44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 20, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/20/22 11:34:14 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can agree with one thing the member said: Historians will look back on this pivotal moment in time in this chamber. However, I imagine some who teach political history will reflect on the fact that by some twisted logic, the Conservative Party, which touts itself to be the party of law and order, throughout the entire siege of Ottawa and its aftermath, sided with those who broke the law.
Can the member please shed some light on how the party of law and order, the party of Brian Mulroney and Flora MacDonald, who brought this legislation into the House, is somehow siding and standing shoulder to shoulder with the occupiers, just not physically in the last few days?
121 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:35:20 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when somebody is standing up for freedom for Canadians, they will never be on the wrong side of history in the history books. I encourage the member opposite to stop the divisive rhetoric that I hear constantly day in and day out here and actually show some leadership. He should be encouraging and should try to give Canadians hope, which is what the Conservatives are doing every day in this place and will continue to do.
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:35:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking my colleague for mentioning that we are experiencing a crisis of trust.
I witnessed the WE Charity saga. The first thing I thought was, how could our government be trusted?
We are seeing unreasonable and disproportionate measures right now, and it is going to dawn on people that what has happened in the last few days is not because of the order. I would like to know if my colleague agrees with that. The order could be confirmed by Parliament on Monday, but it could equally well be stopped.
Given what the world thinks of us, does my colleague think that the NDP might change its mind?
116 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:36:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me be clear that invoking this act is an attack the Prime Minister is using on his political opponents. This is not about public safety, and the Prime Minister has changed his story many times. The blockades at the borders were resolved before this act was involved, and the protest in Ottawa is now over.
Why does the government need to use these unprecedented powers? Why does the NDP want to side with the Liberals and be on the wrong side of history when it comes to the vote on Monday night?
95 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:37:35 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not talking about all the people who have been involved, but all movements, as we know, have leaders. I heard members of the official opposition minimize what is currently going on, calling it peaceful and reflective of regular Canadians.
I would ask my colleague if she thinks the beliefs coming from the leaders are peaceful and non-misogynistic and are really reflective of freedom. Here is the first one: “Canada is ill and suffering and it is suffering from the stench of cultural relativism and political Islam.” That was from B.J. Dichter. Pat King said, “Trudeau, someone's gonna make you catch a bullet one day. To the rest of this government, someone's gonna—”
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:16 a.m.
- Watch
I would remind the hon. member not to use names, please.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:24 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry, but it is in a quote.
Pat King said, “Trudeau, someone's gonna—”
21 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:31 a.m.
- Watch
The hon. member can replace the name with the title.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:35 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Pat King said, “[Mr. Prime Minister], someone's gonna make you catch a bullet one day. To the rest of this government, someone's gonna...do you in, you sons of bitches.”
36 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:47 a.m.
- Watch
I know it is in a quote, but I remind the member that it is unparliamentary language.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry, but I feel a little worked up because I do not think these beliefs are reflective of Canadians—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
29 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:39:06 a.m.
- Watch
Unparliamentary language was an issue last evening and we agreed that we would not use it, even in quotes. I recommend that members stop using those words.
I will give the member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex a chance to answer.
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:39:21 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question, but this is just more inflammatory rhetoric from the NDP. Why would the NDP support this? The party was founded on the principle of civil liberties, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association is actually suing the government right now. It is unprecedented.
I did spend time talking with my own constituents, whom I met up here on the first weekend the protest started in Ottawa. I did not see any of these things. What I saw was patriotic, flag-waving Canadians who had more joy than I have ever seen before. People were hugging in the streets. It was like Canada Day times a thousand, bigger than any Canada Day I have ever seen in this country. I will always be proud to represent Canadians and constituents in my riding who are patriotic and who are free to speak and assemble peacefully.
151 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:40:21 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I join the debate today. I feel that we should not have gotten to this place where we are debating whether or not to use the Emergencies Act. I believe so many steps should have been taken before we got to the point where a government can freeze Canadians' bank accounts if they do not believe in its political ideology. It is not with great joy that I stand on my feet today, but it is always an honour to represent the people of Regina—Lewvan. I want to do that because I have had countless phone calls and hundreds of emails on what we are talking about today in the House of Commons.
I have constantly heard from the other side about the threat to democracy in Canada, but over the last three weeks, we have all been in the chamber, day in and day out, doing our jobs. We have been to committee, doing our jobs. Not once have I heard a Liberal member tell us what the threat to democracy is, because we have been here doing our jobs.
Our leader is a member of the Privy Council, and if there were imminent threats, they could have taken her in, briefed her and talked about what those imminent threats were. The only other group that is carrying the same narrative about a threat to democracy is the CBC. I would love to see the proof from my hon. Liberal colleagues about what is and what was the actual threat to democracy.
It seems that everyone on their feet today is trying to litigate the protest outside, which does not exist anymore, or trying to litigate whether the blockades were illegal. They were illegal, but they are over. What we are talking about is a government that never has the ability to look forward. This Monday, we asked the Liberals for a plan to get rid of mandates and restrictions and they voted against that because they did not have a plan to put in place.
When I stand on my feet today, I am not going to litigate the protests, nor whether the blockades were illegal, because they were illegal and they were removed. What I am going to talk about is whether the Emergencies Act, formerly the War Measures Act, is needed going forward. Does the government still need that power? Does the government still need the ability to freeze the bank accounts of people who donated to the “freedom convoy”? Does the government need the ability to freeze the bank accounts of people who have put pro-Donald Trump comments on their Facebook pages? Is that something that we believe as Canadians a government actually needs? Does the NDP believe that this is a power the government needs going forward?
These are the questions that I think everyone in the chamber should ask. The Liberals have invoked the Emergencies Act and used it to get rid of the protesters and the trucks on Wellington. They are not there anymore, so the question is, moving forward as Canadians, do we want to give the current Prime Minister these powers?
I have the order in council right here, and it is one of the reasons I could never support this act. The order in council, in item (c)(vi), says:
other temporary measures authorized under section 19 of the Emergencies Act that are not yet known.
Canadians do not want to give more power to the Prime Minister and his cabinet given not only what is in the act, but what is not even known yet about what they might use this power for. When I go back to Regina—Lewvan for door knocking and to talk to constituents, they are going to ask if I voted for this. I am going to be proud to say that I absolutely did not.
There are so many other measures the government could have taken before we got to this point. It was unnecessary. We saw the illegal blockades at Coutts, Emerson and Surrey removed without this act. Going forward, when there are no protests and no trucks on Wellington, why would we ever approve this power? Not one Liberal has explained that to me. I hope that in questions and answers one of them does try to explain, first of all, why they need these powers going forward, and second of all, what the imminent threat to our democracy is. We are here. We are doing our jobs. Why would this power be needed going forward?
I had the experience, as many of my colleagues did, of staying downtown in a hotel and walking here and back over the last three weeks. My family was in town for the weekend. My wife, kids and I walked around and talked to some people who were from Saskatchewan. We had conversations and we never felt threatened.
The member for Whitby talked in his speech about downtown residents of Ottawa feeling terrorized by horn-honking and big trucks. I know one resident of downtown Ottawa who feels terrorized right now and her name is Tammy. She runs a gelato café.
Her bank account was just frozen because she has a big heart and she cares for people. She donated $250 for the truck convoy and now her bank and business accounts are frozen. That is one citizen of Ottawa who is feeling terrorized by not the protesters, but by their own government right now. That is what we are talking about.
Citizens around this country are now feeling traumatized, stigmatized, divided from their government. What would my colleagues across the way have to say to Tammy? Do they think it is fair? She said in an interview that she has a big heart and cares for people, but her bank account was frozen. Do they think she is a domestic terrorist? Is that the type of people that now we are trying to protect other Canadians from? I would ask my friends on the NDP side to think about some of these statements because they are going to have to answer to their constituents as well.
I am from Saskatchewan, home of the CCF, home of Tommy Douglas. I guarantee if Tommy Douglas were in the chamber today, he would not be voting in favour of the Emergencies Act. He is the founder of the NDP. He built the principles that the party is supposed to stand on. I believe his comment was “using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut”. Do the New Democrats still have those same principles? Do they believe in the Civil Liberties Association of Canada that is suing the government now saying this is a step too far, this is unconstitutional?
In going home to our ridings, I believe my colleague and friend from Lambton—Kent—Middlesex was exactly right. This will be remembered throughout history. This speech is something that people will look back on and decide who was on the right side of this. The trucks are gone. The blockades are gone. Now we have to decide whether or not we want to be on that side.
I know my Liberal colleagues thought I was going to be up in arms in a very passionate speech, but it is something that is coming from my heart and from what people are telling me. The member for Winnipeg North is always on his feet and says a lot in the chamber and he is going to have to make a decision on how he is going to vote. I know some of his constituents are asking how he is going to vote on this because some will not want him to and he is ignoring his community.
