Trudeau tells us how he became the 'somebody' who did 'something' about the convoy
A cascade failure of governments and police services ended with the prime minister on the witness stand
They were already looking for someone to do something.
"A lot of constituents are calling me about what the PM is going to do about it, it's hard because I know it's not within your purview," Vandenbeld said, according to a readout of the call that was tabled by the commission's counsel on Friday. "People are frustrated and they just want somebody to do something to get the city back."
Over five hours under oath on Friday, Trudeau told the Public Order Emergency Commission his version of how he became that somebody and, more importantly, why the Emergencies Act became that something.
That somebody needed to do something seems blindingly obvious — which likely explains why a plurality of Canadians continue to support the government's use of the Emergencies Act.
But whether Trudeau was fully justified — in a legal sense — in doing exactly what he did is one of the ultimate questions before the commission. And while Trudeau likely walked away from Friday's testimony feeling good about how he accounted for himself, the final ruling of Justice Paul Rouleau remains an intriguing mystery that might yet deprive the federal government of total exoneration.
Second-guessing Trudeau's call
According to Trudeau's testimony, the federal government found itself on February 14 with a dangerous and destabilizing situation that was not under control.
Though some will argue the federal government could have somehow done more to help resolve the situation before that point, Vandenbeld wasn't wrong when she said this situation wasn't within the PM's "purview." Never mind who the protest was aimed at (the "F— Trudeau" flags left little mystery about that) — other levels of government, municipal and provincial, had primary responsibility for, and jurisdiction over, the major roadways that were blocked.
And it's fair to say that neither the federal government nor the Emergencies Act would have gotten involved directly if those other levels of government and police services had been able to prevent or resolve the blockades in Ottawa, Windsor and Coutts.
Months later, the commission functions somewhat as an exercise in counterfactual history.
What if, for instance, the federal government had engaged with the protesters? On Friday, Trudeau testified that doing so might have set a bad precedent by signalling that the government would meet with, or even change public policy for, anyone who was willing to blockade and occupy Ottawa's Wellington Street.
What about the suggestion that police in Ottawa were very close to acting on a plan to clear the protest around Parliament Hill when the Emergencies Act was invoked? Trudeau dismissively testified that the federal government had heard such assurances several times before.
What about the fact that the blockades in Windsor and Coutts were cleared before the emergency measures came into force? Trudeau argued the Emergencies Act was still required to ensure the blockades weren't re-established.
Trudeau told the inquiry that the final decision was his and described how he paused before signing off on the official note from the Privy Council Office. He considered, he said, what might happen if he didn't move forward with the Emergencies Act — what if he waited and someone got hurt?
Police
move in to clear downtown Ottawa near Parliament hill of protesters
after weeks of demonstrations on Saturday, Feb. 19, 2022. (Cole Burston/The Canadian Press)
"But more than that, the responsibility of a prime minister is to make the tough calls and keep people safe," Trudeau said.
He said the government was "able to solve the situation" without loss of life or serious violence. He said he was "absolutely, absolutely serene and confident" that he had made the right decision.
On that basis — and with the national security adviser, all of PCO and CSIS advising that he use the Emergencies Act — the prime minister probably has won the immediate political argument.
The final legal verdict is harder to judge.
Did it meet the legal threshold?
The Emergencies Act says a public order emergency "arises from threats to the security of Canada." It says the definition of what constitutes "threats to the security of Canada" can be found in section two of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.
CSIS determined that the protest and blockades did not meet that standard — at least for its own specific purposes. But the government argues that the interpretation, inputs, purpose and ultimate decision-making are different when the term "threats to the security of Canada" is being considered under the Emergencies Act.
Rouleau's ruling on that question will be fascinating, whatever it says. For now, you can read duelling op-eds that find the government's argument either reasonable or problematic. It's also possible the drafters of the Emergencies Act simply failed to imagine a scenario in which other levels of government seem unable to exercise their own authority.
But Trudeau was noticeably ready and eager to make the government's argument on this point. He leaned forward when the commission's counsel turned to the issue and he asked for parts of the CSIS Act and Emergencies Act to be put up on screen so he could refer to the laws directly.
WATCH: 'This was necessary': Trudeau defends use of Emergencies Act
If Trudeau was weakened politically by the extended chaos of January and February — by the painfully unrequited sense that someone needed to do something — he asserted himself on Friday.
Except for not quite remembering the correct name of Vandenbeld's riding (he thought it was Ottawa East-Nepean) he was on top of the details and arguments and ready to explain. Such traits aren't always evident in his news conferences, or in the caricatures his critics conjure.
No one produced any embarrassing texts from the trove of documents the government has handed over to the commission. Questioned by a lawyer representing convoy organizers, Trudeau displayed some of the empathy that may have been lacking in his public comments this past winter.
Nevertheless, if the commission concludes the government fell short of the legal threshold, that would be an awkward final word on the matter for Trudeau, and for what Canadians have gone through over the past two and a half years.
The most interesting question anyone asked on Friday was whether Trudeau feared that his decision to invoke the Emergencies Act would embolden future governments to use it. It's a sensible thing to worry about.
But perhaps we can all take some comfort from watching what played out on Friday and over the past month. The prime minister just spent five hours under oath, being questioned by a procession of more than a dozen lawyers, after half a dozen of his ministers were made to explain everything from their official interactions to their impertinent text messages.
The next time somebody thinks about triggering the Emergencies Act, they'll at least know what they're letting themselves in for.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Emergencies Act inquiry studies fundamental rights and freedoms at stake in protests
Commission has launched the policy phase of its inquiry, is hearing from legal experts
Though no serious violence was reported, people living in the area said their community descended into lawlessness and they felt threatened by harassment and hazards, while protesters insisted they were exercising their right to peaceful assembly.
Now the commission, which is tasked with determining whether the federal government was justified in its invocation of the Emergencies Act to clear the protests, must grapple with some central questions. Where should the line be drawn on limits to Canadians' right to freedom of peaceful assembly? And what are governments and courts to do when that freedom conflicts with the rights of others?
The commission launched the policy phase of its inquiry Monday with a roundtable discussion featuring legal experts who study the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Justice
Paul Rouleau watches a lawyer appear via video during the first day of
proceedings at the Public Order Emergency Commission inquiry on Oct. 13,
2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
Commissioner Paul Rouleau said the question of how to define whether a protest is peaceful is a "critical element" of the inquiry's work.
There's been very little discussion about the right to peaceful assembly at the Supreme Court of Canada, leaving the reasonable limits on that freedom a bit murky, said Jamie Cameron, a professor emeritus at York University's Osgoode Hall Law School.
The key question, Cameron said, is: "What does it mean to say that an assembly is peaceful in nature?"
Some experts argue a line should only be drawn if a protest becomes violent, but others believe demonstrations can become disruptive enough that they can no longer be considered peaceful, she said.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 for the first time since it became law in 1988 after protesters associated with the "Freedom Convoy" blockaded downtown Ottawa and key border crossings, causing weeks of disruptions to Canada's trade corridors, businesses and residents in those communities.
Prime
Minister Justin Trudeau looks down as he appears as a witness at the
Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, Friday, Nov 25, 2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
The inquiry has heard that police believed the protests in Ottawa would not last longer than one weekend, despite warnings that demonstrators planned to remain in the capital for an extended period of time.
In the end, the protesters entrenched themselves and blocked the streets with encampments and big-rig trucks for three weeks.
"There is a wide degree of consensus on the value of protest in a democratic society," said Vanessa MacDonnell, an associate professor at the University of Ottawa faculty of law and co-director of the uOttawa Public Law Centre.
"The real challenge for decision-makers is, how do we balance the competing rights and interests that are at stake in the context of a public protest? To me, that's where the difficult work is."
The discussion is the first of several that will make up this week's policy phase of the inquiry, which will be used to draft recommendations about how to modernize the Emergencies Act.
The policy phase follows six weeks of public fact-finding hearings at the Library and Archives Canada building in downtown Ottawa, which culminated in Trudeau's hours-long testimony on Friday.
The Emergencies Act legislation granted extraordinary but time-limited powers to the government, police and banks, including the ability to ban people from participating in assemblies that could reasonably be expected to breach the peace, or travel in an area where such an assembly is happening.
That allowed police to create a no-go zone in downtown Ottawa and made it a criminal offence to be in those areas without a valid reason.
The regulations may have been overbroad, several experts on the panel agreed, but the context is important, said Carissima Mathen, a law professor at the University of Ottawa.
"On its face, it does look to be overbroad," Mathen said, adding that there are time limits on the powers and there was a list of exemptions to the ban on travelling in certain areas.
"That will factor into whether, in the circumstance, that kind of prohibition is in fact overbroad."
Charter applies when Emergencies Act invoked
Much of the testimony over the past six weeks at the inquiry focused on whether the government was legally entitled to invoke the act.
Even when the Emergencies Act is invoked, the Charter of Rights continues to apply, as explicitly stated in the legislation.
"At the end of the day, much of the concern is that the act is so broad and powerful. But on the other hand it is Charter-compliant by its very nature," Rouleau said.
"You could argue, certainly, the degree of interference with the Charter should be taken into account in the initial determination of what the threshold for an emergency is."
"I'm glad I'm not the one making the decision, because there is a tension in there," MacDonnell quipped.
Anti-vaccine
mandate protesters block the roadway at the Ambassador Bridge border
crossing in Windsor, Ontario, Canada on February 11, 2022. (Geoff Robins/AFP/Getty Images)
The discussion extended to an afternoon roundtable about the Charter and the fundraising efforts of the protesters.
"It hasn't been fully canvassed by the courts at all but, in principal, the idea of fundraising to support a cause or a social movement is protect by the Charter freedom guarantees," said Michelle Gallant, professor at the Robson Hall Faculty of Law at the University of Manitoba.
She said the fundraising "animates" the freedoms related to the right to expression, assembly and association.
The Emergencies Act also allowed banks to freeze the accounts of people directly or indirectly associated with the protests. The RCMP made up a list of protesters with orders to freeze their accounts, but banks were also given leeway to identify people who were running afoul of the Emergencies Act and freeze their accounts as well.
Typically, when the state seizes or freezes someone's assets, the person is first given notice and an opportunity to respond somehow, said Gerard Kennedy, another University of Manitoba law professor.
Arguably neither of those procedural rights were afforded to protesters who lost access to their money after the act was invoked.
Protected rights to the "enjoyment of property" and due process can be trumped by other legislation, like the Emergencies Act, he said.
Other topics to be discussed this week include cryptocurrency, international supply chains and criminal law, with discussions largely driven by policy papers the inquiry commissioned earlier this year.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Comments
Emergencies Act inquiry price tag estimated at nearly $19M
Final figure on cost of inquiry won't be available until its work is completed
A PCO spokesperson told CBC News that while the total won't be known until the Public Order Emergency Commission completes its work, the federal government approved $18.8 million to cover its costs.
The government also has provided the commission with access to Library and Archives Canada facility in Ottawa to conduct public hearings, along with administrative and technical support.
The commission has been hearing from witnesses for the past several weeks and has yet to conclude its public hearings. It's due to table its final report in February.
The government is required by law to establish an inquiry to examine any declaration of an emergency under the Emergencies Act once that declaration is withdrawn or expires.
Funding helps cover costs of participants
Part of that $18.8 million is meant to cover costs for individuals or groups involved in the inquiry.
Participants were asked to apply for funding if they believed they didn't have the resources to cover their participation.
Commissioner Paul Rouleau, who is running the inquiry, reviewed those applications and submitted funding recommendations to the PCO.
According to documents on the commission's website, nine groups applied for funding. Rouleau recommended that six of them — including a coalition of Ottawa residents and businesses and a group of convoy organizers — receive funding.
CBC asked the PCO which groups were approved and how much each would receive. A spokesperson said the final numbers won't be available until the new year.
The funding recommended by Rouleau primarily covers the cost of lawyers' fees, according to the commission documents. The PCO said that funding is also available to participants and witnesses for other expenses, such as travel.
Blockades cost billions in trade
Earlier this month, the inquiry heard that Transport Canada estimates as much as $3.9 billion in trade activity was halted because of border blockades related to the convoy protests.
At various points in early 2022, protesters blockaded border crossings in Windsor, Ont., the small town of Coutts, Alta., Emerson, Man. and the Pacific Highway in Surrey, B.C.
The blockade at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor forced an estimated $2.3 billion in trade to a standstill, Transport Canada estimated.
Vehicles block the roadway, preventing traffic from entering Canada from the Ambassador Bridge during the protest in February. (Chris Ensing/CBC)
In March, retail analysts said total economic damages stemming from the 23 days trucks and protesters occupied Ottawa streets could range from about $44 million to $200 million.
Estimates tabled at Ottawa city hall suggest city coffers took a $37 million hit due to the protests.
The RCMP spent more than $1.6 million on responding to the convoy protest in Ottawa, according to a CBC access to information request.
Documents also reveal the RCMP spent another $1.2 million on policing protests in Alberta, mostly at the U.S. border crossing in Coutts.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Catharine Tunney and The Canadian Press
3,791 Comments
Trudeau: 'Small Fringe' In Canada Is 'Lashing Out With Racist, Misogynistic Attacks'
CONVY RELIEF PITCHER WHERE'S MILLER ITS TRUDEAU
599 Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCInjC9C-e8&ab_channel=LiveFromTheShed
Tamara Lich’s Lawyer on Tucker Carlson Tonight
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/text-featured-prominently-emergencies-act-inquiry-1.6663216
'Bad humour' and short fuses: How politicians' texts played out at the Emergencies Act inquiry
Criticism and colourful language came from all sides in private texts
Politics is a profession prone to carefully crafted statements and rhetoric, so the text messages offered rare insights into the thought process of many key politicians — and a glimpse at tensions between governments.
Here are some of the stand-out text exchanges from the past few weeks.
'Screwed the pooch'
According to text messages that Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc said Jason Kenney wrote, the then-premier of Alberta accused the federal government of not caring about the Canada-United States border closure in Coutts, Alta.
