So V ote

Feb/19/22 4:56:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois has never sanctioned what has been happening in the streets of Ottawa. These are reprehensible acts. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to commend the law enforcement officers who have done excellent work and who finally got the resources they needed today to respond adequately. The problem is that this should have been done a long time ago. The problem is that the government and the Prime Minister were insouciant. This government cannot make decisions. Chantal Hébert, who has covered many governments over many years, said on the radio yesterday that each successive government in Canada has become increasingly centralist and that the current government has reached the height of centralism. This government is incapable of acting or making a decision. We understand that the Prime Minister was required to isolate, but based on his lack of decision-making, you would think he has long COVID. What happened with the Emergencies Act is a publicity stunt, as only this Prime Minister knows how to do. The problem is that we are setting a dangerous precedent. The seal has been broken. I fear and we fear that in future another government will be able to justify their decision based on what is happening in the streets of Ottawa to invoke the Emergencies Act when the issue is local and partisan and when it suits the government. By using it under the current circumstances, we are tarnishing Canada's reputation even more. The precedents speak for themselves, but the Bloc Québécois is lending them its voice. I would like to give an example and talk about the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City in April 2001, where three‑metre-high security fencing was erected for four kilometres in a densely populated residential sector, where security forces were provided by the Sûreté du Québec, the Quebec City police, the RCMP, CSIS, the Canadian Armed Forces, where protesters were organized, financed, motivated and questioned the authority of the state. They derailed a proposed free trade agreement. No state of emergency was declared at the time because the governments, including the federal government, were prepared. That is what happens. Here we have a government that does not govern, that is unable to make decisions, unable to appoint an ambassador to Paris, unable to issue calls for tenders on time for the rail transportation projects that Quebeckers are waiting for. It is a government that has not issued a decision on Huawei when all of its trading partners have already done so. One sometimes wonders whether this is a government that is capable of doing anything at all. What happened in the streets shows us that our assumptions may have been right. Yes, the Bloc Québécois has asked questions. The Bloc Québécois asked for a crisis task force. The Bloc Québécois took action. We have been accused of asking politicians to control the police. On February 7, the Ottawa police chief requested an additional 1,800 officers. The government’s response was to send 275 officers, and only 20 of them were assigned to the protests. As a percentage, this means that 1% of the Ottawa Police’s request for more officers was met. That is a 99% failure. That is measurable relative to what the Ottawa police themselves asked for while there was still time to act. Yes, we can collaborate. Yes, we can use existing laws. Yes, we can punish these reprehensible acts. That is why the motion adopted by Quebec's National Assembly, which asked the government not to apply the Emergencies Act to Quebec, also insisted on the need for the federal government to collaborate with the provinces. If one thing proves a lack of collaboration, it is this: the CAQ, the Liberal Party of Quebec, Québec Solidaire, the Parti Québécois and even the Conservative Party of Quebec MNA unanimously supported the motion. The “new liberal democratic party of Canada” coalition, however, will take no notice. They say we need this law. We need it to freeze bank accounts and apply economic pressure. I hope it is understandable that I am worried about a government feeling obliged to invoke emergency measures so it can block truckers' funding. Much worse things can happen; I hope they will not, but I am extremely worried. The Basel Institute on Governance has already indicated that FINTRAC, Canada's financial crime intelligence and monitoring system, does not have enough people, enough money or enough resources and that it cannot do enough to prevent financial crimes. Moreover, Canada is known internationally to lack the ability, or perhaps the will, to crack down on the people who commit these crimes. This is the 21st century, yet the government says it does not have 21st-century tools to deal with 21st-century threats, so when it comes to truckers, bring on the emergency measures. What else is there? The government needed the Emergencies Act to requisition tow trucks. What kind of leadership is it when even tow truck operators do not want to fall in line? That is really bad. Obviously, the legislation exists for a number of reasons. There are circumstances in which it must be used. The crisis must be national in scope. It has to be a last resort, and right now this is not a last resort situation. There were other remedies that should have been used, but they were not. I am convinced that more could have been done. The facts speak for themselves. Some will argue that the Ottawa police chief, who yes, of course, has a tough job to do, said that the extraordinary measures brought in by the legislation have been useful. What the Ottawa police chief said was that the municipal, provincial and federal states of emergency were useful. Other levels of government started doing their job before the federal government did its job. I look forward to questions from the government side, which will argue that this was useful and that the police were given additional tools. First of all, the operations that are taking place could have been carried out with more personnel as reinforcements. Second, Parliament exists, we as legislators are here, and legislation that covers emergency measures is already in place precisely because police should not always be given all the tools they want. That is what democracy is all about: the exercise of legislative power over the executive and the police. I could name a whole range of powers that the police once had, but no longer have, that might have been useful for them today, powers that they no longer have precisely because, in a democracy, these powers are not given unless the situation is desperate. Throughout this crisis, I have been waiting for this government to show some leadership. I have been trying to understand how the decisions were made. I been trying to understand where the government's head was at. After quite a bit of searching, I just gave up.

1208 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 5:08:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I had the honour of having the member for Kingston and the Islands as my municipal councillor and mayor when I was doing my Ph.D. at Queen's University. Every year, Kingston's Homecoming event attracts thousands of people who overturn police cars, commit crimes and turn the city upside down. Police from Toronto, Brockville, Kingston and Cornwall and mounted police are on duty. From what I can remember of my five great years in the city represented by the member for Kingston and the Islands, he never called for a state of emergency.

97 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 5:10:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I hope you will allow me to forgo my colleague's little lesson on logic. Security experts are telling us that communication is the most important tool in such operations. For two to three weeks, we asked that a crisis task force be set up and that the minister conduct briefings. The Liberals did not make a decision about that. They do not make decisions. The Ottawa police chief told us yesterday that the more officers are available early in a crisis, the less violence there is later. The Liberals made no decisions and this is the result. I see that my colleague is working at home. Perhaps he forgot his logic in the lobby.

117 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 5:11:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we were just talking about logic. According to the convoluted logic of the member's question, when there is a protest or when someone does not like the government, regardless of the threat level, the organization involved or the government's inaction, the solution is the worst, most radical option, the very last resort. We never supported the things that went on in the street. We never downplayed the threat or the importance of all this. That is why, for the last three weeks, we have been putting forward proposals. I am happy to see that the member has just woken up.

104 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 5:39:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke about the consequences of the blockades. In the world I live in, the real word, we have the Criminal Code, municipal bylaws, the highway safety code and the ability to call in other police forces. There are provisions in the Criminal Code to combat hate crimes. Is my colleague aware that all of these laws applied before the emergency declaration was made? I would also like to ask my colleague whether he thinks that a member of the House of Commons who votes against the emergency measures is against democracy and for violence.

98 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 6:06:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is the first time this act has been used since 1988, since it came into force. Despite this, in response to the friend from the NDP—

30 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 6:07:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will give her a chance to respond. This is the first time that this legislation has been used since it came into force in 1988. In answer to his NDP buddies earlier, the parliamentary secretary to the minister said that this did not set a precedent. My question for the member is this: How is it possible not to set a precedent when this is the first time that such draconian legislation is being used? If the government comes up with an answer, Quebeckers and Canadians should be worried, because it is impossible for this not to be a precedent.

103 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 6:24:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleagues just talked about foreign financing and made many references to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, or FINTRAC. There are two scenarios being advanced. The first is that FINTRAC can get the job done and that there was no need to declare a state of emergency. The second is that FINTRAC is underfunded and understaffed and that this government has not taken cases of financial crime seriously, such as those we are seeing today. Could the member tell us if the government negligently failed to prepare for such crimes?

96 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 7:44:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are told that some demonstrators were planning to overthrow the government. I just had a look around outside and was able to see the state of things. I would like the member to tell me one thing: Of the zero trucks parked outside, how many are planning to overthrow the government?

54 words

All Topics

Feb/19/22 8:47:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we do not see eye to eye with the Conservative Party on a lot of things, but the Bloc Québécois believes that the fundamental role of the opposition is to monitor what the government does. Slips of the tongue can be quite revealing. Earlier today, the NDP member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke said something like, this act “gives us the power as a government” to take action. I would like to know if, while I was away having dinner, the NDP merged with the Liberal Party. If not, I would like to know whether my hon. colleague feels that, by voting in favour of this act, the NDP is signalling that, come Monday when the convoy is gone, it will abdicate its fundamental role, which is to exercise oversight over government action.

142 words

All Topics