44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:12:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to split my time with my colleague, the MP for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke.
What happened in the last few days in Canada is without precedent. It was an organized attack on democracy, coming from the far right and financed from abroad. Our citizens were intimidated. Parliament was forced to cancel a sitting because its safety was at risk.
This is unprecedented in Canada, but not in North America or around the world. It is why this debate is so important. The fact is that we have a choice, as a country, to avoid the path of a far right-driven agenda that uses destabilization, provocation and intimidation as its tactics, aims to roll back so much of the social and economic progress we have made in Canada and aims to undermine our very democracy itself.
Let us start with what this debate is not about. It is not about truckers or the trucking industry. Yes, some truckers have been involved, but the vast majority of truckers are going about their business and doing their job, providing essential services to Canadians during the pandemic. This also goes far beyond the pandemic. There are many people across the country who have not been vaccinated, who do not agree with vaccine mandates and who do not agree with mask mandates, but they are not threatening or intimidating anyone. Not everyone who is part of what is happening is a right-wing extremist, but far too many are.
Let us be clear: What is happening is being driven by the same far-right agenda that led to the attack on the Capitol building in the U.S. that was fomented by Donald Trump. The same far-right agenda has been raising its ugly head in Europe, Brazil and many other countries. It is the same agenda that we have seen here in Canada.
I am a descendant of those who fought against fascism in Europe and a descendant of those who know what dictatorships are really all about and were part of the struggle to bring back democracy in their home countries. I know that we as Canadians cannot be complacent about the threat of this far-right agenda to Canada. Let us also be clear that when people ignore or even condone what we have seen, they are part of the problem.
How did we get here? It starts with the fact that governments and police have, for far too long, had a view of what is legitimate protest and what is not. As someone who is influenced by Gandhian principles of non-violence, the principles practised by Martin Luther King and the spirit of reconciliation of Nelson Mandela, and as someone who has been inspired by the non-violent actions of indigenous peoples defending their rights and lands, I believe in the right of citizens to engage in non-violent protest. These actions and this occupation have been fundamentally different. They have targeted not only our institutions but our citizens with racist, misogynist, homophobic and transphobic abuse and abuse aimed at people following health orders for wearing masks.
What was the response? Does anyone believe that we would be dealing with what we are seeing today if the protesters were indigenous, Black, racialized, climate-justice activists or students, like those at the G20 or in Quebec, or workers on strike? What we are seeing is a failure of governments and the police, driven by the view of what is a legitimate protest. This is not accidental. It is a part of the strategy. It is like Donald Trump, a billionaire, talking about being a friend of workers.
How do we deal with what is happening and the bigger threat to our values and democracy? The response from the police has been deeply flawed here in Ottawa and across the country. This is an occupation led by white supremacists. We saw swastikas, Confederate flags and other symbols of hate and the far right. This occupation has had the aim of abusing and harassing citizens for days; engaging in racist, homophobic, transphobic and misogynistic attacks on residents; making people afraid to leave their homes; shutting down businesses and workplaces; making people lose their jobs; clogging up 911 phone lines so that legitimate calls cannot get through; and endangering residents and residential neighbourhoods.
This occupation has also had as its target our democracy. Occupation leaders have called for the overthrow of our democratic institutions. They have assaulted members of the press. They have threatened violence and unleashed hate against leaders and elected representatives. Yesterday, the occupiers' actions led to the shutting down of Parliament, a shocking and unprecedented move. However, governments and the police refused to take this situation seriously until the last minute. It should never have come to this point.
We saw failed local leadership that refused to take action. I want to acknowledge the heroic work of Councillor Catherine McKenney and Councillor Shawn Menard, who, along with other leaders, residents and labour activists, pushed back against fascism in their community by organizing the battle of Billings Bridge. We have seen right wing provincial governments in Ontario and elsewhere legitimize these occupations and refuse to take action otherwise. We have seen a federal government lead us to a place where we should never have been.
The Liberal government failed to see this occupation for what it was early on. The Prime Minister focused far more on the rhetoric than the reality. He called out the symbols of the far right, which was the right thing to do, but waited far too long to call out the reality of the agenda itself. However, what is really disturbing, as we have this debate, are the actions and incendiary rhetoric of the Conservatives. Speaker after speaker has exposed the true face of the Conservative Party. This is not the party of peace, order and good government, nor of law and order, and it is definitely not Progressive Conservative.
What we have seen is Trump-style, far-right rhetoric that is condoning, even supporting, what is happening. There are disturbing references reminiscent of Trump's “good people on both sides” rhetoric, incendiary rhetoric aimed at the Liberals and the Conservatives and even some good old red-baiting rhetoric thrown in for good measure. However, what do we expect from an acting Leader of the Opposition who saw no problem with wearing a MAGA hat, something that has been seen as—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
1088 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:19:05 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Just because someone is participating virtually does not mean the mikes are not picking up what is going on here in the House. Again, I would ask members, instead of chatting back and forth or thinking aloud, to write their questions or thoughts down and deal with them during questions and comments.
The hon. member for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski has three minutes and 10 seconds left.
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:19:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what do we expect from an acting Leader of the Opposition who saw no problem wearing a MAGA hat, which has been seen as a symbol of white supremacy and Trump's far-right rhetoric, and from a party whose heir apparent to the leadership openly supports what is happening? What is really appalling is how the Conservatives are ignoring what is happening just outside Parliament: the racist, homophobic, transphobic and misogynist abuse we have all heard about. When I stay in Ottawa, I am in the downtown, and many people I know have been deeply affected.
Conservative MPs have gone out of their way to encourage this occupation. A Conservative MP did an interview in front of a flag with swastikas on it. They have taken pictures, shaken hands and put thumbs up, and in the House they have gaslighted the country by telling us these are peaceful gatherings. Conservative MPs who have fuelled this occupation rooted in white supremacy, which is targeting citizens and the press and is pursuing the overthrow of our institutions, must be held to account. There must be an inquiry into how we arrived at this place: how this occupation came to pass, who funded it, who fomented it, who failed to act, who passed the buck and what the role of the police was. We cannot ignore this internationally funded, politically organized, far-right attack on our democracy. We cannot allow this to happen again.
It comes down to privilege. This protest is being driven by an agenda, by an ideology and by supporters who believe they are entitled to target our population and our democratic system. The abuse is no accident. The agenda is racist, homophobic and misogynist to begin with.
Freedom is rooted in our democracy. It starts with respect. It is not about the freedom to be racist, homophobic and misogynist. The very idea of freedom has been hijacked and distorted. It has been used by many to support privilege, particularly white privilege. It is the privilege to endanger and harass others and the privilege to impose an alt-right, foreign-funded attack on our democracy.
This cannot be a moment in time when we sit idly by as the far right becomes emboldened. This cannot be a moment when we sit idly by and allow fascism to be normalized and legitimized. This cannot be a moment when we sit idly by and allow for the police and other institutions to belatedly respond and then carry on to crack down on people peacefully defending their rights, including workers on strike, indigenous peoples defending their lands, Black and racialized communities rising up and climate activists fighting for our survival. This cannot be a moment when we sit idly by and allow for the status quo to carry on. This is not the Canada we can be. We can be and we must be a country that practices respect, denounces bigotry, strengthens our democracy and acts on the racial, social, economic and environmental justice we all deserve.
507 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:22:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Conservative Party generally, and the interim leader of the Conservative Party very specifically, have compared the faux trucker occupation over the last three weeks with indigenous protests across Canada, particularly in Manitoba and British Columbia. I am wondering if the member could offer her comments on that analysis.
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:23:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, yes, absolutely. Those of us from Manitoba know well the kinds of politics unfortunately practised by many Conservatives, including the interim leader from Manitoba, and there is no comparison to be made. Once again we are seeing Conservatives gaslight the country, saying that this foreign-funded, far-right occupation in Ottawa is the same as the kinds of non-violent demonstrations we have seen by indigenous peoples defending their rights and their land and standing up for what they believe in. It is not just deeply insulting, but downright wrong to compare these two things.
We must be very clear that the interim leader has been open, both by wearing a MAGA hat and through her statements, that she and her colleagues are fine with coddling white supremacy and actions that very much support it.
137 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:24:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member and many times we may not agree. One thing she talked about is respect. I listened as she sat there and said the party I belong to is misogynist, white supremacist and all of these great names. We are in a place where we are not supposed to gaslight because we know it is happening outside. I listened to the member talk about the party I belong to and degrade each and every one of us. We have the right to a difference in thought. I do not agree with the occupation, but, like her, I do agree with the right to protest.
Is the member going to hold the Prime Minister responsible, or is she going to continue blaming the Conservatives when it is the Liberals who are in government?
