The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast - 221. Canadian Constitutional Crisis ｜ Brian Peckford

00:00:01.000 Hey everyone, real quick before you skip, I want to talk to you about something serious and important.

00:00:06.000 Dr. Jordan Peterson has created a new series that could be a lifeline for those battling depression and anxiety.

00:00:12.000 We know how isolating and overwhelming these conditions can be, and we wanted to take a moment to reach out to those listening who may be struggling.

00:00:19.000 With decades of experience helping patients, Dr. Peterson offers a unique understanding of why you might be feeling this way in his new series.

00:00:27.000 He provides a roadmap towards healing, showing that while the journey isn't easy, it's absolutely possible to find your way forward.

00:00:35.000 If you're suffering, please know you are not alone. There's hope, and there's a path to feeling better.

00:00:41.000 Go to Daily Wire Plus now and start watching Dr. Jordan B. Peterson on depression and anxiety.

00:00:47.000 Let this be the first step towards the brighter future you deserve.

00:00:51.000 Welcome to Season 4, Episode 78 of the Jordan B. Peterson Podcast.

00:00:58.000 I'm Michaela Peterson.

00:01:00.000 This is a very important episode regarding the fate of Canada, the freedom of Canadian people, which is seriously at risk right now.

00:01:07.000 Honorable Brian Peckford is announcing that he's going to be taking legal action against the Canadian government for infringing upon the Canadian Charter of Rights.

00:01:15.000 This is serious. This could be a big win for Canada.

00:01:18.000 The Honorable Brian Peckford served as Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador for a decade.

00:01:23.000 He wrote part of the Charter of Rights, so he knows when it's being abused.

00:01:27.000 He started in 1972 in the House of Assembly and served as a minister until he became Premier in 1979.

00:01:34.000 Peckford and Dad discussed the legal strategy in response to Canadian health measures and what a federal win for his case would entail.

00:01:41.000 The abuse of power for emergency measures that's occurring now.

00:01:45.000 And they also discussed choosing YouTube and podcasting over traditional media outlets.

00:01:50.000 Also, a quick thanks to Lex Friedman for lending us his studio to record this at the last minute.

00:01:56.000 I hope you enjoy this conversation.

00:01:58.000 Again, if you want an ad-free experience of this podcast, check out show notes or go to jordanbpeterson.supercast.com

00:02:06.000 and you can sign up for $10 a month or $100 a year.

00:02:09.000 That'll change what you press on in Spotify or Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts to the ad-free version.

00:02:16.000 Hello, everyone. I'm here today with a historical figure in the Canadian landscape, the Honourable Brian Peckford, former Premier of Newfoundland.

00:02:43.000 We've been talking over the last couple of days about the broader events in Canada in relationship to the political and constitutional work that Mr. Peckford did in the 1980s

00:02:58.000 and decided that it was necessary to have a serious conversation about such things at this time.

00:03:05.000 I'm going to open this with a bio of Mr. Peckford so that everyone is situated in the proper place to appreciate the conversation.

00:03:13.000 The Honourable A. Brian Peckford, P.C. was born August 27, 1942 in Whitburn, Newfoundland, graduating from Lewisport High School in 1960.

00:03:24.000 He obtained his BA in education at Memorial in Newfoundland in 1966 and later did postgraduate work in English literature and educational psychology.

00:03:35.000 In 1972, Mr. Peckford entered the political arena as a member of the Progressive Conservatives, was elected as a member of the Provincial House of Assembly,

00:03:48.000 soon serving as special and parliamentary assistant to the then Premier Frank Moores.

00:03:55.000 He was Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in 1974 and Minister of Mines and Energy and Minister of Rural Development and Northern Affairs for that province in 1976.

00:04:07.000 In 1979, at the age of 36, which made him a very young leader by the standards by which such things are judged,

00:04:16.000 he became leader of the PC Party and Premier of Newfoundland.

00:04:21.000 His government established the Atlantic Accord, bringing offshore oil and gas revenue to the province, over $25 billion to date,

00:04:31.000 and a say in the management of the resource.

00:04:34.000 Newfoundland's involvement in Canada's constitutional partition process in the early 1980s led to the breakthrough agreement,

00:04:44.000 culminating in the Constitution Act of 1982.

00:04:48.000 He is the only living First Minister who participated in that constitutional process,

00:04:55.000 something that's dead relevant to our later discussion.

00:04:59.000 He retired from politics in March 1989, beginning a consulting company with his wife Carol, assisting companies in Europe and North America.

00:05:10.000 Former Premier Peckford is the author of two books.

00:05:13.000 The last, Someday the Sun Will Shine and Have Not Will Be No More, was a Globe and Mail bestseller in 2012.

00:05:22.000 He was soared to the Privy Council by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth in 1982.

00:05:29.000 He retired in 2001 and presently lives with his wife Carol in Parksville, British Columbia.

00:05:35.000 Now, Mr. Peckford and I have been talking over the last week, as I mentioned,

00:05:42.000 because he has serious concerns about the policies of the current Canadian government

00:05:49.000 in relationship to the Canadian Charter of Rights, which was established as part of the Constitution Act in the 1980s.

00:05:58.000 And he, as I said in the bio, is the only living minister who participated in that constitutional process

00:06:05.000 and is therefore a unique, let's say, historical and current resource because he can help illuminate Canadians

00:06:16.000 as to the intent of the people who were instrumental in drafting, writing and agreeing on all of those fundamentally important accords.

00:06:30.000 So, let's start by talking about what concerns are driving you to re-enter the political discussion at the moment.

00:06:44.000 Well, primarily, it is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,

00:06:48.000 especially those freedoms and rights that are in sections 2, 6, 7 and 15 of the Charter, which I helped craft.

00:06:56.000 And there are freedoms of association, freedoms of expression, religion, conscience, freedom of assembly, freedom of association.

00:07:04.000 That's in section 2. Section 6 of freedom of mobility, the right to travel anywhere in Canada or leave Canada.

00:07:11.000 Section 6 deals with life, liberty and security of the person.

00:07:15.000 And section 15 with equality. Every Canadian is equal before the law.

00:07:21.000 As we sit here today, those provisions are being violated by all the governments of Canada,

00:07:28.000 but in particular in my case right now, the federal government of Canada.

00:07:32.000 And I'm about to launch a lawsuit against the federal government because of these mandates,

00:07:38.000 especially their travel ban.

00:07:40.000 There's no other travel ban in the Western world like this one.

00:07:44.000 And yet we're the second largest country in the world by geography.

00:07:48.000 This impinges upon my right of travel, my right to travel to my family back east or my friends.

00:07:54.000 It takes away my right as a Canadian to be protected by the mobility right of section 6.

00:08:01.000 And therefore, I feel that the federal government has overreached its authority.

00:08:06.000 Okay, so let me get this clear because I'm still having a hard time conceptualizing the fact that this is actually a reality.

00:08:15.000 So the situation we have in Canada is that a former drafter of what is one of the most fundamental articles of our shared agreement as a people

00:08:27.000 is now about to launch a legal claim against the government itself for violating the fundamental principles upon which the entire country is founded and assembled and agrees.

00:08:39.000 That's not too blunt.

00:08:42.000 No, that is that is very, very accurate.

00:08:46.000 That's exactly what's happening.

00:08:47.000 I'm the only first minister left alive who was at that conference and helped draft these freedoms and these rights and the Constitution Act of 1982 itself.

00:08:57.000 And I do this very reluctantly.

00:09:00.000 You know, I've been watching this thing now for almost two years.

00:09:03.000 I've been speaking out about it at public meetings and on my blog and so on.

00:09:08.000 And I've come to the conclusion now that I must, as a Canadian and as one of the writers and founders of the Constitution Act of 1982,

00:09:18.000 not only speak about it, I must act about it.

00:09:21.000 I must show Canadians that I'm so concerned as a citizen, as a former first minister that helped craft this Constitution Act of 1982,

00:09:29.000 that I must take action against my own government because they have violated rights that I and others helped craft in 1981, 1982.

00:09:38.000 Well, what do you think the legal response to this is going to be?

00:09:42.000 You've obviously, and I know this, of course, is you've been consulting with a legal team, I suppose, and we can talk about that.

00:09:49.000 I mean, it seems to me that this puts the courts in an awfully complicated position, to say the absolute least, because it's, and please correct me if I'm misstepping in any way here,

00:10:02.000 it's up to the courts to determine the letter, but also the spirit of these fundamental laws.

00:10:08.000 And it seems to me that it's almost inarguable that if you have a living member of the body that drafted the provisions making the claim that they're being violated,

00:10:20.000 that that's as good an indication about the violation of the spirit of the law, certainly, and perhaps the letter as well, that you could possibly have.

00:10:29.000 Am I summing that up accurately?

00:10:33.000 Yes, you were. And other lawyers, including the lawyers that will be representing me now in this lawsuit,

00:10:40.000 the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms have looked at the situation very carefully,

00:10:45.000 and it's after weeks and weeks of deliberation that we've decided upon this action.

00:10:50.000 So the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms will be launching this lawsuit in the next 24 hours or so

00:10:56.000 on behalf of me and a number of other Canadians.

00:10:59.000 But, of course, because of my present status and previous status as a first minister,

00:11:04.000 this becomes elevated and perhaps more public than it would otherwise become.

00:11:09.000 But this is my deliberate consideration and that of my lawyers of what is going on in this country.

00:11:16.000 What is happening is that there is a section in Charter of Rights and Freedoms

00:11:20.000 which allows governments to override these freedoms in unusual circumstances.

00:11:24.000 And I remember this very well when we were crafting the Constitution.

00:11:29.000 These unusual circumstances, because we're putting it in the Constitution, it's not a federal act or a provincial act.

00:11:35.000 It's in a Constitution which is supposed to enshrine permanent values and give glue to the country.

00:11:41.000 Okay?

00:11:42.000 So this Section 1 can only be used, and I remember this well, in times of peril, in times of war and insurrection,

00:11:50.000 or when the state is in peril, when the existence of the state is in peril.

00:11:54.000 This particular virus, for which there's a recovery of 99%, a fatality rate of less than 1%,

00:12:01.000 does not constitute, in my view, a situation where the country is in peril.

00:12:09.000 And therefore, I argue that Section 1 doesn't even apply, even though they're trying to make it apply

00:12:14.000 and use that as the reason for doing what they're doing.

00:12:17.000 So you're saying that in your estimation, and this is a consequence of the knowledge that you bring forth

00:12:24.000 from conferring with all the people who drafted this legislation to begin with at the provincial and the federal level,

00:12:30.000 that when you drafted it, you did not envision that its provisions could be violated under conditions

00:12:37.000 that weren't a threat, like a fundamental threat to the integrity of the country itself.

00:12:42.000 Exactly.

00:12:43.000 And that the current state of affairs on the public health front does in no way meet that criteria.

00:12:50.000 Absolutely.

00:12:51.000 It does not at all meet that criteria.

00:12:53.000 And even in the extreme circumstance, because we're all fair people, that you tried to make Section 1 apply.

00:13:00.000 And you said what Peckford and others are saying happened in 81, 82, when Section 1 doesn't apply, does apply.

00:13:09.000 Then there were four tests that had to be met in order for it to apply.

00:13:13.000 That means it must be demonstrably justified that what the action is is worthwhile.

00:13:19.000 In other words, some kind of cost-benefit analysis must be done by law.

00:13:23.000 It must be done in reasonable limits.

00:13:25.000 And fourthly, and most importantly, all of those three must be done within the context of a free and democratic society.

00:13:31.000 And a free and democratic society, to me, means parliamentary democracy in our country.

00:13:36.000 We have 14 parliaments, and they have been completely silent.

00:13:39.000 There's no parliamentary committee anywhere in any of those 14 parliaments looking at what's happening to our country.

00:13:44.000 There are the people's representatives.

00:13:46.000 Okay, so you're also saying, and this is also terrible, that you're also saying that even the process itself by which these exceptions could be made has been essentially subverted in the name of something approximating expediency.

00:14:02.000 But that the rationale for that expediency does not indicate a level of seriousness sufficient to justify that expedient process.

00:14:11.000 Absolutely.

00:14:12.000 Absolutely.

00:14:13.000 Absolutely.

00:14:14.000 Exactly what I'm saying.

00:14:15.000 And I think that's extremely unfortunate.

00:14:17.000 And I don't want to speak for myself on this.

00:14:20.000 There's quite a few experts around, like the Great Barrington Declaration over a year ago now, identified, and these were some of the greatest epidemiologists in the world, how to approach this kind of a situation.

00:14:32.000 Okay.

00:14:33.000 And their principles still stand, you know, you protect the vulnerable, you do everything to protect the vulnerable in this kind of situation.

00:14:42.000 And by the way, this is not new.

00:14:44.000 All of the provinces of Canada have what's called emergency measures organizations, which we spend all these millions on as taxpayers, who do nothing else.

00:14:53.000 We sit down every day and organize a plan for some kind of an emergency declared, let's say, let's admit, maybe an emergency or at least a very serious situation in the country.

00:15:05.000 And then they bring to bear all of the planning tools that are necessary, not just a narrow clinical one from the Department of Health.

00:15:13.000 Right.

00:15:14.000 How is the best way?

00:15:16.000 And Lieutenant Colonel David Redman out of Alberta, who wrote the new Emergency Measures Act there, speaks eloquently to this and has produced all kinds of documents that nobody has challenged that this was the appropriate approach to take.

00:15:31.000 Okay, so let's, so there's two issues that stem out of that.

00:15:36.000 The first is, what has also happened, and you're making allusion to that, is that the political, our political leaders have not only circumvented the parliamentary process to produce provisions that violate the Canadian Charter of Rights,

00:15:54.000 but they've abdicated their responsibility for overall governance, which is the balancing of all sorts of competing interests to a narrow public, so-called public health policy.

00:16:06.000 So, and that, that's also inappropriate governance in the most fundamental sense.

00:16:11.000 Yes, absolutely no question.

00:16:13.000 And if anybody looks at the documentation that the Lieutenant Colonel David Redman has produced, they will be convinced that the, and you know, we had the swine flu and other flus before this, other infectious diseases.

00:16:26.000 And that's why these emergency measures organizations were put in place for, you know, like when the river floods in Winnipeg, or when we have, you know, a nice storm in Quebec or whatever, that there are people who have already planned for all of this, and have already contacted the private sector, the public sector, all the relevant government departments.

00:16:46.060 So when something happens, they're ready to move quickly on all fronts, and have a very joint effort to ensure that the totality of society is considered, isn't compromised, and you put in measures which acknowledge all the factors.

00:17:02.920 Because now we know from studies that have been produced, even by Douglas, Dr. Douglas Allen of Simon Fraser University, who looked at 80 studies over a year ago, which showed that the cure was worse than the disease.

00:17:13.380 In other words, the lockdowns caused so many problems on the other side, that was difficult to justify the measures that were being used.

00:17:20.820 Okay, now you alluded to the fact too, that this isn't in some sense, common public knowledge.

00:17:26.180 And then, along with that, we're faced with the extreme oddity, I would say, of the fact that the venue that you chose to announce this move, and to discuss all these issues, isn't a standard news media venue.

00:17:39.460 It's my YouTube channel, and one of the things that you discussed with me earlier this week was the impossibility, in your view, of having these topics dealt with in an honest and straightforward manner by any major news organization in Canada.

00:17:57.460 Which, to me, is almost a statement damning the current larger scale governance structure, which in some sense includes a free press operating in a coherent and articulate and trustworthy manner as a check and an opportunity for reflection on the political process.

00:18:20.140 And so, that in itself seems as worrisome as all the other things that we're talking about at a governmental level.

00:18:26.580 Like, I think this is preposterous in some sense, that this is the place where this discussion is taking place.

00:18:33.040 And so...

00:18:34.140 Yes, no, I think you raise an extremely important point, and one that I need to address.

00:18:39.840 And I've been vocal about being concerned about what's happening for quite some time, and I've held public meetings here on Vancouver Island, and Vancouver, in front of the Art Gallery last October.

00:18:52.000 And I've written letters to national newspapers, and they have not carried any of my letters, which is quite unusual.

00:18:59.080 Because before this happened, they would carry my letters when I made comment on normal public policy issues across the nation.

00:19:07.680 And they carried my letters.

00:19:09.100 But in recent times, they have not even acknowledged that they received them.

00:19:13.540 So, how do you account for that?

00:19:15.740 What's going on?

00:19:17.360 Well, it seems to me that the media, very early on, bought into the government narrative and developed the same kind of fear that a lot of individuals did.

00:19:26.720 Because of what that was being told, all was being proposed with all these cases, even though these cases didn't represent hospitalizations or ICU visits or whatever.

00:19:38.080 And so, there was a fear generated early on, and the mainstream media bought into it very quickly.

00:19:44.240 And now, are out trying to sustain the narrative that they became a part of early on.

00:19:49.260 It's the only way I can explain it.

00:19:50.660 Of course, we also know that all the mainstream media have received significant sums of money from the government of Canada over the last three years, over $600 million.

00:19:59.660 So, one cannot but mention that in any discussion like this, that one has to ask the question,

00:20:06.360 has this flow of money from the federal government to the Canadian press in any way impinged upon their impartiality to tell the story on both sides of the issue?

00:20:17.660 Going online without ExpressVPN is like not paying attention to the safety demonstration on a flight.

00:20:26.000 Most of the time, you'll probably be fine, but what if one day that weird yellow mask drops down from overhead and you have no idea what to do?

00:20:33.760 In our hyper-connected world, your digital privacy isn't just a luxury.

00:20:37.540 It's a fundamental right.

00:20:38.720 Every time you connect to an unsecured network in a cafe, hotel, or airport, you're essentially broadcasting your personal information to anyone with the technical know-how to intercept it.

00:20:48.200 And let's be clear, it doesn't take a genius hacker to do this.

00:20:51.400 With some off-the-shelf hardware, even a tech-savvy teenager could potentially access your passwords, bank logins, and credit card details.

00:20:58.800 Now, you might think, what's the big deal?

00:21:00.900 Who'd want my data anyway?

00:21:02.440 Well, on the dark web, your personal information could fetch up to $1,000.

00:21:06.300 That's right, there's a whole underground economy built on stolen identities.

00:21:11.120 Enter ExpressVPN.

00:21:12.880 It's like a digital fortress, creating an encrypted tunnel between your device and the internet.

00:21:17.560 Their encryption is so robust that it would take a hacker with a supercomputer over a billion years to crack it.

00:21:23.200 But don't let its power fool you.

00:21:24.920 ExpressVPN is incredibly user-friendly.

00:21:27.360 With just one click, you're protected across all your devices.

00:21:30.400 Phones, laptops, tablets, you name it.

00:21:32.480 That's why I use ExpressVPN whenever I'm traveling or working from a coffee shop.

00:21:36.720 It gives me peace of mind knowing that my research, communications, and personal data are shielded from prying eyes.

00:21:42.700 Secure your online data today by visiting expressvpn.com slash jordan.

00:21:47.440 That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash jordan.

00:21:51.200 Starting a business can be tough, but thanks to Shopify, running your online storefront is easier than ever.

00:22:05.520 Shopify is the global commerce platform that helps you sell at every stage of your business.

00:22:09.640 From the launch your online shop stage, all the way to the did we just hit a million orders stage, Shopify is here to help you grow.

00:22:16.920 Our marketing team uses Shopify every day to sell our merchandise, and we love how easy it is to add more items, ship products, and track conversions.

00:22:24.860 With Shopify, customize your online store to your style with flexible templates and powerful tools,

00:22:30.200 alongside an endless list of integrations and third-party apps like on-demand printing, accounting, and chatbots.

00:22:35.920 Shopify helps you turn browsers into buyers with the internet's best converting checkout,

00:22:40.700 up to 36% better compared to other leading e-commerce platforms.

00:22:44.740 No matter how big you want to grow, Shopify gives you everything you need to take control and take your business to the next level.

00:22:51.160 Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash jbp, all lowercase.

00:22:57.220 Go to shopify.com slash jbp now to grow your business, no matter what stage you're in.

00:23:02.120 That's shopify.com slash jbp.

00:23:05.920 What do you expect is going to happen as a consequence of the challenge that you're mounting?

00:23:14.400 And can you go into some details about the precise nature of the challenge?

00:23:17.920 Because I still don't understand it completely by any means.

00:23:23.320 Perhaps it's not understandable completely by any means.

00:23:26.160 But you're obviously, with your legal team, you have a view of how this is likely to unfold.

00:23:32.800 So, what do you want to happen?

00:23:38.820 And how serious a challenge is this to the claim of the government, in some sense, to have legitimate sovereignty?

00:23:46.860 Yes, I think this is very serious because I think, first of all, you have to, as you know, in the legal system, specifically articulate in your lawsuit what it is you're, you know, making the lawsuit about.

00:24:04.800 So, you have to be specific.

00:24:05.900 So, we had to pick one area, you know, freedom of expression, conscience, assembly, association, life, liberty, and so on.

00:24:12.920 And we picked mobility and the federal government itself because this, you know, is the second largest country in the world.