Around dawn on Feb. 14, the RCMP arrested more than a dozen Coutts protesters and seized a cache of weapons, body armour and ammunition — just hours before the Emergencies Act was invoked.
Anti-COVID-19
vaccine mandate demonstrators gather as a truck convoy blocks the
highway at the busy U.S. border crossing in Coutts, Alta. on Feb. 1,
2022. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)
According to the messages LeBlanc shared with Transport Minister Omar Alghabra and Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino three days earlier, Kenney accused the federal government of leaving the provinces holding the bag on protest enforcement.
The texts were brought up during Mendicino's testimony and were in documents released by the inquiry this week.
In the texts attributed to Kenney, he also complained about the federal decision to decline Alberta's request for military equipment that could help remove protesters' vehicles.
One message said — in an apparent reference to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — that "your guy has really screwed the pooch."
"Speaking of bonkers," Alghabra wrote in his text exchange with LeBlanc and Mendicino, apparently in reference to some of Kenney's texts.
"Totally," LeBlanc replied.
Ontario's Sylvia Jones gives a cold response
The commission also got a glimpse of a testy call between Mendicino and Ontario's solicitor general at the time, Sylvia Jones, about how to handle last winter's convoy protests. Their conversation apparently included some colourful language.
Mendicino's chief of staff Mike Jones and Samantha Khalil, director of issues management at the Prime Minister's Office, discussed wanting Jones at the table during trilateral meetings.
"Can have my boss reach out again [to Sylvia Jones] but last call got pretty frosty at the end when [Mendicino] was saying we need the province to get back to us with their plan," wrote Jones.
"'I don't take edicts from you, you're not my f--king boss," the staffer continued, describing Jones' response.
'Tanks' text was a joke - Lametti
Mendicino was party to more than one text conversation that came up during the inquiry. One exchange with Justice Minister David Lametti generated some controversy during the inquiry hearings.
In that text exchange, Lametti told Mendicino he needed to "get the police to move" and secure support from the Canadian Armed Forces, if necessary.
"How many tanks are you asking for," Mendicino wrote back.
"I just wanna ask Anita how many we've got on hand," he added, referring to Defence Minister Anita Anand.
"I reckon one will do!" Lametti texted back.
Public
Safety Minister Marco Mendicino was party to more than one text
conversation that came up during the inquiry. In this one from Feb. 2,
he and Justice Minister David Lametti joked about calling in the
Canadian Armed Forces. (Public Order Emergency Commission exhibit)
During his testimony at the inquiry, Lametti said he wasn't calling for the deployment of the army and described the exchange as banter with a colleague and a friend.
"There will be occasional attempts at bad humour," he said.
Lametti calls Ottawa police chief 'incompetent'
A separate exchange of texts between Lametti and Mendicino appeared during Lametti's testimony.
In those messages, Lametti shared some criticism of former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly, who resigned during the occupation of the city's downtown streets last winter.
"They just need to exercise it and do their job," texted Mendicino, referring to the Ottawa Police Service's authority to enforce the law.
"I was stunned by the lack of a multilayered plan," Lametti responded. "Sloly is incompetent."
While Lametti said he'd now soften his language about Sloly, he told the inquiry he had to move out of his Ottawa residence during the protest to avoid harassment.
"I was frustrated, I have to admit," he said. "It is frank."
Trudeau, Blair take aim at Ford
During a private call with then-Ottawa mayor Jim Watson in early February, Trudeau accused Ontario Premier Doug Ford of hiding from his responsibilities as the streets of the nation's capital were gridlocked by the protest.
Text
messages between Emergency Prepadreness Minister Bill Blair and his
chief of staff were entered into evidence at the Emergencies Act inquiry
on Monday. (Public Order Emergency Commission exhibit)
The inquiry had access to a readout of that call — which is not an exact transcript of the conversation.
"Doug Ford has been hiding from his responsibility on it for political reasons, as you highlighted," Trudeau said.
"Important we don't let them get away from that."
The prime minister wasn't alone in criticizing Ford. Text messages from Emergency Preparedness Minister Bill Blair to his chief of staff also shared a few choice words about the premier.
"I am embarrassed for my former profession. And worried for my government which is being made to look weak and ineffective," Blair, a former Toronto police chief, said in a text message.
"I can't believe that I'm hoping Doug Ford will save us."
Government 'is losing ... confidence in OPS'
Politicians weren't the only ones seeing their private text exchanges aired in public.
A text message from RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki released to the inquiry said the federal government was already losing confidence in the Ottawa police just one week into the massive protest.
The Feb. 5 texts were between Lucki — who was in a meeting with federal ministers at the time — and Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Thomas Carrique.
Text
messages between RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki and Ontario Provincial
Police Commissioner Thomas Carrique were also brought up during the
inquiry. Lucki's texts are in blue. (POEC)
"Trying to calm them down, but not easy when they see cranes, structures, horses bouncing castles in downtown Ottawa," she wrote.
She also provided insight into the government's thinking at the time, adding that she or Carrique might be called in if the government invoked the Emergencies Act.
"Between you and I only, (Government of Canada) is losing (or) lost confidence in OPS, we gotta get to safe action (or) enforcement," Lucki texted Carrique.
'Friendly fire'
In one text exchange with Mendicino's chief of staff, Serge Arpin, who was chief of staff to Mayor Watson, criticized Blair for saying the lack of enforcement was "somewhat inexplicable."
"But it is friendly fire from you guys - don't kid yourself," Arpin wrote.
In a separate text in the same exchange, Arpin told Mike Jones that the RCMP was "lying to you flat out" about the police resources available.
Arpin told the inquiry that comment was the product of exasperation.
"Extraordinary frustration of having to tell the mayor that our residents who are now onto day 14 or 13 of the demonstration and we're not seeing any meaningful progress in terms of additional bodies on the ground assisting [the Ottawa Police Service] with the operation," he testified.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Comments
Multiple lawyers pushed back against Trudeau's claim, suggesting that he hadn't been properly briefed on plans to clear downtown Ottawa of the protesters who had blocked parts of the capital for weeks.
After six weeks of dramatic witness testimony, Trudeau made his own highly anticipated appearance before the Public Order Emergency Commission. He steadfastly defended his government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 for the first time in the law's 34-year history.
WATCH | 'This was necessary': Trudeau defends decision to invoke Emergencies Act:
The commission has heard previously that after initial confusion and dysfunction, the Ottawa Police Service [OPS], the Ontario Provincial Police [OPP] and the RCMP had come together to craft an operational plan.
"We kept hearing there was a plan," Trudeau testified on Friday before a packed room.
A line of anti-mandate protesters stands face-to-face with a line of police officers in downtown Ottawa on Feb. 19. (Michael Charles Cole/CBC)
"I would recommend people take a look at that actual plan, which wasn't a plan at all"
Trudeau said the document he heard about was largely about using liaison officers to shrink the footprint of the protest, with details on enforcement "to be determined later.'
"It was not even in the most generous characterizations a plan for how they were going to end the occupation," Trudeau said.
