EZRA LEVANT ｜ Interview with Keith Wilson, the lawyer going to federal court to fight Trudeau's suspended ban on unvaccinated travellers
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
164.26114
Summary
Keith Wilson, the lawyer for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, is in federal court tomorrow on behalf of his clients, including Brian Peckford, the former premier of Alberta, arguing against Justin Trudeau's ban on unvaccinated people flying.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my rebels. Today, a feature interview with Keith Wilson, the lawyer for the Justice
00:00:04.560
Center of Constitutional Freedoms, who's in federal court tomorrow on behalf of his clients,
00:00:09.180
including Brian Petford, the former premier, arguing against Justin Trudeau's ban on
00:00:16.480
unvaccinated people flying. Now, that ban has been suspended, at least temporarily,
00:00:21.780
who knows, maybe longer. But the federal government wants the whole lawsuit thrown
00:00:25.740
out saying, well, it's no longer relevant. That hearing is tomorrow. I'll talk to Keith about
00:00:30.540
what to expect. But first, let me invite you to subscribe to Rebel News Plus. That is the video
00:00:35.740
version of this podcast. And it's eight bucks a month. You get my weeknight show. There's 20 of
00:00:42.840
those a month, plus 16 other shows. We've got four other weekly shows. That's 36 episodes a month
00:00:48.840
for just eight bucks. I think it's a bargain. But support us because I want you to know we only
00:00:55.300
get money from our viewers. We do not get money from the government. So we rely on you to stay
00:01:00.460
independent. Please consider subscribing for that reason alone to help us stay free. Go
00:01:05.320
to rebelnewsplus.com. All right, here's today's podcast.
00:01:21.480
Tonight, a feature interview with Keith Wilson, the lawyer going to federal court tomorrow to fight
00:01:30.440
against Trudeau's suspended ban on unvaccinated travelers. It's September 20th. And this is the
00:01:44.920
Well, we've interviewed our next guest several times before Keith Wilson. King's counsel is a
00:01:59.600
senior lawyer from Alberta who works with the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
00:02:04.440
One of the cases we focused on with him is the case of Brian Peckford and other plaintiffs who filed
00:02:10.480
a lawsuit on constitutional grounds challenging Trudeau's ban on unvaccinated people flying
00:02:17.960
in the second largest country in the world, one of the coldest countries in the world to tell people
00:02:24.040
they can't fly. They have to drive because they're unvaccinated or they can ride in a bus. Apparently,
00:02:30.760
the COVID virus knows not to attack you if you're in a bus, but it will attack you in a plane. There's
00:02:36.560
no science behind it. It's just vengeance. This lawsuit was filed many months ago, and it has taken
00:02:43.080
months to proceed for various government witnesses to answer questions under oath. And it's on the eve
00:02:50.520
of trial, but as you probably know, a few months ago, Trudeau suspended his ban on unvaccinated people
00:02:57.400
flying. And so the government is saying this lawsuit is now moot. It shouldn't be heard at all. But I think
00:03:05.340
it's important that the lawsuit be heard in any event. We need to know, was it legal? Could they do it
00:03:12.060
again? I think our judges have been too deferential these last two and a half years. So what's next is a
00:03:17.780
feature interview about this subject with Keith Wilson. And joining us now to talk about this very important
00:03:28.140
court case is our friend, the lawyer who has been on the file, well, really, since it was filed,
00:03:33.920
Keith Wilson, QC, who is in Ottawa on the eve of the federal court hearing tomorrow. Keith, great to see
00:03:40.860
you again. Thanks for joining us. The government does not want this to go to a hearing. They want to
00:03:47.380
stop a full trial on it. Why would they want that?
00:03:51.520
Well, maybe they're afraid they're going to lose. Maybe they're afraid that the court is actually
00:03:57.280
going to rule that the provisions of forcing Canadians who are unvaccinated or preventing
00:04:06.400
Canadians who are from unvaccinated from flying and traveling in and out of our country is
00:04:11.960
unconstitutional. The evidence that came through the processes that we've used in this case of cross
00:04:20.100
examining 16 government witnesses hasn't been very good for the government and has really revealed
00:04:26.800
that the decision making was more political than science based. You know, I see a theme here. There
00:04:32.940
are an enormous number of smaller level tickets that have been handed out over the past two and a half
00:04:39.420
years, not just by the feds for quarantine act violations, but by the provinces and cities even.
00:04:44.940
And I see a theme because at the democracy fund, they're representing about 2000 cases and the
00:04:51.940
justice center representing an enormous number as well. What I've observed is that the government
00:04:56.640
would rather delay and delay and delay and delay so that there is no moment of truth that they're
00:05:01.620
hoping that people will either be deterred by these tickets or just pay the tickets. They don't want
00:05:09.060
to have a moment of truth where perhaps hundreds or thousands of tickets will be retrospectively
00:05:16.020
declared illegal. I think that they want to sort of get away with it without having any judicial
00:05:22.100
grownups look things over. Well, that's a great point. I mean, if we're ultimately able to argue our
00:05:28.460
case in court on behalf of former Premier Peckford, nor the last signatory to our and drafter of our
00:05:35.520
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, who's adamant that he never envisioned that laws would be allowed to
00:05:42.400
oppress a minority group or Canadians in the way that this Trudeau government has, it could have
00:05:50.760
implications for those tickets. It's clear that the federal government, the reason for the motion
00:05:56.020
tomorrow is by the federal government to try and strike out our case and prevent it from being heard.
00:06:00.540
And what's really important, and we'll be emphasizing tomorrow, is that all the work's been done.
00:06:07.280
The amount of hours we put in, we filed 15,000 pages of evidence in our compendium. We've cross-examined
00:06:16.120
these 16 government officials and purported experts. We presented our own expert witnesses with expert
00:06:22.280
reports to expose the problems with the vaccines and the side effects of dangers to their ineffectiveness,
00:06:31.380
you know, we've all put a tremendous amount of work in, we're ready to go, and here the government
00:06:36.740
shows up and says, no, no, Canadians, the 6 million Canadians who've been impacted and had their
00:06:41.820
charter rights violated are not going to get their day in court.
