The Shadoe Davis Show - November 24, 2022


Shadoe at Nite Special Thurs aft live from POEC Nov. 24⧸2022


Episode Stats


Length

4 hours and 31 minutes

Words per minute

133.96

Word count

36,413

Sentence count

1,511

Harmful content

Toxicity

6

sentences flagged


Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
00:00:00.000 Thank you.
00:00:30.000 Thank you.
00:01:00.000 Thank you.
00:01:30.000 Thank you.
00:02:00.000 Thank you.
00:02:30.000 Thank you.
00:03:00.000 Thank you.
00:03:30.000 Thank you.
00:04:00.000 Thank you.
00:04:30.000 Thank you.
00:04:59.980 guys how you doing welcome back so these guys should be starting anytime now uh probably right
00:05:06.100 now as i've chosen to address you this is when they'll decide anyway katie telford is justin
00:05:13.320 trudeau's chief of staff she's scheduled to be testifying this afternoon in my opinion
00:05:17.980 she is the mastermind behind the prime minister's office everything trudeau does is carefully
00:05:26.220 calculated by her she's the one with the connections to the media she's the one with
00:05:32.020 connections to large business big corporations across the country she's the one behind all of
00:05:38.040 the scandals as far as i'm concerned and yet she chooses to work pretty much from the shadows in
00:05:43.460 terms of the public consciousness of our country we're always very quick to blame the politicians
00:05:49.920 right but truthfully i don't believe the politicians really know what's going on
00:05:58.280 i think it's the chiefs of staff and the top level bureaucrats who are controlling the show
00:06:04.380 which is what i was suggesting earlier uh in this morning session i said look those people
00:06:09.060 need to be cleaned out they're all political operatives and they all slant one way or the
00:06:12.720 other mostly liberal these days um but anyway she will be cross-examined by brendan miller
00:06:19.300 this afternoon once we get through the commission lawyer two hours and it's going to be interesting
00:06:26.260 to hear how what miller has on her keep in mind too that gerald butts even though he no longer
00:06:34.520 works in the prime minister's office is very very tied to what trudeau does and what telford does
00:06:42.040 And she goes to him for advice from what I've heard from people I know in Ottawa.
00:06:50.340 And so she calculates everything that happens.
00:06:54.540 So it'll be interesting, like I say, to hear what Miller gets out of her.
00:06:57.800 But I do believe also she's probably going to be the toughest cross-examined
00:07:03.320 because I think she's the smartest person in the room, to be honest.
00:07:06.660 More so than Freeland, definitely more so than Trudeau.
00:07:09.940 So anyway, let's get set for this afternoon. I will be doing a show tonight. I didn't last night because of time constraints, but I will be doing a show tonight. And I have Derek Smith, the author of How the Prime Minister Stole Freedom from last year. He's got a new one out. It's number one on Amazon Canada already. It came out last week. It's called One Face, Two Face, Black Face, Blue Face.
00:07:33.900 So the show starts at eight o'clock central tonight.
00:07:36.880 In the meantime,
00:07:37.800 let's wait for the public hearing to resume into the emergency act.
00:07:43.180 Hopefully we get some good stuff this afternoon and I'll be back in just a
00:07:47.520 second.
00:07:47.940 All right.
00:07:48.260 Thanks for joining guys.
00:07:49.380 Don't forget to like and share.
00:07:51.600 Don't forget to follow the page,
00:07:53.660 the shadow Davis show page,
00:07:55.200 like the page,
00:07:56.540 follow me on rumble and follow me on Twitter at shadow Davis,
00:08:00.560 S H A D O E D A V I S.
00:08:03.900 is back in a second order a lot the commission is we convened the commissary
00:08:28.900 plan okay um once again i apologize for the slight delay um issues have come up that i'm having to
00:08:41.220 deal with so uh i apologize now i think we can go to the next uh the next which is the canadian
00:08:50.900 constitution foundation and you're online go ahead great thank you very much so uh good afternoon
00:08:57.940 minister um my name is jenny shen mughanathan and i am counsel for the canadian constitution
00:09:04.660 foundation and today in your evidence you talked about the economic and financial consequences of
00:09:13.060 the protests you talked about the reputational damage to canada as an investment destination
00:09:20.500 and at the end of commission council's examination she asked you to explain how you understood
00:09:27.940 this economic harm was linked to national security. Do you recall that?
00:09:35.480 Yes, I do.
00:09:37.080 All right. And your answer to that was, you believe our security as a country is built
00:09:44.920 on economic security. And if our economic security is threatened, all of our security
00:09:51.620 is threatened. And now I'm not asking you to elaborate on this. I just want you to confirm
00:09:56.420 that this was your evidence. Obviously, I don't have word by word recall of what I said, but