I have some really good friends, Derek, Ryan and Mike, who drove here to to see what was going on. It is 30 hours from Saskatchewan. We walked around the other night and talked with people and they did not feel threatened. A couple of them started to tear up and these are grown farm kids when they saw what was going on in our country. They said is this what Canada looks like now? Is this the type of Canada we want to leave for our children? Police in riot gear and horses on the street. I remember the 2006 election campaign the Liberals said Stephen Harper was going to have police on the street. Well, the Liberals are actually fulfilling that prophesy. They brought in many armed riot police to make sure that Canadians were dispersed. There was not a lot of violence.
Why is no one talking about the violence that happened at the Coastal GasLink Pipeline, where 20 people with axes attacked police officers, did tens of millions of dollars worth of damage and there was not a peep from the Liberal side. Why is that so different from what is going on here? They tried to light a car on fire with people in it. I am troubled. What is the difference?
One of the things I want to get on the record is that the Liberals did not do the steps to make sure the protesters left before three weeks. They sent the Minister of Indigenous Services to talk to some of the protesters in 2020. They sent the Minister of Northern Affairs to talk to protesters at the Mohawk blockades. Why did not one of the front-benchers talk to the protesters and listen to what they had to say?
I will represent my people well. I will be voting against the Emergencies Act. There is no emergency. There is no threat to our democracy and it is a shame that the government has not pulled this bill.
1644 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:50:37 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would be very interested in this colleague's personal view on whether he believes it is justifiable in what he calls civil disobedience, which is against the law, by the way, or occupation, whether it is acceptable to make the lives of other people very difficult, either because their jobs may be in jeopardy because their livelihoods depend on products crossing the border or the poor people who live in Ottawa Centre whose lives have been made very difficult over the past three weeks.
In the member's personal opinion, is that justifiable?
96 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:51:29 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am here to represent the people of Regina—Lewvan, Saskatchewan. Their lives have been made miserable for seven years because of Liberal policies.
There are people who have not been able to go to work for years, because of the anti-oil, anti-agriculture policies put in place. To talk down to me and expect that I do not know what people are going through or who have tough times is, quite frankly, disrespectful to me and to the people I represent. I am here because the people of Saskatchewan have had a tough time because of the pathetic policies these Liberals have implemented over the last seven years.
113 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:52:15 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague wondered whether the NDP had lost or changed its convictions, since it took a firm, clear position against the War Measures Act in 1970.
I would say to him that we are critical of people living in echo chambers right now because they only hear what they want to hear.
I feel like that is kind of what is going on with the NDP right now, because they are only focusing on the abusive actions and words of the protesters, and they are forgetting that the debate is about the Emergencies Act. This act of last resort allows for the use of measures that might be unjustifiable under normal circumstances.
Does my colleague not agree that the NDP is endorsing what could become a dangerous precedent?
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:53:02 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a tough but fair question.
I do think the NDP are going to look back on this and have some reservations about giving unbridled power to the Liberal government. My hope is that through conversations and through talking with their constituents over the next couple of days that they will have a bit of a “come to Jesus” moment and realize that they should be on the side of freedom, they should be on the side of protecting Canadians' civil liberties.
If they go back and look at a few speeches from Tommy Douglas or at a column by Erin Weir, my predecessor, in the National Post about why they should not be supporting these measures, maybe a few of them will make sure they do the right thing on Monday and vote against the Emergencies Act.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:53:50 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, a lot of people have throwing around the name, Tommy Douglas. In any other circumstance, I would be happy about that. It is hard to know what Tommy would do at this point. These are very different times. It is also difficult because he has been gone for so long.
Maybe instead, I could quote someone who is very much in the present, a former Conservative leader, maybe a future, again, Conservative leader. He said:
This is not freedom, it’s anarchy on display at the threshold of our democracy....But what we have seen in the occupation of Ottawa and blockages at border crossings is not the right of protest enshrined in our constitution, but illegal activity that represents a national security and economic threat to Canada. Leaving aside the stated manifesto of the organizers to overthrow the government, these protests are weakening our economy and disrupting the freedoms of law-abiding citizens....Illegal activity cannot shape government policy.
I would like the member to talk about what Peter MacKay and Conservative Senator Vern White had to say about what his party is doing.
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:55:01 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is what this question is about. To have one's own opinion about protesters and blockades, that is fine, but what we are talking about today is the Emergencies Act, and whether it should be used going forward and whether we in this House think the government needs that unbridled power—
55 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