00:24:20.520 Right.

00:24:20.920 Traveling by plane and train is extremely important for business and for the normal functioning of a nation.

00:24:27.340 Remember, for the maintenance of families and for the maintenance of families.

00:24:31.760 The country was formed by moving from east to west with a railway.

00:24:36.020 I mean, our history is all, you know, replete with that kind of stuff.

00:24:39.820 So, what we chose was this particular situation of this travel ban, which, right, impacts every single Canadian in their movement to meet family and to conduct regular business.

00:24:52.520 And so, we thought this would be an area that we should highlight because we had to get specific.

00:24:59.560 So, I'm particularly on the lawsuit challenging the government's program of banning travel by train and plane by Canadians.

00:25:10.900 In other words, we can't travel across our own nation.

00:25:14.340 And the Section 6 says mobility, the right of every Canadian to travel anywhere in Canada or leave Canada.

00:25:20.820 That's what the Section 6 says.

00:25:23.540 That's the exact words of Section 6.

00:25:25.840 So, therefore, that's what we are pursuing now in the courts in the next couple of days, in the next few weeks, and hopefully we'll get a decision.

00:25:32.800 We're asking for an expedited decision in the next three or four months.

00:25:36.220 So, this will fundamentally challenge the approach that the federal government is taking on responding to this so-called pandemic.

00:25:44.980 And therefore, we'll put into question this whole notion of using Section 1 of the Charter to override these rights and freedoms.

00:25:54.080 If us as First Ministers, Dr. Peterson, had wanted to just have protecting rights and freedoms that could easily be changed, we wouldn't have gone to the Constitution.

00:26:04.220 We would have just said, just put an act in the federal parliament and put acts in all the parliaments, and then up to the whim of the political party at the time to change it.

00:26:14.100 We wanted to safeguard it so that it would be on the whim of political machinations and therefore could not be changed only in the most extreme circumstances.

00:26:23.000 So, what we're really concerned about, and what I'm really concerned about, is if this is not, if our Charter is not upheld and then honored, and these freedoms and rights honored, then the next, and therefore we lose,

00:26:38.100 the next time around when there's an emergency two or three years from now, or one, or the government decides and declares that there is an emergency,

00:26:44.880 they can use this as a precedent, and the Charter becomes further diluted, and then our rights and freedoms as individuals has been destroyed, and that section of being a democracy is no more.

00:26:59.000 That is the great danger, and so that's why it's very necessary for me to do what I'm doing.

00:27:03.440 The other point about this is, is that four years after the Charter came in, in 1986, there was a case in the Supreme Court of Canada,

00:27:11.300 where the judges were forced to look at Section 1, because of the way the lawyer had constructed the case for his client, it's called the Oates Test.

00:27:19.900 And in that, the judges tried to describe what this Section 1 meant, and they did not a bad job, not as good as I thought they should do, but still a much better job.

00:27:32.100 And it's really funny, the lower courts who have already looked at the Charter, as it relates to what's going on, have not used this Oates Test, which is highly unusual.

00:27:41.300 Because courts always look to the precedent set by the highest court, Supreme Court, in determining what they will do in their case, because they were both concerning the Charter.

00:27:51.480 And so, the absence of seeing the Oates Test being used in the lower courts so far is very troubling, and therefore, the other reason why we must take this kind of action at this time.

00:28:03.580 Okay, so let me ask you a question about that, because this process of circumventing Parliament, and then failing to meet the proper standards for the kind of crisis that would involve lifting the provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights,

00:28:23.580 that should be blocked by the courts if they're abiding by the principle of common law, reliance on previous presidents, especially at higher court levels.

00:28:37.640 But that's not happening, and that's in the context that we discussed already, where the media, for example, has become co-opted or corrupted to a degree that it's no longer reliable.

00:28:49.940 I've spoken with many lawyers in Canada in recent years who are very upset about the co-option and corruption of the entire legal enterprise for similar reasons.

00:29:03.960 Are you even vaguely confident that the court system itself has enough integrity to give the views that you're putting forward, even though they're at the basis of the Constitution that unites us all?

00:29:19.900 Do you think that your views can get any fairer or more equally impartial hearing in the court system than they have in the media?

00:29:30.240 Well, I think here's where I come down on that.

00:29:33.240 The lower courts have made some decisions which are injurious to the Charter, and they're being appealed to the higher courts.

00:29:41.020 So I think here's where we have an opportunity.

00:29:43.400 This particular lawsuit of mine will go to the Federal Court of Canada first, and then likely to the Supreme Court of Canada second.

00:29:51.780 Regardless of what decision is made, one side or the other will quite likely appeal it.

00:29:55.880 So I think at the Court of Appeal in the provinces, that's the highest courts in the provinces.

00:30:02.640 Every single province has courts, a Supreme Court, and then a Court of Appeal.

00:30:08.640 And Canadians are confused about that because when they hear of these early decisions, I think that's the end of it.

00:30:13.800 And that's only the beginning of it.

00:30:15.440 To use a really good metaphor, Canadian metaphor, we're in the second period, halfway through the second period.

00:30:21.460 We've still got perhaps half the game left or almost half the game left.

00:30:25.740 And that's where the courts of appeal come in, who usually are more independent and more sober thought as it relates to the jurisprudence, which is before that.

00:30:35.680 And so this is where I and the lawyers, I think, come down and say, we have to exhaust all of the civilized legal processes that we set up under our Constitution.

00:30:49.020 And that means these decisions will be appealed to the courts of appeal in the provinces and then the Supreme Court of Canada.

00:30:55.980 So it's these higher courts that have an unbelievable responsibility now, unelected judges, to finally decide whether, in fact, really the democracy of Canada is going to survive or not.

00:31:11.120 Or whether suddenly, from 1867 to 1981-82, we didn't have a written charter.

00:31:16.640 We get one, and now within 40 years, it's being eviscerated or somehow undermined by an overreach of the various governments.

00:31:26.260 That's our position, and we hope to put that to the judges, and hopefully that the judges will see it in that kind of reasoned, balanced way.

00:31:35.280 Okay, so you focused on movement, the right to movement, and I think you put that in a very interesting historical context

00:31:43.880 and practical context with your discussion of the fact, A, that Canada is absolutely huge and people are distributed all across it,

00:31:52.620 and that freedom of movement is necessary for us to conduct our businesses and to maintain our families and to communicate,

00:31:59.600 but also that Canada itself was knitted together as a consequence of facilitation of freedom of movement, not least by the railway.

00:32:07.520 So, but were there other violations of charter principles that you considered highlighting as you moved forward before you settled on freedom of movement?

00:32:19.860 Of course. There were many, including freedom of association and freedom of assembly.

00:32:25.980 Lots of people, the churches, Christian churches and other churches were prevented from getting together.

00:32:31.580 Yeah, and there's a curfew in Quebec still, which is just absolutely beyond comprehension, in my estimation, in a free society, that that can be the case.

00:32:44.000 And I have friends in Quebec who are hurt to the bone by the fact, for example, that they're not allowed to attend religious services, for example.

00:32:54.940 And that's a really egregious violation, because if there's anything more fundamental, let's say, than freedom of association,

00:33:02.720 well, maybe there's freedom of speech, but before that even, there's freedom of belief.

00:33:07.320 And to interfere with that at a governmental level is unprecedented, in my estimation.

00:33:13.480 Especially when they have not gone out of their way to demonstrably justify, which is one of the tests of Section 1.

00:33:19.860 Where is the demonstrably justification, demonstrably justification of what they're doing?

00:33:24.580 One would think in public policy since my time, and long before when I was a premier, one of the things governments did when they were introducing,

00:33:31.820 especially brand new legislation, you know, and doing very serious things with the Constitution would be to do a cost-benefit analysis.

00:33:39.640 And based upon that, you would decide how you went forward.

00:33:42.680 None of that was done.

00:33:43.640 No parliamentary committee was ever struck to look at both sides of the issue and call an expert.

00:33:48.500 All of these kinds of reasonable measures, which were part of the Canadian fabric of developing public policy, have been discarded in this particular...

00:33:57.700 So what are people...

00:33:58.640 Okay, so what are people doing...

00:34:00.740 I've spoken to Rex Murphy about that, and Rex has been the only journalist, perhaps, who's been beating the warning drum,

00:34:10.360 trying to alert Canadians to the fact that the parliamentary process itself has been subverted at the federal and the provincial levels.

00:34:17.460 And he's certainly been allowed to express those views, but I don't think Canadians have any real sense of exactly how serious that is.

00:34:28.160 So one question would be, well, if our laws are no longer...

00:34:32.420 If the laws that restrict our charter freedoms are no longer being produced by parliamentary debate, how are they being produced?

00:34:40.820 And so that would be the first question, how practically, how is this occurring?

00:34:44.900 Is it just by fiat?

00:34:47.580 Is it just by statement?

00:34:49.560 And if so, why are these laws to be regarded as valid at all?

00:34:54.740 And if they're not valid, well, what does that mean?

00:34:57.900 Yeah.

00:34:58.240 Well, here's where the most insidious part of this equation comes into play.

00:35:02.820 What the governments have done and used, in very many cases, existing legislation under which they have the power to make regulation.

00:35:10.820 So they've used existing emergencies, okay, legislation, and inflated it enough or interpreted it in a manner that they can also use in this circumstance and therefore issue additional regulation, okay?

00:35:26.260 And then in other cases, they did not fully explain or have a parliamentary committee look at other amendments when they opened their parliament and closed it within two or three days or a week.

00:35:37.220 In other words, sufficient debate wasn't allowed to understand the repercussions of what they were doing when they were giving more power to the minister and more power to the public health officer.

00:35:47.440 Right, so this really means, this really means in some sense that none of these policies were subject to opposition.

00:35:54.320 Exactly.

00:35:55.140 And let's, we could delve into that a little bit.

00:35:57.820 You might say, well, in an emergency such that provisions shouldn't be subject to opposition because that's inefficient.

00:36:04.240 But that is the same thing as saying two things.

00:36:07.360 One is that they shouldn't be thought about because discussion between opposing parties is actually thought.

00:36:15.860 And then the second thing it's saying is they should be implemented without recourse to the broader public because the broader public is represented in that oppositional structure so that everybody's voices are being allowed to be heard.

00:36:29.800 That's what, that's in some sense the whole point of the parliament where you, parliament means place of talking fundamentally and it means more deeply than that, place of thinking and even more deeply than that, place of discussion of the entire panoply of public opinion.

00:36:45.960 That's all gone by the wayside in the name of efficiency, let's say, or something like that.

00:36:51.420 Yes, doctor, and even, it gets worse than that because we have had time.

00:36:56.520 One can perhaps relieve or excuse, if one wants to, to make, so that your argument is completely reasonable and say, for the first 90 days when this thing began, you could make an argument that, okay, the government's had to move.

00:37:11.000 But in any rational way, if they had used the emergency measures planning that was already in place, they would have moved to protect the vulnerable first and then did a study on the rest.

00:37:21.080 What else do we need to do in society?

00:37:23.720 What they did is just a carte blanche on or over all of society without giving second thought to it.

00:37:29.000 And now all of the studies, 90 days after this started and 100 days, 120 days, showed, right?

00:37:36.940 And then the Great Barrington Declaration is a good example.

00:37:39.320 Over a year old now is the Great Barrington Declaration.

00:37:42.580 So they had lots of information.

00:37:45.000 And Dr. Allen's report from Simon Fraser over a year ago.

00:37:48.460 So they've had lots of information and scientific studies about what's going on to demonstrate that not only are the vaccines destructive,

00:37:57.000 more destructive than any vaccines in our history, and that's a scientific fact, then they had time to adjust.

00:38:05.520 And this is where they have not even been nimble in this kind of circumstance when you think this is the very time that governments will be nimble.

00:38:12.100 Okay, we'll see what we can do with the vulnerable, all these long-term care homes and the hospitals and those who are most vulnerable.

00:38:19.380 And we'll now have the Parliamentary Committee on an expedited basis.

00:38:22.960 I understand that on an emergency basis, bring in experts from both sides within the next 30 days to see whether what else we should do in a reasonable and graduated way

00:38:32.580 or are what we're doing now the most appropriate way to respond to it.

00:38:36.520 Right, right.

00:38:36.980 None of that was done.

00:38:38.300 So your case is, well, in the early stages of the emergency of the pandemic,

00:38:43.780 when people didn't understand the magnitude of the risk, there was potential for justification for reducing parliamentary complexity to short-term efficiency.

00:38:55.200 But as the pandemic has unfolded and we've become more aware of its true risks or lack thereof,

00:39:00.660 we should have returned to the principles of parliamentary democracy as rapidly as possible.

00:39:05.360 And with less and less justification, that's continued to happen.

00:39:09.780 That circumvention of the parliamentary process has continued to happen.

00:39:14.160 And I suppose that culminated in recent months with the Quebec lockdown, the curfew.

00:39:21.460 I don't see how anybody can possibly make the case that that curfew was implemented under conditions that were as uncertain and dire

00:39:30.040 as those that obtained in the initial phases of the pandemic, especially given that Omicron is obviously much less serious than the original virus.

00:39:40.780 And also, we've already attained something approximating an 80% vaccination rate.

00:39:48.100 And that's not going to be pushed up much higher than 90% without government intervention that becomes unbelievably heavy-handed.

00:39:54.500 So, there's less and less justification for more and more circumvention of parliamentary processes as this proceeds instead of exactly the opposite.

00:40:04.940 Exactly.

00:40:05.560 And that's why it took me this long to be convinced that I had to take this action.

00:40:10.620 I mean, I never took this action 90 days after they brought in these things or 100 days or a year after, right?

00:40:16.240 I've been watching this and commenting and making, you know, articulating my concerns as Rex has.

00:40:21.620 By the way, Rex and Murphy and I went to university together.

00:40:24.580 We're both Newfoundlanders.

00:40:26.120 We're all both born in Newfoundland.

00:40:28.140 And I've heard him on your program with you and enjoyed the conversation and loved the English literature and the classics like he does.

00:40:37.460 And we both got a very wonderful education at Memorial in those days.

00:40:41.580 He's no longer there now, but we did.

00:40:43.660 And I do appreciate his commentary and what he's brought to this discussion.

00:40:48.340 It's very, very important.

00:40:49.400 But the other thing is, as you say, the transmission of the of the virus now and the virus has changed.

00:40:56.620 So a lot of the vaccines that are being used are no longer applicable.

00:41:00.240 They don't do anything to the existing variant that we have.

00:41:03.960 They were devised for another variant or for the original virus.

00:41:07.920 The other thing is people getting aboard planes and my travel ban that I'm arguing on before the lawsuit is that everybody transmits it.

00:41:15.980 Now, unvaccinated and vaccinate, transmit, receive and transmit the virus.

00:41:21.100 So it's hard to make the argument that the travel ban should be in place.

00:41:24.800 The transmission of the virus for which all of this is centered is no longer valid.

00:41:29.200 That is, is that the vaccinated protect against the virus because they receive it and transmit it the same as the unvaccinated.

00:41:37.980 And now we find in Denmark, Israel, just in the last few days, right, that in Australia, their case rates have gone to the roof again, even though they're 90 percent vaccinated.

00:41:48.980 And so the whole basis, right, the whole basis of this argument of these lockdowns and travel bans and so on, the basis has crumbled, right?

00:42:00.040 The whole citadel on which this so-called rational approach to a virus has completely crumbled and no longer can sustain itself.

00:42:08.720 So one must then question why is this continuing to be in place when all of that data is available, which at least...

00:42:17.540 Well, I can tell you what I've been informed of about why it's continuing.

00:42:21.900 And I had a conversation with a senior advisor to one of Canadians, provincial governments, a number of conversations.

00:42:28.160 Some of those were conducted with RECs.

00:42:30.300 None of this was made public because the conversation occurred in privacy.

00:42:34.480 And I asked the gentleman I was speaking with why he wouldn't go public.

00:42:40.000 And he said, and I believe honorably, that he believed he could still do more good from within the confines of the governmental structure than as a lone voice crying in the wilderness, let's say.

00:42:50.380 But he told me flat out that Canadian public policy is being...

00:42:56.240 So it's not being generated through the parliamentary process that it's supposed to be generated through.

00:43:02.280 What's happening instead is the politicians are turning to badly sampled opinion polls, short-term opinion polls, and driving policy as a consequence.

00:43:12.680 And then it's not...

00:43:13.740 They're not actually driving it as a consequence of public opinion polls because that would be something like consulting the people.

00:43:19.720 They're utilizing adherence to short-term public opinion polls to maximize the probability that they'll obtain political success in the electoral sphere in the near future.

00:43:31.280 And so I said, I pressed him, I said, so you're telling me that this isn't based on the science because that's certainly what we're hearing.

00:43:39.880 And he said, no, it's not based on the science.

00:43:42.000 That's not driving the decisions.

00:43:43.860 I asked him, is there an end game in place, which is, do we have definitions laid down for when the pandemic is now of sufficient lack of severity that it's over, so to speak, and we can go back to normal life?

00:44:00.180 Is there even a conceptual framework within which that might occur?

00:44:04.780 And the answer to that was, no, there's not that as well.

00:44:08.260 And so it was one of the most shocking conversations I think I've ever had in my life, in some sense, because I'm not a cynic about the political process.

00:44:17.900 I think that cheap cynicism about politics is, it's an abdication of civic responsibility, and it's bitterness masquerading as wisdom.

00:44:31.720 And that, but then when I heard that the situation at the highest levels of governance was more cynical and less responsible than I could have even imagined,

00:44:45.560 and that even when I pushed that interpretation to see if I was misinterpreting, the answer I received was a definitive no.

00:44:54.980 It's as bad as you think, or worse.

00:44:57.800 And I didn't really know what to make of that in the aftermath of the conversation, because, well, for obvious, for all the reasons that we're discussing,

00:45:06.780 it's like, well, have things really got to the point where we don't use parliamentary process, we're violating the Canadian Charter of Bill of Rights,

00:45:14.360 the press is so involved in collusion that they won't even report on it,

00:45:18.820 and they're being subsidized to a great degree by the government in some sense for doing so,

00:45:23.520 and that's so widespread that it covers the entire legacy media, let's say.

00:45:27.760 It's like, it sounds conspiratorial in the deepest sense.

00:45:33.040 And that's why a lot of people have gone that route, is because they have been almost pushed in that route.

00:45:41.440 And you see the government in using their polling here, they're advertising, you've got to get vaccinated on the television,

00:45:47.620 and they're actually even doing ads for children and trying to talk to children directly through a public ad.

00:45:54.340 So they're feeding off themselves, they're creating enough fear so that they'll get the poll they want to get.

00:46:00.380 Well, that's the other thing that I see happening, and this is partly why this process is so dangerous,

00:46:06.080 is first of all, it's very, very difficult to poll people and get a read on really what they want.

00:46:11.820 And that's why we don't have direct democracy by the people.

00:46:16.120 We don't want fear and whim and impulsivity that's not thought through carefully to be the basis for governance.

00:46:24.480 So really what's happened, we could say in some sense, is that by circumventing the parliamentary process

00:46:31.040 and abdicating responsibility for complex, multi-level decision-making,

00:46:37.200 we've reverted to something like the most primordial form of whim rule by mob,

00:46:43.460 and that's all mediated through opinion polls.

00:46:46.480 That's been the alternative to the parliamentary process.

00:46:49.100 The other thing perhaps that a lot of Canadians don't acknowledge and recognize,

00:46:53.480 and Canadians are very wonderful people and very nice people and very trustworthy of their governments, okay?

00:47:01.060 And so what has happened in the last 40 years, they have not noticed because we have not been civically involved like we should.

00:47:07.420 I say in all my public meetings, the level of good democracy is directly related to the amount of civic involvement.

00:47:14.940 Right.

00:47:15.180 The less civic involvement, the less democracy.

00:47:18.440 And this is what's happened in Canada.

00:47:20.120 Yeah, well, that cheap cynicism interferes with that too.

00:47:24.280 And what that means is that because people are cynical and they think that's wisdom,

00:47:28.460 then they abandon these institutions.

00:47:31.400 And then when they're abandoned, that means that maybe the people who shouldn't be running them are able to run them.

00:47:38.060 And then the whole thing gets corrupted from the bottom up.

00:47:40.500 And that's happening.

00:47:41.280 I see that happening with school boards in particular.

00:47:43.820 It's absolutely.

00:47:45.420 It's happening all over the place.

00:47:46.940 And the problem of Canada is not the parliament that you and I grew up with, okay?

00:47:50.820 Where the MP had really significant power, where the parliamentary committee had really significant power.

00:47:56.240 And this is true in all the provinces as well.

00:47:57.860 There's been a gradual shift of power from the parliament, first to the cabinet, and now to the first minister's office,

00:48:04.980 both in all the provinces and in the government of Canada.

00:48:07.640 Donald J. Savoy has written a book on this called Democracy in Canada, The Disintegration of Our Institutions.

00:48:15.100 It's only a couple of years old.

