'We have to act': Justice Minister defends use of Emergencies Act
'It is beyond the capacity of the provinces to do it on their own,' says Minister David Lametti
Federal Justice Minister David Lametti says invoking the Emergencies Act isn't anyone's first choice, but the existing system of checks and balances will ensure the law is implemented properly.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau broke the glass on the Emergencies Act yesterday, the never-before used law designed to help the Canadian government establish order during a crisis, as the convoy protest speaking out against vaccine mandates and other COVID-19 measures remain defiant in Ottawa's downtown core.
The act grants Trudeau and his ministers the ability to "take special temporary measures that may not be appropriate in normal times" to cope with an emergency and the resulting fallout during an "urgent and critical situation."
But many people, including provincial premiers and the federal Conservative Party, are not quite convinced that the protests against pandemic restrictions and subsequent border blockades need to be dealt with emergency measures.
Justice Minister David Lametti made the case for the government's decision to invoke the act in a conversation with As It Happens host Carol Off. Here is part of that conversation.
Minister Lametti … this law is used when there is an urgent and critical situation that seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such a nature that it exceeds the capacity of authorities or the province to deal with it, and it cannot be dealt with under existing laws. Have you met that bar?
I think we have.
Although the federal government has been supportive and the RCMP, in particular, has its supporters for a variety of police actions that have happened across the country, it is beyond the capacity of the provinces to do it on their own.
I think the threat of serious violence is real. I think the threat to critical infrastructure is real ... and so we have to act.- Justice Minister David Lametti
We just saw the Ambassador Bridge [in Windsor] was cleared using existing laws. It took maybe a few more days than people wanted, but was done without anyone being hurt. We've seen Alberta with another blockade [and] the premier [Jason Kenney] says that he doesn't need or want this act to be invoked. Doesn't it just come down really to Ottawa and where we're seeing police who have been unable or unwilling to police a situation with civilians out of control?
Let's go back to the Ambassador Bridge. It was done with American tow trucks and that is something that we are specifically targeting in the [Emergencies Act]: the ability to commandeer those tow trucks for more fair remuneration.
It's only because the federal government stepped in and worked with the United States in taking on an offer on their part to give us tow trucks. The financing of it, as we are beginning to know, a majority of it is coming from other places.
We're targeting measures to freeze those funds and make it more difficult for this to be organized…. We are giving those police authorities who have the operational independence to enforce the law. We're giving them additional laws.
We watched for weeks fuel being taken to trucks, tickets not being issued, insurance not being revoked…. Now you say we need more tools to deal with this, when police haven't been using the ones they've got.
We, as politicians, have to make sure that we provide all the means necessary.
This is an important moment in Canadian history — and I think the threat of serious violence is real. I think the threat to critical infrastructure is real ... and so we have to act.
We've seen the [Stephen] Harper government, the Kenney government, both saying that there are threats to the resource industry in Alberta by foreign funding and using tools that they've got to go after environmental NGOs. Are you concerned that you're setting a precedent with going after the foreign funding of protest movements?
Look, I'll be honest with you. Nobody likes to use the Emergencies Act, right? And as an Attorney General, I hesitate. But one of the advantages of it is its transparency.
All of what we do in these emergency orders will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, will be subject to parliamentary approval and will be subject to an inquiry afterwards … and so I'm confident, Carol, that that will act as a counterbalance to the kinds of very legitimate concerns that you've just raised.
We're not trying to hide anything with this. We're just trying to make sure that people in various parts of the country can live in security, that our economy can function, that our supply chains can function, and that people aren't deprived of essential goods or services because of what amounts to an occupation in certain parts of the country.
And how confident are you that the authorities you're giving these tools to will actually use them?
We've published the declaration of emergency. Hopefully the other orders will be out in short order and that police authorities and financial institutions will begin to use those tools. And hopefully that will have a positive impact on inciting people to go home.
They've made a point. It's time for them to go.
What we've seen is that Canadian authorities can't control a bunch of people with pickup trucks stopping the major trade route of a continent. We've seen the capital city occupied by people who thumb their noses at police with bouncy castles and hot tubs. Using this act, is it not in part international face-saving?
We've seen these kinds of movements in other places. I guess we always thought we were immune. We're not.
I'm a jurist and so the rule of law is important to me. And if you want to make a political point, vote. Get involved in politics ... but holding a gun to the head of government is not how you do it. We have legitimate processes and ways in which to make your voice heard. And what we've seen here is not one of them.
Written by Mehek Mazhar. Interview with David Lametti produced by Kevin Robertson. Q&A edited for length and clarity.
