https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/convoy-inquiry-start-1.6613679
Battle lines are drawn as the Emergencies Act inquiry gets underway in Ottawa
Documents introduced at the inquiry will tell 'quite the story,' lawyer says
Eight months after anti-COVID-19 vaccine mandate protesters gridlocked parts of downtown Ottawa, a public inquiry has opened public hearings as it probes the federal government's unprecedented use of emergency powers to clear the capital.
The Public Order Emergency Commission's official launch this morning kicks off what's anticipated to be a politically tense six weeks as the inquiry hears from federal government representatives about why they felt they had to invoke the never-before-used Emergencies Act, and from those who argue it was a step too far.
Invoking the act gave authorities new powers allowing them to freeze the finances of those connected to blockades and protests, ban travel to protest zones, prohibit people from bringing minors to unlawful assemblies and commandeer tow trucks.
The start of the inquiry saw some of the key players lay out sometimes conflicting views of that decision and what happened in Ottawa last winter.
Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Paul Rouleau, who has been chosen to lead the inquiry, kicked off the morning by explaining the commission's mandate and the challenges it faces.
"A commission's recommendations may be modest or wide-ranging. They may be directed at a range of audiences, including government, public bodies and the private sector," said the commissioner.
"It's also important to understand what commissions of inquiry do not do. They do not make findings of legal liability. They do not determine whether individuals have committed crimes. While inquiries seek to uncover the truth, they are not trials. Questions of civil and criminal liability are decided by courts and not commissions."
WATCH | Ontario judge says inquiries 'are not trials'
The commission will introduce thousands of documents over the next six weeks as it examines the timeline of events leading up to the invocation of the act, the legal framework of the legislation and the government's rationale.
Lawyer Paul Champ, who is representing a coalition of community associations and business improvement areas in downtown Ottawa, has seen some of those documents already. While he's prohibited from talking about their contents, he said they aren't flattering to the various levels of government and law enforcement involved.
"I think there's going to be a very disturbing story to be told," he said.
"I think we're going to see where some of the balls are dropped. We're going to see that there were a lot of disagreements, there were a lot of arguments and dysfunction between key actors. And it's going to be quite the story."
The opening day saw battle lines taking shape as lawyers for key players — including the federal government, the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, Ottawa police and protest organizers — gave brief opening remarks.
"It's important for Canadians to understand the unprecedented critical situation that the country was facing earlier this year," said Robert MacKinnon, a lawyer for the federal government, during his stint a the podium.
Final preparations being made prior to the start of the Public
Emergency Order Commission in Ottawa Oct. 13, 2022. (Sean
Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
"The government witnesses will outline the deliberate step-by-step process in which careful consideration was given to all the available options, which led to the declaration of a public order emergency as a matter of last resort."
A lawyer for the convoy organizers said the government never met the legal threshold to invoke the act.
"It is our view there was no justification whatsoever to invoke the Emergencies Act," said Brendan Miller.
"The government exceeded their jurisdiction both constitutionality and legislatively."
Sloly's lawyer blames limited resources and intelligence
Tom Curry, one of Peter Sloly's three lawyers, said the former chief will provide "first-hand knowledge of how the events unfolded."
Sloly resigned in the middle of the Freedom Convoy protest as frustrations mounted over how the protest was policed after trucks were permitted to park on downtown streets, blockading the capital.
"In particular, he will explain to you the limited resources available to the Ottawa police service to deal with a massive occupation. The limited nature of the intelligence available to OPS about what was coming Ottawa's way," said Curry.
"He will also tell the commissioner why he signalled on Feb. 7 that there may not be a policing solution alone to the occupation."
Ottawa
Police Chief Peter Sloly listens to a reporter’s question at a news
conference on updated enforcement measures as a protest against COVID-19
restrictions continues into its second week, in Ottawa, on Friday, Feb.
4, 2022. (Justin Tang/The Canadian Press)
A lawyer for the Ottawa Police Service said it was "impossible to gauge" the number of vehicles and participants in the crowd.
"The Ottawa police, you will hear, followed that well-established process that had always worked with protesters this time as well, and were prepared for an event, but not for the event that occurred," said David Migicovsky.
"The protest became dangerous, and the situation became volatile."
People in Ottawa were 'terrorized:' lawyer
Another police agency says it was engaged with the protesters.
"You'll hear that the OPP became engaged well before the Freedom Convoy reached the Ontario border," said Chris Diana, counsel for the Ontario Provincial Police.
"You will hear about the OPP's intelligence gathering process and the way that the OPP disseminated intelligence to its policing partners and the timing of sharing that information as the convoy moved across Canada."
Champ said his clients aren't going to take a position about the invocation of the Emergencies Act. He said they want to make sure the official record reflects what people in Ottawa experienced over the three weeks when protesters were using trucks and other vehicles to blockade some of the city's main arteries and neighbourhoods.
"I don't think people really quite get how traumatized, and quite frankly terrorized, the people of Ottawa were," he said in an interview with CBC Wednesday.
"Public services were completely interrupted. Ambulances had a hard time getting downtown. Buses were stopped, Para Transpo was stopped. Senior citizens, people with disabilities were significantly impacted.
"People were hostages in their own homes. And we want to make sure that that story is told."
The protests started in opposition to the federal government's vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers. It has since expanded into a movement against broader public health measures to limit the spread of COVID-19, including provincial mandates.
While the heart of the protest was in Ottawa, blockades at the Canada-U.S. border in Windsor, Ont. and Coutts, Alta. also played out, triggering economic concerns.
Trudeau defends decision to invoke Emergencies Act
The commission is the first of its kind in Canada and is a legal requirement under the Emergencies Act. Through an order-in-council, the commission has been directed to examine the circumstances that led to the declaration of a public emergency and to examine the following issues:
-
The evolution and goals of the convoy and blockades, their leadership, organization and participants.
- The impact of domestic and foreign funding on the protests, including money from crowdsourcing platforms.
- The impact, role and sources of misinformation and disinformation associated with the protests, including the role played by social media.
- The impact of the blockades, including their economic impact.
- And the actions of police and other responders prior to and after the declaration.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has continued to defend his government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14, saying it was necessary "to get the situation back under control."
"That's exactly what we did," Trudeau told a news conference Wednesday.
"The convoy blockades of last winter massively disrupted the lives of Ottawa residents, of people relying on supply chains that come across the borders. It was something that Canadians experienced with real concern, which was why we moved forward with measures that are not to be taken lightly."
WATCH | Trudeau says use of Emergencies Act was 'necessary':
Hatim Kheir, a lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, said he believes the government didn't meet the legal threshold for invoking the act, making those measures enforced under the law illegitimate.
"The government's invocation of the Emergencies Act is a threat to our our very system of government," he said.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedom is one of many organizations that have standing at the commission. Standing gives these organizations certain privileges in the inquiry process, such as the ability to suggest witnesses or cross-examine them. It also means they are given advance notice of documents being submitted into evidence.
Commission getting access to high-level documents
While the commission's eventual recommendations won't carry much legal weight, Kheir said the testimony of witnesses and the evidence that will be put on the record — coupled with the fact that it's going to be livestreamed daily — will bring clarity to what happened last February.
Police
enforce an injunction against protesters on Feb. 19 in Ottawa. Some of
the protesters had been camped in their trucks near Parliament Hill for
weeks. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
"The government is going to have to face the reality of attempting to justify its actions," he said.
"It's not going to have force of law, but it can have a persuasive effect. It's also going to be informative to the public."
At Rouleau's request, the Liberal government has waived cabinet confidence on documents related to its invocation of the act. It's only the fourth time in Canada's history that a public inquiry has been given access to such high-level documents.
A lawyer for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, which is taking the government to court over its use of the Emergencies Act, said she fears those sensitive documents won't be made public.
"We are going into the commission with an open mind but, in our view, the government has yet to prove that the legal threshold to invoke the act was met," Cara Zwibel told a news conference Wednesday.
Police officers push back protesters in front of the Senate of Canada building in Ottawa on Feb. 18. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
"And the burden is on them. Not the other way around."
The commission is expected to hear from 65 witnesses over the next six weeks, including Trudeau, cabinet ministers, government officials from Ontario and Alberta and convoy organizers, including Tamara Lich, who was in the room for Thursday's opening, and Pat King.
The commission also will hear from a number of police and security officials, including former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, the head of Canada's spy agency David Vigneault and the head of the government's Integrated Threat Assessment Centre.
-
A full list of the anticipated witnesses can be found here
Rouleau kicked off the proceedings with an opening statement, which will be followed by presentations and overview reports by the commission's lawyers that will summarize preliminary facts.
During its first phase, scheduled to wrap on Nov. 25, the commission will meet for six weeks. After the first phase ends, the commission will begin a policy phase during which it will host roundtables with policy experts.
Rouleau's final report is due in February — an undertaking he acknowledged will be a challenge during his opening remarks.
The commissioner noted that he is working on a tight timeline, pointing to the Air India inquiry, which had four years to complete its work, and the inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, which had nearly three years to write its final report.
Due to requirements in the legislation, the Emergencies Act inquiry's work is "measured in days, not years," said Rouleau.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNoGJswq9fU&ab_channel=SaultOnlineONNtv
Public Order Emergency Commission Hearing LIVE
45 Comments
unbelievable they didn’t have time to plan…it’s not like they didn’t
know where they were travelling to and what their objectives were, let
alone continually evaluate the number of vehicles…Classic Ottawa…too
many levels of government; everyone looking to pass the buck.
Convoy lawyer says there was 'no justification' for use of Emergencies Act
https://www.fosterllp.ca/partners-associates/brendan-myers-miller
Brendan
is a litigation and appellate lawyer in the areas of regulatory,
public, constitutional, administrative, civil, commercial, criminal and
international law.
He has acted as defence counsel on complex
criminal and regulatory matters including homicides, commercial offences
(charges of fraud, charges under the Securities Act, Consumer
Protection Act, Income Tax Act etc.), commercial transportation
offences, environmental offences, as well as Occupation Health and
Safety charges where serious injury or death has occurred. Further,
Brendan acts as defence counsel on all forms of charges under the Safety
Code Act (Building Code, Fire Code, and Electrical Code etc.).
Whether
acting for an individual or a Fortune 500 Company, Brendan uses his
knowledge of constitutional, regulatory and criminal procedure to ensure
the best outcomes for his clients.
Brendan’s constitutional law
practice involves invoking the constitution to defend businesses and
individuals’ rights against government activity and unconstitutional
legislation, and includes First Nations rights. He has been counsel on
numerous precedent-setting cases in the area, he holds a Masters of
Constitutional Law from Osgoode Hall Law School where he studied under
some of Canada’s most noteworthy constitutional practitioners and
scholars.
He has acted as counsel before all levels of Court in
Alberta including the Provincial Court, Court of King's Bench, and Court
of Appeal. He has also acted as counsel before the Superior Court of
the Yukon Territory, Provincial Court of Saskatchewan, the Federal Court
of Canada, Federal Court of Appeal, and as lead counsel before the
Supreme Court of Canada.
Further, Brendan has acted as counsel before countless administrative tribunals, commissions and boards including:
- The Alberta Securities Commission
- Canadian International Trade Tribunal
- Law Society of Alberta
- Chartered Accountants of Alberta Disciplinary Tribunal
- Alberta College of Social Work Disciplinary Tribunal
- Alberta Insurance Council
- Alberta Teachers Association
- Parole Board of Canada Appeal Division
- Municipal Councils
- Subdivision and Development Appeal Boards
- Service Canada Board of Referees
- Transportation and Safety Board of Alberta
- Alberta Motor Vehicle Industry Council
- Alberta Legislature’s Ethics Commissioner
- Alberta Chief Electoral Officer
His commercial practice involves all areas of commercial litigation, and he also acts in all manner of corporate, partnership and other business association disputes. He has experience in acting for employees and employers in high conflict wrongful and constructive dismissal litigation.
Brendan has been trusted by lawyers and police
officers to conduct matters on their behalf when they find themselves
before courts and tribunals.
He regularly conducts appeals and
judicial reviews in all areas of law for a diverse range of clients from
large corporations to individuals.
Since 2009 Brendan has been a
guest lecturer at Mount Royal University in constitutional rights. He
has also been an instructor in the Trial Advocacy Course at the
University of Calgary Law School since 2015.
In 2019, Brendan was both an editor and contributor of the Alberta Limitations Manual, published by Lexis. He is a co-founder of a pro bono legal clinic at Wellspring Wellness Centre where he provides people going through cancer treatment, as well as their families, legal advice in various areas of law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu8paOgCYT0&ab_channel=RebelNews
Convoy lawyer Keith Wilson gives his thoughts on the Emergencies Act inquiry
982 Comments
They thought that they had the support of the country and could just block the border and occupy downtown Ottawa to get their way!!! So funny!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRWW7pP2PLk&ab_channel=CanadianConstitutionFoundation
Emergencies Act Public Inquiry Hearings - The CCF's opening Statement
183 Comments
Sujit Choudhry
Principal
choudhry.law
1 King Street W., Suite 4800
Toronto ON M5H 1A1
CANADA
suj@choudhry.law
+1 416 436 3679
Constitutional Law
Sujit Choudhry practices constitutional law, both in Canada and globally
A constitutional law resource for counsel, governments, and businesses
Sujit Choudhry has a broad public law practice on questions of constitutional law, administrative law, public international law and international human rights law, in the Canadian courts, including in judicial reviews, appeals, and arbitrations. He frequently appears as counsel, including in the Supreme Court of Canada. He also has an extensive counsel practice. Choudhry is often retained by other lawyers across Canada to work with them on complex constitutional cases, including to serve as co-counsel. He also holds the Q.Arb designation from the ADR Institute of Canada.
Democracy support, constitutional reform and peace processes
Choudhry is an internationally recognized authority on comparative constitutional law. He has been an advisor to democracy support, constitutional reform, and peace processes for over 20 years, including in Cyprus, Egypt, Ethiopia, Jordan, Libya, Myanmar, Nepal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia, Ukraine, Yemen and Zimbabwe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICeR_J5ynk8&ab_channel=CanadianConstitutionFoundation
Public Order Emergency Commission - Day 2 of Hearings
517 Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah3d7oKKS9Y&ab_channel=LittleGreyCells
LIVE - Public Order Emergency Commission - Day 2
Emergencies Act inquiry gets underway in Ottawa
PM Trudeau on Emergencies Act inquiry, ArriveCan, federal-provincial relations – October 13, 2022
Deja Vu Anyone???
https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/690019395651
Justin Trudeau Losing Control of Agenda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBM_zlK8iUc&ab_channel=CanadianConstitutionFoundation
Emergencies Act Legal Challenge Townhall - your questions answered LIVE
Rebel News is sending FIFTEEN journalists to cover the trucker commission of inquiry (but we need your help)
Ezra Levant, Rebel News<info@rebelnews.com> | Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 8:12 PM |
| To: David Amos <David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.com> | |
| ||||||||||||||||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BggMctTNl2c&ab_channel=cpac
Previewing the Public Order Emergency Commission – October 12, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQjDuUmjvSU
Public Order Emergency Commission hearings: Freedom Convoy lawyer speaks with Michael Serapio
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/public-inquiry-emergencies-act-witness-list-1.6612455
65 witnesses set to testify at inquiry into use of Emergencies Act
Public Order Emergency Commission kicks off Thursday
The Public Order Emergency Commission will begin public hearings Thursday on the the federal government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act. It is expected to hear from 65 witnesses during its factual stage, including protest participants, law enforcement representatives, cabinet ministers and officials with provincial and municipal governments, as well as businesses and organizations affected by the protests.
On Tuesday, the commission released a list of anticipated witnesses in their expected order of appearance.
It includes:
- Victoria De La Ronde, a lawyer based in Ottawa.
- Zexi Li, an Ottawa resident who helped secure an injunction against Freedom Convoy protesters.
- Nathalie Carrier, executive director of the Vanier BIA.
- Kevin McHale, executive director of the Sparks Street BIA.
- Catherine McKenney, outgoing City of Ottawa councillor
- Mathieu Fleury, outgoing City of Ottawa councillor
- Steve Kanellakos, City of Ottawa manager.
- Serge Arpin, chief of staff to the mayor of Ottawa.
- Jim Watson, the outgoing mayor of Ottawa who negotiated with protesters prior to the act's invocation.
- Diane Deans, an outgoing City of Ottawa councillor ousted by Ottawa City Council from her position as chair of the Police Services Board during the protest.
- Patricia Ferguson, acting deputy chief of Ottawa police.
- Craig Abrams, Ontario Provincial Police member.
- Carson Pardy, retired chief superintendent of the Ontario Provincial Police.
- Pat Morris, Ontario Provincial Police member.
- Steve Bell, the interim chief of the Ottawa Police who replaced Peter Sloly and oversaw local police operations which ended the protest.
- Russell Lucas, Ottawa Police inspector.
- Marcel Beaudin, Ontario Provincial Police member.
- Robert Drummond, Ottawa Police inspector.
- Robert Bernier, Ottawa Police inspector.
- Thomas Carrique, commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police.
- Peter Sloly, the former Ottawa police chief who stepped down during the protest.
- Brigitte Belton, convoy protest organizer.
- James Bauder, convoy protest organizer.
- Steeve Charland, convoy protest participant.
- Patrick King, convoy protest participant.
- Benjamin Dichter, convoy protest organizer.
- Tom Marazzo, convoy protest organizer.
- Chris Barber, convoy protest organizer.
- Tamara Lich, convoy protest organizer.
- Drew Dilkens, the mayor of Windsor.
- Dana Earley, Ontario Provincial Police superintendent.
- Jason Crowley, Windsor Police interim deputy chief.
- Jim Willett, mayor of the Village of Coutts, Alta.
- Marco Van Huigenbos, a Fort McLeod councillor who was one of the organizers of the border blockade in Coutts.
- Marlin Degrand, assistant deputy minister at the Alberta Justice and Solicitor General department.
- Mario Di Tommaso, deputy solicitor general of Ontario.
- Ian Freeman, assistant deputy minister at the Ontario Ministry of Transportation.
- Rob Stewart, deputy minister at Public Safety Canada.
- Dominic Rochon, senior assistant deputy minister at Public Safety Canada.
- David Vigneault, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.
- Michelle Tessier, assistant deputy minister with Public Safety's national and cyber security branch.
- Marie-Hèlene Chayer, executive director of the Integrated Threat Assessment Centre.
- Michael Duheme, deputy RCMP commissioner responsible for federal policing.
- Brenda Lucki, RCMP commissioner.
