44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 20, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/20/22 8:33:44 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have invoked the Emergencies Act. This is the reformed War Measures Act that gives the federal government and police sweeping and never-before-used powers. Let us acknowledge what has happened. The Emergencies Act suspends civil liberties.
I said earlier this week that this is a deep stain on our country's reputation as a defender of rights and that the dictators around the world would be delighted with Canada. Government MPs scoffed when I said that in the House of Commons. If Canada does this, who could say tyrants, with protesters in their capital cities, could not do the same?
It was not long until we heard answers. China’s state media was first, declaring Beijing had greater moral and legal authority to invoke its national security law in Hong Kong than Canada did against its truckers. Russia Today served up outsized reporting, four times that of the BBC and Al Jazeera, to gin up its viewers, and then there was the best. When I say the best, I mean the worst. The best was Iran’s former leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tweeting out support. Oh, Canada, what horrible company for our nation to keep with Beijing, Moscow and Tehran cheering on the Liberal government. It must feel a little uncomfortable where Liberal, NDP and possibly Green MPs sit.
While the street blockade had to be resolved in Ottawa, the conditions to invoke the Emergencies Act have not been met. This is why I will vote to repeal this dreadful infringement by the federal government. Should most other MPs vote to endorse the Prime Minister’s use of force, they will set a very low bar on future governments to suspend civil liberties. What should concern us, particularly opposition MPs who are willing to support the government’s motion, is the test to invoke the Emergencies Act in the future will be today’s feeble justifications. Here is the actual requirement:
...a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that
(a) seriously endangers the [lives,] health or safety of Canadians [that cannot be effectively dealt with by provinces or territories]
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada
It must be a situation “that cannot be effectively dealt with by any other law of Canada”.
Unlawful blockades in Surrey, Coutts and Windsor were dispersed prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act. Should Parliament label protesters on Wellington and its surrounding streets in Ottawa as a genuine national emergency, a future government could easily find others, such as another protest outside Parliament, illegal immigration or eco-radicalism. Lawmakers should be careful on which path they lead our country.
The members opposite who would support this motion affix their names to it in perpetuity. They will authorize and endorse the suspension of constitutional rights. Government members argue civil liberties are not infringed merely because the law’s preamble says that charter rights are protected, yet prohibiting public assembly is an infringement on civil liberties. Seizing private property without due process is an infringement on civil liberties. Withholding assets without the right to recourse is an infringement on civil liberties. Freezing bank accounts and forcing banks to share private information with security agencies, without any court oversight or even criminal charges being laid, is a gross violation of fundamental rights. Limiting travel is an infringement on civil liberties. There are over 100 police checkpoints in our nation’s capital.
Today’s invocation of the Emergencies Act is an out-of-proportion use of federal powers. Are MPs opposite going to vote to endorse this unwarranted withdrawal of civil liberties?
The government’s actions, along with those of the police, will be studied and analyzed for decades to come by academics, researchers and students just as the draconian War Measures Act has been for the last 50 years. I do not believe their judgment will be a pleasant one. Indeed, I am already struck by the large and growing divergence in perspectives and reporting on this matter by our domestic media and foreign press.
Canada's media and elite opinion, albeit with some exceptions in both camps, have largely echoed the government's position. They say Ottawa protesters are not peaceful while downplaying the suspension of rights. Some simply parrot the government line. Others dismiss the legitimate concerns Canadians have about lockdowns, mandates and restrictions. What we do not see is a full-throated defence of Charter freedoms from Liberal reporters and opinion pundits whom we look for when rights are curtailed at home or abroad. This is in sharp contrast to foreign reporting.
What exactly is being reported beyond our borders?
A Newsweek editor wrote mid-week, “Canada is...arresting dissidents. A country that considers itself a democracy arresting people for the crime of organizing a mass grassroots nonviolent protest should horrify” us.
The Economist, which has long celebrated Canada's Liberals in its pages, wrote:
[The Prime Minister]'s crackdown on protests could make things worse....
Canada’s government should have drawn a clear distinction between harmful acts and obnoxious or foolish words. Peaceful protests are fine; blocking crucial highways so that others cannot go about their business is not.
This is a clear distinction between border points and the Wellington Street protest. The Economist article continues:
[T]he truckers have every right to express their disagreement. A wise government would [have] listen[ed] to them and respond[ed] politely, taking their complaints seriously....
