44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 17, 2022 10:00AM
- Feb/17/22 9:55:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will refer to somebody on Twitter who said something kind of colourful. He said something like, “You know, if you've got somebody walking along waving a swastika and you've got 100 people walking along with him, you've got 101 Nazis.” However, I will set that aside for a second.
What has happened here? The federal government has warned that it is concerned about this situation. We have offered additional support to the municipalities. We saw that the municipality, in this case Ottawa, was unprepared to deal with the issues it was facing, and the flouting of the law brought the law into disrepute. The escalation, step by step, brought us to where we are today, and the premise of my remarks tonight is that I believe the government is thoroughly justified.
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 9:56:06 p.m.
- Watch
Qujannamiik, uqaqtitiji. I would like to thank the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells for his statement.
The Conservatives seem to be attempting to use the chamber as a vacuum. Listening to them downplay what is going on is such a great concern. Without the benefit of the news and the social media, people could be persuaded that this is not a serious national issue. What can the member say to those Canadians who are not in Ottawa, Windsor, Edmonton or Winnipeg and are not experiencing the danger directly?
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 9:56:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first and foremost, this does not apply to the people in the places that the hon. member mentioned. They can go and protest anything they like, and as long as their local officials do not believe it is illegal, they are good to go. However, the nature of this act really helps us pinpoint the areas where illegal actions cannot be condoned and supported by anybody in good faith and need to be dealt with very thoroughly.
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 9:57:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is hard to believe we are here. I certainly did not expect this to be my experience when I was elected into the 44th Parliament, as I am sure many of my other colleagues did not either.
The starting point for this discussion is how we even got here. How did we get to a point that the Prime Minister invoked the Emergencies Act, previously known as the War Measures Act? To give context to the gravity of this action, the War Measures Act was invoked only three times: during World War I, during World War II and during the FLQ crisis. The Emergencies Act has never been invoked until now. What is it? It is “An Act to authorize the taking of special temporary measures to ensure safety and security during national emergencies and to amend other Acts in consequence thereof”.
Leah West, associate director of the prestigious Norman Paterson School of International Affairs and assistant professor of international affairs, national security law, counterterrorism and cyber-operations, has recently been featured in a CBC article regarding the Emergencies Act. She said, “To invoke a national emergency, the government would need to be saying that these protests threaten the security of Canada, our sovereignty or our territorial integrity. I have real concerns about fudging the legal thresholds to invoke the most powerful federal law that we have.” If members take home anything of what I am speaking about tonight, it is that quote right there.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association said, “The Emergencies Act can only be invoked when a situation 'seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada' and when the situation 'cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada'.” It went on to say, “Governments regularly deal with difficult situations and do so using powers granted to them by democratically elected representatives. Emergency legislation should not be normalized. It threatens our democracy and our civil liberties.”
I will go back to my original question: How did we get to this point? Let us go back 21 days and ask how we got to the point that so many Canadians got so angry that they mobilized across the country, drove thousands of miles and spent thousands of dollars just to be heard.
Protesting takes different levels of commitment. People can sign a petition, join a social media group or mobilize. Mobilizing takes another level of commitment. What happened to make people so frustrated that they mobilized across this country?
The other day I was walking to my office in the Confederation Building. For those who know Ottawa, it was a very cold day, about -25°C. It was freezing. I walked down Wellington Street and saw the trucks. I have walked this route since the day I was elected, a female, by myself, and I never felt unsafe. As I walked, I thought that they must want to go home, so I asked. I stopped and asked one of the truckers, “Do you want to be here? Don't you want to go home?” They said, “Yes, of course we do, but no one is listening to us.”
I remember walking to Parliament Hill during the first few days of the protest and speaking with police on the ground. They were polite and engaging. The police have been fantastic. I asked them how they were managing, and they said pretty well. They told me this protest was nothing like Caledonia. They said they had been working protests for decades, and force always escalates a protest. They said force never works for a peaceful resolution. They said the number one thing that works is when protesters are heard. They asked me if I knew why the Prime Minister refused to acknowledge them. I told them I wondered the exact same thing.
Just for fun, I thought I would Google crisis management tactics, just to see what Google had to say. Of course, a top seven useful tactics list popped up, and I am going to share it.
Number one, tell the truth.
Number two, own it and speak from the heart.
Number three, have a plan.
Number four, provide a respectful response.
Number five, use the moment as a learning tool.
Number six, say the same thing to everyone.
Number seven, take all stakeholders into account.
The Prime Minister has a lot more tools at his disposal than Google, yet he still jumped to invoking the Emergencies Act before using the simplest of tools. I do not know that any of those seven tactics has been used by Prime Minister.
Last Thursday, February 10, the Conservative Party put forth a motion in the House asking for a plan, communication and transparency. The Liberal government, whose members have been over-speaking my entire speech and who have no respect, clearly, for the House, voted no. Canadians want and deserve clear and transparent communication. If they do not want to listen to me, they should leave.
On Monday, during a press conference, the Prime Minister said, “Some people will say that we moved too quickly, other people will say no, we should have acted weeks ago. The reality is this, the Emergencies Act is not something to take lightly. It is not the first thing you turn to nor the second nor the third.”
I asked the Prime Minister to please tell Canadians what the first, second and third actions were that he took before invoking the Emergencies Act. I, along with the rest of Canada, am still waiting for an answer. The relationships that have been destroyed in the country may never be rebuilt. The division, segregation and stigmatization have deeply and negatively impacted Canadians.
There have been countless opportunities for the leader of the country to unite Canadians, but instead of bringing us together, our Prime Minister says things like, “They are extremists who don't believe in science. They are often misogynists, also often racists. It's a small group that muscles in and we have to make a choice in terms of leaders, in terms of the country, do we tolerate these people?”
Those are the Prime Minister's words. This is a far cry from the Prime Minister we can quote from 2015, when he won and said, “A positive optimistic hopeful vision of public life isn't a naive dream, it can be a powerful force for change. If Canadians are to trust their government, their government needs to trust Canadians.”
Where is that Prime Minister? Where did he go?
Our office has received thousands of emails and messages from very scared and confused constituents. Some of the messages I have received today alone are the following. People are very concerned about the serious misuse of power and the over-reach of federal government.
One constituent sobbed on the phone that she is frightened and cannot sleep because it reminds her of the October crisis. Another constituent phoned in because he feared he would be arrested if he spoke in public in our local community. People have phoned in, very concerned, that the act is already being implemented and that this debate is purely window dressing.
The general public is confused as to the extent of the powers, and that there is no check on the government's implementation. People are afraid that their bank accounts will be frozen, not because they donated but because they have supported the truckers on social media. Constituents are worried that if they donated even $50 their accounts would be frozen and forever jeopardize their credit ratings.
What are the facts that make the government believe that the blockades are associated with the threat of serious violence for an ideological purpose? What is the legal basis for this extreme action by government?
A constituent wrote to me right before I spoke tonight, and he told me that he received a scam email that his account had been frozen. Has the government acknowledged that this Emergencies Act may have opened the door for fraud and for innocent Canadians to be further traumatized?
Another constituent wrote to me and said, “I am a senior, Michelle. I cannot pay for my food. I cannot pay for my mortgage. Why is the government not dealing with this?”
To the people of Ottawa—
1417 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:07:38 p.m.
- Watch
Unfortunately the hon. member's time is up. I am sure she will be able to add during questions and comments.
The hon. Minister of Families, Children and Social Development.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:07:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the hon. colleague asked what the basis is for invoking the Emergencies Act. There is $450 million a day in trade that is being blockaded by illegal activity. The illegal occupation here in Ottawa is harassing and holding Ottawa residents hostage. The other reason is we have seen very clearly in the news that 52% of those who have donated to support this campaign have actually been from the United States, 1,100 of which supported the January 6 insurrection.
Those are very clear reasons. I ask my colleague on the other side when she thinks foreign interference in our democracy is appropriate.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:08:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I guess my answer would be exactly what I said in my entire speech: How did we get here? What are the first, second and third actions that were taken before invoking the Emergencies Act?
37 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:09:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am a bit of an odd duck and when I have questions, I do research. Right now, I am reading the Criminal Code. It is long, but interesting.
The things that have been happening here are illegal under the Criminal Code, but nothing has been done about that. On behalf of our citizens, can my colleague tell me what measures should have been put in place before today?
71 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:09:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it goes back to a lot of what I was saying in this speech in speaking with the police and different police chiefs about meeting with these protesters. The police were obviously able to clear the blockades at the border crossings by negotiating, talking and listening. I think that is the big piece that was missed. I do not think we needed to go to the strongest parliamentary action to get to this point.
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:10:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for talking about how they received messages. I wanted to say that when I was in my riding this morning, I was able to be on the phone all morning. I was actually answering the phone calls that were coming to my office. I heard many stories and listened to many people today who are afraid, folks who have been duped by lack of information and are misunderstanding what is happening, not just here in Ottawa but right across Canada.
How does my colleague think the miscommunication can be cleared up for the majority of Canadians?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:11:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a great question. I formerly worked in media, and it has been unbelievable to see how people are getting their information from information silos. I think it is one of the biggest contributing factors to the division we are seeing in this country. There is a really big discussion that needs to happen about media and the information that is being released to the public.
69 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:11:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the hon. member put her finger on something very important, which is what she described as silos of information. There seem to be echo chambers of information.
I have constituents who have written to me pleading that it is a terrible lie that convoy protesters went into the Shepherds of Good Hope, accosted staff, demanded to be fed, assaulted a security guard and assaulted a homeless person. They firmly believe this is a lie.
This organization is supported by my church when I am in Ottawa, St. Bartholomew. I have a lot of friends at Shepherds of Good Hope. This was witnessed and this happened, yet the spinning around this from the convoy supporters is extraordinary.
Can the hon. member confirm that she accepts that some convoy protesters have committed assault in this community and terrorized community members?
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:12:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think this whole discussion is part of what I am trying to say. How did we get to a point where each person thinks they are so right and people are so divided? It comes back to the leadership at the very top. When we have a leader telling Canadians that some of the people in this country are bad people, it divides us, and that is the biggest problem we have in this country. We are no longer united; we are divided.
86 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:13:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise today, and I take no pleasure in having to be in this place this evening to debate the invocation of the Emergencies Act. I will say from the outset that I strongly oppose this measure, and I will be voting against it.
In its current version, the Emergencies Act has never been used before. It was invoked this week. It was passed in 1988 to add parliamentary supervision and to make changes to its predecessor, the War Measures Act. The War Measures Act was only used on three occasions: during the First World War, World War II and the FLQ crisis in Quebec.
Let us be clear. The protests that are happening outside of these walls are a political emergency for the Liberal government. It is not a national emergency facing Canada. Furthermore, it is a political emergency for the Prime Minister, and it is one of his own making. He has no one to blame other than himself, his cabinet and his Liberal backbenchers for allowing this situation to arise and to get to the point we are facing today. This week, the Prime Minister admitted that the Emergencies Act was not something to take lightly. In fact, he indicated it is not the first thing to turn to, nor the second.
Canada's Conservatives continue to press the Liberal government on what those first and second options were. We continue to wait. Instead of dialogue with a recovery plan and a path forward, the Liberal government is so devoid of leadership that it has decided to double down and continue to revel in the practice of the politics of disunity and disharmony. It is concerned more with capitalizing on the divisions caused by wedge issues, rather than working to bring all Canadians together.
The Prime Minister has made no effort to de-escalate the situation. Instead, he has insulted and disrespected Canadians. When this issue grew into a national movement, instead of listening to what concerned people have had to say, his government opted to implement the most extreme measure in response to deal with these protesters in downtown Ottawa.
Let us also be clear. The Emergencies Act was not needed before the border blockades were cleared up. Police in law enforcement agencies in Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba and British Columbia were able to use their existing powers to end those blockades without incident. What is different with policing in downtown Ottawa?
In my riding, a protest was planned for the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie this past weekend. Due to the work of the local police authorities of the Niagara Regional Police, OPP and the Niagara Parks Police, they were able to address the issue, allow the protest to remain peaceful and have their views heard before the protests came to a natural end. Effective planning and policing was responsible for this, not the invocation of the Emergencies Act. Imposing the power of the Emergencies Act sets a dangerous precedent. The Government of Canada should not have the power to close the bank accounts of hard-working Canadians, simply on the suspicion of supporting political causes of which the government does not approve or support.
This is a slippery slope, and it is not how any government should operate in a free and democratic society. In fact, the Canadian Liberties Association is now planning to sue the federal government over the Emergencies Act, news which only broke a few hours ago. About the government's decision, it said, “Governments regularly deal with difficult situations, and do so using powers granted to them by democratically elected representatives. Emergency legislation should not be normalized. It threatens our democracy and our civil liberties.”
The protest in Ottawa is entering its fourth weekend. If this was such a pressing public order emergency, as the Liberals want it to appear, then why did it take so long for them to act?
Two weeks ago, the City of Ottawa declared a state of emergency because of these protests, so seized with the matter that on that same day, the Prime Minister needed to take a personal day off, despite being in the same city. Let us not be deceived. This again is not a national emergency. This is a political emergency for the Liberal government, and it is one of its own making.
Ultimately, the job of government, of all elected representatives, is to work together for the greater good to bridge differences, find accommodations and propose solutions for the benefit of all. That is why I chose to stand for public office. It is to help people. I am sure all elected members here in the House feel the same way.
Canada's Conservatives proposed such a solution. In fact, it was a way out of this mess, which the Liberal government with the NDP foolishly chose to ignore. Our motion called on the government to put forward a plan that would outline the steps and dates when federal COVID-19 mandates and restrictions could be rolled back. This approach would have reduced the temperature across the country on this pressing issue, and it could have addressed the concerns of many Canadians, not just those who were protesting. Conservatives offered the Liberals this olive branch. Instead, they turned it down and unnecessarily invoked the Emergencies Act.
We are more than two years into this pandemic, and Canadians simply want a return to their normal lives. When will we get there? Perhaps it will be when the current federal government displays the needed leadership in getting Canadians the health care tools they need and are looking for, for themselves, their families and their loved ones.
Since the early days of this pandemic, Canada's Conservatives have been strong proponents of both vaccines and rapid testing. Why is it only this week that we were debating allocating $2.5 billion toward the acquisition of rapid tests? We should have been debating that a year and a half ago. That would have been the federal leadership Canadians were looking for and desperately wanted and needed. This is the type of federal leadership that is sorely missing from the government sitting across from me. Leadership means bringing people together. Instead, the Prime Minister is polarizing Canadians, wedging Canadians against one another and constantly working to divide us. It is a political strategy that only serves to benefit the Liberals at the cost of our national unity, economic stability and the well-being of our beloved country and citizens.
It also disappoints me greatly that the Prime Minister and his Liberal government are delaying access to critical health care tools that can give all Canadians greater freedoms and choices, especially as they pertain to managing their personal health care and family well-being. Where are the additional resources our provinces have been asking for, in terms of federal health transfers to address the lack of surge capacity in our health care system? For two years, the provinces have been asking for this. Rather than live with the existing very limited capacity, which is constantly at risk, why not invest in our health care infrastructure now to increase this capacity and create relief?
This past January, many of my constituents in Fort Erie, Stevensville and Crystal Beach were angered when the Niagara Health System was forced to close the Fort Erie urgent care centre because of staffing shortages elsewhere in Niagara. This is evidence that our province and our local health authorities require additional resources and the support that the federal government needs to enable. What is the Liberal response to this? The Prime Minister says the government will look at health care transfers once this pandemic is over. That is simply unacceptable.
It has been two long and difficult years. All Canadians deserve a federal government that is here to serve them and protect our national best interests. That means it does not matter what their political party is, where they live in this country, what faith they follow or what their vaccine status is. This is the team Canada approach that we all need. All Canadians deserve so much better from their federal government than we are getting now.
From the very beginning of COVID, the Liberal government was grossly unprepared for this pandemic, just as it was unprepared to deal with the protest when it arrived in Ottawa four weekends ago. The weight of responsibility for this pandemic and Canada's response to it is on the federal government's shoulders, yet instead of working collaboratively to solve the issues facing Canadians, this Prime Minister's attempt to turn the page is the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
Throughout the country, provinces are reducing their public health restrictions, and have put forward plans to reopen their economies, yet the federal government continues to remain silent on its plans to fully reopen areas of federal jurisdiction, especially in time for our all-too-important summer season in areas that are dependent on tourism, such as in my riding of Niagara Falls.
The Emergencies Act is not justifiable to deal with the protesters in downtown Ottawa. Let the police and local law enforcement officials do their jobs, just as they have done at the international border crossings that were blocked in multiple provinces. While the police do their important work, Canada needs its Prime Minister to start doing his by producing a plan to end all federal COVID-19 mandates and restrictions so all Canadians can get on with their lives, peacefully and together.
1592 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:23:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I heard from the member for Niagara Falls, and many of my family members are constituents of his. He talks, and has talked for a long time, about ending the mandates and following policies such as those in the United States, which see a death rate so much higher. If we apply the same death rates to Canada as the United States, there would be an additional 60,000 Canadians dead.
My grandmother, who is a constituent of the hon. member's, needed emergency surgery last month and got it because of lockdowns, because politicians stood up and took steps, because of mandates and because people got vaccinated.
Who among his constituents does he want to sacrifice by throwing public health aside? Could he stand up and tell us whom he would be willing to throw away?
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:24:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, we were all elected to this place to help people. I got into this business because I want to help people. The job of government is to bridge the differences that exist on both sides of the House. Instead, what the current government likes to do is revel in the politics of disunity. It likes to play the majority against the minority. They want to play those wedge-issue games that only serve to protect their interests.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
88 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:24:47 p.m.
- Watch
Let me finish. I will say this at this time. I am here to help people. Why are they not?
20 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:24:47 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. parliamentary secretary had an opportunity to ask his question. He should not be heckling or trying to have another discussion while the hon. member is responding.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:25:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, everyone in Quebec is against this law.
All of the members of the Quebec National Assembly, the Premier of Quebec, Québec Solidaire, the Quebec Liberal Party, the Parti Québécois, the CAQ, everyone is—
42 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:25:21 p.m.
- Watch
Order. I see that, on the government side, the hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage does not want to wait his turn to speak. This is not the first time I have risen this evening, so I would ask everyone to calm down a little and wait their turn to ask a question.
The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert may continue.
62 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
