No to the Emergencies Act

Plus Liberals vote down Conservative motion to lift federal COVID restrictions, lethal aid is sent to Ukraine, and more

No to the Emergencies Act

On February 14, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau along with senior cabinet ministers announced that the government would invoke the Emergencies Act to clamp down on the protests in Ottawa and blockades at the international borders. I believe the federal government has not provided sufficient justification for the use of these emergency powers and that view is shared by many legal experts including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Constitution Foundation. The vote on Monday will be the most important one I take so far during the three Parliaments I have served in. I, along with my conservative colleagues, disagree with the use of the Act and I will lay out my thoughts for voting against the emergency motion that confirms the federal government these powers and extends the state of emergency they called per the Act.

In 1988, Parliament passed the Emergencies Act to add parliamentary supervision and make changes to the act’s prior version, the War Measures Act, as its use was criticised for not upholding charter liberties adequately during the FLQ crisis in Montreal. The final version approved by Parliament defined a national emergency as “an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature” that either “seriously endangers the lives, health and safety of Canadians,” or “seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada.” It must also be a situation that cannot “effectively be dealt with” by the provinces and territories. Under the act, a federal government can declare one of four types of emergencies: a public welfare emergency, a public order emergency, an international emergency, and war itself. In this case, the Liberals have called a public order emergency.

Once a federal government has issued an emergency declaration, they have 7 days to table in Parliament a motion outlining the declaration of emergency and the reasons for calling an emergency. The motion will be provided to all MPs and will kick off an immediate debate on the merits and wisdom of the decision taking precedence over any other business we were conducting beforehand. On Monday, at conclusion of debate, Parliament will vote on the motion. Should the majority of Parliament vote against the federal government’s motion, the motion is defeated and all emergency powers are immediately revoked. If passed, the federal government is granted the specific powers laid out in the emergency motion for a period of 30 days. A government may choose to end the emergency declaration before the 30-day point, but to extend the emergency powers, the government would have to pass an additional motion in Parliament. Debate was to continue today but due to security concerns on Parliament Hill, the Speaker of the House of Commons ordered the closure of the parliamentary precinct. We remain set to continue debate Saturday and Sunday starting at 7am until midnight.

There are several issues with the Liberal government’s use of the Emergencies Act. The first issue is with the Prime Minister himself, who made no effort to de-escalate the situation. In 2020, he spoke before Parliament and said “it is our job to choose respect and communication. We must not embark upon a path where we refuse to listen, or we give in to hostilities”. Yet before the protestor convoy had even left British Columbia, he had denigrated it as a “fringe minority” holding “unacceptable views”. He increased the stakes and raised the rhetoric at a time when a statesman should have been looking for ways to calm things down. Leaders are supposed to listen even to those people they profoundly disagree with. Hurling invectives and insults serves only to divide, wedge and stigmatize a particular group. The Prime Minister then proceeded to retreat to his cottage, as one dissenting senior Liberal noted, and disappeared for several days. The crisis is not about the protests in downtown Ottawa but about his lack of leadership.

Another issue was the justification offered for its use by Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, which was to end the blockade of truckers at the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor, a major trade route between Canada and the United States and the blockade of which cost an estimated $350 million a day. Further border blockades were present at the Coutts border in Alberta and Emerson, Manitoba. I was clear from the beginning of the Coutts blockade; protesting on the streets of Ottawa peacefully at our nation's capital is the right of every citizen but nobody has a right to blockade critical infrastructure like border crossings.

While the Liberal government claims the border blockades were cleared thanks to the use of the Emergencies Act, this is untrue. Before the Prime Minister made his announcement on the Monday, the blockade on the Ambassador Bridge had already ended, as the Ontario Superior Court granted an injunction barring protestors from blocking traffic at the bridge and police had begun making arrests in the days prior. By the end of February 13th that border crossing had been cleared. On the Coutts border a day later, the protestors had begun leaving voluntarily after negotiations with the RCMP. On Wednesday, in Manitoba, the RCMP reached an agreement for the blockaders to depart and the border would be reopened. The only group that remains is in downtown Ottawa, which is under municipal control, unlike the federally regulated borders. It begs the question: was the Emergencies Act truly needed or was it all for show?

This was the first use of the Act since Pierre Trudeau had invoked the War Measures Act to suppress the Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ), an extremist movement declared a terrorist organisation. This was a group that had carried out over 200 bombings, injuring hundreds, and kidnapped and murdered provincial cabinet minister Pierre Laporte. Since 1988, five prime ministers faced issues of national concern and yet did not use the Act. Past governments have avoided using the Emergencies Act during major crises, including on 9/11 when our airspace was shutdown and many flights were forced to land in Canada, during the entirety of the COVID-19 health pandemic, the Oka crisis in 1990 or the stand-offs at Caledonia. Other than during World War I, World War II, and the 1970 FLQ crisis, emergency powers have never been sought by a federal government. In fact, the Quebec government specifically requested for emergency help during the 1970 FLQ crisis. Today, 7 out of 10 Premiers have publicly said they do not accept the use of emergency powers with notably Ontario welcoming its use.

Using the Emergencies Act sets a dangerous precedent because of how low a threshold the federal government has actually set in practice. The Government of Canada should not have the power to freeze the bank accounts of hardworking Canadians simply on the suspicion of supporting causes of which the government doesn’t approve. This government power already exists but it is constrained by forcing governments to seek judicial approval. This takes more time and a judge must hear the reasons and evidence for it. In government briefings I am aware of, civil servants claimed this took too long. Accountability and having to prove cause before a judge cannot be set aside because it takes "too long". This is a slippery slope, and not how the federal government should operate in a free and democratic society.

Finally, a matter of deep concern for me is how the Prime Minister and the key cabinet ministers involved continue to contradict themselves on the extent of the emergency powers can be used, and for how long. On the first morning of the parliamentary debate, the Prime Minister explicitly claimed the emergency powers would apply across Canada. For days prior and during interviews, cabinet ministers have confidently claimed it would be limited to the situation in downtown Ottawa and to specific geographic regions across Canada. These contradictions do not increase confidence. The next concern is that Liberal MPs and parliamentary secretaries have repeatedly said the emergency powers are necessary in case protestors and blockaders return. This is not how the emergency powers are to be used. The Emergencies Act was never to be invoked as a precautionary measure but as a last resort when events and a situation have led to a breakdown in public order. To claim the preemptive use and therefore quick use of extraordinary powers normalizes emergency powers.

I want to assure residents of Calgary Shepard that I will be voting against the motion. The federal government has not met the standards of the law to invoke its extraordinary powers. Police forces across Canada were succeeding at clearing the border crossings and findings ways to talk protestors into returning to their communities. It is a drastic overreach of federal power and Conservatives will be voting against the Liberal’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act.

---

Conservative motion on lifting pandemic restrictions voted down by the Liberals and NDP

On Monday, the Conservatives proposed a motion in Parliament calling upon the Liberal government to present a plan to lift all federal COVID-19 restrictions. Unfortunately, the Liberal government, with the support of the NDP, voted down the motion by a vote of 151-185. The plan would have provided hope for Canadians wishing to return to a pre-pandemic life and aligned Canada with many of the provinces and international friends and allies who have rolled back their pandemic restrictions. Dr. Theresa Tam and many provincial chief medical officials have already called for the re-examination of public health measures and to learn to live with the virus. The Liberal government’s refusal to present a plan is simply more bad policymaking and does not match the decisions taken by provinces such as Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec, who have all offered a date for the lifting of restrictions. Conservatives will continue holding the Liberal government to account on this issue.

---

Lethal aid sent to Ukraine more than a month after their request

The Liberal government is finally stepping up its commitment to Ukraine, announcing $7.8 million worth of lethal equipment and ammunition will be sent to the country as Russia escalates the tensions in the region. This came more than a month after Ukraine had made specific requests for lethal aid to arm their security forces and after many other countries had already done so. Conservatives have been calling upon the federal government to take this threat seriously for months and it took until the massing of over 100,000 Russian troops on the Ukraine border for the Prime Minister to take the threat seriously. The territorial integrity of states is the cornerstone of international stability since 1945. It is time for Canada to stand strongly with our allies and stand up for our values internationally.

---

Prime Minister accuses Jewish Conservative MP of ‘standing with swastikas’

On Wednesday, facing criticism in Parliament for his insults towards truckers and the misuse of the Emergencies Act, the Prime Minister decided to double down on insults and accused Jewish Conservative MP Melissa Lantsman of ‘standing with swastikas’. MP Lantsman is a descendant of Holocaust survivors and the Prime Minister’s words are a new low for parliamentary discourse, one which called for the Speaker to intervene and call out the Prime Minister for inflammatory language. During a time of division, the leader of the country cannot continue to insult, divide, and stigmatize. He should do better. Watch the full exchange below.

---

#JustInflation story

I’ve heard from many constituents over the past two weeks who have shared their experiences with the worsening cost-of-living crisis that has wreaked havoc in our economy. As of January 2022, inflation has now hit 5.1%, the highest in over thirty years. One constituent, Dave, highlighted to me that his utility bill in January was the highest he has ever received during the 34 years he has lived in his house, $155 higher than the same bill in January 2021. Share your #JustInflation story with me through a Substack comment or an email with the header #JustInflation. The federal government needs to know just how badly their policies are failing Canadians.