00:10:05.300 that's what I believe. And I'm sounds like you're reading the transcript. So. All right. Thank you
00:10:11.100 very much. And now I take it, you know, that in order to declare a public order emergency pursuant
00:10:20.400 to the Emergencies Act, there must be what's called threats to the security of Canada.
00:10:26.420 You're aware of that?
00:10:28.420 Yes, I am.
00:10:29.800 And the Emergency Act says that threats to the security of Canada has the meaning assigned
00:10:38.080 by Section 2 of the CSIS Act.
00:10:40.660 You're aware of that?
00:10:42.600 Yes, I am.
00:10:44.060 All right.
00:10:44.580 So I just want to take you to Section 2 of the CSIS Act.
00:10:47.860 and this is com uh either five zeros or six zeros nine three five it should be five zeros
00:11:06.660 if i can take to page eight please
00:11:08.740 Perfect, if you can just pause there.
00:11:17.360 So the CSIS Act defines threats to the security of Canada.
00:11:22.220 And we've heard evidence in this commission that for the purposes of invoking the Emergencies
00:11:27.460 Act here, the focus was on C. That's where they were focused on in terms of the threats
00:11:34.240 to the security of Canada.
00:11:36.160 So what C says is activities within or relating to Canada directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious, or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state.
00:11:56.720 So you see that?
00:11:58.480 I do.
00:11:59.020 All right. And so in terms of the economic harm that you've described today, the reputational damage to Canada as an investment country, you'll agree that it doesn't fall within C, right?
00:12:14.400 The activities relating to Canada directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence. Would you agree with that? Or is that fair to say?
00:12:23.100 Not precisely. You know, if the direction of these questions is to ask me, did I believe we were acting within legal authorities granted by the Emergencies Act,
00:12:49.080 If that's where this question is leading, then my answer is, yes, I believed we had the authority to do what we did.
00:13:03.180 And I hope no one is surprised by my saying that.
00:13:07.440 Had I not believed it, I would not have done it and I wouldn't be here speaking, you know, with sadness, but confidence that we did the right thing.
00:13:21.320 So my question was whether the economic harm that you've described today falls within the definition found in C, which speaks specifically to the support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state.
00:13:47.260 Does the economic harm you've described today fall within C?
00:13:55.340 It's a big question, and so I was offering an answer in several parts,
00:14:00.300 and I offered the first part of it, and I can continue if you'd like.
00:14:07.080 No, I mean to be respectful.
00:14:09.260 I just want to know, you know, I appreciate that your position is that
00:14:13.180 Canada acted within lawful authority to invoke the Emergencies Act, but I just want to understand
00:14:19.240 if the economic harm that we spent a lot of today talking about, whether that falls within the scope
00:14:26.080 of C. And so I just want to know your answer to that question. And I also really do want to be
00:14:35.240 respectful and answer this really important question. But it's a big question. So I'm going
00:14:43.640 to have to take it in stages. And I offered the first stage, I can carry on if you'd like.
00:14:50.460 Sure. So that was my first stage. Second stage is in terms of, you know, one of the things
00:15:03.100 that this commission is, I think, quite rightly investigating, you know, was the government
00:15:10.520 acting within its authorities. For me, as finance minister, an important factor in
00:15:24.420 the judgment I came to, which is that we were, was the expert advice that we received.
00:15:33.100 I'm not a lawyer.
00:15:35.560 I rely on the judgment of officials who advised us and on expert legal advice.
00:15:45.760 And I say that even as I am very confident that it was the right decision and confident in taking personal political responsibility.
00:16:00.040 I can also speak to what I saw and experienced and believed that falls within the scope of the serious violence against persons or property point.
00:16:22.260 But I do want to be clear that I'm not speaking here as someone with an expert legal opinion, but I'm speaking as a minister who made a political judgment and as someone who was also in Ottawa.
00:16:41.660 So some of the things that factored into my thinking about it were, as I described in my testimony this morning, a real concern that we were in a tinderbox situation.
00:17:00.620 where the economic threats and the threats generally
00:17:07.340 and the damage that were being created both by the Ottawa occupation
00:17:14.900 and the Ambassador Bridge did risk, I felt, at every moment,
00:17:22.740 some kind of conflict between protesters and counter-protesters.
00:17:28.400 I saw that and experienced it myself, just being a person who was in Ottawa.
00:17:35.100 I felt it was a tinder keg that could be sparked at any moment and was therefore very dangerous.
00:17:41.380 And although I didn't see it myself, I heard accounts of Windsor of a situation there, which I found to be very credible.
00:17:52.680 I was also influenced. Can I say one more thing?
00:17:56.040 Sure.
00:17:56.280 Which speaks to this. I was also influenced by our IRG meeting on, I think it was the Saturday, the 12th, where we heard from the RCMP commissioner about concerns that there were serious weapons in coots.
00:18:17.620 and that really raised the stakes in terms of my degree of concern about what could be happening
00:18:30.820 there but also what could be happening in this sort of whack-a-mole copycat situation across
00:18:38.480 the country. Okay. So my question was about how you understood the economic harms to fall within
00:18:48.220 subsection or see the definition of threats to security of Canada and see. And as I understand
00:18:54.300 your explanation, your explanation is it falls within it because there's a risk that the economic
00:19:02.220 harm that's being created by the protests could somehow manifest into actual threats of violence.
00:19:10.060 Is that your understanding of how it falls within C? I'm going to object to the question as
00:19:14.760 phrased. That's a legal question. I'm just trying to find out her on, you know, she's offered an
00:19:21.320 explanation for how she says the economic harm falls within C, and she linked it directly to
00:19:28.160 the threats or use of acts.
00:19:29.640 And I'm just trying to understand what that link is.
00:19:33.020 I mean, my counsel may have something to say,
00:19:35.480 but I don't think that's a fair characterization
00:19:38.120 of what I said just now or of what I said this morning.
00:19:45.180 What I think is fair is, first of all,
00:19:49.260 that I relied on expert legal judgment
00:19:53.860 to make a very important and weighty legal decision.
00:20:03.180 What I also said is, as a person who was here in Ottawa,
00:20:08.860 I did see a real danger of violence.
00:20:12.440 And then finally, what I described in my testimony this morning
00:20:18.260 was the way in which the economic security of our country,
00:20:25.200 I really believe, is a part of our national security.
00:20:30.460 But that was a much broader conversation we were having
00:20:34.920 about a broad set of issues,
00:20:39.100 which I certainly think are important for us to think about and consider.
00:20:43.840 and I don't want to mischaracterize your evidence just so that we're all clear do you see a link
00:20:52.420 between the economic harm that you say was caused by the protests to Canada with what's contained
00:21:00.040 in sea in terms of the threats or use of acts of serious violence against persons and again there
00:21:07.320 um I really do not want to shirk my personal political responsibility and while this was a
00:21:18.500 grave and serious decision we took it carefully and thoughtfully and I believed it was the right
00:21:25.100 decision then and I believe today it is the right decision but I'm also conscious
00:21:31.060 if I may continue. Of course. I'm also conscious that I am not a lawyer and I'm not
00:21:43.640 a person who can give expert opinion on the precise parsing of these authorities.
00:21:53.800 It was important for me to be assured that we did have the authority to act, and I received, as a cabinet member, assurances that we had those authorities from people who I believe were qualified to offer those assurances.
00:22:17.700 And I don't mean to belabor the point. I just want to make sure the evidence is clear. So your evidence is that you understood that you had the authority to invoke the Emergencies Act. But in terms of saying there's a linkage between the economic harm caused by the protests with the requirement of the threat or use of acts of serious violence, is that something that you can't speak to?
00:22:43.780 Again, Commissioner, this is a legal interpretation question that will be addressed in closing submissions.
00:22:50.040 And I don't mean to belabor this.
00:22:52.240 I just want to make sure I understand Deputy Minister's evidence.
00:22:55.400 Is she just saying that she can't comment on it because it's a legal question, or is she saying that there is a link?
00:23:01.540 I just want to know what the answer is.
00:23:04.200 I renew my objection and would ask for a ruling on it.
00:23:07.000 okay well i i think at the end of the day i don't think you can pursue this any further at the
00:23:14.660 moment i think you've got your answer and as it is that's fine thank you very much i don't know
00:23:22.120 how much time i have left but i do have just one other point i'd like to or one other issue to
00:23:26.340 address um if i may so when we were talking about fin track this morning and you explored it as one
00:23:33.980 option to pursue, but decided that, you know, making a change to it, you know, the legislative
00:23:40.860 amendment would take too much time. Do you recall your evidence earlier today about that?
00:23:45.820 Yes, I do.
00:23:47.240 All right. And so just so that we're all clear, because we have Canadians watching who
00:23:52.940 may not understand the process, the money, the proceeds of crime and money laundering
00:23:59.460 and terrorist financing act it gives um the ability to create regulations right
00:24:05.240 if your question is was it possible to grant fin track to give fin track these expanded powers
00:24:19.640 through regulation that is correct and i said that this morning we did go on to
00:24:27.120 grant those powers through regulation. And there's just a difference between how
00:24:34.640 regulations are passed versus, say, example, legislation or amendments to legislation.
00:24:41.660 The latter is what you have to do, the three readings, going to Senate. It's a much
00:24:46.220 longer legislative process. That's fair? 100%. And by comparison, passing regulations is a much
00:24:54.980 shorter process absolutely okay those are all my questions thank you very much
00:25:01.540 okay thank you next is the democracy fund jccf
00:25:14.980 good afternoon minister my name is alan honor i'm a lawyer at the democracy fund and we share
00:25:20.500 status with the um the jc stuff and citizens for freedom uh ms freeland in your witness statement
00:25:27.620 you mentioned challenges to supply chains as being a major focus for you in january of 2022
00:25:34.340 but you didn't mention the government vaccine mandate for truckers and i just like to ask
00:25:38.740 you a little bit about that. Can we please pull up OTT 3027621.0001. And Ms. Freeland, while we're
00:25:53.380 waiting for that to come up, this is a letter which is addressed to you and other ministers
00:25:59.540 by the Canadian Trucking Alliance and it's dated December 10th, 2021. I'd like to take you through
00:26:06.660 part of this letter but before i do that can you tell me do you know who this group is the canadian
00:26:10.900 trucker alliance i can't say i'm familiar with them right now maybe i've heard of them but
00:26:16.820 okay well i i think we've heard some evidence about them but if you're not familiar with them
00:26:21.060 that's okay let's just go down uh to the first paragraph here and mr lind i just want to read
00:26:26.900 this to you it says that the canadian trucker alliance is disappointed to learn that our
00:26:32.660 current exemption from the national vaccination mandate is being removed considering the immense
00:26:38.900 impact this decision will have on already beleaguered supply chains. Do you see that? I do.
00:26:46.600 Okay and if I can take you to another part of that letter just on the second page second paragraph
00:26:52.600 please. Here we see CTA estimates that combined the proposed vaccine mandate for cross-border
00:27:02.180 truck drivers and the federal sector mandate announced by the minister of labor would remove
00:27:07.780 between 15 000 and 30 000 canadian drivers from the inter-provincial and international supply chains
00:27:16.260 the expected loss of transportation services service capacity will trigger significant ripple
00:27:22.180 effects throughout the entire economy and mr lund i just want to to ask you this is something you
00:27:29.140 knew about when the exemption for truckers was removed in February, you knew that this
00:27:35.340 might have some effect on the supply chain.
00:27:37.620 Is that fair?
00:27:39.620 I knew that some people asserted that it might.
00:27:44.440 Okay, thank you.
00:27:45.580 And I'm going to suggest, if this is not the first time this group wrote to you, if we
00:27:50.440 can scroll down to page five, please.
00:27:54.400 We have another letter, just to the top of page five.
00:27:58.340 Sorry, it might be page four.
00:28:00.040 Just go up, please.
00:28:01.740 Okay, so here we have a letter.
00:28:04.060 It is a little bit down, please.
00:28:07.820 I'm sorry.
00:28:08.800 Can we just go to the top?
00:28:10.900 So December the 8th, 2021.
00:28:13.560 And if we can scroll down to the second paragraph, it says here,
00:28:19.080 When the mandate was originally announced, CTA expected that upwards of 20% of the 120,000 Canadian truck drivers crossing the U.S.-Canada border would have likely remained unvaccinated by January 2022.
00:28:36.240 Of the 40,000 U.S.-based truck drivers crossing the border, CTA estimated that upwards of 40% of these drivers would not be prepared to meet the vaccine mandate requirement.
00:28:47.260 Do you see that?
00:28:49.860 I do.
00:28:50.600 Okay, and just...
00:28:56.740 One last question about this.
00:28:59.860 You would agree that the reduction of truck drivers crossing the border
00:29:04.060 when there are already supply chain issues could have an effect on the economy?
00:29:08.620 i don't agree with the estimates that are provided there and i don't agree with the
00:29:20.020 assertion that the vaccine mandates themselves caused problems for our supply chain but they