WATCH | Trudeau says Ottawa police had no plan to end convoy protest:
The question of whether police could have handled the crowds without the Emergencies Act has been raised multiple times at the inquiry, as Commissioner Paul Rouleau considers whether its invocation was truly a measure of last resort.
The night before the law was invoked, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki told Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino's chief of staff that she felt police had not yet exhausted "all available tools," according to an email seen by the inquiry. In that email, she also listed a number of measures that could be helpful if the government moved forward.
Jody Thomas, Trudeau's national security intelligence adviser, testified last week that Lucki failed to pass that information on during a meeting with senior officials on Feb. 13.
"Individuals who are at that meeting are expected to provide information that is of use to decision makers ... the prime minister in his cabinet," Thomas said Thursday.
RCMP
Commissioner Brenda Lucki steps out of a vehicle as she arrives at the
Public Order Emergency Commission, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
Thomas also said she doubted the RCMP had firmed up a plan with the OPP.
"There was no evidence there was a plan," Thomas said. "We had been told there was a plan multiple times."
The Emergencies Act says a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that "cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada."
"That was part of the problem, that not all tools were being used," Trudeau said.
Rebecca Jones, a lawyer for former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly, showed Trudeau Lucki's testimony that she and the head of the OPP were briefed on a plan around Feb. 11.
"We were satisfied with the plan," Lucki testified last week.
Jones suggested to Trudeau that there was a disconnect between their testimonies.
"I'm going to suggest what happened is that Commissioner Lucki didn't brief you and your cabinet that there was complete plan on the 13th," she said.
"I can't comment on that," Trudeau said.
Lawyers question how well Trudeau knew the plan
Jones wasn't the only lawyer to question Trudeau's assessment of the police plan.
Under cross examination by the Ottawa Police Service's lawyer, Jessica Barrow, Trudeau said he didn't have the capacity to do a line-by-line review of the police plan.
"I take you would agree with me that perhaps there was a little bit more substance to the plan than you were aware of on the 13th," she said.
"I am unable to speak to that," he said.
Sujit Choudhry, counsel for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, cited the Feb. 13 Ottawa Police plan and pointed out that eight of its pages have been fully redacted.
Canadian
Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Director David Vigneault is seen
as he gives testimony at the Public Order Emergency Commission Nov. 21,
2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
Choudhry asked that the pages be unredacted. The government declined.
"Prime minister, can I put it to you this way? You said we should read the plan but I think you'd agree we can't," he said.
"Indeed," said Trudeau. "I haven't read the plan."
OPS Supt. Robert Bernier, who helped design the force's plan to end the protest in downtown Ottawa last winter, told the commission last month he was already planning to carry out a police operation when the law was invoked.
When asked whether he thought the federal act was necessary to remove protesters, Bernier said it's hard for him to say.
"I did not get to do the operation without it," Bernier responded. "I don't know what complications I would have had had it not been in place and utilized the common law."
Ottawa police and representatives of the other police forces moved ahead with what they called the "February 17 plan", which methodically cleared the downtown core over a weekend. It was one of the largest police operations in Canadian history.
Trudeau says CSIS isn't the decision-maker
With critics arguing the government did not meet the requirements of the legislation, the inquiry has been considering the legal definition of a public order emergency.
The Emergencies Act defines a national emergency as one that "arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to be a national emergency."
The act points back to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act definition of such threats, which include harm caused for the purpose of achieving a "political, religious or ideological objective," espionage, foreign interference or the intent to overthrow the government by violence. It doesn't mention economic security.
The head of the spy agency has testified he doesn't believe the protest met the definition of a national security threat under the CSIS act, but was told the Emergencies Act offered a broader definition of such threats.
Tamara
Lich, front left, returns following a break as Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau waits for questioning to start as he appears as a witnesses at
the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on Friday, Nov 25,
2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
During her examination, commission lawyer Shantona Chaudhury suggested to Trudeau that the protests did "not constitute a threat to the security of Canada as defined in the CSIS Act."
"As defined for the CSIS Act," Trudeau responded.
"Those words in the CSIS Act are used for the purpose of CSIS determining that they have authority to act against an individual a group or a specific plot ... for example."
Trudeau said that cabinet — not CSIS — decides whether to invoke the Emergencies Act.
WATCH | Trudeau explains reasoning behind invoking Emergencies Act:
"The purpose of it for this project was to be able to give us in special temporary measures as defined in the Public Order emergency act. That would put an end to this national emergency," he said.
"There was the use of children as human shields, deliberately. Which was a real concern both at the Ambassador Bridge and the fact that there were kids on Wellington Street, that people didn't know what was in the trucks, whether it was kids, whether it was weapons, whether it was both."
The government has claimed solicitor-client privilege to shield the legal advice it received on interpreting the Emergencies Act.
Trudeau said he is "serene and confident" in the choice he made to invoke the act.
CSIS didn't have tools, mindset to deal with convoy: PM
In an interview with commission counsel in September, Trudeau said CSIS faced challenges during the convoy protests. A summary of that interview was made public Friday.
"He noted that CSIS does not necessarily have the right tools, mandate or even mindset to respond to the threat Canada faced at that moment," said the summary.
"He noted that CSIS has a very specific mandate, and that when they are determining whether there is a threat to the security of Canada, they are doing so for the purpose of obtaining a warrant, wire tap, or to authorize an investigation of a specific target."
CSIS's key mandate is to investigate activities suspected of constituting threats to the security of the country and to report to the government of Canada.
Commissioner
Paul Rouleau presides over the Public Order Emergency Commission in
Ottawa, on Wednesday, Nov. 23, 2022. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick (The Canadian Press)
"CSIS has been challenged in recent years by the threat of domestic terrorism, which it was not designed to address. He observed that CSIS is limited in its ability to conduct operations on Canadian soil or against Canadians," said Trudeau's interview summary.
Trudeau seized with 'what if' thoughts
In his September interview, Trudeau said the Incident Response Group, a special committee made up of cabinet ministers and security officials, mused about bringing in legislation to clear the crowds, but felt passing a bill through Parliament would take too long.
"For example, the IRG looked at the possibility of special legislation to compel tow truck drivers to fulfil their government contracts. Ultimately, it was determined that the legislative process (up to and including royal assent) would have taken weeks," said the summary of Trudeau's interview.
"Therefore, the IRG determined that if the police needed new legal authorities, the response would require the Emergencies Act's invocation."
WATCH | Trudeau reflects on repercussions of not invoking Emergencies Act:
Trudeau testified Friday he had to pause a moment when his top public service adviser, Clerk of the Privy Council Janice Charette, sent him a memo advising him to invoke the act around 3:40 p.m. ET on Feb. 14.
"That was a moment that I took with the weight of the decision I was about to take," he said.
Trudeau would tell the public he was going to invoke the act within the hour.
"What if the worst had happened in those following days? What if someone had gotten hurt?" he said. "What if a police officer had been put in a hospital? What if, when I had an opportunity to do something, I had waited?"
Trudeau's testimony Friday marks the end of public hearing phase of the commission's work.
Rouleau says writing report will be a challenge
The inquiry has heard testimony from dozens of witnesses, including Ottawa residents, local officials, police, protesters and senior federal ministers.