- Curtis Zablocki, deputy RCMP commissioner and commanding officer of Alberta.
- John Ossowski, former president of the Canada Border Services Agency.
- Michael Keenan, deputy minister at Transport Canada.
- Christian Dea, chief economist at Transport Canada.
- Michael Sabia, deputy minister at the Department of Finance Canada.
- Rhys Mendes, assistant deputy minister at the Department of Finance Canada.
- Isabelle Jacques, assistant deputy minister at the Department of Finance Canada.
- Cindy Termorhuizen, assistant deputy minister at Global Affairs Canada.
- Joe Comartin, former Canadian consul general in Detroit.
- Jody Thomas, national security and intelligence adviser to the prime minister.
- Jacquie Bogden, deputy secretary to the cabinet on emergency preparedness and COVID recovery.
- Janice Charette, clerk of the Privy Council.
- Nathalie Drouin, deputy clerk of the Privy Council
- Anita Anand, federal minister of defence.
- Marco Mendicino, federal minister of public safety.
- Bill Blair, federal minister of emergency preparedness and president of the King's Privy Council.
- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose government invoked the Emergencies Act to address the protest.
- Omar Alghabra, federal minister of transport.
- David Lametti, federal minister of justice and attorney general of Canada.
- Dominic LeBlanc, minister of intergovernmental affairs.
- Chrystia Freeland, deputy prime minister and finance minister.
Former Ontario Superior Court justice Paul Rouleau, now a judge on the Ontario Court of Appeal, has been chosen to lead the inquiry. He has been tasked with examining the circumstances leading up to the invocation of the Emergencies Act — a decision that continues to be politically divisive eight months later.
The act gave the government new powers to address the anti-vaccine mandate protest that blocked main arteries around Parliament Hill with parked trucks and other vehicles for nearly a month.
Rouleau also has been directed through an order-in-council to offer "lessons learned" about the use of the act and to comment on the "appropriateness and effectiveness of the measures taken."
Commission to kick off with document dump
According to a statement from the commission, Rouleau will begin the public hearings with an opening statement on Oct. 13, followed by presentations and overview reports by the commission's lawyers.
The commission said the overview reports will include summaries of preliminary facts, which will be placed into evidence.
At Rouleau's request, the Liberal government has waived cabinet confidence on documents related to its invocation of the act. It's only the fourth time in Canada's history that a public inquiry has been given access to such high-level documents.
It is not clear yet how — or if — those sensitive documents will be made public.
"The commission is about to embark on the public phase of the process of finding answers to the questions assigned to it by Parliament under the Emergencies Act. This critical phase will shed light on the events that led to the declaration of the public order emergency and fully explore the reasons advanced for the declaration," Rouleau said in a media statement Tuesday.
"I am confident that, with the co-operation of all of the parties, the hearings will provide a fair and thorough process for the presentation of the evidence required for the commission to be able to give the public the answers to which it is entitled."
Hearings will take place at Library and Archives Canada in Ottawa on Wellington Street, not far from the heart of the protests.
The first phase of the commission will meet for six weeks and is scheduled to wrap on Nov. 25. The following week, the commission will begin a policy stage during which it will host roundtables with policy experts.
Rouleau's final report is due Feb. 6.
"Did Justin Trudeau need the controversial Emergencies Act to stop t...
| Sun, Oct 9, 2022 at 6:36 PM | |
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
| What’s happening | |||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Judge grants injunction aimed at ending Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor, Ont.
Law enforcement will collaborate and co-ordinate how to respond to ruling, Mayor Drew Dilkens says
Chief Justice Geoffrey B. Morawetz handed down the ruling Friday. It came into effect at 7 p.m. ET, as a large crowd was still present at the bridge.
Five hours after the deadline, some 100 protesters remained milling around the entrance to the bridge, waving Canadian flags.
The document, which was provided late Friday by the City of Windsor, states that anyone having notice of the order is prohibited from "impeding or blocking access to the Ambassador Bridge and indirect or direct approaching roadways and access points" for 10 days.
The injunction authorizes police or "designated agents" to remove any vehicles, personal property, equipment, structures, or other objects that impede or block access to the bridge, and approaching roadways.
It allows for the arrest and removal of anyone the police have "reasonable and probable grounds to believe is contravening, or has contravened, any provision" of the order, although they can be released if they agree to obey the order.
People are free to engage in peaceful protests that don't impede or block access to the bridge or approaching roadways, the order states.
Earlier Friday, Ontario Premier Doug Ford announced a provincial state of emergency that could result in harsh penalties for protesters who cause major disruptions.
Windsor police warn of charges, arrests
In a statement issued after Friday's court proceeding, Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens said he was pleased the injunction was granted.
"At the same time, I'm disappointed that it had to come to this," he said.
WATCH | 'We are obviously very, very pleased' about injunction, mayor says:
Earlier Friday, Dilkens told CBC News that more police are expected to arrive in Windsor from outside of the community.
"The goal is the preservation of life, I don't want anyone to die over this," he said.
"The goal and objective here is to have the protesters leave voluntarily.… But if they refuse to leave, steps will have to be taken to remove them."
Friday evening, the Windsor Police Service said it wanted to make clear to demonstrators that "it is a criminal offence to obstruct, interrupt or interfere with the lawful use, enjoyment, or operation of property."
"The offence itself is known as mischief to property," the police service said in a statement. "The unlawful act of blocking streets at and near the Ambassador Bridge is resulting in people being denied the lawful use, enjoyment and operation of their property and causing businesses to close down."
Police warned that anyone found to be committing that offence, or assisting others in doing so, may be arrested, and said "charges and/or convictions related to the unlawful activity associated with the demonstration may lead to denial in crossing the U.S.A. border."
Police were also distributing flyers to protesters in Windsor Friday about the provincial state of emergency and the potential for fines or jail time for those that violated the law.
WATCH | Ford tells protesters to go home after declaring state of emergency:
'Astronomical' economic impact
During the injunction hearing, court heard that since Monday, the blockade has allowed only a trickle of traffic across the bridge into the U.S. through a side-street entrance, which was also blocked overnight Wednesday and in the early hours of Thursday morning.
Mike Wills, a lawyer representing the auto groups that filed for the injunction and the City of Windsor, one of the interveners, said while one lane may have been opened by protesters, it "will not matter" because it may "be closed as quickly as it can be opened" due to the actions of those behind the blockade.
People
pray as truckers and supporters block the access leading from the
Ambassador Bridge, linking Detroit and Windsor on Friday. (Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press)
Wills told the court that the plaintiffs — the Global Automakers of Canada, Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association and Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association — represent dozens of Canadian car companies that are losing as much as $50 million per day due to blockade.
Their economic recovery is impossible due to the "astronomical" amount of money it's costing and "impractical" because protesters are not from one group or faction, said Wills.
"I only represent a small group being impacted by this blockade," he told the court.
"It can't be fixed — it's irreparable."
While some say demonstrations have been peaceful, and the plaintiffs acknowledged they have "been without violence, undertaken by sincere and honest individuals," Wills told the court that peacefulness is not a factor and there is "a strong case [protesters] have not been lawful."
Acknowledging the rights to freedom of expression, Wills said it is "not in their rights to block an international trade artery" and guaranteed freedoms "may not be exercised in a completely unfettered manner."
WATCH | Trudeau promises 'consequences' if protests continue:
Protesters argued bridge not completely blocked
Antoine d'Ailly, counsel for Citizens for Freedom, a non-profit representing Windsor individuals who support the blockade, argued access to the bridge wasn't completely blocked.
"Based on the photographs we've shown … at most it's the left two, perhaps three lanes of Huron Church Road [a main road to the bridge] that is being slowed or impeded by trucks that are unable to proceed any further, and the supporters on the road," he said.
"The submission here is that the protesters are in no way fully blocking access to the bridge, one way or the other. At best here, we're dealing with a partial impediment."
WATCH | Lawyer Jane Scholes explains the ruling:
Injunction Granted
The judge asked for an update on the bridge protests, which City of Windsor lawyer Jennifer King obtained from the Windsor Police Service.
King told court that, as of late Friday afternoon:
- The southbound bridge exit leading onto Huron Church Road was completely blocked by protesters, except for one lane that was negotiated to remain open for emergency vehicles to use responding to a call.
- Huron Church Road at Tecumseh Road to College Avenue was blocked, and the bridge could not be accessed.
- The bridge entrance on Wyandotte Street westbound was completely blocked by protesters.
- The bridge entrance eastbound on Wyandotte Street was open, but intermittently being blocked by protesters.
Windsor mayor wants to reopen bridge safely
After the ruling, Windsor's mayor said that local, regional and national law enforcement would co-ordinate how to respond to the injunction and reopen Ambassador Bridge.
"I remain hopeful for a peaceful and negotiated resolution to the current blockade," Dilkens said in a statement. "No operational details will be disclosed, to ensure the safety and security of all involved."
Protesters have been rallying around the Ontario-Michigan crossing since Monday. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
Dilkens also thanked the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, the representative plaintiff, as well as the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce and Ontario's attorney general for their support.
"Over the past few weeks, we have all been gripped by the protest activity occurring across Canada," he said. "As these demonstrations in Ottawa, Alberta and right here in Windsor have shown, there is a segment of our population who feel left behind as we have collectively fought this virus.
"To that end, as a nation, it is clear that we have a lot of healing to do, emerging from this public health nightmare."
A motion about whether to continue the order beyond 10 days is scheduled to be heard in Windsor court on Feb. 18.
With files from Reuters
Convoy leaders, PM expected to testify at inquiry into use of Emergencies Act
Public inquiry will examine federal government's decision to grant police emergency powers
A
close-up view of a line of anti-mandate protesters, standing
face-to-face with a line of police officers in downtown Ottawa on
Saturday, Feb. 19, 2022. (Michael Charles Cole/CBC)The Liberal government invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14, granting police extraordinary temporary powers to clear people out of downtown Ottawa and allowing banks to freeze the accounts of some of those involved.
The decision came after nearly three weeks of protesters whose trucks clogged downtown Ottawa streets and also set up blockades at several border crossings.
Protesters, who had raised millions of dollars through online crowdfunding sites, were calling for an end to the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine mandates, and in some cases an end to the Trudeau government.
Protesters had set up a bouncy castle, a hot tub and dozens of structures on the streets surrounding Parliament Hill by mid-February, while people in big rigs kept their trucks running and blared their horns day and night until a court injunction lessened the noise. Protesters pledged to stay.
The noise and disruption led to mounting public frustration from people living nearby, and Ottawa police and city officials described a state of "lawlessness" as they struggled to maintain order.
Trudeau cited "serious challenges to law enforcement's ability to effectively enforce the law" when he announced plans to invoke the act for the first time since it became law in 1988.
"This is about keeping Canadians safe, protecting people's jobs and restoring confidence in our institutions," he said at the time.
The Emergencies Act requires that a public inquiry be called to examine the government's decision-making any time it is invoked.
The Public Order Emergency Commission and Ontario Appeal Court Justice Paul Rouleau, who is the lead commissioner, will assess the basis for the government's decision and the appropriateness and effectiveness of the measures taken to deal with the blockades. They will also review whether there should be any changes to the Emergencies Act itself.
Since it was established on April 25, the commission has been collecting documents and interviewing dozens of people, including central figures in the "Freedom Convoy" such as Tamara Lich, Chris Barber, Pat King and James Bauder — all facing criminal charges for their roles.
A draft list of potential witnesses at the hearings includes outgoing Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson and senior city officials, members of the Ottawa Police Services Board and David Vigneault, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.
Peter Sloly, who resigned as Ottawa police chief during the convoy, and his replacement, interim police chief Steve Bell, are also expected to testify. So are Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland and Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino.
Mendicino told reporters last week the Emergencies Act was necessary to restore order across the country, including on Wellington Street "where for three weeks, the situation was virtually ungovernable."
Public
Safety Minister Marco Mendicino rises during Question Period on
December 9, 2021 in Ottawa. Mendicino told reporters last week the
Emergencies Act was necessary to restore order across the country. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
Temporary measures under the act gave police greater leeway to make arrests, impose fines, tow vehicles and freeze assets.
"We will co-operate fully with Judge Rouleau and his review and his commission, and look forward to receiving any lessons learned or any recommendations that come out of it," Mendicino said.
Keith Wilson, a lawyer with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms who is representing a number of key convoy organizers, said his clients are eager to talk about what was happening and why they were in Ottawa.
"They're hoping it will become apparent, which many already know, that there was no need to invoke the Emergencies Act," he said.
A number of community groups representing people living in and around downtown Ottawa are also taking part.
"I'm hoping they will delve a little bit about the actual impact on businesses and residents and not just the occupation," said Louise Lapointe, who leads Action Sandy Hill.
Questions over whether docs will be public
The government said it will be providing sensitive cabinet documents to the commission, but there have been concerns about whether that — and other critical information — will be made public. Rouleau has not said whether he will release information protected by cabinet confidence.
Ryan Alford, a professor at Lakehead University who is representing the Canadian Constitution Foundation at the inquiry, said he is concerned government and police agencies will try to shield evidence from the public, citing national security concerns.
"This would be a nightmare," he said.
Commission lawyers will question witnesses, much like in a regular court setting, but unlike a court, the inquiry is tasked with fact-finding and making recommendations, rather than assigning blame.
Cara Zwibel, a lawyer with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, says the process will hold government accountable and help get the full story about why cabinet enacted the emergency legislation.
The commission has until mid-February to deliver its final report to Parliament.
Email Update #100: Support the lawsuit that silenced the convoy
 Joel Harden, MPP<joel@joelharden.ca> | Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:17 PM |
| To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> | |
La version française suit. Read this message in your browser Tonight is our third emergency town hall in the last week. Our goal was to keep you informed about community efforts to get through this moment. As I said last week, we will outlast the convoy with neighbour-to-neighbour solidarity: looking in on others, offering safe walks, delivering meals to those in need, and creating digital platforms to pool resources and skills. This is what we’ve promoted, and those efforts are working. Our focus tonight, however, is quite practical. We will share how you can support the citizen-led lawsuit that silenced the convoy horns. Zexi Li, Paul Champ, Emelie Taman and others won an injunction against convoy honking in the downtown core last Monday. The honking reached 84 decibels in Zexi’s home at one point, and that’s the equivalent of running a lawnmower in your living room. But since February 7, the residents of Centretown, Lowertown, and Sandy Hill have been able to sleep. The honking has stopped. But that legal effort costs money, and we need your support. You can donate to The Ottawa Fund hosted by Friends of the Ottawa Convoy Class Action Fight. We are living in a unique moment that will be discussed for some time. But let’s never forget how we came together when our institutions failed. My very best, Joel -- Health card expiry extended The Ontario government has extended the expiry dates for health cards until September 30, 2022. Ontarians will continue to be able to use their expired health card, including a red and white health card, to access insured health care services. Health care providers can continue to accept expired health cards following the previous February 28, 2022 deadline. Rapid tests announcement The province is is expanding access to free rapid testing kits to the general public for at-home use. Starting February 9, over 2,300 participating grocery and pharmacy locations will provide free rapid tests while supplies last, with a limit of one box of five tests per household per visit. A list of participating retailers as well as information on how retail locations are distributing rapid test kits can be found at Ontario.ca/rapidtest.
Please note: our offices are currently closed for in-person services. We continue to serve you over phone and email. You are receiving this email because you have either signed an action item on our website, or wrote to us. During COVID-19, we send weekly MPP updates such as this one. To unsubscribe, you can reply to this email letting us know or click the link at the bottom of this email. David, Ce soir, c'est notre troisième réunion publique d'urgence en une semaine. Notre objectif était de vous tenir informés des efforts de la communauté pour traverser ce moment. Comme je l'ai dit la semaine dernière, nous survivrons au convoi grâce à la solidarité entre voisins : en veillant sur les autres, en offrant des promenades sûres, en livrant des repas aux personnes dans le besoin et en créant des plateformes numériques pour mettre en commun les ressources et les compétences. C'est ce que nous avons encouragé, et ces efforts portent leurs fruits. Ce soir, cependant, nous nous concentrons sur un aspect plus pratique. Nous avons besoin de votre soutien pour le procès mené par les citoyens qui a fait taire les klaxons des convois. Zexi Li, Paul Champ, Emilie Taman et d'autres ont obtenu une injonction contre les klaxons des convois dans le centre-ville lundi dernier. À un moment donné, les klaxons atteignaient 84 décibels au domicile de Zexi, ce qui équivaut à faire fonctionner une tondeuse à gazon dans votre salon. Mais depuis le 7 février, les résidents du centre-ville, de la Basse-Ville et de la Côte-de-Sable peuvent dormir. Les klaxons ont cessé. Mais cet effort juridique coûte de l'argent, et nous avons besoin de votre soutien. Alors, s'il vous plaît, faites un don au Fonds d'Ottawa organisé par les Amis de la lutte contre le recours collectif contre le convoi d'Ottawa. Partagez ce que vous pouvez. Nous vivons un moment unique qui fera l'objet de discussions pendant un certain temps. Mais n'oublions jamais comment nous nous sommes rassemblés lorsque nos institutions ont échoué. Partagez votre amour avec le procès qui nous a aidé à prendre le virage. Mes meilleurs voeux, Joel -- Prolongation de l'expiration de la carte santé Le gouvernement de l'Ontario a prolongé la date d'expiration des cartes santé jusqu'au 30 septembre 2022. Les Ontariens pourront continuer à utiliser leur carte santé périmée, y compris la carte santé rouge et blanche, pour accéder aux services de soins de santé assurés. Les fournisseurs de soins de santé peuvent continuer à accepter les cartes santé expirées après la date limite précédente du 28 février 2022. Annonce de tests rapides La province élargit l'accès aux trousses de dépistage rapide gratuites au grand public pour une utilisation à domicile. À partir du 9 février, plus de 2 300 épiceries et pharmacies participantes offriront des tests rapides gratuits jusqu'à épuisement des stocks, avec une limite d'une boîte de cinq tests par ménage et par visite. Une liste des détaillants participants ainsi que des renseignements sur la façon dont les détaillants distribuent les trousses de test rapide se trouvent à l'adresse Ontario.ca/rapidtest.
Veuillez noter que nos bureaux sont fermés pour les services en personne alors que les Ontariens sont appelés à travailler à domicile. Nous continuons à vous servir par téléphone et par courrier électronique. Vous recevez cet e-mail parce que vous avez signé une action sur notre site web ou que vous nous avez écrit. Pendant COVID-19, nous envoyons des mises à jour hebdomadaires, comme celle-ci. Pour vous désabonner, vous pouvez répondre à cet e-mail en nous le faisant savoir ou cliquer sur le lien au bas de cet e-mail. Joel Harden, MPP | ||||||
| -=-=- Joel Harden, MPP · 109 Catherine St, Ottawa, ON K2P 0P4, Canada |
Created with NationBuilder, software for leaders.