00:06:44.740
Right. Yeah, my comment about the other tickets was not that they're necessarily the same species
00:06:49.660
of law, but just the same political rope-a-dope. If the government can just hang on and just avoid a
00:06:56.440
moment of truth, it can sort of get away with things. Now, mootness, I think a lot of people
00:07:02.260
understand sort of instinctively, you know, we use the phrase that's a moot point, as in it's not
00:07:07.840
a live controversy anymore. And I can see in some ways why they would say that, because
00:07:14.040
those 6 million Canadians who were essentially put on a no-fly list, I was one of them.
00:07:20.720
Well, I can fly again. But I think the problem is we know that these lockdowns can be flipped back
00:07:28.480
on like a switch. Lockdowns were lifted and then reimposed, lifted and then reimposed.
00:07:34.040
I think that as long as it remains a possibility, as long as the governments don't renounce it,
00:07:41.540
it could come back in a heartbeat. I mean, Trudeau has talked about the need for, to be, quote,
00:07:48.300
up to date with your jabs. He no longer says two jabs or three jabs. He's got a rolling number that you
00:07:54.080
can never stay current with. I think that although it may be moot today, it may be very real and very
00:08:01.760
live tomorrow. Well, and I'm not even convinced it's moved today. And the reason I say that is
00:08:08.880
in the government press release and press conference they held in early June, where they announced that
00:08:16.020
they were suspending the travel vaccine mandate, they used the word, even in the printed press release,
00:08:25.760
they used the word suspend seven times. And the Minister of Health, Federal Minister of Health,
00:08:31.480
made it clear in his own words at the press conference that he would not hesitate to bring
00:08:36.360
these back in. And there's one other thing that's a detailed point that's important.
00:08:41.700
It's not like they have to call Parliament into session and have an open debate about whether to bring
00:08:49.300
back in the travel mandates. That's not how this works. It's the Minister of Transportation in his office
00:08:55.240
signing a document. The Minister has the authority, they claim, under the Aeronautics Act to do this.
00:09:02.280
So it's not like they have to go through a consultative process, a process that's intensively
00:09:09.480
democratic and deliberative and discussion-based and public and transparent. The Minister could be
00:09:17.920
signing the order to reinstate them right now, right this minute, as the listeners are listening to
00:09:23.840
this. And that's all it takes. So there's many reasons why we say, first of all, it's not moved.
00:09:30.740
And there's some other ones, too. There's still elements of these that are in the order that are
00:09:35.080
still in force. For example, the requirement that you disclose your private personal information about
00:09:41.480
your vaccine status. You need to disclose that when you get on an airplane to fly back into the country,
00:09:46.600
because if you're not vaccinated, you have to quarantine for 14 days. Right. So there's still
00:09:51.960
elements of the order that are in force. But more importantly, we emphasize in our written
00:09:56.120
submissions and will tomorrow orally, the Canadians right now are uncertain about where they sit with
00:10:01.360
this government. They're uncertain about what the charter really means. They're uncertain about
00:10:05.380
whether they should plan trips, important trips, to see family members, to help care for family members
00:10:10.440
and go to funerals and be at family members' bedside when they're dying. And they shouldn't have that
00:10:16.080
uncertainty. We're Canadians. Mobility is one of the most important rights under our charter.
00:10:21.560
It's one that cannot be overridden because people hear about the notwithstanding clause. It doesn't
00:10:24.700
apply to Section 6 mobility rights just for people to be aware of that. So this is tremendously
00:10:31.440
important. We've spent all the resources. The legal dollars have been spent. The hard work has been
00:10:37.240
done. We have a hearing schedule starting October 31st. So tomorrow we're hoping to persuade the court
00:10:42.640
that legally, when you look at the case law and the Supreme Court of Canada's direction on a situation
00:10:48.240
like this, that we check all the boxes and this case has to go ahead. And it's also important,
00:10:53.780
I'll say one more thing, Ezra, because I know I'm running long here, but
00:10:56.700
the court's brand is in trouble right now. By that, I mean the institution of our court
00:11:05.540
as one of the key elements in our democracy is not in good shape. People's confidence in the courts,
00:11:13.260
I think, is at an all-time low. Are the courts there to be an overseer of government overreach
00:11:18.700
and a protector of people's rights and freedoms, or are they not? So I guess tomorrow we're going to
00:11:24.480
find out. You know, that's a great point. You mentioned that this could be reimposed with the
00:11:29.500
signature of an anonymous bureaucrat in a closed room by himself literally could be happening right
00:11:34.620
now. There are not a lot of checks and balances. We haven't had a vigorous opposition. All the normal
00:11:40.980
checks and balances in society have failed until most recently the leader of the opposition himself
00:11:46.640
did not oppose. The media has been a chorus cheering on the government. The, you know, anyone who
00:11:53.500
was a dissenter, say a doctor with a different opinion, would be hounded by his college of physicians
00:11:58.420
insurgents. And the courts, you're so right, their brand is in trouble. Other than the case of
00:12:04.580
Arthur Pawlowski at the Alberta Court of Appeal, I am unaware of a senior court in a substantive manner
00:12:11.220
striking down any element of an important lockdown provision anywhere in the country. I mean, you tell
00:12:17.480
me if you know of one that I'm not thinking of, and our Supreme Court itself hasn't even touched the
00:12:22.440
subject. It's been two and a half years. It's like our Supreme Court's been on vacation when we've had
00:12:28.240
the civil liberties bonfire. It really is. There's so few checks and balances. If we don't have the
00:12:36.320
right to this trial next month, it really will feel like that the whole thing's an inside job.
00:12:43.880
Agreed. I mean, it's, it's, I think it's how we define ourselves. That's why you saw during the
00:12:49.560
trucker protests. You know, the most common, uh, um, reproduced sign was the charter of rights and
00:13:00.160
freedoms, handmade signs all over the place. But so many trucks had the charter in their window.
00:13:06.720
They had it, uh, pasted or taped to the side door, or they had blowups of the charter. Um,
00:13:14.540
and it's because how we define ourselves as Canadians and, and, you know, look at who my
00:13:19.180
client is, the Honorable Brian Peckford, former premier of Newfoundland, last surviving drafter
00:13:27.200
and signatory of our charter of rights and freedoms. And as you know, cause you've got him on your
00:13:31.780
program, he's beside himself as to what's happened to our country and what's happened to the charters.
