44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 17, 2022 10:00AM
- Feb/17/22 4:21:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, who I have aligned myself with are the Canadian people who have rights under our Constitution and who do not deserve to have those rights trampled upon because there is a protest taking place in a few city blocks of Ottawa. This does not meet the threshold of the Emergencies Act. As much as the Liberals want to say it does, the only emergency is a political emergency for the Prime Minister who has utterly failed this country and who has utterly failed to deliver the leadership that he is supposed to give.
There is no need for the Emergencies Act. Anything that has been described can be dealt with under existing legislation and under existing tools. The idea that we need to use this draconian act when its predecessor has only been used three times, during world wars and during times when people were being kidnapped and explosions were happening in the streets, and to compare that to what is happening outside of Parliament is ridiculous.
We need to reject the Emergencies Act provisions immediately.
178 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:22:24 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member is incorrect. This piece of legislation has never been enacted before. He is trying to suggest that the Emergencies Act is the same thing as the War Measures Act, and he could not be further from the truth. They are completely different and call on different measures.
What I find most alarming is that this member wants to align himself with a group outside, a group whose first objective in their calls to action is, if we can believe this, to have the Governor General of Canada and the Senate get together to overthrow a democratically elected Parliament and set up a citizen advisory committee of Canadians that will then govern the country. That is what this member is aligning himself with when he supports the people outside.
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:23:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised the hon, member, being so terrified of what he sees outside, found his way into the House of Commons. It must have been very difficult for him to walk past the bouncy castles and the kids' play area to get inside.
This is a ridiculous argument. The idea that somehow a manifesto by a few people on the Internet is a threat to the national security of the country, is a clear and present danger to the national security of our country, is absolutely ridiculous. This is a protest that has gone on. We have said, quite clearly, that it is time for the individuals there to move their trucks or to have them moved. That can all be done through existing legislation.
I know that this member and his government like to control Canadians. They like to gather all the power they can. We need to reject this draconian overreach and do it today.
160 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:24:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
My question is about something the government said to him just now about how the Emergencies Act and the War Measures Act are completely different. I think they are brushing off concerns and being a little too simplistic in their attempts to dissociate the two.
Could my colleague comment on that? After all, there are a few little similarities between these two acts. Moreover, neither of these two pieces of legislation, the current one or the former one, is called for right now.
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:25:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I said that it was the predecessor to the Emergencies Act, which is demonstrably true. I think it is quite simply ridiculous. I heard another Liberal member say just before that the government has done an impeccable job of managing this situation. I think Canadians would disagree. It has been a catastrophe. However, the government's catastrophe and the failure of the Prime Minister does not justify the use of an Emergencies Act to punish Canadians for voicing views that are outside of what the government finds acceptable.
This can all be managed under current laws, as it has been done at the Ambassador Bridge, Coutts, Emerson and Surrey. These have all been managed without the draconian overreach of the Emergencies Act. The House must oppose this action.
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:26:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with my distinguished colleague from Elmwood—Transcona.
This is an exceptional, unprecedented and extremely concerning situation that has ramifications for the health of our democracy and the future of political debate and vitality in Canada and at the federal level.
The first thing I would like to point out is what and who we are dealing with. We are not dealing with ordinary protesters. I can say this from experience, because it is no secret that I have participated in many protests for various causes in the past as a student, union representative and MP.
There are surely many people of good faith among these protesters. They are tired and exasperated and cannot stand any more health and vaccine mandates. We understand that because after two years, we are all fed up.
However, the convoy has been infiltrated by members of the far right. What is more, most of the convoy organizers use extreme right-wing rhetoric and are openly affiliated with the far right. It is not a rumour or hearsay, since they wrote in black and white that if they do not get what they want, they will overthrow the government and replace it with a provisional government in collaboration with the Senate and the Governor General. These people are anti‑Parliament, anti‑public health and anti‑democracy, and they are threatening to overthrow an elected government by force.
I would remind the House that these people have received public support from the interim leader of the Conservative Party and her finance critic, who is now a leadership candidate for that same party. I think that one day, the Conservative Party will have to answer to Canadians for its actions and its place in history.
These protests are largely being funded by foreign sources, including the United States and Donald Trump supporters. Let us not forget that Donald Trump provoked and continues to defend the assault on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Some protesters here actually said they wanted this to be Canada's January 6.
Some of these protesters openly identify themselves as white supremacists, make racist comments and unabashedly wave Nazi or Confederate flags. Let us not forget that the Confederates are the Americans who fought to preserve the right to own slaves. These are the symbols some people have been waving throughout this long illegal occupation of downtown Ottawa.
Protesters are traumatizing and verbally abusing local residents. Some minorities and racialized people, including people of Asian origin, have been spat on and had insults shouted at them. Journalists are being targeted by protesters, who are behaving like bullies rather than legitimate protesters.
While we may not have all the relevant information on the Ottawa protesters yet, there is no doubt that this is the same movement, with the same intentions, supporting the same cause. People are organizing in the same manner. Let us not forget the arsenal of weapons seized in Coutts, Alberta, including assault rifles, bulletproof vests and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
The current situation is not the same as when people protest to protect our public health care system, for example. The situation we have been experiencing in Ottawa for the last three weeks is altogether different, and it is becoming unbearable for local residents. Some locals even took it upon themselves to block roadways to prevent additional trucks and big rigs from getting downtown.
This clearly illustrates the Liberal government's inaction. If the situation has deteriorated to the point where the Emergencies Act needs to be invoked, it is because the Liberal government did nothing. The government's lack of leadership is clearly to blame for the dangerous and awful situation we are in.
If we are responsible parliamentarians, we will analyze the bill before us. I initially had reservations, and, as the leader of the NDP said today, we will support it reluctantly; we are not happy about it, and we do not like it. However, there are some important safeguards.
First, the act maintains fundamental freedoms. The right to legally and peacefully protest is not affected. Rights and freedoms are maintained. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is still in force. I will get back to that later. This is quite different from the analogies and conflated comparisons being raised by other political parties in the House. It is not the same thing at all.
The act comes with a time limit. There is a sunset clause. It has to be renewed after 30 days. It is therefore not indefinite. Not only are arbitrary and random arrests not possible, but fundamental freedoms are protected, the act is in force for a limited period of 30 days, and most of all, and this is important, the act can be revoked at any time by a majority vote of the members of the House. All it would take is for 20 of our colleagues to ask the Speaker to hold a vote in three days.
Since the three opposition parties have a majority, if there were any abuses committed by the police, the federal government, or the Liberal government, we could pull the plug, just like that. These safeguards are extremely reassuring and should reassure all Canadians.
This is very interesting legislation, and I would point out to my Conservative Party colleagues that what they are saying is absolutely ironic, because the Emergencies Act was brought in by the Conservative Party. It was Brian Mulroney’s government that passed this legislation in 1988. Before they get all worked up about it, perhaps they should open a history book, because this is their law. They are the ones who passed it.
Speaking of history, it makes me very uncomfortable to hear the leader of the Bloc Québécois imply that this is the War Measures Act redux. He is conflating the two acts to appeal to his base in a very unscrupulous, intellectually dishonest and flawed way. This brings back a very painful memory for all Quebeckers, the memory of the 1970 October crisis. During that period, hundreds of police officers took to the streets of Montreal to randomly arrest nearly 500 people, without cause, without any charges. This was not an attempt to restore peace, but an attempt to intimidate the public, a national emancipation movement and a civil society movement.
That is what happened in 1970, and the Bloc Québécois needs to stop conflating the two situations and comparing apples to oranges. The leader of the Bloc Québécois is very confused. These situations are nothing alike. Being arrested in the middle of the night and thrown in prison by the police is nothing like someone having their bank account frozen because they chose to participate in an illegal occupation that is infringing on the rights of the people of Ottawa. These situations are nothing alike.
Friends of my parents were arrested during the October crisis. I think it is an insult to the victims of the October crisis to compare them to the proto-fascists who have been occupying Ottawa for the past three weeks. The two cannot be lumped in together. That is just wrong. The laws are different, the circumstances are different, the demonstrators and the illegal occupation are completely different.
We agree that the law should not apply in Quebec. It will not because there are no blockades or illegal occupations in Quebec. There is no siege, so there should be no problem. The NDP supported the Bloc Québécois motion on that yesterday, but unfortunately the Conservatives blocked it.
Let me be very clear: We are not giving the Liberal government a blank cheque. We are keeping a close eye on it, we will be very vigilant, and we will use the provisions in the act that enable us to shut this down if it is abused in any way, but the people of Ottawa deserve to have their city and their peace and quiet back.
