44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 17, 2022 10:00AM
- Feb/17/22 11:27:22 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Québécois compared a public emergency order to the War Measures Act, which is not the case. His public safety critic suggested that this measure takes away the rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is not the case.
This order merely gives police and provincial authorities additional powers to do their jobs, which includes tracking financial contributions to illegal activities, including in Quebec, that cause economic damage.
Normally, the Bloc likes the idea of provincial discretion. Why is it now against a reasonable and proportional measure for its province?
104 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 11:34:28 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, without question, today is a dark day for Canadian democracy.
In Quebec, the use of the War Measures Act in 1970 was an extremely traumatic experience. Some 500 people were arbitrarily arrested, people who were held for weeks without being told their rights. This brings back some truly painful memories.
Obviously in politics there is the law, the letter of the law, the punctuation of the law and the text of the law, but there is also the spirit of the law. People can say that the Emergencies Act is not the same as the War Measures Act, but it triggers memories of a trauma for Quebec.
I would like my leader to talk about the trauma Quebec experienced with the application of the War Measures Act in 1970.
131 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 12:32:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand the member's concern. I want to provide him with reassurance.
These measures are time-limited. They are subject to parliamentary and judicial scrutiny, and we will only use these measures as long as they are required. We recognize their extraordinary nature. They have to be subject to the scrutiny of this House; it is in the law. We will only use them as long as they are required, and we will always ensure that they are compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 2:42:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the circumstances require it.
We have been very clear that we will not use these measures where they are not necessary. I would not want to deprive Quebeckers of these important tools to ensure their security and the integrity of their territory.
There is talk of possible demonstrations and blockades at the Lacolle border crossing this weekend. All the measures in the declaration are temporary, targeted, and exercised in accordance with the charter.
75 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 4:40:49 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 5:21:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are asking ourselves whether or not the measures were adequate, and I want to comment on that and present the range of measures that could be at our disposal and that we could use. The fundamental problem is not whether these measures exist or are adequate, but why the Prime Minister is not using them. That is the problem.
We are justified in wondering if the measures are adequate. I hope that the government will wake up, show leadership and use them properly so we can finally resolve this situation that no one is happy about.
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 5:23:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I believe that I was not clear and I will try again.
First, journalists do not support the Bloc Québécois. Journalists support the Bloc's position, namely that it is against this legislation.
Second, the Bloc Québécois does not support the protesters. What we want is the proper use of effective measures to put an end to this situation. The Bloc Québécois is wondering why the government is using this extreme measure when other measures could have been used but were not.
The Bloc Québécois wanted the government to show leadership and to use the tools already at its disposal, tools that were used to resolve situations elsewhere in Canada. Unfortunately, this situation is ongoing. Quite simply, this government needs to smarten up.
141 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 5:52:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this legislation does not force the provinces to use the measures in the act. The government is giving them the option if they need it. No one is being forced to use them, and jurisdiction is still respected.
In order to solve certain problems, this legislation is indeed necessary.
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 6:47:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would say to my hon. colleague, the parliamentary secretary, that he should read the emergency measures regulations. There is no certainty in here. There is no precision. It is far too broad. I could read into the record critical infrastructure and how it is defined to include ports, piers, lighthouses, canals, tramways and bus stations. However, this is not in any way specific to the circumstance we are in right now, and that is what makes me have a good deal of resistance to voting yes, while I do think we need to do more because we have a current emergency.
104 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 7:11:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for sharing that he is finding this difficult, that he is troubled about it and that it is not easy for him to approve this measure. I appreciate his honesty.
However, he also said that he was not giving the Liberals and the government a blank cheque by supporting this measure, which I do not understand. How is the NDP's support not a blank cheque? What kind of measures would it take for his party to see reason and reject the use of this act? What would it take to change his mind?
100 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 7:20:32 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the member did a very good job of outlining why these measures are justified.
I want to ask her a question about what will happen after in terms of combatting hate, and what members of this House, across party lines, can do to do just that. We have seen hate expressed by the alt-right in the United States in recent years, and evidently it has made its way northward, unfortunately.
What can we do, collectively as elected officials in the House, to work together to fight hate? We have seen its effect in London, clearly.
100 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 10:56:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this act is necessary. It is proportionate. As we have made very clear, this act does not affect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We are not bringing in the military. This act, as my hon. colleague knows, is not the War Measures Act. This is a new act, which is quite mellow, I can say, compared with the previous act.
64 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 10:59:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is, as always, an honour to stand in this chamber and address the issues that are impacting Canadians. However, I stand in this chamber tonight to speak to an issue that should make every one of the 338 members of the House take a moment to pause: the invocation of the Emergencies Act, an act passed in 1988, which was the successor to the War Measures Act.
If I could, I want to talk a bit about the history and why it is so important to understand that, in the context of where we are this evening. The War Measures Act was invoked three times in the history of this country: World War I, World War II and the FLQ crisis, under former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau.
I find it incredibly troubling that this is the context in which we find ourselves today. Wars and murdered politicians is the context for the debate that we find ourselves in here today.
The invocation of the War Measures Act was an extreme measure to deal with significant issues. I do not think there would be a member of this House who would not agree with the need for a mechanism like this to exist, because the reality is that there are instances where significant action needs to be taken. We see this Liberal Prime Minister invoking this Emergencies Act, taking and granting himself and his government unprecedented authority that includes significant things that suspend, for example, due process.
The members opposite do not necessarily like to consider the precedent of the decisions that they make. The precedent is being set by the invocation of this act that it is okay to suspend due process, a fundamental aspect of a modern democracy to ensure there are not things like unreasonable search and seizure. Although the members of the government talk about the Emergencies Act being subject to the charter, there are aspects of it that are allowed to be overridden because of what the Emergencies Act allows. It is important to acknowledge those things as we enter into this debate.
We see there is this seemingly flippant approach to such a serious issue, which is setting a precedent, that I would simply ask this question of the members opposite and members of the NDP who have indicated that they are going to support this: If this were former prime minister Stephen Harper who had invoked this act, would they be celebrating it? Would they be laughing in their seats? Would they be poking fun and seemingly enjoying the fact that they are taking away the right to due process and that they are suspending certain aspects of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms? That is an important question that I hope every member of the Liberal Party and every member of the NDP considers carefully.
An unprecedented step was taken three weeks after the Prime Minister did nothing but inflame tensions in what is a time that Canada, I would submit, has never been more divided. The context for this is the fact that there are and continue to be protests taking place in the streets of Ottawa. The members opposite do not like to listen to this because it is inconvenient to their narrative, but I, along with my Conservative colleagues, have condemned the blockades, illegal activities and hateful imagery associated with it. The members opposite do not like that because it disrupts the divisive narrative that their leader continues to forward.
We have done that while also being the only party in this country that has been willing to actually acknowledge the fact that over the course of the last number of months there has been an unprecedented level of division that has alienated Canadians.
Now that is funny. The member opposite just said that we have somehow stoked these tensions. That member, I expect, when he goes to a Liberal caucus meeting next time around, would be quick to accuse—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
670 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
