Juno News - June 09, 2021


Trudeau won’t stay at a government quarantine hotel. Why should anyone else?


Episode Stats


Length

20 minutes

Words per minute

180.40851

Word count

3,692

Sentence count

199

Harmful content

Misogyny

2

sentences flagged

Hate speech

6

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Justin Trudeau will be visiting the United Kingdom later this week, and the government has designated a hotel in Ottawa as a quarantine facility for him and his delegation to stay in while he's there. But what does that have to do with the rest of us? And why should he be quarantined in a hotel?

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 You're tuned in to The Andrew Lund Show.
00:00:09.200 Christian Freeland is not the only person over in the UK right now.
00:00:13.060 Justin Trudeau will be joining later this week.
00:00:15.260 Mark Garneau was there a couple of weeks ago.
00:00:17.100 This is one of the biggest multilateral events to take place in person this year.
00:00:22.340 And the first, in fact, that Canada has participated in in quite a while, as I understand it.
00:00:26.920 And the government has been extolling the virtues of in-person multilateral diplomacy.
00:00:32.120 And by the way, I agree with it.
00:00:33.780 Certain things you cannot replicate on a Zoom screen, especially in a diplomatic context.
00:00:39.760 But the problem is that Canadians like you and like me are still being told,
00:00:44.620 any travel we want to do isn't all that important.
00:00:47.620 We shouldn't be leaving the country, but they can. 0.98
00:00:51.300 And politicians are, by the way, exempt from quarantine.
00:00:54.200 They're exempt from hotel quarantine.
00:00:55.880 But Justin Trudeau is choosing to do a hotel quarantine just to prove the point that this
00:01:02.200 is the way we should all be doing things.
00:01:04.540 Except there's a problem.
00:01:06.080 One of the restrictions the federal government put in place was to ensure that international 1.00
00:01:11.140 flights could only enter the country through four airports.
00:01:14.440 And it was hotels around those four airports, Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, and Vancouver,
00:01:19.640 that had to be converted to these government-approved accommodations.
00:01:23.300 Well, there aren't any in Ottawa, which is where Justin Trudeau's plane is going to be flying into.
00:01:29.540 So just to prove that Trudeau is willing to play by the rules, they're taking over an Ottawa hotel
00:01:34.560 and turning it into a government quarantine facility that Justin Trudeau and his handlers and other staff
00:01:41.340 and even some media will have to stay at.
00:01:43.720 But it's theatrical. It's fake. It's not a real quarantine hotel.
00:01:48.040 It's just being done to appease the peasants, which is so central to the government's insistence
00:01:54.000 that this is all how a normal functioning society is supposed to work.
00:01:58.440 I want to talk about this with Michelle Rempel-Garner, who says that the hotel quarantine in Ottawa is not enough.
00:02:04.480 She joins me on the line now.
00:02:06.140 Michelle, good to talk to you. Thanks for coming on today.
00:02:09.080 Likewise. Thanks for having me.
00:02:10.220 So your motion, which you put before the House of Commons, was to force Justin Trudeau and his delegation
00:02:16.120 to quarantine at one of his designated hotel quarantine sites that every other Canadian's been subjected to,
00:02:23.120 rather than this special Ottawa hotel arrangement that's being set up.
00:02:27.980 When push comes to shove, why does it matter if he's going through the motions
00:02:31.040 and quarantining in a hotel upon return?
00:02:35.120 Oh, let me count the ways, Andrew.
00:02:37.020 First of all, there are tens of thousands of Canadians who are separated from loved ones
00:02:42.680 by border restrictions, and they can't afford the quarantine hotel system, number one.
00:02:50.920 Number two, there have been reports of sexual assaults at these hotels.
00:02:55.600 There have been reports of COVID-19 outbreaks.
00:02:58.480 And the government's own panel of scientists has said that this program should be scrapped.
00:03:05.520 So, you know, the elitism of, well, I'm not going to stay at the regular hotel.
00:03:13.240 I need to shut down an Ottawa area hotel to do this.
00:03:16.600 It's ridiculous.
00:03:18.100 It's theatre at the taxpayer expense.
00:03:20.700 And I just think it's probably one of the most bourgeois things that he's done.
00:03:28.020 I had the department officials at Health Committee today.
00:03:31.600 I encourage you to have a look at that.
00:03:33.520 I asked a couple of the deputy minister-level folks,
00:03:39.080 well, you know, what's different about the prime minister's security
00:03:42.260 as opposed to a woman who's allegedly been sexually assaulted at a quarantine hotel.
00:03:47.540 And their response was just so removed from reality and actually disgusting.
00:03:56.100 The prime minister should not be travelling if he's not going to stay at a quarantine hotel
00:04:00.760 like everybody else, or he should scrap the program,
00:04:03.680 which he should have done a long time ago.
00:04:05.660 Yeah, this is the government that famously said back in 2015 when first elected
00:04:10.720 that it was going to be evidence-driven, unlike those conservatives.
00:04:13.760 We're going to listen to the evidence and listen to the science.
00:04:16.180 And time and time again, when the so-called science doesn't align with their policy objectives,
00:04:21.460 there's always a reason for why they aren't following it.
00:04:24.280 And this report that came out a little while ago is a great example of this.
00:04:28.500 The government's given no concession that the report might be valid,
00:04:32.340 even though they were the ones that put it together.
00:04:33.940 They've just been downplaying it and talking about all the reasons why,
00:04:37.420 well, you know, we'll take it into consideration.
00:04:39.300 It's just an interim report when it says the hotel quarantine simply doesn't do anything.
00:04:44.840 Yeah, great points and a few things to build on from that.
00:04:48.520 First of all, I've heard rumours from a few well-placed sources
00:04:52.140 that the government was actually in possession of that report for a long period of time,
00:04:56.920 that they actually renewed the hotel quarantine program
00:04:59.380 while being in possession of that report and sitting on it.
00:05:03.580 You know, I think that's something that needs to be looked into
00:05:06.420 based on what you just said, that the government isn't making science-based decisions.
00:05:11.540 And just furthering that, I have asked department officials numerous times
00:05:16.640 to publish data that shows that this quarantine hotel system
00:05:21.280 is better at preventing the spread of COVID
00:05:23.260 than any number of other options, including at-home quarantine.
00:05:26.780 They can never provide that.
00:05:27.800 Bluntly put, Trudeau failed to close the border when it counted in early 2020.
00:05:33.560 And the hotel quarantine program was just put in place, I believe,
00:05:37.940 to discourage middle-class Canadians from travelling
00:05:40.580 to make it cost-ineffective,
00:05:43.080 because it's sure not stopping NHL players and rich people
00:05:46.200 from getting special exemptions.
00:05:47.520 It's sure not stopping Justin Trudeau from travelling abroad.
00:05:50.460 And that entitlement, that elitism, that stratification of social class
00:05:57.000 under the guise of public health orders is disgusting.
00:06:00.380 And I hope that Canadians of all political stripes
00:06:02.960 hold him to account for it.
00:06:04.840 You are right about the elitism, not just in hotel quarantine, 0.93
00:06:08.400 but in general with a lot of the travel restrictions,
00:06:11.140 because we've seen that people who have money can get around it.
00:06:15.080 You know, they can fly with a private jet into an airport
00:06:17.560 that's not one of those main four.
00:06:19.180 They can pay for the hotel quarantine if they need to.
00:06:22.080 They can do these bizarre arrangements like driving to a border
00:06:25.540 and taking a helicopter over that we heard of happening in Ontario and Quebec.
00:06:29.540 And politicians in the same boat.
00:06:31.220 They're telling Canadians that their travel is not essential
00:06:34.220 no matter why they want to do it or how important it is.
00:06:36.900 But when they're doing something abroad,
00:06:38.640 whether it's a G7 summit or something else, it's essential.
00:06:42.360 And there is a double standard there.
00:06:44.160 And admittedly, I'm not one who's saying don't travel.
00:06:46.660 I'm saying that if they're telling people not to travel,
00:06:49.880 they should be playing by the same rules.
00:06:52.360 How is an NHL player traveling into Canada more essential than,
00:06:59.120 you know, I had a constituent in tears call me
00:07:01.340 about how his cross-border relationship is in very difficult times,
00:07:07.500 has family members that are sick.
00:07:09.640 How is that travel more essential?
00:07:11.040 It's just complete, you know, I was going to use an expletive.
00:07:15.260 It's just so bad.
00:07:19.420 The program needs to end.
00:07:21.200 And at this point in time,
00:07:22.600 the federal government should be putting forward benchmarks
00:07:25.000 for safe reopening and lifting of federal restrictions
00:07:28.360 as it pertains to the border.
00:07:29.680 They can do that while at the same time doing something
00:07:31.740 that they've also completely failed on,
00:07:33.600 which is putting in place a system to detect pathogens
00:07:38.060 that are like might have a significant impact on Canada,
00:07:42.360 like COVID variants of concern.
00:07:44.700 Why did the COVID, the Delta variant,
00:07:47.040 that's what they're calling it, I believe, in India,
00:07:49.200 was detected in October.
00:07:51.480 And then they only banned flights from there,
00:07:54.240 what, about a month ago?
00:07:55.540 What is like, how does that happen?
00:07:57.940 So it's just nonsensical.
00:07:59.880 I also actually condemn the, you know,
00:08:03.300 some of the senior level officials
00:08:04.800 that are giving the government advice on this.
00:08:07.340 They're so disconnected from reality.
00:08:08.940 But the buck stops with these ministers
00:08:10.700 and the prime minister who are living
00:08:13.560 by one different set of rules for themselves
00:08:16.180 than everybody else.
00:08:18.300 And I hope that people realize that,
00:08:20.100 that this is an entitled elitist system
00:08:24.180 from an out-of-touch government
00:08:25.500 and from a prime minister who thinks
00:08:27.120 it's more important to go to, you know,
00:08:28.820 to travel abroad when no one else can,
00:08:31.600 rather than fix the system first.
00:08:33.280 He should have done that.
00:08:33.980 He's making people pay tax dollars
00:08:36.440 so that he can stay in a bougie hotel in Ottawa for optics.
00:08:42.480 If he's so committed to the hotel quarantine system,
00:08:45.000 maybe he should stay in one of those rooms
00:08:46.560 that don't have a lock
00:08:47.560 that other women have had to be subjected to. 0.97
00:08:49.780 If his security is so important,
00:08:51.160 maybe he could just fix the system for everybody.
00:08:53.820 Very well said.
00:08:54.860 Conservative health critic Michelle Rempel-Garner,
00:08:57.160 always a pleasure.
00:08:57.820 Thank you, Michelle.
00:08:58.820 Thank you.
00:08:59.820 I want to turn from the political side of this
00:09:02.160 to the legal side of this.
00:09:03.500 Last week, I was tied up for three days.
00:09:05.840 I say tied up.
00:09:06.580 I enjoy doing it.
00:09:07.560 And I wasn't nearly as tied up as the people
00:09:09.160 that were actually participating in the Zoom call.
00:09:11.540 But in a federal court Zoom hearing,
00:09:13.920 as the constitutionality of the hotel quarantine
00:09:16.560 was being challenged,
00:09:18.360 there were a number of applicants,
00:09:19.600 most of them represented by the Justice Center
00:09:21.800 for Constitutional Freedoms.
00:09:23.060 But our friends at Rebel and Kian Bextie
00:09:25.780 were also putting their claims forward,
00:09:28.040 arguing that this federal hotel quarantine program
00:09:31.480 is not constitutional.
00:09:33.620 And also, basically, that it doesn't work.
00:09:36.520 The effectiveness, or lack thereof,
00:09:38.660 became very central to the hearing as well.
00:09:41.280 I want to bring in Sia Hassan, 0.99
00:09:43.120 who is a lawyer with the Justice Center
00:09:44.700 for Constitutional Freedoms
00:09:45.940 and was one of the two primary litigators
00:09:48.220 on this case for the JCCF.
00:09:50.780 Sia, thanks for coming on.
00:09:52.080 Great to talk to you.
00:09:53.120 Thank you so much for having me.
00:09:54.660 Now, we've seen an injunction
00:09:56.560 on this question before.
00:09:58.040 This is really the first time
00:09:59.620 that in a full hearing on the merits,
00:10:02.240 we've had the constitutionality of this
00:10:04.540 attested, isn't it?
00:10:06.240 That's correct.
00:10:07.020 Yes, the Justice Center brought a constant,
00:10:09.220 an injunction hearing
00:10:10.280 where we were not successful.
00:10:11.980 But the judge found that there were serious issues
00:10:14.940 to be tried when it came to Section 7
00:10:17.020 and 9 of the Charter.
00:10:18.220 And then we were able to have the full hearing
00:10:21.420 on the merits of our charter argument.
00:10:24.280 The premise of this program,
00:10:26.240 I know I've talked about it on the show in the past,
00:10:28.180 is that in January,
00:10:29.980 the government of Canada said,
00:10:31.480 we've got all these variants coming in.
00:10:33.180 Our travel measures that we have in place
00:10:35.100 now aren't working.
00:10:36.220 So we're going to force anyone 0.96
00:10:37.880 who comes into the country by air
00:10:39.540 to stay in a hotel near the airport
00:10:41.940 for three days to get a test.
00:10:44.060 And then at the end of that three days,
00:10:45.560 they can continue on home
00:10:46.900 and complete their quarantine.
00:10:48.980 What's really the basis of your arguments?
00:10:51.380 And what is it that your applicants
00:10:52.900 are actually fighting for?
00:10:55.160 We brought quite a,
00:10:56.880 we were challenging quite a few
00:10:58.440 of the charter sections,
00:11:00.100 but really the main area is the detention.
00:11:03.400 So under Section 7,
00:11:04.900 we have the right to liberty
00:11:06.300 and security of person.
00:11:07.640 And under Section 9,
00:11:08.800 we have the right
00:11:09.460 not to be arbitrarily detained.
00:11:11.240 And really the focus was on the fact
00:11:13.500 that people that are forced
00:11:14.680 into these government-mandated hotels,
00:11:17.000 they're being detained against their will.
