Every Wednesday, our parliamentary correspondent in Ottawa Marie Vastel analyzes a federal political issue to help you better understand it.
Accused by some of doing nothing for two weeks, warned by others that the threat posed by convoys of truckers was very real, Justin Trudeau resigned himself to invoking the Emergency Measures Act. Inaction was no longer possible. The government had to intervene at border checkpoints and in downtown Ottawa. But the proposed solution is far from unanimous, especially among the provinces that do not want it. And the Prime Minister now finds himself defending a first recourse to this law, which he did not want either.
Justin Trudeau seemed hesitant Monday night as he announced that his government would be the first to invoke the Emergencies Act. He gave the floor to his ministers, so that they could justify the decision and explain the details. He repeatedly insisted that he wanted to “be very clear” about the guidelines that will frame the powers provided. But also that the army would not be deployed and that freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate peacefully would not be violated.
The Prime Minister was reluctant to move forward, it is said in his entourage. The idea of brandishing the club against demonstrators in this way made him uneasy. That he became the second Trudeau to invoke such an exceptional law, after that on war measures in 1970, certainly did not escape him. But the authorities reported to him at the same time that certain extremist elements made security too unstable at the sites of demonstrations, which have multiplied in the country.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police announced on Monday the seizure of weapons and a large quantity of ammunition as well as the arrest of 13 people who allegedly intended to use them against the police at the border crossing in Coutts, Alberta. . The day before, the police of Peterborough announced the theft of a truck transporting 2000 weapons.
The Liberals repeat that they had no choice but to provide special measures to dismantle the occupation of Ottawa—whose police chief has just resigned—the remaining roadblocks, and above all, to prevent the blow if other were added.
Justin Trudeau has also been accused for ten days by the opposition of “hiding”. An Angus Reid poll reported that Canadians blame the prime minister the most, not his Ontario counterpart, Doug Ford, or the police: 66% of respondents believe he made the situation worse, compared to 20% who believe it has improved it.
“My hunch is that it’s too late for him to reverse the image that he has ingrained in the minds of many Canadians, which is that of chronic indecision,” says the professor at the School of Political Studies of the University of Ottawa François Rocher.
More complex justification
If Doug Ford willingly accepts help from Ottawa – which allows him to wash his hands of it – almost all the provinces oppose it. Only Ontario, British Columbia, Newfoundland and one of the three territories would have welcomed Justin Trudeau’s decision, according to our information.
The others retort, with good reason, that they have managed the demonstrations themselves so far. That of Quebec was short-lived, the border crossing of Coutts was abandoned by the shaken demonstrators after the important seizure of weapons, that of Emerson in Manitoba would soon be reopened.
The hard line of Ottawa thus arrives at a funny moment, more complicated to justify.
And it lends itself to criticism. Because the provinces can deny its relevance and blame the federal government for imposing it on them without having consulted them before creating a precedent which “would have required more tact or diplomacy”, we deplore in Quebec. A missed opportunity, adds Professor Rocher.
The law theoretically applies everywhere, admitted Mr. Trudeau. But his measures will only be applied “where they are really necessary”, he assured in the same breath, visibly aware, there again, of the perception that his gesture could leave. His government, however, has since systematically refused to specify whether they will be where local governments do not want them.
However, if this is the case, relations between the federal government and the provinces will be weakened. In Ottawa, we claim to be well aware of this and have no intention of imposing or interfering.
The opposite could create “a conflict of legitimacy”, with the federal government giving the impression of infantilizing the provincial governments, according to Professor Rocher. “Relations would be more tense in the future, between the federal government and certain provinces which would have opposed it. It would be a loss of confidence, ultimately. And trust takes a long time to restore once it’s broken. »
The repression now promised by Ottawa also comes at a time when most provinces are radically relaxing their health measures. Even the federal government is doing the same, abandoning PCR tests at the border. Everyone insists: these reductions are guided by Public Health, and not by the thousands of citizens who have joined the convoy in Ottawa over the past three weekends.
Justin Trudeau, who has dismissed their grievances from the start, could nevertheless find himself giving them new ammunition. Whether by initiating the relaxation of federal border measures. Or by making history by tightening the screws on them, invoking the Emergencies Act, which he would have preferred never to have to defend.