00:48:16.660 It's a haunting book.

00:48:18.380 But he's one of the experts in governance in Canada, and he's a scholar at the University of Moncton.

00:48:23.600 And this is more or less his epic book.

00:48:25.360 He's written quite a few books on this over the years.

00:48:27.860 And this is a book that every thinking Canadian should read because it methodically and intelligently deals with how,

00:48:37.140 over time, without a shot being fired, the movement of power from where it should reside in the parliament

00:48:43.320 all the way to the prime minister's office and the premier's office.

00:48:46.860 And this, therefore, this situation in early 2020, we were very vulnerable to this kind of thing happening by governments

00:48:57.040 because we have been ready to that kind of atmosphere over time with power shifting

00:49:02.200 and therefore exercise of power quickly by the executive rather than by the parliament.

00:49:07.940 Okay, so we've outlined to some degree what it means if the challenge that you're proposing to mount fails.

00:49:16.420 And what it'll mean is that what's happening now with the centralization of power

00:49:21.020 and the circumventing of the parliamentary process and the reliance, let's say, on opinion polls and whim

00:49:26.280 and the abdication of responsibility for governing to so-called experts who are unidimensional in their viewpoint,

00:49:32.280 that's the status quo and that's becoming more and more the norm.

00:49:38.760 This episode was sponsored by ZocDoc.

00:49:41.300 No one knows what you're looking for in a doctor better than you,

00:49:43.960 and no one's better at giving you the tools to find that perfect doctor than ZocDoc.

00:49:49.080 Finding and booking the right doctor doesn't need to be a nightmare.

00:49:51.820 Will they take your insurance, understand your needs, or be available when it's convenient?

00:49:56.000 ZocDoc makes answering yes to all of the above as easy as possible.

00:49:59.540 ZocDoc is a free app that shows you patient-reviewed doctors,

00:50:03.700 takes your insurance, and they are available when you need them.

00:50:07.860 It takes your insurance and lets you choose a time slot for an in-person or video consultation.

00:50:12.680 Go to ZocDoc.com slash JBP and download the ZocDoc app for free,

00:50:18.460 then start your search for a top-rated doctor today.

00:50:21.080 Many are available within 24 hours.

00:50:23.700 That's Z-O-C-D-O-C dot com slash JBP.

00:50:28.740 This episode was sponsored by Relief Band.

00:50:31.720 Nausea can happen at the worst possible times.

00:50:34.340 It's one of the unpleasant experiences that can completely incapacitate you wherever you are.

00:50:39.680 Relief Band is the number one FDA-cleared anti-nausea wristband

00:50:43.320 that has been clinically proven to quickly relieve and prevent nausea and vomiting.

00:50:48.260 They even have the Relief Band Sport for the more adventurous listeners,

00:50:53.480 which is waterproof and compatible with Apple or Android watches.

00:50:56.280 It's a band you wear rather than a pill you take,

00:50:59.260 so there are zero side effects.

00:51:01.780 Relief Band makes a great gift for any time of year.

00:51:04.660 Right now, they've got an exclusive offer just for JBP listeners.

00:51:08.240 Go to ReliefBand.com and use promo code JBP.

00:51:10.940 You'll receive 20% off plus free shipping and a no-questions-asked 30-day money-back guarantee.

00:51:18.020 So head to ReliefBand.com and use our promo code JBP for 20% off plus free shipping.

00:51:26.760 I don't understand what will happen if you win.

00:51:31.540 I mean, because if you win, it means that the laws that have governed us

00:51:37.800 for the last, let's say, year, two years,

00:51:40.580 accepting that initial period of maybe we could say uncertainty bordering on the level of potential emergency,

00:51:48.100 if you win, what does that mean for the political sovereignty of the federal and provincial governments?

00:51:58.320 I think what that means is that if we win,

00:52:02.060 we have identified that we have some very substantial laws on the books

00:52:07.700 that when challenged and brought rationally towards our highest courts,

00:52:11.940 we'll be honored.

00:52:13.040 And that will give Canadians faith to reform either the existing political parties

00:52:18.340 or go with new political parties that recognize in their platform,

00:52:23.360 which they've signed off on with the people,

00:52:25.840 that they respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms

00:52:28.280 and only in very dire circumstances, like a war, insurrection cannot be circumvented, right?

00:52:34.220 That we must get back to a parliamentary type of democracy.

00:52:38.220 The power must be returned to the parliament.

00:52:41.080 Look, Jody Rabel, when she argued as a Minister of Justice

00:52:45.580 and then later wanted to appear before a parliamentary committee,

00:52:48.700 she was allowed to appear a couple of times, then they shut the committee down,

00:52:51.900 even though she indicated in writing that she had more information that she wanted to present.

00:52:56.780 So there was the complete, what shall I say, tyranny of the majority

00:53:00.880 and for the parliamentary system to work.

00:53:03.120 We have examples all over the place of this in all of the parliaments of Canada.

00:53:07.100 So if we win, I think it will restore some confidence in our system with Canadians 0.91

00:53:14.580 and tell them that, yes, we have to reform the system more

00:53:19.220 and we can go with other political parties or reform the existing ones

00:53:23.100 so that these leaders understand and revise their platforms

00:53:27.920 to get back to what is true parliamentary democracy in our country.

00:53:32.000 So what does it say about, if you win, what does it say about the culpability

00:53:38.600 of our current political leaders?

00:53:40.820 I mean, I don't understand if their policies have been shown to violate

00:53:46.840 the most fundamental principles upon which our country maintains its peace

00:53:51.580 and prosperity, its integrity.

00:53:54.060 If they violated that, what does that mean for them?

00:53:58.520 What are the consequences of that?

00:54:00.180 I think the consequences is that either they'd have to do a wholesale reform

00:54:06.100 of their parties or other new parties will emerge with the kind of platform

00:54:11.500 that is implicit in that way.

00:54:15.180 Okay.

00:54:15.540 You knew part of, one of the people who was involved in the process

00:54:19.340 that led to the establishment of the rules and regulations,

00:54:23.700 the principles that we're discussing was Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

00:54:27.080 Oh, so what do you think his intent was in relationship to the Charter of Rights?

00:54:37.020 And what do you think?

00:54:38.980 He wanted less involvement of the provinces.

00:54:41.620 That's why another piece of history, Doctor, that nobody seems to know about

00:54:45.580 is that when we started the process of getting the Charter,

00:54:48.760 it was a 17-month negotiation,

00:54:50.080 and over halfway through, the Prime Minister of Canada left the table

00:54:54.120 and said, you're too difficult to deal with,

00:54:56.500 even though it's a federal state, you know, powers in the provinces,

00:54:59.500 powers in the...

00:55:00.340 Here's where it's all gone wrong.

00:55:01.940 And so he left the table and unilaterally passed his own bill

00:55:06.620 to patriate the Constitution and have his own version of the Charter.

00:55:11.080 And he went to his own friends in the Supreme Court who turned him down.

00:55:15.500 What he was doing was viewed unconstitutional on September 28th, 1981.

00:55:21.380 Then he came back to the table and we got the deal we have now.

00:55:25.020 So he didn't get his Charter.

00:55:27.040 His Charter was amended by us because we're in a federal state.

00:55:31.160 And the court ruled, you cannot do this because you're impacting upon

00:55:34.400 other units of the Confederation which have legitimate power.

00:55:38.160 And so he had to come back to the table and then we negotiated what became...

00:55:43.100 For example, when you look at the Charter Rights and Freedoms

00:55:45.160 now in that parchment piece that people see

00:55:47.560 where they go into the Government of Canada's sites,

00:55:49.620 and I signed a whole bunch of them at a public meeting last night,

00:55:52.300 there was only one name on that Charter, Pierre-Electroudos.

00:55:55.880 That's unconstitutional.

00:55:57.900 All of the names of the First Ministers need to be on that Charter

00:56:01.480 in order for it to be legitimate

00:56:03.100 because it took all the First Ministers, except Quebec,

00:56:06.380 who wouldn't agree, but all the rest see it.

00:56:09.420 There were nine provinces and the federal government

00:56:11.520 that signed off on that Charter,

00:56:13.980 that signed off on that Constitution Act 1982.

00:56:16.660 So there's this insidious thing going on for four or five decades

00:56:20.940 whereby everybody thinks it's Trudeau's Charter.

00:56:23.680 Trudeau's Charter got defeated by his own court.

00:56:26.660 It was the Charter of the provinces and the federal government together

00:56:29.600 that got approved.

00:56:30.540 That's a really important piece of history

00:56:33.260 which gives an important backdrop to the nature of our country

00:56:36.820 as the court saw it in 1981

00:56:40.860 and which one hopes the court will continue to see now

00:56:44.860 in 2022 and 2023.

00:56:47.840 This is an extremely important thing.

00:56:49.640 The other point that everybody ignores is this,

00:56:53.560 that the Charter doesn't begin with Section 1.

00:56:55.780 It begins with a tiny preamble of one sentence.

00:56:59.720 Whereas the country, Canada,

00:57:03.820 whereas we are founded on the principles of the supremacy of God

00:57:07.980 and the rule of law.

00:57:10.440 And after that sentence, it's not a period,

00:57:13.860 it's not a semicolon or a comma,

00:57:15.760 there's a colon which says everything follows after this.

00:57:20.640 And that's another area where the courts 0.93

00:57:22.800 and the governments are falling down on the job

00:57:26.100 is that they're supposed to consider everything

00:57:29.500 in the Charter in light of two principles,

00:57:33.760 the supremacy of God and the rule of law.

00:57:36.600 And somehow that which is a key part

00:57:39.860 of opening the Constitution,

00:57:42.460 the introduction to the Constitution,

00:57:44.440 has been missing.

00:57:45.860 And that's the other part that I argue very strongly.

00:57:48.540 Until it's taken out,

00:57:49.780 if somebody says we don't want to have anything about God,

00:57:52.180 well then, fine,

00:57:53.600 you'll have to change the Constitution.

00:57:54.920 But as long as it's in there,

00:57:56.500 those words are just as important as any other words

00:57:58.880 in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

00:58:00.960 And therefore, have to be acknowledged

00:58:02.660 in any rendering of any decision under the Charter.

00:58:06.200 And so what do you think that means practically

00:58:08.140 in this particular case?

00:58:10.440 Well, in my particular case,

00:58:12.160 I'm arguing straight on the travel ban.

00:58:15.140 But one would hope that in the consideration

00:58:18.240 of this lawsuit that the judges will introduce their case

00:58:24.200 and their decision and relate to the history of the Charter.

00:58:28.660 Right.

00:58:29.160 And also relate to what, how the Charter opens.

