44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 20, 2022 07:00AM
- Feb/20/22 7:13:03 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, to make it abundantly clear, for the second time, I retract that statement.
Blockades are already in violation of the Criminal Code, provincial highway acts and any number of municipal bylaws and court injunctions. This was and still remains the purview of the police. They had all the tools necessary.
The legal authority for the government to invoke this act is currently being challenged by both the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Constitution Foundation. They argue that the high legal threshold has not been met. They acknowledge that, in the language used by the government, they see no civil liberty violation because the act is still subject to the charter.
The talking points the Liberals extensively use argue that just because a process is supposed to obey the charter, it means that it will. By that logic, the mere fact that the charter exists should mean there will never be charter violations. This is simply not true. The Prime Minister now has carte blanche to do what he wants to, not only to the people who participated in the blockades and the convoy, but also to anyone merely suspected of being involved in sharing supplies. This is a dangerous precedent.
The Prime Minister is normalizing the use of emergency powers. The most disturbing aspect of the act is the broad sweeping banking measures. Banks now have the authority to freeze bank accounts without court order. The Prime Minister now has the broad discretion to seriously mess with the finances of anyone ever suspected of being involved in the protests anywhere in Canada.
Let me conclude with the following: There was no emergency that endangered the lives of Canadians or threatened the sovereignty of Canada. This was political overreach. This was a political emergency, not a national one. The Prime Minister's unjustified invocation of the act is deeply problematic and will have lasting consequences. The public's trust in our democratic and financial institutions has been seriously diminished. Invoking the act proves that the Prime Minister's absolute, unreserved incompetence made such an extreme measure necessary.
350 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 7:31:30 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am also very concerned about our democracy. Three million Canadians have had their charter right to freely enter and leave the country violated by the government and mandates. They are mandates that the government is continuing to add to, at a time when the World Health Organization and medical experts are saying that these kinds of restrictions are not working, now that omicron is everywhere.
On top of that, there are the digital privacy violations that the government has committed. On top of that, the government is freezing bank accounts. I have emails from people in my riding who are claiming that they had their accounts frozen for buying a “freedom convoy” t-shirt.
In part (f) in the Gazette, it says that the Prime Minister can take “other temporary measures authorized that are not yet known.” I think that basically means that if the Emergencies Act is put in place, he can do whatever he wants and there is no coming back from it.
Will my NDP colleague vote against this legislation, recognizing that charter rights continue to be violated?
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:06:22 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I took special care in my speech to emphasize the importance of the charter. As I said at the outset, the Emergencies Act is subject to it. It is time limited for a period of 30 days. It is geographically focused. If police need those powers, then those extra powers are available, but if they do not need them, they do not need to use them. Therefore, I do not know where the concern of the Bloc and Conservative members comes from when they say there is a threat to freedom and that the government has engaged in overreach here. We heard from the police. They needed the extra powers in order to push back against what was a clear threat to our democracy, and it looks like in the past few days there was success in that regard because of the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
149 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:18:34 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the story that was just told by the Liberal member in trying to perpetuate the myths the Liberals are putting forward, the myths that there is no charter infringement, there is nothing going on here and people are not losing their freedoms.
The government said it needed this act. Coutts got rid of the blockades without using the Emergencies Act. Surrey got rid of the blockades. Windsor got rid of the blockades. If the member does not think that individual Canadians are losing their freedoms, does he believe that the freezing of 73 bank accounts by the government is not a loss of freedom in Canadians' eyes?
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 3:48:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have two questions. First of all, would the member acknowledge that the Emergencies Act brought in place by a Conservative government is subject to the charter? The charter still reigns supreme. Would she acknowledge that?
Second, how does she feel about the fact that the Conservative Party is now on the opposite side of this issue, not just with respect to where the government sits but also the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Ottawa police chief and the Conservative Premier of Ontario? All of these three have supported the government putting in place the Emergencies Act. How does she feel about those two things?
109 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 4:16:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I believe the hon. member raised an incredibly important point of law around the protection of our rights and freedoms under our charter. It is necessary for him to clearly answer this point in order for us to fully understand the scale and scope of powers granted under the provisions of the proclamation.
I know the hon. member to be a learned lawyer who would have some knowledge of this incredibly important point of law as the former attorney general of Ontario. Will he please confirm and clearly state whether the rights afforded by the charter remain whole and intact; or is the government, through its declaration, attempting to surreptitiously rescue any potential charter breaches, violations and abuses of government authority through section 1 of the charter and thereby being compliant, as he has so far stated? The public and this House deserve to know.
147 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 4:17:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is right. He and I had the opportunity to work on very important charter-related issues when we were banning the practice of carding in the province of Ontario. The member was a city councillor then, and he and I worked together on that particular aspect.
The essence of the Emergencies Act is to ensure that charter rights are protected. That is very much the intention and motivation behind it. It states so within the legislation itself. We also have to remember that the charter rights come with reasonable limits. There are reasonable limits that allow for charter rights. For example, as long as a protest is a peaceful and lawful expression of ideas, that is within the charter rights, but if it becomes not peaceful or becomes unlawful, then there is recourse available to ensure that the protest or, in this instance, an occupation almost four weeks long, a total siege, can be put to an end.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 7:52:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the problems I had with the member's speech is that he seemed to assume that the implications we are dealing with in respect to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its relationship to the Emergencies Act have somehow already been tested.
I would encourage the hon. member to look at the Debates from April 1988, when MP Blackburn, a former NDP member from Brant, stated that Japanese Canadians who had been interned under the War Measures Act were very concerned that the Emergencies Act would not actually protect charter rights. To this day, there has been no reference to the Supreme Court on the application of the Emergencies Act.
To have it on record, is the member okay with that?
Second, I would hope that the member agrees that—
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 10:49:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will pick up on what the member just stated. At this time we are talking about the Emergencies Act, but think of how much better it would have been to be talking about the heroes of the pandemic. Here we are pushing the three-year mark, and at the end of the day, so much good has taken place.
Moving to his speech, there are a couple of points I would like to highlight. One is the importance and supremacy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We have heard the word “freedom” a lot during this debate, and the Emergencies Act does not override any aspect of the charter. Second, as the member made reference to, at any point in time there are four political entities in the House that have more than 20 members. All it takes is 20 members to require a vote on the revocation of the act at any point in time.
If the member could pick up on those points, I would appreciate it.
175 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:24:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we were keeping a close eye on the situation.
After three weeks, during which many protests took place on Parliament Hill, it was time for the government to intervene. We gave all police forces the tools they needed to put an end to this convoy once and for all.
I am pleased that my colleague is saying that the charter provisions will be respected and that the act will be used with great restraint. It will be time limited and target the geographic areas where it is needed.
I think that people are tired of these protests, and we want to provide law enforcement with all of the tools and powers needed to put an end to these protests.
121 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:26:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will say it again so that all Canadians can hear me. The charter provisions will be respected and the act will be used with great restraint. Its use will be time limited and will target the geographic areas—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès): Order. Resuming debate.
The hon. member for Langley—Aldergrove.
61 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/20/22 11:38:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there were two questions. The first was about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Indeed, the Emergencies Act says that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights must still apply, but it is not good enough just to say that. The regulations coming out of the order in council actually have to honour that, and I am submitting that did not happen.
69 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