The inquiry has heard conflicting views from police and intelligence agency leaders about whether the Emergencies Act powers were needed.
Convoy participants were given a week to tell their side of the story.
Tamara Lich — perhaps the most recognizable of the convoy organizers — told the inquiry late Thursday that she joined the "Freedom Convoy" after failing to get a response from members of Parliament she emailed about ending COVID-19 restrictions.
After 31 days, 76 witnesses and more than 7,000 exhibits, the Emergencies Act inquiry now shifts gears. The commission is winding down its public hearings but will still hear opinions from academics and experts next week.
It will then be up to Commissioner Paul Rouleau to weigh the evidence as he drafts his final report, due to be tabled in Parliament in February.
"My difficult task is still in front of me," said the Ontario Appeal Court justice.
"I'm not going to shy away. It's very challenging to get this written. My hope is that once it is written and provided, there be enough there that even if you don't agree with me, the facts will be there."
WATCH | What we've learned from the Emergencies Act inquiry so far:
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Ben Andrews and The Canadian Press
Trudeau says Ottawa police plan to clear protest 'wasn't a plan at all'
The Public Order Emergency Commission has heard from dozens of witnesses over the past 6 weeks
After six weeks of dramatic witness testimony, Trudeau is making his own highly anticipated appearance before the Public Order Emergency Commission to defend his government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 for the first time in the law's 34-year history.
The commission has heard previously that after initial confusion and dysfunction, the Ottawa Police Service [OPS], the Ontario Provincial Police [OPP] and the RCMP had come together to craft an operational plan in the days before.
"We kept hearing there was a plan," Trudeau testified Friday before a packed room.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears as a witness at the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on Friday. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)"I would recommend people take a look at that actual plan, which wasn't a plan at all"
Trudeau said the document he heard about was largely about using liaison officers to shrink the footprint of the protest, with details on enforcement "to be determined later.'
"It was not even in the most generous characterizations a plan for how they were going to end the occupation," Trudeau said.
WATCH | Trudeau says Ottawa police had no plan to end convoy protest
The question of whether police could have handled the crowds without the Emergencies Act has been raised multiple times at the inquiry, as Commissioner Paul Rouleau considers whether its invocation was truly a measure of last resort.
The night before the law was invoked, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki told Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino's chief of staff that she felt police had not yet exhausted "all available tools," according to an email seen by the inquiry. In that email, she also listed a number of measures that could be helpful if the government moved forward.
Jody Thomas, Trudeau's national security intelligence adviser, testified last week that Lucki failed to pass that information on during a meeting with senior officials on Feb. 13.
"Individuals who are at that meeting are expected to provide information that is of use to decision makers ... the prime minister in his cabinet," Thomas said Thursday.
Thomas also said she doubted the RCMP had firmed up a plan with the OPP.
"There was no evidence there was a plan," said Thomas. "We had been told there was a plan multiple times."
The Emergencies Act says a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that "cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada."
"That was part of the problem, that not all tools were being used," said Trudeau.
Lawyers question how well Trudeau knew the plan
Under cross examination by the Ottawa Police Service's lawyer, Jessica Barrow, Trudeau said he didn't have the capacity to do a line-by-line review of the police plan.
"I take you would agree with me that perhaps there was a little bit more substance to the plan than you were aware of on the 13th," she said.
"I am unable to speak to that," he said.
Sujit Choudhry, counsel for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, cited the Feb. 13 Ottawa Police plan and pointed out that eight of its pages have been fully redacted.
A line of anti-mandate protesters stands face-to-face with a line of police officers in downtown Ottawa on Feb. 19. (Michael Charles Cole/CBC)
Choudhry asked that the pages be unredacted. The government declined.
"Prime minister, can I put it to you this way? You said we should read the plan but I think you'd agree we can't," he said.
"Indeed," said Trudeau. "I haven't read the plan."
OPS Supt. Robert Bernier, who helped design the force's plan to end the protest in downtown Ottawa last winter, told the commission last month he was already planning to carry out a police operation when the law was invoked.
When asked whether he thought the federal act was necessary to remove protesters, Bernier said it's hard for him to say.
"I did not get to do the operation without it," Bernier responded. "I don't know what complications I would have had had it not been in place and utilized the common law."
Ottawa police and representatives of the other police forces moved ahead with what they called the "February 17 plan", which methodically cleared the downtown core over a weekend. It was one of the largest police operations in Canadian history.
Trudeau says CSIS isn't the decision-maker
With critics arguing the government did not meet the requirements of the legislation, the inquiry has been considering the legal definition of a public order emergency.
The Emergencies Act defines a national emergency as one that "arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to be a national emergency."
The act points back to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act definition of such threats, which include harm caused for the purpose of achieving a "political, religious or ideological objective," espionage, foreign interference or the intent to overthrow the government by violence. It doesn't mention economic security.
The head of the spy agency has testified he doesn't believe the protest met the definition of a national security threat under the CSIS act, but was told the Emergencies Act offered a broader definition of such threats.
Canadian
Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Director David Vigneault is seen
as he gives testimony at the Public Order Emergency Commission Nov. 21,
2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
During her examination, commission lawyer Shantona Chaudhury suggested to Trudeau that the protests did "not constitute a threat to the security of Canada as defined in the CSIS Act."
"As defined for the CSIS Act," Trudeau responded.
"Those words in the CSIS Act are used for the purpose of CSIS determining that they have authority to act against an individual a group or a specific plot ... for example."
Trudeau said that cabinet — not CSIS — decides whether to invoke the Emergencies Act.
WATCH | Trudeau explains reasoning behind invoking Emergencies Act
"The purpose of it for this project was to be able to give us in special temporary measures as defined in the Public Order emergency act. That would put an end to this national emergency," he said.
"There was the use of children as human shields, deliberately. Which was a real concern both at the Ambassador Bridge and the fact that there were kids on Wellington Street, that people didn't know what was in the trucks, whether it was kids, whether it was weapons, whether it was both."
The government has claimed solicitor-client privilege to shield the legal advice it received on interpreting the Emergencies Act.
Trudeau said he is "serene and confident" in the choice he made to invoke the act.
CSIS didn't have the tools, mindset to deal with convoy: Trudeau
In an interview with commission counsel in September, Trudeau said CSIS faced challenges during the convoy protests. A summary of that interview was made public Friday.
"He noted that CSIS does not necessarily have the right tools, mandate or even mindset to respond to the threat Canada faced at that moment," said the summary.
"He noted that CSIS has a very specific mandate, and that when they are determining whether there is a threat to the security of Canada, they are doing so for the purpose of obtaining a warrant, wire tap, or to authorize an investigation of a specific target."
CSIS's key mandate is to investigate activities suspected of constituting threats to the security of the country and to report to the government of Canada.
Tamara
Lich, front left, returns following a break as Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau waits for questioning to start as he appears as a witnesses at
the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on Friday, Nov 25,
2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Pre
"CSIS has been challenged in recent years by the threat of domestic terrorism, which it was not designed to address. He observed that CSIS is limited in its ability to conduct operations on Canadian soil or against Canadians," said Trudeau's interview summary.
Government felt passing legislation would be too slow
In his September interview, Trudeau said the Incident Response Group, a special committee made up of cabinet ministers and security officials, mused about bringing in legislation to clear the crowds, but felt passing a bill through Parliament would take too long.
"For example, the IRG looked at the possibility of special legislation to compel tow truck drivers to fulfil their government contracts. Ultimately, it was determined that the legislative process (up to and including royal assent) would have taken weeks," said the summary of Trudeau's interview.
"Therefore, the IRG determined that if the police needed new legal authorities, the response would require the Emergencies Act's invocation."
Trudeau told the commission the IRG started seriously considering the Emergencies Act after the third weekend of protests in Ottawa.
"The events of the first weekend caught police by surprise. By the second weekend, it was apparent that the police were unable to end it. It was still not taken care of after the third weekend, with current tools and resources," said Trudeau's interview summary.
WATCH | Trudeau reflects on repercussions of not invoking Emergencies Act
Trudeau testified Friday he had to pause a moment when his top public service adviser, Clerk of the Privy Council Janice Charette, sent him a memo advising him to invoke the act around 3:40 p.m. ET on Feb. 14.
"That was a moment that I took with the weight of the decision I was about to take," he said.
Trudeau would tell the public he was going to invoke the act within the hour.
"What if the worst had happened in those following days? What if someone had gotten hurt?" he said. "What if a police officer had been put in a hospital? What if, when I had an opportunity to do something, I had waited?"
Trudeau's testimony Friday marks the end of public hearing phase of the commission's work.
The inquiry has heard testimony from dozens of witnesses, including Ottawa residents, local officials, police, protesters and senior federal ministers.
The inquiry has heard conflicting views from police and intelligence agency leaders about whether the Emergencies Act powers were needed.
Convoy participants were given a week to tell their side of the story.
Tamara Lich — perhaps the most recognizable of the convoy organizers — told the inquiry late Thursday that she joined the "Freedom Convoy" after failing to get a response from members of Parliament she emailed about ending COVID-19 restrictions.
Government worried about economic impacts
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland defended the government's decision Thursday, arguing that the protests sparked political concerns south of the border.
At various points in early 2022, protesters blockaded border crossings in Windsor, Ont., the small town of Coutts, Alta., Emerson, Man., and the Pacific Highway in Surrey, B.C.
As a result, Freeland said, she heard complaints from the highest levels of the White House. She called it a "dangerous moment for Canada."
Still, a number of groups — including the convoy protest organizers and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) — have argued that invoking the act amounted to government overreach.
"The government is running out of time to prove it met the high burden of invoking the Emergencies Act," the CCLA said in a statement on Thursday.
Friday's hearings will finish with lawyers making their final arguments to Commissioner Rouleau.
The commission is winding down its public hearings but will still hear opinions from academics and experts next week. Rouleau's final report is due to be tabled in Parliament in February.
WATCH | What we've learned from the Emergencies Act inquiry so far
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Ben Andrews and The Canadian Press
Trudeau tells Emergencies Act inquiry CSIS didn't have right tools, mindset to deal with last winter's threats
The Public Order Emergency Commission has heard from dozens of witnesses over the past 6 weeks
After six weeks of dramatic witness testimony, Trudeau is making his highly anticipated appearance before the Public Order Emergency Commission on Friday to defend his government's decision to invoke the law for the first time in its 34-year history.
The definition of what constitutes a public order emergency has been studied closely during the public hearings, with critics arguing the government did not meet the requirements of the legislation.
Under the Emergencies Act, a national emergency is defined as one that "arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to be a national emergency."
The act then points back to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act's definition of such threats, which include harm caused for the purpose of achieving a "political, religious or ideological objective," espionage, foreign interference or the intent to overthrow the government by violence. It doesn't mention economic security.
The head of the spy agency has testified he doesn't' believe the protest met the definition of a national security threat under the CSIS act, but was told the Emergencies Act took a broader definition of a threat.
In an interview with commission counsel in September, Trudeau said CSIS faces challenges. A summary of that interview was made public Friday.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears as a witness at the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on Friday. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
"He noted that CSIS does not necessarily have the right tools, mandate or even mindset to respond to the threat Canada faced at that moment," said the summary.
"He noted that CSIS has a very specific mandate, and that when they are determining whether there is a threat to the security of Canada, they are doing so for the purpose of obtaining a warrant, wire tap, or to authorize an investigation of a specific target."
CSIS's key mandate is to investigate activities suspected of constituting threats to the security of the country and to report up to the government of Canada.
"CSIS has been challenged in recent years by the threat of domestic terrorism, which it was not designed to address. He observed that CSIS is limited in its ability to conduct operations on Canadian soil or against Canadians."
Trudeau said he believes it's the cabinet, not CSIS, that ultimately invokes the Emergencies Act.
Government felt passing legislation would be too slow
The government has claimed solicitor-client privilege to shield what legal advice it received about interpreting the Emergencies Act.
In his September interview, Trudeau said the Incident Response Group, a special committee made up of cabinet ministers and security officials, mused about bringing in legislation to clear the crowds, but felt passing a bill through Parliament would take too long.
"For example, the IRG looked at the possibility of special legislation to compel tow truck drivers to fulfil their government contracts. Ultimately, it was determined that the legislative process (up to and including royal assent) would have taken weeks," said the summary.
"Therefore, the IRG determined that if the police needed new legal authorities, the response would require the Emergencies Act's invocation."
A line of anti-mandate protesters stands face-to-face with a line of police officers in downtown Ottawa on Feb. 19. (Michael Charles Cole/CBC)
Trudeau told the commission lawyer said it was after the third weekend of protests in Ottawa that the IRG seriously considered the Emergencies Act.
"The events of the first weekend caught police by surprise. By the second weekend, it was apparent that the police were unable to end it. It was still not taken care of after the third weekend, with current tools and resources," said Trudeau's interview summary.
"That's when the prime minister and cabinet felt it was the right moment. "
What the commission has heard so far
Trudeau's testimony Friday marks the end of public hearing phase of the commission's work.
The inquiry has heard testimony from dozens of witnesses, including Ottawa residents, local officials, police, protesters and senior federal ministers.
The inquiry has heard conflicting views from police and intelligence agency leaders about whether the Emergencies Act powers were needed.
The night before the law was invoked, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki told Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino that she felt police had not yet exhausted "all available tools," according to an email seen by the inquiry.
But documents submitted into evidence on Thursday indicate that the RCMP wanted to keep the Emergencies Act in place for weeks after the protests were cleared.
Government worried about economic impacts
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland defended the government's decision Thursday, arguing that the protests sparked political concerns south of the border.
At various points in early 2022, protesters blockaded border crossings in Windsor, Ont., the small town of Coutts, Alta., Emerson, Man., and the Pacific Highway in Surrey, B.C.
Earlier this month, the inquiry heard that Transport Canada estimates as much as $3.9 billion in trade activity was halted because of border blockades related to the convoy protests.