00:13:36.960
So, um, uh, this is a real, tomorrow's an important day for Canada. You know, I mentioned how so many
00:13:43.140
institutions that normally are a check on power have either been silent or egging on power. The
00:13:49.640
media are amongst the worst. Uh, I, I didn't mention the historic, traditional left-leaning civil
00:13:58.600
liberties associations. When I was a young man, I remember Alan Borevoy of the Canadian civil liberties
00:14:04.600
association. He was a real classical liberal. He was a lefty, but he, he loved freedom and he was
00:14:10.840
always railing against authority. Um, I liked him. I liked his style. I liked the fact that he felt like
00:14:17.100
a David versus Goliath. And I didn't mind the fact that he was much to my left because I felt like he
00:14:22.440
was a public spirited man. The Canadian civil liberties association is an example of a group that
00:14:28.880
we really could have used the last two years, but they were sleeping. So there's the justice center for
00:14:34.300
constitutional freedoms. There's a democracy fund, a few cases with the Canadian constitution fund,
00:14:41.360
CCF. And I think I've just listed them all. Let me ask you this. Has there been any interveners
00:14:49.640
applying to join your case as a friend of the court? As in, if there's an important constitutional
00:14:55.660
battle, often other groups that feel like they have a stake in it will ask the judge if they can make
00:15:00.760
a submission. Your case cries out for interveners for freedom. Can you tell me, are there any
00:15:07.400
interveners in your case? I hate to even ask if the Canadian civil liberties association is one of
00:15:14.120
them? No, there's not. And they are not. And obviously one would expect when you look at some of the
00:15:22.340
other challenges going on, you know, whether it's the judicial review applications in federal court
00:15:28.020
against the invocation of the emergencies act, you know, a number of provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan,
00:15:33.520
for example, initiated or intervened in those. It's remarkable. And I just, I wonder, you know,
00:15:41.620
as to why the most obvious one to me, I mean, the rights of Canadians who've been deprived from
00:15:49.920
traveling across the country to be at the side of a dying loved one or to care from, for a parent or
00:15:58.440
a loved one who's recovering from surgery or cancer treatment, to be at funerals and weddings and other
00:16:05.200
celebratory events that are part of living a fulsome life. Those are human rights too. And they're not
00:16:13.160
just charter rights. Our charter is supposed to be reflective of human rights. And it seems like the
00:16:18.780
left has hijacked the human rights sphere for more abstract identity politics. And, but, you know,
00:16:29.180
thank goodness for the Democracy Fund and the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms and Canadians
00:16:33.600
like the Honourable Brian Peckford and the other applicants that we represent and other lawyers are
00:16:39.100
representing. There's four cases that have been brought together that are being heard together
00:16:42.940
tomorrow. And we all have the same goal, which is to have the court rule that, that depriving Canadians
00:16:51.040
of these rights was a gross abuse of charter rights. It's interesting. We, we have this viral hashtag
00:16:59.120
going, Ezra, that I'm sure you're well, I know you're well aware, we all are about Trudeau must go. I've
00:17:05.820
been struck by the number of tweets under that hashtag, by people talking about their torment,
00:17:13.900
their, the harm they felt, the emotional disturbance they feel from not having to been able to go to
00:17:21.920
family, loved ones, funerals, and being able to go and care for and be at the bedside of a dying
00:17:28.240
loved one. It just, people aren't, you know, that's why they're, they post it. That's why they'll never
00:17:33.460
forget. So we need to make sure the charter is upheld and that the court rules that this was a
00:17:39.160
breach. And that's what we intend to do tomorrow to allow us to go to the full trial of the case
00:17:46.740
scheduled for October 31st. You know, most of the lockdowns in Canada were administered by the
00:17:53.320
provinces and some by cities. The federal government didn't have a lot of jurisdiction over our day-to-day
00:17:59.020
lives other than airlines, a very important one, and border issues, a very important one. And of
00:18:04.120
course, people who work for the government directly. Um, I say that because the airlines,
00:18:10.940
that industry is one of the most heavily regulated industries in Canada. I mean, other than,
00:18:16.060
I suppose, banks and tobacco companies, the airlines are every move they make. And if they get off
00:18:22.720
side with the government, they could be punished so capriciously. I mean, we've seen it before.
00:18:28.260
The lockdown imposed, the rules imposed by the feds would have killed the airlines if the government
00:18:36.060
wasn't there to sort of bail them out. So I can understand why the airlines were absolutely
00:18:40.580
submissive to the government, because the government has the power of life or death over them in a way
00:18:45.700
that they do over so few other industries. We don't even, like, thank God Trudeau doesn't have the
00:18:52.120
control over most industries the way he does over airlines. So I, I think I know the answer to my
00:18:58.520
next. So I, that doesn't excuse them participating, uh, so, so lustily, for example, in vaccine mandates
00:19:06.080
for their staff, but it might not excuse it, but it explains it. But I, I wonder if anyone put aside
00:19:13.460
the airlines themselves, has anyone from the tourism industry, from the convention industry,
00:19:19.800
from cross-border travel, I don't know, has anyone in the industry expressed opposition
00:19:27.560
to these rules, expressed support for your lawsuit? I mean, surely the airlines, if they were speaking
00:19:34.760
in secret, so Trudeau couldn't hear, surely they would say they, they hated being the most brutally
00:19:42.200
punished industry. Did, have you had any feedback from, from the airlines even privately?