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:25:32 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in this parliamentary debate, we are talking about who is at fault. As I clearly indicated, the Liberals very much are. We should never have been in this position. However, let us be clear on who has encouraged this occupation. The Conservative interim leader, the heir apparent and numerous Conservative MPs have legitimized, encouraged and supported this occupation. It is clearly documented in social media through pictures they have shared and in coverage by the mainstream media.
Canadians see through much of this. What we need is principled leadership. We do not need leaders in our Parliament supporting foreign-funded, alt-right movements that seek to overthrow our democracy and target citizens. I hope the member and all of her colleagues change course, condemn that kind of activity and take appropriate action.
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:26:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the act we are discussing cannot be invoked as a preventive measure. It is right there. We already know that.
This week, the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie told the media in Quebec that if protesters were to leave and the blockades were removed by Monday, the NDP might reconsider its decision to support the government. Well, it is over. The protesters have left. They are no longer in front of Parliament.
Does my colleague think that the NDP might decide not to support the government on this?
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:27:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to point out that the people who led and supported this occupation are unfortunately still active.
As I clearly said in my speech, we must be serious about this operation, which was funded and organized by the far right in an attempt to attack our democracy and to intimidate and harass Canadian citizens. This is a problem we are facing and that we must now take seriously.
74 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:28:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am, not surprisingly, both happy and sad to have the chance to speak in the debate on the confirmation of the use of the Emergencies Act to break the border blockades and lift the siege of the capital.
I am happy to speak, because I think that the situation had reached a crisis point, and the use of the Emergencies Act was necessary to counter a real threat to democracy and the rule of law in Canada. However, I am sad that it has come to this. I am sad, because the Liberals let the situation go on for so long that we reached this crisis point.
It is important to consider how we got to this point. There is enough blame to go around when it comes to the widespread failure to understand that the blockades and the siege of downtown Ottawa and the parliamentary precinct are not protests or exercises in free speech. Instead, the self-described freedom fighters who organized this came prepared to use intimidation, harassment and coercion to get the policy changes that they want. That is not how democracy works; it is not how peaceful protests work, and these tactics have nothing to do with the right to free speech.
We have a rich history of protest in this country, and at times, many of us have been participants in those protests. However, the goal of those protests has always been to change minds and thus bring about change in policy by political means. Their goals have always been to convince governments to change course by making it clear that the political price of failing to do so would be too high.
Blockades and occupations are another thing altogether. None of what has been going on outside of Parliament for three weeks is part of any rich tradition of civil disobedience. Those engaging in civil disobedience do so with a clear understanding that they are taking on any harm to themselves. They accept that it is they themselves who will face harm from the arrests and penalties that result from their law-breaking. They accept that harm to themselves in order to make a strong, moral argument. Instead, those involved in the blockades and the siege seek to inflict harm on others until we all give in to their demands.
Legitimate protests never aim to extort change by intimidation or by deliberately causing harm to others. As the judge in the case resulting in an injunction against around-the-clock sounding of high decibel air horns in Ottawa said, he was not aware that honking was an expression of any great ideas.
I am critical of the Liberals for failing to recognize the nature of the threat that these blockades in Windsor and Coutts and the siege of downtown Ottawa represented. It is hard to understand how this could have been missed, when the organizers clearly stated their intention to force change and even to replace the elected government, when they set up base camps outside downtown Ottawa to ferry supplies to the occupiers downtown or when they organized an attack on 911 services in Ottawa to deny emergency services to residents. This is intimidation. This is extortion.
It is hard to understand how it could go on so long when the evidence of harassment and intimidation of residents and local businesses went on right on the steps of Parliament. We ended up with a situation where, according to most reports, over 50% of businesses downtown were forced to close altogether, and more than 85% had to curtail their activities in order to keep their workers safe. It is bitterly ironic for those businesses that the result of the tactics adopted by those who were arguing that we should open up actually resulted in further closures and heavy losses for local businesses and local workers.
It is hard to understand how the fact was missed that blockades at border crossings in Coutts and Windsor were designed to inflict economic damage severe enough to force change. Workers in factories, including those at GM plants, at a time when we are fighting hard to keep the auto industry alive in Canada, lost shifts as the border blockade interrupted the supply chain.
The ultimate irony is that the Coutts and Ambassador Bridge blockades cost thousands of truckers, for whom the organizers falsely claim to speak, hours and even days stuck in the resulting jams. Once removed, those organizers tried to block the bridge in Windsor once again.
While I do hold the government responsible for letting the situation get out of hand, at the same time I reject the idea that somehow the government or vaccine mandates created division and that division explains the blockades and siege. Yes, there are some truckers involved in these disruptions, but never forget that over 90% of truckers are vaccinated. Never forget how they continued to work through the pandemic before vaccinations were available, at considerable risk to themselves and the health of their families, to protect the rest of us and our economy.
They know, like the overwhelming majority of Canadians, that masks, vaccinations and social distancing are what have brought us as close to escaping this pandemic as we have come so far. They know that social solidarity and standing united behind our health workers saved literally thousands of lives and gave a death rate from COVID less than half that of the United States. They know that only continuing to pull together as a society will get us to the other side.
Yes, people are free to reject science and the unequivocal advice of medical experts. They can choose to do so, but freedom means accepting the consequences for the choices we make. It does not mean we have the right to inflict the consequences of our choices on others. Those who reject the mandates should not be surprised to find restrictions on what they can do due to the risk they pose to others and to our ability as a nation to survive the pandemic.
No doubt as the pandemic drags on we all want to see restrictions lifted, but for the vast majority of Canadians, this should happen only when it is safe to do so. Five new deaths from COVID were recorded yesterday in British Columbia, including yet another on Vancouver Island, where we are still continuing to lose an average of more than one person per day to COVID. Those are families that lose a loved one each and every day. As of yesterday, the number in critical care in B.C. dropped below 1,000, a number that is still far too high, although thankfully it is down considerably. However, even with numbers dropping, our hospitals and health care workers are near the breaking point.
It is this tension resulting from the ongoing pandemic that the organizers of the blockades and siege have exploited for their own ends. Members should make no mistake that the organizers are extremists and anti-democratic in their goals. It is their clear intention to use force, intimidation and for some, as we have seen at the Coutts border crossing, violence to achieve their ends.
In downtown Ottawa we have seen the open display of hate symbols, racism and homophobia. We have seen the intimidation of residents demanding they remove their masks. This happened to me personally more than once, but it has been most often directed at those the occupiers perceive to be weak and vulnerable to such pressure: women, racialized Canadians and members of the 2SLGBTQI community.
Before some say that every protest has its bad apples or that it is only an extremist minority among the protesters, let me point out that the organizers never once condemned things like the display of Nazi flags, nor did they condemn intimidating local residents by demanding they remove their masks, and supporters have argued that there were only a few swastikas flying in the Ottawa occupation, although I personally counted six in three blocks in a single day. Let me repeat the obvious question: How many swastikas are okay? The obvious answer is none.
People say Confederate flags are just symbols of rebellion, and those who argue that may want to stop and think for just a moment about making that argument in this current context. Confederate flags are clearly symbols of racism and the violence associated with anti-Black racism. That is why I support my colleague the member for New Westminster—Burnaby's private member's bill to ban the public display of these ugly symbols of hate, which discourage full participation in Canadian society by some of our citizens.
We have seen invasions of businesses who are enforcing mandates to keep their employees and all of us safe, and now, with more than half the businesses in downtown Ottawa forced to close, there are literally thousands out of work because of those closures. More than 1,500 people who work at the Rideau Centre mall alone have been out of work for three weeks now.
We have seen the physical intimidation of journalists and the use of children as shields. There have been open threats of violence against the Prime Minister, cabinet and us as members of Parliament both on the streets and online. Perhaps most relevant to our debate here about the invocation of emergency powers, we have seen repeated statements from the organizers that they would not leave until the mandates are lifted.
This is why New Democrats are supporting using emergency powers to put an end to what are, in fact, organized attacks on democracy. As we have done for the past three weeks now, New Democrats continue to reject the narrative that Canadians are more divided than ever. The evidence is, frankly, just the opposite.
When I stand to vote on this motion to affirm the invocation of the Emergencies Act, I will be standing with health care workers, with first responders, with grocery workers, all front-line workers and yes, the vast majority of truckers, but I will also be standing to pledge vigilance to ensure these necessary but extraordinary powers are used only to remove these serious threats to democracy and never to infringe on our rights to protest and dissent.
Again, let me say I am sad it has come to this, but I am proud to stand firmly against the use of intimidation, hatred and violence to overturn our democracy.
1747 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:38:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke for all the work he has done over many years on human rights. His speech today really highlighted some of the things around human rights.
The hon. member mentioned using children as human shields. Frankly, that is one of the aspects of this protest that has offended me more than almost anything else that has been going on. They are putting children in harm's way, children who sometimes are not able to get vaccinated. One of the reasons for us to get vaccinated is to protect our children, and now we are seeing children being put in situations of danger.
Could the hon. member expand on how that is an affront to the human rights of some of our most vulnerable Canadians?
135 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:39:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, while I do not want to focus extensively on the use of children as shields, I did see it personally as I walked on the streets in Ottawa and I was horrified to see parents putting their kids in danger for some distorted view of what freedom means. It shows that the organizers have little respect for basic rights and freedoms, little respect for what it actually means to be Canadian.
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:40:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure I can actually thank the member for that question, but I will say what is very clear here is that some people, and I am not accusing members in the chamber, but some people who helped organize these demonstrations intended to use force and intimidation to change public policy. That is not what democracy is about. That is not what Canada is about. That is not what I am about here as a member of Parliament.
82 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:40:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member referred to being in favour of peaceful protests, but under these regulations, the Emergencies Act order requires financial institutions to cease dealing with designated persons. Designated persons is defined as anyone associated with a protest.
Keeping in mind that we both support peaceful protests, could the member explain what a designated person means in the act? Is it a protest organizer? Is it a protest attendee? Is it a donor? Is it someone who tweets in support? How far does the act go?
87 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:41:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to go back to the Emergencies Act, which builds in parliamentary oversight to this process and which allows at any time for 20 members of Parliament to request a vote to revoke these provisions. As the previous member asked what about laws that were already in effect, what I think is really true here is that the Emergencies Act gives us the power as a government, as a society to enforce existing laws and regulations to prevent those who would use force, violence and intimidation to get around those laws. If anyone is using their resources to prolong these demonstrations, blockades and occupations, they will fall under the provisions of the Emergencies Act.
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:42:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill.
I rise today with a very heavy heart to speak in support of the invocation of the Emergencies Act by our government and the motion in this House to affirm the government's decision. I want to acknowledge that I am speaking from the traditional unceded lands of the Algonquin people. I want to thank the many truckers in my riding of Scarborough—Rouge Park, and the hundreds of thousands of truckers around the world, who have helped us throughout the pandemic.
Ever since I can remember, I have gone to protests. We have been protesting the rights of Tamils on the island of Sri Lanka from the time I was maybe four or five. After the anti-Tamil pogrom in 1983, I demonstrated for weeks on end at the India consulate in Dublin, Ireland. Later in Canada in the 1980s, I protested apartheid of South Africa. In the 1990s, I protested the cuts to education in Ontario under their then premier Bob Rae. In 1995, I organized a vigil and protest right here on Parliament Hill as Tamils were being displaced in the north and east of the island.
In the 2000s, I extended legal supports to protesters at Queen's Park. I did a number of them throughout the decade. In 2009, I was right here in Ottawa and provided legal support to those who were protesting against the Tamil genocide in Sri Lanka. This has been referred to, in the last several days, as the Tamil protest. It started in early February and ended in May of 2009. This included similar protests on University Avenue in front of the U.S. consulate, and I worked with the then chief of police for the City of Toronto, now the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, to ensure those protests were peaceful.
I can recall my nephew, who was 10 years old at that time, going to many of these protests with my late father-in-law. My partner and I took our four-month-old in frigid temperatures to protest on Dundas Square in the winter of 2009. During this time, I also attended protests in Washington, New York and Geneva. I am therefore an ardent believer in the right to protest as a tool of dissent and political advocacy. I believe in the right to protest, and I also believe that children should be part of protests, but not used as shields in an illegal occupation.
Since January 29, 2022, Canada has been gripped by what started off with protesting, and has turned into illegal blockades and occupiers. Many colleagues across the aisle have talked about their interactions with the illegal blockaders. I have a great deal of respect for many of my colleagues across the aisle. They have spoken about their interactions with some truckers and other protesters, and their ability to walk through the illegal blockades and understand and empathize.
Sadly, I do not have that privilege. Many in this House do not have that privilege. Even though, as parliamentarians, we are supposed to enjoy the same level of privilege, I do not share that privilege.