00:11:18.740 They are not going there voluntarily.
00:11:21.320 And of course,
00:11:21.860 we raised the issue
00:11:22.680 that once you're detained,
00:11:23.820 you're entitled to speak to counsel,
00:11:25.580 which is also a right
00:11:26.700 that is being violated
00:11:27.720 during these quarantine hotels
00:11:30.660 when this is going forward.
00:11:33.020 So those are,
00:11:33.600 those were some of the issues
00:11:34.880 that we raised.
00:11:35.920 I was tuned in
00:11:37.100 for the majority of the hearing.
00:11:39.000 And at one point,
00:11:40.160 the federal government's lawyer
00:11:41.520 was saying that,
00:11:42.900 well, it's not arbitrary
00:11:43.780 because everyone is getting it to,
00:11:46.360 everyone's subjected to it.
00:11:48.100 And you have people
00:11:49.680 that are coming into the country
00:11:50.960 that know this is going to happen.
00:11:52.680 Is the government admitting
00:11:54.860 that this is detention
00:11:56.020 when they make that argument,
00:11:57.460 when they just focus
00:11:58.220 on the arbitrary part?
00:12:00.740 No, I don't think they were admitting
00:12:02.200 any part of the detention.
00:12:03.580 In fact, they argued
00:12:04.280 that it was a frivolous argument.
00:12:06.640 But the argument,
00:12:08.420 there's two parts to detention.
00:12:09.960 So first,
00:12:10.480 you have to actually
00:12:11.320 either be physically
00:12:12.120 or psychologically detained.
00:12:13.820 And they argued
00:12:14.520 that once you're at the airport
00:12:15.880 and you're being mandated
00:12:17.640 to go to these quarantine hotels
00:12:19.460 and or the quarantine facilities,
00:12:21.340 you are detained.
00:12:22.580 And then the second part
00:12:23.720 is that it has to be arbitrary.
00:12:26.060 And the arbitrary argument,
00:12:27.480 there's quite a few arguments to it.
00:12:29.080 But one of them
00:12:29.940 is the fact that
00:12:30.820 there's only a small number
00:12:32.760 of people actually
00:12:33.620 who are being subject
00:12:34.460 to the quarantine hotels.
00:12:35.700 75% of the international travelers
00:12:38.720 who come to Canada
00:12:39.620 are completely exempt
00:12:40.960 from the quarantine hotel.
00:12:42.700 So their focus is only
00:12:43.940 on 25% of the international travelers.
00:12:47.260 That in itself,
00:12:48.100 we argued,
00:12:48.640 was arbitrary.
00:12:49.720 The fact that
00:12:50.380 the land travelers
00:12:51.280 are being treated differently
00:12:52.540 than the air travelers,
00:12:54.240 those types of things
00:12:55.060 make the detention arbitrary.
00:12:57.160 At one point,
00:12:57.960 when you talk about
00:12:58.720 how few people
00:13:00.240 of overall travelers
00:13:01.600 are subjected to this,
00:13:02.680 one thought that comes to mind
00:13:03.740 is that a lot of people
00:13:05.020 are simply not traveling
00:13:06.500 because they don't want
00:13:07.600 to be subjected to this.
00:13:08.880 And it seems as though
00:13:10.280 the government has put in place
00:13:11.660 a lot of these measures
00:13:12.720 not because the measures
00:13:14.280 themselves work,
00:13:15.600 but because they're trying
00:13:16.780 to make travel
00:13:17.740 so convoluted
00:13:19.900 and so costly
00:13:20.940 for people
00:13:21.440 that they don't do it.
00:13:22.260 They're trying to discourage travel,
00:13:23.640 it looks like.
00:13:24.520 And if that is,
00:13:25.640 in fact,
00:13:25.980 the case,
00:13:27.000 that's not a selling point
00:13:29.400 on a constitutional defense
00:13:30.900 for the government.
00:13:31.540 Because as I understand it,
00:13:33.740 any limitation
00:13:34.400 of constitutional freedoms
00:13:35.540 has to be very pointed
00:13:36.600 and very directly tied
00:13:38.440 to the policy objective,
00:13:40.040 which if it is just a part
00:13:41.480 of discouraging it,
00:13:42.580 it really isn't tied.
00:13:44.300 Well, the government
00:13:45.260 is arguing that
00:13:46.160 the reason for these measures
00:13:47.640 is to limit the importation
00:13:49.920 of the variants.
00:13:51.540 But you're absolutely on point.
00:13:53.400 And one of the other arguments
00:13:54.580 we made was the Section 6.1 argument,
00:13:57.000 which is your chartered right
00:13:58.260 to enter Canada freely
00:13:59.820 and be able to leave freely.
00:14:01.740 And when you put in place,
00:14:02.880 when the government
00:14:03.360 puts in place measures
00:14:05.280 that prevent people
00:14:06.480 from traveling
00:14:07.280 or makes it difficult
00:14:08.360 for them to come back,
00:14:09.860 that violates their charter rights
00:14:11.540 under Section 6.1
00:14:12.760 because the measures
00:14:15.140 are very restrictive
00:14:17.660 and they violate a lot of people
00:14:20.660 to enter.
00:14:21.160 It just makes it
00:14:21.720 a lot more difficult.
00:14:23.000 And they argue
00:14:23.520 that that was also
00:14:24.480 against Section 6.1
00:14:25.940 of the charter.
00:14:26.500 Anyone who's ever followed
00:14:29.180 any of these constitutional arguments
00:14:30.840 in Canada in any case
00:14:32.400 knows that we, of course,
00:14:33.760 have Section 1 of the charter,
00:14:35.140 which subjects
00:14:35.800 all of the subsequent charter rights
00:14:37.480 to so-called reasonable limits.
00:14:39.880 And in a lot of contexts,
00:14:41.900 this means, I would fear,
00:14:43.700 that if the government
00:14:44.360 can say the program's working,
00:14:46.440 a court could find
00:14:47.620 that the limitation
00:14:48.660 of freedoms would be limited.
00:14:50.240 Is that where you feel
00:14:51.400 this case is headed,
00:14:53.220 where the court may concede,
00:14:54.700 yes, rights are being violated,
00:14:56.640 but the limitation is justified
00:14:58.840 because of X, Y, Z,
00:15:00.480 when you're talking about
00:15:01.320 the variance or importation risk
00:15:03.380 and so on?
00:15:04.700 Well, we're hoping
00:15:05.400 the court will not find that,
00:15:06.880 that they will find
00:15:07.660 that these limits
00:15:08.460 are not justified
00:15:09.380 under Section 1.
00:15:10.800 But that's probably
00:15:11.960 where things are going to turn.
00:15:13.940 And we were before
00:15:15.220 the Chief Justice, Crampton,
00:15:16.900 and he was actually
00:15:17.700 very concerned about the evidence
00:15:19.140 and he was asking the Crown,
00:15:20.800 you know,
00:15:21.020 where's the evidence for this
00:15:22.260 and where's the evidence for that?
00:15:23.540 So he was very alive to the issue
00:15:25.240 and I take comfort
00:15:27.260 in the fact that
00:15:28.060 he was asking questions
00:15:29.420 and he wanted to know
00:15:30.500 where the evidence was.
00:15:32.460 So I thought
00:15:33.740 that was a good sign.
00:15:35.140 Yeah, and one point
00:15:36.040 that I found very interesting
00:15:37.660 and the government lawyers
00:15:38.960 did not really seem
00:15:40.040 to have an answer for it
00:15:41.260 was,
00:15:42.500 and just for people
00:15:43.300 that haven't come
00:15:43.920 into the country under this,
00:15:44.900 you might not know this,
00:15:45.740 but you go to the hotel quarantine,
00:15:47.200 you get a COVID test.
00:15:48.460 At the end of your three days,
00:15:50.140 if your test is positive,
00:15:51.600 more often than not,
00:15:53.280 you still continue home
00:15:54.860 exactly as you would have
00:15:56.700 if your test came back negative
00:15:58.360 and you still go into
00:15:59.580 14-day quarantine
00:16:00.600 exactly as if your test
00:16:01.900 was negative.
00:16:03.400 And in doing so,
00:16:04.820 the government has really made it
00:16:06.220 so there's not
00:16:06.760 a substantive difference,
00:16:08.320 which makes me question
00:16:09.800 and I would hope
00:16:10.340 makes anyone question,
00:16:11.680 okay, well,
00:16:12.220 what's the point of this all?
00:16:13.580 And the judge had asked,
00:16:14.940 I know,
00:16:15.440 at a couple of points
00:16:16.300 for more information about that
00:16:17.880 and the government
00:16:18.280 didn't really seem
00:16:18.920 to have the data
00:16:19.720 on how many people
00:16:20.620 have actually not been permitted
00:16:22.260 to go right home
00:16:23.080 even with a positive test result.
00:16:25.280 And, you know,
00:16:25.900 at one point,
00:16:26.440 it seemed like the lawyer
00:16:27.760 for the government of Canada
00:16:28.820 had said,
00:16:29.400 well, you know,
00:16:30.180 if you know you're positive,
00:16:31.580 your mindset will be different
00:16:32.980 when you're in quarantine,
00:16:33.960 which again,
00:16:34.500 doesn't seem like
00:16:35.800 the most selling argument
00:16:37.400 for them.
00:16:38.920 Definitely.
00:16:39.620 And that was,
00:16:40.320 I mean,
00:16:40.600 I think they argued
00:16:41.440 a lot of points,
00:16:42.800 but one of them was,
00:16:43.860 yes,
00:16:44.020 the government is arguing
00:16:45.240 that if you know
00:16:46.000 that you're positive,
00:16:46.820 then you will have
00:16:47.820 a different mindset.
00:16:48.960 Well,
00:16:49.140 the argument was,
00:16:50.040 where's the evidence for this?
00:16:51.480 It certainly wasn't
00:16:52.240 in any of the affidavits.
00:16:53.580 It just,
00:16:54.080 it was something
00:16:54.820 that one of the Appian
00:16:56.160 stated in her cross-examination.
00:16:58.680 And so that was something
00:16:59.800 that we challenged.
00:17:01.340 And certainly,
00:17:02.420 it doesn't appear
00:17:03.080 that they are collecting data
00:17:04.560 with respect to
00:17:05.300 how many people
00:17:05.980 who test positive
00:17:07.160 get to go home
00:17:08.020 versus who is being directed
00:17:09.540 to the quarantine facility.
00:17:12.340 Now,
00:17:12.920 I know that this was,
00:17:13.900 again,
00:17:14.080 a three-day long hearing.
00:17:15.720 There were thousands
00:17:16.440 and thousands
00:17:17.020 of pages of evidence.
00:17:18.800 It's entirely possible
00:17:20.280 that the program could end
00:17:22.380 if the government
00:17:22.940 ends the program
00:17:23.840 before a decision
00:17:25.180 comes from the court.
00:17:26.600 But if that happens,
00:17:27.720 is it still important
00:17:28.700 in your eyes
00:17:29.420 that this be found
00:17:30.500 unconstitutional?
00:17:32.320 Absolutely.
00:17:33.200 I think it's very important
00:17:34.660 because this is the first time
00:17:36.240 in post-charter history
00:17:37.740 where the government
00:17:38.780 is forcing people
00:17:40.940 into quarantine,
00:17:41.880 essentially detaining
00:17:42.860 people en masse.
00:17:44.160 And if this is found
00:17:46.580 to be constitutional,
00:17:48.000 I think it's going to be,
00:17:48.960 it's going to set
00:17:49.700 a very dangerous precedent
00:17:51.040 because moving forward,
00:17:52.660 the government
00:17:53.120 can continue to do so.
00:17:55.240 Versus if the courts
00:17:56.160 put a stop to it now,
00:17:57.820 they will not be able
00:17:58.840 to use that later on
00:17:59.940 in other emergency contexts.
00:18:02.920 Yeah, and this is,
00:18:04.560 I think, a very important point,
00:18:05.940 Sia, because we know 1.00
00:18:06.820 that, yes, this is
00:18:07.720 a once-in-a-lifetime problem
00:18:09.620 that we're dealing with now,
00:18:10.760 we certainly hope,
00:18:11.780 as far as COVID,
00:18:12.700 but the very nature
00:18:14.280 of the circumstances
00:18:15.660 under which governments
00:18:16.540 wish to suspend liberties,
00:18:18.040 which is situations
00:18:19.200 of emergency,
00:18:20.160 are the circumstances
00:18:21.220 in which it's most important
00:18:22.500 to preserve
00:18:23.500 and protect liberties.
00:18:24.580 I mean, the right
00:18:25.200 to enter the country
00:18:25.960 without detention
00:18:26.720 is, for the most part,
00:18:28.460 not a right
00:18:29.420 that is challenged
00:18:30.260 on a day-to-day basis
00:18:31.580 under normal circumstances.
00:18:32.920 So this idea
00:18:34.200 that an emergency
00:18:35.060 is a trump card
00:18:36.480 that you can use
00:18:37.200 to suspend the charter
00:18:38.140 is simply not accurate
00:18:40.000 and very dangerous
00:18:41.340 of a presumption
00:18:42.200 by the government,
00:18:42.940 I'd say.
00:18:43.940 Absolutely,
00:18:44.720 and that's what we told
00:18:45.780 the Chief Justice
00:18:47.160 that it's exactly
00:18:48.480 during these times
00:18:49.540 the emergencies
00:18:50.240 when charter rights
00:18:51.920 are being violated.
00:18:53.060 So it's very important
00:18:53.980 for the courts
00:18:54.680 to be vigilant
00:18:55.400 and to be the gatekeepers
00:18:56.800 and ensure that the government
00:18:58.160 isn't violating our charts
00:19:00.340 arbitrarily.
00:19:03.640 So I know predictions
00:19:05.360 are very difficult.
00:19:06.560 You put your best foot forward,
00:19:08.120 you make the arguments,
00:19:09.040 you submit the evidence,
00:19:09.980 the Chief Justice
00:19:10.600 has to rule.
00:19:11.920 What do you think
00:19:12.660 this case will really
00:19:13.780 come down to
00:19:14.680 in the court's decision?
00:19:15.820 What do you think
00:19:16.260 will be, I guess,
00:19:17.520 the factor that sways
00:19:18.940 the decision
00:19:19.640 one way or the other?
00:19:21.560 It's really hard to tell
00:19:23.000 and I really can't predict,
00:19:24.500 but what I can say
00:19:25.720 is that the Chief Justice
00:19:27.120 was listening.
00:19:28.080 It was very clear
00:19:29.180 that he had read
00:19:30.000 everyone's material.
00:19:31.420 He had marked things up.
00:19:32.860 He was asking
00:19:33.420 a lot of intelligent questions
00:19:34.980 and he did tell all of us
00:19:37.320 that he was going
00:19:38.040 to review all of the affidavits
00:19:39.980 and the evidence in detail
00:19:41.440 and that we had given him
00:19:42.900 a lot to think about.
00:19:44.380 So I think that's all,
00:19:46.420 that's what we can ask
00:19:47.300 when we're having a hearing
00:19:48.320 to have a judge who listens
00:19:49.520 and who takes notes
00:19:51.080 and who asks questions
00:19:52.320 and I think that's always
00:19:53.800 a positive sign.
00:19:54.900 Sia Hassan,
00:19:56.680 lawyer with the Justice Centre
00:19:58.080 for Constitutional Freedoms.
00:19:59.380 A very big week last week
00:20:01.080 with three days
00:20:01.940 in federal court
00:20:02.940 arguing for the end
00:20:04.260 of the hotel quarantine plan.
00:20:05.560 So I hope you were able
00:20:06.640 to get some much needed
00:20:08.020 and much deserved rest afterwards,
00:20:09.440 but I appreciate you
00:20:10.640 joining me today, Sia.
00:20:11.580 Thank you.
00:20:12.100 Thank you.
00:20:12.580 Thank you for having me.
00:20:14.080 Thanks for listening
00:20:14.800 to The Andrew Lawton Show.
00:20:16.220 Support the program
00:20:17.040 by donating to True North
00:20:18.280 at www.tnc.news.
00:20:21.440 The Andrew Lawton Show
00:20:24.680 to to theいる
00:20:27.200 at www.tnc.news.gov.
00:20:27.600 .