00:19:48.320
No. And, you know, it's interesting when, when I was approached in December to lead the, the legal
00:19:57.920
team for the justice center on this, and I commend my, my other lawyers that have worked with me, they're
00:20:03.200
phenomenal. Um, it was a controversial move. I mean, there's a big shift occurring right now. We're
00:20:09.640
seeing it most manifestly in the last 72 hours with this hashtag Trudeau must go movement of people
00:20:15.300
standing forward. It was, uh, it was a risky move for me to stand up and say, yeah, I'll be the face
00:20:21.360
of this and I'm going to take this on. So I think the industry groups and all the, the tourism industry
00:20:26.740
groups had their head down and didn't were afraid to stick their head out of the trench and, and join the
00:20:31.360
battle. Um, because obviously we know now that they are raising concerns and they're being very vocal
00:20:37.900
about the harm, you know, the businesses at Niagara Falls and other, uh, tourist destinations in close
00:20:43.740
proximity to the border are hurting badly. That's widely known. Uh, they're, they're pressuring their
00:20:48.860
politicians on both sides of the border and then resort towns like Banff and Jasper close to my home
00:20:54.220
in Alberta are hurting badly because, uh, Europeans and other travelers, they don't want to do the
00:20:59.880
arrive camp. They don't want to quarantine. They it's ridiculous. The evidence was so clear in the
00:21:06.760
cross-examination phases when we were going after the witnesses, uh, for the federal government that
00:21:11.400
they openly admitted that these were the measures, uh, to require vaccination for travel in Canada,
00:21:18.180
not just for Canadians, but for tourists and others, uh, and workers coming into our country were
00:21:23.680
the most restrictive than any other G7 country. Other developed world countries in the world,
00:21:31.460
similar to Canada did not at any time take these measures. We're unique, just like right now,
00:21:38.520
for those who've traveled, discovered they had to put a mask on as soon as they entered Canadian
00:21:42.560
airspace. Cause you know, it's about the science, right? Like the virus knows that you've crossed a
00:21:47.260
geopolitical boundary, really smart virus. Uh, I'm being sarcastic, obviously. So no,
00:21:53.700
those groups didn't come forward. I think they're vocal now because we're in a different time. I
00:21:57.660
think the tide's turning and people are more comfortable speaking up, but they certainly
00:22:01.460
weren't in the early days. Yeah. I should point out that WestJet's new CEO, who's only been on the
00:22:07.440
job less than a year, I think seems to have a courage to him. And I think it's because he comes
00:22:11.800
from abroad. He's not a Canadian. He hasn't been taught the passive obedient Canadian corporate
00:22:16.560
mindset. I see him tweeting about, he wants to end the mask rule. Like he's focused on masks.
00:22:22.360
And again, there's a guy listening to his customers as opposed to listening just to Trudeau. I'm,
00:22:27.240
I'm surprised he hasn't been ordered to shut up by his board who, who should properly be terrified
00:22:31.940
by the government. But let me, let me come back to the point you've made twice now. You have done
00:22:37.460
so much preliminary, preliminary work, uh, examining under oath, the government witnesses,
00:22:45.520
the people who built this flight ban. You say you cross-examine 16 government witnesses.
00:22:54.040
Can you tell for our viewers? I mean, that's all, and you mentioned the 15,000 pages of records.
00:23:00.440
What were some of the most interesting or revealing or damning admissions that you were able to extract
00:23:07.240
from these government witnesses? Because I don't think that's been widely covered. I think Rupa
00:23:13.680
Subramania, uh, uh, covered some of them and she's an excellent independent reporter, but I, I don't think
00:23:19.960
that the media party, as I called them, has been that interested in this lawsuit. You'd think a former
00:23:26.120
premier, the last surviving signer of the constitution, you'd think every word Brian Peckford would say
00:23:31.420
would be on the front page of the news, but because he's a contrarian, they pretend he doesn't exist.
00:23:35.920
Tell me some of the most interesting admissions by the government witnesses.
00:23:42.400
Well, one would be a Dr. Larenko, who is the most senior official at Health Canada.
00:23:48.280
Paragraph five of her affidavit reads that I am the government official who approved
00:23:53.740
the COVID vaccines. So she's the equivalent of the head of the FDA. And what, what she,
00:24:03.760
what I had to do to get her to confirm that the vaccine that has been applied and injected into
00:24:12.360
many millions of Canadians is an experimental drug is I first asked her to go over the stages of
00:24:21.620
testing before she would approve, for example, the shingles vaccine. And I walked her through all the
00:24:28.860
steps. And at the end, she gets to the point where, and did have to go through a phase three trial on
00:24:35.220
humans before you approved it for general use in the general population. Yes. Did the same thing for
00:24:41.140
the pneumonia vaccine. I did the same thing for every current modern vaccine I could think of.
00:24:46.920
And then I did the same steps with her for the COVID vaccine. And when I got to phase three trial
00:24:54.380
question, she said, no. So the phase three trial was never done. And it's actually happening right now
00:25:02.900
on millions of Canadians across this country that have been double or triple or quadruple vax.
00:25:08.940
Um, but could you imagine agreeing to be part of a phase three trial for the pneumonia vaccine?
00:25:17.200
A phase three trial for those who don't know, that's basically when you move from
00:25:21.160
experiments on animals, I guess, to experiments on people. Is that what you mean by a phase three trial?
00:25:26.640
That's right. So, so the, the, the phase two and the phase three are on humans, on people.
00:25:31.400
And, but could you imagine volunteering for that? They'd sit you down and they'd explain to you,
00:25:35.380
this is experimental. You're, you're going to be a subject in our phase three trial.
00:25:38.940
Um, does anybody who went and got the vaccine recall being sat down and told that they were
00:25:43.920
about to be come a subject in a phase three trial? That's why in our pleadings, in our court documents,
00:25:48.780
we refer to it as experimental because Dr. Larenko confirmed under oath that no phase three was
00:25:54.820
completed on the COVID vaccines before the vaccine was made available for general use. You know what
00:26:01.340
she says is she says, but, oh, we changed the approval process. We create, they call it the new
00:26:07.320
pathway approach, which doesn't have the phase three. So the other thing that was really remarkable
00:26:14.020
was, um, Dr. Waddell, who was the chief epidemiologist for the, uh, public health agency
00:26:22.560
of Canada. When I noticed in the written recommendations in their evidence, their exhibits that
00:26:29.340
to transport Canada, that there was no recommendation for vaccinating air travelers as a mitigation
00:26:37.280
strategy. So I'm sitting there going, could this be right? Is it the case that the public health
00:26:43.620
agency of Canada did fact, did in fact not even recommend vaccination of air travelers as a
00:26:50.620
mitigation strategy? So I put it to her under cross-examination. Uh, and, and she agreed.
00:26:56.340
I said that, you know, the truth is madam or doctor rather that, that you did not recommend
00:27:01.800
vaccination of air travelers as a mitigation strategy for COVID. Correct. And she said, yes.
00:27:07.680
And she went on to add that, that basically I can't remember precise words, but the gist of it
00:27:13.260
transcripts are available publicly was that the scientific evidence didn't support it. Um, there was
00:27:19.300
a number of other shocking moments in the testimony. I, one last one I'll give to make it three
00:27:25.520
is, uh, Ms. Little, uh, who is the lead of the COVID recovery team at Transport Canada,
00:27:32.600
where she included a PowerPoint slide, uh, in exhibit E to her affidavit page, slide 15,
00:27:40.380
just reviewing that. Um, and it clearly states that they deliberately decided to deprive Canadians
00:27:48.680
of their ability to go care for loved ones, um, provide care, um, compassionate travel. It was a
00:27:56.680
conscious decision to, to, um, exclude as an exception. So not create an exception for compassionate
00:28:05.700
travel. So they, they made a decision and I cross-examined her on this under oath that they
00:28:11.380
contemplated the harm that would be caused to thousands, if not more of Canadians by depriving
00:28:18.000
them from being at the bedside of a dying loved one or going to funerals, weddings, et cetera.