[But the Liberal Prime Minister] has done the opposite.
Another respectful British magazine, The Spectator, was much more harsh, writing:
Peaceful civil disobedience is an established means of drawing attention to injustice when ordinary means of recourse have been exhausted....
... Canada’s elites...are fixating on the presence of truckers in the capital and at the borders only as [a national] embarrassment.... They aren’t interested in hearing about the impact of the mandates on citizens’ lives....
It has not been possible for the truckers and their supporters to have their grievances addressed by ordinary civic means....
This civil disobedience is all [the Prime Minister] can cite in justification of the Emergencies Act. The [government] rationale is that ongoing protest and peaceful civil disobedience constitute a threat to national security and to the economy....[A] credible government would have avoided this situation entirely by addressing, or at least expressing a willingness to evaluate, the suffering it is inflicting on its own people.
The title of this provocative article is “[The PM]'s totalitarian turn”, but its conclusion is identical to that of the liberal magazine, The Economist, along with Europe's Financial Times, which is that the Government of Canada got it wrong.
It goes on in other publications. The New York Times asserted, on Monday, that Canada “Declares National Emergency”, allowing temporary suspension of civil liberties.
Ottawa-based reporters did not like that or that The New York Times included coverage as well as photos of police arresting protesters near our Parliament yesterday, at gunpoint.
The Wall Street Journal, which is the largest U.S. newspaper, editorialized that the truckers' protest could have been handled without abusing the law. “Government's job is to maintain public order while respecting civil liberties.” Canada has failed on both scores.
Foreign press's conclusion is that our Prime Minister crossed a democratic line.
Canadians want the blockade to end, but it never should have come at the expense of the rule of law, crackdowns, abuse and totalitarian methods in Canada, say western press. Oh Canada, that is a deep stain and national embarrassment.
I miss my Canada, but there is some hope. The Wall Street Journal's editorial offers a warning and perhaps a way out, writing, “Protesters aren't emergencies, and Western leaders had better get used to handling civil disobedience firmly without traducing civil liberties.”
How should Parliament respond? The only question for us is this: Does this legislative body support trampling civil disobedience and protest by undermining rights and freedoms? We cannot undo what has happened. Invoking the Emergencies Act is on the Prime Minister and his Liberal cabinet, but we do not need to be culpable. We can stop it. Parliament can act. We must not approve our juvenile Prime Minister's decision and gross misuse of federal law. Parliament can reject the Emergencies Act. It should, because Canadians, along with the rest of the world, are watching and seeing whether we will get it right.
1447 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:43:42 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I actually want to thank the member opposite, because a lot of what I have heard this morning has been very divisive in the name of non-divisiveness. While I may disagree with much of what was said, I actually appreciate that the tone did not go for that divisiveness.
What I wanted to speak about, though, is the trucking piece. I worry about minimizing what we have seen here in Ottawa. I was speaking to a constituent whose father was travelling back and forth delivering produce and was stuck at the U.S. border. He was vaccinated, but he was stuck because of the protest. He was unable to get more gas and food for himself because of what was happening while he was on the other side of the border .
Does the member not agree that the majority of truckers were not supporting what we saw in Ottawa, and in fact that what was happening in Ottawa was a massive disruption to the lives of people who live in this region?
175 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:44:49 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have attempted to maintain a civil tone throughout these debates.
I actually do not know where the majority of truckers are on this question. I certainly know a lot of them are not happy with lockdowns, restrictions and mandates, even though the vast majority of them are vaccinated.
I represent a border community. There are five international crossings in my riding. I do not think that border points should be blocked, which is why I maintained from the outset that they had to be cleared out. That being said, peaceful civil disobedience is an acceptable way to express oneself. We have seen it throughout the ages, and I hope it will continue here in Canada.
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:45:49 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, could my colleague tell us more about the potential repercussions of using the Emergencies Act when it is not required, as is being done right now?
28 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:46:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think it has repercussions on Canada's reputation.
Right now, in Europe, England, the United States and elsewhere, people are saying that Canada does not respect human rights. I find that disturbing and very unfortunate.
38 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:46:38 a.m.
- Watch
Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji. I would like to thank the member for New Brunswick Southwest. I have been thoroughly disgusted that the Conservatives continue to minimize the extremism that has been allowed to grow in all of Canada.