00:58:33.060 And it's in this context that we will be considering

00:58:35.560 our decisions.

00:58:36.940 Yeah, well, it's to some degree,

00:58:38.460 the idea of right itself is predicated on the idea of,

00:58:42.400 I would say, it's something approximating

00:58:45.780 the divine worth of each individual,

00:58:48.360 which is what makes us equal before the law.

00:58:50.920 The rights aren't,

00:58:52.120 this is a problem I had, I would say,

00:58:54.440 in some sense with the Charter of Rights,

00:58:56.100 right to begin with,

00:58:56.960 because there's some confusion

00:58:59.720 about the derivation of the rights.

00:59:02.040 Are these rights that are granted to you

00:59:03.680 by your government?

00:59:04.400 Or do you have those rights to begin with

00:59:07.040 as a consequence, let's say,

00:59:08.320 of something approximating your relationship

00:59:10.040 with the divine and then the government

00:59:12.620 can impose limitations on that

00:59:14.200 only where that's practically necessary.

00:59:16.020 But I suppose the inclusion of that preamble

00:59:18.640 is one of the acts that was taken

00:59:22.560 and articulated properly to put

00:59:26.140 the idea of the intrinsic worth of the individual

00:59:30.860 on something like metaphysical grounds.

00:59:32.660 So it's a precondition,

00:59:34.320 it's a precondition for the existence

00:59:35.800 of the body of laws and the constitution itself.

00:59:37.660 Exactly, exactly.

00:59:40.220 And that's extremely important.

00:59:42.140 And I deliberately introduce this now

00:59:44.960 because I know hardly anybody else

00:59:46.740 in discussing the Charter

00:59:48.560 and the Constitution Act in 1982 have done so.

00:59:51.720 That's partly why freedom of religion

00:59:53.440 is so important.

00:59:54.860 And we should say,

00:59:55.640 we're not speaking about this necessarily

00:59:57.340 in specifically religious terms.

00:59:59.300 There's no difference between freedom of religion

01:00:01.500 and freedom of belief.

01:00:02.920 And there's no difference between freedom of belief

01:00:05.280 and the capacity for independent thought,

01:00:07.120 but also the right to follow the dictates

01:00:09.400 of your own conscience.

01:00:11.140 Exactly, exactly.

01:00:12.640 And so therefore,

01:00:13.740 it's in the totality of the Charter, right,

01:00:17.320 that even my lawsuit should be considered

01:00:19.560 and other lawsuits like it.

01:00:21.160 And so all of this is extremely important

01:00:24.100 in knowing who we are as Canadians

01:00:26.020 and how we are going to function

01:00:27.480 as human beings

01:00:29.200 in some democratic structure into the future.

01:00:32.140 Because our democratic structure

01:00:34.460 will be significantly reduced

01:00:36.900 if we lose on having these provisions

01:00:40.180 of the Charter honored again.

01:00:43.200 Thrive knows that quitting smoking is f***ing hard.

01:00:46.060 You get advice like try hypnosis

01:00:48.380 or quit cold turkey.

01:00:51.840 Instead, start small with Thrive,

01:00:53.680 which can lead to something big.

01:00:55.500 Start stopping with Thrive.

01:00:57.300 Right.

01:00:57.580 And so you're also making the case

01:01:00.680 that there's been a tremendous abdication

01:01:02.620 of responsibility

01:01:03.540 on the part of our political leaders

01:01:05.240 and also the circumvention

01:01:06.820 of our parliamentary processes,

01:01:08.980 which is dangerous procedurally

01:01:10.760 and also a threat to our liberty

01:01:13.120 and freedom and prosperity,

01:01:15.460 all of that.

01:01:16.280 But we also have had that discussion

01:01:19.260 in the context of,

01:01:20.520 in some sense,

01:01:21.020 a broader discussion

01:01:21.920 because you also made the case

01:01:23.400 that it's the degeneration

01:01:25.660 of civic involvement

01:01:27.680 as a consequence

01:01:29.020 of a narrow cynicism

01:01:30.460 that set up the preconditions

01:01:34.020 for this to occur

01:01:34.920 in the face of an emergency.

01:01:36.420 And so Canadians

01:01:37.480 shouldn't be patting themselves

01:01:38.800 on the back

01:01:39.560 in self-righteous manner 1.00

01:01:41.400 saying those damn politicians 1.00

01:01:42.820 have betrayed us. 1.00

01:01:43.960 They should be thinking,

01:01:44.960 well, that's occurred to some degree

01:01:46.820 and that's awful

01:01:47.740 and hopefully unconstitutional.

01:01:49.840 But it's happening

01:01:51.040 in the context of all of us

01:01:52.540 not stepping forward

01:01:54.520 to take our proper place

01:01:55.820 in the governance of society

01:01:57.060 because we're cheaply cynical

01:01:58.500 about politics

01:01:59.520 and lazy and irresponsible. 0.86

01:02:01.980 Absolutely. 0.99

01:02:02.640 I couldn't agree more.

01:02:03.560 And that's where

01:02:03.940 the educational system,

01:02:05.160 you know,

01:02:05.280 the whole totality

01:02:06.160 of our society

01:02:06.960 comes into play

01:02:07.740 and the various parts

01:02:09.120 of that society

01:02:09.920 which make it function better.

01:02:11.460 And one of the great areas

01:02:12.640 is in education.

01:02:14.020 When I taught grade eight

01:02:15.220 back in the late 1960s,

01:02:18.620 in Springdale, Newfoundland,

01:02:21.140 I introduced civics.

01:02:22.380 There was no civics

01:02:23.220 in the class,

01:02:23.960 in school even back then.

01:02:25.720 I introduced it.

01:02:26.980 There was within

01:02:28.000 the Department of Education's

01:02:29.760 curriculum guidelines

01:02:30.980 the opportunity

01:02:32.140 if any school

01:02:33.020 or teacher wanted to teach it,

01:02:34.740 there was some materials

01:02:36.140 available on civics

01:02:37.280 and you could teach a course

01:02:38.460 and I went to the principal

01:02:39.380 and asked if I could teach it.

01:02:40.620 This is back in the late 1960s.

01:02:43.600 So the gradual erosion

01:02:45.140 of our educational system

01:02:47.540 to the educational

01:02:48.620 necessarily include,

01:02:50.460 right,

01:02:51.420 a course on the governance

01:02:53.420 and on the system

01:02:54.320 of government

01:02:54.900 at the municipal,

01:02:56.120 provincial,

01:02:56.580 and federal level

01:02:57.260 was missing.

01:02:58.320 Even then.

01:02:59.140 And continued to be

01:03:00.240 even worse

01:03:00.880 as time went on

01:03:01.740 and the history

01:03:02.320 got taken out

01:03:04.260 of the course,

01:03:05.240 out of the curriculum

01:03:06.160 and some fusion

01:03:07.300 of social studies

01:03:08.660 got repaired.

01:03:10.040 Well,

01:03:10.260 the whole principle

01:03:11.320 And so on it went

01:03:12.380 ever since then.

01:03:13.100 All the principle

01:03:15.060 of the sovereignty

01:03:16.040 of the individual

01:03:17.020 and then the associated

01:03:18.340 sovereignty of the people,

01:03:19.980 that principle

01:03:20.560 cannot abide

01:03:21.360 unless sovereign individuals

01:03:22.760 take responsibility

01:03:23.700 for governance

01:03:24.560 and cheap cynicism

01:03:25.940 is no excuse

01:03:26.800 for not engaging

01:03:27.980 in that process.

01:03:28.800 I mean,

01:03:28.940 I've been struck

01:03:29.520 through my whole life

01:03:30.400 talking to young people

01:03:31.620 in particular

01:03:32.200 about their feelings

01:03:34.000 of powerlessness

01:03:34.880 and their separation

01:03:37.460 in some sense

01:03:38.240 from the day-to-day

01:03:38.920 operations of the state.

01:03:40.040 And I got involved

01:03:41.300 in the political party

01:03:42.260 when I was very young.

01:03:43.300 I was 14.

01:03:44.020 It was with the NDP

01:03:44.820 in Alberta

01:03:45.480 with Grant Notley

01:03:46.760 and that was all

01:03:48.460 about the same time

01:03:49.420 that you were operating

01:03:50.860 on the processes

01:03:52.360 that we're describing now

01:03:53.440 and one of the things

01:03:54.460 that absolutely shocked me

01:03:55.920 even back then

01:03:57.080 when I was that young

01:03:58.020 was how hungry

01:03:59.200 the political parties

01:04:00.600 were for anyone's involvement,

01:04:02.720 how welcoming they were

01:04:04.100 if you wanted

01:04:04.720 to get involved

01:04:05.540 and how much scope

01:04:07.500 of movement

01:04:08.180 was available to you

01:04:09.440 as a private citizen

01:04:10.440 almost at your beck and call

01:04:12.820 if you were willing

01:04:13.540 to involve yourself

01:04:14.440 in the political process.

01:04:16.060 Now,

01:04:16.180 I don't think young Canadians, 1.00

01:04:18.340 they certainly haven't been taught

01:04:19.920 that that's the case

01:04:20.940 and they certainly

01:04:22.280 haven't been guided

01:04:23.220 through the training processes

01:04:25.280 necessary to make them aware

01:04:27.960 of the availability of that

01:04:29.380 but it's also partly

01:04:30.360 to be laid at the feet

01:04:31.360 of Canadians.

01:04:32.180 It's like,

01:04:32.660 you could be involved

01:04:33.660 in the political process

01:04:34.720 if you just asked

01:04:36.260 and wanted to be.

01:04:37.520 It's not like these parties

01:04:38.600 aren't crying out

01:04:39.640 for workers,

01:04:41.320 volunteers

01:04:41.900 and you can move up

01:04:43.560 the ranks very quickly

01:04:44.540 if you're competent

01:04:45.400 so there's no excuse

01:04:47.640 for that not happening.