Automatic Response Re: Methinks Justin Trudeau's buddies Joel Harden and Justin Ling should not deny that I just called them again N"esy Pas?
Joel Harden<joel@joelharden.ca> | Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 10:14 AM |
| To: motomaniac333@gmail.com | |
Thank you for your email to MPP Joel Harden.
Please note that we are currently receiving a very large amount of correspondence. We are reading every email and prioritizing responding to urgent and time-sensitive requests.
If your email is regarding the “freedom convoy”
We hear you that the protest was and continues to be incredibly traumatic and disruptive for our community, especially those in the downtown core and Centretown. We are reading every single one of your emails about how this is affecting you, and MPP Harden is ready to work with all levels of government to do what is needed and facilitate a safe exit of the convoy from our streets.
MPP Harden is pushing for action by calling for Premier Ford and the Ontario government to step in with financial support for our residents, workers, and small businesses affected by the convoy. We are also calling on the Ford government to provide logistical support with health and safety inspectors who can assist with fining people breaking our health and safety laws.
If your email is regarding assistance with a provincial service or casework
Please fill out this intake form on our website and our caseworker will get back to you promptly: https://www.joelhardenmpp.ca/
For all other inquiries, including meeting requests, media requests and other issues facing our community
We will respond swiftly and promptly
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 10:14:10 -0400
Subject: Methinks Justin Trudeau's buddies Joel Harden and Justin Ling
should not deny that I just called them again N"esy Pas?
To: justinrling@gmail.com, joel@joelharden.ca,
Donna.Riguidel@forces.gc.ca, "Thomas.Lawson"
< Thomas.Lawson@forces.gc.ca>, Glen Canning <grcanning@gmail.com>,
"scott.macrae" <scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, patrick_doran1
< patrick_doran1@hotmail.com>, mcu <mcu@justice.gc.ca>, "david.hansen"
< david.hansen@justice.gc.ca>, "don.iveson" <don.iveson@edmonton.ca>,
Cindy Bruneau <Cindy.Bruneau@edmonton.ca>, premier
< premier@gov.ab.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, jesse <jesse@jessebrown.ca>,
"lorne.gunter" <lorne.gunter@sunmedia.ca>, "joshua.skurnik"
< joshua.skurnik@hotmail.com>, "Staples, David (Edm Journal)"
< dstaples@edmontonjournal.com>, "Jacques.Poitras"
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
paul.mcleod@buzzfeed.com, justin.ling@vice.com, macklamoureux
< macklamoureux@gmail.com>, "macpherson.don"
< macpherson.don@dailygleaner.
https://justinling.ca/
https://www.canadaland.com/
Rumours Of A Suppressed Globe Story About Justin Trudeau Are Bullshit
There is no evidence that Trudeau was once fired for an affair. There
is no gag order. There is no Globe story.
October 8, 2019
Analysis By Justin Ling
It’s a bit funny that there has been so much fear over a Russian
disinformation effort in this election, given that Canadians seem
perfectly willing to churn out disinformation all on our own.
In recent weeks, rumours and innuendo have swirled suggesting that The
Globe and Mail has been working on a hot scoop about Justin Trudeau’s
departure from West Point Grey Academy, the Vancouver school he worked
at in his late 20s.
It’s at that school where Trudeau donned brownface in a shockingly
racist display — the academy’s 2000-01 yearbook is what broke the
story wide open.
But many have begun peddling a whole other scandal out of Trudeau’s
time at West Point Grey.
Plenty of the chatter is just the usual drone of social media —
anti-Trudeau denizens of Twitter and Facebook swapping speculation and
untruths.
That baseless nonsense, however, has been finding ways to break through.
Ottawa-based Frank Magazine, a noted gossip rag, suggested that
Trudeau’s exit from the school may have been due to an affair with a
student’s mother — but introduced that info with “Another account has
it that…” without any kind of sourcing.
Then former Liberal Warren Kinsella began teasing on Twitter some big
Globe scoop that would supposedly get to the heart of the story. That,
in turn, only ramped-up the wild-eyed online myth-making.
Blogger James DiFiore — one of few people in modern history to be
convicted for voting multiple times in a Canadian federal election —
took it into another realm, claiming it was a teenager that Trudeau
had slept with.
Then more wackiness from the wider peanut gallery: That there’s a
conspiracy afoot. That there’s a non-disclosure agreement. That
Trudeau took the Globe to court to block the story.
It all culminated in a Conservative Party press release sent to
journalists on Monday afternoon, just ahead of the official
English-language leaders’ debate.
The release took a very we’re just asking questions tone, but was a
huge wink-and-nod to the swirling absurdity. “Why did Justin Trudeau
leave West Point Grey Academy?” the release asked, obtusely. “What’s
the real reason? Why has his story changed so many times, and if the
above reports are incorrect, why hasn’t Trudeau corrected the record?”
Screenshot from Conservative Party website showing the top of their
October 7, 2019, news release headlined: "Why did Justin Trudeau leave
his teaching job at West Point Grey Academy?"
A Conservative Party of Canada news release sent out Monday.
All this, which presupposed an awful lot, only exacerbated the issue.
Soon Kinsella was sharing it, adding: “The question isn’t going away.”
On Monday, the Conservative Party also registered
westpointgreyacademyscandal.ca — though there’s nothing at the domain
and the registration has since been anonymized. (Liberals were left
wondering if it was meant as a psych-out campaign before the debate.)
Then The Buffalo Chronicle, a noted fake-news site which Canadaland
has reported on previously, relished in the opportunity. “Sources are
now telling The Chronicle that Trudeau is in private talks with the
principal source of that piece to suppress explosive sex allegations
that, if made public, would likely force Trudeau to resign his
office,” they wrote.
The trouble with this is that it’s all bullshit.
Let’s start with the Globe: journalists there had been looking into
the reasons behind Trudeau’s departure from the school. But they
didn’t find anything nefarious.
Reporters at the paper have been confused, for weeks, about this rumoured story.
At a press conference late last week, Globe reporter Marieke Walsh
asked Trudeau about what she described as “unfounded rumours” about
why he left. “I moved on,” Trudeau said. He was also asked about
whether he signed a non-disclosure agreement. His answer, simply, was
“no.”
Two well-placed sources at the paper tell Canadaland that, yes, there
was an investigation into why he left the school — but that it failed
to turn up any evidence of an alleged affair. There was no court
injunction, no gag order.
Even the premise of the idea that the courts got involved is wild —
while a judge could, in theory, bar a newspaper from reporting such a
story, it couldn’t make secret the fact that it heard the case.
Trudeau v. The Globe and Mail would be on the court dockets. It isn’t.
The Liberal Party has also told Canadaland categorically, no, there is
no court action of any kind against the Globe.
So what’s the real story?
In his 2014 book Common Ground, Trudeau wrote that he left West Point
Grey over a dispute around the student paper, of which he was in
charge. A student took a pointed stance in its pages, earning
reprimand from the administration — which also shut down the paper
itself. “[That] convinced me that West Point Grey was not the best fit
for me as a teacher, nor I for them. Shortly after, I took a teaching
position in the Vancouver public school system,” Trudeau wrote.
It’s a Sorkin-esque stand on principle that sounds a bit contrived,
but it’s actually backed up.
In his 2017 unauthorized biography of Trudeau, writer Alan Hustak
largely reinforced the story, but in a slightly less flattering light.
Turns out the offending article, which Trudeau signed off on,
“savaged” an English teacher at the school. Hustak, citing former
headmaster Clive Austin, wrote in Magnetic North that Trudeau himself
also got reprimanded for putting the paper out. “Justin advanced the
argument that his students had the right to ‘free speech.’ Austin
didn’t buy it. West Point Grey released Justin from his contract.”
Austin put out a statement last week amid all this mess.
“I recall the day that Justin visited me in my office near the end of
the 2000-2001 school year and told me he had enjoyed his first few
years of teaching, yet was considering a return to Montreal,” the
statement read. It added that “we parted company on good terms.”
A 2015 Global story, which spoke to former students and faculty,
reported that Trudeau left “to pursue new challenges.” The same year,
CBC spoke to former students and collected social media posts, with no
mention of the supposed affair. There’s a Reddit thread with some of
his former students sharing stories as well, also with no mention.
Publicly, at the time (as is played up by the Tories) Trudeau said he
was moving on to give speeches.
There is nothing to this story. There is no evidence that Trudeau was
fired for an affair. There is no gag order. There is no Globe story.
Kinsella knows nothing about any of this, as is par for the course.
Justin Ling writes regularly for a variety of Canadian publications
and is the co-host of Canadaland’s OPPO podcast.
Updated on October 8, 2019, at 5:35 p.m. EDT to include information
about the westpointgreyacademyscandal.ca domain.
https://globalnews.ca/news/
‘A family affair’: Canada’s next first lady? Lunch with Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau
By Laura Stone Global News
Posted March 23, 2015 11:48 am
Updated October 21, 2015 9:33 am
Lunch with Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau in Ottawa. (Laura Stone/Global News).
Lunch with Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau in Ottawa. (Laura Stone/Global News).
OTTAWA – It is the first sunny day the nation’s capital has seen in a
while, and Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau wears a flower-print shirt speckled
with yellow for the occasion as she bounds out of a booth in Lower
Town’s Das Lokal restaurant to say hello.
Fitting, too, since the 39-year-old mother of three and wife of
Liberal leader Justin Trudeau is preparing to emerge from her
self-declared “cave” since giving birth to her son, Hadrien, almost a
year ago.
“I’m still feeding so I’m not totally free. I love it. I’ll probably
do it until he asks to stop,” she laughs.
WATCH: Justin Trudeau thanks his wife Sophie and his family as they
get set to embark on “an adventure together”
Ever since her husband won the leadership in April 2013 and
Grégoire-Trudeau appeared at his side with their other two children –
Xavier, 7, and six-year-old Ella-Grace – it was clear that Trudeau’s
family would play a role in his political life and as prime minister,
if he gets that far.
Justin Trudeau, his wife Sophie Gregoire and their children Xavier and
Ella-Grace celebrate after he won the Federal Liberal leadership
Sunday April 14, 2013 in Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld
Justin Trudeau, his wife Sophie Gregoire and their children Xavier and
Ella-Grace celebrate after he won the Federal Liberal leadership
Sunday April 14, 2013 in Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld.
As Canada readies itself for an October election, that time is now.
“I’ve always been involved on a personal level, as a couple, in what
we’re doing, in the journey we have embarked on,” Grégoire-Trudeau
says.
“And I feel that now that things are getting more concrete, and
that we’re approaching elections, yes I want to support him and this
is a family affair as well.”
Tweet This Click to share quote on Twitter: "And I feel that now
that things are getting more concrete, and that we're approaching
elections, yes I want to support him and this is a family affair as
well."
For Grégoire-Trudeau, that means opening herself up to the public:
talking about her life as an entertainment journalist turned
stay-at-home mom; about how to provide her children with stability
without shielding them from the reality of Trudeau’s profession (“I
don’t want my kids to be raised thinking they’ll get into a park and
people applaud”); and raising awareness about eating disorders, from
which she once suffered.
I ask her about the language being used to describe the role that
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s wife, Laureen, will play during the
election. Leaked documents have suggested the Conservatives are going
to “leverage” her to connect with voters during the campaign.
But Grégoire-Trudeau doesn’t see that as being used.
“I’m going to turn 40, so I’m going into politics at a certain time in
my life where I have a better idea of who I am and what I stand for,”
says Grégoire-Trudeau, who celebrates her birthday next month.
“I don’t see it as a game to play. I will stay who I am, and I connect
well with people, because it comes from a true place. Not a role that
I’m trying to fill. So I’m not worried.”
As for Laureen Harper?
“Good if the wife of a prime minister wants to connect with the
people, because that’s why we’re here. And I heard she’s fun. So, do
it.”
It’s an attitude of increased visibility the country has not seen for
some time, and, perhaps, a sign of things to come if Grégoire-Trudeau
moves into 24 Sussex this fall.
“It’s important for Canadians to have a better idea of who stands by
the person who is holding such an important role, and what kind of
values does she share, and what does she do with her life, and what
are her passions?” Grégoire-Trudeau says.
“I want people to get to know me, because I want to get to know them.”
No marriage is easy
Out of the house for a rare afternoon, Grégoire-Trudeau is using her
family’s favourite restaurant as an office of sorts.
After lunch, there’s a meeting with Valerie Galley, wife of Assembly
of First Nations chief Perry Bellegarde, to discuss the issue of
missing and murdered aboriginal girls – a cause Grégoire-Trudeau took
up when she heard about the near-death beating of Winnipeg teen
Rinelle Harper.
“I was reading the newspaper in the morning, and I just had a knot in
my throat. I said, I have to do something. I can’t sit here and do
nothing – I can’t. So I called up her family,” she says.
Grégoire-Trudeau, who tries to eat healthily, admits to loving
“everything.” She doesn’t tolerate pickiness in her home. (“Sorry,”
she tells her kids. “This is what I made for dinner.”)
“Should we order?” she asks, looking down at the drink menu by mistake.
“Ok I’ll have a tequila!” she laughs, before settling on creamy carrot
soup followed by cod with thyme, lemon and polenta.
Usually in yoga clothes, Grégoire-Trudeau takes pains to note this is
not a typical day.
She calls her daily routine “ever so boring.”
“I think people have this perception of the life that I lead, or that
we lead, of drivers, the high life,” she says. “It’s not that.”
There is no security detail, not even after a highly-publicized
incident at the Trudeaus’ Rockcliffe Park home last year.
Last August, a “very intoxicated” 19-year-old man wandered into their
unlocked home by mistake, laying knives out on the table and leaving a
threatening note behind.
Grégoire-Trudeau and her children were upstairs sleeping.
“That event was not cool,” Grégoire-Trudeau says.
Tweet This Click to share quote on Twitter: "That event was not
cool," Grégoire-Trudeau says.
“I don’t want to be going to bed at night thinking that people want to
harm us, or my family, because that’s when the lioness comes out. And
I don’t want to live that way. I mean, now, do I put my alarm system
every single night? Yes. Do I double check all the doors? Yes. But do
I freak out about it? No.”
Born into a family of water-skiers, Grégoire-Trudeau was on skis by
the time she was four. The family also does skating, swimming, biking,
canoeing – “Justin loves to canoe” – camping, and tennis.
“We do so much stuff,” she says.
After studying commerce at McGill University and then communications
at the University of Montreal, she got her start in TV as a news
ticker writer. She worked her way up to a Quebec correspondent at
eTalk, where she held a position until 2010 before staying at home
full-time.
“I’m at home with the kids, it was a decision that I had the luck and
luxury, in a way, to be able to make,” she says.
Publicity in political life has thus far been an anomaly.
“It’s not really part of my daily life. It’s like one per cent of my
life, and I like it that way.”
I ask if she’s worried about opening herself up to the public, and in
so doing, her marriage.
Justin Trudeau kisses his wife Sophie Gregoire as they leave the stage
after he won the Federal Liberal leadership Sunday April 14, 2013 in
Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld View image in full screen
Justin Trudeau kisses his wife Sophie Gregoire as they leave the stage
after he won the Federal Liberal leadership Sunday April 14, 2013 in
Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld.
Following the release of his memoir last fall, Trudeau was asked
during a CBC interview about extramarital affairs, which he denied.
“Ha! Really?” Grégoire-Trudeau says.
“Ask if whatever happened in our lives – I’m not saying it did or
didn’t – as if we would answer that.”
She puts down her fork and looks across the table.
“I can tell you right away that no marriage is easy,” she says.
“I’m almost kind of proud of the fact that we’ve had hardship, yes,
because we want authenticity. We want truth. We want to grow closer as
individuals through our lifetime and we’re both dreamers and we want
to be together for as long as we can.
“I’m happy that we had to go through that.”
On Trudeau’s decision-making
After speaking at the same event in Montreal 12 years ago, it took
Trudeau almost three months to ask his future wife to dinner.
“I told him that he should bring me to a restaurant that he’s never
been to and I’ve never been to. So we ended up in this little, I would
call it, tiny joint,” Grégoire-Trudeau says.
The joint was an Afghan restaurant with interior garden, recommended
by Trudeau’s younger brother, Sacha, who has “eclectic tastes.”
The date went on for hours.
“We went karaoke-ing, had ice cream. And he brought me back to my
place,” Grégoire-Trudeau says.
“His face changed, and he says, ‘I’m 31 years-old.’ And I’m like,
‘Yes?’ And he says, ‘I’ve been waiting for you 31 years.’ We both
bawled like babies, and that was it.”
“I tell that to my children.”
By chance, Grégoire-Trudeau had also gone to school with her husband’s
other brother, Michel, who died in an avalanche in 1998. She had even
been to a graduation party at Pierre Trudeau’s home in Montreal, where
the eldest Trudeau brother was serving beers.
Margaret Trudeau (left) arrives on Parliament Hill with sons Justin
(centre) and Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau (right) where former prime
minister Pierre Trudeau will lie in state Saturday September 30, 2000.
(CP PHOTO/Adrian Wyld) View image in full screen
Margaret Trudeau (left) arrives on Parliament Hill with sons Justin
(centre) and Alexandre (Sacha) Trudeau (right) where former prime
minister Pierre Trudeau will lie in state Saturday September 30, 2000.
(CP PHOTO/Adrian Wyld).
“We’re so lucky that’s how we found each other. It’s crazy,” she says.
Married for 10 years, Grégoire-Trudeau calls her relationship “super close.”
“We talk about everything,” she says.
Tweet This Click to share quote on Twitter: "We talk about
everything," she says.
“We have great debates. I would say that our values are the same, but
because we’re man and woman, and we’re a couple, sometimes we’ll
disagree on some stuff, right. It’s just normal.”
She says Trudeau’s decisions, such as removing two of his caucus
colleagues following harassment allegations, weigh heavily on him –
and he goes through a philosophical process to make them.
“It’s not just based on what he thinks. That is where the danger comes
in – when it’s based on your own personal values, exclusively. And
that’s not what he tries to do,” she says.
“Yes, he’s a lone thinker, he likes to be able to just go be in
silence and think things out. And he also has a team of people with
which he debates in a healthy way to make sure that everybody has
their own opinion, that it’s not a ‘yes, yes, yes’ kind of
environment. And then there’s family, and then there’s sleeping on it.
