest person in the world, two of their Brampton warehouses were ordered to close because of major COVID outbreaks due to a lack of safety precautions and working conditions that one worker likened to a hell, with minimal personal protective equipment and virtually no social distancing. This brings me back to the illegal occupation. I have said it before, and I will say it again: This convoy is a fraud. Its lead organizers claim to represent workers, human rights, peace and love, but are, in fact, deeply hostile to the working class and have direct and close ties to hate groups. It is a dangerous movement that has been allowed to get out of control by a federal government that failed to pay attention and certain official opposition party members who not only supported but fuelled its fire, and the minimization of the threat we are faced with, the radicalization of individuals into white nationalist movements. It is backed by members of the ultra-wealthy, including Elon Musk, the richest man on earth, who will not let his workers form a union; Donald Trump, the disgraced former President of the United States and someone who was praised by the interim leader of the Conservative Party; and a number of wealthy Canadian elites who have made five-figure donations to this illegal occupation. I ask members: Would real working-class movements be supported by such people? Of course they would not be. The public cannot let those with wealth and power distract them from the real reasons their lives are getting harder. They cannot let anyone shift the blame away from their corporate landlord who refuses to make essential repairs, from their boss who freezes their wages while inflation eats away at their paycheque, or the credit card company that takes federal money while charging them exorbitant interest rates. We must fight against all forms of oppression, inequality and inequity, and that takes a functioning democracy. I also want to say to members of the government that we will be watching carefully. If there is any hint of overreach or any indication that these measures we are debating today are no longer necessary, we have been clear that they cannot count on our support. Our party fully supports the Canadian Civil Liberties Association's call for review of what has happened, and we expect a thorough and full public inquiry to identify systemic gaps in governance and policing that have resulted in this crisis. Equally as important, we will be holding the government accountable to help countless individuals in Canada who were struggling before the pandemic and are finding life even more difficult almost two years after it began. This suffering is causing alienation and despair, which is fuelling the rise of extremist and anti-democratic movements. As we move beyond this illegal occupation, we must shift our focus to raising the living standards of millions of people, so we can replace that despair with hope. We will never stop fighting to make lives better, and we will never stop fighting to defend our democracy.

1358 words

All Topics

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Feb/20/22 7:29:57 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in the previous engagement with the member for Brantford—Brant, he referenced the fact that this side of the House started to laugh when he said he was part of the party of law and order, and I want to read for him a quote from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, that it “supports the fundamental objectives of the invocation of the Emergencies Act that is intended to regulate and prohibit illegal public assemblies and lead to the breach of peace, and to restrict the funding of such illegal assemblies.” The party of law and order across the way does not even agree with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. That is why we find it remarkably funny, the position they have taken on this. I am wondering if my NDP colleague can reflect on whether she also sees perplexing statements and positioning coming from the Conservative Party.

156 words

All Topics

Ms. Leah Gazan

Feb/20/22 7:30:55 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is exactly what I am talking about. We have two powerful men bantering back and forth. We have almost had the government overthrown. We have had to call in police. Now is not the time for division. People across the country expect us to work together to get back on track. They are struggling. That is what the NDP is here to do.

66 words

All Topics

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Feb/20/22 7:31:30 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am also very concerned about our democracy. Three million Canadians have had their charter right to freely enter and leave the country violated by the government and mandates. They are mandates that the government is continuing to add to, at a time when the World Health Organization and medical experts are saying that these kinds of restrictions are not working, now that omicron is everywhere. On top of that, there are the digital privacy violations that the government has committed. On top of that, the government is freezing bank accounts. I have emails from people in my riding who are claiming that they had their accounts frozen for buying a “freedom convoy” t-shirt. In part (f) in the Gazette, it says that the Prime Minister can take “other temporary measures authorized that are not yet known.” I think that basically means that if the Emergencies Act is put in place, he can do whatever he wants and there is no coming back from it. Will my NDP colleague vote against this legislation, recognizing that charter rights continue to be violated?

188 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 35