SoVote

Feb/21/22 3:12:38 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Huron—Bruce has six minutes remaining in his speech.

14 words

Feb/21/22 3:12:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when I left off I was talking about 2010 and the G20. No situation is the same and we all know that, but if we go back to that time, the protest lasted over a week. There were 1,100 people arrested and there was a lot of destruction. Those of us who are old enough can remember that. In my point before, I was not knocking the former chief of police, who is now the Minister of Emergency Preparedness. I was just stating the fact that he was the chief. When the member for Oxford and I were on the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, he appeared there and explained all the intricacies of the operation and all the dealings they had. My point was that he does not say now that they should have used it. He never said once that in reflection he should have used it. That time, using those images and what was going on, would be a lot closer to the test than what we are dealing with here. I think that is what the member for Oxford was saying as well. There was an issue here in Ottawa about a year and a half ago on Elgin Street right in front of the police station. Again, I am not saying every situation is the same. I am not saying that. Each one is different and has different levels of risk, but it is an example of where the lower part of Elgin Street was shut down by over 100 protesters who were very inspired by what they were protesting. It was a multi-day shutdown of Elgin. At no time did the mayor of Ottawa or the police chief go to the government and say that they needed to bring this act in to shut those people down. Whether people think it is right or wrong, they went in at three in the morning on a Saturday and dealt with the blockade. There have been protests and blockades around this country all the time since this act was enacted in the eighties, and it has never been used. We heard all sorts of examples of this. That is why I think it is so important for the City of Ottawa to do an inquiry. It has 1,500 uniformed men and women and over 600 civilians employed within the police service. They are good people. At the leadership level, at the city level, something went wrong. They knew for weeks the truckers were coming here. They knew for weeks that trucks were coming. I had calls from people saying there was going to be 10,000 trucks here and asking what the city was going to do. The leadership would have had way more intel than I obviously would have had. Again, I am not criticizing the city or the mayor, I am just asking what they did. We do not know. That is why they need to have an inquiry. The committee is fine, but there also needs to be something a little more in-depth than that, and possibly an inquiry at the federal level as well to figure out why this was done and where the breakdown happened. We heard about the Ambassador Bridge at length, and it was cleared. The Blue Water Bridge was cleared. It was a multi-jurisdictional unit that worked at it with the Windsor Police Service, the OPP and the RCMP. The OPP, the RCMP, the police services in the cities and the regional police, like Peel, Durham and York, work together all the time. It is not some bureaucratic nightmare like some of the Liberal members of Parliament talk about. They work together all the time. The other thing I would like to talk about, and it was brought up in question period and many other times, has to do with the charter, specifically the seizure and freezing of bank accounts and whether that happened or not. We have to be honest, the Minister of Finance has been very unclear. Even in question period today, Liberals used very smart words. They say things like “the RCMP never”, but if we look at the act, the power is given to the banks. These ministers are picking their words very carefully. That is where I think they really crossed the line with Canadians. It is scary to think someone might be getting their bank account frozen and may be targeted. This is an overreach. When it is all over and done with, there could be some lawsuits and payouts because there was an overreach. If we look at the G20, there was over $15 million paid out. The other thing I will say is that there has been a tremendous focus on this issue. Ukraine and Russia have been a tremendous focus, but the biggest thing the Liberals do not want to focus on are the issues with the economy, the issues around people's pay cheques, the inflation around how much it costs to live. Every time we fill our cars, it is $1.55 or $1.60 a litre. These are things the Liberals are desperate not to talk about. They will talk about everything else but that. The sooner we can, let us get beyond this, lift the mandates, unite this country and get back to being one of the best. I look forward to that and I am sure most members of Parliament look forward to that as well.

924 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/21/22 3:18:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the convoy, the organizers were very clear. They said it was about overthrowing the government by staying in Ottawa until all the mandates had been lifted. That was the organizational group and the types of things they were telling Canadians. I understand that there are possibly dozens of Conservative members of Parliament who have donated to this convoy cause. I am wondering if the member would agree that donating to those sorts of stated objectives might be somewhat of a conflict. Is that maybe why the Conservatives do not want to vote for the Emergencies Act? Would it be self-serving? Are these not questions that need to be answered and maybe should be a part of the inquiry and what happens afterwards?

