44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 19, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/19/22 4:36:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Calgary Centre for his remarks. By way of a brief rebuttal, I would simply say that the powers used under the Emergencies Act declaration were used most recently as February 16 in Windsor to thwart an attempted resurrection of a blockade. If the member's concern is with investment in this country, I would say the blockades actually threaten the investment climate in this country.
My point is in response to something he raised to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He said we should not be stigmatizing, and I agree with him. However, when far-right elements, including a group called Diagolon, are actively involved with arming themselves and carrying ammunition and body armour to blockade the border at Coutts, and when that results in four arrests for conspiracy to commit murder and ongoing investigations as to whether that group has links to groups raising swastikas and Confederate flags here in Ottawa and the blockade in Ottawa continues, I think we do have an ongoing threat that needs to be resolved.
Can the member comment on that response?
189 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 4:37:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, yes, I am very thankful that the peace officers at the Coutts border crossing in Alberta were able to intercept what was obviously very destructive elements that embedded themselves within the actual protest organization. Once that was discovered, the whole blockade disbanded because they did not want to be associated with that.
This is a problem wherever we are in the world, and it is not right or left. There are going to be elements that break the law no matter what. We have said all along that these blockades were illegal on their own, but when we throw in a mix of violence that is going to potentially injure our peace officers, they have raised the bar, and it has to be addressed very quickly. It does not matter what side of the spectrum it comes from. Any type of illegal activity that leads to violence will be detrimental to all of us.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 4:39:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have heard about the Coutts blockade many times in the House. The member speaking before me asked about the legal implications, the people who have been charged with attempted murder, the violence and the white racism there, but in addition to those, there is an economic impact. Those 18 days the blockade was in place cost $864 million to the Alberta economy.
What do we do when the government in place, the Alberta government, that has the legislation in Bill 1 to actually stop these blockades, does not do it? When the provincial government fails to protect the people and economy of Alberta, does the federal government not have an obligation to step it?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 5:09:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will just point out the logical inconsistencies the member was attempting to make vis-à-vis the Liberals being a government incapable of taking decisions, when we have taken a decision that no government has ever taken in Canadian history.
Let us find some common ground. The Bloc is against the blockades. The Bloc has said the blockades are illegal. We all agree with that. We also agree with listening to the police and cutting off the funding that is supplying those blockades. One of the tools to do so is by tracking that money to things such as credit unions, banks, cryptocurrency sites or online sites.
When no sites or donations are being made from the province of Quebec that would necessitate the application of these emergency measures in the province of Quebec, does the member opposite agree with that aspect of this law applying in his province?
152 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 5:39:49 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 5:56:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question posed by my friend opposite. This certainly does set a precedent in terms of protest. We cannot have blockades of this nature, which literally bring our economy to a halt.
We have gone through the pandemic. We have serious challenges with transport across Canada right now, and we need to make sure that all of our systems are working properly. If the government were to not get involved in a situation where there are such economic losses and job losses, then we would be responsible. I believe we are doing the right thing right now.
101 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 7:10:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I respect the member opposite, but I am going to take strong disagreement with one point that she and her party have made repeatedly in today's debate, which is that there is no crisis.
I think we are in agreement that the blockades still exist outside the chamber, so in Ottawa there clearly is a problem. We know that on February 14, the declaration was put into force. On February 16, we know that in Windsor, there was an attempted resurrection of the blockade, which was thwarted successfully, which was great, but reports are showing that even today the Surrey border is again being closed on account of blockades. Clearly, the protest continues and the problem has not been resolved.
Does the member opposite agree that indeed these tools are required in order to address what is clearly a national problem that must be regulated in order to ensure that the economic security, territorial integrity and the sovereignty of our borders are not compromised by unlawful and illegal blockades?
172 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 7:26:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let us talk about hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is the Prime Minister's statements in 2020 compared with his statements now. They are very similar types of situations. Blockades were happening that were going on for weeks. They were across the country and were blocking critical infrastructure. These are all the arguments we are hearing today for why this act is required. The Prime Minister, at that time, said that we should “resolve this through dialogue and constructive outcomes”.
We offered an opportunity to the government. We could have had a constructive outcome by ending the federal mandates and restrictions in order to make sure that the many other Canadians who feel the same concerns but are not part of any kind of illegal protest could see the end of them as well. That would have been the opportunity to have a constructive outcome. This is hypocrisy. The Prime Minister is full of it.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 8:33:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, when indigenous people blocked the railways in 2020, my colleagues opposite demanded strong action from the government to put an end to the blockades, which they were quick to call illegal.
