Questions are going to loom large after this Emergencies Act commission is over. That’s because the important questions remained largely unanswered during the commission. And that’s as the Trudeau Liberals would have it.
Or at least questions will be asked in the fair or objective or conservative-tolerant news media and social media. The “news” media is currently engaged mostly in running cover for the Trudeau Liberals or they are brushing it all off because according to their polling, it was a “popular” move that he made —as if that’s the most important point.
The question of the feds hiding behind “privilege” (like parliamentary privilege — a valid legal concept in a parliamentary setting — even though this commission is itself a parliamentary commission); and submitting only heavily redacted evidentiary documents to the commission — some redacted to the extent that entire documents are redacted even though they were “provided” as requested and required by various parties. Pages are submitted, but they are entirely blacked-out. This is insulting to the process. To Canadians.
Here’s one such document as displayed by a lawyer to Trudeau today. Note that this is a document Trudeau suggested — in sworn testimony — that we Canadians read (even though he admits he’s never read it). Turns out every single page — the entirety of each page — is redacted. Whole pages are submitted completely blacked-out, as if useful for anything other than to demonstrate their power over us and to just thumb their noses at the process — at Canadians — and have a good laugh.
Trudeau was questioned by Canadian Constitution Foundation lawyer Sujit Chaudhry, who asked if Trudeau, having now invoked the Emergencies Act, if he hasn’t “released the Kraken,” as it were, meaning his government or any government in the future could and likely will use this Act whenever a government feels like it (as this one did), for, well, whatever cause they deem to be a “crisis.” They could, say, thus prevent people from demonstrating, or speaking out. Block their bank accounts and freeze their assets. Jail folks at will with no bail. Revoke their credit. Take their property. Revoke their insurance, summarily ruin them, and their families, in essence. And the reason could be anything. Climate change, say, since they and several other governments and politicians have already declared, sometimes repeatedly and with more and more urgency each time, is itself “an emergency” and “a crisis.” Where might that lead insofar as opinions expressed, and what activities people can engage in…? Indeed, Trudeau acknowledged today that at the start of the so-called “Covid” pandemic, the cabinet discussions included invoking… the Emergencies Act!
In answer to the question, Trudeau answered no, because (in essence), after all, look at me sitting here having to go through all of this!Â
That is a patently contemptuous answer in addition to being disingenuous. And it speaks to the shambolic nature of this whole process — or to possibly stretch the point — this whole Trudeau Liberal government. If this government — or any future government now that Trudeau and his group have set this precedent — can simply redact evidence and invoke “privilege” and not answer questions which will make them look bad or, indeed, look guilty of making an irrational decision based mostly on their politics, their ideology, on pure vengeance, or which proves they were irresponsible, engaged in a breach of ethics, or a worse form of malfeasance —then what is there to worry about? If they can redact any document or parts of them that make them look guilty, there is no downside. So why wouldn’t they invoke it again for another “crisis”?
Trudeau and others in his cabinet have testified that a major reason they invoked the Emergencies Act was the lack of tow trucks to clear the mess. Hours were spent this week discussing this in testimony. Tow trucks tow trucks tow trucks. They kept insisting this was a big deal in invoking the Act, all week.
Look at this document that one of the lawyers presented today. Until this morning at 10:26 AM (after fighting for at least a week to get the documents unredacted) this one was redacted. Below is my screenshot from this morning (click for a larger view). You can see the before and after here. Look at what was redacted — the supposedly acceptable official government reason for which was, and I quote, “irrelevance,” as determined by the Trudeau Liberal government itself. We can see where what was redacted (as “irrelevant”) was (in part) the words “Americans OFFER TOW TRUCKS”. This is not “irrelevant,” obviously, because as I said, and as Trudeau’s cabinet and staff all insisted all week, a huge part of the point about the inability to clear the convoy or blockades they created, was the lack of big tow trucks. Here, the government blocks our knowledge of extremely pertinent facts. In fact, the Americans had offered some tow trucks up (and they were refused!). Before the invocation of the Emergencies Act. Irrelevant?
So extremely questionable redactions, and refusal to answer vital questions on the basis of supposed “privilege”…Â If that’s not enough to conclude this is largely shambolic, and which sets the horrible precedent of allowing them to do whatever the hell they want and get away with it in the future, the Liberals also know the “news” media division of the Trudeau Liberals will let them off too. Lots of the self-anointed elites in Trudeau’s vast “news” media have already quite publicly snickered about how this whole commission of inquiry won’t have any effect on Trudeau at all anyway, for example. I don’t know if he was snickering when he wrote it, but here’s Trudeau’s Globe and Mail division this week with Lawrence Martin writing:
“The Emergencies Act inflicted abuses, such as the freezing of people’s bank accounts,” intones Mr. Martin. But he expressed no follow-up concerns about such abuses of government against its (his!) own people. He just stated that the government abused its people. No concern that this could happen again? And worse? Nope, apparently not. And the words “such as” in that breezy, blithe sentence indicates to me that Mr. Martin knows there are other abuses, too, but he doesn’t even bother to mention them, because reasons shut up.
In fairness to Lawrence Martin, who is as arrogant and wrong on this file as he ever has been, he rightly also acknowledges that it is not just him who clearly gives him a huge pass (or even accolades), but the Canadian people who will also give him a pass. It’s popular! Polls! Abuse some people – it’s OK! So some Canadians give this a pass. For sure. Some Canadians also have the capacity to be wrong. That is also correct. And what’s also true is that this is not how this works. That is not how countries work.
I guess I must be part of what Trudeau called “a fringe minority” with “unacceptable views” among other of his slanders and insults; or as the Globe and Mail’s Andrew Coyne calls them: a group of “anti-social yobs” and “half-wits.” Because I don’t give Justin Trudeau a pass on any damned thing.
PTBC was founded by Mr. Johannesen in 2000.
Contact Mr. Johannesen about this article using this form. Please refer to article's title.
FOLLOW @JoelJohannesen ON X!
- Say something. - Friday October 25, 2024 at 6:03 pm
- Keep going, or veer right - Monday August 26, 2024 at 4:30 pm
- Hey Joel, what is “progressive?” - Friday August 2, 2024 at 11:32 am