129 words

All Topics

Mr. Ben Lobb

Feb/21/22 3:19:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, because Adam Vaughan tweets it, it does not make it true. If the member wants to go outside that door and read those names off, I am sure there will be many lawyers calling him this week. I guarantee that. The other thing I will say to that member, who I have known a long time, is that, if he knew, what did he do four weeks ago? Nothing. What did the Minister of Public Safety do? Nothing. What did the Minister of Justice do? Nothing. What did the mayor of Ottawa do? Nothing. They welcomed them in on a red carpet, so we do not need any of your lectures.

113 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/21/22 3:20:34 p.m.
Watch

We are getting into debate again and I want to make sure that members run everything through the Chair and not necessarily going straight to another member. The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

35 words

Ms. Elizabeth May

Feb/21/22 3:20:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member for Huron—Bruce does not want to take you outside behind the wood shed. It had that feeling to it. I am sure we want to make sure we address our comments through the Chair and not at the Chair.

49 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/21/22 3:20:57 p.m.
Watch

We are getting really late in the day and I know we just finished question period, so there is still a lot of energy floating around. The hon. member for Montcalm.

31 words

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Feb/21/22 3:21:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Minister of Emergency Preparedness said that he wanted to restore the rule of law. However, following the rule of law involves meeting the criteria required to invoke the Emergencies Act. The government failed to do that, but it still talking about restoring the rule of law. Does my Conservative colleague not think that the government is basically just living by the old adage of “do as I say, not as I do”?

80 words

All Topics

Mr. Ben Lobb

Feb/21/22 3:21:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is what the Prime Minister's mantra has been the whole time since he has been in. What I would ask is what this act is trying to do that the police cannot already do. The police are doing it. There are at least ten thousand police officers in this country and they are working every day to keep our streets as safe as they can. What is the act doing? It really does not do anything except put fear into Canadians.

85 words

All Topics

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

Feb/21/22 3:22:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we know that prominent Republicans in the U.S. have voiced their support for this illegal occupation, including Donald Trump. Ottawa Police Service noted concerns over the significant amount of foreign funding supporting the convoy. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton criticized GoFundMe's decision to block the remaining funding, saying that they “failed to deliver Texans’ money”. This seems like international interference. Is my colleague is as concerned as I am about the foreign funding that has funded and fuelled this illegal occupation, which literally brought—

92 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/21/22 3:23:10 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Huron—Bruce.

7 words

Mr. Ben Lobb

Feb/21/22 3:23:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have not seen the list, so I would not know, but how about the Tides Foundation and all of the different groups that have been operating for years on foreign dollars? Members of Parliament have never said a word. If there are foreign dollars, I do not think any of them were allocated, but the point is that this practice needs to be put to an end anyway. If people want to protest, they should do it with Canadian dollars and do it legally and peacefully. The bottom line here is that it is about federal mandates that do not make any sense and do not keep Canadians safe. An unvaccinated truck driver driving down the I-95 or the I-75 poses no risk to society. That is the bottom line.

135 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, BQ)

Feb/21/22 3:24:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Jonquière. I want to begin by saying that I did not walk down the street in front of Parliament waving a Canadian flag. I did not block the street by parking my car in the middle of it. I have never agreed with the people who decided to occupy the city. However, even though I did not agree with them and I felt it was important to follow the public health guidelines, I still think that invoking the Emergencies Act is an extreme move for this government to take. I am sad today. I am sad because we are in a situation of extreme polarization. We are wondering how we got to this point. We might say that the COVID-19 pandemic played a role. We might also be wondering whether the government did anything to try to reduce this polarization. I do not think it did. It is unfortunate, because the government let a bad situation drag on without addressing it. As the saying goes, the longer we wait, the worse things will get. The government did nothing to address the situation when the protesters set up across the street. Instead of trying to ease tensions and find ways to de-escalate the situation, it decided to add fuel to the fire. I think it did this because it was politically advantageous. These people across the street were there to express their frustration. They were there to say that they are tired of the health measures. We understand. I too am tired of the health measures, but I also recognize that we need to live with and continue following these measures until they can all be lifted. The government had a different view, however. It chose to villainize the protesters, as though it were us against them. It wanted to keep adding fuel to the fire because it was politically advantageous. We saw how that played out. Instead of showing empathy, the government chose to insult these people by doing absolutely nothing and not even trying to put an end to what was happening. This worked in the beginning, because the leader of the Conservatives ended up leaving. The Conservatives were caught up with their own issues, having had their contradictions exposed. No one could really figure out if they were for or against the health measures. No one could tell whether they were for or against the convoy of protesters. Some were opposed, while others supported it. It was a tough time for the Conservatives as political foes. What did the government end up doing? More nothing. It washed its hands of the whole thing and allowed the situation to deteriorate, knowing it would throw the Conservatives into turmoil. The sad thing is that the government's role is not to just stand by and be partisan. Contrary to what we have seen, it should not be partisan at all. This government adopted a partisan approach instead of dealing with a situation and improving social cohesion so we can all get along better and more forward as a society. That is the problem. Then the government skipped a few steps. After washing its hands of the whole thing, it suddenly found itself in the spotlight. Everyone was wondering how it was possible that people could settle in for weeks with no response from the other side and why the government was just hurling insults at these people without really trying to resolve the impasse. That is what we saw. It seemed to me that, by choosing to play with fire, the government was running the risk of getting burned. Its lack of leadership was obvious. Then the pyromaniac decided to pass itself off as a firefighter. It decided to pretend it was taking action and looking for a way to end the situation. It decided to invoke the Emergencies Act. The Premier of Quebec did not want it. The National Assembly unanimously voted against it. Seven out of 10 provinces said they did not want it, and that is kind of a big deal. When all those stakeholders are telling the federal government it is going too far, it seems to me the government should be able to read the room, listen to people and find some other way to address the issues. We proposed a solution to the government. We asked it not to apply the act in Quebec or to apply it only in specific areas. The government was not interested because it wanted to play politics with the Emergencies Act. It was so urgent that the government sat on its hands for weeks and did not try to resolve the situation. Quebec had protests too. They were handled, and the situation went back to normal. A bridge was blocked, but then it was unblocked without the use of emergency measures. It seems as though Ottawa simply lacked the will. Many critics spoke of a “health dictatorship”. I obviously disagree, but, by invoking the Emergencies Act, the Liberals kind of gave them a leg to stand on. The member for Louis-Hébert recently went so far as to say that he was uncomfortable with his government's decisions and positions because it was politicizing the pandemic. Earlier today, we learned that member is not alone. Other members within the Liberal ranks feel the same way. As my colleague from Mirabel noted, the government knows it is in trouble. Members of its own caucus are challenging its actions. MPs in the House are challenging its actions. To us, it looks like things are not going well for either the Liberals or the Conservatives. The NDP is on the fence; nobody knows yet. It has been very hard to understand that party's position lately. The government said it was prepared to use strong-arm tactics to ensure success. Maybe it went too far, but it will never admit that. Maybe there are people on the inside who felt that way. The government decided to make this a confidence vote. Maybe it thinks people will be afraid of triggering an election, so they will toe the line and it can say it was right all along. My colleague from Mirabel shared a very interesting analysis. He said the government had decided to change this from a vote of conscience, which would have allowed people to do their own analysis of the situation and vote in accordance with their real, sincere thoughts and feelings about it, to a confidence vote. That is an excellent explanation of what happened every step of the way. Every time the government had an opportunity to do the right thing and make the right decisions, it opted to politicize things instead. I really do not get it. The only thing the government managed to do since the start of the protest that became an occupation was haul out the nuclear option, the Emergencies Act, a law that has not been used since 1988, the year I was born. We got through all kinds of crisis situations, but not this one. This one was impossible. The government could not handle it. A few hundred people parked in front of Parliament, and the situation was out of control. The government could not deal with it. That surprises me. I am not saying extremist elements were not present. I am not saying it was not dangerous. What I am saying is that the government let things go. The government did nothing at all. That is shameful. It tried to persuade us by forcing our hand, but the truth is it was not very persuasive. Had the government managed to persuade us, to prove that this act was indeed necessary, then why are we still debating it when it has been in effect for seven days already? Even this morning, it was not clear whether the government would be able to get a majority to adopt the motion. It has been a tough road. We can see that the government is not in control of the situation, even after dropping the nuclear option that is the Emergencies Act. I want to extend an invitation to all members of the House. When it comes time to vote later, rather than voting under threat, rather than voting with a gun to our heads—because the government is always trying to push the envelope and polarize and politicize the situation—I invite them to vote according to their conscience and to ask themselves whether it was worth it. Is invoking the Emergencies Act absolutely necessary? We do not think so.

1449 words

All Topics

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Feb/21/22 3:34:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member and his party need to pick a lane. On the one hand, he is saying we should have stepped in sooner, that we should have been proactive, that we should have gone in without any invitation from the provinces to deal with this. On the other hand, he says that Quebec does not need the federal government. Did we step in without Quebec's request to help out in long-term care homes? No, we did not. We waited until Quebec asked us. Would the hon. member not believe that is actually the way we would proceed in this circumstance, that if Quebec asked us to help with the Emergencies Act, he would recognize that and welcome it?

125 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval

Feb/21/22 3:35:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am a bit disappointed in the question from my colleague. I have the impression that this debate on the Emergencies Act, which is a serious, important piece of legislation with far-reaching consequences when it is invoked, is being used as an opportunity to do some Quebec bashing. That is unacceptable. I will not answer his question because, personally, I think it is below the belt.

69 words

All Topics

Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC)

Feb/21/22 3:35:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this crisis started on January 7. The government knew about it for six weeks, but all of a sudden, it was an emergency. Is the hon. member convinced that the government is not doing this for any other reason than a power grab?

45 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval

Feb/21/22 3:36:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, to answer my colleague's question, for some reason, the government sat on its hands throughout the entire crisis. It did not do a single thing. It did not lift a finger. Instead, the Prime Minister insulted the protesters and hid in his basement. At some point, he woke up. Suddenly it became urgent to bring in the Emergencies Act to resolve the situation. It seems like he tried to save face instead of truly trying to resolve the situation.

82 words

All Topics

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

Feb/21/22 3:37:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He raised some important points. However, does he not recognize that despite the fact that the streets of Ottawa are calmer today, some real threats remain? There are two places near the capital where truckers are waiting. There are also truckers who have been stopped with a convoy at the Pacific Highway border crossing in British Columbia. This is not over. Does my colleague not believe that being able to freeze bank accounts that are funding these illegal occupations is a good thing for preventing money from Donald Trump supporters and the United States from flowing in and being used to organize these sieges and protests?

115 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval

Feb/21/22 3:37:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my response to the member is that when we look at Wellington Street and elsewhere around the country at this time, we can see that all is quiet. Do we still need the police to continue their work? Yes, certainly. Do we need to continue to be vigilant with respect to foreign influence? Yes, certainly. However, personally, I do not feel particularly threatened at this time, and I am not convinced that ordinary folks, who are at home right now, are feeling particularly threatened.

86 words

All Topics

Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ)

Feb/21/22 3:38:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Emergencies Act was a mistake from the get-go, and the government knows it. Today, now that the dust has settled in Ottawa, it is even more of a mistake. Despite all that, the Prime Minister has decided to turn tonight's motion into a vote of confidence. That makes no sense. Why decide to make it a vote of confidence? Is it to silence his own caucus, because some of its members are asking themselves serious questions, or is it to muzzle the NDP?

88 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 36