Speaking Notes for the Honourable Marco Mendicino, Minister of Public Safety

Honourable Joint Chairs and Committee Members,

Thank you for the invitation to speak to you briefly today, on the declaration of an emergency under the Emergencies Act.

As members know, the Act was invoked on February 14th, following blockades that illegally disrupted the lives of Canadians, harming our economy, and endangering public safety.

Invoking the Act was not something we undertook lightly.

We were clear from the start that we did not want to use it for a single moment longer than necessary.

That’s why the Government revoked the Act ten days later, when we assessed that the situation diminished sufficiently so as to no longer warrant its use.

We also knew from the start that our decisions would undergo the strictest amount of scrutiny.

The Government has been clear about its critical commitment to continue to be accountable and transparent in all it does.

All Canadians should rightly expect to see, understand, recognize and ultimately have trust in how their government institutions act on their behalf.

Especially following the invocation of an emergency.

Indeed, the creation of this Committee enshrined in the Act is a true demonstration of accountability and transparency.

Section 62(1) of the Emergencies Act stipulates that, “the exercise of powers and the performance of duties and functions pursuant to a declaration of emergency shall be reviewed by a committee of both Houses of Parliament designated or established for that purpose.”

I’m confident that this joint Committee will, in reviewing the declaration of emergency that Government made, provide the necessary scrutiny and accountability that Canadians expect.

This is important work.

By now, many of you will have already participated in fulsome debates about the need for invoking an emergency.

All of those discussions have been public, and indeed, televised and prepared in text on Hansard for all to see.

But this Committee will be able to take that work a step further.

All Canadians should be confident that their Government is following the rule of law.

And that’s why I welcome the Committee’s review of this critical use of the Act.

Chairs, Members: the purpose of the Act has been well-explained to this Committee already.

But I will highlight that it is explicit in how it is to be used, which is to say, to fill any gaps in existing federal and provincial or territorial legal authorities needed to respond to the emergency.

The actions of the so-called “Freedom Convoy” and the movement it inspired left no doubt as to whether invoking an emergency was needed.

In the weeks leading up to the invocation, we saw a gain in momentum for the movement across the country, with a significant increase in numbers in Ottawa.

We saw illegal protests and blockades including at strategic ports of entry.

Participants adopted a number of threatening tactics, causing fear, disrupting the peace, impacting the Canadian economy, and feeding a sense of public unrest.

We were also made aware of organized elements from extremist groups involved in what was happening, threatening our institutions and our economy, which cannot be allowed.

While the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly is an important part of our democracy, individuals are not justified in breaking the law or engaging in violence.

In shock, we all witnessed:

It is the Government’s job to act in times of crisis.

It was clear we needed to invoke the Act to supplement the authorities available to address the blockades and occupation, to keep Canadians safe, protect jobs and restore confidence in our institutions.

And doing so helped to regulate crowds, prohibit illegal blockades and keep essential corridors open, mobilize essential services, set up secure areas, as well as freezing financing of the occupations and preventing foreign money from funding the blockades.

These measures were targeted, temporary and proportionate.

We invoked them only after exhausting other options and after consulting provinces and territories.

As the architect of the Act, the Honourable Perrin Beatty said to this Committee, “the authorities have cited several ways in which the Act helped…it made it easier to cordon off downtown Ottawa, and significantly cut the time to authorize police from other jurisdictions to assist.”

Members, he went on to raise the question: “Did the Act meet the twin goals of allowing the authorities to respond quickly and effectively in a crisis, while limiting the impact on civil liberties?”

Which he followed by saying, “My answer is that it did.”

As I have stated, our goal was to ensure we did not abandon Canadians – or our law enforcement – in a time of great need.

And I’m confident your review of the facts will inspire their confidence that the right decisions were made.

Joint Chairs, Honourable Members, I want to thank you for your ongoing consideration of the measures we have taken.

And I look forward to your questions and continued debate.

Thank you.

Date modified: