Fallout from the Emergencies Act
Plus the Russia-Ukraine crisis, data shows Canadians struggling to keep up with rising cost-of-living, and more
Fallout from the Emergencies Act
I was against the invocation of the Emergencies Act to quell the protests against the federal government’s policies around the country. Parliament voted to extend its use on February 21, but Prime Minister Trudeau revoked it just two days later. The Act calls for the creation of a committee to review the government’s actions in taking such a drastic step and I spoke on the issue in Parliament this week. The text of my speech on the subject is pasted below. It is technical and I address broad misconceptions by backbench Liberal MPs on what this parliamentary review committee must actually do in its work.
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to follow the whip of one's own party when joining debate on this issue. I do not want to re-thread the same ground that he has already covered. I have already basically chopped off half of what I wanted to cover, but I want to specifically focus now on the actual parliamentary review committee.
I have heard all types of things being debated in this House on what will actually be done by this committee. I want to go back to what the law says and what the motion actually says, because I want my constituents back home, the residents of my riding, to understand exactly what it is that we are debating.
The House has already weighed in on the subject, on the wisdom of using the Emergencies Act. We had a vote on it and we are on the record. The Bloc and the Conservative Party are on the record, and so are the Liberals, the Greens and the New Democrats, so our parties have already kind of determined for ourselves, and each individual MP has, whether it was wise to use it or not. The act is very specific. Part 6 of the act is the parliamentary supervision section of the Emergencies Act. It says the following in subsection 62(1):
The exercise of powers and the performance of duties and functions pursuant to a declaration of emergency shall be reviewed by a committee of both Houses of Parliament designated or established for that purpose.
I have heard members in this chamber say that it would be a discussion about the protest, the blockades at the border, how it happened, the use of racist language and the grievances of the protesters, but what we are talking about here is not about keeping citizens accountable: We are talking about keeping government accountable.
The Liberal government has a record of not being willing to be kept accountable by Parliament, by citizens or by anybody. It has repeatedly done this before. In the past six and a half years I have been here, there have been motions pushed forward by government House leaders to try to restrict the ability of members to do their work both in the House and in committees, and beyond. I remember a sitting on a Saturday. We had to sit on Easter Saturday to prevent the government from obtaining almost absolute powers to tax and spend.
This is the same government. It tried to force through Standing Order changes as well. These are the same people who are now trying to jury-rig or jerry-rig this committee in order to have the outcome they want, and it is a predetermined outcome, I believe.
I also want to draw the attention of my constituents back home to the fact that this committee's meetings will be held in private. The law requires it under subsection 62(4):
Every meeting of the Parliamentary Review Committee held to consider an order or regulation referred to it pursuant to subsection 61(2) shall be held in private.
That is the most interesting part of this committee's work. It will be to review all of the internal documentation. I truly hope it will include the opinion of the Department of Justice of Canada on whether the threshold was met in enacting the Emergencies Act for its usage.
Every single one of those meetings will be held in private. Furthermore, even the motion reiterates that an oath of secrecy will be required of every single member of the committee, all the members who are elected or Senate members, and every single staff member or witness who will be participating in the dissemination of this information at the committee. It would be incredibly difficult thereafter to produce a report on the government's conduct—not the citizens' conduct, but the government's conduct—in calling for this Emergencies Act.
I also want to draw to the attention of my constituents and the House that it is this motion, motion No. 9, that specifies February 14 and February 23. Those are the actions that will be reviewed by the committee members.
Many members have heard the issues that we on the Conservative side have with the way the chairmanship of this committee will be structured. I want to draw the attention of people to the fact that the co-chairs of this committee will be voting chairs. They will be able to move motions at committee. I have been at my share of parliamentary committees, including a joint committee with the Senate. I have never seen a meeting function well when a chair is able to move motions and is able to vote. In this Parliament, I was briefly able to chair the public accounts committee, which I think is considered by all accounts to be one of the most neutral committees in this Parliament. As chair of that committee, I tried to bring absolute neutrality to the task in ensuring that we left our partisanship at the door. Both sides, both opposition members and government caucus members, had one goal in mind, which was the proper administration of government and the proper administration of funds. While we had maybe differing interests, the end goal was exactly the same, which was to ensure that taxpayers' money was properly stewarded. It would have been totally impossible to function properly had I, as chair then, been able to move motions myself and to vote on matters. It strikes me as odd that this is something that would be done in this particular situation.