I have seen the effects of these extremist messages reach my home community of Iqaluit. Iqaluit has one of the lowest vaccination rates in Nunavut, albeit about 70%. These extremist ideologies, such as not getting vaccinated because of religion, have had detrimental effects in my community. Once COVID-19 arrived in Iqaluit, it rampaged through the community. For weeks, COVID-19 cases rose. Iqaluit is not the largest community in Nunavut, but it had the highest incidence rates for a while.
Does the member agree that these extremist views having infiltrated the farthest reaches of my riding in Nunavut is an indication that extremism such as this is a national issue requiring urgent action?
150 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:47:48 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I agree that citizens in this country should look to science and vaccines as a way out and a way to protect themselves. However, that does not involve invoking the Emergencies Act. I hope my remarks today have convinced NDP members to at least think about their support for the draconian actions that the government has taken and the impact on Canada's reputation. We cannot undo it, but Parliament should not sanction what the Liberal government has done.
81 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:48:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if you fail to plan, you plan to fail. That is the deal.
From the early stages of the pandemic to a protest that has become the target of the sledgehammer that is the Emergencies Act, the government has failed in every way to plan for events that it had ample opportunity to be ready for. It has dismally planned to fail.
Before COVID-19 we had SARS, a precursor to the pandemic that should have given us a road map for what could come, but it did not. From a dismal lack of stockpiling of PPE to the completely inadequate health care capacity of our whole system to the failure to produce a single drop of vaccine two years in, Canada was not ready for what became the biggest spend of money in all Canadians' lifetimes combined.
What will we see in the next decade? Misspending has created the largest inflation in 30 years, gas prices are now over $1.80 in some parts of the country, and grocery bills are crippling our families.
The government did what the government had to do when there was no plan: It intervened. The problem with the government taking total control is that it hates to lose the control that it has gained.
Let us switch gears to the protests here in Ottawa. The convoy drove from west to east, making its way slowly across the country while making it well known that it was not happy with the mandates. In every town it entered, it was met with thousands of Canadians who supported it, feeling hopeful for change. Canadians had their own reasons for supporting it, but the common thread was the need for change, for hope and for the end of suffering.
The government had fair warning. People were coming and they were unhappy. The government had ample time to listen to the people and create a plan, a road map out of this pandemic, that Canadians so desperately needed. However, instead of listening and seeing what other countries that had had fourth waves ahead of us were doing, on January 7 our health minister said that he saw more mandates coming.
There was Quebec's tax on health and the continued PCR testing that the WHO said was unnecessary. There was and has been no scientific medical data to back up these mandates, just as there was no data to prove that the Prime Minister was correct in suggesting that interprovincial passports for truckers were absolutely necessary.
Instead of listening and creating a safe, responsible plan, the government took a heavy hand, threatening more mandates and belittling Canadians for expressing their displeasure.
The Ottawa police, the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police had all the time they needed to prepare for trucks coming downtown, but let us be honest: There was no plan. An article in the National Post on Saturday stated that the Ottawa police's plan was that the trucker protest would last just a weekend. When police were overwhelmed, they still did not announce an emergency. The following week, they became more indecisive. The police chief stated that he believed protesters would dissipate on their own. It was a failure to plan.
Especially, there was no plan from the federal government to address this larger group or manage any elements of lawlessness. There was absolutely no plan to understand that this was not just a fringe element, but a larger movement of ordinary Canadians simply looking for hope from somebody, anybody, as we in the world continually reach the last phases of the pandemic and the beginning of an endemic. It was a larger group that had no affiliation with hate, intolerance or lawlessness. We only had to listen to and speak to many of those screaming to be heard, or see the messaging from our constituencies.
Most of all, it was a failure of the Prime Minister.
We must all remember just one thing in the House, and that is whom we work for, whom we represent and whom we answer to. When we forget that, and it feels like the government has forgotten it, we find a divided country. A divided country allows our country to be weak on the world stage, weak in future planning and weak to those who look to us for a path forward.
The Prime Minister made a choice, and that choice ignored Canadians when they most needed a leader to hear from. Here are some of the voices from Bay of Quinte in the last few weeks.
My son struggles after COVID19 to the point where he has completely broken down. He can no longer play with friends and he has no interest in even attending school.
I had a major reaction to the first vaccine where I cannot mentally get the second and cannot get a medical exception. I am at the verge of breaking down every day and have never had so little hope.
I donated $30 to the trucker convoy not because of any other reason than I wanted hope and an end to mandates. I’m a single mother and I’m afraid my bank account will be frozen, and I will be detained.
I am currently a teacher. I am speaking on behalf of children that are being masked all day long. They cannot breathe. They are not developing social skills with one another that they should be. The language development in several of my senior kindergarten students are being stunted because of masks.
This is after we should be celebrating what we have done as a country, a country that is 90% vaccinated, a country that has all the opportunity in front of it for a prosperous future and a country that can start to heal from its wounds.
As COVID‑19 wanes, what is left today is a country in shambles. What remains is a country divided, leaving generations of mistrust in government. When a government divides and conquers, once trust is broken, it is almost impossible to build it back. Mothers, daughters and sons have contacted us in the last few weeks. There has been massive trauma experienced as a result of COVID‑19. Domestic abuse and mental health issues have gone through the roof.
The question for the government is this: Why are your politics more important than the heart of this nation? We keep creating division when we should be healing. We cannot keep fighting across the aisle, slinging mud and acting like it is helpful. Canadians need us to meet them with an open heart, acknowledge the pain and trauma they have suffered throughout this pandemic and do all we can to be a light after this dark tunnel. It is time to say that we are sorry, right our wrongs, start mending our country and build trust again.
The government did what it had to do at the beginning of the pandemic: It intervened because it had no plan. There have been countless consequences of that. Again, with no plan to deal with a prolonged protest in downtown Ottawa, the government is in another failure scenario with the Emergencies Act. We are against this act.
The actions taken these past three weeks in several locations in Canada are not an aberration, but rather a manifestation of the growing frustration Canadians feel with our federal government and its inability to truly listen to Canadians and put them ahead of its overreach. The invocation of the Emergencies Act is a slap in the face to all Canadians and not a proud moment in our country’s history.
Even if the need for law enforcement is justified to bail out those who failed to plan, it is the financial overreach that has me most concerned. The law must be predictable and transparent, and the financial overreach of this act is not. Banks should not be and are not our nation’s prosecutors. There are laws now that ensure law enforcement can and will go after unlawful activities, but no Canadian who innocently donated to a cause because they wanted desperately to feel hope should feel maligned. Certainly no government looking at powers that allow financial information to be accessed should be allowed to make those changes permanent, as the Deputy Prime Minister made claim to this week.
The invocation of the Emergencies Act under these circumstances is an insult to all Canadians and certainly not a proud moment in our country’s history. Our nation needs to start healing now, and that is the only plan that we all need to get behind.
1443 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:57:40 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have noticed not only this morning but over the past couple of years a very targeted, divisive approach to get to this government, and not on any merit.
I will ask the member why he is blurring jurisdiction lines. I know we have heard from Bloc Québécois members about the importance of jurisdiction and from other members about the importance of ensuring that the rule of law and our Constitution are maintained. Our Constitution accounts for those jurisdictional lines. As part of their main argument, we have heard members talk about how our federal government has failed because of lack of action by regional or provincial governments. Can the member please clarify his position there?
122 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:58:33 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this was a failure of the government because it starts at the top. We have heard the government members on the other side blame every single party for this, but it starts with the tone and escalation of not treating Canadians as Canadians and pitting them against each other.
We talked about the failure of the police here in Ottawa to take care of the situation. I said that throughout my whole speech. However, it was also the government's tone in not recognizing what was happening, not listening to Canadians and not ensuring that we start healing this nation instead of dividing it.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 8:59:21 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will ask my Conservative colleague whether he agrees with me on two things—not that he has to.
Especially since yesterday, I have noticed that the government has been constantly giving us the same two arguments. First, that a poll of 300 people shows that Quebeckers approve, and second, that the City of Ottawa has said that the use of the Emergencies Act was necessary.
In the member’s opinion, why is the scope of the Emergencies Act being downplayed?
What reason will we hear tomorrow in the House for why we should support invoking the Emergencies Act?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:00:29 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague from Quebec and I agree. She talked about two points. We have talked about two points this week too: We are looking for point one and two of what the government did before invoking the Emergencies Act. We cannot seem to get that answer. There is no justification for it since we did not have step one, two or three introduced before this motion.