They have called for the overthrow of a government and, de facto, all of us serving in this House. They brought symbols of hate, like the confederate flag, Nazi symbols and others, to the protest. They have destroyed the pride flag. They have threatened media. They have taken food from a homeless shelter. I ask my colleagues opposite to please forgive me if I do not feel the same level of confidence engaging with these so-called protesters.
I would never cast dispersions over a group based on the acts of a few, but after 23 days, many who may feel strongly about the type of hate and vitriol we see on the streets should distance themselves and condemn them, including the Conservative Party of Canada.
The impacts of these illegal blockades on Ottawa, Coutts, Emerson, Surrey and Windsor are profound. These illegal blockades are different in form and substance to the hundreds of protests we see here in Ottawa annually. That is why, after considerable consultation and engagement, our government invoked the Emergencies Act on February 14, 2022. We did so after the City of Ottawa, Windsor and others invoked emergencies in their municipalities, and after the Province of Ontario did so as well.
Ultimately, Canada is a rule of law country. In declaring a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act, we followed the law and are acting within it. There are clear conditions set out in the Emergencies Act in order for a public order emergency to be declared. Our government believes those conditions have been met.
I want to highlight the preamble of the Emergencies Act, which reads:
AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;
Any and all action our government takes will be subject to the charter, and it is the solemn responsibility of the Attorney General to ensure this. The Emergencies Act can only be invoked in specific serious circumstances that amount to a national emergency.
In order to meet the threshold for a national emergency, three conditions must be met. First, we must be in a situation that either seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and exceeds the capacity of authority of a province to deal with it, or that seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada.
Second, the capacity of the provinces and territories to handle the situation must be considered insufficient or show gaps. Third, we must conclude the situation cannot be handled adequately under any other Canadian law, including provincial and territorial laws.
Our government believes these conditions were met, and we have tabled an explanation of the reasons for issuing this declaration, as required by this act. We also tabled, as required, a report on any consultation with the provinces with respect to the declaration. I would especially like to highlight and thank for their support the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador, as noted in the document of invoking the act to respond to this national emergency.
As members have seen, our government introduced targeted orders under the act. While the act technically applies to all of Canada, we have been very careful to tailor orders to be as focused as possible and only those places affected by blockades and illegal occupations will see any change at all.
We introduced the following six temporary measures to bring the situation under control. One, regulation and prohibition of public assemblies that lead to a breach of peace and go beyond lawful protests. Two, designating and securing places where blockades are to be prohibited. Three, directing persons to render essential services to relieve impacts of blockades on Canada's economy. Four, authorizing direct financial institutions to render essential services to relieve impact of blockades. Five, enabling the RCMP to enforce municipal laws and provincial offences. Finally, imposition of fines or imprisonment for contravention of any order or regulation made under section 19 of the Emergencies Act.
There are a number of safeguards built into this act. As required by the act, the Prime Minister met with the cabinet, as well as premiers, prior to invoking the act. After having declared the act, we tabled the declaration within two days, and Parliament has been able to debate it within seven days. In the coming days, the parliamentary committee will be struck and an inquiry will be called. The declaration lasts for 30 days and can be revoked at any time at the will of Parliament.
The situation is urgent. As interim chief of the Ottawa Police Steve Bell said yesterday that the police would not have been able to undertake the enormous operation currently taking in place in Ottawa without the temporary measures extended to it by the Emergencies Act.
We are invoking the Emergencies Act to end illegal blockades and occupations. We are invoking it to restore the rights of those who cannot safely walk the streets of downtown Ottawa and other places.
1424 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:52:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for talking about his personal experiences throughout his life. First and foremost, we are all human, and we have lived through certain situations. I appreciate the fact that he raised those issues.
My question is quite simple. During 17 days, nothing was done by the government. Even on February 11, the Prime Minister said that laws could be applied to solve this problem. Three days later, he tabled that bill. What happened in those three days to have him table that bill?
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:53:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this gives me an opportunity to respond to this question, which has come up a number of times. I want to specifically direct the hon. member to the Report to the Houses of Parliament: Emergencies Act Consultations. It outlines all of the measures taken by the government in respect to addressing the situation we have seen.
First and foremost, I think that starting on January 31, there were direct conversations with the mayor of Ottawa. There were numerous conversations with the premiers, including Premier Ford in Ontario. There were consultations with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
I can go on. This is an eight-page document that I hope the hon. member can go through to look at the work we did prior to invoking the Emergencies Act.
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