00:28:23.220
And that was, that's abhorrent. And I've said that untruth or while I was cross-examined that I find
00:28:29.420
that deeply offensive, that, that our government officials knowingly made that decision. And that
00:28:35.260
was part of the briefing document that went to the minister and the assistant deputy ministers.
00:28:40.720
I can't recall if it went to the prime minister's office or not, but I do recall with certainty
00:28:44.540
that she testified that this briefing document where this was written was given to the minister
00:28:49.920
and form part of the decision. So those are some three highlights.
00:28:53.980
Well, I think that rings true. Trudeau has such a vengefulness in anyone who dared to remain
00:29:00.400
unvaccinated, dared to ignore him ought to be punished. He has, there's a punitive approach to him. He,
00:29:05.220
he, uh, he takes these things personally and he knows that if you're unvaccinated,
00:29:10.380
the likelihood of you voting for him is near zero. So what does he care if he denies you a last
00:29:18.400
moment with a dying loved one that he knows he's not going to hurt his people? And I think, I think
00:29:25.060
he, he has a sociopathic approach. That is not a bug. That is a feature. That is not an accident.
00:29:30.860
That is on purpose. I'm sure of it. Uh, the fact that Canada alone has these rules in the whole world
00:29:37.440
is bizarre. Let me ask you about the hearing tomorrow. The federal government is applying
00:29:42.200
to the federal court to have a judge throw this out as being moot. They're saying, strike this
00:29:46.780
claim out. It's not alive anymore. Even though, as you say, it's only been quote suspended, not
00:29:52.100
deleted. And the government certainly can't be trusted not to bring it in again. Um, do we know
00:29:59.100
who the judge is who's hearing it? Let me start that way. Is it, it's a single judge on the federal
00:30:04.200
court? Is that right? And, and can you tell us who that judge is? If you know, um, there's been
00:30:11.240
some indication as to who it might be. It's always been my practice. Uh, maybe I'm unusual this way
00:30:18.260
to not focus on that at all. What I focus on is when I get into that courtroom, I look that judge in
00:30:24.040
the eye and I talk to them. That's what I'll do tomorrow. I don't care. You know, we'll get the
00:30:30.680
judge. We'll get, I suspect it'll be a very senior judge, even the publicity and the political
00:30:35.940
significance of this case, but whoever it is, I will do the best that I can as, as a litigator
00:30:43.080
to reach into their soul and to their legal mind and try and get those two things to meld together
00:30:51.080
for the right result. I'm sure you will. I'm just reminded that an earlier constitutional challenge
00:30:56.340
before the federal court had to deal with these airport quarantine hotels. I don't know if you
00:31:02.360
remember, but a while back when you landed, you had to go to a hotel at your own expense for up to
00:31:09.140
three days. And they were thousands of dollars. Bizarrely. We had actually one of our former
00:31:14.560
reporters. Um, he came back to Canada. He was forced to go to the hotel quarantine. He counted,
00:31:20.900
he had 14 interactions with different people in the hotel quarantine as opposed to just getting in
00:31:27.360
his car and driving home by himself. Uh, so there was, there was some interesting, uh, litigants,
00:31:33.080
including our former reporter and the judge, if I recall, who heard it was no one less than the chief
00:31:38.460
judge of the federal court. So they put the absolute top dog on it. And I thought, okay,
00:31:44.640
they're taking it very seriously. Well, yeah. Or they were putting the most political guy on it
00:31:48.940
because not only did he rule that there was, uh, he, not only did he rule that this was fine,
00:31:56.220
this was legal. He said it didn't even amount to a charter breach that could be justified. As you
00:32:02.040
know, in Canada, there's sort of a two-step, was your right infringed to begin with? And if it was,
00:32:08.160
is that demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society? The cases almost always turn
00:32:14.840
on that second part. Cause yes, the government did something to you, but can they explain it as
00:32:19.280
reasonable or proportional? This chief judge said, no, no, no, you weren't even detained.
00:32:25.840
You were not even detained because it was only three days and it was in a hotel. And I, I'm stunned
00:32:32.840
by that decision. And I think that's under appeal right now, but, and I'm not asking you to badmouth any
00:32:39.340
judge, but I'm just saying the more senior, the judge, the more experienced, but also in that case,
00:32:44.900
the more political, I, I am still, every time I think of that ruling that the federal court said
00:32:50.740
is not, you are not detained, even if you were ordered to go to a detention. I, I think, as you
00:32:57.520
say, the court's reputation has taken a bruising over the last two years, as well as any other,
00:33:02.520
you don't have to respond to that. Cause I know you want to be.
00:33:04.480
Well, let me, let me, let me though, please. Um, I'll tell you this in the last several weeks,
00:33:12.700
actually number of many months, uh, I, the first time I had to wear a mask, we all know how useless
00:33:20.980
they are and it's theater. That's what the science is. We're not being, uh, fit tested with an
00:33:29.460
occupational health and safety and special regulatory regulator mask. And I've had that done
00:33:34.220
in different industrial contexts. That's not what's happening. We got these stupid things on
00:33:38.960
our face that we move around and we can take down to eat and stuff. Well, I've had to wear one to fly
00:33:45.140
to Ottawa. Well, guess where else I'm going to have to wear one tomorrow in the courthouse, you know,
00:33:52.060
and that doesn't make me feel that I'm going into an impartial open-minded environment.
00:33:58.040
Yeah. When I'll say one other thing carefully and, but clearly is when the chief justice of our federal
00:34:07.660
court of appeal was asked to reveal the vaccination status of the judges on his bench and his staff,
00:34:15.200
he declined because he said that was personal private health information. The chief judge,
00:34:23.040
justice of the federal court and the chief justice of our Supreme court of Canada, both volunteered
00:34:29.780
that personal private information about health status of their judges and staff. I think the chief
00:34:36.560
justice of the federal court of appeal got it right in law and policy to not reveal that personal
00:34:44.420
information. So contextually, I have a concern that COVID has, and governmental responses to it,
00:34:52.900
has so polarized our society that it has created some influence on the judiciary. And, but I keep
00:35:01.720
going into it with optimism and good faith that we're going to get a fair and objective hearing
00:35:06.720
and we're doing everything we can myself and other lawyers that will be arguing tomorrow on behalf of
00:35:12.220
Canadians to, to try and remedy this horrific wrong that so many millions of Canadians have suffered and
00:35:18.440
are fearful of experiencing again at the whim of the prime minister and his minister of transportation.
00:35:25.260
Well, we'll be live tweeting that case as we often live tweet important cases. I think Sheila Gunn-Reed
00:35:31.500
will be our reporter who specializes in that. So you can follow that here. Also, I understand that it'll be
00:35:37.640
available on a video link, but I, I hear that the court we're talking about is the court neutral,
00:35:43.840
that the court has bolted the doors. Now you correct me if I misunderstood, misheard this or
00:35:50.560
misunderstood. Is it a fact that the courts in Ottawa, which normally are open to the public,
00:35:55.400
including, you know, the media and, and just interested persons, that they are bolting the
00:36:00.560
doors and not allowing people in? Did I hear that incorrectly?
00:36:03.640
No, you didn't. I mean, I don't know if they're bolting the doors, but they'll, you know, they're
00:36:09.700
going to, we received an email from a senior clerk of the court last week, indicating that due to the
00:36:17.400
enormous amount of interest in this case, they're anticipating a sizable number of Canadians to be
00:36:26.020
outside the courthouse. And they were concerned about accommodating all those people inside the
00:36:30.820
courthouse in part, because they still have this social distance inside the courthouse. So we've
00:36:38.560
been advised that only ourselves as lawyers and a specific list of clients will be allowed into the
00:36:45.120
courtroom and everybody else will have to stay outside. So it's unprecedented as far as I'm aware
00:36:51.600
in that respect as well. So I get the logic. This is perfect COVID logic because so many people want
00:36:59.180
to come in, no one can come in because, you know, I mean, that, that's the, that, that scares me a
00:37:05.580
little bit. Well, we'll, uh, we'll be watching with great interest. Do you know how many hours have been
00:37:11.040
set aside for this? And, and I imagine that the court will have to rule on it fairly soon because
00:37:17.580
this matter was set down for trial next month, if I'm not mistaken. So obviously they'll have to let
00:37:23.260
everybody know within a month. Um, what's your thinking about how long this mootness hearing
00:37:28.680
will go and when you'll get the judge's response. It's too early to guess, but what do you think it
00:37:33.580
might be? Well, we're, we're, we're starting at nine 30 and the attorney general's lawyers will go
00:37:39.740
first followed by myself and, and, and counsel for the other applicants. There's four counsel in total
00:37:46.600
four, four pardons. Um, I'm optimistic we will complete the hearing tomorrow. You know, we, we,
00:37:52.440
we might run over a bit, you know, past the normal closing of the court at four 30 and push into five
00:37:58.440
or maybe six, but I'm optimistic that we will complete the hearing tomorrow. Um, and then I would
00:38:04.520
hope that we would get a decision, uh, sometime in the next, uh, two weeks or so, um, as to whether
00:38:12.520
we're not, we're going ahead. And, and just to really emphasize, I mean, everything is done as
00:38:18.920
well, all the evidence gathering, all of the pleadings, all of our legal factums are written,
00:38:24.460
uh, our books of authority have been filed and exchanged. The only thing left to do on this case,
00:38:31.880
I mean, like getting a new house built or a new office built. The only thing to do is the walkthrough,
00:38:36.980
like, uh, is to go to court and argue about the evidence that's before the oral phase. So, uh,
00:38:44.140
hopefully the court will make an expeditious decision in the next week or so, uh, on the
00:38:50.000
application tomorrow. And hopefully we'll reject the efforts by the federal government to block
00:38:54.780
Canadians from having the federal court rule on their charter. Yeah. You know, I was just thinking
00:38:59.640
of, uh, what a uniform, um, local president said when, um, he was fired for dissenting about,
00:39:08.320
uh, the entire labor union, basically labor movement, selling out its membership and absolutely
00:39:14.200
colluding with its employers in imposing vaccine requirements that were not in the collective
00:39:19.980
agreements. And, and I remember he ended his video by saying, if the union and the company
00:39:25.620
are saying the same thing, one of them is not needed. And he was condemning uniform for selling
00:39:32.260
out its members. You would think that if you, you know, solidarity forever, collective bargaining,
00:39:37.700
but the government and the, and the company say, we want to, a vaccine. You just, you don't even
00:39:42.580
bargain. You just say, okay. And I, and I'm thinking of that same thing with the separation of the
00:39:48.560
branches of government. We have the legislature, which has really not been part of this at all.
00:39:54.300
They've been marginalized. It was the executive, like you say, some period. So first branch of
00:39:59.880
government, the legislative, not even involved. The second branch of government, you know, the
00:40:05.780
cabinet and their bureaucrats imposes ban. So now we're looking to the third branch of government,
00:40:11.860
the judiciary to review it. And if they choose to punt, if they choose to dodge their responsibility
00:40:18.960
and say, yeah, no, we don't need to hear this because they said they're suspending it. So it
00:40:24.720
probably won't come back. You've done all that work. Thanks for that. But we're not going to bother
00:40:28.760
hearing it. It reminds me of what that uniform leader said. If you got three branches of government
00:40:34.240
and one of them is useless and then the other one's useless, what's even the point? So if the court
00:40:38.480
believes that it is a branch of government, if it believes it's a check and balance on,
00:40:42.400
on the powers that be, it ought to prove it. And if it ducks its duty here, I think that it will erode
00:40:50.360
a lot of what remains of its fading credibility. I think you're exactly right. The brand of the
00:40:55.640
courts is damaged. Keith Wilson, QC, lawyer for Brian Peckford with the Justice Center for
00:41:02.000
Constitutional Freedoms. You guys are doing great work. Give me one last word. Give me something more
00:41:05.840
hopeful than my despondent review of the courts these past two and a half. Give me something
00:41:11.020
positive to think about as we head into this hearing tomorrow. Well, two-legged stools fall over.
00:41:18.800
That's not optimistic. That's reality. I think this is an opportunity for, you know, Canadians. And,
00:41:26.620
you know, why am I putting so much effort into this? I have confidence in a system that has that
00:41:32.260
separation of powers. That's the one that served us best when you look at the comparative examples
00:41:37.280
of governmental design around the world through our modern history. And so, I'm optimistic that the
00:41:45.580
tide is turning. Canadians are confident in coming forward and speaking their truth. And I am optimistic
00:41:52.920
that we will be successful and that the court will decide to take this to the final level.
00:41:59.220
And regardless of the precision of their outcome, there will be elements of the decision win or lose
00:42:06.420
that will help illuminate the boundaries between government powers to interfere in people's freedoms
00:42:13.500
in their lives. So, I think there's reason for hope. There's a pathway that can work. And I'm going to
00:42:22.860
continue along with others like the Democracy Fund and the Justice Center, Constitutional Freedoms,
00:42:27.100
and the amazing number of lawyers who've all come forward to try and restore everybody's hope and
00:42:33.100
faith in our systems. Well, I hope you're successful. We'll be watching, we'll be live tweeting, and we'll
00:42:38.660
report on the results. Keith Wilson, KC, King's Council. Great to spend some time with you and good luck
00:42:46.180
tomorrow. Thank you very much. Thank you. Stay with us. My final thoughts are next.
00:42:51.240
Hey, welcome back. I got some letters here. OREXX said, paid campaign, fringe minority,
00:43:07.660
could Trudeau and butts be more obtuse? You know, it's funny because, I mean, they're always on the
00:43:12.620
attack. They're perpetual campaigners. But part of me thinks sometimes they actually are so insulated.
00:43:17.800
They really don't know anyone who has a different point of view than them because they operate in
00:43:22.640
the circles of lobbyists and bureaucrats and politicians in the media party. If they see
00:43:27.100
someone dissenting, if they see someone that is not in love with Trudeau, they think that makes no
00:43:31.700
sense. That can only be explained that they are some foreign Putin operative. They literally cannot
00:43:37.220
comprehend a world when people don't see Trudeau as the Sun King. Will P says,
00:43:49.820
You're talking about the police chief in Ottawa who basically enforced martial law as brutally as,
00:43:57.460
I don't know, Eastern European countries do, and then threatened peaceful protesters. Not just that,
00:44:04.160
threatened anyone who dared to donate to the truckers, threatened to hunt them down. He should
00:44:09.120
have been fired that day. But of course, that's where policing is in Canada now.
00:44:16.380
the very moment that I heard Elon Musk was going to buy Twitter, I instinctively said,
00:44:20.200
I don't think he will, which leads me to believe this is almost like a publicity stunt for both of
00:44:24.640
them. I don't know, but I do know that the truth is stranger than fiction, and all the world is truly
00:44:29.140
a stage. I think you're right. I think Elon Musk is a bit of an actor on that stage. He likes being
00:44:35.120
dramatic. He likes being a little bit quirky, and I'm glad he is, frankly. I think he did want Twitter,
00:44:42.140
but I think he also wanted a better deal than maybe he offered. And I think the fact that it's
00:44:48.580
overrun by bots, as they say, by fake accounts, I think that is a factor. I think that Twitter,
00:44:54.980
its primary value is not for freedom of information, but for control of information.
00:45:00.220
Whoever controls Twitter can throttle ideas they don't like and boost those that they do.
00:45:06.220
I think its chief value is, frankly, to people like the CIA or the Pentagon.
00:45:12.140
Their use of it as an information tool far outweighs its value to advertisers. I don't know
00:45:18.900
which side Elon Musk would have been on that, frankly. I think he's freedom-oriented in the West,
00:45:23.680
but of course, he's heavily invested in China. He's a complicated man, and Twitter's a complicated
00:45:28.280
problem. That's our show for today. I hope you enjoyed the feature interview with Keith Wilson.
00:45:32.560
He'll be in court tomorrow. We'll be live blogging that, live tweeting that. Our chief reporter,
00:45:37.480
Sheila Gunn-Reed. Until then, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters,
00:45:41.420
to you at home, good night, and keep fighting for freedom.
00:45:44.280
Bonjour tout le monde. Tabitha Peters ici pour Rebel News.
00:45:48.380
Hi, everyone. Tabitha Peters here for Rebel News. On Saturday, September 17th,
00:45:53.400
I attended a nationwide rally in Toronto, in Queen's Park. Leader of the People's Party,
00:45:59.280
Maxime Barnier, was there. He gave a speech. He spoke to all of his supporters.
00:46:03.360
He took pictures, and we were able to interview him. Hear what he has to say on the Arrive Can
00:46:08.880
app, Monsieur Pierre Paulievre, and what the future holds for the People's Party of Canada.
00:46:14.460
Question, but what brings you here today amongst the people, Toronto, the rally, everything?
00:46:18.880
Yeah, my goal today, to be here. Why I'm here today is very simple. I wanted to thank
00:46:25.060
all these freedom fighters across the country and people here in Toronto that did the fight
00:46:30.800
when it was very difficult, when they were calling us names and, you know, racist, xenophobe,
00:46:38.760
and selfish, only because we were speaking about our values and more freedom and less government
00:46:46.460
in our life. So we did that the last two years. And now we are winning that battle. And we were
00:46:51.800
able to change the public opinion. Yes, maybe we were a tiny minority two years ago, but now I believe
00:46:58.880
that we are a majority. And that's why I believe we won't have any mandates this fall or this summer,
00:47:05.180
because these traditional politicians are doing politics not based on convictions, but on the polling
00:47:11.580
and focus group. And they're going to see that the majority of Canadians are fed up with that.
00:47:16.320
So I wanted to be here and tell them, you know, thank you. But we need to fight. We need to fight
00:47:23.560
again. There's still the Arrive Canada apps. And we cannot take, we know that right now, we cannot take
00:47:29.920
our freedom for granted in this country anymore. And I want to tell them that I will always be there.
00:47:35.640
I was there in the beginning of that pandemic. And, you know, I'm fighting for freedom, personal
00:47:43.620
responsibility, respect and fairness. And that's the BBC. And I believe that, you know, the next
00:47:50.060
election, we will be ready and we'll increase our number of votes. And we will have some candidates
00:47:58.100
that will be elected in parliament. And we will be able to have that freedom revolution in parliament.
00:48:03.920
The mainstream media and the liberals and these establishment politicians are telling us,
00:48:14.800
just move on. Just move on. We won't move on until we finish that fight, until we will
00:48:25.840
finish that fight, until we finish that fight. You mentioned the Arrive Canada app. What is your
00:48:33.760
comment with that still ongoing in airports in Canada?
00:48:36.720
Don't, don't, don't do it. Don't download that apps. We don't know what the federal government
00:48:41.680
is going with your personal information. And, and I know that they can give you a tickets
00:48:47.180
about that. But, you know, you must fight that. Actually, I received for maybe $15,000 of tickets
00:48:54.360
the last two years. So, and I didn't pay that. I'm fighting, I'm fighting in the court. And
00:48:59.800
actually next week, September 21st, I'll be in the court in Ottawa with Brian Petford, because,
00:49:07.480
you know, we are challenging the government. We understand that here in Canada, we have the
00:49:13.160
constitutional right to be able to travel freely across our country, being vaccinated or not. And
00:49:19.320
we are fighting for every Canadian on that. It's, it's crazy. We know now we have the data, we have
00:49:41.000
the statistics and we know that that virus is not deadly for the huge majority of Canadians. If you're
00:49:48.120
under 60 years old, without any comorbidity, there's no risk. Actually, it's more risky to take the
00:49:53.800
vaccine than COVID-19. So let's stop all that. But I believe that up to now, we did very well,
00:50:01.480
we the freedom fighters and everybody that were there in the beginning and fighting and are still
00:50:09.480
here. I want to thank them because of them, we were able to shift the public opinion, like I said.
00:50:14.360
So the Quebec government has to vaccinate the Quebecers if they're ready for the next shot.
00:50:32.920
What is your opinion on Monsieur Pierre Polievre now winning the Conservative leadership party?
00:50:38.200
Yeah, Pierre Polievre spoke like a Conservative during the Conservative leadership. Actually, if you want to be the
00:50:43.560
leader of the Conservative party, you need to speak like a Conservative, like O'Toole did. O'Toole said,
00:50:48.920
you know, I'm a true blue and he was elected. And I did it also in 2017 when I was running for them.
00:50:55.720
And I had 49% of the vote, but I can tell you that was the best decision in my political life
00:51:01.800
to create the PPC. And I want to thank everybody
00:51:04.280
that are supporting us. But that being said, Poliev spoke like a Conservative. He was able to be elected.
00:51:11.640
But the question is, Poliev is a career politician. He was elected the first time at 25 years old.
00:51:17.720
And now he's 42 years old. And he's an opportunist politician. He was not with us when we needed him,
00:51:23.880
when we needed the Conservative to be with us in that fight for our freedoms in May 20, in March or
00:51:30.040
May 2020, because it was not popular. So now he's speaking about freedom because we did the job,
00:51:37.160
all the freedom fighters across the country, and we were able to influence Canadians and to shift the
00:51:43.080
public opinion on our side. So Poliev is speaking about that. I'm very happy that he's speaking about
00:51:48.440
freedom, good for him, but we cannot trust him. And that's why the People's Party is there and we
00:51:54.760
will keep him honest. And so I believe that he will do like O'Toole, he will go to the left,
00:52:02.760
because there's more seat here in the GTA than in all Alberta. And he will go to the left. And what
00:52:08.440
he's doing for, for example, equalization formula? Nothing. He's not speaking about that. But that's why
00:52:15.720
people out West are frustrated. And, you know, we need to have a solution for that. And our solution
00:52:22.760
is to change equalization formula to be less generous. And the formula must be fair for everybody.
00:52:28.680
That's why we have Western alienation in Alberta, Saskatchewan and BC. But Poliev is not speaking
00:52:35.240
about that because it's not popular. So we cannot trust him on the real issues that are important for
00:52:40.200
the future of this country. Like the Paris Accord is in favor of the Paris Accord. Yes,
00:52:45.800
he won't impose a carbon tax, but he will impose more regulations on businesses. That would be a cost
00:52:50.920
for us. The question is not the carbon tax. The question is the Paris Accord. We must withdraw
00:52:57.480
from that accord. Poliev won't do that. So I can go on mass immigration. He's not speaking about that.
00:53:03.720
He's speaking about the housing challengers that we have. The price of the prices of houses is going
00:53:10.360
up. Yes, I understand that. But that being said, he wants to impose the he wants to impose to your
00:53:18.840
municipalities how to deal with it. He wants to interfere in provincial and municipal jurisdiction.
00:53:28.760
Life is affordable. We'll cap spending and cut waste to reverse inflationary deficits
00:53:33.640
and taxes. That includes axing new taxes on your paycheck, gas, heat and other essentials.
00:53:40.360
The cause of the problem is immigration. But he won't speak about that. It's mathematical.
00:53:45.160
We have too many people that are coming here. And so they want to have a house. And I understand that.
00:53:49.720
So prices of houses is going up. The prices is going up here downtown Toronto, in Montreal and in Vancouver,
00:53:56.840
because 40% of our immigrants are going to Montreal Toronto and in Vancouver. And after that, people are
00:54:04.440
leaving here Toronto and Montreal and they're going to other cities and prices of houses are going up in
00:54:11.240
these other cities also across the country. So the solution to that is to have sustainable immigration.
00:54:17.560
Poliev won't speak about that. So we'll see what will happen. But you can always count on us to speak
00:54:24.520
about our values. And we have the right vision for this country to be freer and more prosperous.
00:54:31.240
Let's keep fighting. Let's keep fighting together. And yes, the truth will always win.
00:54:40.200
We will win safe, strong and free. Freedom, freedom, freedom.
00:54:47.880
Last question. What's the future for the People's Party?
00:54:51.000
The future, you know, I'm very pleased what we did up to now. It took 15 years for the Green Party to
00:54:55.960
have more than 1% of the vote. And after one year, we had 1.6% of the vote. And after 35 years,
00:55:02.520
the Green Party had 2% of the vote. And for us, after only 40 years, we had 5%. So what is the future?
00:55:08.920
We will grow. We are showing to these establishment politicians when we're speaking about our values
00:55:15.000
openly with passion and conviction. Yes, you can grow your support. And that's what we're doing.
00:55:20.520
From 0% when we created the party, 1.6% in 2019, 5% at the last election. I don't know what
00:55:27.560
will happen in the next one, but I can tell you we will grow. And I believe that we will have real
00:55:32.440
freedom fighters in Parliament. Thank you very much. That's all.