1356 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:35:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that I get to ask this NDP member from Quebec a question, because I would love to hear his insight into this.
Public opinion polling is showing that 72% of Quebeckers are in favour of the Emergencies Act being invoked, but even more astonishing, according to Abacus Data, 63% of the people who voted for the Bloc Québécois in the last election say that they would never vote for an MP that supports the protests outside.
What we are seeing here is the Bloc Québécois lining up with the Conservatives, saying they are supportive of what is going on outside right now. I wonder if the member could provide his comments, being a member of Parliament from Quebec, on why it is the Bloc is taking this approach.
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:36:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It certainly has been a little hard to keep up with the Bloc Québécois's position on this situation these last two weeks.
First they accused the government of doing nothing, of failing to act. They demanded it help the people of Ottawa. Now that Ottawa is preparing to use these tools, such as freezing bank accounts to put the financial squeeze on people participating in illegal occupations, suddenly that is not okay.
They cannot say one thing one week and another the next. Indeed, statistics show the majority of Quebeckers support this measure, clearly indicating solidarity with the people of Ottawa and a desire give them back their city as soon as possible. This has gone on long enough.
133 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:37:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am concerned about what I am hearing today from the member of the NDP. It is painting a picture that is inflammatory by implying that the majority of those who are protesting are racists, rather than a few who show their ignorance whenever an opportunity arises.
Personally, I have multiple examples of indigenous, Black, Indian, Muslim, Sikh and Jewish participants who have taken part in this peaceful protest and are proudly talking about it. They are either here to do that or have shared their information after fact-checking what they are hearing from mainstream media and from members in this House.
When did the member personally interact with these individuals who are behaving in the way he is claiming they are?
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:38:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
If there are people of good faith out there who want to express their opinion, that is fine. However, they have unfortunately been dragged into a movement organized by people who self-identify as being with the far right. It is clear. The connections have been made.
We have received dozens of reports from people in Ottawa who have been insulted and endured racist verbal abuse by people who were in fact displaying neo-Nazi symbols and the Confederate flag.
While most protesters are not carrying this flag, we have seen it, and the evidence is there. This illegal occupation, which is unfortunately supported by the Conservatives, does include a far-right element.
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:39:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I must say, I was a little taken aback by the arrogance of the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie when he talked about my leader and the Bloc Québécois.
I think my colleague is being disingenuous. He implied that the Bloc leader is not looking at the act in an intellectually honest way, when what we said is that these are two different laws. At this point, it is like using a bazooka to kill a fly, after all.
The Prime Minister had three weeks to take action under existing legislation, but he did not lift a finger. Now we are being put in a position that no one wants to be in.
I would like to know whether the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is aware that Quebec as a whole, that is, his own National Assembly, opposes the use of the Emergencies Act on Quebec territory. We do not need it.
My colleague does not represent only himself. He represents Quebeckers, so he should take that into account in his comments.
183 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:40:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. I expected my comments and my argument to get her attention.
We agree on the fact that this need not apply to Quebec. I agree with the members of the National Assembly of Quebec, since we do not need this in Quebec. There is no illegal occupation or siege there.
With respect to the comparison to the War Measures Act, it was people from the Bloc Québécois who made the comparison. They have to live with it.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:41:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today in support of emergency measures to restore order in a situation that has been steadily getting out of hand. The convoy movement has clearly come to mean many things to many people, but it matters that the stated intention of the organizers has been to disrupt and overthrow Canada's democratic institutions, as outlined in their published memorandum of understanding and their discussions in the media.
A lack of leadership by the federal government and local police in Ottawa have led us to a point of crisis. Coupled with the discovery of weapons caches, allegations by authorities of conspiracy to commit murder, reports of involvement by elite military members and the prolonged harassment of people in their homes and places of work, there can be no question that this has to stop. The status quo is unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue.
The failure of the Ottawa police so far to bring an end to the occupation and the persistence of border blockades until the declaration of emergency measures show that additional measures are necessary to break the logjam. I am glad that all the border crossings have reopened in the last several days and I look forward to the end of the illegal occupation of Ottawa, an end that I hope comes swiftly and peacefully.