01:04:49.580 No,

01:04:49.900 no,

01:04:50.100 absolutely

01:04:50.580 but the educational system

01:04:52.240 is partly to blame

01:04:53.120 because we're

01:04:53.860 troughed up through

01:04:54.700 before we become an adult

01:04:56.020 and want to get involved

01:04:57.160 in the political parties

01:04:58.080 we have,

01:04:58.980 you know, 0.96

01:04:59.320 complete ignorance

01:05:00.280 of how the process works

01:05:01.820 even the political parties

01:05:02.840 work like you say

01:05:03.640 or how the municipal council works

01:05:05.360 or the school board works

01:05:06.420 or the province works

01:05:07.560 what powers

01:05:08.140 do the provinces have

01:05:09.040 what problems,

01:05:10.000 you know,

01:05:10.640 the powers

01:05:11.640 that the federal government

01:05:12.340 have

01:05:12.560 how are we different

01:05:13.520 from the United States

01:05:14.380 of America

01:05:15.020 which is the elephant

01:05:16.100 that lives next door to us

01:05:17.340 we should know

01:05:17.900 all of these things

01:05:18.780 and this should be a course

01:05:20.200 you know,

01:05:20.440 developed from grade 7 or 8

01:05:21.820 up to the last year

01:05:23.020 of high school

01:05:23.740 so that when people graduate

01:05:25.420 they have a knowledge

01:05:27.400 and an understanding

01:05:28.260 that they can then pursue

01:05:29.520 through university

01:05:30.800 and so on

01:05:31.360 and have to participate

01:05:33.160 in the civic process

01:05:35.180 exactly

01:05:35.600 well we have vague courses

01:05:37.220 that are in the political

01:05:39.200 ideological domain

01:05:40.440 that basically concentrate

01:05:41.600 on something approximating

01:05:43.560 the vague horrors

01:05:45.080 of the past

01:05:45.800 not that those aren't real

01:05:47.380 and not that we shouldn't

01:05:49.300 take responsibility for them

01:05:50.760 but there are no substitute

01:05:52.360 for detailed knowledge

01:05:54.740 of the actual structures

01:05:55.960 of governance

01:05:56.600 and there's certainly

01:05:57.480 no substitute

01:05:58.280 for the deep respect

01:06:00.900 that should be part and parcel

01:06:02.440 of every Canadian's

01:06:04.040 political view

01:06:04.840 for the integrity

01:06:06.040 of the institutions

01:06:07.080 that have enabled us

01:06:08.040 to live in peace

01:06:08.740 and prosperity

01:06:09.380 for well the entire

01:06:10.600 expanse of Canadian history

01:06:12.020 internally

01:06:12.580 and then much

01:06:13.780 in the much broader

01:06:14.540 western world

01:06:15.280 for hundreds of years

01:06:16.240 before that

01:06:17.040 yeah exactly

01:06:18.240 but what has also happened

01:06:19.660 is that

01:06:20.200 we have

01:06:21.460 the individual

01:06:22.960 because of the nature

01:06:24.280 of governments

01:06:24.980 over the last 40 years

01:06:26.320 where the state

01:06:26.940 has taken out

01:06:27.540 more and more

01:06:28.580 say

01:06:29.340 in the operation

01:06:30.460 not only of the society

01:06:31.880 generally

01:06:32.300 but even of the economy

01:06:33.760 and everything

01:06:34.480 that goes with it

01:06:35.260 plus everything else

01:06:36.260 is that

01:06:37.180 the sovereignty

01:06:38.260 of the individual

01:06:39.060 the importance

01:06:39.960 of the individual

01:06:40.880 your individual

01:06:41.940 actions

01:06:43.320 your individual decisions

01:06:44.560 have become

01:06:45.340 less and less and less

01:06:46.560 and so

01:06:46.980 individuals feel

01:06:48.280 somewhat powerless

01:06:49.400 because the state

01:06:50.640 has taken over

01:06:51.340 almost every aspect

01:06:52.400 of your life

01:06:53.940 and so

01:06:54.380 every time

01:06:55.420 there's a problem

01:06:56.080 what is some politician

01:06:57.540 doing about it

01:06:58.320 not what am I doing

01:06:59.640 about it

01:07:00.060 as an individual

01:07:00.780 even over our

01:07:02.300 health care

01:07:02.840 for example

01:07:03.460 it's all been

01:07:04.380 just relegated

01:07:05.120 to the state

01:07:05.740 to the degree

01:07:06.340 that you know

01:07:07.320 you've got to fix

01:07:08.380 my problem

01:07:09.100 you know

01:07:09.580 nothing about

01:07:10.280 whether I'm taking

01:07:11.040 my

01:07:11.340 you know

01:07:12.420 I have a good diet

01:07:13.340 or if I'm exercising

01:07:14.820 it's like

01:07:15.540 back to the pandemic

01:07:16.900 again

01:07:17.280 this is a really

01:07:17.880 good example

01:07:18.660 of where governments

01:07:20.040 have really

01:07:20.580 fallen down

01:07:22.460 on the job

01:07:23.140 is that

01:07:23.740 everybody knows

01:07:24.740 that vitamin D

01:07:25.540 is very very important

01:07:26.960 for your health

01:07:27.800 and that it's a great

01:07:29.160 vitamin

01:07:30.920 as it relates

01:07:32.000 to your immune system

01:07:33.600 yet no government

01:07:34.740 in Canada

01:07:35.480 has been advancing

01:07:36.800 and promoting

01:07:37.460 vitamin D

01:07:38.120 during this very

01:07:38.820 critical time

01:07:39.560 when studies

01:07:40.560 have shown

01:07:41.020 that those

01:07:41.540 who have adequate

01:07:42.220 levels of vitamin D

01:07:43.340 have less hospitalizations

01:07:45.080 than those

01:07:46.080 that have

01:07:46.900 you know

01:07:47.740 adequate levels

01:07:48.600 so one would think

01:07:49.820 that if they were

01:07:50.280 really concerned

01:07:50.960 about public health

01:07:51.820 one of the first things

01:07:52.840 they should have had

01:07:53.580 in every press conference

01:07:54.960 they had

01:07:55.360 go get your vitamin D

01:07:57.400 levels tested

01:07:58.240 right

01:07:58.720 and then start

01:07:59.400 taking vitamin D

01:08:00.320 if in fact

01:08:01.060 your levels are low

01:08:01.860 and we all know

01:08:02.680 about 80%

01:08:03.440 of people

01:08:04.320 who live in northern

01:08:04.960 climes like Canada

01:08:05.920 have a deficiency

01:08:07.220 in vitamin D

01:08:09.140 so here we had

01:08:10.600 a really cheap way

01:08:12.240 of helping

01:08:13.280 so the hospitalization rate

01:08:15.340 could have been

01:08:15.720 a lot less

01:08:16.740 than what it was

01:08:18.960 just by people

01:08:19.800 taking regular

01:08:20.880 vitamin D

01:08:21.580 and so this is

01:08:22.460 a really really

01:08:23.500 common sense concept

01:08:24.940 that had lost

01:08:26.020 all meaning

01:08:26.820 in some kind

01:08:28.320 of different approach

01:08:29.520 and it all had

01:08:30.440 to be pharmaceutical

01:08:31.260 it all had to be

01:08:32.240 some kind of

01:08:33.140 you know

01:08:33.600 vaccine

01:08:34.320 it just couldn't be

01:08:35.420 a vitamin D

01:08:36.180 and zinc

01:08:37.100 and vitamin C

01:08:38.000 and kerosene

01:08:38.800 and other things

01:08:39.460 like that

01:08:40.100 not to mention

01:08:41.100 ivermectin

01:08:41.840 or hydroxychloroquine

01:08:43.400 which have been

01:08:44.080 on the market

01:08:44.640 for 40 or 50 years

01:08:45.920 yet they're telling us

01:08:46.980 to take a vaccine

01:08:47.780 that hasn't had

01:08:48.580 the tests

01:08:49.120 that these other two

01:08:50.040 have had

01:08:50.500 so let's

01:08:51.940 let's recapitulate

01:08:52.940 and maybe we should

01:08:53.700 close because

01:08:54.380 we've covered

01:08:54.900 an awful lot

01:08:55.540 of territory

01:08:56.100 and i think

01:08:56.660 it'll take

01:08:57.140 the listeners

01:08:57.780 of this podcast

01:08:59.320 a fair bit

01:09:00.200 of time

01:09:00.560 to digest

01:09:01.160 everything

01:09:01.580 that's been

01:09:02.080 discussed already

01:09:02.960 and so

01:09:03.840 you're mounting

01:09:04.860 a challenge

01:09:05.600 to the

01:09:06.920 integrity

01:09:08.260 and constitutional

01:09:09.720 appropriateness

01:09:10.880 of a series

01:09:11.480 of laws

01:09:11.940 that have been

01:09:12.340 passed in Canada

01:09:13.200 over the last

01:09:13.980 two years

01:09:14.640 and you're

01:09:15.580 mounting that

01:09:16.260 as one of

01:09:16.980 the establishers

01:09:18.440 of the charter

01:09:19.080 upon which

01:09:20.580 the entire country

01:09:21.500 is predicated

01:09:22.280 making the claim

01:09:23.440 that these actions

01:09:24.740 violate both

01:09:25.560 the spirit

01:09:26.040 and the law

01:09:26.920 that governs

01:09:27.900 our land

01:09:28.280 at the deepest

01:09:28.820 possible level

01:09:29.620 of analysis

01:09:30.200 that's the first

01:09:31.400 thing

01:09:31.800 the second thing

01:09:32.960 is the collusion

01:09:35.020 between the press

01:09:36.040 and the governmental

01:09:37.980 agencies that are

01:09:39.060 circumventing the

01:09:39.860 parliamentary process

01:09:41.040 is so intense

01:09:42.180 that it's almost

01:09:42.780 impossible to have

01:09:43.600 this discussion

01:09:44.260 in the public

01:09:45.860 landscape

01:09:46.360 there aren't

01:09:47.400 venues for that

01:09:48.360 no I've tried

01:09:50.440 it's not like

01:09:51.240 I haven't tried

01:09:51.880 I'm not making

01:09:52.540 this kind of

01:09:53.940 statement

01:09:55.820 without evidence

01:09:57.740 I don't come by

01:09:58.840 all of this lightly

01:09:59.620 I don't want to do

01:10:00.740 what I'm doing

01:10:01.320 I'd rather not

01:10:01.980 have to do this

01:10:02.800 as a Canadian

01:10:03.440 and especially

01:10:04.260 as a first minister

01:10:05.320 who was involved

01:10:06.280 in the constitution

01:10:06.860 this is not a trivial

01:10:09.360 I've written

01:10:10.660 the National Post

01:10:11.440 I've written other

01:10:12.100 newspapers

