Juno News - Air travel Covid vaccine mandate is back in court

00:00:00.000 Transcribed by ESO, translated by —

00:00:30.000 Thank you.

00:01:00.000 welcome to canada's most irreverent talk show this is the andrew lawton show brought to you by true

00:01:20.420 north hello and welcome to you all the andrew lawton show here canada's most irreverent talk

00:01:30.700 show the end of another week at least insofar as this program is concerned but fear not true north

00:01:37.820 has you covered and i'll just put in a bit of a plug before we get into what's turned out to be

00:01:42.820 a rather busy show true north nation is taking place and what is it it's next saturday so i guess

00:01:48.380 That's nine days away in Calgary.

00:01:51.680 So if you are from Calgary or Alberta or anywhere in the country or the world, in fact, and want to come on by, I will be there.

00:01:58.540 Premier Danielle Smith will be there.

00:02:00.460 Brett Wilson, the star of Dragon's Den, is going to be there.

00:02:05.360 Lots of your favorites at True North will also be there.

00:02:09.080 MP Stephanie Cusey, we've got...

00:02:11.140 The problem when I start naming everyone is that I'm bound to just miss someone.

00:02:15.120 So I'm not doing that intentionally.

00:02:16.320 I'll stop naming right now, but it's going to be a lot of fun. And we have, well, I don't want to

00:02:21.600 oversell it, but we have a little surprise. Well, it's a big surprise. Like it's a big physically

00:02:26.560 large surprise, which is not me. I'm not referring to myself. I, you know that I'm there. I'm the

00:02:31.960 physically large non-surprise, non-surprise, but it's going to be great fun. And we still have

00:02:36.380 some tickets available. I think we're getting close to that sellout point, but I do hope to

00:02:40.740 see you all there. You can find the details at truenorthevents.ca. But all of that aside,

00:02:46.780 let me talk about this big hearing that was taking place yesterday before the Federal Court of

00:02:53.020 Appeal. Now, this is, I don't want to get too bogged down in the legal ins and outs here,

00:02:58.960 but the Federal Court of Appeal heard a four-hour long argument back and forth between government

00:03:06.280 lawyers and lawyers for people challenging the vaccine mandate for air travel now this may seem

00:03:13.000 like a bit of a distant memory right now because it has been a couple of years since this was first

00:03:18.600 floated it was something that justin trudeau promised in the 2021 election remember this

00:03:26.200 you deserve a government that's going to continue to say get vaccinated and you know what if you

00:03:31.960 don't want to get vaccinated that's your choice but don't think you can get on a plane or a train

00:03:37.800 besides vaccinated people and put them at risk. Yeah he didn't just advocate for this policy or

00:03:47.300 implement it. Justin Trudeau campaigned on this. He actually went to voters and said I would like

00:03:53.480 to bar the unvaccinated from planes and trains and federally regulated workplaces. You couldn't work

00:04:00.820 as a bureaucrat in the federal department of widgets unless you were vaccinated against

00:04:06.840 COVID. That was obviously a winning proposition. Justin Trudeau emerged victorious in that election

00:04:12.080 and proceeded with the policy and later the even more punitive policy of requiring vaccination

00:04:18.720 from truckers to cross the border back and forth between Canada and the United States. But one of

00:04:25.240 the things that I will point out about this is that the federal government had these mandates,

00:04:29.020 they escalated them they did them in spite of scientific evidence and data arguing against them

00:04:36.140 science and data saying that these things were not actually necessary we're not keeping people

00:04:41.100 out of the hospital we're not saving lives but the federal government persisted anyway

00:04:45.900 so there was a challenge put forward by a number of different people one of them was former

00:04:50.540 newfoundland premier brian peckford one of them was the leader of the people's party of canada

00:04:55.740 Maxime Bernier. Now Bernier in particular had a very interesting approach to this. His case was

00:05:01.240 not just I'm a Canadian that wants to go and see grandma. He was saying, listen, I'm a federal

00:05:06.360 politician. Part of my job is to crisscross the country and speak to Canadians. This law

00:05:13.400 is preventing me from doing something that is fundamental to democracy and to the democratic

00:05:19.260 process. So that was the argument that was put forward. Now, the legal process is very slow at

00:05:25.600 times. It took some time for this case to go before the federal court. By the time it did,

00:05:31.800 the federal government had already rescinded the mandate. Now, the language they used was that it

00:05:37.220 was suspended. It wasn't over. It wasn't done. They didn't say, we're sorry. We shouldn't have

00:05:43.080 done this. We're never going to do it again. They said, we're suspending it and we might bring it

00:05:46.800 back. And there was also another press conference where the government started talking about

00:05:50.620 reworking its definition of fully vaccinated. So it might have actually been the case where you

00:05:56.580 had to be boosted within a certain period of time to travel. So all of that is important context to

00:06:02.680 the federal government's argument that we shouldn't even have a court case on this. We

00:06:07.500 shouldn't even hear this argument. It is moot, which is to say that it's not a live issue. This

00:06:13.460 is what's at stake. The federal court said it's moot. There's no point in hearing this. The

00:06:16.960 mandate's over. That was the discussion that went towards the federal court of appeal yesterday,

00:06:22.480 which now has the decision to make about whether they should actually have a hearing on the merits

00:06:28.240 of this mandate in the first place. Eva Chipiuk knows this file well. She joins me now, a lawyer

00:06:33.540 with Chipiuk Law. Eva, good to talk to you again. Thanks for coming on today. My pleasure. Thanks

00:06:38.740 for having me. Now I mean obviously when we put the word moot in our stories we put it in quotation

00:06:44.360 marks because it's a term that has a meaning in law and I think has a reason in law but it's one

00:06:49.880 that I think has been very convenient for the government here because anytime they've had an

00:06:54.920 issue that they don't want to really have it answered in court they do this and oftentimes

00:07:00.260 with alarming success even the Emergencies Act the federal government has said oh well I mean

00:07:05.140 the Emergencies Act is over now. Nothing to see here. It's all moot. So it's not surprising they've

00:07:10.000 tried that here, but it's concerning that the courts have so far gone along with it.

00:07:14.660 Very much agree with you on that. And those were the arguments that, of course, the lawyers were

00:07:19.460 making in court. And at the first instance, I recall one of, I thought, the most powerful

00:07:25.960 arguments that at least Keith Wilson brought forward is, what are the other option for

00:07:30.600 Canadians then? Do you want to see them back in Ottawa in a protest? This is the forum to resolve

00:07:38.000 these issues and these disputes, especially issues that are this contentious and this polarized and

00:07:45.400 political, in fact. So we're seeing these battles on Twitter. Wouldn't it be a more sophisticated

00:07:52.520 place to have this evidence heard and open to the public in an established forum like the court

00:07:58.860 system so public interest is a huge point on it and so i can't see how they suggest that it's not

00:08:07.580 in the public interest so you know i i think you probably saw in some of the tweets that 20 000

00:08:14.140 people were registered to watch that hearing yesterday that appeal i don't i doubt that

00:08:19.980 that's ever happened in canadian history before so just on that fact alone it shows what an

00:08:25.900 intense amount of public interest there is yes and i mean the one thing that the lawyers have

00:08:31.580 mentioned both at the federal court level and in the appeal hearing yesterday also was that

00:08:36.860 the government's own language suggests this was just a suspension they've not taken it off the

00:08:41.500 table they've not said we'll never do it again and that's where i think the mootness argument

00:08:46.620 kind of falls flat here because if you follow this through to its natural conclusion anytime

00:08:51.900 the federal government does something on a temporary basis they can dodge accountability

00:08:57.580 because they say well the fact scenario is different there's no point in having this

00:09:01.340 discussion again there's no point in litigating the old one because when we bring the new one in

00:09:05.980 it's going to be different than a live issue and it basically means that there will never be a

00:09:10.700 ruling on what is really a core constitutional question did this violate your mobility rights

00:09:15.740 as a canadian who was not able to travel yeah i was just trying to take some notes because of

00:09:21.020 so many things always come up but uh a hundred percent um so one of the the government was

00:09:27.260 definitely painting the picture that the suspension the word suspension doesn't really

00:09:31.740 mean anything it was rescinded in the end because it expired so what many canadians actually don't

00:09:38.220 know it was an interim order um that continuously expired every two weeks so if it didn't expire

00:09:46.860 they would renew it. And so they're kind of like, well, it expired, so it's gone. And

00:09:53.580 whether it's suspended or rescinded would be a more appropriate word. It's not

00:09:57.740 effective in law anymore. So that means it's not law. But one of the points that was made yesterday,

00:10:03.980 which I also think is very important, is because these were interim orders, they weren't debated

00:10:08.940 in the house of commons and in the open public forum so a decision like that maybe that's where

00:10:18.380 the court should say okay let's let's dissect this a little bit more because when there's like

00:10:24.060 a year or two of public debate and everyone can have their say on it and that that seems more

00:10:29.020 democratic a better use of everyone's time if that's the kind of law we were challenging

00:10:34.940 then maybe I see the point. But in this case, it was like all these very reactionary responses

00:10:42.700 on a short-term basis. Maybe that doesn't make sense. Let's just talk about these. Let's debate

00:10:47.860 this as adults and as people that have questions on this. So for many reasons, that didn't really

00:10:54.100 make sense. And so those were some of the points that were made yesterday. And one thing that's

00:11:00.140 very important to note is on the first instance, the federal court judge said, well, you know,

00:11:05.580 it's not live, it's not an active law now, but if it is, you're welcome to come back to court.

00:11:11.180 This is after all the parties have put in a lot of time and effort and Canadians have either

00:11:17.340 donated through charitable organizations that were involved in this or directly.

00:11:23.420 So you're just asking citizens and Canadians to continuously front a challenge to the government.

00:11:28.940 I don't think that's the appropriate use of anyone's time or funds, or Canadians should be

00:11:35.200 asked of that anyway. Well, and I would also jump on that point, because I think that's an important

00:11:39.760 one, Eva, which is that one of the core arguments behind courts using mootness and finding mootness

00:11:45.500 is that judicial resources are scarce. There's a cost and an effort and a time that it takes to

00:11:51.960 litigate a case. I would argue that hearing the case once and for all actually takes fewer

00:11:58.660 judicial resources than hearing it every year or every two years or every three years

00:12:03.480 if something like this is reintroduced. I mean, we are a legal system that is based on precedent,

00:12:09.280 and you can't actually have common law unless you hear the cases that are going to form the

00:12:14.920 precedent for how the law is in the future. The mental gymnastics, Andrew, have been interesting

00:12:20.700 Because what the courts at the first instance said, and then the questions from the court judges yesterday were similar, or at least one was, is, well, the science at that time was what it was.