As a result, Freeland said, she heard complaints from the highest levels of the White House. She called it a "dangerous moment for Canada."
Still, a number of groups — including the convoy protest organizers and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) — have argued that invoking the act amounted to government overreach.
"With just one day of testimony left, the government is running out of time to prove it met the high burden of invoking the Emergencies Act," the CCLA said in a statement on Thursday.
Friday's hearings will be capped by closing arguments as lawyers make their final arguments to Commissioner Paul Rouleau.
The commission is winding down its public hearings but will still hear opinions from academics and experts next week. Rouleau's final report is due to be tabled in Parliament in February.
PMO staff say Bergen privately acknowledged concerns over engaging with protesters
Former interim Tory leader says she has different recollection of Feb. 3 call
A summary of interviews with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's senior aides was released by the public inquiry looking into the federal government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14.
The document said Trudeau's chief of staff, Katie Telford, asked whether Bergen could help and the two leaders discussed reaching out to protesters in a Feb. 3 phone call.
"Ms. Telford added that during the call, Ms. Bergen acknowledged that there were significant concerns about whom the federal government could engage with and setting a bad precedent," the summary said.
The conversation happened on Bergen's first day on the job, when she publicly challenged Trudeau's government in the House of Commons for not offering an "olive branch" to the protesters.
During question period she charged that the prime minister needed to come up with a plan to make protesters "feel they have been listened to." Instead, she told MPs, Trudeau was "threatening Canadians with more vaccine mandates."
For her part, Bergen said Thursday that she had a different recollection of that Feb. 3 call with Trudeau. She said the prime minister called to congratulate her on becoming leader, and that they discussed a number of things.
"I asked him if he would consider reaching out and extending an olive branch to the people who had come to Ottawa," Bergen wrote in an email. "He said he didn't want to set a precedent by speaking to protesters in that way."
The document released by the commission says federal officials considered possible engagement with the protesters "more than once as a possible option" to bringing an end to the blockade.
Former
Conservative interim leader Candice Bergen denied the PMO staff
members' account of her Feb. 3 phone call with Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
Ultimately that option had little support across government, Telford told the commission Thursday.
"There were too many unanswered questions," she said.
"There was no clarity in terms of who the discussion would be with on either side of the discussion, and what the discussion would be about and what it might result in."
Trudeau's senior staff appeared on the second-last day of public hearings held by the commission, which is probing the federal government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act in response to protests that gridlocked downtown Ottawa and blockaded the Canada-U.S. border.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Comments
WATCH LIVE: Trudeau FINALLY takes the stand at the Trucker Commission
Rebel News<info@rebelnews.com> | Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 11:41 AM | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| To: David Amos <David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.com> | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
From: Blogger <no-reply@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 07:02:05 +0000
Subject: Your post titled "MARCO MENDICINO PUBLIC ORDER EMERGENCY
COMMISSION INQUIRY Day 28 - November 22, 2022" has been reinstated
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Hello,
We have re-evaluated the post titled "MARCO MENDICINO PUBLIC ORDER
EMERGENCY COMMISSION INQUIRY Day 28 - November 22, 2022" against Community
Guidelines https://blogger.com/go/
been reinstated. You may access the post at
http://davidraymondamos3.
Sincerely,
The Blogger Team
LIVE TRUDEAU ON THE STAND PUBLIC ORDER EMERGENCY COMISSION INQUIRY Day 31 - November 25, 2022
From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario <Premier@ontario.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 19:53:48 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Christine Van Geyn Methinks everybody
knows why I love the circus that no doubt will cause a writ to be
dropped during the Yuletide Season N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly valued.
You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
reviewed and taken into consideration.
There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
response may take several business days.
Thanks again for your email.
______
Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
Merci encore pour votre courriel.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Info <Info@gg.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 19:51:17 +0000
Subject: OSGG General Inquiries / Demande de renseignements généraux au BSGG
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for writing to the Office of the Secretary to the Governor
General. We appreciate hearing your views and suggestions. Responses
to specific inquiries can be expected within three weeks. Please note
that general comments and opinions may not receive a response.
*****
Nous vous remercions d'avoir écrit au Bureau du secrétaire du
gouverneur général. Nous aimons prendre connaissance de vos points de
vue et de vos suggestions. Il faut allouer trois semaines pour
recevoir une réponse à une demande précise. Veuillez noter que nous ne
donnons pas nécessairement suite aux opinions et aux commentaires
généraux.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message may contain confidential or privileged
information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are
not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this email. Please notify the sender immediately if you have
received this email by mistake and delete it from your system.
AVIS IMPORTANT : Le présent courriel peut contenir des renseignements
confidentiels et est strictement réservé à l’usage de la personne à
qui il est destiné. Si vous n’êtes pas la personne visée, vous ne
devez pas diffuser, distribuer ou copier ce courriel. Merci de nous en
aviser immédiatement et de supprimer ce courriel s’il vous a été
envoyé par erreur.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Ien, Marci - M.P." <marci.ien@parl.gc.ca>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 19:53:02 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Christine Van Geyn Methinks everybody
knows why I love the circus that no doubt will cause a writ to be
dropped during the Yuletide Season N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for emailing the Office of the Honourable Marci Ien, Your
Member of Parliament for Toronto Centre
We are currently dealing with a high volume of emails, please be
advised that email inquires will take up to 7 business days for a
response.
We hope you and your loved ones are safe and healthy during this time.
Your voice is important to us and we appreciate the time you took to
reach out to us today.
Thank you again for your note and your patience as we respond to a
high volume of messages. If this is urgent, please call our
Constituency Office at 416-972-9749
All physical mail sent to the Toronto Centre Constituency office or
our Ottawa Office will be subject to delays in retrieving since our
offices are physically closed due to COVID-19.
If you have inquiries regarding Municipal Concerns:
please contact Robin Buxton Potts, your City Councillor for Ward 13
Email: councillor_BuxtonPotts@
Phone: 416-392-7903
If you have inquiries regarding Provincial Concerns:
please contact Kristyn Wong-Tam, your Member of Provincial Parliament
for Toronto Centre
Email: Kwong-Tam-QP@ndp.on.ca
Phone: 416-972-7683
If you are unsure whether your issue is of a Federal, Municipal, or
Provincial matter please visit the following website:
https://lop.parl.ca/About/
If this is an emergency please call 9-1-1.
If you are sick, or looking for information on COVID-19 and how to
prevent spreading the virus, please visit the following websites:
www.Canada.ca/Coronavirus<http
www.ontario.ca/coronavirus<htt
https://www.toronto.ca/home/
The following telephone numbers may be useful, although please read
the instructions on the websites before calling in to ensure that the
phone lines are open for those most in need:
· Public Health Agency of Canada: 1-833-784-4397
· Tele-health Ontario: 1-866-797-0000
· Toronto Public Health: 416-338-7600
For 24/7 Mental Health and Wellness Services
please visit: www.wellnesstogether.ca<http:/
or text WELLNESS to 741741 or call 1-866-585-0445 (Adults)
or text WELLNESS to 686868 or call 1-888-668-6810 (Youth)
For 24/7 First Nations and Inuit Wellness Services
please call: 1‑855‑242-3310
For 24/7 Crisis Line for Residential School Survivors
please call: 1 (866) 925-4419
Thank you for your patience and understanding.