“And feeling that it’s the right thing to do for the most amount of
people, and that in the long run it’s the right decision.”
She believes her husband has a chance of winning this year’s election,
something she credits with his ability to connect with the public.
“I see something happen when people meet Justin, and look into his
eyes, and be face to face with him,” she says. “The exchange is real,
and they feel him.”
Most of all, Trudeau reminds his wife that politics is about helping the public.
And if Grégoire-Trudeau becomes the de-facto first lady of Canada
later this year, that is what she will remember.
“If you’re in power, or you’re in a position of responsibility, and
you think that people are there for you – it’s the opposite. We’re
there to serve them. And that’s how I want my children to be brought
up,” she says.
“It moves me when I talk about it. Because, if the people give you
their trust, your first responsibility is to be of service to them.”
© 2015 Shaw Media
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Joel Harden, MPP" <joel@joelharden.ca>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 00:17:35 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Email Update #100: Support the lawsuit that silenced the convoy
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
La version française suit. Read this message in your browser
< https://www.joelhardenmpp.ca/
David, <https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Tonight is our third emergency town hall in the last week.
< https://www.joelhardenmpp.ca/
Our goal was to keep you informed about community efforts to get
through this moment.
As I said last week, we will outlast the convoy with
neighbour-to-neighbour solidarity: looking in on others, offering safe
walks, delivering meals to those in need, and creating digital
platforms to pool resources and skills. This is what we’ve promoted,
and those efforts are working.
Our focus tonight, however, is quite practical. We will share how you
can support the citizen-led lawsuit that silenced the convoy horns.
Zexi Li, Paul Champ, Emelie Taman and others won an injunction against
convoy honking in the downtown core last Monday. The honking reached
84 decibels in Zexi’s home at one point, and that’s the equivalent of
running a lawnmower in your living room.
But since February 7, the residents of Centretown, Lowertown, and
Sandy Hill have been able to sleep. The honking has stopped.
But that legal effort costs money, and we need your support. You can
donate to The Ottawa Fund hosted by Friends of the Ottawa Convoy Class
Action Fight <http://www.ottawafund.ca>.
We are living in a unique moment that will be discussed for some time.
But let’s never forget how we came together when our institutions
failed.
My very best,
Joel
---------- Original message ----------
From: Justin Ling <justin.ling@vice.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:53:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Methinks the DND and the RCMP really should figure out
who you truly work for ASAP EH Mr Baconfat?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Stop emailing me.
Justin Ling
VICE
c: 613-407-2292
PIN: 2AE185AB
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 12:47:32 -0700
Subject: Methinks the DND and the RCMP really should figure out who
you truly work for ASAP EH Mr Baconfat?
To: Donna.Riguidel@forces.gc.ca, "Thomas.Lawson"
< Thomas.Lawson@forces.gc.ca>, sunrayzulu <sunrayzulu@shaw.ca>,
"jason.kenney" <jason.kenney.a1@parl.gc.ca>, cblatchford
< cblatchford@postmedia.com>, Glen Canning <grcanning@gmail.com>,
"scott.macrae" <scott.macrae@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, patrick_doran1
< patrick_doran1@hotmail.com>, "rod.knecht"
< rod.knecht@edmontonpolice.ca>
"Marianne.Ryan" <Marianne.Ryan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
< Charmaine.Bulger@rcmp-grc.gc.
< peter.mackay@justice.gc.ca>, "david.hansen"
< david.hansen@justice.gc.ca>, "don.iveson" <don.iveson@edmonton.ca>,
Cindy Bruneau <Cindy.Bruneau@edmonton.ca>, premier
< premier@gov.ab.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, sean <sean@canadalandshow.com>,
jesse <jesse@jessebrown.ca>, "justin.ling" <justin.ling@vice.com>,
"lorne.gunter" <lorne.gunter@sunmedia.ca>, "joshua.skurnik"
< joshua.skurnik@hotmail.com>, "Staples, David (Edm Journal)"
< dstaples@edmontonjournal.com>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
< Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, acampbell <acampbell@ctv.ca>, "steve.murphy"
< steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
https://baconfatreport.
Tuesday, 2 November 2021
The CBC News is Too Too Funny today Methinks the LIEbranos and CUPE could use a little Deja Vu N'esy Pas Ross Wetmore?
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 04:31:12 +0000
Subject: RE: YO Mr Jones do ya think Higgy or Stevey Boy Murphy or
everybody's evil blogging buddy Chucky Lelanc will explain just one of
my old emails to the latest CUPE Bosses?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
Thank you for taking the time to write.
Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.
If your inquiry more appropriately falls within the mandate of a
Ministry or other area of government, staff will refer your email for
review and consideration.
Merci d'avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
En raison du volume des messages reçus, cette réponse automatique vous
informe que votre courriel a été reçu et sera examiné dans les
meilleurs délais.
Si votre demande relève plutôt du mandat d'un ministère ou d'un autre
secteur du gouvernement, le personnel vous renverra votre courriel
pour examen et considération.
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144 or by email
media-medias@gnb.ca<mailto:med
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000 Fredericton New-Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick E3B 5H1 Canada
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/premier.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 01:31:06 -0300
Subject: Fwd: YO Mr Jones do ya think Higgy or Stevey Boy Murphy or
everybody's evil blogging buddy Chucky Lelanc will explain just one of
my old emails to the latest CUPE Bosses?
To: andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca, Bruce.Macfarlane@gnb.ca,
marc.martin@snb.ca, hugh.flemming@gnb.ca, robert.gauvin@gnb.ca,
kris.austin@gnb.ca, michelle.conroy@gnb.ca,
attorneygeneral@ontario.ca, caroline.mulroneyco@pc.ola.org,
rbrossard@contribuables.ca, krondolo@generationscrewed.ca,
federal.director@taxpayer.com, jbowes@taxpayer.com,
Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca, Ernie.Steeves@gnb.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca,
tyler.campbell@gnb.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
PABMINMAILG@cra-arc.gc.ca, premier@gov.bc.ca,
strathmore.brooks@assembly.ab.
calgary.lougheed@assembly.ab.
premier@gnb.ca, premier@ontario.ca, scott.moe@gov.sk.ca,
premier@gov.ab.ca, premier@leg.gov.mb.ca, ksims@taxpayer.com,
fterrazzano@taxpayer.com, pmacpherson@taxpayer.com,
on.director@taxpayer.com, prairie@taxpayer.com,
Diane.Lebouthillier@cra-arc.
<barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, David.Coon@gnb.ca,
Kevin.A.Arseneau@gnb.ca, megan.mitton@gnb.ca, "Mike.Comeau"
<Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, ministryofjustice <ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca>,
"Holland, Mike (LEG)" <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, jcarpay
<jcarpay@jccf.ca>, "Petrie, Jamie" <JPetrie@nbpower.com>, "Furey,
John" <john.furey@mcinnescooper.com>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "howard.anglin"
<howard.anglin@gmail.com>, "John.Williamson"
<John.Williamson@parl.gc.ca>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>,
"Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 01:18:15 -0300
Subject: YO Mr Jones do ya think Higgy or Stevey Boy Murphy or
everbody's evil blogging buddy Chucky Lelanc will explain just one of
my old emails to the latest CUPE Bosses?
To: "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, Stephendrost1418@gmail.com,
"Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee"
<robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, "Roger.L.Melanson" <roger.l.melanson@gnb.ca>,
"robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>,
fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@
Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca, jesse@viafoura.com,
news@dailygleaner.com, nben@nben.ca, premier@gnb.ca,
dominic.leblanc.c1@parl.gc.ca, Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca, jeff.carr@gnb.ca,
oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.
megan.mitton@gnb.ca, David.Coon@gnb.ca, Kevin.A.Arseneau@gnb.ca,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, nick.brown@gnb.ca, Trevor.Holder@gnb.ca,
michelle.conroy@gnb.ca, carl.davies@gnb.ca,
Roger.Brown@fredericton.ca, ron.tremblay2@gmail.com,
Bill.Morneau@canada.ca, premier <premier@ontario.ca>,
philippe@dunsky.com, Steven_Reid3@carleton.ca,
darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca, Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca, "sylvie.gadoury"
<sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.
<Cyril.Theriault@gmail.com>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, pchamp@champlaw.ca, "hugh.flemming"
<hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, Newsroom
<Newsroom@globeandmail.com>
Steve Drost Elected President of CUPE NB
This Saturday April 24 2021, Steve Drost has been elected for a 2-year term as provincial president of the New Brunswick Division of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE NB). More than 200 delegates, representing CUPE locals from across the province, elected Drost to lead New Brunswick’s largest union. The vote was conducted Saturday afternoon at CUPE NB’s 58th annual convention, which took place virtually, Friday and Saturday.
Role of the Clerk
The Clerk of the Privy Council has three main roles:
- Deputy Minister to the Prime Minister
- Secretary to the Cabinet
- Head of the federal public service
The Clerk’s job is to advise the Prime Minister and elected Government officials in managing the country. The Clerk does so from an objective, non-partisan, public policy perspective. He also ensures Canada's federal public service is managed effectively and follows a code of value and ethics in its work to design and deliver high quality services and programs for Canadians and their families.
To do this, the Clerk and the team at the Privy Council Office:
- Work with departments and agencies to develop policy options and choices for the Government.
- Advise and support ministers in making policy decisions.
- Record Cabinet decisions, inform departments and agencies about them, and work with the public service to carry them out in a timely and effective way.
Meet the Clerk
Following her tenure as Interim Clerk, which began on March 9, 2021, Janice Charette became the Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet on May 28, 2022.
Prior to rejoining the Privy Council, Ms. Charette was the High Commissioner for Canada in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and agreed to serve as Interim Clerk while Ian Shugart is on medical leave.
From October 2014 to January 2016, Ms. Charette was Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet. Previously, she was Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council and Associate Secretary to the Cabinet (2013-2014), as well as Associate Secretary to the Cabinet and Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (2010-2013).
In addition, Ms. Charette has held several senior leadership positions in the public service, including:
- Deputy Minister for Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (2006–2010)
- Deputy Minister for Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2004–2006)
- Associate Deputy Minister for Health Canada (2003–2004)
Ms. Charette attended Carleton University, where she received a Bachelor of Commerce degree, and she was granted an honorary doctorate from Kingston University, United Kingdom. In March 2021, Ms. Charette received the ICD.D designation from the Institute of Corporate Directors. The designation represents a commitment to excellence in the boardroom and the highest standards of leadership.
Nathalie G. Drouin became Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council and Associate Secretary to the Cabinet on August 23, 2021.
Prior to joining the Privy Council Office, Mrs. Drouin was Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada from June 2017 to August 2021. Mrs. Drouin previously served as Senior Associate Deputy Minister of the Department of Justice of Canada from September 2016 to June 2017.
From September 2012 to September 2016, Mrs. Drouin was Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General for the Gouvernement du Québec.
In addition, she held a number of positions within the Autorité des marchés financiers, including Director of Legal Affairs and Director General of Market Supervision and Legal Affairs.
Nathalie G. Drouin holds a bachelor’s degree in law and a post-graduate diploma in business administration, both from Université Laval. She has been a member of the Quebec Bar since 1992.
Hammond ON tanphoto.ca
Methinks this hearing will make for a fine "October Surprise" on both sides of the "Medicine Line" N'esy Pas? Peek a BOO
https://www.cpac.ca/episode?id=639648f1-3bb9-4a9a-b5a0-6e6d8a5097d0
Public Order Emergency Commission – October 13, 2022
Public hearings of the Public Order Emergency Commission begin in Ottawa. The commission, led by Paul Rouleau, is studying the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 to declare a public order emergency. The declaration of emergency came in response to protests, at a number of Canada–U.S. border crossings and in downtown Ottawa, opposing the government’s COVID-19 public-health measures. The Emergencies Act requires an inquiry to be held following any declaration of emergency, with the mandate of examining both the circumstances of the declaration and the measures taken under it. Please note: Video with ASL sign language interpretation is available at https://publicorderemergencycommission.ca/
Meet the Commissioner, the Honourable Paul Rouleau, and the team of professionals supporting the work of the Commission.
Commissioner
Co-lead Counsel
Senior Counsel
Regional Counsel
Counsel
- Stephen Armstrong
- Misha Boutilier
- Eric Brousseau
- Sajeda Hedaraly
- Alexandra Heine
- Nusra Khan
- Étienne Lacombe
- John Mather
- Allison McMahon
- Jean-Simon Schoenholz
- Dahlia Shuhaibar
- Guillaume Sirois-Gingras
Senior Policy Advisors
Research Council
- Geneviève Cartier – Chair
- Jamie Cameron
- Michelle Gallant
- Nomi Claire Lazar
- Kent Roach, CM, FRSC is a professor of Law at the University of Toronto. He formerly served as director of research to numerous inquiries and reviews, including the Commission of Inquiry into the Bombing of Air India Flight 182 and the Independent Review of the Toronto Police’s Missing Persons Investigations. He also served on the research advisory committees for the Arar and Ipperwash inquiries. He wrote expert reports on police-government relations for Ontario’s Ipperwash Inquiry and Quebec’s Inquiry into the Protection of Journalist Sources. He was volume lead for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s volume five on the legacy of residential schools for Indigenous people. Acting pro-bono, he has represented Aboriginal Legal Services in a number of Supreme Court cases. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada in 2002, appointed as a member of the Order of Canada in 2015, and was awarded the Molson Prize for contributions to the social sciences and humanities in 2017. His most recent book published by Irwin Law this year is Canadian Policing: Why and How it Must Change.
- Clifford Shearing
- Jocelyn Stacey
Staff
- Hélène Laurendeau – Executive Director, A member in good standing of the Barreau du Québec since 1986, Hélène has practiced law in private practice and for the Department of Justice Canada in the fields of administrative law, labour law and human rights law. Retired from the public Service of Canada after 30 years of service, she successively held the positions of Associate Deputy Minister and Deputy Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. She assumed the role of Deputy Minister and oversaw the creation of the Department of Crown Indigenous-Relations and Northern Affairs Canada when it was created in 2018. Ms. Laurendeau retired as Deputy Minister of Canadian Heritage.
-
Michael Tansey – Senior Communications Adv
Michael Tansey is a communications professional with over 30 years of experience in strategic communications planning, media relations and crisis communications. A former journalist, Mr. Tansey has worked on two previous public inquiries, including the Commission of Inquiry into the Bombing of Air India Flight 182. He is also a freelance writer/photographer who has worked in every major policy area including Indigenous affairs, health, justice, the environment, and intergovernmental affairs.
Mr. Tansey was educated in English and French in Montreal and is fully bilingual.
General inquiries
For general enquiries about the Commission's mandate, please contact info@poec-cedu.gc.ca.
Media inquiries
For media enquiries and/or to be added to the media list and receive updates, please contact Michael.Tansey@poec-cedu.gc.ca
613 851 4587
https://www.loopstranixon.com/lawyers/bio/jason-beitchman
Jason Beitchman
Partner
Firm Expands into the Financial District with New Office and the Addition of Litigation Partner, Jason Beitchman
June 29th 2022 - Toronto
Loopstra Nixon LLP announced today the opening of its financial district office in the Richmond-Adelaide Centre in Downtown Toronto. The Western Toronto-based law firm has permanently relocated a team of lawyers to the downtown core as the firm continues its expansion. The group includes, Jason Beitchman (formerly of Rayman Beitchman LLP) who has joined the firm as a partner to lead its Commercial Litigation team downtown.
Bobbi-Ann Wallace (Co-Chair, Corporate/Commercial Law and Head of the Competition Practice), Graham Phoenix (Head of the Bankruptcy, Insolvency & Restructuring) and the firm’s Managing Partner, Allan Ritchie, will also be based in the financial district office. Joining them are associates Adam Burt, Gordon Chan, Daniel Cohen, Clay Fernandes, Tamara Watson and Sarah White.
“We have grown from 16 to over 65 lawyers in the last decade without losing sight of our commitment to value, efficiency and mid-market excellence. In recent years we’ve increased our client following in the downtown core and recognized the need to bring our services closer to those clients,” said Ritchie.
The firm’s financial district office also includes hotelling facilities to accommodate a steady stream of lawyers working downtown on a non-permanent basis. Whether to encourage collaboration, facilitate client interaction or create flexibility in their day, the new office provides options for our lawyers (and our clients) that are critical in today’s evolving professional services environment. “Our culture is one of progress. We share the ambition of our clients and, as their strategic partners, we are committed to ensuring that our talent pool and the expertise of our team keeps pace,” says Phoenix.
Loopstra Nixon was founded 50 years ago by Charles Loopstra and Sandy Nixon, both of whom manage active practices to this day.
Contact Nikki McCourt, Content and Communications Specialist, for more information.
About Loopstra Nixon LLP
We are a team of client-centered lawyers who are shaping the future of business and public law in Canada. Learn more at www.loopstranixon.com.
Police handling of Ambassador Bridge blockade 'a success story,' OPP lawyer tells inquest
Police handling of the Ambassador Bridge blockade in February was “a success story,” said an OPP lawyer at the inquiry into the federal government’s invoking of the Emergencies Act earlier this year.
“In Windsor, you will hear about how the OPP took on a leadership role, working with the Windsor Police Service, and — with the help of additional resources from other police services — successfully cleared the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge,” said Christopher Diana, legal counsel for provincial police, speaking at the hearings of the Public Order Emergency Commission.
Lawyers representing various levels of government, law enforcement organizations, and the protesters gave opening remarks on the first day of the hearings in Ottawa on Thursday.
Diana said OPP provided “crucial assistance” to the police response to the so-called Freedom Convoy and its supporters in Ottawa, Toronto, and Windsor.
While Diana touted the OPP’s experience dealing with protests and blockades, he said the hearings will be an opportunity to examine “what worked well, what may not have worked as well, and potential lessons that were learned through these incidents in Ottawa, Windsor, and across the country.”
Police officers face Freedom Convoy supporters blockading the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor on Feb. 12, 2022. Photo by Jeff Kowalsky /Getty Images Diana noted that provincial police already had “sufficient legal authority” to respond to the demonstrations without the public emergency legislation that was activated at both the federal and provincial level.
Meanwhile, Antoine d’Ailly — legal counsel for a group calling itself Citizens For Freedom — said he and co-counsel Amanda Armstrong will represent “the interests and perspectives of the peaceful demonstrators in Windsor, Ontario.”
Citizens For Freedom, said d’Ailly, is participating in the hearings to “advance the interests of truth and transparency, and to assist this commission in producing a balanced and accurate public record.”
Police officers make an arrest after clearing the blockade of the
Ambassador Bridge by Freedom Convoy supporters in Windsor on Feb. 13,
2022. Photo by Nathan Denette /Canadian Press
The City of Windsor has retained a legal team to speak at the hearings. Jennifer King, one of the lawyers on the team, told the inquiry of Windsor’s geographic significance as a city with multiple border crossings.
“(The Ambassador Bridge) enters the City of Windsor, connecting directly to a municipal road — Huron Church Road, itself a critical economic artery for the city.”
“There is no direct provincial highway connecting the bridge and Highway 401.”
The blockade in February had “profound negative impacts not only on trade and the automotive sector, but also on the city, its residents, and its businesses,” King asserted.
King said the City of Windsor will cooperate fully with the commission, and is particularly interested in any policy recommendations that may result from the commission.
She described Windsor as “a local government on the front lines of emergency response” and “the home of critical infrastructure.”
The municipality is looking forward to recommendations and planning that “protects the international crossings in Windsor in a way that prioritizes and supports the interests and needs of the city and its residences and businesses,” King said.
As required by the Emergencies Act, the Public Order Emergency Commission has been formed to examine and assess the basis of the Government of Canada’s decision to declare a public order emergency on Feb. 14.
Among the subjects being dealt with is “the appropriateness and effectiveness” of the measures taken.
Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens — who is among the 65 witnesses, including the Prime Minister, set to speak at the hearings — is scheduled to give testimony in November, as is Acting Deputy Chief Jason Crowley of the Windsor Police Service.
https://standupcanada.solutions/legal-solutions/ols/products/legal-info-pkg2-tickets
LEGAL INFORMATION PACKAGE #2 - Represent Yourself in Provincial Offences Court
| File Name | Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| LEGAL INFORMATION PACKAGE #2 - Represent Yourself in Provincial Offences Court | 1.26 MB |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukUKc7-z0Kc&ab_channel=RebelNews
Civil liberties being restricted through unclear laws | Fight The Fines lawyer Amanda Armstrong
TDF receives standing to the Public Order Emergency Commission
Written by The Democracy Fund
June 29, 2022
The Honourable Paul Rouleau of the Ontario Court of Appeal has granted TDF standing to the Public Order Emergency Commission.
Toronto: The Democracy Fund (TDF) has been granted standing to the Public Order Emergency Commission by the Honourable Paul Rouleau, which is an independent public inquiry being held into the declaration of the Emergencies Act by the federal government during the trucker convoy protests in Ottawa and blockades at border crossings across Canada in February 2022.
In being granted standing, TDF can participate in this unprecedented and historical public inquiry by presenting evidence, examining witnesses and making legal submissions.
The Public Order Emergency Commission was established by the Governor in Council on April 25, 2022, and is a mandatory inquiry under the Emergencies Act. The inquiry was declared in response to the public order emergency declared by the Government of Canada on February 14, 2022, and which remained in effect until February 23, 2022.
The Commission will assess the events leading up to the declaration of the Emergencies Act and the measures taken for dealing with the emergency. The Commission will present its findings and recommendations in a final report to the House of Commons Senate by February 20, 2023.
TDF lawyers have been deeply involved in providing legal counsel and representation to truckers and peaceful protesters who participated in the protests and blockades, and also issued a statement on February 15, 2022, stating that the invocation of the Emergencies Act was unwarranted and may only be used in extraordinary circumstances such as a national emergency that seriously endangers the lives, health and safety of Canadians.
TDF shares its standing on the Commission with the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms and Citizens for Freedom.
To help in the fight against unconstitutional mandates, laws and government overreach, you can make a donation to support TDF.
About The Democracy Fund:
Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education. TDF supports an access to justice initiative for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.
On Thursday, October 13, TDF’s Litigation Director Alan Honner spoke to the Commission about our on-the-ground efforts in Ottawa and Windsor during the Freedom Convoy last February and explained that TDF is currently representing dozens of people who have been criminally charged in relation to the protests in Ottawa, Windsor and Coutts. And that TDF also represents thousands of others who have been charged under the Quarantine Act and other COVID-related matters.
In his opening statement, Alan Honner explained that TDF's objective is to participate in the fact-finding process of this inquiry. TDF wants to know the real reason why the federal government invoked the Emergencies Act. From our perspective, the government did not meet the requisite legal grounds to invoke a public order emergency. The extortionary measures the government invoked were inappropriate and outside of their jurisdiction.
In a later interview with Rebel News, Alan Honner points out the Ontario Provincial Police's (OPP) comment during yesterday's Public Order Emergency Commission about how the Windsor protest was dealt with and how this helped our case:
Alan Honner also highlights a very important comment made in the Alberta government's opening statement:
Watch Alan Honner's full interview with Rebel News where he discusses day 1 of the Public Order Emergency Commission:
E-transfer (Canada):
donations@thedemocracyfund.ca - password democracy if required
Cheques made out to The Democracy Fund:
PO Box 61035 Eglinton/Dufferin RO
Toronto, ON M6E 5B2
🚨 For E-transfer and cheque donations, please include the following legally required information:
- Full name
- Email address
- Full address
- If making a corporate or business contribution,
Alan Honner
Barrister & Solicitor
3416 Dundas Street West, Unit 201
Toronto, ON M6S 2S1
T: 416 303 6487
F: 416 352 5255
About
Alan Honner is a lawyer based in Toronto, Ontario. He represents clients in litigation, appeals and judicial reviews.
Alan has appeared as trial counsel in the Superior Court of Justice (Jury and Judge alone) and the Ontario Court of Justice. He has been counsel at the Ontario Court of Appeal, The Ontario Divisional Court and the Federal Court of Canada. He has also conducted hearings in various administrative tribunals including the Financial Services Commission of Ontario, the Landlord Tenant Board and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.
Alan is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School and the University of Waterloo. He is a former director at the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (2016-2022) and is a member of the Law Society of Ontario.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WINDSOR v. PERSONS
Antoine d’Ailly
Law Office of Antoine d'Ailly
https://www.lakeheadu.ca/users/A/ralford/node/21753
Prof. Ryan Alford
Professor
Thunder Bay
Hours: Monday to Friday 9:00am - 4:30pm
Office: PA 1010
Phone: +1 (807) 346-7866
Professor Alford received his doctorate in public, constitutional, and international law from the University of South Africa. He recently published two books on the subject of the rule of law with McGill-Queens' University Press. (Most of his law review articles are available on his SSRN page).
Prior, he was awarded his master’s degree from the University of Oxford and his law degree from New York University. He is called to the bar of Ontario and is an attorney and counselor-at-law of the state of New York.
Upon receiving his law degree, he served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Robert L. Carter of the Southern District of New York and the Honorable Rosemary S. Pooler of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. After entering practice he worked for the firm of Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton in their New York and Brussels offices, focusing on international arbitration, transnational litigation, and cross-border mergers and acquisitions.
Prior to joining the Bora Laskin Faculty of Law, he was Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Victoria Faculty of Law, where he was awarded the First Year Class Teaching Award. He has also served as a Visiting Fellow of the Max Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal Theory.
- Constitutional history
- Historical development of the Rule of Law
- Nonderogable rights during public emergencies
Current Courses:
- Constitutional Law
- Professional Responsibility
- Special Topics: Rule of Law
Sample Publications:
- Seven Absolute Rights: Recovering the Foundations of Canada's Rule of Law (Montreal: McGill-Queens' University Press, 2020) (peer-reviewed book).
- Permanent State of Emergency: Unchecked Executive Power and the Demise of the Rule of Law (Montreal: McGill-Queens' University Press, 2017) (peer-reviewed book).
- "The Origins of Hostility to the Rule of law in Canadian Academia: A History of Administrativism and Anti-Historicity", in Attacks on the Rule of Law from Within (M. St-Hilaire and J. Baron, eds.) (Toronto: Lexis-Nexis, 2019) (peer-reviewed book chapter).
Community Service:
- Bencher (director) of the Law Society of Ontario (the regulator of the province's legal professions).
- Adjudicator of the Law Society Tribunal (the quasi-judicial disciplinary body that hears allegations of professional misconduct).
- Vice-Chair, Tribunal Committee of the Convocation of the Law Society (responsible for the supervision of the Tribunal and the revision of the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Rules of Practice and Procedure).
- Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute
- Research Associate, University of British Columbia Centre for Constitutional Law and Legal Studies
Other:
Prof. Alford serves as the faculty supervisor of Bora Laskin's chapter of the Runnymede Society, the national law student membership group dedicated to debating the ideas and the ideals of constitutionalism, individual liberty and the rule of law.
He also brought a successful constitutional challenge to the provisions of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act (Alford v. Canada (Attorney-General) 2022 ONSC 2911 (CanLII). In that case, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice struck down a federal statute that abridged freedom of speech and debate in Parliament for implicitly amending the unwritten provisions of the Constitution of Canada --the first time that any Canadian court has done so.
He was also granted standing by the Public Order Emergency Commission (the Rouleau Commission) to participate as a party before the Inquiry and to make submissions about the propriety of the Government of Canada's promulgation of the Emergencies Act.
Emergencies Act inquiry begins with provinces pushing back against invocation
PM Trudeau, along with several senior cabinet ministers, other government officials, convoy leaders, local officials and police chiefs are part of the more than 60 witnesses expected to testify
OTTAWA — As the commission into the Emergencies Act gets underway lawyers representing police forces and provinces say they don’t believe the Trudeau government had to take the unprecedented step of invoking the act.
The Public Order Emergency Commission, led by Justice Paul Rouleau, started off with opening statements on Thursday; the beginning of what is expected to be six weeks of hearings into the government’s use of the act last February.
The act, which had never been used since it replaced the War Measures Act in 1988, allowed the government to clear the streets of Ottawa, freeze financial assets of convoy protesters and keep protesters away from downtown Ottawa and border crossings across the country. The protesters were demonstrating against COVID-19 vaccine mandates, lockdowns and the government.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, along with several senior cabinet ministers, other government officials, convoy leaders, local officials and police chiefs are among the more than 60 witnesses expected to testify.
Trudeau’s cabinet gave Rouleau a mandate to look at the convoy’s funding, misinformation and the impact of the protests on the economy, Rouleau said he will look at those issues, but his primary focus will be on why the government invoked the act and whether it was justified in doing so.
He said getting to the truth of what happened is important for society.
“Uncovering the truth is an important goal. When difficult events occur that impact the lives of Canadians, the public has a right to know what happened,” Rouleau said in his opening remarks.
The commission has given legal standing to civil rights groups, convoy leaders police agencies, municipalities and provinces to testify. Lawyers representing those groups gave opening statements Thursday.
Mandy England, a lawyer for the Government of Alberta, noted the province had cleared a long-running blockade at the Coutts border crossing before the Emergencies Act was invoked.
“Existing law enforcement tools that were already in place were completely sufficient and they were successfully used,” she said.
England and lawyers from Saskatchewan said the provinces were only informed hours before the government brought in the act. The provinces both argued the federal government had made their mind up to bring in the act even before meeting with them.
Christopher Diana, lawyer for the Ontario Provincial Police, said the provincial force was tracking the convoy before it hit the province’s borders. He said the extra tools the act provided were not necessary.
“While the Emergencies legislation, in particular the provincial legislation, provided useful tools, there was sufficient legal authority in their absence to deal with the protest activities that took place.”
Other parties disagreed.
A lawyer representing former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly said they will show that the convoy protests were unlike anything the country had seen and represented “an unprecedented threat to national security,” as well as a “paradigm shift in public protests.”
The federal government has its own lawyer as part of the commission, Robert MacKinnon, who will argue the government had no other choice.
“The evidence will show the invocation of the Emergencies Act was a reasonable and necessary decision, given escalating volatile and urgent circumstances across the country.”
Paul Champ, a lawyer representing businesses and residents in downtown Ottawa, said his group will take no position on the use of the act, but said an event like the convoy cannot be allowed to happen again.
He listed the many disruptions people living downtown experienced from loud air horns and trucks running around the clock, to closed businesses and the inability to use public transit or even get a taxi.
He said the commission needs to remember that 15,000 people call the area home.
“People see the Parliament buildings, and they think this is all governments, and so forth but there are people, there are children, there are schools.”
The inquiry is a legislative requirement of the act. The act also requires that Rouleau deliver a report by February. He said that is a tight timeline and unlike other inquiries, like Air India, or the inquiry into missing and murder Indigenous women, it cannot be extended or changed.
“This commission of inquiry is unique, to the best of our knowledge, in that its deadline is set by statute. Other inquiries have worked under deadlines set by cabinet. That sort of deadline is set based on an assessment of needs, and can and frequently is extended as circumstances require. This is not a possibility for our commission.”
The hearings in the building that houses Library and Archives Canada are being livestreamed and members of the public can share their views with the commission online.
With additional reporting by Christopher Nardi
Twitter: RyanTumilty
Email: rtumilty@postmedia.com
John Ivison: Trudeau has high bar to meet to justify use of Emergencies Act's extraordinary powers
Trudeau and his ministers must make the case that the nut they had to crack was much tougher than a rowdy occupation by some unsophisticated troublemakers
OTTAWA — The national inquiry into the invocation of the Emergencies Act, in the wake of the truckers’ convoy occupation of downtown Ottawa, is going to be used as a political bullhorn for all kinds of individuals and groups who have been granted standing.
Commissioner Paul Rouleau will need to keep a tight grip on proceedings to prevent them pinballing all over the place, as discredited police officers and politicians seek to rehabilitate their reputations, and disgruntled provincial governments express umbrage that they were not consulted.
But Lakehead University law professor Ryan Alford made an opening statement that gets to the nub of the inquiry: the federal government has to prove it met the legal standard for using the emergency provision of last resort.
Alford said that in its opening statement the government of Canada’s counsel, Robert MacKinnon, had said Ottawa had a “reasonable basis” for declaring a public order emergency.
“Unfortunately, a reasonable basis is not a legal, let alone constitutional, basis for using unprecedented and destructive emergency powers,” he said.
In its order in council, the government said the blockades in Ottawa were “being carried out in conjunction with activities that are directed toward or in support of the threat or use acts of serious violence.”
But, as Alford pointed out, the correct legal standard for threats to the security of Canada requires those acts to be direct, “not tied to serious acts of violence in some fashion, not in conjunction with or association in some fashion.”
The onus is on the government to prove that it believed there was a clear and present threat to national security from the truckers’ convoy that existing legislation could not contain. “The rule of law requires nothing less,” said Alford.
MacKinnon made the case that the imposition of the Emergencies Act was indeed a measure of last resort and was proportional to the threat.
But Brendan Miller, counsel for the Freedom Group of protesters, said that there was no justification for the government exceeding its constitutional bounds. He said the inquiry is not going to hear that protesters were engaged in sabotage or clandestine acts; that they were being manipulated by foreign influence; that they used serious violence against people or property; or that they were intent on destroying or overthrowing the government of Canada.
To be clear, the illegal occupation in Ottawa was best summed up in the emergency debate in the House of Commons at the time by Conservative MP Michael Chong, who said all Canadians have the right to protest, as a fundamental freedom enshrined in the Constitution. But they do not have the right to blockade streets, highways, border crossings, rail lines or pipelines. “There is no right to harm other people or interfere with the freedom of fellow citizens,” he said.
The rally organizers claimed they were champions of freedom, but their protest meant the gates of Parliament were bolted — literally.
Yet, the police had already cleared protests in Coutts, Alta., and Windsor, Ont., without resorting to the Emergencies Act’s provisions.
Many of those arrested in Ottawa were charged with committing mischief, an offence already on the books.
Trudeau said the Emergencies Act provisions were needed to compel tow truck drivers to remove the big rigs from downtown. But as senators Claude Carignan and Jean-Guy Dagenais have pointed out, the Ontario Highway Traffic Act already gave police powers to force towing companies to act to ensure the orderly movement of traffic.
The invocation did allow the government to take measures that still seem inconceivable in a modern democracy, such as freezing or suspending the bank accounts of anyone involved in the blockade, without a court order.
The explanation given by Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino was that the protests were coordinated “by a small, organized group driven by an ideology to overthrow the government through whatever means.”
Canadians have been forced to take that statement on faith — until now.
The commission’s first day allowed counsel for all parties with standing to summarize their case. We will subsequently have 30 days of hearings before the final report is delivered by Judge Rouleau to Parliament on Feb. 20. As he pointed out, the timeline is tight, in comparison to other federal commissions of inquiry that have lasted years.
The judge will be granted access to cabinet confidences — only the fourth time in Canadian history that cabinet privilege has been waived. He will also have access to sensitive information deemed to have national security implications, which will not be made public.
If the cabinet did receive intelligence that there was an organized group of ideologically driven insurrectionists involved in the truckers’ convoy, the commissioner will find out, and we must trust that he lives up to his commitment of openness and transparency to hold the government to account.
The suspicion is that the Americans were getting antsy about the impact on international trade and the Liberal government panicked. Certainly, the order-in-council used to implement and justify the legislation talks more about the relationship with trading partners, the adverse effect on the Canadian economy and the breakdown in distribution chains than it does about the security of Canada.
Concerns about the economy are serious, but they don’t justify the circumvention of Parliament or the executive arm of government ruling by fiat.
When Tommy Douglas, the founder of the NDP, opposed Pierre Trudeau’s War Measures Act, he called its use “a sledgehammer to crack a peanut.”
It is up to Justin Trudeau and his ministers to make the case in front of the commission that the nut they had to crack was much tougher than a rowdy occupation by a bunch of unsophisticated troublemakers.
• Email: jivison@postmedia.com
Commissioner / Commissaire
The Honourable / L’honorable
Paul S. Rouleau
VOLUME 1
Held at :
Library and Archives Canada
Bambrick Room
395 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N4
Thursday, October 13, 2022
Thank you for writing to the Premier of New Brunswick. Please be assured that your email will be reviewed and if a response is requested, it will be forthcoming.
Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le premier ministre du Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que votre courriel sera examiné et qu’une réponse vous parviendra à sa demande.
RE Hospira etc Please respond in writing if you wish to argue with me or against in Federal Court
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Prime Minister announces Public Order Emergency Commission following the invocation of the Emergencies Act
Main Content
Browser not supported
This website is not compatible with Internet Explorer or older version of Microsoft Edge(version 78 and older).
For full functionality please use a supported browser.
Ottawa, Ontario
The Government of Canada’s top priority remains keeping Canadians safe, while protecting jobs, trade, and our economy. In February, when blockades and occupations across the country disrupted our economy, hurt workers, and endangered public safety, the government invoked the Emergencies Act to supplement provincial and territorial capacity to end them.
The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced the establishment of the Public Order Emergency Commission, an independent public inquiry following the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
The Commission will examine the circumstances that led to the declaration being issued and the measures taken in response to the emergency. This includes the evolution of the convoy, the impact of funding and disinformation, the economic impact, and efforts of police and other responders prior to and after the declaration.
The Prime Minister also announced the appointment of the Honourable Paul S. Rouleau as Commissioner of the Public Order Emergency Commission. Justice Rouleau brings twenty years of experience on the bench to the role. He was first appointed as a Justice of the Superior Court of Ontario in 2002, then to the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 2005. He has also since been appointed as a Deputy Judge of the Supreme Court of Yukon, the Nunavut Court of Justice, and the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories.
As Commissioner, Justice Rouleau will submit a final report in both official languages to the Government of Canada on his findings and recommendations, which must be tabled in the House of Commons and Senate of Canada by February 20, 2023.
Quotes
“Ensuring the safety and security of everyone in Canada and protecting our economy are top priorities. I am pleased to announce that the Honourable Paul S. Rouleau has agreed to serve as the Commissioner and undertake this important work. He will look into the circumstances that led to the Emergencies Act being invoked, and make recommendations to prevent these events from happening again.”
“When our government invoked the Emergencies Act to help end the illegal blockades and get our country moving again, we committed to Canadians that we’d be upfront and transparent about it. We have kept that commitment – and today we’re taking a further step with the establishment of the Commission. I’m confident that this process will examine the circumstances that led to the invocation of the Emergencies Act fairly and impartially, as well as make potential recommendations regarding the management of public order emergencies.”
“Invoking the Emergencies Act was a decision taken only after careful consideration and with significant caution. As we reflect on the circumstances that led to this action, Canadians can have confidence this Commission will be undertaken in a thorough and independent manner, as the Act itself requires.”
Quick Facts
- On February 14, 2022, the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, with the support of the Honourable Marco E.L. Mendicino, Minister of Public Safety, and the Honourable Bill Blair, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness, announced the declaration of a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act, to end disruptions, border blockades, and the occupation of Ottawa’s downtown core. The declaration was revoked on February 23, 2022.
- The Emergencies Act requires that a commission be convened within 60 days and its report tabled in Parliament within 360 days of the revocation of the declaration of a public order emergency. The Commission must examine the circumstances that led to the declaration being issued and the measures taken for dealing with the emergency.
- Under Part I of the federal Inquiries Act, the Commissioner has the power to summon witnesses under oath, and require them to provide documents or other items that the Commissioner consider necessary to carry out their work.
- The Commission’s work and mandate are outlined in the Order in Council, which establishes the Commission and its mandate.
Related Product
Associated Links
Government of Canada declaration and revocation of a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act to end disruptions, blockades and the occupation of the city of Ottawa
On February 14, 2022, the federal government declared a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act to end disruptions, blockades and the occupation of the city of Ottawa. The declaration of a public order emergency was revoked by the federal government on February 23, 2022.
Emergencies Act
In order to declare a public order emergency, Canada’s Emergencies Act requires that there be a national emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada. Threats to the security of Canada may include the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political or ideological objective.
National Emergency
A national emergency is an urgent, temporary and critical situation that:
- seriously endangers the health and safety of Canadians;
- cannot be effectively dealt with by the provinces or territories; or
- seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada.
It must be a situation that cannot be effectively dealt with by any other law of Canada.
Procedural steps
There are additional, strict safeguards built into the Emergencies Act to ensure democratic oversight and accountability during an emergency.
Declaration of public order emergency
When a public order emergency is declared under the Emergencies Act, it allows the federal government to make certain orders and regulations that it believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms continues to protect individual rights. Any measures taken under the Act must be reasonable and proportionate to the risks posed to public safety and the well-being of Canadians.
The Government of Canada must formally, by proclamation, declare an emergency, effective from the day it is made.
- Proclamation Declaring a Public Order Emergency (SOR/2022-20)
- Order in Council: Order directing that a Proclamation be issued (PC2022-1016)
- Declaration of a Public Order Emergency Under S. 58
The Declaration expires after 30 days unless an extension is confirmed within specific timelines by both the House of Commons and the Senate or is revoked. At any time, the Senate or the House of Commons can review and potentially revoke the Declaration and revoke and amend any orders or regulations made under the Act. The Government of Canada may also revoke the Declaration at any time by way of a proclamation by the Governor in Council under section 22 of the Emergencies Act.
- Proclamation Revoking the Declaration of a Public Order Emergency (SOR/2022-26)
- Order in Council and Proclamation: Revocation of special temporary measures for a Public Order Emergency (PC 2022-150)
Motion
The Government must table a motion for confirmation of a declaration of emergency in both the House of Commons and the Senate within seven sitting days after the declaration is issued. The motion must be tabled with an explanation of the reasons for issuing the declaration.
Consultations
The Act requires consultation with the provinces and territories before a Declaration is issued.
Once a Declaration is issued, a report must be tabled in Parliament within seven sitting days explaining the consultations that have taken place.
Read the report, which also includes the letters from the Prime Minister to Premiers.
Orders and Regulations
Any Government actions taken to respond to the emergency must be tabled in both the House of Commons and the Senate within two days after the Government issues the orders or regulations. This ensures that the Government’s actions are transparent and that the Government will be accountable before Parliament for its actions.
Emergency Measures Regulations:
- Emergency Measures Regulations (SOR/2022-0021)
- Order in Council: Emergency Measures Regulations (PC2022-0107)
Emergency Economic Measures Order:
- Emergency Economic Measures Order (SOR/2022-22)
- Order in Council: Emergency Economic Measures Order (PC2022-0108)
Related Links
Canada’s Emergencies Act
Backgrounder
The Emergencies Act, which became law in 1988, is a federal law that can be used by the federal government in the event of a national emergency.
The Act contains a specific definition of “national emergency” that makes clear how serious a situation needs to be before the Act can be relied upon. A national emergency is an urgent, temporary and critical situation that seriously endangers the health and safety of Canadians or that seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada. It must be a situation that cannot be effectively dealt with by the provinces and territories, or by any other law of Canada. There are four types of emergencies that can be declared under the Emergencies Act:
- A public welfare emergency
- A public order emergency
- An international emergency
- A war emergency
The Emergencies Act can be invoked to grant temporary additional and necessary powers to the federal government when provincial, territorial and federal tools are no longer sufficient to deal effectively with the serious issues being faced, such as the ability to make orders or regulations that are believed, on reasonable grounds, to be necessary to respond to the issues at hand. Such issues include public health and safety risks as well as economic issues.
For example, when necessary for dealing with a public order emergency, the federal government can issue or adopt temporary orders and regulations:
- Regulating and prohibiting public assemblies, including blockades, other than lawful advocacy, protest or dissent,
- Regulating the use of specified property, including goods to be used with respect to a blockade,
- Designating and securing places where blockades are to be prohibited (e.g. borders, approaches to borders, other critical infrastructure),
- Directing specified persons to render essential services to relieve impacts of blockades on Canada’s economy, with compensation,
- Authorizing or directing specified financial institutions to render essential services to relieve the impact of blockades, including by regulating and prohibiting the use of property to fund or support the blockades,
- Measures with respect to the authorizing of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to enforce municipal and provincial laws by means of incorporation by reference,
- The imposition of fines or imprisonment for contravening on any of the measures declared under this public order emergency.
Democratic safeguards: parliamentary oversight, accountability, and respecting Canadians’ individual rights
The Emergencies Act has stringent, built-in protections which ensure democratic oversight and accountability with respect to the way in which the Government exercises its powers under the Act.
The Act also requires consultation with the provinces and territories before a Declaration is issued, unless the provinces and territories cannot be adequately consulted without unduly jeopardizing the effectiveness of the proposed action. Once a Declaration is issued, a report must be tabled in Parliament within seven sitting days explaining the consultations that have taken place.
Impact of the Emergencies Act on individual rights
When the Emergencies Act is invoked, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) continues to protect individual rights as the Government of Canada takes the necessary steps to safeguard the safety and well-being of Canadians. In deciding on measures to take, the Government must respect constitutionally protected rights and freedoms, including the rights of citizens to enter Canada and the right to life, liberty and security of the person, as well as Canada’s obligations under international law. The Charter allows the Government to balance the rights of the individual with the interests of society where limits on guaranteed rights and freedoms can be justified in a free and democratic society.
Specifically, section 1 of the Charter allows the Government to put limits on rights and freedoms if those limits:
- are set out in law;
- pursue an important goal which can be justified in a free and democratic society; and
- pursue that goal in a reasonable and proportionate manner.
This means that during a public order emergency, as defined by the Emergencies Act, the Government must only take actions that are a reasonable and proportionate response to the risks to safety of Canadians.
Transparency and accountability
In view of its exceptional nature, there are additional, stringent safeguards built into the Act to ensure democratic oversight and accountability during an emergency. The following procedural steps act as checks and balances under the law:
- Declaration: The Government of Canada must formally declare an emergency, effective from the day it is made.
- Government tables motion in Parliament: The Government must table a motion in both the House of Commons and the Senate within seven sitting days that asks for confirmation of the Declaration and explains the reasons for it. The Government also gives Parliament a report on the consultations held with provinces before the Declaration was made.
- Parliament votes: Both the House of Commons and the Senate must vote on the motion. If either the House of Commons or the Senate does not vote in favour of the Declaration, then it is revoked that very day.
- The Senate or House of Commons are recalled, if necessary: If either the Senate or the House of Commons is not sitting at the time the Declaration is issued, it must be recalled to sit within seven days of the date of the Declaration.
- Government issues and tables orders and regulations: Any Government actions taken to respond to the emergency must be tabled in both the House of Commons and the Senate two days after the Government issues the orders or regulations. This ensures that the Government’s actions are transparent and that the Government will be accountable before Parliament for its actions.
- A parliamentary review committee is established: A special joint committee of both the House of Commons and the Senate must be established to review the Government’s actions under the Act on an ongoing basis.
- Parliament exercises powers: At any time, the Senate or the House of Commons can review and potentially revoke the Declaration and any orders or regulations made under the Act.
- Declaration expires or is extended: The Declaration expires after 30 days unless an extension is confirmed within specific timelines by both the House of Commons and the Senate.
- An inquiry held: After the emergency has ended, the Emergencies Act requires the Government to hold an inquiry, and table a report to each House of Parliament within three hundred and sixty days after expiration or revocation of the declaration of emergency.
Additional Resources
Emergencies Act
R.S.C., 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.)
An Act to authorize the taking of special temporary measures to ensure safety and security during national emergencies and to amend other Acts in consequence thereof
Preamble
WHEREAS the safety and security of the individual, the protection of the values of the body politic and the preservation of the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the state are fundamental obligations of government;
AND WHEREAS the fulfilment of those obligations in Canada may be seriously threatened by a national emergency and, in order to ensure safety and security during such an emergency, the Governor in Council should be authorized, subject to the supervision of Parliament, to take special temporary measures that may not be appropriate in normal times;
AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;
NOW THEREFORE, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
Short Title
Marginal note:Short title
1 This Act may be cited as the Emergencies Act.
Application and Construction
Marginal note:Binding on Her Majesty
2 (1) This Act is binding on Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province.
Marginal note:Federal jurisdiction
(2) For greater certainty, nothing in this Act derogates from the authority of the Government of Canada to deal with emergencies on any property, territory or area in respect of which the Parliament of Canada has jurisdiction.
Marginal note:National emergency
3 For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that
(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada
and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.
Marginal note:Construction
4 Nothing in this Act shall be construed or applied so as to confer on the Governor in Council the power to make orders or regulations
(a) altering the provisions of this Act; or
(b) providing for the detention, imprisonment or internment of Canadian citizens or permanent residents within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
- R.S., 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.), s. 4
- 2001, c. 27, s. 248
PART IPublic Welfare Emergency
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
5 In this Part,
declaration of a public welfare emergency means a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 6(1); (déclaration de sinistre)
public welfare emergency means an emergency that is caused by a real or imminent
(a) fire, flood, drought, storm, earthquake or other natural phenomenon,
(b) disease in human beings, animals or plants, or
(c) accident or pollution
and that results or may result in a danger to life or property, social disruption or a breakdown in the flow of essential goods, services or resources, so serious as to be a national emergency. (sinistre)
Declaration of a Public Welfare Emergency
Marginal note:Declaration of a public welfare emergency
6 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that a public welfare emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 14, may, by proclamation, so declare.
Marginal note:Contents
(2) A declaration of a public welfare emergency shall specify
(a) concisely the state of affairs constituting the emergency;
(b) the special temporary measures that the Governor in Council anticipates may be necessary for dealing with the emergency; and
(c) if the direct effects of the emergency do not extend to the whole of Canada, the area of Canada to which the direct effects of the emergency extend.
Marginal note:Effective date
7 (1) A declaration of a public welfare emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the declaration shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 58.
Marginal note:Expiration of declaration
(2) A declaration of a public welfare emergency expires at the end of ninety days unless the declaration is previously revoked or continued in accordance with this Act.
Orders and Regulations
Marginal note:Orders and regulations
8 (1) While a declaration of a public welfare emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
(a) the regulation or prohibition of travel to, from or within any specified area, where necessary for the protection of the health or safety of individuals;
(b) the evacuation of persons and the removal of personal property from any specified area and the making of arrangements for the adequate care and protection of the persons and property;
(c) the requisition, use or disposition of property;
(d) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered;
(e) the regulation of the distribution and availability of essential goods, services and resources;
(f) the authorization and making of emergency payments;
(g) the establishment of emergency shelters and hospitals;
(h) the assessment of damage to any works or undertakings and the repair, replacement or restoration thereof;
(i) the assessment of damage to the environment and the elimination or alleviation of the damage; and
(j) the imposition
(i) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(ii) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
for contravention of any order or regulation made under this section.
Marginal note:Restriction
(2) Where a declaration of a public welfare emergency specifies that the direct effects of the emergency extend only to a specified area of Canada, the power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation, may be exercised or performed only with respect to that area.
Marginal note:Idem
(3) The power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation,
(a) shall be exercised or performed
(i) in a manner that will not unduly impair the ability of any province to take measures, under an Act of the legislature of the province, for dealing with an emergency in the province, and
(ii) with the view of achieving, to the extent possible, concerted action with each province with respect to which the power, duty or function is exercised or performed; and
(b) shall not be exercised or performed for the purpose of terminating a strike or lock-out or imposing a settlement in a labour dispute.
Marginal note:Control or direction of police force
9 (1) Nothing in a declaration of a public welfare emergency or in any order or regulation made pursuant thereto shall be construed or applied so as to derogate from, or to authorize the derogation from, the control or direction of the government of a province or a municipality over any police force over which it normally has control or direction.
Marginal note:R.C.M.P.
(2) Where the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is used or employed in a province or municipality pursuant to an arrangement under section 20 of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, subsection (1) applies in respect of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, subject to the terms and conditions of the arrangement.
Revocation, Continuation and Amendment of Declaration
Marginal note:Revocation by Parliament
10 Parliament may revoke a declaration of a public welfare emergency in accordance with section 58 or 59.
Marginal note:Revocation by Governor in Council
11 The Governor in Council may, by proclamation, revoke a declaration of a public welfare emergency either generally or with respect to any area of Canada effective on such day as is specified in the proclamation.
Marginal note:Continuation by Governor in Council
12 (1) At any time before a declaration of a public welfare emergency would otherwise expire, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 14, may, by proclamation, continue the declaration either generally or with respect to any area of Canada for such period, not exceeding ninety days, as is specified in the proclamation if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that the emergency will continue to exist or that the direct effects of the emergency will continue to extend to that area, as the case may be.
Marginal note:Review of orders and regulations
(2) Before issuing a proclamation continuing a declaration of a public welfare emergency, the Governor in Council shall review all current orders and regulations made under section 8 to determine if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that they continue to be necessary for dealing with the emergency and shall revoke or amend them to the extent that they do not so continue.
Marginal note:Multiple continuations
(3) A declaration of a public welfare emergency may be continued more than once pursuant to subsection (1).
Marginal note:Effective date
(4) A proclamation continuing a declaration of a public welfare emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Marginal note:Amendment by Governor in Council
13 (1) Where the Governor in Council
(a) has issued a declaration of a public welfare emergency specifying that the direct effects of the emergency extend only to a specified area of Canada, and
(b) believes, on reasonable grounds, that the direct effects of the emergency have extended to any other area of Canada or to the rest of Canada,
the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 14, may, by proclamation, amend the declaration to specify that other area as an area of Canada to which the direct effects of the emergency extend or to remove the existing specification, as the case may be.
Marginal note:Effective date
(2) A proclamation amending a declaration of a public welfare emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Consultation
Marginal note:Consultation
14 (1) Subject to subsection (2), before the Governor in Council issues, continues or amends a declaration of a public welfare emergency, the lieutenant governor in council of each province in which the direct effects of the emergency occur shall be consulted with respect to the proposed action.
Marginal note:Indication
(2) The Governor in Council may not issue a declaration of a public welfare emergency where the direct effects of the emergency are confined to, or occur principally in, one province unless the lieutenant governor in council of the province has indicated to the Governor in Council that the emergency exceeds the capacity or authority of the province to deal with it.
Effect of Expiration or Revocation
Marginal note:Effect of expiration of declaration
15 (1) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a public welfare emergency expires either generally or with respect to any area of Canada, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration or all orders and regulations so made, to the extent that they apply with respect to that area, as the case may be, expire on the day on which the declaration expires.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of declaration
(2) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a public welfare emergency is revoked either generally or with respect to any area of Canada, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration or all orders and regulations so made, to the extent that they apply with respect to that area, as the case may be, are revoked effective on the revocation of the declaration.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of continuation
(3) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation continuing a declaration of a public welfare emergency either generally or with respect to any area of Canada is revoked after the time the declaration would, but for the proclamation, have otherwise expired either generally or with respect to that area,
(a) the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration, or
(b) the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration to the extent that the declaration, orders and regulations apply with respect to that area,
as the case may be, are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of amendment
(4) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation amending a declaration of a public welfare emergency is revoked, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the amendment and all orders and regulations to the extent that they apply pursuant to the amendment are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
PART IIPublic Order Emergency
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
16 In this Part,
declaration of a public order emergency means a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 17(1); (déclaration d’état d’urgence)
public order emergency means an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada and that is so serious as to be a national emergency; (état d’urgence)
threats to the security of Canada has the meaning assigned by section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. (menaces envers la sécurité du Canada)
Declaration of a Public Order Emergency
Marginal note:Declaration of a public order emergency
17 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that a public order emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 25, may, by proclamation, so declare.
Marginal note:Contents
(2) A declaration of a public order emergency shall specify
(a) concisely the state of affairs constituting the emergency;
(b) the special temporary measures that the Governor in Council anticipates may be necessary for dealing with the emergency; and
(c) if the effects of the emergency do not extend to the whole of Canada, the area of Canada to which the effects of the emergency extend.
Marginal note:Effective date
18 (1) A declaration of a public order emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the declaration shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 58.
Marginal note:Expiration of declaration
(2) A declaration of a public order emergency expires at the end of thirty days unless the declaration is previously revoked or continued in accordance with this Act.
Orders and Regulations
Marginal note:Orders and regulations
19 (1) While a declaration of a public order emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
(a) the regulation or prohibition of
(i) any public assembly that may reasonably be expected to lead to a breach of the peace,
(ii) travel to, from or within any specified area, or
(iii) the use of specified property;
(b) the designation and securing of protected places;
(c) the assumption of the control, and the restoration and maintenance, of public utilities and services;
(d) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered; and
(e) the imposition
(i) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(ii) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
for contravention of any order or regulation made under this section.
Marginal note:Restriction
(2) Where a declaration of a public order emergency specifies that the effects of the emergency extend only to a specified area of Canada, the power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation, may be exercised or performed only with respect to that area.
Marginal note:Idem
(3) The power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation, shall be exercised or performed
(a) in a manner that will not unduly impair the ability of any province to take measures, under an Act of the legislature of the province, for dealing with an emergency in the province; and
(b) with the view of achieving, to the extent possible, concerted action with each province with respect to which the power, duty or function is exercised or performed.
Marginal note:Control or direction of police force
20 (1) Nothing in a declaration of a public order emergency or in any order or regulation made pursuant thereto shall be construed or applied so as to derogate from, or to authorize the derogation from, the control or direction of the government of a province or a municipality over any police force over which it normally has control or direction.
Marginal note:R.C.M.P.
(2) Where the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is used or employed in a province or municipality pursuant to an arrangement under section 20 of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, subsection (1) applies in respect of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, subject to the terms and conditions of the arrangement.
Revocation, Continuation and Amendment of Declaration
Marginal note:Revocation by Parliament
21 Parliament may revoke a declaration of a public order emergency in accordance with section 58 or 59.
Marginal note:Revocation by Governor in Council
22 The Governor in Council may, by proclamation, revoke a declaration of a public order emergency either generally or with respect to any area of Canada effective on such day as is specified in the proclamation.
Marginal note:Continuation by Governor in Council
23 (1) At any time before a declaration of a public order emergency would otherwise expire, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 25, may, by proclamation, continue the declaration either generally or with respect to any area of Canada for such period, not exceeding thirty days, as is specified in the proclamation if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that the emergency will continue to exist or that the effects of the emergency will continue to extend to that area, as the case may be.
Marginal note:Review of orders and regulations
(2) Before issuing a proclamation continuing a declaration of a public order emergency, the Governor in Council shall review all current orders and regulations made under section 19 to determine if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that they continue to be necessary for dealing with the emergency and shall revoke or amend them to the extent that they do not so continue.
Marginal note:Multiple continuations
(3) A declaration of a public order emergency may be continued more than once pursuant to subsection (1).
Marginal note:Effective date
(4) A proclamation continuing a declaration of a public order emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Marginal note:Amendment by Governor in Council
24 (1) Where the Governor in Council
(a) has issued a declaration of a public order emergency specifying that the effects of the emergency extend only to a specified area of Canada, and
(b) believes, on reasonable grounds, that the effects of the emergency have extended to any other area of Canada or to the rest of Canada,
the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 25, may, by proclamation, amend the declaration to specify that other area as an area of Canada to which the effects of the emergency extend or to remove the existing specification, as the case may be.
Marginal note:Effective date
(2) A proclamation amending a declaration of a public order emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Consultation
Marginal note:Consultation
25 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), before the Governor in Council issues, continues or amends a declaration of a public order emergency, the lieutenant governor in council of each province in which the effects of the emergency occur shall be consulted with respect to the proposed action.
Marginal note:Idem
(2) Where the effects of a public order emergency extend to more than one province and the Governor in Council is of the opinion that the lieutenant governor in council of a province in which the effects of the emergency occur cannot, before the issue or amendment of a declaration of a public order emergency, be adequately consulted without unduly jeopardizing the effectiveness of the proposed action, the lieutenant governor in council of that province may be consulted with respect to the action after the declaration is issued or amended and before the motion for confirmation of the declaration or amendment is laid before either House of Parliament.
Marginal note:Indication
(3) The Governor in Council may not issue a declaration of a public order emergency where the effects of the emergency are confined to one province, unless the lieutenant governor in council of the province has indicated to the Governor in Council that the emergency exceeds the capacity or authority of the province to deal with it.
Effect of Expiration or Revocation
Marginal note:Effect of expiration of declaration
26 (1) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a public order emergency expires either generally or with respect to any area of Canada, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration or all orders and regulations so made, to the extent that they apply with respect to that area, as the case may be, expire on the day on which the declaration expires.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of declaration
(2) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a public order emergency is revoked either generally or with respect to any area of Canada, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration or all orders and regulations so made, to the extent that they apply with respect to that area, as the case may be, are revoked effective on the revocation of the declaration.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of continuation
(3) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation continuing a declaration of a public order emergency either generally or with respect to any area of Canada is revoked after the time the declaration would, but for the proclamation, have otherwise expired either generally or with respect to that area,
(a) the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration, or
(b) the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration to the extent that the declaration, orders and regulations apply with respect to that area,
as the case may be, are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of amendment
(4) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation amending a declaration of a public order emergency is revoked, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the amendment and all orders and regulations to the extent that they apply pursuant to the amendment are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
PART IIIInternational Emergency
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
27 In this Part,
declaration of an international emergency means a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 28(1); (déclaration d’état de crise internationale)
international emergency means an emergency involving Canada and one or more other countries that arises from acts of intimidation or coercion or the real or imminent use of serious force or violence and that is so serious as to be a national emergency. (état de crise internationale)
Declaration of an International Emergency
Marginal note:Declaration of an international emergency
28 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that an international emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 35, may, by proclamation, so declare.
Marginal note:Contents
(2) A declaration of an international emergency shall specify
(a) concisely the state of affairs constituting the emergency; and
(b) the special temporary measures that the Governor in Council anticipates may be necessary for dealing with the emergency.
Marginal note:Effective date
29 (1) A declaration of an international emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the declaration shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 58.
Marginal note:Expiration of declaration
(2) A declaration of an international emergency expires at the end of sixty days unless the declaration is previously revoked or continued in accordance with this Act.
Orders and Regulations
Marginal note:Orders and regulations
30 (1) While a declaration of an international emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
(a) the control or regulation of any specified industry or service, including the use of equipment, facilities and inventory;
(b) the appropriation, control, forfeiture, use and disposition of property or services;
(c) the authorization and conduct of inquiries in relation to defence contracts or defence supplies as defined in the Defence Production Act or to hoarding, overcharging, black marketing or fraudulent operations in respect of scarce commodities, including the conferment of powers under the Inquiries Act on any person authorized to conduct such an inquiry;
(d) the authorization of the entry and search of any dwelling-house, premises, conveyance or place, and the search of any person found therein, for any thing that may be evidence relevant to any matter that is the subject of an inquiry referred to in paragraph (c), and the seizure and detention of any such thing;
(e) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered;
(f) the designation and securing of protected places;
(g) the regulation or prohibition of travel outside Canada by Canadian citizens or permanent residents within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and of admission into Canada of other persons;
(h) the removal from Canada of persons, other than
(i) Canadian citizens,
(ii) permanent residents within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and
(iii) protected persons within the meaning of subsection 95(2) of that Act who are not inadmissible under that Act on grounds of
(A) security, violating human or international rights or serious criminality, or
(B) criminality and who have not been convicted of any offence under any Act of Parliament for which a term of imprisonment of more than six months has been imposed, or five years or more may be imposed;
(i) the control or regulation of the international aspects of specified financial activities within Canada;
(j) the authorization of expenditures for dealing with an international emergency in excess of any limit set by an Act of Parliament and the setting of a limit on such expenditures;
(k) the authorization of any minister of the Crown to discharge specified responsibilities respecting the international emergency or to take specified actions of a political, diplomatic or economic nature for dealing with the emergency; and
(l) the imposition
(i) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(ii) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
for contravention of any order or regulation made under this section.
Marginal note:Restriction
(2) The power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation,
(a) shall be exercised or performed
(i) in a manner that will not unduly impair the ability of any province to take measures, under an Act of the legislature of the province, for dealing with an emergency in the province, and
(ii) with the view of achieving, to the extent possible, concerted action with each province with respect to which the power, duty or function is exercised or performed; and
(b) shall not be exercised or performed for the purpose of censoring, suppressing or controlling the publication or communication of any information regardless of its form or characteristics.
- R.S., 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.), s. 30
- 1992, c. 49, s. 125
- 2001, c. 27, s. 249
Marginal note:Control or direction of police force
31 (1) Nothing in a declaration of an international emergency or in any order or regulation made pursuant thereto shall be construed or applied so as to derogate from, or to authorize the derogation from, the control or direction of the government of a province or a municipality over any police force over which it normally has control or direction.
Marginal note:R.C.M.P.
(2) Where the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is used or employed in a province or municipality pursuant to an arrangement under section 20 of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, subsection (1) applies in respect of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, subject to the terms and conditions of the arrangement.
Revocation and Continuation of Declaration
Marginal note:Revocation by Parliament
32 Parliament may revoke a declaration of an international emergency in accordance with section 58 or 59.
Marginal note:Revocation by Governor in Council
33 The Governor in Council may, by proclamation, revoke a declaration of an international emergency effective on such day as is specified in the proclamation.
Marginal note:Continuation by Governor in Council
34 (1) At any time before a declaration of an international emergency would otherwise expire, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 35, may, by proclamation, continue the declaration for such period, not exceeding sixty days, as is specified in the proclamation if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that the emergency will continue to exist.
Marginal note:Review of orders and regulations
(2) Before issuing a proclamation continuing a declaration of an international emergency, the Governor in Council shall review all current orders and regulations made under section 30 to determine if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that they continue to be necessary for dealing with the emergency and shall revoke or amend them to the extent that they do not so continue.
Marginal note:Multiple continuations
(3) A declaration of an international emergency may be continued more than once pursuant to subsection (1).
Marginal note:Effective date
(4) A proclamation continuing a declaration of an international emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Consultation
Marginal note:Consultation
35 Before the Governor in Council issues or continues a declaration of an international emergency, the lieutenant governor in council of each province shall be consulted with respect to the proposed action to the extent that, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, it is appropriate and practicable to do so in the circumstances.
Effect of Expiration or Revocation
Marginal note:Effect of expiration of declaration
36 (1) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of an international emergency expires, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration expire on the day on which the declaration expires.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of declaration
(2) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of an international emergency is revoked, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration are revoked effective on the revocation of the declaration.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of continuation
(3) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation continuing a declaration of an international emergency is revoked after the time the declaration would, but for the proclamation, have otherwise expired, the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
PART IVWar Emergency
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
37 In this Part,
declaration of a war emergency means a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 38(1); (déclaration d’état de guerre)
war emergency means war or other armed conflict, real or imminent, involving Canada or any of its allies that is so serious as to be a national emergency. (état de guerre)
Declaration of a War Emergency
Marginal note:Declaration of a war emergency
38 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that a war emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 44, may, by proclamation, so declare.
Marginal note:Contents
(2) A declaration of a war emergency shall specify the state of affairs constituting the emergency to the extent that, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, it is possible to do so without jeopardizing any special temporary measures proposed to be taken for dealing with the emergency.
Marginal note:Effective date
39 (1) A declaration of a war emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the declaration shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 58.
Marginal note:Expiration of declaration
(2) A declaration of a war emergency expires at the end of one hundred and twenty days unless the declaration is previously revoked or continued in accordance with this Act.
Orders and Regulations
Marginal note:Orders and regulations
40 (1) While a declaration of a war emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary or advisable for dealing with the emergency.
Marginal note:No conscription by regulation
(2) The power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations may not be exercised for the purpose of requiring persons to serve in the Canadian Forces.
Marginal note:Punishment
(3) The Governor in Council may make regulations providing for the imposition
(a) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(b) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
for contravention of any order or regulation made under subsection (1).
Marginal note:Restriction
(4) The power under subsection (1) to make orders and regulations, and any powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed by or pursuant to any such order or regulation, shall be exercised or performed with the view of achieving, to the extent possible, concerted action with each province with respect to which the power, duty or function is exercised or performed.
Revocation and Continuation of Declaration
Marginal note:Revocation by Parliament
41 Parliament may revoke a declaration of a war emergency in accordance with section 58 or 59.
Marginal note:Revocation by Governor in Council
42 The Governor in Council may, by proclamation, revoke a declaration of a war emergency effective on such day as is specified in the proclamation.
Marginal note:Continuation by Governor in Council
43 (1) At any time before a declaration of a war emergency would otherwise expire, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 44, may, by proclamation, continue the declaration for such period, not exceeding one hundred and twenty days, as is specified in the proclamation if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that the emergency will continue to exist.
Marginal note:Review of orders and regulations
(2) Before issuing a proclamation continuing a declaration of a war emergency, the Governor in Council shall review all current orders and regulations made under section 40 to determine if the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that they continue to be necessary or advisable for dealing with the emergency and shall revoke or amend them to the extent that they do not so continue.
Marginal note:Multiple continuations
(3) A declaration of a war emergency may be continued more than once pursuant to subsection (1).
Marginal note:Effective date
(4) A proclamation continuing a declaration of a war emergency is effective on the day on which it is issued, but a motion for confirmation of the proclamation shall be laid before each House of Parliament and be considered in accordance with section 60.
Consultation
Marginal note:Consultation
44 Before the Governor in Council issues or continues a declaration of a war emergency, the lieutenant governor in council of each province shall be consulted with respect to the proposed action to the extent that, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, it is appropriate and practicable to do so in the circumstances.
Effect of Expiration or Revocation
Marginal note:Effect of expiration of declaration
45 (1) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a war emergency expires, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration expire on the day on which the declaration expires.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of declaration
(2) Where, pursuant to this Act, a declaration of a war emergency is revoked, all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration are revoked effective on the revocation of the declaration.
Marginal note:Effect of revocation of continuation
(3) Where, pursuant to this Act, a proclamation continuing a declaration of a war emergency is revoked after the time the declaration would, but for the proclamation, have otherwise expired, the declaration and all orders and regulations made pursuant to the declaration are revoked effective on the revocation of the proclamation.
PART VCompensation
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
46 In this Part,
compensation means compensation under subsection 48(1); (indemnisation)
Crown means Her Majesty in right of Canada; (État)
Minister means such member of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada as is designated by the Governor in Council as the Minister for the purposes of this Part. (ministre)
Liability
Marginal note:Protection from personal liability
47 (1) No action or other proceeding for damages lies or shall be instituted against a Minister, servant or agent of the Crown, including any person providing services pursuant to an order or regulation made under subsection 8(1), 19(1), 30(1) or 40(1), for or in respect of any thing done or omitted to be done, or purported to be done or omitted to be done, in good faith under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
Marginal note:Crown not relieved of liability
(2) Subsection (1) does not relieve the Crown of liability for the acts or omissions described therein and the Crown is liable under the Crown Liability Act or any other law as if that subsection had not been enacted.
Compensation
Marginal note:Compensation
48 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and the regulations made under section 49, the Minister shall award reasonable compensation to any person who suffers loss, injury or damage as a result of any thing done, or purported to be done, under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
Marginal note:Release
(2) No compensation shall be paid to a person unless that person, in consideration of the compensation, signs, in a form provided by the Minister, a release of any right of action that the person may have against the Crown as a result of any thing done, or purported to be done, under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.
Marginal note:Subrogation
(3) The Crown is subrogated to all rights of any person to whom compensation is paid to recover damages in respect of the loss, injury or damage for which the compensation is paid and may maintain an action in the name of that person or in the name of the Crown against any person against whom the action lies.
Marginal note:Application of recovered sums
(4) Any sum recovered by the Crown pursuant to an action under subsection (3) shall be applied
(a) first, to payment of the costs actually incurred in the action and in levying execution, and
(b) second, to reimbursement of the Crown for the compensation paid to the person whose rights were subrogated,
and the balance, if any, shall be paid to that person.
Marginal note:Settlement
(5) No settlement or release bars the rights of the Crown under subsection (3) unless the Minister has concurred therein.
Marginal note:Regulations
49 The Governor in Council may make regulations
(a) prescribing the form and manner of making applications for compensation, the information and evidence to be submitted in connection therewith and the procedure to be followed in the consideration of applications for compensation;
(b) prescribing the period within which applications for compensation must be made;
(c) prescribing the criteria to be used in determining the eligibility of any person for compensation;
(d) prescribing the methods and criteria to be used in assessing any loss, injury or damage for which compensation shall be paid;
(e) prescribing the maximum amount of compensation that may be paid to any person either generally or with respect to any particular loss, injury or damage;
(f) prescribing the terms and conditions for the payment of compensation;
(g) providing for the payment of compensation in a lump sum or in periodic payments;
(h) providing for pro rata payments of compensation;
(i) establishing priorities among persons applying for compensation on the basis of classes of persons or classes of loss, injury or damage or otherwise;
(j) respecting the giving of notices to persons affected by applications for compensation; and
(k) generally, for carrying into effect the purposes and provisions of this Part.
Appeals
Marginal note:Assessor and Deputy Assessors
50 (1) The Governor in Council shall, from among the judges of the Federal Court, appoint an Assessor and such number of Deputy Assessors as the Governor in Council considers necessary to hear and determine appeals under this Part and, subject to this Part, may prescribe their jurisdiction.
Marginal note:Acting assessor
(2) The Governor in Council shall, from among the judges of the Federal Court, appoint an acting assessor to act in the place of the Assessor in the event of the Assessor’s absence or incapacity.
Marginal note:Deputy Assessor
(3) The Assessor may designate a Deputy Assessor to hear and determine any appeal under this Part and, where the Assessor does so, the references in sections 52 and 53 to the “Assessor” shall be construed as including references to the “Deputy Assessor”.
Marginal note:Appeal
51 (1) Any person who has applied for compensation and is not satisfied with the decision of the Minister thereon may appeal the decision to the Assessor.
Marginal note:Limitation period
(2) No appeal may be made under this section more than three months after the day on which the person applying for compensation receives notice of the Minister’s decision thereon or such longer period as the Assessor may, either before or after the expiration of that period of three months, allow for special reasons.
Marginal note:Powers of Assessor
52 (1) On the hearing of an appeal under this Part, the Assessor may
(a) confirm the decision of the Minister;
(b) notwithstanding the maximum amount, if any, of compensation that may be paid to the person appealing, vary the decision of the Minister; or
(c) refer the matter back to the Minister for such further action as the Assessor may direct, including the calculation of compensation without regard to the maximum amount, if any, that may otherwise be paid.
Marginal note:Costs
(2) In any appeal under this Part, costs may be awarded to or against the Crown.
Marginal note:Decision final
(3) The decision of the Assessor on any appeal under this Part is final and conclusive and, except for judicial review under the Federal Courts Act, is not subject to appeal to or review by any court.
Marginal note:Payment
(4) Where the Assessor varies a decision of the Minister by awarding compensation or increasing the amount of compensation awarded by the Minister or, on a matter referred back for further action, the Minister increases the amount of compensation previously awarded, the Minister shall pay that compensation or increased compensation, as the case may be.
- R.S., 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.), s. 52
- 1993, c. 34, s. 61
- 2002, c. 8, s. 182
Marginal note:Sittings and hearings
53 (1) The Assessor may sit and hear appeals at any place or places, and shall arrange for such sittings and hearings as may be required.
Marginal note:Expenses
(2) The Assessor is entitled to be paid such travel allowances as are paid for attendances as a judge of the Federal Court under the Judges Act.
Marginal note:Procedure
54 The Assessor may, with the approval of the Governor in Council, make such rules respecting the conduct of appeals and the procedure for the bringing of appeals as the Assessor deems necessary to enable the discharge of the Assessor’s duties under this Act.
Marginal note:Registrar
55 The Governor in Council may appoint a registrar of appeals and such other persons as the Governor in Council considers necessary to carry out the purposes of this Part.
Payment
Marginal note:Payment out of C.R.F.
56 Compensation and costs awarded against the Crown under this Part shall be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
PART VIParliamentary Supervision
Interpretation
Marginal note:Definitions
57 In this Part,
declaration of emergency means a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 6(1), 17(1), 28(1) or 38(1); (déclaration de situation de crise)
Parliamentary Review Committee means the committee referred to in subsection 62(1); (comité d’examen parlementaire)
sitting day, in respect of a House of Parliament, means a day on which that House is sitting. (jour de séance)
Consideration of Declaration of Emergency
Marginal note:Tabling in Parliament when sitting
58 (1) Subject to subsection (4), a motion for confirmation of a declaration of emergency, signed by a minister of the Crown, together with an explanation of the reasons for issuing the declaration and a report on any consultation with the lieutenant governors in council of the provinces with respect to the declaration, shall be laid before each House of Parliament within seven sitting days after the declaration is issued.
Marginal note:Summoning Parliament or House
(2) If a declaration of emergency is issued during a prorogation of Parliament or when either House of Parliament stands adjourned, Parliament or that House, as the case may be, shall be summoned forthwith to sit within seven days after the declaration is issued.
Marginal note:Summoning Parliament
(3) If a declaration of emergency is issued at a time when the House of Commons is dissolved, Parliament shall be summoned to sit at the earliest opportunity after the declaration is issued.
Marginal note:Tabling in Parliament after summoned
(4) Where Parliament or a House of Parliament is summoned to sit in accordance with subsection (2) or (3), the motion, explanation and report described in subsection (1) shall be laid before each House of Parliament or that House of Parliament, as the case may be, on the first sitting day after Parliament or that House is summoned.
Marginal note:Consideration
(5) Where a motion is laid before a House of Parliament as provided in subsection (1) or (4), that House shall, on the sitting day next following the sitting day on which the motion was so laid, take up and consider the motion.
Marginal note:Vote
(6) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (5) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall forthwith, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.
Marginal note:Revocation of declaration
(7) If a motion for confirmation of a declaration of emergency is negatived by either House of Parliament, the declaration, to the extent that it has not previously expired or been revoked, is revoked effective on the day of the negative vote and no further action under this section need be taken in the other House with respect to the motion.
Revocation of Declaration of Emergency
Marginal note:Motion for revocation
59 (1) Where a motion, for the consideration of the Senate or the House of Commons, to the effect that
(a) a declaration of emergency under Part I or II be revoked either generally or with respect to any area of Canada, or
(b) a declaration of emergency under Part III or IV be revoked,
signed by not less than ten members of the Senate or twenty members of the House of Commons, as the case may be, is filed with the Speaker thereof, that House of Parliament shall take up and consider the motion within three sitting days after it is filed.
Marginal note:Vote
(2) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (1) shall be debated without interruption for not more than ten hours and, on the expiration of the tenth hour or at such earlier time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall forthwith, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.
Marginal note:Revocation of declaration
(3) If a motion debated in accordance with subsection (2) is adopted by the House, the declaration, to the extent that it has not previously expired or been revoked, is revoked in accordance with the motion, effective on the day specified in the motion, which day may not be earlier than the day of the vote adopting the motion.
Consideration of Continuation or Amendment of Declaration of Emergency
Marginal note:Motion for confirmation of proclamation continuing a declaration
60 (1) A motion for confirmation of a proclamation continuing a declaration of emergency and of any orders and regulations named in the motion pursuant to subsection (3), signed by a minister of the Crown, together with an explanation of the reasons for issuing the proclamation, a report on any consultation with the lieutenant governors in council of the provinces with respect to the proclamation and a report on the review of orders and regulations conducted before the issuing of the proclamation, shall be laid before each House of Parliament within seven sitting days after the proclamation is issued.
Marginal note:Motion for confirmation of proclamation amending a declaration
(2) A motion for confirmation of a proclamation amending a declaration of emergency, signed by a minister of the Crown, together with an explanation of the reasons for issuing the proclamation and a report on any consultation with the lieutenant governors in council of the provinces with respect to the proclamation, shall be laid before each House of Parliament within seven sitting days after the proclamation is issued.
Marginal note:Orders and regulations named
(3) A motion for confirmation of a proclamation continuing a declaration of emergency shall name the orders and regulations in force on the issuing of the proclamation that the Governor in Council believed, on reasonable grounds, continued at that time to be necessary or, in the case of a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection 43(1), advisable, for dealing with the emergency.
Marginal note:Consideration
(4) Where a motion is laid before a House of Parliament as provided in subsection (1) or (2), that House shall, on the sitting day next following the sitting day on which the motion was so laid, take up and consider the motion.
Marginal note:Vote
(5) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (4) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall forthwith, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.
Marginal note:Revocation of proclamation
(6) If a motion for confirmation of a proclamation is negatived by either House of Parliament, the proclamation, to the extent that it has not previously expired or been revoked, is revoked effective on the day of the negative vote and no further action under this section need be taken in the other House with respect to the motion.
Marginal note:Revocation of orders or regulations
(7) If a motion for confirmation of a proclamation continuing a declaration of emergency is amended by either House of Parliament by the deletion therefrom of an order or regulation named in the motion pursuant to subsection (3), the order or regulation is revoked effective on the day on which the motion, as amended, is adopted.
Orders and Regulations
Marginal note:Tabling in Parliament
61 (1) Subject to subsection (2), every order or regulation made by the Governor in Council pursuant to this Act shall be laid before each House of Parliament within two sitting days after it is made.
Marginal note:Reference to Committee
(2) Where an order or regulation made pursuant to this Act is exempted from publication in the Canada Gazette by regulations made under the Statutory Instruments Act, the order or regulation, in lieu of being laid before each House of Parliament as required by subsection (1), shall be referred to the Parliamentary Review Committee within two days after it is made or, if the Committee is not then designated or established, within the first two days after it is designated or established.
Marginal note:Motion for revocation or amendment
(3) Where a motion, for the consideration of the Senate or the House of Commons, to the effect that an order or regulation laid before it pursuant to subsection (1) be revoked or amended, signed by not less than ten members of the Senate or twenty members of the House of Commons, as the case may be, is filed with the Speaker thereof, that House of Parliament shall take up and consider the motion within three sitting days after it is filed.
Marginal note:Vote
(4) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (3) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall forthwith, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.
Marginal note:Motion for concurrence
(5) If a motion debated in accordance with subsection (4) is adopted by the House, a message shall forthwith be sent from that House informing the other House that the motion has been so adopted and requesting that the motion be concurred in by that other House.
Marginal note:Consideration
(6) Where a request for concurrence in a motion is made pursuant to subsection (5), the House to which the request is made shall take up and consider the motion within three sitting days after the request is made.
Marginal note:Vote on motion for concurrence
(7) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (6) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall forthwith, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.
Marginal note:Revocation or amendment of order or regulation
(8) If a motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (6) is concurred in, the order or regulation is revoked or amended in accordance with the motion, effective on the day specified in the motion, which day may not be earlier than the day of the vote of concurrence.
Parliamentary Review Committee
Marginal note:Review by Parliamentary Review Committee
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.
Marginal note:Membership
(2) The Parliamentary Review Committee shall include at least one member of the House of Commons from each party that has a recognized membership of 12 or more persons in that House and at least the Leader of the Government in the Senate or Government Representative in the Senate, or his or her nominee, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, or his or her nominee, and the Leader or Facilitator who is referred to in any of paragraphs 62.4(1)(c) to (e) of the Parliament of Canada Act, or his or her nominee.
Marginal note:Oath of secrecy
(3) Every member of the Parliamentary Review Committee and every person employed in the work of the Committee shall take the oath of secrecy set out in the schedule.
Marginal note:Meetings in private
(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.
Marginal note:Revocation or amendment of order or regulation
(5) If, within thirty days after an order or regulation is referred to the Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to subsection 61(2), the Committee adopts a motion to the effect that the order or regulation be revoked or amended, the order or regulation is revoked or amended in accordance with the motion, effective on the day specified in the motion, which day may not be earlier than the day on which the motion is adopted.
Marginal note:Report to Parliament
(6) The Parliamentary Review Committee shall report or cause to be reported the results of its review under subsection (1) to each House of Parliament at least once every sixty days while the declaration of emergency is in effect and, in any case,
(a) within three sitting days after a motion for revocation of the declaration is filed under subsection 59(1);
(b) within seven sitting days after a proclamation continuing the declaration is issued; and
(c) within seven sitting days after the expiration of the declaration or the revocation of the declaration by the Governor in Council.
- R.S., 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.), s. 62
- 2022, c. 10, s. 248
Inquiry
Marginal note:Inquiry
63 (1) The Governor in Council shall, within sixty days after the expiration or revocation of a declaration of emergency, cause an inquiry to be held into the circumstances that led to the declaration being issued and the measures taken for dealing with the emergency.
Marginal note:Report to Parliament
(2) A report of an inquiry held pursuant to this section shall be laid before each House of Parliament within three hundred and sixty days after the expiration or revocation of the declaration of emergency.
PART VIIConsequential and Related Provisions
64 to 80 [Amendments and repeal]
SCHEDULE(Subsection 62(3))Oath of Secrecy
I, 
,
swear that I will not, without due authority, disclose or make known to
any person any document or information acquired by me by reason of the
duties performed by me on behalf of or under the direction of a
Parliamentary Review Committee established pursuant to the Emergencies Act. So help me God.
Inquiries Act
R.S.C., 1985, c. I-11
An Act respecting public and departmental inquiries
Short Title
Marginal note:Short title
1 This Act may be cited as the Inquiries Act.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 1
PART IPublic Inquiries
Marginal note:Inquiry
2 The Governor in Council may, whenever the Governor in Council deems it expedient, cause inquiry to be made into and concerning any matter connected with the good government of Canada or the conduct of any part of the public business thereof.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 2
Marginal note:Appointment of commissioners
3 Where an inquiry as described in section 2 is not regulated by any special law, the Governor in Council may, by a commission, appoint persons as commissioners by whom the inquiry shall be conducted.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 3
Marginal note:Powers of commissioners concerning evidence
4 The commissioners have the power of summoning before them any witnesses, and of requiring them to
(a) give evidence, orally or in writing, and on oath or, if they are persons entitled to affirm in civil matters on solemn affirmation; and
(b) produce such documents and things as the commissioners deem requisite to the full investigation of the matters into which they are appointed to examine.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 4
Marginal note:Idem, enforcement
5 The commissioners have the same power to enforce the attendance of witnesses and to compel them to give evidence as is vested in any court of record in civil cases.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 5
PART IIDepartmental Investigations
Marginal note:Appointment of commissioners
6 The minister presiding over any department in the federal public administration may appoint, under the authority of the Governor in Council, a commissioner or commissioners to investigate and report on the state and management of the business, or any part of the business, of the department, either in the inside or outside service thereof, and the conduct of any person in that service, so far as the same relates to the official duties of the person.
- R.S., 1985, c. I-11, s. 6
- 2003, c. 22, s. 174
Marginal note:Powers of commissioners
7 For the purposes of an investigation under section 6, the commissioners
(a) may enter into and remain within any public office or institution, and shall have access to every part thereof;
(b) may examine all papers, documents, vouchers, records and books of every kind belonging to the public office or institution;
(c) may summon before them any person and require the person to give evidence, orally or in writing, and on oath or, if the person is entitled to affirm in civil matters on solemn affirmation; and
(d) may administer the oath or affirmation under paragraph (c).
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 7
Marginal note:Subpoena or summons
8 (1) The commissioners may, under their hands, issue a subpoena or other request or summons, requiring and commanding any person therein named
(a) to appear at the time and place mentioned therein;
(b) to testify to all matters within his knowledge relative to the subject-matter of an investigation; and
(c) to bring and produce any document, book or paper that the person has in his possession or under his control relative to the subject-matter of the investigation.
Marginal note:Idem
(2) A person may be summoned from any part of Canada by virtue of a subpoena, request or summons issued under subsection (1).
Marginal note:Expenses
(3) Reasonable travel expenses shall be paid at the time of service of a subpoena, request or summons to any person summoned under subsection (1).
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 8
Marginal note:Evidence taken by commission
9 (1) In lieu of requiring the attendance of a person whose evidence is desired, the commissioners may, if they deem it advisable, issue a commission or other authority to any officer or person named therein, authorizing the officer or person to take the evidence and report it to the commissioners.
Marginal note:Powers for that purpose
(2) An officer or person authorized under subsection (1) shall, before entering on any investigation, be sworn before a justice of the peace faithfully to execute the duty entrusted to the officer or person by the commission, and, with regard to the taking of evidence, has the powers set out in subsection 8(1) and such other powers as a commissioner would have had if the evidence had been taken before a commissioner.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 9
Marginal note:Witnesses failing to attend, etc.
10 (1) Every person who
(a) being required to attend in the manner provided in this Part, fails, without valid excuse, to attend accordingly,
(b) being commanded to produce any document, book or paper, in his possession or under his control, fails to produce the same,
(c) refuses to be sworn or to affirm, or
(d) refuses to answer any proper question put to him by a commissioner, or other officer or person referred to in section 9,
is liable, on summary conviction before any provincial court judge, or judge of a superior or county court, having jurisdiction in the county or district in which that person resides, or in which the place is situated at which the person was required to attend, to a fine not exceeding four hundred dollars.
Marginal note:Justice of the peace
(2) For the purposes of this Part, a judge of a superior or county court referred to in subsection (1) shall be a justice of the peace.
- R.S., 1985, c. I-11, s. 10
- R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 203
PART IIIGeneral
Marginal note:Employment of counsel, experts and assistants
11 (1) The commissioners, whether appointed under Part I or under Part II, may, if authorized by the commission issued in the case, engage the services of
(a) such accountants, engineers, technical advisers or other experts, clerks, reporters and assistants as they deem necessary or advisable; and
(b) counsel to aid and assist the commissioners in an inquiry.
Marginal note:Experts may take evidence and report
(2) The commissioners may authorize and depute any accountants, engineers, technical advisers or other experts, the services of whom are engaged under subsection (1), or any other qualified persons, to inquire into any matter within the scope of the commission as may be directed by the commissioners.
Marginal note:Powers
(3) The persons deputed under subsection (2), when authorized by order in council, have the same powers as the commissioners have to take evidence, issue subpoenas, enforce the attendance of witnesses, compel them to give evidence, and otherwise conduct the inquiry.
Marginal note:Report
(4) The persons deputed under subsection (2) shall report the evidence and their findings, if any, thereon to the commissioners.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 11
Marginal note:Parties may employ counsel
12 The commissioners may allow any person whose conduct is being investigated under this Act, and shall allow any person against whom any charge is made in the course of an investigation, to be represented by counsel.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 12
Marginal note:Notice to persons charged
13 No report shall be made against any person until reasonable notice has been given to the person of the charge of misconduct alleged against him and the person has been allowed full opportunity to be heard in person or by counsel.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 13
PART IVInternational Commissions and Tribunals
Marginal note:Authority to confer powers on
14 (1) The Governor in Council may, whenever the Governor in Council deems it expedient, confer on an international commission or tribunal all or any of the powers conferred on commissioners under Part I.
Marginal note:Exercise of powers in Canada
(2) The powers conferred on an international commission or tribunal pursuant to subsection (1) may be exercised by the commission or tribunal in Canada, subject to such limitations and restrictions as the Governor in Council may impose, in respect of all matters that are within the jurisdiction of the commission or tribunal.
- R.S., c. I-13, s. 14
RELATED PROVISIONS
On April 25, 2022, the Government of Canada established the Public Order Emergency Commission to inquire into the circumstances that led to the declaration of emergency that was in place from February 14-23, 2022, and the measures taken for dealing with the emergency. Justice Paul Rouleau was appointed Commissioner.
Live Webcast
Watch the live webcast of the Commission’s Public Hearings or archived recordings from past proceedings.
Documents
A variety of documents will be made available to the general public and media throughout the inquiry, including decisions, policy papers, overview and institutional reports as well as exhibits.
The Commission
Meet the Commissioner, the Honourable Paul Rouleau, and the team of professionals supporting the work of the Commission.
Commission Mandate
The Terms of Reference entrust the Commission with a broad and far-reaching mandate, which includes both an investigative component and a policy component.
Share Your Views
The Commission’s public submission process that ran from August 18 to October 31 allowed Canadians to share their views and experiences on all aspects of the Commission’s mandate. We thank the 9,000 individuals who took the time to share their views.
No comments:
Post a Comment