00:12:33.940 So how can we, if even if we address it now, if this comes back in a year or two, the science is going to be different.

00:12:40.740 So this is going to be a waste of everybody's time.

00:12:43.780 And that goes against exactly what you were saying.

00:12:47.660 The rule of law precedents in Canada.

00:12:49.520 It's always facts specific. Facts are going to always massage a case a little bit one way or the other. But the reasoning behind it, that's the reason that everyone's in court, was the reasoning behind the government's decisions and the mandates, even whether the interim orders make sense or whatever.

00:13:09.160 none of that is being discussed or debated of course the science is going to be different

00:13:13.480 probably we'll be all be more knowledgeable if this ever came forward again but it's not on the

00:13:19.840 scientific points only that the court is being asked to hear this case so it was very concerning

00:13:26.360 to hear that in the first instance and then again yesterday i i've told this story on the show many

00:13:31.880 many times so bear with me if you're one of the members of the audience that have heard it but in

00:13:35.720 In 2019, when the Leaders Debates Commission barred True North and Rebel from covering the debate,

00:13:41.220 we went to federal court, we secured an injunction, and we were able to go and cover the debate.

00:13:46.420 And then after the debate, we wanted to proceed with the case because we thought there was a big

00:13:50.540 problem here of a government body arbitrarily deciding which journalists can and can't have

00:13:55.940 access to government-run events. And the court said, as it did in the vaccine mandate case,

00:14:00.580 well, the debate's over. You got what you wanted. There's really no point in hearing this.

00:14:04.880 Because there's never going to be another debate.

00:14:07.180 Yeah.

00:14:07.560 And then you fast forward to 2021, literally the identical thing happens.

00:14:12.020 In this case, not with us.

00:14:13.340 We were accredited, but Rebel experienced the same thing.

00:14:16.840 And they went before the court and the same government said, this is mood.

00:14:19.620 It's kind of an academic point.

00:14:21.360 It doesn't really matter.

00:14:22.520 Did the same thing and they started from zero again.

00:14:25.060 So I think that, you know, there is a very real debate to be had here again.

00:14:29.500 I mean, if they have a trial on the facts and on the merits, it may not go the way that Mr. Peckford and Mr. Bernier and all of them want it to.

00:14:37.320 But at the very least, they should be heard and the government should be forced to defend the constitutionality of this, which right now it hasn't been forced to do, has it?

00:14:46.320 Yeah, no. And your example is a perfect highlight of judicial economy. How does it make sense to bring this to court again? And especially when so many resources were spent already with all the parties, three months, like at least it was months and months of already since the since the case was started.

00:15:09.020 but it was at least two months of daily cross-examinations, which is a massive endeavor.

00:15:15.660 And so the actual court case was scheduled for three days. That's not a huge amount of time

00:15:21.660 considering the huge issues at stake. And like I said, the public interest, the polarity,

00:15:27.760 all of that stuff, I think it was three, maybe five days. But to ask all the parties to just

00:15:33.760 start all over again, and then maybe we'll listen to it. But then why wouldn't we be in the same

00:15:37.540 position again then? Why wouldn't the court make the same arguments again? Yeah, very, very well

00:15:43.500 said. Your coverage of this on Twitter has been quite good, not just for people in who know the

00:15:48.420 law, but I'd say especially for people that aren't lawyers. You've explained the issues very well.

00:15:52.540 Eva Chibiuk, always a pleasure. Thanks for coming on today. Thanks for having me. All right. Thank

00:15:57.460 you so much. It's funny when I talk about these issues, which were, I mean, the dominant issues

00:16:01.880 in the Canadian political landscape for the better part of three years, they do seem like relics

00:16:07.420 of a bygone era. And I think they are. And I think it's a good thing that mandates are now

00:16:12.940 just seen as so distant and so past and so old that we're not going to bring them back.

00:16:18.320 The government of Alberta yesterday, I got a bit nervous because I saw a headline that it was

00:16:22.300 reimposing masking restrictions in healthcare environments. But then you look at the fine

00:16:27.140 print and you realize they're really just saying, yeah, but any individual hospital can come up with

00:16:31.220 its own policy and override what was sort of a baseline that Alberta Health Services was putting

00:16:36.840 forward now whether they should have done it at all is something that you can discuss and debate

00:16:41.160 but the whole point is is that we cannot allow uh the very unscientific way government approach

00:16:47.860 these things to stand without being challenged and this is why i've been a proponent of an inquiry

00:16:53.680 and this is not to besmirch the the work that people involved with the national citizens inquiry

00:16:58.260 are doing but the final product the final report will really have no basis in law will not be a

00:17:04.860 matter of the public record in terms of the government's approach to this. So I think we do

00:17:10.520 need to have these discussions still. Kenneth Green has done a tremendous job. He is a senior

00:17:15.700 fellow with the Fraser Institute and has a piece out COVID-19 hygiene theater, masks and lockdowns,

00:17:23.140 solid science in quotation marks or science veneer. Dr. Kenneth Green joins us now. It's

00:17:29.640 good to talk to you again, Kenneth. Thanks for coming back on. Good to be with you.

00:17:33.380 You know, science is something that is not a one-size-fits-all solution, I think.

00:17:38.460 It's a process, and it's one that people will learn from and adapt,

00:17:43.520 and you bring in new evidence and you revise your hypotheses and conclusions.

00:17:47.680 The scientific process, though, I'd say took a bit of a bludgeoning over the last three years, didn't it?

00:17:52.860 It did.

00:17:53.560 And you put your finger on a very important point, which is people misunderstand what science is.

00:18:01.340 We talk about the science, and there is no such thing as the science

00:18:05.720 any more than there is the flow of water.

00:18:09.040 It's a process, right?

00:18:11.000 And so it's a process.

00:18:12.080 Really what it is, it's trial and error formalized.

00:18:16.360 It's formalized trial and error learning.

00:18:18.340 That is, you create a hypothesis, you do an experiment, you publish it,

00:18:23.260 you repeat it, you test it, you come to conclusions, you publish it,

00:18:26.060 somebody else tests that.

00:18:27.660 It's an integrated trial and error learning.

00:18:30.280 But it's not an authoritative voice. At any given time, in fact, almost all of the studies that are being done will be wrong, right? They will not be repeated and they will not be confirmed.

00:18:44.980 and so so when when people invoke this this entity of that we're following the science

00:18:51.380 that's not a thing that's a they may construct in their mind what size is at any given moment but

00:18:57.140 but it's not really a thing and the thing is governments when they did this uh created a

00:19:03.060 real problem because they they gave people the illusion that there was this fixed body of

00:19:07.700 knowledge where all people all scientists come together and say vote and say this is reality

00:19:14.020 and that the government was just following that.

00:19:19.020 But, of course, looking back,

00:19:20.560 if you actually look back at the literature that existed at the time,

00:19:23.520 the body of scientific literature, which is a real thing,

00:19:28.100 if you looked at that at the time that they were making their decisions

00:19:31.140 to impose masking, to impose social distancing,

00:19:34.120 to impose stay home, stay safe,

00:19:36.680 three months to flatten the curve,

00:19:39.120 three weeks to flatten the curve,

00:19:40.460 three months to flatten the curve,

00:19:41.660 three years to flatten the curve,

00:19:42.580 If you look back at the actual literature that was published at the time, as a group called the Cochrane Library has done formally, what you find is there was no evidence that any of those measures would reduce the transmission of COVID or the severity of COVID or the duration of COVID or which parts of the population were affected by COVID.

00:20:08.760 But the evidence was very, very, very, very weak and inconsistent, and mostly negative,

00:20:17.140 mostly that is found as the biological common sense would tell you, viruses are not affected

00:20:27.260 by much.

00:20:28.960 Viruses are a force of nature.

00:20:30.460 They're like earthquakes and tornadoes.

00:20:34.020 It's very difficult for humans to influence a virus that is passing through a population.

00:20:38.760 of any kind uh and so um yeah so so yeah i think we have a problem with regard to and i

00:20:45.960 the issue of how governments portrayed what they were doing with regard to science because they

00:20:50.920 corrupted uh science they corrupted people's understanding of science they corrupted faith

00:20:56.360 or belief in science that science is a good way of knowing uh and i think all that is all dangerous

00:21:03.400 uh because yeah this is that i might be you know i'm still i'm a scientist i have to you know have

00:21:09.320 to to i've trained in the sciences like doctorates in environmental science and i still believe

00:21:14.520 science is the best way of knowing uh how the world actually works and and empowers us to to

00:21:21.160 make the world better make a better place for the world when you bring up the trust in science i

00:21:26.360 think that's a key point here is that it's not even like in the long run what the government did

00:21:31.880 really helped it because i i think even very dutiful diligent otherwise obedient people that

00:21:37.560 wanted to follow whatever justin trudeau and theresa tam were telling them will start to get

00:21:42.280 suspicious when there can be a complete reversal like i mean the ones that we've all talked about

00:21:46.440 here are you know you don't need masks don't worry about the mask don't wear masks to everyone wear

00:21:51.080 a mask from you know border closures are racist to we have to close the border to uh you know the

00:21:56.760 the vaccine will prevent transmission too.

00:21:58.600 No, no, no, we never said it.

00:21:59.680 Like if they had approached this

00:22:01.140 with a bit more humility

00:22:02.320 and said, we are learning as we go,

00:22:05.060 this is what we think now.

00:22:06.280 And then we changed it

00:22:07.440 because this came up.

00:22:08.820 There would probably be

00:22:10.140 a little bit more forgiveness there,

00:22:11.700 but we didn't hear that.

00:22:12.820 And in fact, the efforts

00:22:14.160 that official institutions went to

00:22:17.000 to block dissent and criticism,

00:22:19.900 which as you indicated,

00:22:21.180 Kenneth, is part of the process,

00:22:23.000 just completely erodes

00:22:24.560 that they were really interested

00:22:25.720 in real science yeah i think that's right i think i think uh there was actually a breach a breach

00:22:31.480 in the wall of trust of science as an institution and particularly the idea of scientific medicine

00:22:38.900 um i don't think we'll ever recover or or the the public health agencies the the cdc the centers

00:22:45.160 with disease control u.s um environment can the the health canadian health authorities i don't

00:22:51.400 think they'll recover their reputation because it's what you said which is at a certain point

00:22:55.160 You know, there's a saying, which is, oh, somebody posted something on Twitter, Twitter X, whatever you want to call it, and as people say, they said the quiet part out loud, and they shouldn't have done that, which is they revealed their inner truth, which is that the government is not using science, and the people who are coming out saying that they were the champions of science also were stating things that would be shown to be, as you said, 180 degrees.

00:23:25.160 wrong within such a short period of time that it's undeniable to people that they you point

00:23:33.800 out the window right somebody says it's raining out you you point out the window it's not raining

00:23:39.000 there's a certain point where people can't deny that they're being misled and i think that's

00:23:43.480 happened that i think covid was was a case in that um it was of that sort where where the

00:23:50.200 the complete turnaround was so obvious and when they when they were when they finally resorted

00:23:53.880 saying the science is changing day by day even people who have no background in the sciences

00:24:01.080 have to understand or know that science because you have to do experiments you have to publish

00:24:05.960 them you have to write and so forth can't change day by day just one one quick question in closing

00:24:16.760 here kenneth i mean in politics there's a desire to move beyond this and really not to live in

00:24:21.560 2020 2021 2022 which i i'm sympathetic to in science is there still a bit of lingering

00:24:28.520 curiosity have you have your colleagues in various fields of science thought that you

00:24:32.920 know maybe we should go and look back empirically did this work did this work or have they sort of

00:24:38.840 tried to move on as well well i'm i'm not embedded at a university or in the institution of science

00:24:45.640 uh these days i'm not in which is why you're so reliable but those of us on the on the outside

00:24:51.720 tangential side who are are analysts or students of what's going on in science certainly uh think

00:24:58.040 something needs to be done and and and there are there are more and more um polls and and uh things

00:25:04.280 coming out showing that people just don't trust uh the science to the science anymore i find that

00:25:10.360 troubling and and i've said the same thing as you have or something similar to what you have which

00:25:14.360 is until there is some process of reconciliation, some process of admission by the agencies,

00:25:22.420 not just while we should have communicated better, which is, I think, the highest they've

00:25:27.140 gotten at the U.S. health agencies, while we need to communicate more and better, until there is

00:25:33.580 actually some sort of process in which they admit we were making stuff up, we were arbitrary and

00:25:39.440 capricious. We did immense damage to people's lives. Literally, probably much more damage than

00:25:45.700 COVID did. We're fired. We're fired. We're leaving this field because we can't bring anything

00:25:54.080 positive. Until there is some process of reconciliation and admission of blame,

00:25:59.960 there won't be any healing. But this goes back a long way. This goes to climate change as well,

00:26:08.700 which we've talked about in the past, which is until there's an admission that the process,

00:26:14.320 that the interpretation of actual scientific information was corrupted. And here's why,

00:26:20.520 and here's how, and here's how we're not going to do this again. You won't get a restoration

00:26:25.300 of trust. I think that's all there is to it. Very well said. The essay in the Fraser Institute

00:26:33.640 is COVID-19 Hygiene Theater, Masks and Lockdowns,

00:26:37.960 Solid Science in air quotes or scare quotes

00:26:40.620 or science veneer.

00:26:42.160 And that is by Dr. Kenneth Green.

00:26:43.720 Always a pleasure.

00:26:44.380 Thanks for coming back on.

00:26:45.700 Oh, it's good to be with you.

00:26:47.060 All right.

00:26:47.460 Thanks very much, Kenneth.

00:26:48.280 Have a wonderful rest of the week and weekend.

00:26:50.980 We have been covering over the course of the week

00:26:54.000 on this show and in True North's coverage more broadly,

00:26:58.180 the horrific terror attacks that have been taking place

00:27:01.380 against Israel and against Israelis.

00:27:03.640 And we've been covering the Canadian response to this, both from Canadian officials and also from Canadian communities, both Jewish and non-Jewish.

00:27:13.700 And well, on one hand, I think it is very easy to dismiss this for some of these people that want to have their heads in the sand about the world as just an Israel thing.

00:27:23.800 I would encourage you to look more closely.

00:27:26.260 The attacks that are taking place against Israelis are, if a lot of the rabid anti-Israel and anti-Semitic folks have their way, not going to be limited to Israel at all.

00:27:37.440 A Hamas official has actually called for a global jihad, in his words, against Jewish people around the world.

00:27:46.520 We have in London, England, schools that have said they will close tomorrow.

00:27:50.000 We've had synagogues that have had to ramp up security.

00:27:52.800 And I've not really heard from the federal government much in the way of very definitive

00:27:57.480 steps that are taking place to protect the Jewish people tomorrow in communities across

00:28:03.660 Canada.

00:28:04.520 Conservative Party of Canada Deputy Leader and Thornhill MP Melissa Lanceman joins me

00:28:09.420 now.

00:28:10.300 Melissa, let me just first and foremost say my thoughts and condolences are with your

00:28:14.840 community and your friends and family through this time.

00:28:18.040 I'm not a Jewish person.

00:28:19.380 And I'm a great ally of Israel, but I've not had to shoulder this the way Jewish people in Canada have.

00:28:25.500 How real are these concerns about tomorrow?

00:28:29.500 Well, look, I think they're a big concern from so many members in the community.

00:28:35.340 And first off, I should say thank you.

00:28:37.040 And thank you to all of those who have reached out, who, you know, don't have to say the things that they did,

00:28:44.820 but super appreciative of the thoughts and the prayers, certainly for the people on the ground.

00:28:52.600 But in our own community, there is a heightened sense of fear.

00:28:58.040 And that's exactly what these messages are intended to do.

00:29:01.620 You know, when a terrorist leader calls on something like this around the world,

00:29:07.300 its intention is to destabilize the normal daily lives of Jews living in communities abroad.

00:29:13.820 abroad and instill fear in the community. And that's exactly what it's doing.

00:29:19.780 One of the things that is so inspiring whenever Jews are targeted in attacks is the resilience

00:29:25.940 of the Jewish people. I mean, this is a community that has survived the Holocaust,

00:29:30.160 has survived numerous attacks on the existence of Israel and continued ones. This is very different

00:29:36.840 than a lot of these stories that have emerged in the last few years, both in death toll and

00:29:41.440 And I think the narrative, and I'm wondering just in general, when you see a lot of the discussions in the media and online about this, what are they missing?

00:29:50.220 Well, look, I think depending on which media you're looking at, they're missing the point entirely.

00:29:55.360 We have media in Canada that won't use the word terrorist when they talk about Hamas.

00:30:02.420 So, you know, that's a complete revision of what is happening here.

00:30:07.240 You have the sick, sadistic terrorist organization committing crimes on women, on children, on elderly Holocaust survivors, kidnapping them.

00:30:19.820 We've heard stories and frankly seen images that we've never really seen before.

00:30:25.040 You almost are watching this in real time as if you would be on a body cam if you were interested in that kind of thing.

00:30:32.460 And this is disheartening, certainly, for the community and the resilience for the community.

00:30:39.440 You're right. Throughout history, biblical history, there is instance after instance of those trying to eradicate the Jewish people.

00:30:48.540 And this genocidal terrorist group is no different.

00:30:51.800 Their goal is one goal, and that's the eradication of Israel and the eradication of Jews around the world.

00:30:57.700 The federal government has, I think, said the right things when it comes to condemning Hamas.

00:31:02.460 Justin Trudeau and your leader, Pierre Paglia, both spoke very eloquently on Monday night.

00:31:06.880 They've been unequivocal that Hamas is a terror group.

00:31:09.980 When you look at the efforts that the government has been doing, or I mean, in some cases not

00:31:14.440 been doing to help Canadians in Israel, though, tremendous doublespeak here.

00:31:19.500 I mean, on one hand, we were hearing from the foreign minister, Melanie Jolie, that

00:31:23.040 everything was hunky-dory and that the officials in Tel Aviv were working all through the weekend.

00:31:27.640 And then we find out yesterday that the embassy was, in fact, closed.

00:31:32.160 and everything was being handled out of Ottawa.

00:31:34.560 What's your take on this?

00:31:35.700 I mean, is the government doing enough to help Canadians

00:31:38.740 just this basic consular role

00:31:40.680 that global affairs is supposed to be providing?

00:31:43.800 Well, look, certainly not.

00:31:44.640 And we've managed to call and push the government.

00:31:47.900 For the people watching, they might understand.

00:31:52.260 The writing that I'm so lucky to represent

00:31:54.320 has the largest number of Jews anywhere in the country.

00:31:58.060 And at any given time,

00:32:00.540 There are tons who are visiting, studying, you know, celebrating something in Israel.

00:32:06.860 So the very fact that they would reach out to our office suggests that they're not getting the answers that they need from government.

00:32:13.300 You know, nobody on the other end of the phone, an auto standard reply saying, you know, please don't travel to Israel, to people who are in Israel, saying that the embassy is open, the embassy is closed.

00:32:24.100 Call this number.

00:32:25.240 But nobody answers.

00:32:26.240 And when you're in a situation where you are fearful, you should at the very least expect that the government is going to answer the phone.

00:32:36.040 So they were slow off the mark, slow to start.

00:32:38.860 And finally, finally, after a major push, do we have the first flights out of Canadians wanting to come home?

00:32:46.740 You mentioned that fear is the goal for Hamas and its supporters.

00:32:51.740 Just in closing, Melissa, what's your message to Jewish Canadians, but I'd say all Canadians for taking the next few days and weeks?

00:32:59.260 This is all Canadians. And I would say, you know, watch, you know, watch who has the courage to stand by their by their conviction.

00:33:06.060 Watch very carefully that the words that are used, you know, for for those in our in our own community here north of Toronto and in Jewish communities and in other communities across the country.

00:33:16.580 you know, stay vigilant and we will make sure that we continue to push on the government

00:33:22.120 to keep Canadians safe wherever they are, whether they are in Canada or they are traveling abroad

00:33:27.840 and want to get home. Deputy Conservative Leader Melissa Lansman, thank you so much for coming on

00:33:33.480 and try to stay as comfortable and as peaceful as you can in these very difficult times. Thank you.

00:33:40.020 Thanks so much. All right, thank you. That was Melissa Lansman, the Deputy Leader of the

00:33:45.100 Conservative Party. I want to move on and take a bit of a different view of this, a bigger picture

00:33:50.240 view, if I may, on this thing, because oftentimes the people who are very against Israel are against

00:33:56.880 the idea of Israel. They may say, I'm critical of this particular thing the Israeli government

00:34:02.380 has done. And as I've said, that's absolutely a fair discussion or criticism. But really what

00:34:07.500 they're doing is masking what is at its core a contempt and an opposition to the existence

00:34:13.640 of Israel. And this is where the term anti-Zionist is often being used as a substitute for anti-Semitic

00:34:21.380 because someone is trying to cloak their genuine beliefs here. And it's amazing how often this is

00:34:27.580 kind of cloaked in human rights language, the language of human rights. No, we're not

00:34:31.980 anti-Semitic. We're just supporting human rights for Palestinians. Well, my next guest knows human

00:34:37.920 rights in an international context very well. Sarah Teach is an international human rights

00:34:42.720 lawyer. She is with the Macdonald Laurier Institute. She's also the co-founder and

00:34:47.560 executive director of Human Rights Action Group. Sarah, good to talk to you. Thanks for coming on

00:34:53.260 today. Just let's start there for a moment, because we often hear human rights, I think,

00:34:58.800 appropriated by people that have a very anti-Israel view. Right, absolutely. I think what we're seeing

00:35:06.660 come to the fore, especially now, is a lot of human rights defenders are not actually approaching

00:35:11.920 human rights in a principled way. Because if they were, they would be against these human rights

00:35:16.380 violations that Hamas has been committing. And when you talk about that, I mean, we're all

00:35:23.360 seeing these images, which I'm not sharing on this program. People that want to can go and look them

00:35:28.420 up. And there's a huge amount of denialism. And, you know, I bring this into the context of

00:35:33.240 Holocaust history, and we wonder how could anyone deny the Holocaust? Well, look at what people are

00:35:37.540 doing in real time to deny Holocaust atrocities when we have a much more information, data and

00:35:43.880 photographic evidence in real time than we did about the Holocaust. Right. And we're seeing

00:35:50.020 people deny things that are undeniable at this point. We have videos, we have photos of the

00:35:55.100 crimes. There are photos of tiny corpses and people are still denying like in a widespread

00:36:01.100 manner on social media this, that the beheaded babies are calling that a myth. They're calling

00:36:05.680 that false information. I'm not even sure how you do that when you have photographic evidence.

00:36:11.060 One of the distinctions that we often hear is that, okay, you know, your issue is with Hamas,

00:36:16.480 not with the Palestinian people. And I think there is an important distinction there. Israeli

00:36:20.520 citizens are not the same as IDF soldiers. Hamas militants are not the same as individual people

00:36:26.340 in Gaza that have nothing to do with this conflict. But on both sides, casualties are caught up in

00:36:32.080 this. I mean, you look at Israel's response to Gaza right now, cutting off access to water,

00:36:37.320 electricity. I know that's being criticized by human rights activists. And I was wondering what

00:36:41.720 your take on that is. Right. I mean, I think that that's only going to get worse, frankly. And it's

00:36:46.900 heartbreaking. It is devastating to see photos of Gaza babies who are innocent being pulled from

00:36:51.700 the rubble. I think what folks need to remember, and I think this is the message that's sort of

00:36:55.700 already getting lost, is that it's Hamas that has responsibility for this. And when calls are

00:37:00.920 coming up for de-escalation by Jolie and others, it's almost not taking into consideration that

00:37:06.420 there are still 150 plus hostages in Gaza. It's not possible to de-escalate unless and until

00:37:14.360 Hamas releases those hostages. Well, yeah, and I think that de-escalation has become another one

00:37:20.260 of these words that seems to be a euphemism now, because when people are talking about de-escalation,

00:37:25.960 And they're not calling for Hamas de-escalation because Hamas was the one that escalated.

00:37:31.000 And by that, I mean, just created this conflict, I mean, in terms of the latest iteration of

00:37:36.100 it with its attack on Saturday, an attack for which it's been quite proud and has talked

00:37:40.940 about expanding and doing more of.

00:37:43.100 And I think that's the important part that's also missing, is that Israel unilaterally

00:37:48.380 withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

00:37:50.620 That is as de-escalatory as it gets, but has it diffused the conflict? No.

00:37:57.060 No, not at all. And you see this sort of messaging come out of pro-Israel accounts and Israel

00:38:02.440 government as well, that when Israel pulled out of Gaza, the Palestinian people in charge at the

00:38:07.980 time, which was not Hamas right away, they had this opportunity to build up Gaza like a modern

00:38:13.080 day Singapore or Dubai. And they've received so much money in international aid. And instead,

00:38:18.780 all that money has been funneled into Hamas leadership. The head of Hamas lives in a villa

00:38:22.920 in Qatar. He's not even there. He lives the life of luxury. And this money is going towards building

00:38:27.780 tunnels, collecting weapons that are then used to attack innocent Israelis. And, you know, there's

00:38:33.180 again, when you criticize the Israeli blockade, well, what about Egypt, right? There's also a

00:38:36.960 border with Egypt and Egypt has not let in the Palestinians through their border as well. So

00:38:41.160 there's a lot of misinformation here, a lot of misplaced blame. And certainly Hamas does not

00:38:46.840 have the best interests of Palestinians at heart. Yeah. And I think that's where oftentimes people

00:38:51.940 don't look enough at the other Arab countries that have made their own decisions on this, which

00:38:55.900 again, domestic considerations play into as well, but they have a similar, I'm trying to be very

00:39:02.840 careful with my language here, but a lot of Arab countries have not done anything to support

00:39:07.400 Palestinian people in a humanitarian way, but they love to point the finger at Israel and say that

00:39:12.320 it's the source of all the problems. Right. No one's blaming Egypt for locking down their border.

00:39:17.340 No one. I haven't seen that anywhere. No. And Israel and Egypt, for its part, has been kind

00:39:23.500 of instigating in its way by saying, oh, yes, we warned Israel and we did this and did that.

00:39:29.000 Moving on from this, I mean, the international community loves to crap on Israel. I mean,

00:39:33.660 it's one of the United Nations favorite pastimes. And at a certain point, I mean, what outcome can

00:39:39.020 there be, but for Israel to disengage from a lot of these institutions. And I think the lack of

00:39:44.500 nuance, I mean, from all the people that like to call for nuance, the lack of nuance they've given

00:39:48.300 about the situation has been quite shocking. Right. I mean, I don't know about disassociating

00:39:53.600 from the institutions. I do still believe that those institutions are important, but certainly

00:39:57.780 Israel cannot listen and will not listen to calls for de-escalation at this time. And if you see

00:40:02.560 that coming out of the EU, the United Nations, when Israel has 150 plus hostages in the territory,

00:40:08.900 There's no way that they're listening.

00:40:10.200 And frankly, they shouldn't.

00:40:12.680 What's, I mean, no one has the crystal ball here.

00:40:15.300 But if you were to see where this is going to go, I mean, Hamas is not showing signs

00:40:19.500 of de-escalating on its part.

00:40:21.200 Israel has to, cannot just sit down and say, and just let it happen in the interest of

00:40:26.000 a quote unquote de-escalation.

00:40:27.740 So where does this go?

00:40:29.180 I mean, I don't see a lot of outs here.

00:40:31.640 No, that's the heartbreaking part of this all is that Hamas, because they don't care

00:40:35.340 about their own people. I don't see a realistic possibility that they're just going to give back

00:40:40.600 the hostages. Because frankly, if they did, I think Israel would back right down. I mean,

00:40:44.420 this is what Israel cares about at the end of the day is the hostages. And Hamas knows this,

00:40:48.640 and they're taking advantage of this, right? So if Hamas continues to hold on to the hostages,

00:40:53.160 Israel cannot back down. Israel cannot look away from its people and not try to get those people

00:40:57.140 back. And it's the Palestinian civilians that are going to pay the heavy price.

00:41:01.620 Yeah, very well said.

00:41:03.300 Sarah Teach is an international human rights lawyer

00:41:05.700 and co-founder of Human Rights Action Group.

00:41:08.560 Sarah, thank you for coming on today.

00:41:10.440 Thank you so much for having me.

00:41:11.880 All right.

00:41:12.580 You know, I shared this a little bit

00:41:14.200 at the beginning of the week

00:41:15.660 and I've been, to be honest,

00:41:17.320 trying to find the time and energy

00:41:19.420 and emotional strength to put this all in writing.

00:41:23.980 And I'm finally doing it

00:41:25.360 and I'm gonna have a newsletter out this afternoon.

00:41:27.160 So if you are subscribed to my Substack, you'll see it.

00:41:29.820 If you're not, you can get subscribed now.

00:41:31.660 It's at andrewlaughton.substack.com.

00:41:34.160 But to give you a bit of a primer on this,

00:41:36.740 if you have not gathered in the last three days,

00:41:39.540 Israel is a country that has deep meaning to me

00:41:42.240 and not because of my Jewish faith,

00:41:44.740 although certainly my Christian faith

00:41:46.220 has played a significant role

00:41:48.280 in my relationship with Israel,

00:41:50.040 but also my understanding and appreciation for history

00:41:54.420 and for the complexities of the world

00:41:56.240 and for the human story of Israel.

00:41:59.220 I was chatting about this with Melissa Lansman a few moments ago.

00:42:02.320 The one recurring theme throughout history is anti-Semitism, but the corollary to that

00:42:07.720 is resilience.

00:42:08.920 Resilience is an absolutely essential and pervasive part of the Jewish story.

00:42:15.560 And I have no doubt whatsoever that Israel will survive this, that the Jewish people

00:42:20.960 will survive it.

00:42:22.100 But it's important to look around and see all the people who are not contributing to

00:42:26.600 the attacks on Israel with their rockets or their knives or their guns, but the people who are

00:42:32.500 contributing with their words. And I'm looking at a lot of you that occupy positions of leadership

00:42:38.160 and power in universities and unions in governments who are very morally indistinct

00:42:44.800 from Hamas. You may not be violent, but you share the same goal, which is an utter contempt

00:42:49.620 and disdain for the beacon of light in the Middle East. So I'll leave you with that. More of my

00:42:56.420 thoughts coming out in that sub stack and we'll have more coverage over the weekend at true north

00:43:01.120 to the jewish people watching and listening shabbat shalom i hope you have a very safe weekend and to

00:43:06.660 all canadians thank you god bless and good day to you all thanks for listening to the andrew

00:43:11.940 Lawn Show. Support the program by donating to True North at www.tnc.news.

00:43:41.940 We'll be right back.

00:44:11.940 We'll be right back.

00:44:41.940 Thank you.

Juno News - October 12, 2023

Air travel Covid vaccine mandate is back in court

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript