00:20:32.400And I do have some time. I want to thank my friends from the OPP and the Ottawa Coalition for giving me some of their time. Mr. Cameron took you to the McLean Report and there was some discussion about your roles. Would you agree with me that you are not only the chief advisor, legal advisor to the government, you are also considered as Attorney General the guardian of the rule of law and of the Constitution?
00:25:23.080Okay. So would you, do you need me to take you to the CSIS Act?
00:25:26.580Oh, no, it's fine. I believe I have answered to the point that I can answer with previous counsel.
00:25:35.700I'm not sure I can add anything else. If you want me to repeat myself, I will, but it's your time.
00:25:41.800No, thank you. And I know now we've heard over the course of the commission's time that in terms of the CSIS Act, it's Section C that the government was relying on here.
00:25:57.440Okay. But here we have all four potentially laid out. There's also a news release that was put out when the act was invoked, and that's COM 50657.
00:26:11.800And you know what, I'm not sure I have a page number written down here.
00:26:26.800Let's take a look, if we can scroll down further, keep going.
00:26:37.360So it lists the measures that will be put in place.
00:26:41.800And here it's describing what has to happen in order to declare a public border emergency.
00:26:47.920And sorry, stop right there. Thank you, Mr. Clark.
00:26:50.240It says threats to the security of Canada may include the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property.
00:26:57.720So, again, there we're using discretionary language instead of the sort of the mandatory language that's in the act.
00:27:11.080I would put to you that it's not misleading, although you may have wished to have more
00:27:16.680technical detail as a lawyer, but it is not misleading in terms of its general direction.
00:27:22.980Okay. Let's talk about the Charter. I know that when the Emergencies Act was invoked,
00:27:28.840and I think we've seen some documents, there's concern that some people think that the
00:27:34.420Emergencies Act suspends the operation of the Charter. And I take it that that is something
00:27:39.740that you are concerned about and that you want to provide people assurances that's not, in fact,
00:27:44.540what the Emergencies Act does. That's true. Okay. And you said, I think, in a couple of
00:27:49.940your statements publicly when the Act was invoked that lawful protest was permitted.
00:27:55.200Correct. Now, were you getting a sense by this point that maybe people that were participating
00:28:02.840in these protests did not have a clear understanding of what a lawful protest was.
00:28:09.080I think that may be true for some, but they were participating in an unlawful protest.
00:28:16.020They were participating in a protest that was trampling on the rights of other Canadians,
00:28:20.620the Section 7 rights to security. They were having a negative impact on mental health.
00:28:26.280They were having a negative impact on people's mobility, both in urban areas like Ottawa,
00:28:31.460but also at border crossings no they weren't they were there as a group they were harassing
00:28:36.340canadians uh no they weren't there were there were threats of violence so we saw we saw a plot
00:28:41.880uncovered in coots alberta there were reports of violence uh reports of guns possibly present in
00:28:48.220ottawa where is he getting this from there was uh the tracking of potential uh imv left-wing
00:28:53.480corporate media this is all bs this has already been established as despite messaging to try to
00:28:59.200try to say go home uh people weren't listening okay so the this was this was not a legal protest
00:29:06.140by any stretch of the imagination yes it was quite illegal and and uh the emergencies act out with it
00:29:12.420when when minister mentosino was here yesterday he he said that he he believed that uh although
00:29:17.840the he would characterize i think it the same way that the protest was illegal that there were
00:29:22.960thousands of people who were aiming to protest lawfully and thousands of people who were. So
00:29:29.260not people who were blocking trucks, people who were simply on the streets, on their feet,
00:29:34.620protesting peacefully. Yeah, I grant you that possibility. Okay. And the orders that were put
00:29:39.500in place under the Emergencies Act required those people to leave the area. That's correct.
00:29:47.400Thank you. They always had the option to go somewhere else to protest legally.
00:29:50.620When the blockade was cleared, people went down the street, Wellington Street in Ottawa towards Booth, and they protested on the side of the road, not impeding traffic, not impeding pedestrians, manifesting their political beliefs, waving signs.
00:30:07.440Throughout all of this, those people had an option to move to protest legally, and they didn't.
00:30:14.420Okay, I want to talk about the financial measures that were put in place.
00:30:18.480And if we can go to SSM CAN 404423, would you agree that the financial measures gave both police and financial institutions discretion to freeze assets of individuals who were engaged in unlawful activity as it was defined under the emergency orders?
00:32:58.320And if you can scroll down to the third page,
00:33:05.520uh the bit that's highlighted um this is the bit that sort of led to the um led to the confusion
00:33:16.100um but would you agree with me that here you're you're not saying that someone who's donated
00:33:20.660couldn't have their assets frozen that is contemplated by the orders that's right what
00:33:27.920i mean i've i chose language uh that i probably shouldn't have used in in the framing of this
00:33:34.520What I meant to say is that if you happen to live in the United States and you're supporting what's going on in Canada, then you ought to be worried that these financial measures could kick in.
00:33:50.860The other clarification I would also stand by with respect to the discretion, and I think that was a legitimate follow-up question to which we gave a legitimate clarification.
00:34:00.900and then this will be my final uh my final bit um this is I guess we've heard about CSIS 101
00:34:07.000I want to talk about Oaks 101 talked about the the proportionality the need for all of the
00:34:12.360measures under the act to be proportional um and would you agree with me that proportionality is
00:34:17.300assessed in context so when a court is looking at whether um government action or measure is
00:34:23.540proportional it assesses it against the objective that the government is trying to achieve
00:34:27.860Absolutely right. And I'm glad you asked that because it allows me to say that we took targeted, time limited, temporary measures that focused on specific areas of the occupation that we needed to get at the financing, as well as the geographical definitions and a few other things.
00:34:49.240the measures we took were specific to the blockades. They were time limited. I believe
00:34:55.180they passed charter muster and they were quite proportional to the task at hand. And I think
00:35:00.640in this is the one time I will go to hindsight, they worked quite well and quite efficiently.
00:35:05.840Okay. And by invoking the Emergencies Act, the objective is to address a national emergency,
00:35:13.100a threat to the security of Canada under the Emergencies Act.
00:36:27.760So the first injunction was effective Friday, February the 11th.
00:36:31.940Windsor Police and the OPP, together with their policing partners,
00:36:34.920safely cleared the bridge over that weekend and then although the bridge was reopened to traffic
00:36:41.080just after midnight the morning of february the 14th the city of windsor sought to continue the
00:36:46.200injunction you're aware of this i am indeed okay so the chief justice granted this extension on
00:36:51.240february the 18th this is uh the chief justice of ontario's decision regarding the extension
00:36:57.000have you seen it i have seen parts of it uh and i now have it in front of me great so i'm just
00:37:03.080just going to ask you some questions about the findings that the Chief Justice made and the
00:37:07.980evidence that was before him on February the 18th. The Chief Justice found that the city had
00:37:13.660established a prima facie case that the protesters had breached multiple bylaws and continued to do
00:37:21.060so after the order came into effect. You're aware of this? I am. Okay. The court also found that
00:37:26.680protesters breached the February the 11th order as evidenced by multiple arrests under the criminal
00:37:32.340code for breach of an order. I'm aware of that as well. Did you share the Chief Justice's concern
00:37:38.180that protesters would continue to breach the law? Yes, and it's certainly consistent with the
00:37:43.760information that we were getting, both from Windsor and other places. Right. So the Chief
00:37:49.640Justice also found in this paragraph 47 of the decision, which is before you, shows that the
00:37:55.280Chief Justice also found, based on the evidence that was presented to him on that day, that there
00:37:59.860was a risk that protesters would reassert presence on the roadways to block access
00:38:04.360to the bridge. Minister Lamedi, were you also concerned at that time about the
00:38:09.640risk that protesters would return and block the bridge again? Very much so,
00:38:15.040including even after the bridge was cleared later that day and the
00:38:20.020next day, we were monitoring very closely what police reports were saying.
00:38:25.460There were reports that people were coming back or, in fact, when the blockades began to be cleared in Ottawa, that trucks would leave Ottawa and go to Windsor to the Ambassador Bridge.
00:38:40.780So we were monitoring all of that, but it was very much alive in our concerns.
00:38:46.200Right. And that was all before the Chief Justice on February 18th when he heard the continuation of the injunction.
00:39:34.900And I would add, as I stated with the previous counsel,
00:39:40.940that there was always the opportunity to conduct legal protests,
00:39:44.400but the method chosen had a deleterious effect on many, many other people.
00:39:50.280And can you tell the commission, in your view, what are the consequences of these threats you saw to the rule of law?
00:39:56.860Well, it undermines. It undermines the ability of people to live, to work, to function.
00:40:03.640It undermines their mental health. It undermines their sense of security.
00:40:07.880That's rich coming from a guy who helped to shut the country down and locked them away for two and a half years.
00:40:13.760Decision makers to make decisions. Democratically elected decision makers to make decisions.
00:40:20.280And you can agree or disagree, but there's a process for disagreement. And that process has served our country well since its inception. This completely undermines that. It's the rule of the mob as opposed to the rule of law.
00:40:35.520um minister lametti the next paragraph um we see that the democracy fund which is a party here
00:40:42.780before this commission attended at that hearing as an intervener friend of the court and argued
00:40:47.540that an injunction was not warranted as there were other enforcement remedies to address the
00:40:51.940unlawful conduct including the emergencies act because as we know the emergencies act was already
00:40:56.840invoked at that time and i just wanted to point out uh for you i'm not sure if you knew the
00:41:01.340decision in detail, but that argument was rejected on the basis that the test for a statutory
00:41:07.060injunction under the Municipal Act does not require consideration of the availability of
00:41:12.080other enforcement remedies. Right. I knew that. I would add that nobody has a monopoly on irony.
00:41:17.620Right. So in paragraph 68, I have one more question, Minister Labani, although perhaps
00:41:23.660your answer may take more time than I have. At paragraph 68, the Chief Justice concluded by
00:41:30.660repeating a statement from his reasons on the initial injunction and he says simply put freedom
00:41:36.480of expression does not extend to the point that the protesters activities can result in the denial
00:41:42.180of fundamental rights and freedoms to all those detrimentally affected by the blockade um could
00:41:48.800you just i know we don't have much time but can you unpack this balancing of rights for us uh just
00:41:53.600briefly does the extent of an individual right or freedom under the charter have to be measured
00:41:58.920against its effect on other members of the community and their rights and freedoms.
00:42:04.020Thank you. I agree with every word that Chief Justice Morowitz has written here.
00:42:09.080Rights are not absolute, and one's own individual rights go as far as they do not detrimentally affect the rights of others.
00:42:20.220With respect to peaceful protests, there's always going to be a bit of inconvenience for a short period of time.
00:42:27.560But when you lock in and you block people from living and working and sleeping at night because you're honking your horns or can't get your children to school or to the hospital because you've impeded traffic, or you've blocked a bridge in Windsor that is vital for the economy of not just southwestern Ontario, but the whole country, and the impact that that has on families and on mental health and the stress that it was on people.
00:42:54.160All of that is so far beyond the legitimate exercise of free speech, freedom of expression, particularly when there's always an option to do it legally in a time and place and space that doesn't have...
00:43:09.260Not acknowledging at all the government's lack of involvement in this.
00:43:44.620And that extends to the police decision of how to allocate and use resources, correct?
00:43:50.520Yes, in terms of operations, but there are larger decisions where, at the very least, according to what was written in the IPRWASH report, governments can make their priorities known in certain contexts, particularly these kinds of emergency contexts.
00:44:09.120Right, and you said that, you referenced the IPRWASH a couple times this morning.
00:44:51.720And are you, my friend just took you to it, but I just want to confirm you were aware that enforcement actions were underway in Windsor on February 12th and the 13th and that the bridge was reopened just after midnight on the 13th or morning of the 14th, correct?
00:45:07.740And as I had said, even conversations later on the 14th indicated that we were still worried that continued occupations might be reasserted of the Ambassador Bridge.
00:45:22.160Okay. And prior to those enforcement actions on the 12th and 13th, you weren't provided with a copy of the operational plan, correct?
00:46:00.140So was the source of the information you were receiving about the enforcement action at the Ambassador Bridge on February 12th and 13th, was that mostly from, say, television or news reports?
00:46:11.160It was information we received around the cabinet table, often through the RCMP
00:46:20.080commissioner, or I believe it's also possible through the national security
00:46:28.820and intelligence apparatus. But I'm pretty sure it was mainly commissioner Lucky.
00:46:35.340Okay. And just to be clear, because I actually don't remember. So February 12th and 13th was
00:46:41.060weekend it was actually super bowl weekend um was there cabinet meetings happening uh over the
00:46:46.660course of that weekend yes there were okay um so i just want to take you we've looked at a lot of
00:46:55.860your texts this morning so i'm just going to bring this particular one up um if we could have ssm can
00:51:05.720What we're doing is we're assessing facts on the ground
00:51:09.900in order to determine whether there is a national emergency
00:51:14.640and whether, according to the Emergencies Act,
00:51:20.060provincial laws are adequate to the task.
00:51:23.600um that includes whether there are gaps in provincial laws or whether there is a necessary
00:51:29.680or whether there is a non-application of laws um if i i mean i could give you examples but it's
00:51:36.560your time uh so it's it's it's really just an assessment of the adequacy of the current state
00:51:43.360of laws uh both in terms of their use or their non-use as as a way of determining whether uh
00:51:50.160we've met the threshold for the emergencies act okay but you'll agree with me sir that it's it's
00:51:55.440a very different thing to be identifying gaps in existing laws so that new tools can be provided
00:52:02.640as opposed to reviewing how existing tools are being employed those are quite different things
00:52:07.760aren't they oh yes they are and i'm not and i'm not being non i'm not being judgmental about the
00:52:12.080non-use i'm just saying that's a factor it's a fact on the ground i'm not i'm not being judgmental
00:52:18.080about the non-use at all. Okay. And you'll also agree with me, sir, that to the extent it is a
00:52:24.940provincial decision as opposed to an operational decision by police. So with respect to something
00:52:31.100like a province's decision to invoke its own emergencies legislation, that's ordinarily a
00:52:37.740matter that falls within exclusive provincial jurisdiction, correct? Yes, that's true. But we
00:52:43.640We had a situation, for example, I saw with my own eyes, the license plates of the rigs that were sitting on Wellington Street in Ottawa, and they came from across the country.
00:52:54.380And in order for a number of the financial measures that we put into place to work, we needed national application.
00:53:01.620And although a number of those measures fell within provincial jurisdiction, I think it was quite a reasonable observation on our part to have come to the conclusion that not every province would have put these measures into place in order for us to implement these kinds of financial measures.
00:53:21.980So, again, it's a question of efficacy and creating a useful tool that will fill a gap.
00:53:32.360It's not a judgment on the operational plans of any province.
00:53:37.880And, sir, you also talked about looking at the existence of effective laws and looking for gaps in the laws.
00:53:46.340And I take it that could be gaps in either federal laws or provincial laws, correct?
00:53:51.980And you would agree with me again that in the ordinary course, the decision about whether to enact laws to fill gaps in provincial laws is a matter that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces, isn't it?
00:54:06.440Oh, absolutely. But we're talking about an emergency here, a temporary limited measure with very specific purposes.
00:54:14.060Okay, so just so that I'm clear then, it's your position and the federal government's position that when there is a national emergency, the federal government can review what provincial laws exist and how those laws are being applied, and if it thinks it's necessary, can step in and deal with those matters by orders and regulations under the Emergencies Act, even though those matters would ordinarily fall under provincial jurisdiction, correct?
00:54:41.740I just want to say when it comes to the position for the purposes of legal argument, that will be the matter of submissions at the end of the case.
00:54:53.360And my short answer is no. I don't agree with the way you've characterized it.
00:54:59.280Okay, and can you tell me what part of what I've said you disagree with?
00:55:02.460So I would suggest you read the Emergencies Act, which says to examine the laws that exist and filling gaps in that matter.
00:55:16.820But you would agree with me that under Section 19 of the Emergencies Act, the federal government can make orders and regulations that deal with matters that in ordinary times would come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces, correct?
00:55:30.440I think that's fair, but it's not something one does likely.
00:55:34.440Thank you, sir. Those are all of my questions.
00:55:37.440Okay, thank you. And good luck with the fire.
00:55:42.440I'm hoping it's a false alarm. Thank you.
00:55:51.440Okay, next is the Government of Canada, please.
00:56:00.440Thank you, Commissioner. And I am advised that the Minister needs to go and vote by 3.15. I expect to be done well before that, but just so we're all keeping an eye on the clock.
00:56:11.580I will have questions and there may be re-examination, so we're going to have to figure it out, but one step at a time.
00:56:17.300Okay, thank you. Let's start with SSM.CAN.407845.
00:56:25.280minister just to remind you in a text message to your chief of staff on january 30th which
00:56:35.080we'll put on the screen to refresh your memory you raised a question about the emergencies act
00:56:41.060you see that yes and your testimony in response to questions from commission council was that
00:56:46.580you're raising it as a matter of prudence this is the sunday evening on the first weekend of the
00:56:54.220protest um do you start thinking about the emergencies act every time there is a protest
00:57:01.100no but this was quite extraordinary we'd already seen a weekend and and uh of of a blockade uh
00:57:09.340which wasn't going anywhere soon so this was uh this is just prudence on my part um and on january
00:57:17.48030th, you're testifying that it's a matter of prudence. On what date or at what stage did
00:57:24.060consideration of the Emergencies Act move from a matter of prudence and a mere possibility
00:57:29.520to a step that was being given serious consideration by cabinet?
00:57:34.920I think towards as we moved into the sense I got as we moved into the sort of 11th, 12th,
00:57:43.56013th of February it began to be serious certainly for me it was moving into that weekend that it
00:57:51.500became a serious possibility for me okay let's go to ssm.can.407851
00:57:57.440and this was a text message exchange with minister Mendicino that you were taken to by commission
00:58:06.020council you'll recall that mr. Cameron asked you about your first sentence there you need to get
00:58:13.540the police to move. The exchange goes on to talk, you say, and the CAF if necessary. Mr. Mendicino
00:58:21.940writes, how many tanks are you asking for? I just want to ask Anita how many we've got on hand.
00:58:27.680You respond, I reckon one will do. On February 2nd or at any other point, were you seriously
00:58:36.720suggesting that CAF be brought in or that there be tanks brought in to Ottawa to deal with the
00:58:44.640situation? No. This exchange is meant to be a joke between two friends. CAF, if necessary. The CAF
00:58:54.380is always the last resort under the National Defence Act, the very last resort, even after
00:58:59.720the Emergencies Act. So, in a sense, the Emergencies Act is the second last resort. And I think it's
00:59:05.540there, particularly as we moved along, that the CAF was not an option.
00:59:12.780Okay. You recall questions from Mr. Hawner on behalf of the Democracy Fund about the
00:59:21.520timing of revocation. Let's please put up SSM.can.407902. And Minister, he put to you the
00:59:31.900suggestion that but for some concern about getting ahead of the NDP, your government would have
00:59:39.040continued the Emergencies Act. Do you recall those questions? Yeah, I do. And you mentioned in your
00:59:44.420evidence that there were other text messages. This is a text message between yourself and Eric
00:59:50.300Antoine, February 23rd. Who is Mr. Antoine? No, it's actually between my chief of staff
01:08:32.480And so I'm going to ask this witness some questions about the evidence that Mr. Vigneault gave
01:08:37.040and see if he can help us at all with the basis on which Mr. Vigneault thought
01:08:43.600that it was appropriate for him to give an opinion to the Prime Minister about invoking the act,
01:08:49.460even though he had an opinion as the director of CSIS that the threshold of 2C had not been met.
01:08:57.360So with that in mind, let me ask you, Minister Lamedi, if you had followed that either live or in preparing for the hearing,
01:09:11.300that exchange in which the director of CSIS, Mr. Vignon, had said in a closed session,
01:09:22.920which got summarized into an open session, that based on assurances he had received,
01:09:30.060he thought it was appropriate to give an opinion to the Prime Minister on whether or not the
01:09:34.220act should be invoked independently of his view on the fact that 2C had not been met.
01:09:40.540did you follow that issue i read the transcript of it thank you that that that helps us um when
01:09:48.300when the matter uh uh came up and i mr clerk are you able to pull up the transcript of the 21st
01:09:56.940for us just in case uh minister lametti wants to see the way that uh that director vignon put it
01:10:03.740And I'm looking at page 58 of the transcript.
01:10:17.120No, it's not the guy that fell over Cass, but it sure feels like that, doesn't it?
01:10:26.260Let me, while it's coming up on the screen, Minister Lamedi, I'll...
01:10:33.740you you've you've uh read the transcript but just to put some context around the question i'll ask
01:10:41.100you about it uh i'm at the top of page 58 of the transcript and uh oh looks like we might get it up
01:10:49.98058 and yes if you could just zoom in so we can get that so when okay and uh this is uh director
01:11:13.700vigno speaking so when that was first brought up the fact that the emergencies act was using
01:11:19.120the same words as the CSIS Act to define the threat, so imported into the Emergencies Act,
01:11:24.960I needed to understand for myself and for, you know, the course of this, what the implication
01:11:31.340of that. And that's when I was assured that, you know, they were, it was a separate understanding.
01:11:40.020You know, the confines of the CSIS Act and the same words based on legal interpretation,
01:11:45.220jurisprudence federal court rulings and so on there was a very clear understanding of what
01:11:50.700those words meant in the confines of the thesis act and what i was reassured by is that there was
01:11:56.960you know in the context of the emergencies act there was to be a separate interpretation based
01:12:02.760on the confines of that act and so my question to you uh minister lametti is what assurances
01:12:11.160had Mr. Vignon received that allowed him to come to that conclusion
01:12:18.000that there were different interpretations of the test
01:12:25.660under the CSIS Act and under the Emergencies Act.
01:12:29.860Commissioner, I need to object to that question on the ground
01:12:32.280so that it may get into areas of solicitor-client privilege.
01:12:37.280In addition to the fact you asked me to comment on a conversation
01:12:40.260which i was not part of um commissioner the commission council are in a conundrum here as
01:12:51.940i think are the parties who have tried to pursue this issue with uh director vignon with uh minister
01:12:58.580lametti and with others as the hearing has proceeded um we recognize though that solicitor
01:13:06.260client privilege poses a special challenge for the commission not only because of issues
01:13:12.500of the extent of the extent to which you're able to adjudicate on those issues but also because
01:13:19.060the time it takes to resolve them especially if the matter ends up getting referred to a
01:13:25.060court of superior jurisdiction would be frankly fatal to the timetable that you're obliged to
01:13:30.900work by and so commission council are not going to call on you to make a ruling on this issue
01:13:36.420we would observe that we have a throughout that is from the beginning of this proceeding through
01:13:43.540till now attempted to find a way to lift the veil that has made such a black box of what has turned
01:13:53.780out to be a central issue before the hearing now if we believed that that prevented you from
01:14:00.020assessing the basis on which the government came to its conclusion we
01:14:03.920would ask you for ruling on it but we are confident that there are other ways
01:14:07.880that we can get the same information on the record or get the same result through
01:14:14.460legal arguments and so we're not pressing you for an issue we just regret
01:14:17.780that it ends up being an absence of transparency on the part of the
01:14:22.440government mr. commissioner I apologize for interrupting but the minister does
01:14:28.060need to um go and vote now i understand perhaps my friend and i can we can continue to deal with
01:14:33.440this issue in his absence okay well maybe uh go go and vote then uh is uh and vote wisely
01:14:42.780um so uh make sure you put your mask on when you get up and walk away
01:14:49.380unbelievable he's been sitting there for hours with no mask on but now he's got to put it on
01:14:55.420that's outrageous the commission is in recess for 10 minutes all right all right so the commission
01:15:03.640is taking their afternoon break that's fine that's good whole lot of nothing with david
01:15:10.680lametti this morning in my opinion uh and this afternoon for that matter nothing you know you
01:15:19.780got to guys you got to sit back and go all right this is a cagey experienced emeritus lawyer okay
01:15:28.220he is experienced in the art of litigation and he is very steeped in his knowledge of canadian law
01:15:36.260most of the people aside from mckinnon there the council lawyer who was talking just at the end
01:15:44.620there and who did the interrogation sorry the examination of Lamedi when we first started this
01:15:51.060morning I believe that he and Lamedi are contemporaries but most of the lawyers who
01:15:56.340were questioning Lamedi in count in in cross later on were disciples of David Lamedi or students of
01:16:06.080David Lamedi in some way so it's going to be very rare that you find one of those people
01:16:16.940getting an upper hand on a guy like that having said that
01:16:23.820when we did see separation between his role as justice minister versus his role as attorney
01:16:32.180general and by the way i have been saying for a very long time now that those two roles need to
01:16:37.280be separate because they come into conflict with each other as we've seen this morning
01:16:43.400if you're looking for truth that is if you're trying to cover up truth
01:16:47.560then let's keep those roles as combined as we possibly can
01:16:51.140but ultimately his bias showed when he was answering as the minister of justice and just
01:17:05.720as a regular everyday resident of ottawa his liberal bias and i don't want to use the word
01:17:10.920liberal i use it in terms of the party he he runs for he represents he's a member of but as far as
01:17:16.340liberal in terms of mindset no progressive possibly leftist marxist um he was absolutely
01:17:25.200convinced that these people the convoy were terrorists
01:17:29.240that was his mindset so how could one how could that personal mindset not pollute
01:17:36.640his professional mindset in terms of how how anything gets applied legally in this country
01:17:44.620After all, he is the foremost lawyer in the country in terms of the way our government structure is set up.
01:17:55.480So we're going to you know, I'm going to stay with with the live stream, guys.
01:17:59.720I'm going to bring something over to you. I want you to see.
01:18:02.440We were talking earlier during one of the breaks about the big meeting last night in Ottawa regarding should masks be mandatory for students in an Ottawa Carleton school division, I believe is the division that we were talking about.