At the end of the day, we agree that this is a step too far, especially, as I mentioned, given the financial ramifications to Canadians and especially when the government wants some of these changes to be permanent, which we certainly do not agree with. As I have stated, it is definitely overreach by the government.
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:01:17 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member spoke a lot about healing and the mending of fences. My concern through a lot of this is that alternative, right wing, white supremacist organizations are central to a lot of what we have seen over the last three weeks here in Ottawa and across the country. We should not associate, as some members across have, with people like Pat King, who talked about the depopulation of the Caucasian race and suggested that the only way the convoy in Ottawa would be solved is with bullets.
Could the member comment on the dangers of that and the fact that the government has to respond to it in an extremely serious and decisive manner?
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:02:14 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to address this. We have condemned it from the onset. We have condemned it every single day as MPs and as Canadians. At the end of the day, this is not what the protest movement was about. These are Canadians, and we are listening to them in our constituency offices. I get calls and emails as a member of Parliament, and the majority of Canadians wanted hope and wanted to end division and end mandates.
As to this element that exists in Canadian society, all of us as MPs strongly condemn it. I want to make that very clear. We have zero association to it, and all members of the House, who represent Canadians all across this country, condemn hate, condemn violence and condemn intolerance. Let us make sure that is the way we go forward from here on out.
145 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:03:16 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my heart aches to be in the House speaking on this today, and I want to echo some words from my constituents. I know many of us in this room have had thousands of emails and phone calls from constituents. Here are just a couple of quotes from some of those emails and phone calls: “Never did I think I would see this in my country” and “I do not recognize our Canada right now. Our anthem has lost all meaning this week.” Let us remember our anthem: “True patriot love in all of us command” and “The True North strong and free!” That is what our anthem stands for, and when Canadians and my constituents are telling me they think our anthem has lost all meaning because of the actions over the last several weeks, it is disheartening.
They are sending these emails because there is a crisis in this country. However, the crisis is not what the Prime Minister is depicting. The crisis is a lack of trust from Canadians in the Liberal government and the Prime Minister. That is the crisis we are facing.
When citizens come to Ottawa, the seat of our national government, what they expect is to be heard and respected. Instead, the Prime Minister vilified, mocked and stigmatized. Let us take a look at what the Prime Minister preaches and what he practises. He preaches that diversity is our strength, that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian and that he has their backs. However, what the Prime Minister practises is calling them racist, misogynist, the fringe and unacceptable. These are not the actions of a leader. These are the actions of a schoolyard bully, and that is exactly how the Prime Minister has acted.
The Prime Minister said invoking the Emergencies Act was the last possible step he would take. It was not the first, it was not the second and it was not the third. What were steps one, two and three? None of us have seen them. It clearly states in the Emergencies Act that to invoke the legislation we must table a document that outlines who we have spoken with, such as groups, organizations and people, before we press the nuclear option. Did he speak to anyone? Did he go outside and meet with the protesters? No. Did he speak with anyone outside his bubble before he pressed this nuclear option? No. What the Prime Minister did was hide in his cottage. When Canadians wanted hope and needed leadership, he abandoned them and neglected his duty.
The Prime Minister led us into this crisis. He had no intentions of ending the mandates. He wanted no path forward for a united Canada. Instead, every time, he doubled down. He threatened to increase restrictions and vilified millions of Canadians, further stoking fear and division. The Prime Minister's mission is accomplished. Here we are, as a country, divided and fallen.
This was not a national emergency. This was not a security issue. This was a political emergency brought on by the Prime Minister. It was a political emergency because over the last few weeks Canadians found their voice. They found their voice to stand up for what they believe in. They found their voice to push back against a bully. The vaccinated and unvaccinated found their voice to say they want their jobs back, they want their families back and they want their lives back, and when the Prime Minister saw Canadians standing up, he pressed the panic button. That panic button was the Emergencies Act.
Here, I want to be very clear. The ramifications of invoking the Emergencies Act are profound. That is because it has never been done before. During 9/11, the Oka crisis and the height of this pandemic, no government ever talked about invoking the Emergencies Act. Two years ago, when antienergy activists blocked highways, railways and ports, the government under the Prime Minister never talked about the Emergencies Act. Those protests lasted for 17 days and actually brought our entire economy to its knees, as zero trade was happening. Did they think about the Emergencies Act then? No.