There have been many protests in Canada over the 34 years since the Emergencies Act was developed as an alternative to the War Measures Act. None of them have resulted in a prolonged weeks-long occupation of the nation's capital city. None of them have been characterized as this one is by the active and sustained harassment of residents in their homes, on the street and in their places of work. The fact that many Canadians are feeling legitimate fatigue because of the pandemic challenges we have all had to suffer does not excuse this behaviour. The fact that many Canadians share a desire with convoy organizers to lift public health measures does not absolve the organizers of responsibility for their undemocratic objectives.
The fact that most Canadians fed up with vaccine mandates and passports do not support white supremacy or endorse messages of hate does not make this small number of Canadians who do any less dangerous in this volatile time. I believe that many Canadians, frustrated and tired of the pandemic, have sympathy for the convoy because they want to see an end to certain public health measures, but I believe that the overwhelming majority of them do not support the extremist views and objectives of the convoy organizers. It is very important that there be space in our country for debate about the issues of the day. In our day, that includes the nature and extent of public health measures.
On my part, I believe that the discussion should be led by public health officials on the basis of the best available information. I have been consistent in that position since the outset of the pandemic and I will continue to be, even as I respect the right of others to disagree. Many Canadians want to have a discussion about public health measures, including vaccine mandates and passport systems. There is room for this discussion in a democracy and the right to engage in those conversations has to be protected. Ending the illegal occupation and stopping the extremists who have their own undemocratic political agenda is necessary to make space for that legitimate debate and protest. It may also create space for Dr. Tam to undertake the review of public health measures that she hinted at on February 4, measures that have largely been expected to come after the omicron wave, even before the convoy left for Ottawa.
Making changes to public health orders while the occupation persists is not advisable, in my opinion, because it would encourage people to think that public policy can be set by intimidation and the threat of violence. Capitulation does not work. In Winnipeg, where the Manitoba Conservatives announced a sudden change to public health orders in response to the convoy, demonstrators are still set up downtown, even though the province has said all public health measures will be lifted within the next several weeks.
In my day, I have been part of many different political demonstrations and supported many different causes. I have seen police clear out demonstrations of people protesting against free trade agreements and racism and in defence of indigenous rights far more quickly and far more brutally, despite those demonstrations being truly peaceful demonstrations. I recall not that long ago in Winnipeg, in 2020, in the aftermath of George Floyd's murder at the hands of police, a demonstration at the legislature that was attended by thousands of people. I remember organizers in the lead-up to that event publicly communicating that violent demonstrators were not welcome. I remember them working to make a plan that would make it hard for anyone who wanted to hijack the demonstration with violent or hateful acts, and it was a successful demonstration. Many people made their point, went home and continued to be involved in all sorts of continuing anti-racism activity, including protests and demonstrations, but they did not occupy downtown Winnipeg for weeks on end.
We have even seen camps of the homeless, who have nowhere else to go, get cleared out in no time by police, simply for being in some of the same spaces that are being occupied now in downtown Winnipeg. It was not a problem to clear out the homeless. I do not know why it is acceptable to allow other folks to set up in the way that they have when others who are just seeking to live in some kind of community get cleared out.
I was talking earlier about the demonstration surrounding George Floyd's death in Winnipeg. I think that is what a commitment to peaceful protests looks like in responsible political organizing. It takes work. There are people who do that work. We can tell by their public messages. I have not seen that kind of leadership from the organizers of these occupations. I have to say that if any efforts have been made, they certainly have not been effective.
I was pleased last Thursday when the member for Portage—Lisgar and the interim leader of the Conservative Party finally called for the convoy to go home, but they have not gone home. The Ottawa police have shown they cannot be trusted to send them home, and so we have to have additional measures to move them along.
I agree that the Prime Minister has done a terrible job as a leader through this crisis. While it is right to call out proponents of hate and extremists in the crowd and in the ranks of the organizers, it is wrong to lump the far larger group of Canadians who are tired of public health messages into that group. It has not served our national dialogue, it has not served our country and it has not served our body politic.
I would be remiss if I did not note that the Conservatives have been engaging in their own brand of politics on these issues. The Conservative government in Manitoba was the first to implement a vaccine passport system, but federal Conservatives never showed up on the steps of the legislature to oppose that system. Leaked letters show that the interim Conservative leader has been more concerned about making this a political problem for the Prime Minister than to help the country find a way to de-escalate and get out of this situation. While there is absolutely a very serious responsibility on the part of the Prime Minister to provide that leadership, there is also a responsibility on others in this House, particularly the leader of the official opposition. Leaked letters have also shown that the Conservative premier of Manitoba has been happy to privately beg the Prime Minister to intervene while criticizing his intervention publicly.