However, now they think it is a good idea to take selfies with the protesters who are occupying Parliament Hill and who have been paralyzing the nation's capital for three weeks.
The member has one position when the protesters are indigenous and another when they are supported by white supremacist groups. Can he explain that discrepancy?
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:35:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened with care to my hon. colleague. She gave a very interesting description of the rural-urban divide in this country. I am not sure that it accurately reflects the full diversity of opinion in this country. I agree with her that there have been many jobs lost in the pandemic, due to the virus itself and some of the policy responses. One of the ironies is that the impact of the blockades in Ottawa caused other people to lose their jobs, small businesses to not be able to open and custodians to not be able to work. People working in sandwich shops and restaurants lost income.
How would the member feel if one of the communities in her riding was blockaded by, say, 500 trucks, so that all of the businesses in one of the towns she represents could not earn an income for three weeks, or even longer? Would that be okay with her residents?
160 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 9:47:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is the problem with the Liberal Party: Every day the story changes. Every day the reason it needs these powers changes. We know from legal experts that it does not need these powers to stop blockades. The powers exist. No government, since Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the Prime Minister, has required this. We have had 9/11, the Oka crisis and the G20 in Toronto. Never has a Prime Minister gone this far to punish political opponents.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 10:50:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her remarks. She made a number of very important points.
The first is that there are other legal tools in place. The government does not need to bring in the Emergencies Act every time there is a need for law enforcement action. The Emergencies Act has not been used since 1988. Obviously this country has faced blockades, standoffs and occupations as well as very violent situations and terrorist attacks in the intervening years, yet this is the first time the Emergencies Act has been used.
The member also correctly talked about how the Prime Minister could have sought to defuse the situation. I note the dramatic difference in the rhetoric being used today, the demonization of those with different points of view, from what the Prime Minister said two years ago about another set of blockades, when he said that it was important to talk to people, to listen and to try to come to an understanding.
It looks like the Prime Minister is using a hammer on those who have a political perspective that is different from his own, a hammer that is uniquely reserved for those with those kinds of perspectives. I wonder if the member could comment on that.
209 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:26:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have just proven that we can actually have conversations, because I just heard a question from the member without being called any names. I thank that member.
The fact of what he is referring to, when we are looking at this, is that there is nobody here saying that we approve of the blockades. It is just being said we have. When I say there are regular people out there, I have never said that everybody is regular. I am saying the majority of people out there protesting, or that were out there protesting before these new measures came in, were just absolutely normal people.
There are always going to be those people. No matter what kind of protest, there are always going to be those individuals. That is something I am very concerned with.
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:57:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have listened quite extensively today to the Conservatives and their reactions to the blockades and the protesters, and I note the amount of support they continue to provide that group. There is a conflicting message. On one hand, they say that they are against the blockades and want people to go home, and on the other hand, they are worshipping their actions.
We have been consistent. The blockades have cost our communities a great deal. They shut down downtown Ottawa. Some blockades were for economic purposes and caused job losses at our borders in Manitoba, Alberta and Ontario. The need is there, and a good example with this enactment is the issue of children. Children were actually used as part of the blockade.
I wonder if the member can provide his thoughts about using children in illegal blockades. Does he support that too?
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:58:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, frankly, even from this member I expect better. My position has been clear: yes to peaceful protests, yes to those calling for an end to mandates and no to illegal blockading of critical infrastructure. I would say this consistently across the board, regardless of who is doing the blockading. I would also say no to the arbitrary abuse of power by the government to target people who had only so much as donated to the convoy movement long before any of the blockades started. It should be a fairly simple principle, and it is one that members of the Liberals and the NDP used to understand. We cannot justify any abuse of power by government simply because we disagree with the actions of some protesters.
127 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/19/22 11:59:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have been clear that I do not agree with the emergency measures being used in the first place. I think law enforcement already had the tools they needed and that has been clear. Certainly, it should be all the more evident now, even to those who were maybe on the fence before, that the border blockades had either already ended or were well on their way to ending at the time the emergency measures were brought in. It would not make sense to continue these emergency measures at any point after the protests and blockades ended. I do want to be clear, though, that I do not think there was any justification for bringing in these measures in the first place or at any time.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