Meanwhile, over the last week, the blockades the Prime Minister is saying are devastating our economy in Coutts, at the Ambassador Bridge and Emerson have all been resolved and it did not take the Emergencies Act to do it. They were resolved because the police services in those areas used the tools that were available to them under the Criminal Code, existing tools. There was no need for the Emergencies Act to resolve these blockades.
In many cases, people just went there and listened. Did the Prime Minister do that? He has refused to do that. Several of my colleagues and I went to Coutts and spent hours talking with the organizers. They said they just wanted to be heard. That is what they were asking for. They felt they were heard because we went there. We reached out to them and had a conversation and they made the decision to start pulling out. These are families from across Alberta, in my case from Coutts, that are frustrated and angry because no one was listening to them.
What happened when they pulled out of the blockade? We can see it on video on YouTube. They stood hand in hand with police officers and sang O Canada, and in many cases hugged one another and shook hands. That is what happens when we do not use a sledgehammer.
What is the threat to national security? These blockades have been removed. What is the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act? The simple answer is that there is none. A prominent lawyer in my riding sent me a note that said, “There was never a point with regard to any alleged blockade that could not have been resolved under the existing Canadian law that would justify the invocation of the Emergencies Act.” Yesterday, in a scathing editorial, The Wall Street Journal stated, “In abusing these powers for a nonemergency, [the Prime Minister] crossed a democratic line.” I would argue the Prime Minister wants to erase that line entirely.
The Liberal finance minister has already said that she wants to make some of the powers that have been invoked as part of Emergencies Act permanent. Was the endgame of invoking the Emergencies Act, which we all now know was unwarranted and unjustified, to simply make portions of this power grab permanent? Was that the Liberals' goal all along? Will the Liberals ban protests that do not align with their ideology? Will they retain access over Canadians' savings accounts?
They are saying these powers are geographically targeted. We know that is not true. The financial implications of freezing bank accounts impact every single Canadian. It is not geographically targeted. I have no words for this type of audacity and unfortunately this is real. This is happening in Canada, not Moscow, not North Korea and not Cuba. It is right here.
I received a call at my office from a single mother in my riding. She donated $20 to the convoy because she felt it was important. She wanted an end to the mandates. She donated $20. Since the Liberals have invoked the Emergencies Act, they have threatened to freeze the accounts of anybody who supported this convoy or the protests. When the Minister of Justice was asked what metrics there would be to decide whose accounts would be frozen, he could not answer or would not answer. Instead, he compared anyone who supported these protests to terrorists.
Is this mom a terrorist? Is she a racist? No, this mom is terrified. She is terrified her accounts will be frozen and she will be unable to feed her kids or will maybe miss a mortgage payment and lose her home. This is who this mom is. Of course she is not a terrorist, but this is the fearmongering we see and the threats that are happening.
This is a sad day in our country. It is incumbent on all of us in the House to defend civil liberties when a governing party so callously and blatantly wants to travel over them. I look at the bricks in this House that were built on a strong foundation of democracy, freedom and a strong, united country. The government is taking a sledgehammer to those foundational bricks of our democracy. We cannot and we must not let that happen.
1428 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:13:04 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague said that all the truckers at Coutts wanted was to be heard. I would like him to comment on the fact that an arms cache was found at Coutts.
34 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:13:22 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member raised that. I know the Liberals want to paint every single Canadian with the same brush, or every single person who was a part of that.
I will tell you that I was on the phone for hours on Monday, as were many of my colleagues, with the organizers of the Coutts protest. When they found out that a different group, a militant group, had made their way into the protest, they wanted nothing to do with it and they immediately stood down and brought down the blockade.
They were not associated with that group and it is shameful that the Liberals are trying to paint this group as being the same as every other protester who is out there and that this is exactly who everyone is, because they know it is not true.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:14:12 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech.
Ironically, this morning I received an Instagram notification, which reminded me of what happened exactly two years ago, specifically the rail blockade of—
36 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:14:27 a.m.
- Watch
I am going to interrupt the member because there is a second conversation going on at the same time, which is preventing me from hearing the member’s speech and question.
The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, on a point of order.
52 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 9:14:46 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Albert—Edmonton has referred to me as a despicable human being. I am pretty sure that is not parliamentary language. I would ask that you ask him to withdraw those comments, please.
39 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