Members have cast aspersions on whether a member of the Conservative Party or a member of the Liberal Party should be chair or not be chair. I think the members who are elected to be chairs of these committees will leave their partisanship at the door. I truly hope that, especially on something as important as this. There was a Bloc member who mentioned the fact that future generations and parliamentarians will look back to this committee and this particular instance and will determine whether this was a wise use of the Emergencies Act and whether the threshold had been met. One would hope that whatever report comes out of this will set the standard for when the government can and cannot, or should or should not, use the Emergencies Act.
I want to draw the attention again of constituents and members of the House to the inquiry section of the Emergencies Act. A lot of what members have been talking about so far is actually covered by the inquiry that must, under section 63 of the act, be called by the government 60 days after an emergency ends. That is the situation where we will see every act, every decision and every protest and blockade that happened in this country in the lead-up to the government's claiming it needed to use the Emergencies Act. The inquiry is the situation where we will also be able to judge the wisdom of what various citizens were doing all across our country, and I am sure there will be criminal court proceedings that will be partially completed by then, or well under way by then, that will be used by the inquiry judiciously in the determination of fault where there may be fault and in finding whether the government wisely used its power and whether the threshold had been met.
Again, that is for the inquiry. What we are talking about with the parliamentary review committee here is judging whether the government was wise to do it.
These are the things I felt needed to be said: This would not be a balanced committee. This would not be a committee that is going to ensure accountability. I have sat at those House leader meetings. I heard the member for Vancouver Granville say they were productive discussions. They were not productive. They were not productive in any way. If they were, we would not have debated briefly a motion from the government side to stop and shut down debate.
It is the government's responsibility to run the calendar of the House of Commons. The Liberals are in charge. They are the ones who determine how many hours of debate everything receives. It is not the responsibility of the official opposition or any of the opposition parties to ensure the government's agenda gets through. I have a great deal of respect for the colleagues in the other opposition parties, but they do not need to help the government push this through. We are here to keep the government accountable, specifically the cabinet, and the government caucus members can take up that responsibility as well.
What we are seeing here is an attempt by the government to engineer a preferred outcome. That is what its members would like to see, and I have tried to stick specifically to my concerns around the motion and what the Emergencies Act says must happen, because that is what my constituents want to hear. This is not about litigating what happened before February 14. This is about litigating what happened between February 14 and February 23, and I think we owe that to people in my riding.
There is a Yiddish proverb that applies here, and I want to make sure I get it in. Members know my great love for everything Yiddish and Hebrew, and for proverbs as well. It says, “When you sweep the house, you find everything.” I think by sweeping through legislation and the actual content of the motion, my constituents back home in Calgary Shepard will see this is an attempt by the government to set a predestined final destination for the report, one that will absolve them of any sins.
Canada’s response to Ukraine
The invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation has brought war back to Europe in a manner not seen since World War II. This unprovoked attack, coming on the heels of a joint pact between the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, is the most serious threat to the rules-based international order since 1945 and to global peace and security. In the days following the invasion, Canada, with its allies, has acted decisively and implemented a broad range of sanctions designed to cripple the Russian economy and put pressure on President Putin and his allied oligarchs who finance his war machine. While Conservatives support the actions taken to date by the Government of Canada more can be done. The starting point should be the expulsion of the Russian Ambassador to Canada and the recalling of Canada’s Ambassador from Moscow, direct the CRTC to remove the state propaganda broadcaster Russia Today from Canada’s airwaves, and implement visa-free travel from Ukraine to Canada. Some of these additional ideas are being partially implemented now. In the long term, Canada must rise to the occasion and ramp up energy production to help our allies in Europe move away from Russian energy sources. It is undeniable that over the past 20 years as Putin took power in Russia and re-organized as well as re-armed the Russian military; he did so thanks to the royalties and cash made off the sale of Russian oil and gas – and primarily to European customers. The Liberal government has failed to recognize that Canadian oil and gas is vital to Canadian and European security. Canada’s energy industry is not used to finance a war machine and we do not use our energy exports as a source of geopolitical blackmail. Exporting Canadian energy to Europe will displace Russian energy and lead to President Putin’s money supply drying up or at minimum being disrupted. This is a long-term strategic necessity for Canada. Canadian dollars should not go to the war chest of a violent authoritarian like President Putin, and Conservatives stand strongly with Ukraine, the people of Ukraine, and the over one million Canadians with ties to Ukraine against Putin’s war of conquest. If you would like to support the Ukrainian people in their fight against tyranny, consider donating to the Canada-Ukraine foundation at the link below.
53% of Canadians struggling to keep up with cost of living
In a recent committee appearance, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland claimed “we have done a really good job” of managing the economy during the pandemic, a claim that is vastly out of touch with what Canadians are experiencing. Housing, gasoline, and groceries, the main expenditures for households, are all going up in price for the same amount of goods. In January, the annual inflation rate in Canada reached 5.1 percent, outpacing wage increases of 2.4 percent over the same period and reaching levels not seen since September 1991. As Canada deals with skyrocketing inflation and the Bank of Canada raises interest rates for the first time since 2018, data from the Angus Reid Institute found that over half of Canadians are unable to keep up with the rising cost of living. Many say they are unable to cover an unexpected $1,000 expense and 70% say money is a source of stress in their lives. It’s time to get spending under control and for a new approach that will create a dynamic and more prosperous Canada. Conservatives will continue pushing for solutions that will benefit you.
Copperfield Fun Fest
Thank you to everyone who came out to the Copperfield Fun Fest event this past Saturday. It was a pleasure to speak with each of you and hear your concerns about inflation, Covid restrictions, and share in our concern for the Ukrainian people. I will continue to represent you and raise your concerns in Parliament.
Rare Disease Day
February 28th was Rare Disease Day in Canada. The theme this year is 'Share Your Colours'. In Parliament, I was able to share this limerick in recognition.
Millions in Canada
Two-thirds of them youth
Battle rare disease daily
A sad, somber truth
These diseases touch families
And count several thousand
From MS through to Alport
And Von Recklinghausen
They are tough on the children
But also their parents
For those stricken with grief
I understand ‘cause I share it
My three oldest children
Battle ills of this kind
And the youngest I lost
Is always on my mind
We here in this Chamber
Have a big role we share
Supporting access to treatments
And affordable care
So whether team blue
Red, green, orange, or grey
Please join me in celebrating
This #RareDiseaseDay
The war in Ukraine is a terrible thing .
But the biggest threat to Canadians is our Federal Liberal government and any Canadian politicians with ties to the WEF , no matter what party they belong to .
No government should have the power to freeze our bank accounts and the push for digital ID and currency just makes that worse .
Tom
With the obvious war measures act and the behaviour of the media being unleashed on the public in such a fixed and staged bunch of lies.I find this time in our lives difficult to take anymore, with the overwhelming participation of unhappy Canadian Citizens from coast to coast protesting to rid this country of the deplorable Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. There will be such a laps in people & children of all ages that will scar this great nation for years to come because of an idea of only a few wealth powerful families believe they will solve all the worlds problems. The global roll out of this pandemic and how it was handled ????? You really have to wonder how they thought this would work.
I took my shot and I talked others in my family to do so well I’m not happy that I did this to myself ? There will be no retribution against government for there action or the drug companies that are exempt from any wrong doing ?
How Tom is this right ?
The truth will continue to rise and the strong will continue to grow and hopefully overthrow this evil group of liberals. If they won’t hear they will have to be shown ! Why Tom is the war so important abroad when we are so close to a civil war brewing in Canada ?
I hope you are heard in Ottawa Tom as those that have been abused by this atrocity will not forget anytime soon.
WR Mowat