Kindest Regards
Toronto Centre stands on the traditional territory of many nations
including the Mississaugas of the New Credit, the Anishinabeg, the
Haudenosaunee, and the Wendat Peoples
U.S. concern about convoy blockades a 'dangerous moment for Canada,' Freeland testifies at inquiry
Several PMO staffers are also expected to testify, including Trudeau's chief of staff
As Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland tells it, Brian Deese is a hard man to get hold of.
So when U.S. President Joe Biden's senior economic adviser requested a call with her on Feb. 10 about the ongoing border blockades, Freeland said, she knew the stakes were high.
"That was a dangerous moment for Canada, I felt," the deputy prime minister testified Thursday before the Emergencies Act inquiry.
"That one conversation was a seminal one for me. And it was a moment when I realized as a country, somehow, we had to find a way to bring this to an end."
Freeland described the call with Deese in front of the Public Order Emergency Commission Thursday. The commission is reviewing the federal government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 to clear anti-public health measure protests in Ottawa and deter border blockades.
As part of its work, the commission is probing whether the government met the threshold to trigger the never-before-used legislation.
Tearing up at one point, Freeland defended her government's actions by arguing economic security is linked to national security.
"I really do believe our security as a country is built on our economic security," she said.
"And if our economic security is threatened, all of our security is threatened. And I think that's true for us as a country. And it's true for individuals."
Minister
of Finance Chrystia Freeland appears as a witness at the Public Order
Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on Thursday, Nov 24, 2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
Freeland said that after her call with Deese, director of the U.S. president's National Economic Council, she knew the blockades had set an "amber light flashing" south of the border regarding supply chain vulnerabilities with Canada.
She said she worried the blockades would tip the balance in favour of Democrats and Republicans who support a protectionist trade stance.
"It wasn't just the immediate damage, it wasn't just the immediate harm. It wasn't, 'Oh, you know, this plant loses four days of operation,'" Freeland said Thursday.
"The danger was were we in the process, as a country, of doing long-term and possibly irreparable harm to our trading relationship with the United States."
At various points in early 2022, protesters blockaded border crossings in Windsor, Ont., the small town of Coutts, Alta., Emerson, Man., and the Pacific Highway in Surrey, B.C.
The government cited a threat to Canada's economic security when it invoked the Emergencies Act last winter.
The definition of what constitutes a public order emergency has been studied closely during the public hearings, with critics arguing the government did not meet the requirements of the legislation.
Under the Emergencies Act, a national emergency is defined as one that "arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to be a national emergency."
The act then points back to CSIS's definition of such threats, which include harm caused for the purpose of achieving a "political, religious or ideological objective," espionage, foreign interference or the intent to overthrow the government by violence. It doesn't mention economic security.
Last week, Clerk of the Privy Council Janice Charette testified that she took a wider interpretation of the act that included concerns about the economy when she advised Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to invoke the act.
WATCH | Deputy prime minister explains discussions with White House official
The government has not waived solicitor-client privilege on the legal opinion it received about invoking the act.
CEOs warned Canada was seen as a 'joke'
In a phone call with Canadian bank CEOs, Freeland was told repeatedly that Canada's international reputation was at risk.
A readout of the Feb. 13 call was entered into evidence Wednesday.
One person on the call, whose name was redacted in the document provided to the commission, said Canada had been labelled a "joke" by American investors.
"I had one investor say, 'I won't invest another red cent in your banana republic in Canada,'" the speaker said. "That adds to an already tough investment perspective."
WATCH | U.S. incentives on EVs and batteries would have been 'a disaster' for Canada, Freeland says
Another speaker said Canada needed "to show the world proactively that we won't let this happen again and that our trade corridors will remain open."
"Canada's reputation is indeed at risk," the speaker said.
"We should think about putting the military in place to keep the border crossings moving even after the protesters are removed."
WATCH | Freeland gets emotional in testimony before Emergencies Act inquiry
One speaker, whose name was also blacked-out, expressed concerns about how the government would address the blockades.
"I am very concerned about the banking system being seen as a political weapon of the government," said the business leader, whose name was also redacted.
"We can't politicize the banks."
On Thursday, Freeland choked up as she recalled the warning on the call that Canada's reputation was at risk.
"I had, at that moment, a very profound duty to Canadians to stand up for them," she said, her voice cracking.
"I'm surprised that I'm getting emotional ... when I heard that, I realised I'm the finance minister, I'm the deputy prime minister, I have to protect Canadians. I have to protect their well-being."
Freeland feared Canada would be 'discredited' as an ally of Ukraine
Later that night, cabinet would meet to discuss invoking the Emergencies Act. Freeland said that between the call with bank officials and the cabinet meeting, she had a meeting to discuss intelligence suggesting Russia intended to invade Ukraine. Russian troops moved in on Feb. 24.
In an interview with commission lawyers in September, Freeland said she feared the protest would affect Canada's response to the war. A summary of that interview was entered into evidence Thursday.
Office
of the Prime Minister staff John Brodhead, Policy Advisor, Katie
Telford, Chief of Staff and Brian Clow, Deputy Chief of Staff, appear as
witnesses at the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa, on
Thursday, Nov 24, 2022. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
"Freeland also pointed out that if Canada's capital had still been occupied when Russia invaded Ukraine, in her view, such a situation would have completely discredited Canada as an ally in support of Ukraine," said the summary document.
"Russian media would have been focused 24/7 on what was occurring in Canada, which would have made Canada appear very weak at a time it needed to be strong. Further, it would have made it very difficult to take action after the invasion."
Minister faces questions about frozen accounts
Freeland also fielded questions about the decision to give authorities emergency powers to freeze the finances of those connected to the protests.
Data presented to the inquiry last week suggested that approximately 280 bank accounts with approximately $8 million in assets were frozen due to the emergency measures.
Freeland defended the move, saying the government wanted the protests to end peacefully and the economic measures acted as an incentive to leave the protest zones.
"I was sort of saying, 'We really have to act, something has to be done.' And I remember a colleague saying to me, 'My nightmare is blood on the face of a child.' And I remember that very clearly. Because I was worried about that," she said.
Last week, Brendan Miller — a lawyer for some of the protest organizers — argued under cross-examination that the order to freeze accounts was an act of overreach and halting fundraising on crowdfunding platforms breached Canadians' right to freedom of expression.
Three members of Trudeau's staff were also set to testify Thursday, including his chief of staff Katie Telford. She will be joined by deputy chief of staff Brian Clow and Trudeau's director of policy John Brodhead.
The three staff members also spoke to commission staff before their appearance and a summary of that conversation was tabled.
"[The staff members] asked the Commission to comment on threats to the economic security of Canada, which carry with them a threat of tangible physical harm and violence," said the summary.
Trudeau will make his highly-anticipated appearance tomorrow as the commission finishes the public hearing portion of its work.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Comments
"The difference now is the majority of people support the EA having been invoked."
No comments:
Post a Comment