Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

DAN ALBAS -- We have yet to see any sort of plan for our path forward from this Trudeau Liberal government

 


It was two weeks ago that CBC reported that Canada’s Chief Public Officer, Dr. Theresa Tam stated: “all existing public health policies, including provincial vaccine passports, need to be "re-examined" — because it's clear now that Canada and the rest of the world will be grappling with COVID-19 for months or years to come.”

Unfortunately, we have yet to see any sort of plan for our path forward from this Trudeau Liberal government.

As a result, earlier this week the official Conservative opposition tabled the following motion:

“That, given that provinces are lifting COVID-19 restrictions and that Dr. Theresa Tam has said that all existing public health measures need to be "re-evaluated" so that we can "get back to some normalcy", the House call on the government to table a plan for the lifting of all federal mandates and restrictions, and to table that plan by February 28, 2022.”

This motion by design did not dictate what that plan should look like only that we should have a plan. It was a motion that Global News Chief Political Correspondent described as a “very reasonable proposition to the Government”.

Sadly, this Government is not, in my view, in a reasonable mood and opposed this motion. Fortunately, the BLOC was in support of this motion leaving the NDP to be the decider. I regret to inform you that once again the NDP has sided with the Liberals and opposed this motion.

With no plan in place the illegal protests have continued and the tension in Ottawa has increased significantly.

As you may now be aware, Prime Minister Trudeau announced he was invoking the Emergencies Act, which is the replacement for the former War Measures Act. The War Measures Act was only used once outside of wartime by Pierre Elliott Trudeau at the request of the Quebec Government in 1970.

The replacement Emergencies Act has also never been used until PM Justin Trudeau decided to invoke it this week, despite opposition from many provincial Premiers most notably Quebec.

However, the Premiers of BC and Ontario do support the Emergencies Act being used.

What is the Emergencies Act? As the Canadian Civil Liberties Association describes it:

“The Emergencies Act can only be invoked when a situation "seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada" & when the situation "cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada."

The last reference is of particular importance: that “cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.”

As all Canadians will know prior to the Emergency Act being invoked police were able to peacefully clear the Freedom protest that was occurring on the Ambassador Bridge under existing Canadian laws. In British Columbia we have witnessed the RCMP clearing anti-pipeline and old growth logging protests over the past six months also under existing Canadian laws.

In summary, much as the Canadian Civil Liberties Association has also concluded, PM Trudeau has “not met the threshold necessary to invoke the Emergencies Act”. So how does Prime Minister Trudeau get away with invoking this if the threshold is not met?

The Emergencies Act will need to be confirmed in the House of Commons where it is expected once again the NDP will prop up and support PM Trudeau and his minority Government.

My thoughts?

Aside from the fact that it is well established that existing Canadian Laws can deal with protests, in reality this is largely an Ottawa problem where the Ottawa police for whatever reason have either been unable or unwilling to deal with.

Now many Canadians will be subject to the Emergencies Act for what we hope will be a short period of time largely to solve an Ottawa problem.

My question this week:
Do you agree with the decision by PM Justin Trudeau to invoke the Emergencies Act?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.

Comments

  1. UnknownFebruary 16, 2022 at 12:01 PM

    Why is this not being challenged in court? -- "Cabinet’s exercise of its extraordinary powers under the ‘Emergencies Act’ would be subject to limited judicial oversight... Even after the proclamation and any orders or regulations have survived parliamentary scrutiny, they may be challenged in court. Broadly speaking, there would be two potential bases for judicial review of a proclamation, order, or regulation made under the Emergencies Act:
    (1) inconsistency with the Act, on administrative law grounds; and
    (2) inconsistency with the Constitution...

    “The Federal Court could, in theory, quash an emergency proclamation, order, or regulation pursuant to s. 18.1(3)(b) of the Federal Courts Act because:
    (1) Cabinet erroneously concluded that a “public welfare emergency” was taking place;
    (2a) Cabinet made an order or regulation that does not fit into one of the “matters” specified in s. 8 of the Act; or
    (2b) Cabinet did not have “reasonable grounds” to believe that an order or regulation was “necessary for dealing with the emergency”...