01:18:18.780And last night there was the big meeting and one of the fathers gets up and starts talking here, even though every single member of the school board is masked, as you can see, some of the people in the audience and by the way, it was standing room only in this in this room last night.
01:18:35.280Some of the parents were masked. Most weren't. No decision was come to the void. The vote last night didn't happen because police were called to clear the room.
01:18:46.000so in many ways it was an american style uh protest last night that happened at this meeting
01:18:55.800but let's see what this father had to say here we really do appreciate and it is our job as
01:19:01.220trustees to ensure that we are hearing the voices of all our constituents so again i'd like to thank
01:19:05.000you for your time look at these ridiculous masks just for a point of clarification for myself would
01:19:09.260you be able to cite the uh resources where you're stating that 90 of parents don't want their0.84
01:19:14.880children mask? Just so I understand the presentation. Yes, absolutely. So the board did a survey on the
01:19:21.540number of students that were masking. That is an implicit description that parents do not want
01:19:26.140their kids masking. Even if you want to be generous and say it's 80%, fine. 80% of your constituents
01:19:31.620absolutely do not support this policy. And if you are here to support your constituents and vote
01:19:38.100with what they want, it's not mandatory masking. People are still going to be free to mask if they
01:19:43.400want. Nobody wants to take that away. I don't want to take it away. There's plenty of people
01:19:46.880here mask good for them. But it's the imposition of a mandate forcing people who don't want to do
01:19:52.740it. And 95% of students are not masking right now, or whatever it was, it was less than 10%.
01:19:58.080So let's call it 90% of students are not masking, they do not want to do it. And if you're I heard
01:20:03.740the argument that well, you know, some of them are being bullied, and that's why they don't feel
01:20:07.520comfortable. Well, guess what, when my children defied the mask mandate, they were bullied for
01:20:11.720not wearing a mask thank you and they stood up for themselves so it's possible if you want it you can
01:20:17.260do it and again no decision was reached at all last night because the board obviously saw that
01:20:29.800it was not going to go in their favor and so they they called the police instead like a bunch of
01:20:34.640cowards the cops came and the cops cleared the room and i would imagine that the vote will
01:20:41.840probably happen now behind closed doors and yes they probably will vote for mandatory masking at
01:20:46.820some point later on this week or maybe next week even though they hear from the majority of parents
01:20:53.640who say they don't want it so what does that tell you that means probably more parents will be
01:20:58.780pulling their kids from the public school system in Ontario or that specific location in Ottawa
01:21:04.780Carleton, which is fine. We saw last night during the regular show, the Shadow at Night live stream
01:21:10.140that goes at eight o'clock central every weeknight, that 52% in terms of independent schools,
01:21:21.880that's the growth number of independent schools in Ontario since 2013. That means schools that
01:21:27.400are not part of the public school system or the public catholic school system in ontario both
01:21:33.120funded by the provincial government these are independent schools that are funded by the parents
01:21:40.300who send their kids to these schools yes they are licensed by the province
01:21:44.520but they're independent of any sort of government intervention or school board intervention
01:21:51.720They are independent of any forced provincial curriculum or unions, for that matter.
01:22:00.400That's what parents are doing in droves since 2013.
01:22:04.360That number, again, for independent schools, 53% growth in the last nine years.
01:22:13.040So, it's good news, and I'm wondering if it's happening in other provinces.
01:22:20.020I know I've touched on it during the show about homeschooling or private schooling.
01:22:28.520And I think each province has regulations that are slightly different than other provinces in terms of what you can and can't do when it comes to private schools.
01:22:39.820And when I say private schools, I mean schools that are being created by private citizens to send their kids to.
01:22:46.540almost like the old the old school houses and school marms of the 1880s as opposed to the
01:22:55.260big bloated system that uh that we have now which is good news okay guys this afternoon
01:23:04.820we have minister of defense anita anon i don't know what the relevance of her testimony is going
01:23:11.100to be i didn't i don't recall seeing any army in the streets unless of course there were members
01:23:18.500of the military involved in the uh in the stomp down during the last couple of days of the freedom
01:23:26.400convoy in ottawa um and then we're going to hear from minister of transport omar algabra presumably
01:23:33.700mostly about the arrive can app and we know how it's going to go so i'm i'm guessing that these
01:23:44.120two ministers their testimony will roughly take the next six or seven hours and it's what now
01:23:50.6402 21 so i believe the commission is going to be going late unless commissioner rulo decides to
01:23:56.160wrap it up early which i doubt he will do tomorrow we're supposed to be hearing from
01:24:02.120Members of Justin Trudeau's office, his chief of staff, Katie Telford, and a couple of her assistants are slated to be on the stand tomorrow.
01:24:13.420I'm not sure if they're going to be testifying at the same time.
01:24:16.280I would assume so, much like the CSIS people did on Monday.
01:24:20.780And then Christia Freeland, the deputy prime minister, is supposed to be tomorrow afternoon.
01:24:24.400And then on Friday, all day, it's Justin Trudeau, and that will be the end of the Public Order Emergency Commission.
01:24:34.740After that, Justice Rulo will take all of the documentation from the commission six weeks and have to come up with a ruling, a decision as to whether or not the Emergencies Act was imposed legally or not by February 20th.
01:24:51.360And he'll present that to the House of Commons.
01:24:54.400it strikes me today and yesterday and even when bill blair testified on monday afternoon
01:25:04.300that the government has rigged these proceedings
01:25:08.380maybe not so much in the first four or five weeks but definitely
01:25:14.140in the past couple of days i have seen a lot more favoritism
01:25:19.680in regards to Rulo allowing certain things and not allowing other things. I mean, it came to a
01:25:30.420head yesterday when Brendan Miller, who is the attorney for the Freedom Convoy, at least he's
01:25:36.820the lead attorney for the Freedom Convoy, was so frustrated with the lack of a ruling from
01:25:42.360Justice Rulo regarding redactions from government documents provided last week. They made the
01:25:48.360request for unredactions last Wednesday, and Rouleau still hadn't ruled on that as of noon
01:25:57.820yesterday. Very frustrating for any other attorney who is trying to question these witnesses
01:26:04.860without any evidence to back up what they're asking, obviously. So Rouleau did make his
01:26:12.900ruling yesterday, but he did kick out Miller to let him back in in the afternoon, but he was
01:26:18.960making a point. So it seems to me that Justice Rouleau, on the surface, seems like a fair-minded
01:26:28.100individual. But knowing what we know about his background, his history as a member of the Liberal
01:26:36.980party of canada and a very large donator as well that he is going to be siding with the government
01:26:43.300here no matter what it makes me happy that the convoy leadership a few weeks ago had their chance
01:39:35.060The Commission is reconvened, la Commissora Pran.
01:39:40.060Okay, I understand it's now my turn? Okay. I don't have many questions, so I apologize
01:39:48.060for making you bounce back and forth. I just want to start with one easy one, which is
01:39:56.060In one of the cross-examinations, you talked about the insurance and the need to make it national.
01:40:07.620And I take it you would agree that by the exercise you went through, you're overriding a provincial right, if you like, to control insurance, at least in that limited respect.
01:40:23.580So it's an exercise when we look at it, it's not just a sort of a power of the federal government that's exercised within its discretion, becomes in a way a constitutional exercise that goes into another area of constitutional jurisdiction and that may have some impact on how this has to be looked at. Would that be fair?
01:40:48.840I think that's fair. In response, I guess I would say that it is an emergency, that this is an extraordinary set of powers, which requires an extraordinary set of steps both before and after.
01:41:03.020Yeah, I'm more thinking in terms of the review test.
01:41:07.540To give you a bit of a hint at what it was. And as a spoiler, I don't think Madame de Rouen agreed with you, but that's okay, I gather.
01:41:19.720the second thing i wanted to just raise quickly which is was also raised is the role of injunctions
01:41:26.440and as i understand it i may be wrong you're not a big fan of injunctions being taken by the
01:41:33.960government well it is i think that's generally fair in the sense that i i've always felt that
01:41:40.440governments had other had other tools at their disposal that being said i did join as attorney
01:41:45.880general the injunction in the city of ottawa um in order to give complete coverage territorial
01:41:52.760coverage to uh the citizens seeking injunctive the citizens group seeking injunctive relief
01:41:59.160because some of that would have been federal uh land so i wanted to make sure that they
01:42:03.400they had complete coverage um i i guess it's an old private lawyer's bias that i see injunctions
01:42:10.200as a private law remedy for for citizens to use um in the courts uh it is a public law setting i
01:42:17.720understand that but but it is a remedy that citizens can use um and i think government has
01:42:22.840other tools and i appreciate that and we did talk about it and there is also an issue uh about
01:42:30.680enforceability and so on but i guess one of the areas that it's come up in the course of
01:42:36.280these hearings is that law enforcement and sometimes has issues in terms of
01:42:46.420clarity and an injunction gives them clarity as to what's legal and what is
01:42:51.500not and do you see a role in this type of a protest for injunctions to give
01:43:01.200police a clear line when it goes from protest to as you've described it an occupation a fair point
01:43:10.160uh it worked it worked i suppose or had a positive role in windsor uh the question of who who seeks
01:43:16.160injunctions again it's it's uh it's not necessarily in the toolkit of the federal government if if
01:43:24.080it's not on land that falls within federal jurisdiction or if the police of uh if the
01:43:28.960the police of jurisdiction doesn't fall within federal authority but but it is it's definitely
01:43:32.900there is an option okay and i'm going to go back to the decision to uh sort of the what we call the
01:43:41.400church and state distinction and and ipra wash and i guess one of the things that that may or
01:43:48.740may not be an issue in what we're doing is is understanding how ipra wash would extend to the
01:43:56.180types of situations that you and your government were faced with and to put it
01:44:02.420in a maybe in a it may be in an unreasonable way but as I understand it
01:44:10.940the RCMP the decision to deploy RCMP officers to do provincial to support the
01:44:19.380province would not be something that is the province has a right to call on
01:44:25.420It depends on the nature of their agreement with the federal government and the RCMP.
01:44:30.000Some provinces have contractual policing and don't, but yes, it would be something that they would request of the government or the RCMP, the federal government.
01:44:39.660Yeah, and I guess what I'm wondering is, is that something that should be reviewed or should be structured in the sense that what is the role of different police and how are they dispatched?
01:44:53.060In other words, is that purely a decision, and I don't know, by your commissioner to decide to support, for example, the Windsor Police, where there's no agreement and it would be deploying resources and money?
01:45:07.640I think the question is probably best asked to Minister Mendicino in the sense that I believe there are agreements in place for the RCMP to move its effective resources around.
01:45:21.220And I know that's true in provinces where they have contractual policing arrangements.
01:45:26.160The relationship in Ontario or Quebec, for that matter, where you have multiple levels of policing, including provincial police forces, I think would be different.
01:45:34.200But I can't say I know the answer to that.
01:45:35.800Because Minister Mendocino did speak about the arrangements, and he did say the political level, he is involved in a decision to deploy from one province to the other, as I understand it.
01:45:51.320It's actually, as I understand, a joint decision by the province and the government.
02:00:47.360Now, even though we won't be having a lot of questions for you,
02:00:58.320they are very, very important questions that have come up before the Commission
02:01:02.760and been raised by the parties in two areas that I'm going to concentrate Commission Council's questions on.
02:01:10.680And I'll just begin by headlining those two areas.
02:01:16.060One is the role that the Department of National Defence plays when a province makes a request for assistance to the federal government for assistance that is potentially or perhaps best provided by the Canadian forces.
02:01:35.020uh and the second area is uh your views as the minister of of national defense uh of the
02:01:48.700times if ever and the circumstances of which it would or would not be appropriate for personnel
02:01:56.240and equipment of the canadian armed forces to be used in an otherwise civil public order this guy
02:02:03.580is so hard to follow oh so with that said i will just ask you to describe a little bit about your
02:02:11.700position i'll begin by asking you to confirm that you were appointed as the minister of
02:02:16.760national defense in october of 2021 is that correct wait and uh you're gonna speak french
02:02:23.100minister of national defense you're responsible for both the department of national defense
02:02:28.120and the canadian armed forces correct well i'd like to be a little bit more specific than that
02:02:35.680in section please you can almost certainly do better than i could on that point and section
02:02:40.900four of the national defense act specifies that the minister of national defense has management
02:02:46.000and direction of the canadian armed forces i work very closely with a senior team and in particular
02:02:52.040the chief of defense staff who under section 18 of the national defense act has control and
02:02:59.600administration of the canadian armed forces i also work closely with my deputy minister
02:03:05.740who under section 7 is appointed and the deputy minister has to take the department of national
02:03:14.420defense human resources in that department as well as advising the minister on decisions
02:03:20.840And that is the, I would say, the triumvirate within which we work and the framework for the decision making in the Department of National Defence with, of course, me as Minister at the APEX.
02:03:33.540Now, we've heard a fair bit of evidence about the role that the Ministry of Emergency Preparedness and the Department of Public Safety play in the initial receipt processing, consideration, etc.
02:03:50.840requests for assistance from provinces at a high level can you describe the
02:04:00.600the role that the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defense
02:04:04.520plays in that process I certainly can I will say that that process is not run
02:04:12.600out of the Department of National Defense although we sometimes are the
02:04:16.920subject matter of a request for assistance that may come to Minister Blair, who is the
02:04:23.400minister of the RFA process and under Section 4-H of the Emergency Management Act, has the
02:04:32.440jurisdiction to continue to address requests for assistance. And so in terms of the Department
02:04:41.360of National Defence, as I said, sometimes the Canadian Armed Forces and the resources of the
02:04:47.540forces are the subject matter of requests for assistance. For example, in hurricanes and floods
02:04:56.660during COVID, for example, the Canadian Armed Forces have been the subject of requests for
02:05:04.220assistance from the provinces, and we do our very best to respond in whatever way we can.
02:05:11.360Your institutional report, which is, again, Mr. Kirk, I don't need it called up, but the one that you adopted early in your evidence refers to two main mechanisms under the National Defence Act by which the Canadian Armed Forces can be called on to support civil authorities, again, at a high level.
02:05:37.780I'll tell you what I can do is I can repeat it.
02:05:44.120Your institutional report outlines two main mechanisms by which, under the National Defence Act, the Canadian Armed Forces can be called on to support civil authorities.
02:05:59.000under section 273.6 of the national defense act the minister of national defense can authorize
02:06:08.740any duty involving public service and under sub two of that act it is in the case of law
02:06:18.200enforcement only if it is in the national interest to do so and only if all other means have been
02:06:26.640exhausted. That is one particular way in which I as Minister can authorize the use of the armed
02:06:35.660forces and the other way is the aid to civil power. I will say it's very, very important to clarify
02:06:43.340that under 273 of the National Defence Act, the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last
02:06:51.680resort what that means is that the matter cannot be effectively dealt with other than the assistance
02:07:01.640of the canadian armed forces that is almost verbatim from the act and i take that very
02:07:10.580seriously it was the main framework in which i operated as minister not only during the
02:07:20.080months of february and march of 2022 but since the inception of my role as minister
02:07:28.240it's a very important section and we have to remember its import in all circumstances thank you
02:11:48.500Now, the next topic, I'm, as Commission Council, just going to ask you to speak on at a relatively high level and to the extent parties want to provide the Commission with more information through you, they will pursue it.
02:12:07.780But it appears from the evidence we've heard from emergency preparedness and in particular, and to some extent, public safety, that what gets called in this proceeding, the Alberta RFA, the request by the province of Alberta for assistance from the CAF, didn't follow the same process to what you call the triumvirate or ultimately to your desk as the first two that you described did.
02:12:36.260can you again at a high level describe how that process was different from it it did follow the
02:12:43.640same process as I mentioned Minister Blair will initially ask me about CAF resources as he did
02:12:52.840in the case of the Alberta request for assistance when I received an inquiry from Minister Blair
02:13:00.080relating to the use of CAF resources in Alberta
02:13:18.980the utility or usability of those trucks
02:13:21.240and the consequences of providing that assistance.
02:13:27.380and he did provide me with his advice and it was that advice upon which i made
02:13:34.040a preliminary decision about whether we could accede to what i heard from minister blair was
02:13:42.580a request fair enough i i hadn't meant to say followed a different process i guess i meant
02:13:47.480came to a different conclusion so can you tell us what and i and i will caution you you'll you
02:13:53.040might remember that that there's a limit on the detail with which you can describe the difficulty
02:13:59.020of this machinery being applicable to the context in which it was hoped to be used
02:14:05.580that your documents ended up getting redacted on some fine points there so speak at a high level
02:14:12.680what was it in general terms that you were told about by your armed forces personnel about the
02:14:21.500suitability of the tow trucks that were otherwise at least in the same general area about their
02:14:28.540suitability for the task that they were being asked for first of all i'll i'll expand on the
02:14:36.100answer to that specific question about suitability because the response that i received from my team
02:14:45.860was broader it didn't only relate to suitability so first and foremost the number of trucks that
02:14:53.740the Canadian Armed Forces had available to assist were very few in number second of all is the
02:15:04.740suitability point that being that these vehicles were not suitable for the task at hand these vehicles are
02:15:15.860typically used for very, very large scale purposes.
02:15:23.240For example, pulling a tank out of a ditch is the type of mission that we would typically use those vehicles for.
02:15:32.680And thirdly, because they are so large and so heavy, there would be likely considerable damage to any roads on which they traveled.
02:15:43.740And then finally, using these vehicles, even if we got past the first three points that I just mentioned, would likely cause some escalation because the Canadian Armed Forces would be therefore involved in a personnel capacity.
02:16:03.160And we have not discussed this yet, but I did have concerns about deploying the Canadian Armed Forces, as did my Chief of Defence staff, as did my Deputy Minister, for escalatory reasons.
02:16:20.020And so for all of those four reasons, that decision relating to the suitability of acceding to the request from Alberta did not go the same way as the first two requests for assistance.
02:16:35.560Well, that's a perfect segue to the second category that is of interest to the Commission and to the parties, which is the propriety of the Canadian Armed Forces being deployed for the purposes of dealing with civil unrest or law and order issues.
02:16:58.780And you've just touched on one that intersects the two points, and if I understood your answer correctly, and I'll just put it in my own terms, the mere appearance of Canadian Armed Forces tow trucks at what is otherwise a public order disturbance, you and your Chief of Defence staff would worry could be a provocation because the equipment would be immediately recognizable as Army equipment.
02:17:28.780I'd like to take a step back to give some more context to why I made the
02:17:36.600point about potential escalation which I sent senses your the gist of your
02:17:42.780question any minister of national defense in a democracy would be loath to
02:17:58.780except in the most dire of circumstances our country's soldiers are not police officers
02:18:10.300they are not trained in crowd control they are not trained in protest management
02:18:17.740they are not law enforcement and that reality was one that the chief of defense staff and
02:18:28.060my Deputy Minister and I carried with us throughout this time. Furthermore, the National
02:18:35.580Defence Act itself specifically states that the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last resort,
02:18:44.220and I've already taken you through the legal analysis there. But if you put those two points
02:18:51.260together we need and we need to make sure that the canadian armed forces are not deployed in
02:19:00.520cases where we are addressing protest management or anything related to that given the potential
02:19:08.800for escalation let me see if i can break that out into at least two parts one point which you
02:19:16.140were quite eloquent on and frankly certainly wasn't evident to Commission
02:19:22.360Council until we interviewed you back in September on this point is that there is
02:19:29.520it's probably very evident to all of the parties who are who are representing
02:19:34.860police forces but the training of a soldier I will say no longer because I
02:19:41.200I think it might once have, but no longer includes the type of training that public order units in law enforcement would get in terms of crowd management and the dynamics of that situation.
02:19:55.100So they simply don't know what to do when they encounter the crowd, or at least they haven't been trained to deal with crowds as part of their basic training.
02:28:34.300I do recall that, but I will say that there was a lot of literature being written about the protests during this time, and it continues.
02:28:47.160And I don't base any government decision-making on articles in the press.
02:28:55.120I'm focused on intelligence. I'm focused on advice based on the intelligence that comes forward.
02:29:02.880It's fairly peripheral, I would say, an article like that.
02:29:08.320Okay, well, you are getting to where I'm going with this, Minister, and Anne.
02:29:12.800And what I was trying to ask is, how do you place what you are consuming personally and in the media alongside the advice that you may be receiving from the RCMP or CSIS or other professional advisors?
02:29:28.560And just before before I ask you about that, I just would you agree that kind of the review of intelligence, the review of information is something that is best kind of understood through the lens of the experts who are providing that information?
02:29:46.060well i'm a rational decision maker so i do welcome advice from experts and i make my
02:29:55.660decisions based on the advice that i'm provided with many times my decisions accord with the
02:30:04.280advice that i'm given sometimes they don't but i always take information that is provided to me
02:30:10.740into account. And that is why I'm always asking my officials for the most amount of information
02:30:16.620they have as early as possible. Right. And so, for example, if someone posts a threat
02:30:25.400on social media, it would often be, and got one like, it would often be helpful to hear
02:30:31.200from CSIS or the RCMP whether that is a serious threat that the government should take into
02:30:37.460account or whether it is something that is not significant and you would normally rely on expert
02:30:44.360advice as to how to contextualize that type of information i do i i tend not to again make
02:30:54.880decisions about my security or decisions relating to my portfolio based on like on a tweet so i will
02:31:06.800definitely be searching for in-depth substantive information before making any decisions having
02:31:14.480said that this was a time when i was concerned for the safety of my staff and myself and i
02:31:22.400encouraged my staff to work at home for example the department of national defense was surrounded
02:31:28.240by protesters and it was a time where we did need to be concerned for our safety including my safety
02:32:54.080And at those tables, you would have received information and advice from the RCMP and CSIS as well.
02:33:03.440Yes, but the advice was not coming to me directly.
02:33:07.040The advice was by way of reports to the table.
02:33:11.620So I want to be clear that I was not having a one-on-one conversation with either of those organizations.
02:33:20.300Okay, and I wasn't suggesting that they were reporting to you directly.
02:33:24.080But when they are speaking at either the IRG or the cabinet meetings, you are listening to that advice as part of, and you are a decision maker at those tables, correct?
02:33:37.480I'm a minister of the crown, and I am executing my duties as such.
02:33:44.460And I am a person who undertakes due diligence in all circumstances.
02:33:48.820And I was listening intently to whomever was reporting in those meetings.
02:33:54.080okay so i think you agree with my question that that you would have been listening to their advice
02:34:03.140and any other advice that you would have received at those tables as part of your decision making
02:34:07.860process yes thank you minister those are all my questions thank you what was the point of that
02:34:13.640next uh call on the jccf and democracy fund okay let's hope this is better this guy was good this
02:34:21.740morning commissioner i believe uh we've been seated 10 minutes by uh the convoy organizers
02:34:30.940so that taxed me up my understanding also all right thank you minister and i'm system here so
02:34:37.420merci so much uh minister and i'm rob kittredge council for uh the justice center for constitutional
02:34:45.740freedoms and we share standing at these hearings with the democracy fund and citizens for freedom
02:34:51.300I take it you'd agree with me that the public order emergency declaration earlier this year
02:34:55.660did not meet the requirements for such a declaration.
02:37:03.400And that's because once cabinet policy is presented to the public, that policy is the agreed collective decision of all members of the cabinet, right?
02:37:14.680The executive branch of government in a democracy.
02:37:18.280Right. In fact, from a constitutional perspective, cabinet decisions are in effect your decisions, aren't they?
02:37:25.700Our collective decisions as the executive branch of government in a parliamentary democracy, yes.
02:37:33.400And you wouldn't say they're your decisions, but you're certainly party to the decision.
02:37:48.180So it was a collective decision that was in part your decision.
02:37:51.060At the executive branch of government.
02:37:54.020And you can't publicly recidate the prison.
02:37:56.480the importance of the declaration of a public order emergency is one with which i agree one i
02:38:09.520support given he's got something he's got something the inability of children to go to school the
02:38:17.320inability of people to go to work the inability of trade to cross the border the inability of
02:38:23.460citizens to live peacefully in certain parts of our country, the buildup of arms in certain
02:38:29.580areas, certainly the threats that were present. Yeah, yeah. Interrupt her. Interrupt her.
02:38:37.140She's made her point. The right approach for our government. Right. But if you felt differently,
02:38:42.580you couldn't repudiate or criticize the decision unless you stepped down from your post as minister.
02:38:47.840That is a hypothetical that I do not need to respond to, given that I agreed with the decision
02:38:52.960and I agree with the principle embedded in our parliamentary democracy
02:38:58.240that the executive branch of government makes decisions collectively.
02:39:05.100The government has waived certain aspects of cabinet confidence with regard to these proceedings.
02:39:10.060For example, as you know, some records have been produced that could have been withheld on cabinet confidence grounds.
02:39:15.920This has been a partial selective waiver,
02:39:18.180and cabinet confidence has been used to keep some evidence from being put before the commission.
02:39:22.960But there hasn't been any waiver of cabinet solidarity, has there?
02:39:28.540I believe that we are all committed to our oath,
02:39:34.360and we will make decisions, as I said, on a collective basis.
02:39:39.760We've done that to date, and we will continue to do that.
02:39:43.320That is foundational to the way in which decisions are made in this country
02:39:47.560as part of our parliamentary democracy.
02:39:50.660I asked you at the outset whether you agreed that the public order emergency declaration earlier this year did not meet the requirements for such a declaration as set out in the Emergencies Act, and you disagreed.
02:40:03.400If you had agreed with me, you would have to resign your cabinet post, wouldn't you?
02:41:29.060And in this case, in all cases in which I've been involved,
02:41:33.920that decision-making process is functioning robustly.
02:41:38.580I can respect the response, I guess, but so are you saying that you are free to criticize and repudiate the decisions of cabinet without resigning your posts?
02:41:49.600I will continue to reiterate the point that at all times we are able to have a full and robust discussion to satisfy ourselves that decisions that we are making are in the best interests of our country, as was the case in the public order emergency.
02:42:07.520At all times in private cabinet meetings, you're free to express yourself.
02:42:11.740But in public, if you repudiate or disagree with the decisions of cabinet, you're not allowed to say that publicly, are you?
02:42:19.300Again, I don't find this line of questioning relevant.
02:42:21.820That's not what you find irrelevant. It doesn't matter.
02:42:24.440The public order emergency and the situation that was gripping our country was dire.
02:42:29.380and it was extremely important for our government to take steps after three weeks of protests
02:42:36.560where existing law enforcement had not been able to effectively respond to them.
02:42:42.020Right. Well, I find it relevant, and I see no objections from my friends.
02:42:45.920Well, I think you've got your answer, and I think you've gone about as far as you can on this.
02:46:42.980And he moved on to talking about how bringing in the CAF was a last resort, even more so than the Emergencies Act, which he characterized as a second last resort.
02:46:53.840But that's not precisely accurate, is it?
02:46:59.900Do you mean Minister Lamedi's statement or the content of his statement?
02:47:04.000That the Emergencies Act is, I'm sorry, that bringing in the CAF is the last resort
02:47:08.920and the Emergencies Act is the second last resort.
02:49:41.560The National Defense Act in Section 273 simply says that the Canadian Armed Forces cannot supersede other law enforcement mechanisms unless there is no other option for law enforcement.
02:51:56.760And in that capacity, we were trying our very best to supply those materials across the country in a spirit of making sure we got through the pandemic together.
02:52:08.140And that was exactly the approach that I was taking in the RFA process as well.
02:52:14.360Thank you. And no doubt those PPE efforts were greatly appreciated.
02:52:18.620In terms of who you did tell after the assessment, did you, I think you indicated that you did speak to Minister Blair?
02:54:18.480I will circle back to some of those points. In respect of the transportation on the roads,
02:54:23.680did you consider that you might communicate to Alberta that this was a concern or a potential
02:54:28.160issue and have a discussion with them about the possible scope of the damage, if there's anything
02:54:33.440that could mitigate it and allow Alberta to consider whether it was willing to incur
02:54:38.080some risks in exchange for being able to allow the RCMP to carry out its enforcement action
02:54:43.520early in the in the coots blockade so i was not in direct touch with the province of alberta on
02:54:49.040these items the rfa process runs through minister blair's office and so my having a direct
02:54:57.440conversation with alberta was not something that would have been in keeping with our process and
02:55:03.520nor was i in the country at the time that's fair did you suggest to minister blair that that might
02:55:09.280be something that he could consider doing? I did not. Okay, thank you. And when you say
02:55:15.380there were a small number, and I respect and understand that there may be restrictions on
02:55:19.140elaborating on that, so I'm not trying to go there, and so obviously, you know, feel free to
02:55:24.600stop me if that's a concern. Was the concern that the number wouldn't be enough to, in your view,
02:55:31.840effectively assist Alberta, or was the concern that you felt it was necessary to keep all of
02:55:37.500equipment available on the basin at CAF Edmonton for purposes there? There are two reasons. One
02:55:48.340of sufficiency for the task at hand, but also two for operational efficacy and maintaining
02:55:56.020sufficient resources for the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to do its role as the military of
02:56:05.660Canada. In terms of sufficiency for the task at hand, would you agree that, again, that would be
02:56:12.260an option that Minister Blair perhaps could have discussed with Alberta, whether they were willing
02:56:16.240to accept just one piece of equipment and whether that might be of some assistance to them in
02:56:21.860meeting the goal for accumulating equipment to achieve the enforcement action? Again, I'm the
02:56:28.060Minister of National Defence. My job is to provide information to Minister Blair when he requests
02:56:34.940information about CAF resources. That's exactly what I did in that circumstance. I don't tell
02:56:41.960other ministers and my colleagues how to effectively perform their jobs and I believe
02:56:48.700Minister Blair is a very effective minister. And did you maintain the view that perhaps the
02:56:56.740number and sufficiency of CAF equipment to respond and assist Alberta, even as the threat
02:57:05.200grew to, or as the event grew to what has been characterized by your government as a threat to
02:57:10.020national security, sufficient to justify the invocation of the Emergencies Act? Or did you
02:57:14.600at any point consider when it had reached that point that you might reconsider that assessment?
02:57:20.880Could you repeat the question? What is the precise question?
02:57:24.160Did you maintain your view that the quantity of equipment was a concern that would prevent the use of Canadian Armed Forces equipment, even as the event grew to what your government has characterized as one that necessitated invoking the Emergencies Act?
02:57:45.740Your question focuses on quantity, whereas my response focused on quantity, suitability, usability, and efficacy to reach the expected or desired objective.
02:58:04.320And so it is the totality of those factors which led to my conclusion.
02:58:10.040She is very easy to read, wouldn't you say?
02:58:12.540And I maintain that that was the right conclusion all the way along until the government of Canada made the prudent decision to invoke the emergency staff.
02:58:27.320Okay, taking perhaps, and I anticipate that you may give the same answer based on what you said, but taking it a step back and out of simply that factor, did you at any time re-evaluate your assessment of the totality of factors during the course of the event prior to invoking the Emergencies Act?
02:58:43.280And you'll have to remember that an RFA did not come to me for signature, and I provided this information to Minister Blair after discussion with my officials.
02:58:56.560And after I provided that information, I remained confident in its veracity and accessibility,
02:59:02.780and I continued going about my business at a very difficult time
02:59:07.940at the Ministry of National Defence because of external factors
02:59:11.240like the potential further invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
02:59:17.680On to the next factor that you indicated that you considered,
02:59:20.940I understand that you had a concern about deploying members of the Canadian
02:59:27.600And in that RFA from Alberta, there was an inquiry about both equipment
02:59:32.620and personnel. Could those pieces of the RFA, or were those pieces of the RFA maybe a better way
02:59:40.640to put it, were they looked at separately and communicated separately in your opinion to
02:59:45.220Minister Blair, for example, you know, the equipment might be one piece and the resources
02:59:51.620might be a second piece in terms of the suitability of responding? I believe we have
02:59:59.280this already. I have indicated there were four main factors that underpinned my decision relating
03:00:07.360to when she starts to smile. She feels very superior. I conveyed those factors to Minister
03:00:16.500Blair in a phone call and my response rests there. Okay. And I'll rephrase the question
03:00:29.560because I'm not sure if I stated it clearly. Was it your view that perhaps a request for personnel
03:00:37.260might be, um, extractable or a request for equipment? So for example, um, yes, I might
03:00:44.700loan you equipment but i have concerns about using personnel was that ever something that
03:00:49.500was considered or was it always treated as both items together all four items together
03:00:56.380led to the decision that we made that's not the question okay and if uh you had the knowledge that
03:01:05.620if operationally individuals had been cleared from the blockade so that only trucks are made
03:01:12.540to be cleared. Would you agree that there might not have been the same concerns that were raised
03:01:17.940in your assessment about escalation and optics about engaging the Canadian Armed Forces in
03:01:24.140an enforcement action? You are putting a hypothetical to me which I do not believe is
03:01:33.220relevant and I have no... Does she have the ability to not answer a question that she thinks is not
03:01:40.960the operational plan was anticipating that the civilians would be removed from the blockade0.91
03:01:49.000with secondary time. And I had understood from what you said, and perhaps I had a misunderstanding
03:01:57.080that one of the concerns would be interactions between the Canadian Armed Forces and civilians
03:02:04.000and a concern that that might not be appropriate or something that they were trained to do.
03:02:07.280My question is whether your assessment of that might change with the information that an operation to clear equipment would be carried out at a time after individuals had been arrested or otherwise dispersed from the scene.
03:02:22.960It would not change, primarily because I am not, I've said this a number of times now, separating out the various factors that led to the decision not to provide the tow trucks in Alberta.
03:02:38.640And secondly, the deployment of the Canadian Armed Forces as a general matter has the potential to be escalatory, given that Canadian Armed Forces are not trained in crowd control or protest management.
03:02:57.660Oh, she just said what she wouldn't answer before.
03:03:00.280The usual of having Canadian Armed Forces deployed was concerning in many circumstances during this time, including in this one.
03:03:13.460Okay, thank you, Minister, and thank you, Commissioner.
03:03:15.500Those are my questions this afternoon.
03:08:20.780So I was wondering if you could explain a little bit what the difference between approving an RFA for infrastructure such as a parking lot at the Kersey Drill Hall in Ottawa and potentially considering the Alberta request for assistance for military tow trucks.
03:08:45.900Okay, I will do that, but I want to build on my last answer relating to that sentence, because I thought you were going to ask me one more question on that, and you have not, so I will just say what else I wanted to say.
03:09:00.620And that is that the sentence, at no time will CAF members be employed in a security of enforcement rule, nor will they conduct any assistance to law enforcement tasks.
03:09:11.660The Chief of Defence Staff knew that that was an issue that was very important to me.
03:09:17.400I had done extensive analysis and discussion relating to Section 273.6, Sub 1 and Sub 2 of the National Defence Act.
03:09:27.640And in particular, sub B of 273.6 sub 2, which states that the matter cannot effectively be dealt with other than with the assistance of the Canadian Armed Forces.
03:09:39.180And in this email, he is, I believe, responding and addressing my concern that we are aligned on the point that the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last resort.
03:09:56.760because in a democracy, the Minister of Defense, and certainly this was the case for me,
03:10:07.860would be loathe to deploy the Canadian Armed Forces in a law enforcement capacity,
03:10:15.960except in the most dire circumstances.
03:10:18.800And I believe that he knew that was my view and my interpretation of the law.
03:10:24.420It reflected our discussions and the advice he gave me, and that sentence, I believe, is based on those conversations that we have had and the concerns I have.
03:10:36.220And I'm sure he knew that I would, if it wasn't in there, I would have replied and indicated that it should be.
03:10:44.980Now on to the question relating to RFAs and the substance of the RFAs.
03:10:53.080The question highlights how we have to consider each RFA on its merits, and in particular, each RFA should be evaluated on the subject matter of the RFA.
03:11:08.000The Cartier Drill Hall was a parking lot, very easily handed over for use during this time.
03:11:23.080not being used by the Canadian Armed Forces at the time.
03:11:27.500And certainly, we wanted to support law enforcement efforts wherever possible.
03:11:37.320And the same thing applies to the other item.
03:11:44.040We have more than a thousand meal packs,
03:11:48.140and we can provide those to the Parliamentary Protective Services.
03:11:54.040And so it was easy with these two things.
03:12:00.580The math and our answer was that it was very important to have all the information.
03:12:08.920But it wasn't basically the same subject concerning the third RFA from Alberta.
03:12:18.140In the same vein, Madam Minister, can you explain to us the difference between potentially considering the deployment of military trucks and the deployment of military personnel or military equipment in different situations, such as natural disasters and such as what we witnessed during the COVID?
03:12:48.140There is a difference there. There is a difference between soldiers. On the one hand, it's a lot of soldiers, but we're also talking about military equipment to help people in the Atlantic provinces.
03:13:07.160In one case, we're talking about tow trucks, which were few in number, not suitable for the task, and not clear that they would reach the objective desired, as well as having potential escalation by the deployment of CAF.
03:13:27.840And on the other hand, we have natural disaster in the form of a hurricane sweeping the Atlantic provinces. And the question was, can the Canadian Armed Forces help with the clearing of debris?
03:13:42.460And so, as you would have seen in the news, Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in Newfoundland, PEI, and Nova Scotia to make sure that the provinces had the support they needed in the clearing of debris, the restoring of power lines, the repairing of roadways, and those types of undertakings.
03:14:10.420So it was very different. The two things were very different. And that is the case. That is always the case with Canadian Armed Forces, because on the one hand, you have the RFA, whose subject is very different from the other category. So we really have to analyze each RFA from a specific lens.
03:14:37.080I take it that the potential to inflame in the context that you can, well, to the extent that you considered that in the context of the RFA from Alberta is not a factor that is in play for the types of deployment you just mentioned, you know, following hurricanes or in the context of helping.
03:15:00.800The nub of the issue is whether it is a law enforcement situation.
03:15:06.800And in Operation Lentis, which is the operations that we utilize for assisting with hurricanes and floods and the like, that is all assisting citizens trying to recover from hurricanes and natural disasters.
03:15:24.820So, clearing large trees off of roadways, lifting them off of power lines so that power can be restored.
03:20:17.780the importance of my analysis relating to the Emergencies Act related to Canada.
03:20:28.140And in particular, I had reference, as someone familiar with statutes,
03:20:37.000to Section 16 of the Act and the definition of public order emergency
03:20:42.600being an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada
03:20:47.740and that is so serious as to be a national emergency.
03:20:51.960And I believed the information that I had fulfilled that definition.
03:20:58.360In terms of what we are witnessing generally around the world
03:21:05.640and including in Ukraine with a further invasion of a sovereign democratic country,
03:21:17.740I am also concerned about that, of course.
03:21:22.460But it is not part of the analysis that I undertook in terms of agreeing with the decision that our government made.
03:21:33.020And the reason I asked is, and maybe I should have been more specific, is not in terms of the security of Canada as much as it being a national emergency
03:21:44.660And the impact on supply lines that we've heard was certainly some have testified that that was an important impact on Canada that was only worsened or likely to be worsened because of the war in Ukraine.
03:22:03.640So that's why I was asking, but obviously it was not a factor for you in terms of why it was a national emergency as opposed to the security issue.
03:22:14.660that's right okay um and then the second thing is it's just to and i i know i'm quite certain
03:22:22.560what your answer will be but i think what alberta was trying to raise with you and you wouldn't
03:22:28.640necessarily be aware is that there's a suggestion that at one point the rfa well let me give you
03:22:38.880the background alberta secured some tow trucks heavy tow trucks and at one point was looking for
03:22:48.200drivers was there a separate are you aware or were you separately asked by way of an rfa not for
03:22:58.080heavy tow trucks but for drivers who could operate the tow trucks that had been acquired
03:23:06.040by Alberta and I think that's what I suspect that's what the questioner was trying to get at
03:23:12.580and I was not okay I did not have any conversations relating to drivers of trucks well that's uh thank
03:23:20.940you very much for accommodating you so much the schedule for the commission and for coming
03:23:25.360to testify thank you so much so I think we'll take the uh the afternoon break um and uh we'll
03:47:46.100They couldn't find any legislation or regulation because the jurisdiction was local law enforcement.
03:47:55.780It either was the responsibility of the local police or the provincial authorities.
03:48:01.740So then what we did and what I tasked our department is to put together a toolkit to be proactive out of the sense of being proactive and collaborative and constructive to put together a toolkit based on the rules and the regulations that the department has found to be utilized to help enforce the law and to help mitigate or manage the escalation of the situation.
03:48:30.080So that's where eventually the strategic enforcement strategy became to be.
03:48:39.580And we heard from your deputy about the development of what I think was originally called the maximum enforcement strategy ended up evolving into the strategic enforcement strategy about seeing what laws from various jurisdictions could be brought to bear on the situation.
03:48:59.400And we don't need to rerun the evidence that he gave us because he gave us quite a thorough account of it.
03:49:09.560But the point I remember him mentioning, and I'll ask you to comment on from the ministerial perspective,
03:49:16.920is that just the way the Department of Transport works, because it has to take its federal responsibility
03:49:24.700and coordinate that with all of the provinces and territories,
03:49:28.920there's already a very strong network within the Department of Transport
03:49:33.560with all of the partner agencies or equivalent agencies,
03:49:38.920including law enforcement and regulation in each of the provinces and territories.
03:49:45.080And would that level of connectivity and intergovernmental relations
03:50:52.120You know, after the first week, it's become clear that the situation, as I said, has become
03:51:00.060a lot more complex and a lot more volatile.
03:51:02.900and it seemed that there was a bit of confusion
03:51:10.920about whose responsibility it is to deal with enforcing the law
03:51:16.580or is there capacity enough locally to enforce the law.
03:51:23.000So I was proactive in reaching out to my provincial counterpart,
03:51:27.620particularly in Alberta, in Ontario, in BC as well, and in Manitoba.
03:51:39.240Let's start with your efforts to engage with Ontario.
03:51:45.260The time frame I'm going to concentrate on, just to get the matter focused quickly,
03:51:51.500is the sort of February 7th, 8th, 9th time frame.
03:51:55.120So we are at the point where the convoy has put down roots, so to speak, in Ottawa.
03:52:06.420There are other events at Coutts and Emerson.
03:52:10.980And if I could ask the clerk to call up SSM CAN, 405289.
03:52:17.120And, Minister Al-Ghabra, this will be a text, a series of texts between you and Minister Mulroney, Carolyn Mulroney of the province of Ontario.
03:52:34.360And would you describe her as your counterpart in the Ontario government?
03:52:41.940and uh if you you can just look at the text there see if that reminds you of the exchange you had
03:52:52.400we it might not be necessary for us to go to the ones on the 8th and 9th though if that would help
03:52:57.520you remember we can can you tell us what you were attempting to do with minister moroni of the
03:53:02.560ontario government with respect to the effort you've just been describing sure i i talked about
03:53:08.660how the idea of strategic enforcement strategies come to being, I just want to add another context
03:53:17.680to this, is that we were looking for tools that will help end the blockades and the occupation
03:53:27.620with as minimum confrontation as possible, too. So that's where the idea of utilizing some of the
03:53:35.160provincial powers that they have in regulating commercial vehicles became obvious because it
03:53:44.980really will create an, I don't want to call it an incentive, but certainly dissuade people who
03:53:52.460are using commercial vehicles from using them illegally and hopefully discourage people who
03:53:58.940are thinking of joining the occupation to realize that there's significant consequences.
03:54:05.160So that's where the idea has come about, and I wanted to, when we finalized or developed this, it wasn't completely finalized,
03:54:15.560but when we have the outline of what we were thinking, I reached out to Minister Marouni to share with her what we have put in place or what we are proposing.
03:54:31.540By the way, also that day I had participated in a press conference with my colleagues, Minister LeBlanc and Minister Mendicino.
03:54:40.140We felt it was up until that moment, the federal government had not spoken out publicly about our role in dealing with the blockades and the occupation.
03:54:50.960So I reached out to her and I asked if she would have time to speak with me so I can share with her what I thought was constructive ideas.
03:55:03.760Well, as you can see from the response, she said that she's heard my comments through the media because in my comments at the press conference, I did outline some ideas that the provincial governments can use.
03:55:23.820And she responded saying that our deputies are in communication and she would get back to me later.
03:55:30.840and uh clerk if i could ask that you call up wps 506 maybe 966
03:55:41.680now this is this is a bit of a longer document mr clerk and and uh you can either word search
03:55:55.080potato or scroll down until you come to it it's a fairway is it's a cluttered document and it's
03:56:13.160and you'll come to a heading protests a political hot potato
03:56:25.080there uh there we go thank you and uh can you tell me what this as they say it's a bit of a
03:56:35.160cluttered document and there's a lot happening in it but did you recognize this no is this a
03:56:40.920an article but yes an account a readout of of multiple events but if we look at the
03:56:49.160uh paragraphs under protests a political hot potato the first paragraph reads and i'll quote
03:56:56.760there are growing calls for ford to get more involved in bringing the protest to an end
03:57:01.480after all ottawa and windsor are in ontario and then this is a quotation from you i call on the
03:57:09.000government of ontario to join us in securing an end to these illegal blockades in several ontario
03:57:14.280cities and to apply the law transport mineral minister omar algabra told a news conference on
03:57:21.560wednesday um now uh was this part of your effort to get ontario engaged in the enforcement plan
03:57:35.800yes and were you briefed by your deputy or your other staff on the reasons that ontario was
03:57:44.020giving for uh not being fully enthusiastic about the enforcement plan there's a lot of speculation
03:57:53.160but um i um um i it's not like really i i can't give you a a reason that i feel i can speak on
03:58:04.400behalf of the ontario government but there is a lot of speculation about the apparent hesitation
03:58:08.860Right. But one thing I was wondering if your deputy or your staff briefed you on was the concern certainly that the lawyers observing the situation could have had, which is that if you start using enforcement mechanisms for what might be called an ulterior purpose or for some objective other than those mechanisms were designed for,
03:58:34.480you run into legal issues including the procedural fairness that has to be applied before the
03:58:42.040enforcement can be effective before it can take effect so so you you recognized that there were
03:58:48.480genuine issues that ontario was concerned about before it could become fully invested in the
03:58:54.080enforcement plan i mean i mean i think it was clear um even through my conversations direct
03:59:00.900conversations with minister maruni that we have a difference of opinion we had a difference of
03:59:05.680opinion um in my understanding in my opinion uh we were asking for the laws to be applied we were
03:59:13.960not asking for an extra interpretation of the law we thought the laws are what the laws are and
03:59:21.660and they can be applied to help mitigate or deal with the illegal blockades and occupation okay
03:59:29.620Well, that's helpful. And then, and as I understand it from our interview on February 9th, you met with Minister Mulroney to pursue this issue further. And can you tell us about that meeting?
03:59:40.420Yes. So in between the text and the meeting, her deputy had sent my deputy an official response to our outreach.
04:00:00.240And in that response, they outlined why that our request was not doable.
04:00:06.560And that's on the record. So thank you for pinpointing that in this chronology.
04:00:12.060And she texted me a copy of that letter, but I still asked if it's possible to have a conversation with her.
04:00:23.140And that's when we ended up virtually meeting.
04:00:25.600And we, as I said, it was clear that we had a different opinion on how we deal with it
04:00:36.820She thought that this was a federal jurisdiction
04:00:40.440And I was saying that the roads that the blockaders and the occupiers were on
04:00:52.500were under municipal or provincial jurisdiction.
04:00:56.560And we hoped that the province would take the lead
04:01:13.200maybe you could flesh that out a little bit i mean it's it it it's a federal problem in the sense
04:01:29.140that uh there's serious problems in ottawa by this stage at coots some of the other point
04:01:36.240ports of entry um but i understand that the message you were trying to get across to minister
04:01:42.680Mulroney is that it was primarily the provincial enforcement tools that would be able to solve the
04:01:47.680problem. Is that the gist of it? That's correct. Yeah. Clerk, could you call up please SSM NSC CAM
04:01:57.52050256? Can you tell us who Mike Maka is? He's my chief of staff. Thank you. This is an email if
04:02:12.000uh it'll come up in a second it'll be an email chain
04:02:17.440and if we can just scroll down to page two and uh
04:02:27.760there we go a readout um of uh your your meeting with a member of parliament and i'm sorry i'm
04:02:38.960you might be better at that name than i am
04:02:41.600kismar check kismar check thank you uh who as i understand it is a liberal mp
04:02:47.360from from windsor ontario correct thanks and can you tell us about
04:02:52.160that i mean that the clerk can help you scroll down
04:02:55.120through the notes if you'd like to remind yourself but it might be that by
04:02:58.560by looking at uh points there you can be reminded of what it was you talked
04:03:02.800about and what it was of concern to you uh and your colleague
04:03:08.960Well, you know, I was doing a lot of outreach at the time, and my colleague and friend, Eric Kuzmierczak, has also wanted to convey to me the facts on the ground as he sees them in Windsor and the impact that the bridge blockade has had on the community.
04:03:33.800from automotive sector to retailers, to law enforcement, to trade.
04:03:44.620So he reached out to share with me what he's seeing,
04:03:52.820his community's sentiments, and to inquire about
04:03:58.380what else can we do as a federal government?
04:04:01.340What else can I do as a member of parliament?
04:04:03.800to help deal with the reality and the pain
04:04:07.840that the people of Windsor are dealing with.
04:05:17.900but perhaps primarily with respect to the Ambassador Bridge,
04:05:20.440but presumably with all of the border points,
04:05:22.800You also, in terms of your ministry's multi-jurisdictional efforts to coordinate your transportation function with those of the other jurisdictions in which the vehicles have to travel, you also have a relationship with officials in the United States, correct?
04:05:47.100And did you engage with him when Ambassador Bridge was becoming problematic?
04:05:52.800Yes. In fact, he had reached out to me and we scheduled the call.
04:06:00.180He wanted to express the concerns that the U.S. government and what he's hearing from industry
04:06:08.020that is being caused by the blockades at the Ambassador Bridge.
04:06:15.940So do you have many interactions with Mr. Buttigieg that begin with him reaching out to you?
04:06:27.800No, usually I'm the one who's trying to reach out to him to advocate for Canada's interest.
04:06:36.140Right. And here he's probably not indifferent to Canada's concerns because it's a symbiotic relationship, but he's calling you because he's feeling, his constituency is feeling the impact of the Ambassador Bridge on nearby ports of entry blockages. Is that right?
04:06:53.260Indeed, the Ambassador Bridge is the most important port of entry that connects our two countries.
04:07:01.520It's an average $400 million a day of trade that crosses that bridge.
04:07:06.960And when it's shut down and also given the just-in-time business model that many in the auto sector and other sectors use,
04:07:18.760that blockade caused a significant disruption
04:07:24.920to supply chains, to businesses on both sides of the border.
04:07:48.760Now, this is the summary of your interview, and you discussed this at page six,
04:07:56.580where the clerk has put you there, call with Secretary of State Pete Buttigieg.
04:08:04.600Now, if we look after the introductory paragraph to the introduction to a quote from you,
04:08:15.160and I'll read the introduction and a quotation, it says,
04:08:17.780Minister Aghabra was asked about the following statement he had made in the course of his call
04:08:22.520with Secretary Buttigieg. So, for the context of the readers, that's me or one of my colleagues
04:08:29.100asking you to elaborate on this statement. In the course of our interview with you,
04:08:36.600we've asked you to elaborate. And this is a statement you made during your call with
04:08:43.840secretary buta judge but i can tell you and i just spoke to the prime minister that we are running
04:08:51.400out of patience if things aren't addressed in the very near term we as the federal government will
04:08:57.160step in and at that point this is february uh 10th uh as it's noted at the top of the page there
04:09:05.160um was it your understanding that you and your colleagues in cabinet were contemplating the
04:09:12.720options that would include federal intervention uh as to find solutions to the blockades and the
04:09:20.640convoys i i can't recall specifically if the conversation in cabinet about the the second
04:09:31.840track uh of the emergency act had happened before this call or after but i could tell you that my
04:09:39.120intention. And this, maybe I should explain the conversation first, because in the conversation,
04:09:46.840I explained the secretary certainly was anxious and wanted to know when, if I could give an
04:09:54.260estimate, when will this end and how quickly can a port of entry be reopened. And I was explaining
04:10:03.240to him the complexity of enforcement and whose responsibility and that our federal government
04:10:09.520is not able to direct police to how to operate their law enforcement.
04:10:17.520So I gave him a context of how the complexity of the situation, but at the same time, I
04:10:25.860wanted to give him, to reassure him that this was an important matter and that yes, despite
04:10:32.600the complexity that we're going to put, we're going to do everything we can at the federal level
04:10:37.740to fix this issue. So it was, for me, it was intended not, I could say, even if we had started
04:10:45.740the conversation, I wasn't sure where we're going to go at the federal level, but I wanted to give
04:10:53.060him a sense of confidence that this is a priority for us and that we will do what we can to
04:11:00.740to uh to deal with it as quickly as possible now right about then in the course of your
04:11:07.640discussions with secretary buta judge um ontario invoked its emergency order and uh it would it be
04:11:16.420fair to just fair to say that that went some way to address the concerns and take the pressure
04:11:22.660off you, at least temporarily, and in particular,
04:11:29.000Secretary Buttigieg would be able to see that things were happening
04:11:32.120and enforcement might be not far in the future.
04:11:38.000As I said, while it offered me relief to see the provincial government
04:11:43.080up its participation or its role in dealing with the illegal blockades
04:11:50.560and occupation. The outcome was still that the point of entry was closed. So that was the
04:12:00.820eventual concern for Secretary Buttigieg, and for me to be precise. And yes, we could see that now
04:12:10.360new tools are provided to law enforcement, but we still couldn't see the end of the blockades.
04:12:20.560There was a lot of fluidity and volatility in what was happening at Windsor or across the country, to be honest, because at different blockades, even the one in Windsor, we would hear reduction in size, growth in size, clearance on one side, but maybe still a tenuous situation.
04:12:42.480So while, yes, it offered some comfort, but we still had the roads closed.
04:12:50.560okay let's move ahead a few days and uh mr clerk if you can call up uh ssm nsc can four zeros
04:13:04.400zero two one four these would be the irg meeting minutes for february 12th
04:15:26.940So what we did proactively reach out to all
04:15:32.240or as many as we can to those ports of entry to different institutions,
04:15:37.360including rail companies, to just encourage them to be alert,
04:15:45.100to perhaps increase their security, and to have plans in case any of these blockaders
04:15:55.780or slow rollers start appearing outside their institution.
04:16:00.340and with respect to your effort to encourage the provinces to obtain heavy lift tow truck capacity
04:16:06.900did ontario express any interest in participating in a program like that not that i recall thanks
04:16:13.380now at the end of that paragraph we see a report on the situation at manitoba which i'll just
04:16:19.620summarize by saying um manitoba said we're we're doing okay on our own thanks so
04:16:29.380your sense was that manitoba wasn't interested in in in it wasn't sensing that it had a problem
04:16:36.460serious enough to become involved in the assistance you were offering is that it
04:16:39.920yeah i mean i can't describe why but they certainly um uh the minister and and and i think it was
04:16:49.320officials actually at the time um they were not indicating any interest in in any support from
04:16:55.160federal government okay moving ahead chronologically uh mr clerk if we can turn up the same prefix but
04:17:03.960with the last four digits being zero four zero one we're now moving ahead
04:17:13.400to the irg minutes of the 16th so we're now post invocation
04:17:19.240uh before we jump over that is there anything that you think is important to this chronology
04:17:28.680that involves your particular involvement in the decision of cabinet to invoke the emergencies act
04:17:37.740sure i mean that is the i guess the the question that uh i had to deal with and so did my colleagues
04:17:47.060And I kind of alluded to it in my previous response, is that, again, that moment in time, there was a lot of concern about ongoing escalation and inspiration that these blockades and occupations had been causing.
04:18:07.060And it felt, as I said, that it wasn't just Ottawa, it wasn't just Windsor, it was Sarnia, it was Cornwall, it was Emerson, it was Cootes, it was Surrey, it was the Port of Vancouver, it was the Port of Halifax.
04:18:27.400All that to say is that there have been reports of either threats or some form of florals, some form of protest, and it felt that there was a stalemate, and that stalemate was raising the temperature.
04:18:49.560uh occupiers and blockaders were becoming more entrenched those who opposed them were also
04:18:57.300becoming more entrenched in opposing them so there was a sense of a stalemate and a risk
04:19:04.500to many people including those who were participating in the blockades that this
04:19:13.340could get out of hand, that we could be reaching a tipping point where it could escalate and
04:19:21.280we would look back and regret not doing something sooner.
04:19:27.140And not to mention, by the way, the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Canadians
04:19:32.120who have been personally impacted, either through their livelihood or their quality
04:19:39.440of life, businesses that I heard from.
04:19:44.400So there's been this situation across the country was getting into a really period of
04:19:51.760a lot of, I would say, concern about where this is going to head if we don't end up doing
04:20:02.320And I know I grappled with that decision.
04:20:06.960I didn't take that decision lightly, and I would say I was reluctant to do that decision.
04:20:13.020But it was the right thing to do to protect Canada's national interest, to protect Canada's security, to protect Canadians.
04:20:24.220And at a time like that, yes, the Emergencies Act is for emergencies, and it felt like an emergency.
04:20:32.760now let me back up a little bit to we mentioned your involvement and your minister department's
04:20:39.900involvement in the enforcement strategy strategic enforcement strategy your deputy described a
04:20:48.720companion strategy that you your department was working on the tow truck strategy and as you were
04:20:56.920meeting with the irg uh is it fair to say that you weren't the only one around the table who
04:21:04.460realized that the ability to tow these vehicles was problematic uh in the situations both at
04:21:12.020at the border points and in ottawa i i don't want to speak on behalf of my colleagues or breach
04:21:18.900cabinet confidentiality i'm sorry i didn't mean to imply that just you it's your brief so you tell
04:21:24.400So, yeah, I certainly, you know, felt that having access to tow trucks was an issue.
04:21:34.840We for weeks been asking or we've been told that it was near impossible, if not impossible, to find tow truck operators who are willing to take the risk to participate in a law enforcement action.
04:21:52.940so that was a common uh feedback that i heard from the department from others um so it's clear
04:22:00.240to me that availability of tow trucks and not just any tow trucks by the way we're talking about
04:22:05.100specialized tow trucks uh was uh the availability was an issue and so again
04:22:12.340recognizing that i have to be more careful about the questions i ask you than i asked your deputy
04:22:20.460but what we know is that part of what came out of the emergency measures order was an authority to
04:22:29.580compel tow truck service providers to provide towing services and
04:22:36.260so is it safe to say that that was an element of the emergency legislation that you considered an
04:22:45.540important part of the overall solution. Indeed. Look, I think it was really important that the
04:22:51.880Emergencies Act is precise, targeted, and is measured. And the tool to compel tow truck
04:23:02.700operators was very specific and narrow and necessary to help law enforcement deal with
04:23:10.520blockades okay and uh we have uh thank you clerk uh the document for the february 16th irg meet
04:23:20.040and meeting minutes and if we can go down to page seven about just a quarter of the way from the
04:23:24.680top immediately after the redaction right so here you are reporting uh and because this is unredacted
04:23:33.000you're allowed to talk about this somebody has decided that it's fair or game uh and it says
04:23:39.160the minister of transport confirmed that tow truck capacity challenges appear to be resolved
04:23:43.960for the alberta and ontario confirming that they have appropriate towing capacity
04:23:51.880and that speaks for itself uh i because i don't want to ask you to expand on that in case it
04:23:58.600would involve a confidence cabinet but um we can get some insight from your uh on this point from
04:24:06.920from your witness statement uh and then can you can you call that up
04:24:15.160uh mr clerk i think i introduced it at the beginning
04:25:18.760Now, an issue that you might have heard talked about,
04:25:23.020It depends how closely you've been following the proceedings.
04:25:26.920I think there's what I think is not contentious is that not long after the enactment of the invocation of the Emergencies Act, trucks did get towed.
04:25:43.540And that some documentation indicates mostly documentation where the tow truck drivers are seeking to get paid for their services.
04:25:53.020that at least the mechanism for compensating tow truck drivers who were asked to provide services
04:26:00.960or compelled to provide services under the Act, that that part of the system worked.
04:26:05.620But I wonder if you followed the evidence closely enough to have observed the observations made by some of the police,
04:26:12.320and in particular Ottawa and OPP witnesses who've spoken about the fact that they already
04:26:21.280had tow trucks lined up and available willing to provide service and that in fact those
04:26:31.560arrangements pre-existed the Emergencies Act and could have been used without the enactment
04:26:37.320of the Emergencies Act. Have you followed that evidence and that point of issue?
04:26:43.380I haven't been able to follow all of the proceedings, but I got reports on what is being said.
04:26:50.280And I'll share with you my perspective. Throughout these weeks of outreach and discussions and
04:27:00.440and debates. No one has said that the tow truck issue was resolved. In fact, in all of my
04:27:11.060conversations prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act, availability of tow trucks was
04:27:18.180always highlighted as an issue and that tow truck operators were worried about their safety,
04:27:39.420Having access to tow trucks that could do this was an issue.
04:27:44.820And again, the tow truck did not appear
04:27:52.100until after the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
04:27:54.640So I can't speak to what the others have been testifying, but I could tell you that that's what I had heard. That was my understanding. And again, the facts are is that the tow trucks did not appear until after the Emergencies Act was invoked.
04:28:09.900Thank you for that. Now, those are all of the specific questions I have for you, but I'd like to finish up by asking you if you have anything you'd like to add, just general observations or things you think it's important for the commissioner to hear.
04:28:25.040And in that category, if you have recommendations about things that could have been done differently, if different protocols or legislation or whatever had been in place when you were trying to develop your enforcement strategy and trying to develop your tow truck strategy, those types of points would be helpful to the commission.
04:28:44.580i just want to go back to the picture that i tried to uh draw for you but the situation and how um
04:28:55.160how heightened the sense of anxiety and concern for public safety for economic well-being of our
04:29:03.600country was how at the time cities and municipalities were asking us to do something
04:29:12.160Provincial governments were saying this is a federal issue.
04:29:15.760Opposition parties were asking us questions.
04:30:51.980I think those are important questions.
04:30:54.340And in fact, I've tasked my department to do some work on what can be done to strengthen federal legislation or tools to add additional maybe tools, set of tools to protect critical infrastructure.
04:31:12.300along those lines let me just follow up with a question that takes us right back to the very
04:31:16.300beginning of your evidence minister al-gabra you talked about the fact that you have at least an
04:31:21.660annual meeting of a council of ministers of transportation at the federal and provincial
04:31:27.660and territorial level um do you think that if uh at the next one of your meetings you put your
04:31:37.660heads together to see if you could come up with plans procedures and protocols so that you're
04:31:44.220not trying to invent this thing from the start the next time a problem like this arises that
04:31:48.940that the in the the the officials themselves perhaps even without new legislation or perhaps
04:31:55.420with a due to fashioning appropriate legislation could advance the situation i think i i think
04:32:04.400absolutely i uh by the way we did have a council of ministers after uh that incident typically
04:32:11.520we have them in february um and i think it's really important to collaborate with provincial
04:32:20.400governments on clarifying uh these what appear to be misconceptions or miscommunication
04:32:27.520or misunderstanding but also identifying tools i'll just note for example the alberta government
04:32:34.160has its own critical infrastructure legislation so perhaps we can also learn from the government
04:32:44.880of alberta and other provincial governments on what else we could do at the federal level and
04:32:49.440how we can collaborate on on on closing these gaps thank you minister and thank you commissioner
04:32:58.080those are my questions. Okay, so if I could first call on the Democracy Fund, JCCF, please.
04:33:17.780Good evening, Minister. Good evening. I'm Hatem Kier,
04:33:20.840Counsel for the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
04:33:23.260so right from the start of the pandemic while you know people like you and i had the opportunity to
04:33:31.240work from home truckers still had to go out and keep the goods moving right right and that's why
04:33:39.260they were originally designated as essential service providers and they were exempted from
04:33:44.280vaccine mandate right um so first of all let me just say that truckers over the last two years
04:33:55.320have done an amazing job like you said when many of us had the option of working from home
04:34:03.800they kept the movement of goods going most of us never thought for a moment about how these
04:34:11.320products got to the shelves, but we certainly were reminded of the importance of the industry
04:34:18.280when everything else was shut down, yet the products kept on arriving. So I don't think
04:34:26.540we could say thank you enough to truckers for their professionalism and for their job.
04:34:32.700and to answer your question about how policies were developed throughout the pandemic these
04:34:42.400were done given the advice based on the advice that were received from public health
04:34:47.440and also taking into account considerations of the realities on the ground and there have been
04:34:55.400several professions and several categories that were granted exemptions at the beginning of the
04:35:02.340pandemic. And truckers were one of them? Truckers were one of them. Okay, and you note in your
04:35:06.400witness statement that the protests arose in response to the elimination of that designation,
04:35:11.340correct? My understanding is that the protests rose to oppose all mandates, not just truckers
04:35:22.480mandate. But you say in your interview summary, which you adopted, it states that your understanding
04:35:28.640was that the protest arose in response to the elimination of that designation, right?
04:35:32.700I think it was a trigger, but again, I am not here to speak on behalf of the protesters.
04:35:41.060But my understanding is that in every communication they issued, they opposed all vaccine mandates.
04:37:22.360So I'm assuming that what you're saying is correct.
04:37:25.680And I take it you were aware that this was happening at the time in February, at least in the broad strokes?
04:37:31.760Yeah, I mean, again, as I said, all governments, not just in Canada, provincial, municipal, around the world,
04:37:39.340had different public health measures, including mandates.
04:37:42.320And all governments had their own plan of how to adjust these measures.
04:37:48.440Okay, and then if we go to page 7 in this document, which for the record is in the database as JCF50s193, this is Manitoba news release dated February 11th, right?
04:39:52.360But at the end of the day, it's up to the government.
04:39:54.620Like, the government, none of these governments have shared with me their rationale. I'm assuming that just like they impose these measures based on their advice that they receive, I'm assuming they're adjusting their measures based on the advice that they receive and their own considerations.
04:40:12.360Well, we heard yesterday that at the first minister's meeting relating to the invocation of the Emergencies Act, that Premier Kenney asked the federal government to lift the vaccine mandate as it applied to truckers crossing the border.
04:40:26.100And he mentioned that he had raised that previously. I don't believe you were at that meeting, but were you aware of his opinion?
04:40:32.320I was not at that meeting. I think he had made it public.
04:40:37.340I just can't remember when he made it public, his opposition to border truckers crossing the border's mandate.
04:40:47.880Well, we also saw a text from Premier Kenney, which was forwarded to you by Minister LeBlanc,
04:40:55.880where Premier Kenney called the trucker vaccine mandate, quote, dumb political theater, end quote.
04:41:03.500so again given these comments from premier kenny and the the timing of the provinces you still
04:41:11.180maintain that none of this was in response to the protests again you'll have to ask these
04:41:16.100the provinces that question i i'm not in a position to offer justification for
04:41:21.240a provincial government's decision well given the motivation of the protesters did the government
04:41:28.640consider resuming the exemption for truckers um and by the way let me just be uh clarify and again
04:41:37.040it's not up to me to talk about provincial government's uh decisions but they did not
04:41:41.820most governments provincial governments did not lift all mandates so just for the record um
04:41:49.040And second, you know, we don't make public policy based on the number of protesters or emails that we get.
04:42:04.140We make public policy, particularly during the pandemic.
04:42:07.100And let me be the first to acknowledge governments around the world, including the federal government, did extraordinary measures in what we believe was the right thing to protect the health and safety of Canadians.
04:42:20.820I never imagined provinces shutting down businesses.
04:42:24.960I never imagined provinces invoking curfews.
04:42:29.180I never imagined the federal government putting limitation on travel.
04:47:31.800Well, so you said in your interview summary that some tow truck drivers refuse to tow trucks out of sympathy with the protests, right?
04:47:39.620I said that, yes, there is a reluctance for a variety of reasons.
04:47:44.500One of the reasons may be because they might be sympathetic, but the bigger reasons that we heard is that they were afraid for their livelihood and their safety.
04:47:54.500Well, I want to focus on the group that was objecting out of sympathy with the protest.
04:47:57.960Do you agree that they may have done so out of political or moral reasons?
04:52:04.520And you didn't consult with the municipality on the strategy?
04:52:08.960I had a meeting, by the way, with Mayor Dilkens.
04:52:14.000um um i think february 11th i think uh so uh i certainly reached out i know my colleague minister
04:52:23.140medicino has also uh reached out um so um i put an effort into making sure that i heard directly
04:52:31.440from the mayor you saw that i also had spoken with my colleague eric kuzmerchik member parliament
04:52:36.660from windsor so it was really important for me to hear directly from um those who are representing
04:52:42.620Windsor about the experience that they're going through and ideas that they may have.
04:52:48.160Right. And we'll talk about that call that you had with Mayor Dilkens in a few moments.
04:52:52.980But I take it that you didn't specifically ask for input on the tools that you were putting into this strategy.
04:53:01.240Again, the strategy was developed, put together by officials based on my request.
04:53:07.060and I know and the idea was to consult our stakeholders our key partners so but I'm not
04:53:15.960able to answer your question about the level of engagement and who exactly was involved in this
04:53:21.480development. Thank you okay so let me put this to put it to you this way when you're in a situation
04:53:29.360and you've already talked about your call with Minister Mulrooney on February the 9th and in
04:53:35.680your witness statement, you state that in that call, Minister Mulroney advised you that Transport
04:53:42.020Canada's enforcement proposals were simply unworkable. That's what she told you? Yeah, I mean,
04:53:49.140I don't know if that was the exact word, but maybe it was, but saying that what we were proposing
04:53:56.160was not doable. Okay, so if you're in this kind of situation where your provincial colleagues are
04:54:02.000maybe not on board at the moment and you're in a situation where safe resolution requires three
04:54:07.380levels of government to collaborate wouldn't you agree that you should reach out directly
04:54:11.520to consult with the impacted municipalities on this kind of strategy um again um i reached out
04:54:20.400to mayor gilkins and i had a conversation with him um to hear from him about what's going on
04:54:26.120to get a briefing from him and then to, I offered him, what else can we do to help? So I had direct
04:54:35.300conversation with the mayor, as I said, my other colleagues as well. Right. And so it is important
04:54:40.540to reach out directly to the municipality then. You agree? I think so. So Deputy Minister Keenan
04:54:47.500also confirmed that Transport Canada would not have shared the strategy with Windsor after it
04:54:51.860was finalized and again relied on Transport Canada's provincial partners to share it as they
04:54:57.300saw fit. And he didn't know if it had been shared. I take it you did not share the strategy with
04:55:03.100Windsor. I didn't. But again, I mean, the document was about provincial and federal tools and mostly
04:55:15.380provincial tools. So it made, I guess, sense. And again, I shouldn't be talking about what
04:55:22.480exactly happened because I wasn't involved in it, but maybe I'm attempting at understanding
04:55:28.220what happened. Right. And so we did get some clarity on that from the Deputy Minister. I can
04:55:33.940tell you that I'm not aware of any evidence that Windsor received it. I just wanted to confirm
04:55:38.980with you that if the purpose of the strategy was to coordinate with three levels of government,
04:55:42.880Wouldn't it have been important then to ensure that all levels of government had a copy?
04:55:49.880Councillor, at the risk of repeating myself, myself, my colleague, Mr. Kuzmierczak, my colleague, Minister Mendicino, perhaps others have reached out to the mayor to ensure that we are still in touch and in contact.
04:56:09.740We offered, we solicited input, we offered help.
04:56:15.800So I guess what I'm trying to demonstrate
04:56:36.900And Mayor Dilkin said that there was excellent communication with the different levels of government.
04:56:41.620I was just trying to confirm with this strategy that was an important strategy that Transport Canada had worked on, why it didn't get to the local authorities that were on the ground.
04:56:53.320Yeah, I can't answer that question because I wasn't involved in the day-to-day put together of this strategy.
04:57:12.380Okay. And so this is a memo that she prepared for you, reflecting your meeting with Mayor Dillekins.
04:57:20.360Yes, it's a briefing note before a call.
04:57:22.800Okay. So I just have a couple of clarification questions about this call, because you hadn't referenced it in your witness summary.
04:57:30.820And I just I'm not sure if it's if it matters, but you had said that the call was maybe on the February the 11th.
04:57:38.020I think that was Mayor Dilkin's recollection. This document seems to be dated February 10th.
04:57:43.700Oh, it's not uncommon that my staff prepares a briefing note the night before so I can read it overnight in preparation for my meeting.
04:57:51.940And the briefing note tends to cover a variety of issues in case any other topic is approached when I'm speaking with whoever I'm being prepared for.
04:58:01.740And then your staff would insert the notes from the call. Is that what we have here?
04:58:07.180I don't know. I think this is the actual briefing note. I don't know if it has the readout of the call. I think this is the actual briefing note.
04:58:15.720okay so when he when it says current status and it has notes about what mayor dillkins is saying
04:58:21.420this is not notes from his from the call no no this is um uh preparing me for what's the latest
04:58:30.260activities that have been happening there okay so if you could just scroll down to the second page
04:58:35.160so you're aware at this point then that that the city uh along with uh uh the apma is seeking an
04:58:44.020injunction. And on the second page, you'll see at the top, it states that the OPP has been sent to
04:58:50.200Windsor to assist with the situation and RCMP are sending a public order unit based in Ontario to
04:58:56.240assist alongside the OPP in Windsor. So you are aware of that as of around February 10th? Yeah,
04:59:02.100as I said, this was a note prepared by my team to prepare me for the call. And the idea is to
04:59:09.880sure that i'm up to date on the ongoing activities great thank you for clarifying that and my last
04:59:15.800question is um minister al gabra you told my friend commission council earlier that you
04:59:21.160tasked your department with what can be done to federal legislation and tools to protect
04:59:26.120critical infrastructure did you task your department to consult with border municipalities
04:59:32.440and other partners in considering these changes and tools oh um i mean we're not at that stage
04:59:39.560yet. Perhaps we will get there. But for now, the idea is to put together a simple proposal
04:59:49.780on what additional tools we need. And then what we would do is we would then talk to our partners.
04:59:57.200For sure, it would make sense municipalities that have such critical infrastructure to seek
05:00:03.240their input. Okay, thank you. Those are all my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Next is former
05:00:09.880chief slowly's council please thank you mr commissioner and nicholas de stefano for chief
05:00:14.760slowly we've ceded our time to the government of canada okay um opp chris diana for the opp and
05:00:25.000we likewise have no questions and it ceded our time to government of canada oh my god okay
05:00:32.120no that's gonna be a long okay windsor police service
05:00:39.000Hi there, Heather Patterson for the Windsor Police Service. We have no questions.
05:00:46.020Okay, and the Government of Alberta, please.
05:00:55.160Good afternoon, it's Mandy England for the Government of Alberta. We do have some questions
05:00:59.840and I'm wondering if we might be able to take the time for the Windsor Police Service that
05:01:03.180they weren't able to use this afternoon but there wasn't an offer made but let me and and you owe me
05:01:11.140five minutes from the last time but let's let's go and see where we go fair enough thank you very
05:01:19.000much commissioner um minister you will agree with me that in your communications with minister
05:01:24.320sani before february the 13th that you did not raise or discuss the federal emergencies act
05:01:29.920is that right that is correct okay thank you um i'd like to take you to some comments that were
05:01:36.000made in your witness statement um and i would ask if that could please be pulled up um just so you
05:01:40.880can see it it's at wts uh i believe it's 6075 at page four and as it's being pulled up um the first
05:01:51.920comment that i'd like to draw your attention to is nonetheless uh his being your assessment was
05:01:58.080is that some provincial governments, for example, Ontario and Alberta, viewed the issue as an issue
05:02:04.280falling under federal jurisdiction requiring federal intervention. And so if I could paraphrase
05:02:09.940colloquially the request that the government of Alberta did make for assistance to the federal
05:02:14.540government, it's our information that you own some heavy lift tow trucks that are sitting in our
05:02:19.840province, and we would like to borrow them. So would you agree with me that that request was
05:02:25.140not the same thing as saying, responding to this event doesn't fall under Alberta's
05:02:29.720jurisdiction. This falls under federal jurisdiction.
05:02:35.120First of all, it was actually a comment that was mentioned to me by Minister Sani that
05:02:42.820they also see this as because it's a point of entry. They see that the federal government
05:02:51.100is implicated in this, and that the federal government needed to play a leadership role
05:02:59.140on it. So this was based on a comment that I had received from the minister. Second,
05:03:06.540you know, I think I can't comment on the RFA. That's not necessarily where my comment had come
05:03:17.380from. Okay, thank you. And so in terms of, you know, the issue that there was a port of entry,
05:03:23.620I understand you were saying that there was a role, but not that it was a matter solely of
05:03:27.360federal jurisdiction. Alberta did not in any way imply that it viewed this as not being anything
05:03:33.060to do with it, right? You were aware that Alberta was actively responding to it as a matter within
05:03:37.660its jurisdiction? You know, when I asked Minister Sani and I, Minister Sani and I have a very good
05:03:47.680professional relationship where we are in regular contact when she was a Minister of Transportation.
05:03:54.400When I asked if she would be willing to issue a joint statement, because I felt having a joint
05:04:02.640statement by two levels of government calling on the blockaders to go home would send a strong
05:04:10.100message to those who are thinking of staying or those who are thinking of joining.
05:04:17.200She refused to do that because she said that this is a federal issue because what the blockaders