What I am trying to say is that there are a lot of different political agendas at work in and around the convoy, but the upshot is that the people of Ottawa have been terrorized in their homes for weeks now, while the country careens toward a level of political instability we have not seen in my lifetime. That is why it really is time for the convoy to go home. That does not mean it is time for the discussion around public health measures to end, but it means that those who want to demonstrate and those who want to protest have to start doing so in a peaceful way.
I know there have been many who have done this in a peaceful way, but as with the efforts made by the organizers of the other protests that I was referring to earlier, there has to be an effort to root out the violence and the extremists and those who are intimidating people in Ottawa. That has to become far more a part of the public message of this convoy in order for the real issues that people are concerned about to be heard. They may not agree with me on those issues, and that is okay, but if they want that message to be heard, then their political organizing has to take a shape very different from the shape it has taken in the convoy.
I appeal to all those Canadians who may be frustrated and angry with me because I have not called for an end to all public health measures right now. I prefer to defer to public health officials on this point, but I call for them, in their good spirit and in their good faith, to start actively calling on the convoy organizers to promote peace, to dislodge themselves from downtown Ottawa and anywhere else where they are hanging on, and then to engage in the kinds of peaceful protests that Canada knows very well. I think that is how we get this dialogue back on track and create a path to unity in Canada.
1698 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:51:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's intervention was very thoughtful.
I want to highlight that a number of speakers have suggested the Prime Minister meet with those who are illegally blocking Parliament Hill and engage in dialogue with them. I just want my friend opposite to reflect and maybe give us a sense of why that is not possible and why political engagement at that level is inappropriate, just given what is out there right now.
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:51:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not think it makes sense for a Prime Minister to meet with a group that has a stated objective of displacing a democratically elected government with some kind of self-appointed committee and the Governor General and the Senate. I read the MOU and I thought it was ridiculous. Unfortunately, it sounded so ridiculous that too many people, including people in the Ottawa Police Service and the government, failed to take seriously the threat that these folks represent to stability.
There are a lot of Canadians who have supported them in good faith without taking that part of it seriously, but that part of it, and the determination that it represents, has been a big part of why this has been such an obstinate protest and why it has been so hard to dislodge. That is the part that we now need to deal with.
149 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:52:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what test has been met in order to justify this extreme measure? The former NDP member of Parliament Svend Robinson has said:
I was in the House during 1988 debate on the Act, when we were promised that “emergency powers can only be used when the situation is so drastic that no other law of Canada can deal with the situation”.
That test has not been met.
@NDP can [you] stop this.
It is clear from the member's speech that the New Democrats are not going to stop this. What is happening in Ottawa that regular laws cannot deal with? We saw all the other blockades at borders removed with existing laws. What is the specific law that has to come into place to take care of something that has been taken care of elsewhere?
140 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:53:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would note that some of those border blockades were only cleared out once the state of emergency had been declared. Therefore, in some of those cases, this declaration has played a role in having those clear out.
Second, I would note that for as much as there may be powers under existing laws to clear out Ottawa, the Ottawa Police Service has not done it. Something in the context needs to change, and this is how we get to the position we are in.
I wish we had had a more unified call across party lines early in the convoy to send the message that they should all go home. Instead, we saw a lot of people in this place encourage them, which is not to say that they should not be giving voice to the legitimate questions about public health measures. Even where there is disagreement between the NDP and those folks who hold views about—
164 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:54:55 p.m.
- Watch
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:55:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am a bit surprised to see the NDP change without warning, from yesterday, the values that are part of its DNA. They are a humanist, social democratic political group, and I do not understand this reversal.
We will be voting on this order on Monday. This afternoon, one hour or two ago, we heard the Ottawa police chief say that this weekend will not be like the previous ones and he will clear out the place in a certain way.
In that context, is it still appropriate for us to spend three days discussing this, only to show up on Monday with a bill that may no longer be relevant?
113 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:56:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yes, I think it is important to spend the next three days having this debate.
Even though the NDP is prepared to support these measures because of a lack of leadership at this level, this debate in the House is truly important. It is about the members of the House of Commons and allowing them to express themselves and determine the direction to take for the next days and weeks. I think this debate is important, regardless of what happens this weekend.
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