    “It follows that an order or regulation made under the Act in response to a “public welfare emergency” could be challenged as inconsistent with the Charter... If an order or regulation made under the ‘Emergencies Act’ were challenged on constitutional grounds, and if the court concluded that the order or regulation limited a Charter right, then the government would have to satisfy the court that the limit on the Charter right effected by the order or regulation was (or is) “reasonable”, “prescribed by law”, and “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society” under s. 1 of the Charter. Whether the government would succeed in this would depend on the facts...

    “The Act itself, or an order or regulation made under it, could also be challenged as exceeding Parliament’s constitutional jurisdiction. Section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 gives the provinces exclusive jurisdiction in respect of certain “heads of power”. It is not difficult to imagine how federal action under the ‘Emergencies Act’ might encroach on these areas of provincial jurisdiction...”

    --‘COVID-19: Can they do that? Part II: The Emergencies Act’,
    MARCH 18, 2020
    https://www.mccarthy.ca/en/insights/articles/covid-19-can-they-do-part-ii-emergencies-act

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Abbotsford-Mission MLA Reann Gasper to step down for Conservative Leader Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay to run in a by-election

Deputy Whip and MLA Reann Gasper has informed the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia of her decision to step down as MLA for Abbotsford-Mission, creating an opportunity for Conservative Party of British Columbia Leader Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay to seek the seat in a forthcoming by-election. Gasper said the decision was made carefully and deliberately, with the future of British Columbia firmly in mind. Abbotsford-Mission MLA Reann Gasper “This is a decision I have made after a great deal of careful consideration, and I believe it is the right decision for me, for our Party, and for the work ahead,” said MLA Gasper. “It has been a privilege to represent the people of Abbotsford-Mission, and I am deeply grateful to everyone who placed their trust in me. I am also grateful for the opportunity to serve alongside my colleagues in the Conservative Caucus and to contribute to our leadership team.” “I have confidence in Kerry-Lynne, in her leadership, and in her ability to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

NDP Sits on $61 Million With No Start Date for Burnaby Hospital

Phase 2 of Burnaby Hospital redevelopment  was green lit to go ahead in September 2023 The NDP spent $45 million on the Burnaby Hospital redevelopment, cancelled the second phase, and now has another $61 million listed for the project in the province’s Public Accounts, with no start date for construction. If the NDP cancelled the project, what is happening to the $61 million set aside for it? The Phase 2 project was expected to cost between $1.7 billion and $1.8 billion and was intended to expand the hospital’s capacity. With Burnaby’s population growing and residents struggling to access healthcare, the government should be investing in healthcare capacity, not leaving millions of dollars tied up in limbo. “The NDP spent $45 million on this project before cancelling it, and now $61 million remains listed for it in the Public Accounts,” said MLA Misty Van Popta, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure. “If the government isn’t going to build the hospital expansion, it should explain whe...
Post a Comment
Read more

BC Conservatives Point to Warning Signs in BC’s Economy

While Canada posted modest job gains in July, warning lights are still flashing in British Columbia. Youth unemployment remains stubbornly high, leaving too many first-time jobseekers shut out of the workforce. BC also lost 3,400 public administration jobs in July, likely as temporary Census positions ended. “BC's jobs divide remains stark. Unemployment is far higher in business-driven communities like Kelowna (9.3%) and Abbotsford-Mission (8.3%) than in Victoria (5.0%). Government should be focused on creating the conditions for private-sector investment and job growth,” said Gavin Dew, MLA for Kelowna-Mission and Shadow Minister for Economic Development. “We need an economy where young people can find work, businesses can hire, and every region has the opportunity to prosper.” This comes as BC faces five straight quarters where more businesses are closing than opening, an NDP cabinet rift over job-creating projects like Tilbury LNG, and fresh signs that even the province's to...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more