Monday afternoon, Yves-François Blanchet summoned the journalists to rue Wellington, opposite the federal parliament. The air was sweet; it smelled of spring. Above all, there was not the shadow of a truck in sight.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
The siege has been lifted; many health measures will be soon.
If there is an emergency, it no longer seems to be in downtown Ottawa. In fact, the urgency would rather be reconciliation, the “repairing” of families torn apart by two years of pandemic, estimated the Bloc leader.
And that, he added, “certainly does not go through recourse to the Emergency Measures Act “.
Hard to fault him.
True, it had to stop. But after three weeks of noisy occupation, the protesters broke camp – or were arrested. The barricades erected at the borders have been dismantled.
It is done. They left. The flow of trade between Canada and the United States is flowing as before. Life for businesses, employees and residents of downtown Ottawa has resumed.
Everywhere in the capital, despite a still very strong police presence, everything seems to be back to normal. Everywhere except the House of Commons.
On Monday evening, parliamentarians kept alive the Emergency Measures Act, which grants extraordinary powers to the government. The motion passed by a vote of 185 to 151.
Justin Trudeau had warned a few hours earlier that the apparent calm should not be trusted; the danger was always latent. “We feel, he said, that the emergency situation is still present. »
Protesters gathered on the outskirts of Ottawa after the police operation are just waiting for a loophole to sneak into the heart of the city. On Saturday, other protesters tried to block a border crossing in British Columbia.
According to the Prime Minister, the Emergency Measures Act would therefore still be necessary to prevent further blockades and demonstrations.
The problem is that this is not the role of this sledgehammer law.
It must respond to a serious and immediate danger to the life, health and safety of Canadians. A pandemic, for example. And again: when COVID-19 hit in the spring of 2020, the Trudeau government refused to declare a state of emergency.
He felt it was not necessary to deal with the pandemic of the century.
And now it would be to prevent demonstrations potential…
Steve Bell, Ottawa’s acting police chief, called the powers granted by law “extremely beneficial” to clear the streets of the capital.
The law has made it possible to decree prohibited areas, to force tugs to do their job and to cut off supplies to demonstrators. The police operation was a success.
Obviously, therefore, the Emergency Measures Act was helpful. The big question now is whether it was necessary. And if she still is.
Already, when the Prime Minister invoked it last week, lawyers pointed out that the authorities already had all the tools to act. They didn’t need any additional powers; rather political courage.
One could answer that there was urgency. After all, the country was facing individuals bent on bringing down a democratically elected government.
We can no longer say that today. How is this exceptional law still justified?
Where is the national emergency?
It’s the world upside down: the Conservative Party, the party of law and order, sided with the demonstrators, rejecting en bloc, Monday evening, the motion supported by the Liberals and the neo- democrats.
Some Tories even mocked the New Democrats. They accused them of denying the spirit of the great Tommy Douglas, who voted against the War Measures Act in October 1970.
Not that Tommy Douglas had any feeling of sympathy for the FLQ, we can imagine. For him, it was a matter of principle.
History has proven him right. The police had abused their powers during the October crisis. Hundreds of ordinary Quebecers had been detained without charge.
The Emergency Measures Act would not allow such abuses. Unlike the War Measures Actit remains subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Still: it gives the government sweeping powers – including the power to order financial institutions to freeze citizens’ accounts without judicial review.
“This case was unprecedented. It was a group that wanted to attack our democracy, overthrow elected officials,” explained New Democrat leader Jagmeet Singh, to justify his party’s support for the government.
A “reluctant” support, it must be said.
“These measures should not be applied to indigenous communities, environmentalists, racialized communities or anyone in our country who wants to demonstrate in a legal way,” warned Mr. Singh.
The problem is that it is likely to happen if the state starts to invoke the Emergency Measures Act in all sauces. This time, the cause and the values of the participants in the “freedom convoy” are repugnant to a large majority of New Democrats.
But what if a possible populist government, for example, declared a state of emergency to put down pro-climate demonstrations?
With the support of the NDP, the Liberal government may have just opened a door that will be difficult to close.