01:10:12.620 and they have not

01:10:13.640 carried my stuff

01:10:14.420 nor have they ever

01:10:15.140 gotten back to me

01:10:15.960 and all of them

01:10:16.800 also know

01:10:17.460 that I'm out there

01:10:18.280 on my blog

01:10:19.000 which gets 10,000

01:10:20.240 to 15,000 readers

01:10:21.940 every day

01:10:22.620 and a lot of them

01:10:23.800 know that

01:10:24.160 so I've had to go

01:10:24.940 to alternate media

01:10:25.960 and I've done about

01:10:26.920 50 interviews

01:10:27.760 before I launched

01:10:28.760 this lawsuit

01:10:29.460 all over Canada

01:10:30.620 two and three hours long

01:10:31.880 and I get hundreds

01:10:33.100 and hundreds of emails

01:10:33.960 a day responding

01:10:34.880 to what I'm doing

01:10:35.880 and now I've been led

01:10:38.240 to where I am today

01:10:39.840 to actually

01:10:40.480 as one individual

01:10:41.320 with others

01:10:42.640 file a lawsuit

01:10:44.040 against the government

01:10:45.020 of Canada

01:10:45.420 in the federal court

01:10:46.520 on the travel ban

01:10:47.860 to give it specificity

01:10:49.640 so that I can make

01:10:50.780 this kind of lawsuit

01:10:52.640 valid

01:10:53.400 and how do you think

01:10:54.900 if you had your will

01:10:57.300 and you had

01:10:58.680 you were acting

01:10:59.920 in accordance

01:11:00.440 with the idea

01:11:01.220 that someday

01:11:02.160 the sun will shine

01:11:03.220 and have not

01:11:03.920 will be no more

01:11:04.880 what do you think

01:11:06.760 Canadians should do

01:11:08.380 as a consequence

01:11:09.420 of receiving

01:11:10.200 the information

01:11:10.980 we have today

01:11:11.980 and in terms

01:11:15.120 of their reactions

01:11:16.000 to the fact

01:11:16.960 of this lawsuit

01:11:17.740 and its potential outcomes

01:11:19.080 so if you could

01:11:19.920 call on Canadians 0.76

01:11:20.900 to deliver

01:11:21.520 what they should

01:11:22.140 be delivering

01:11:22.680 as individuals

01:11:23.540 given the situation

01:11:25.240 we're in now

01:11:25.920 what would you

01:11:27.020 recommend

01:11:27.740 for them to do?

01:11:29.140 I would recommend

01:11:30.180 the following

01:11:30.720 please don't go down

01:11:31.860 a bunch of rabbit holes

01:11:32.900 talking about

01:11:33.720 a monarchy

01:11:34.640 of a hundred years ago

01:11:35.920 I get all this

01:11:36.940 all the time

01:11:37.440 that Canada is only

01:11:38.280 a corporation

01:11:39.000 it's not really

01:11:39.600 a country

01:11:40.020 and all of that

01:11:40.580 stick with what

01:11:41.540 we know

01:11:42.120 for sure

01:11:43.140 and we know

01:11:43.720 we have a constitution

01:11:44.840 and two written documents

01:11:46.460 one when we were formed

01:11:47.720 another in 1981

01:11:49.280 they are documents

01:11:50.600 that were passed

01:11:51.180 legally

01:11:51.600 through parliamentary

01:11:52.880 democracies

01:11:54.360 and they have been

01:11:55.720 exercised

01:11:56.400 they have been used

01:11:57.400 so the very fact

01:11:58.740 that they've been used

01:11:59.540 makes them

01:12:00.140 a reality

01:12:01.140 because part of our

01:12:01.920 constitution

01:12:02.280 is also custom

01:12:03.300 and convention

01:12:04.240 and that custom

01:12:05.220 and convention

01:12:05.760 proves

01:12:06.380 that what we have

01:12:07.540 is valid

01:12:08.240 okay

01:12:08.600 so what they should

01:12:09.560 be doing

01:12:10.060 is sticking

01:12:10.820 with the elected

01:12:11.800 all of the elected

01:12:13.480 people

01:12:13.980 in their legislative

01:12:15.340 assemblies

01:12:16.020 everybody in their

01:12:17.480 legislative assembly

01:12:18.320 right up to the premier

01:12:19.080 and in the federal government

01:12:20.500 go write your MPs

01:12:23.220 write your MLAs

01:12:24.580 ask them

01:12:26.120 and demand

01:12:26.860 meetings with them

01:12:27.940 to go through

01:12:28.820 what are you doing

01:12:29.680 about this

01:12:30.160 what is your argument

01:12:31.260 against

01:12:32.000 in favour of these mandates

01:12:33.580 when all this information

01:12:34.640 is available

01:12:35.240 so Canadians

01:12:36.420 must start

01:12:37.100 to really activate

01:12:38.440 their civic

01:12:39.100 responsibilities

01:12:40.040 in a huge way

01:12:42.120 and then involve

01:12:43.360 themselves

01:12:43.800 in legitimate

01:12:44.360 organisations

01:12:45.100 who are open

01:12:46.640 and free

01:12:47.320 that are going

01:12:48.060 to help you

01:12:48.600 do this kind

01:12:49.340 of protest

01:12:49.820 so you're saying

01:12:50.820 that we should

01:12:51.460 trust the basic

01:12:52.680 institutions

01:12:53.460 we should have

01:12:54.880 faith in them

01:12:55.540 because they've

01:12:56.080 worked for us

01:12:56.820 in the past

01:12:57.360 they've united

01:12:57.980 our country

01:12:58.580 and are drawn

01:12:59.840 from a tradition

01:13:00.580 that has united

01:13:01.900 countries

01:13:02.780 for long

01:13:03.540 before that

01:13:04.280 and that we should

01:13:05.520 start using them

01:13:06.420 properly

01:13:07.000 and responsibly

01:13:08.220 and also

01:13:09.500 like in my

01:13:10.080 particular case

01:13:10.740 the Justice Centre

01:13:11.440 for Constitutional

01:13:12.780 Freedoms

01:13:13.200 Rocco Galati

01:13:14.120 in Toronto

01:13:14.740 who's got

01:13:15.620 a constitutional

01:13:16.180 foundation

01:13:16.820 and he's

01:13:17.940 initiating

01:13:18.980 actions against

01:13:19.880 the federal

01:13:20.280 government

01:13:20.680 there's another

01:13:21.700 one calling

01:13:22.180 the Canadian

01:13:22.660 Constitutional

01:13:23.320 Foundation

01:13:23.680 itself

01:13:24.180 in Ontario

01:13:25.100 all of these

01:13:25.760 organisations

01:13:26.300 who are

01:13:26.840 looking for

01:13:27.800 support

01:13:28.600 financial support

01:13:29.640 they should be

01:13:30.420 supported

01:13:30.820 because they are

01:13:31.620 very

01:13:32.020 they're vanguards

01:13:33.360 we can put

01:13:35.060 links to them

01:13:35.800 we can put

01:13:36.380 links to them

01:13:36.940 in the description

01:13:37.620 of this video

01:13:38.380 so we'll have

01:13:39.060 if you can get

01:13:40.160 your team

01:13:40.620 to give us

01:13:41.800 all the links

01:13:42.560 that you would

01:13:43.060 like to put

01:13:43.680 in the description

01:13:44.340 of the video

01:13:44.880 then we'll do

01:13:45.480 that

01:13:45.820 and we'll do

01:13:46.740 our best

01:13:47.120 to get this

01:13:47.600 out

01:13:47.860 well hopefully

01:13:48.880 tomorrow

01:13:49.420 as soon as

01:13:50.280 we possibly

01:13:50.820 can

01:13:51.280 well thank you

01:13:52.700 very much

01:13:53.160 but I really

01:13:54.100 think that

01:13:54.540 if we get

01:13:55.380 back to

01:13:55.820 participating

01:13:56.380 in our

01:13:56.860 democracy

01:13:57.400 we can turn

01:13:58.240 this around

01:13:58.920 and it may

01:14:00.240 come to also

01:14:01.060 like the

01:14:01.660 truckers

01:14:02.020 convoy

01:14:02.480 now

01:14:02.800 peaceful

01:14:03.820 demonstration

01:14:04.620 civil

01:14:05.300 disobedience

01:14:06.080 is also

01:14:06.560 a part

01:14:06.940 of democracy

01:14:07.640 legitimate

01:14:08.680 civil

01:14:09.160 disobedience

01:14:09.960 we must

01:14:10.440 protest

01:14:11.140 in front

01:14:11.520 of our

01:14:11.800 legislatures

01:14:12.440 in a

01:14:13.000 peaceful

01:14:13.360 manner

01:14:13.900 demonstrating

01:14:15.180 and articulating

01:14:16.260 our position

01:14:17.040 in a rational

01:14:17.920 way

01:14:18.340 and so

01:14:18.920 part of that

01:14:19.440 is definitely

01:14:20.120 concern about

01:14:22.020 the manner

01:14:22.720 in which

01:14:23.060 governance

01:14:23.480 itself

01:14:23.900 is being

01:14:24.360 conducted

01:14:24.780 in Canada

01:14:25.360 and a call

01:14:26.480 for return

01:14:27.020 to parliamentary

01:14:27.780 supremacy

01:14:28.580 and proper

01:14:29.180 procedures

01:14:29.760 absolutely

01:14:30.940 absolutely

01:14:32.260 well thank

01:14:33.340 you very

01:14:33.660 much for

01:14:34.200 speaking with

01:14:34.920 me today

01:14:35.400 and for

01:14:36.060 and for

01:14:36.960 all of the

01:14:37.360 people who

01:14:37.720 are listening

01:14:38.100 to this

01:14:38.580 thank you

01:14:39.000 for your

01:14:39.340 attention

01:14:39.740 and and

01:14:40.780 pay attention

01:14:41.360 because this

01:14:41.880 is a non-trivial

01:14:42.800 occurrence

01:14:43.260 and if we're

01:14:44.760 careful and wise

01:14:45.660 maybe we can

01:14:46.360 weave our way

01:14:47.080 through this

01:14:47.520 without having

01:14:48.160 things crumble

01:14:49.020 into anything

01:14:49.700 resembling chaos

01:14:50.700 around us

01:14:51.500 thank you

01:14:53.120 very much

01:14:53.660 very great

01:14:54.560 pleasure to

01:14:55.020 meet you

01:14:55.420 sir

01:14:55.700 we'll talk

01:14:58.920 again perhaps

01:15:00.000 as this

01:15:00.480 unfolds

01:15:01.720 okay thank

01:15:02.420 you

01:15:02.580 thrive knows

01:15:22.340 that quitting

01:15:22.800 smoking is

01:15:23.500 hard you get

01:15:24.860 advice like

01:15:25.520 try hypnosis

01:15:26.940 or quick 0.50

01:15:28.680 cold turkey

01:15:29.600 instead start

01:15:31.360 small with

01:15:31.840 thrive which

01:15:32.380 can lead to

01:15:32.980 something big

01:15:33.780 start stopping

01:15:34.680 with thrive

The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast - January 27, 2022

221. Canadian Constitutional Crisis ｜ Brian Peckford

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript