QP: Final arguments before the emergency measures vote

Posted on by

I was initially unsure that there would be a Question Period today, given the solid 18-hour “debates” that took place over the weekend, but lo, there it was on the calendar, and all of the leaders were in place for it, with Deputy Speaker Chris d’Entremeont in the big chair. Candice Bergen led off, script in front of her, and she cited experts that said that the government had all of the tools it needed to clear the occupation without the Emergencies Act, and demanded to know the criteria to end the orders. Trudeau read that the measures supplemented local police, and that they would lift the measures as soon was feasible. Bergen demanded to know what particular powers were needed, and Trudeau listed a number of issues that he said proved provinces and municipalities needed the measures. Bergen demanded an apology from Trudeau for calling the extremists who organised the occupation racists, misogynists and of holding “unacceptable views,” and Trudeau declined, saying people can disagree with the government and that their Charter rights are protected. Luc Berthold took over in French, and quoted Nathaniel Erskine-Smith’s reluctance on the measures and worried the prime minister would make it a confidence measure. Trudeau repeated his list of events to justify the orders. Berthold then raised the issue of Joël Lightbound before repeating the demand for an apology in French, and Trudeau repeated his talking points about Canadians speaking together. 

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and demanded the emergency orders be lifted now that the occupation was over, but Trudeau replied that they were still in a precarious situation as they needed to remain vigilant from efforts to re-establish blockades. Blanchet demanded to know one place in the country that still needed the measures, and Trudeau said that once the orders were lifted, they would look at how to better empower police to prevent future actions.

Jagmeet Singh appeared by video and lamented the impact of the occupations and blockades on workers, and noted the support for small businesses but wanted supports for workers. Trudeau praised their efforts over the past two years, and said they were moving forward with “measures to support them.” Singh repeated the question in French, and Trudeau repeated his response. 

Round two, and Raquel Dancho lamented the notion that this might be a confidence measure (Holland: I look forward to a vote in a few hours), and insisted this was about power to go after dissidents (Mendicino: We will only use these powers as long as necessary), Gérard Deltell insisted the powers were no longer needed (Mendicino: All powers were used in consultation with local authorities), Michael Chong demanded to know if they had a legal opinion on the Charter compliance for freezing bank accounts (Lametti: I am confident as Attorney General, and they respect Section 8 of the Charter), and Scott Reid demanded to know how many accounts were frozen (Mendicino: The RCMP have clarified that they did not submit any list of donors and they are acting within the Charter).

Kristina Michaud called the crisis over and demanded the emergency orders rescinded (Mendicino: The threat is not over and we are taking advice of local authorities), and got even more incredulous and warned of the precedent this sets (Mendicino: There are still risks in spite of progress being made).

Lianne Rood worried about peoples whose accounts were “accidentally” caught in the RCMP “dragnet” (Blair: This was about the people parked on the street and if someone’s account is frozen, they should call their bank), Joël Godin repeated the question in French (Blair: The measures were not retroactive and the Act has parliamentary scrutiny built-in), Shannon Stubbs quoted professors who worried over-reach by banks (Blair: Same answer).

Bonita Zarrillo worried about people being arrested under emergency orders (Blair: Law enforcement say these orders were essential in ending the occupations), and Heather McPherson worried about the guns found at the Coutts blockade, and wanted legislation to halt foreign funding (Mendicino: We are concerned about the severity of the charges, and we are concerned about the rhetoric and extremism, and we need to be vigilant about it).

Round three saw questions on convincing the NDP to support the orders (Mendicino: These measures are targets and comply with the Charter; Blair: When did you give up being the party of law and order?), demanding the orders be lifted today (Mendicino: The advice we’re getting is that threats remain), worries about the situation in Ukraine (Oliphant: We support Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and we condemn Russia’s recognition of Donetsk and we stand with allies), worries that the emergency orders will be used in perpetuity (Blair: We will only use the measures as long as they are required; Mendicino: Law enforcement has been professional in their use of the powers and it will be sunsetted when appropriate), a repeated demand for the legal opinion (Lametti: Were he a lawyer, he would know that I speak as Attorney General, and my opinions are covered under solicitor-client privilege), NDP support for the orders (Blair: The Emergencies Act is not the War Measures Act), and demands support for border municipalities affected by blockades (Mendicino: We have open lines of communication), and direction that the declarations and orders are tied to this particular emergency (Lametti: That is how they are drafted).

Overall, if you were looking for rhetorical splendour or even cogent debate on a very important upcoming vote in the Commons, well, this was not it. While Candice Bergen did ask a couple of the right questions, she also was too quick to go to bat for the occupiers and their organizers, and continued to downplay what was at stake. For his part, Trudeau was stiff and scripted for much of his responses, and stuck to particular lines that were generic and didn’t necessarily answer the questions, or challenge what they were based on, which is his typical pattern. We are so terrible at debating the big stuff in this country, and today (let alone this whole past weekend) was no exception.

As for the mood of the Chamber itself, it was largely quiet with fewer MPs present than usual, but did have a few outbursts where the Deputy Speaker was forced to cool the temperature, but those were fairly few and far between—though the fact that the Conservatives were shouting down Heather McPherson for raising the weapons at the Coutts blockade was very interesting, or indeed, a very curious choice. I will say that I was surprised that we didn’t hear a litany of more sob stories of fake constituents whose bank accounts were allegedly frozen by the RCMP for donating the occupations, but maybe they realised that we were onto them for their nonsensical bullshit and decided not to push their luck any further (though only just barely).

Sartorial speaking, snaps go out to Tom Kmiec for a dark blue three-piece suit with a white shirt and a blue and yellow striped tie, and to Christine Normandin for a black dress with sleeves that were partially lace and with a detailed panel down the front. Style citations go out to Candice Bergen for a black dress with white, yellow and blue florals, and to Tako Van Popta for a navy suit with an eggplant shirt and a blue tie.