00:29:28.600 affected it they had a contribution to that supply chain problem no i don't agree with that
00:29:33.160 The vast majority of Canadian truckers are, in fact, and were at the time vaccinated
00:29:39.000 and supported the vaccine mandates.
00:29:42.720 Okay, well, let's go to page six, please.
00:29:52.320 Okay, in the first paragraph that we see there, the CTA is giving stats that truckers move
00:29:58.520 about 70% of the $648 billion Canada-U.S. trade.
00:30:03.300 Does that sound about right to you?
00:30:05.440 Again, I can't say whether that's true or not,
00:30:12.320 but I have no reason to.
00:30:14.440 Let me say this.
00:30:16.340 Trucking is very important for the Canadian economy.
00:30:19.280 Trucking is very important for our supply chains,
00:30:21.420 and trucking is very important for cross-border trade.
00:30:23.680 That I am very prepared to agree with.
00:30:26.460 I think we can all agree on that.
00:30:27.580 And let's just consider that if what the Canadian, if what the CTA is saying is correct, and the drivers are reduced by 20%, that's a reduction of 24,000 trucks in the supply chain.
00:30:46.160 the challenge here for me is i disagree with the fundamental premise and this was something that
00:30:58.140 was looked at carefully by minister al gabra uh and also by the minister of health
00:31:04.680 okay so you you disagree with the fundamental premise of the canadian trucker alliance thank
00:31:10.800 you um i'll move on to something else i just want to understand a little bit more um about what was
00:31:17.520 going on in january and you you gave some evidence today and i think you told us that it was a it was
00:31:25.760 a very intense month for you that would be fair yes that would be fair okay let me let me make
00:31:31.280 sure that i understand it so um on the one hand you were preparing a budget yes okay and um there
00:31:39.760 There was the issue of the Build Back Better legislation in the States,
00:31:44.520 and there was the electric vehicle tax credit, right?
00:31:47.860 That was on your plate.
00:31:50.380 Not solely on mine, but it was something I was working on.
00:31:53.600 Right.
00:31:55.340 And there was the COVID recovery,
00:31:58.020 and there were local and global supply chain issues.
00:32:01.440 Yes.
00:32:02.260 Okay.
00:32:02.580 And there was the looming threat of inflation.
00:32:05.740 Yes.
00:32:06.540 And we talked a little bit about the Ukraine,
00:32:08.460 and I think you said that was the biggest threat to national security since World War II.
00:32:14.780 The Russian invasion.
00:32:16.480 The Russian invasion.
00:32:17.200 When it actually happened.
00:32:19.180 Yes, I think that is the biggest national security challenge our country has faced.
00:32:23.920 And it was on your radar in January?
00:32:26.200 Yes, it was.
00:32:27.460 Okay.
00:32:28.220 And in the midst of this, there was this trucker protest of unprecedented proportions
00:32:33.420 taking place across the country, and you described that as whack-a-mole.
00:32:38.460 No. What I would describe as what we saw happening from the moment that the initial occupation began is copycat protests happening across the country, and that posed a particular national challenge.
00:33:03.460 I see. I thought you said the word whack-a-mole, but it's not important. But what is important I would put to you is that the U.S. was unhappy with the situation in Canada, and they were seeing their own vulnerability in our supply chains. That was your evidence, was it not?
00:33:21.580 Certainly.
00:33:21.980 And they didn't like that.
00:33:26.120 The, in particular, blockade of the Ambassador Bridge exposed the vulnerability of the U.S. economy, particularly the car sector, to the Canadian car sector.
00:33:39.500 Exactly.
00:33:39.940 And I put it to you, Minister, that the government felt that they had to do something about these protests, not because of threats of serious violence, but because your government was completely overwhelmed and you were under a tremendous amount of pressure from the United States.
00:33:55.380 I absolutely disagree with that.
00:33:57.380 Okay. Well, we heard evidence from you earlier today, and you said that you were put into contact with Brian Deese. So he's the economic advisor to the president. He's a very influential player in the decision for the electric vehicle tax credit issue, and he actually contacted you.
00:34:16.400 That's correct.
00:34:17.060 Right. And you thought that it was striking that someone of his importance, who's so hard to get a hold of, contacted you.
00:34:24.400 I had spoken to Brian Deese before and since, but the speed and urgency with which he got in touch with me was definitely significant and relevant.
00:34:39.340 And he was unhappy and there could be major economic consequences.
00:34:42.980 What he said to me as I reported in that readout was that they were very concerned that because of the blockades, U.S. factories would shut down.
00:34:58.780 Right, and we heard that the CEOs of two major banks contacted you, Canadian banks, I believe, and we also heard that President Biden, who is probably the world's most powerful person, or near that, had a telephone call with the Prime Minister.
00:35:15.680 Yes, both of those things are true.
00:35:17.560 And that telephone call, it happened on a Friday, and by the Monday, the Emergencies Act was invoked.
00:35:25.580 That's true.
00:35:26.280 Okay, and so I put it to you, Minister, that the federal government had to show the USA that they were in control, and that explains why the Emergencies Act was invoked, despite the fact that, for example, the Ambassador Bridge was cleared and open to traffic.
00:35:45.020 No, I wouldn't agree with that characterization.
00:35:47.340 Okay, well, I would put it to you that the pressure the government was under explains why the Emergencies Act was invoked, despite the fact that a deal had been struck with the protesters in Ottawa to reduce the footprint of the protest in that city.
00:36:02.580 Again, I would disagree with that.
00:36:05.020 Well, let's see if you would agree with this.
00:36:06.820 I'd put it to you that there was no meaningful consultation with the provinces, not even advanced notice of what the first minister's meeting was about.
00:36:14.980 and that's because the government didn't have time for it.
00:36:19.080 They just had to make a decision about the Emergencies Act
00:36:22.340 because of the tremendous pressure that they were under.
00:36:25.680 Again, I disagree with a great deal of that characterization.
00:36:31.240 One last question for you then, Ms. Freeland.
00:36:33.120 I put it to you that given the overwhelming situation
00:36:37.980 that the government was facing explains why they were willing
00:36:41.740 to use extraordinary powers against their own people,
00:36:45.500 despite the fact that no police agency or intelligence agency
00:36:49.780 told them that there were threats to the security of Canada?
00:36:54.500 Again, I disagree with many of the premises in that question,
00:37:01.580 and I would be happy to elaborate, but it seems that we're out of time.
00:37:05.760 It seems so. Thank you very much for your answers.
00:37:08.080 Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.
00:37:10.000 Okay, thank you.
00:37:10.880 Next, I'd like to call on the government of Alberta.
00:37:18.900 Thank you very much and good afternoon.
00:37:21.220 Minister Freeland, I have just two questions for you this afternoon.
00:37:25.680 As has been discussed today, oh, sorry, I apologize for the transcript.
00:37:29.240 My name is Mandy England, and I'm one of the lawyers for the government of Alberta.
00:37:32.940 As has been discussed today, you had consultations with the CEOs of several banks on February the 13th
00:37:38.720 about potential economic measures.
00:37:40.880 And you said in your testimony today how important it was for you to hear from the leaders of the financial institutions what their views were on the situation with the blockades.
00:37:50.160 And as you're also aware, the consultation with the First Ministers of the Provinces and Territories was held on the morning of February 14th, and that was after the cabinet meetings and the IRG meetings had been held.
00:38:02.840 Now, consulting with the CEOs of financial institutions for their views on the situation is not required by the Emergencies Act before the government can invoke the Act for a public order emergency.
00:38:14.200 But consulting with the provinces and territories for their input is required.
00:38:18.020 As Deputy Prime Minister, don't you think that the input of the first ministers of the provinces and territories on the potential invocation of the Emergencies Act and the proposed measures would have been relevant information to have before you at the IRG meetings and the cabinet meetings where the invocation of the Emergencies Act was discussed and debated?
00:38:37.000 Thank you for the question. And as a former intergovernmental relations minister, I understand it and I really do understand the importance and sometimes the challenges of that federal-provincial relationship.
00:38:57.800 In this particular situation, it was a very complex, fast-developing situation, and each minister was responsible for managing a series of relationships and bringing that information to the table.
00:39:18.120 My colleague, Dominic LeBlanc, is an extremely able minister, an extremely able intergovernmental affairs minister, and I relied on him, as did everyone around the table, to manage that relationship and to bring to us and to the table his knowledge of the views of the provinces and territories.
00:39:43.140 and with your knowledge that they weren't consulted or about the emergencies act or told
00:39:49.320 until the morning of february the 14th that the emergencies act might be invoked wouldn't you agree
00:39:54.940 that the information on their views on the potential invocation of the emergencies act
00:39:58.900 wasn't before the cabinet or the irg it wasn't one of the items because it wasn't available
00:40:04.440 until February the 14th?
00:40:10.160 In my view, Minister LeBlanc very effectively,
00:40:16.460 from what I could see,
00:40:18.220 very effectively communicated with the provinces and territories
00:40:21.100 and communicated with us what he learned from those conversations.
00:40:28.720 that discussion that happened on the Monday was important.
00:40:37.040 I wasn't part of that discussion, but it happened and it was important that it happen.
00:40:42.060 And so the evidence that has been given before this inquiry is that the Emergencies Act
00:40:46.500 had not been raised with any of the first ministers of the provinces or territories
00:40:51.780 or any of the cabinet members of the provinces or territories.
00:40:55.640 So wouldn't you agree with me that whatever information it was that Minister LeBlanc was bringing to the table, it did not involve discussions about the Federal Emergencies Act?
00:41:06.120 Again, there, I would say this was an area of responsibility for Minister LeBlanc, who I do absolutely believe does that very difficult job very well.
00:41:17.740 And I had confidence in how he did that job.
00:41:22.860 I'll move on to my second question.
00:41:25.640 We spoke about the call that you had the banks on February the 13th.
00:41:31.640 There was another call with the banks on February the 21st.
00:41:34.640 I'd like to just pull up the readout from that call if I may.
00:41:37.640 It's ssm.can401828.
00:41:54.640 And the section that I'd like to draw your attention to is close to the top.
00:41:57.580 It's the portion that reads from DPM, which I take to be indicating that this is what you said on the call as Deputy Prime Minister would be DPM.
00:42:07.080 Is that correct?
00:42:08.080 I think so.
00:42:09.540 Okay, thank you.
00:42:10.800 And then there's a paragraph that begins first.
00:42:14.580 And then the next little paragraph says,
00:42:16.220 the RCMP has told us they have heard from protesters as they were leaving the blockades
00:42:21.700 that they did so because their family said their accounts were frozen, so get the hell
00:42:25.640 out of there. This is a much better and peaceful way to end things. Now, freezing someone's bank
00:42:31.680 account without due process engages their personal rights, and it also engages the personal rights of
00:42:36.800 the families that shared many of those bank accounts, individuals who weren't even at the
00:42:40.720 protest. You've stated here in this document that your view was that this is better and more
00:42:47.640 peaceful, presumably than using the existing legal authorities, which multiple branches of
00:42:54.240 law enforcement have testified that this inquiry were adequate to bring a peaceful end to the
00:42:58.420 protests. And indeed, they did so using those authorities. So do you still hold that view today
00:43:04.300 that freezing the accounts was a better solution than law enforcement carrying out its legal
00:43:10.240 authorities in the responsible manner that they do? The view that I do hold, as we discussed
00:43:18.880 earlier today, is one of my very grave concerns about bringing these illegal blockades and this
00:43:28.680 illegal occupation to an end was the danger that there would be violence and that there would be
00:43:34.820 violence directed towards the protesters. I was particularly concerned because of reports
00:43:42.640 that children were present and that was one of the reasons that I felt the financial
00:43:55.320 tools that were put in place by the Emergencies Act were a better option. From my perspective,
00:44:04.180 the job of these tools was to create a peaceful, nonviolent incentive for people who were doing
00:44:16.960 something illegal to leave. And I think those tools did work. And so I would just remind you
00:44:25.260 in that regard that the call that we're looking at this readout from in front of us was held on
00:44:29.720 February the 21st. And so at that time, the COOTS blockade, we can scroll up to the top of the
00:44:35.260 document. We have Monday, February the 21st, and you say, it's hard to believe it was only a week
00:44:43.760 ago. We were on a call last Sunday, which was February the 13th, talking about this. So this
00:44:48.520 is a call that was held on February the 21st, after the enforcement actions had been taken out
00:44:52.880 at COOTS, which were done before the Emergencies Act was invoked, after the Ambassador Bridge was
00:44:57.460 cleared, which was before the Emergencies Act was invoked. And while the enforcement efforts in
00:45:01.580 Ottawa were well underway, you would have had the knowledge at that time that there was peaceful
00:45:06.200 resolution by law enforcement at both of those border blockades, and that there was no violence
00:45:12.760 against children. And it was a peaceful resolution by law enforcement in Ottawa. And so with respect
00:45:22.000 to those comments about the fear of the prospect of violence i don't i don't know that uh on the
00:45:29.520 timeline of february 21st are you saying you still had them then and you would still have those today
00:45:35.040 no not at all on and so you expressed this view after no may i explain absolutely i didn't realize
00:45:45.120 you were talking i apologize no problem it can be hard on the video calls um so on february
00:45:51.600 21st, when I made those comments, it was looking back on the events of the week that had passed.
00:46:00.380 And I certainly believed then, and I believe today, that the financial tools we put in place
00:46:09.240 aided in the peaceful resolution of all of those occupations and blockades.
00:46:17.620 The reports that we heard, the reports that were in the media, the reports from law enforcement were that many people did leave as a result of the incentives created by those tools.
00:46:32.020 And then the final thing that I think is important to emphasize is we said on February 14th, we are putting these tools in place, so please leave now.
00:46:45.560 so that these tools never need to be used.
00:46:49.600 So any person who had their account frozen had due warning that they were engaged in illegal activity
00:47:01.140 and that they should stop doing that activity.
00:47:04.620 And the other thing that I would point to that I think did work well
00:47:09.380 is the accounts were very quickly unfrozen after the illegal activity ceased.
00:47:15.560 And with respect to the due warning, there were, as you acknowledged in your earlier
00:47:20.560 testimony, accounts of families, individuals who weren't present at the protests that were
00:47:25.560 also frozen.
00:47:26.560 Would your view be the same with respect to those individuals?
00:47:30.560 Again there, that was never the intent to in any way affect family members.
00:47:44.560 Certainly the consequence, the reality of people having joint bank accounts made that impossible to entirely avoid.
00:48:00.340 But I would say that the family members whose presence at the protest, at the illegal occupation and blockades, caused the accounts to be frozen, had a very easy, readily available remedy with a lot of notice.
00:48:20.300 They could have left before the freezing began.
00:48:23.080 And as soon as people did leave, the accounts were unfrozen.
00:48:27.980 Thank you, Minister. Those are my questions today.
00:48:30.340 Okay, thank you. Next, I'd like to call on the City of Ottawa, please.
00:48:37.480 The City has ceded its time to the Government of Canada.
00:48:41.320 Alyssa Tompkins for the records.
00:48:43.360 Okay, thank you. Council for former Chief Slowly, please.
00:48:48.500 Rebecca Jones for Chief Slowly, and we also have no questions for the Deputy Prime Minister
00:48:52.740 and have ceded our time to the Government of Canada. Thank you.
00:48:55.880 Okay, next is City of Windsor.
00:49:00.340 Good afternoon, Deputy Prime Minister.
00:49:10.320 My name is Jennifer King, and I am legal counsel to the City of Windsor.
00:49:15.160 I only have a few moments with you this afternoon.
00:49:17.920 You have testified about the macroeconomic impacts of the border blockades
00:49:22.620 and the Ambassador Bridge blockades specifically.
00:49:25.840 In my few moments with you, I want to shift tracks a bit
00:49:28.820 and ask you to scope down and talk to us about the impacts of the blockades on the community
00:49:34.240 and individual level. As you may be aware, I hope you're aware, Windsor is not just a road
00:49:41.420 to the Ambassador Bridge. It's a community. It's a place where people live, work and study.
00:49:48.760 Are you aware that the bridge lands in the community? Yes, I am. Are you aware that for
00:49:55.420 Windsor and Windsorites, the blockade of the bridge was felt directly and immediately?
00:50:01.640 Yes, I am.
00:50:03.400 I understand from Deputy Minister Sabia that Transport Canada has not completed an analysis
00:50:09.020 of the blockade and the impacts on the local economy and local Windsor businesses. Is that
00:50:16.280 right?
00:50:16.880 That's right.
00:50:17.700 Okay. But you are well aware of the importance of the automotive sector as an employer in the
00:50:22.780 region, right? I'm very aware of that and was motivated by my awareness of that and some of
00:50:30.280 the actions we've been discussing today. Okay. And you're aware that given the nature of the
00:50:34.640 automotive sector, the blockade had a significant impact and resulted in almost immediately in
00:50:40.620 shutdowns and partial layoffs? Yes. Can you tell us generally how impacts on the Canadian economy
00:50:48.740 at this kind of macro level that you've been talking about trickles down and impacts local
00:50:53.320 communities and residents particularly communities like windsor that are reliant on these types of
00:50:58.840 automotive industries i think you've been doing a very good job of telling us that and certainly
00:51:05.300 i'm you know very prepared to agree with you that windsor was very specifically and meaningfully
00:51:16.300 affected. Okay. You also gave testimony this morning about U.S. EV incentives. Mayor Dilkens
00:51:22.320 gave evidence to this commission about the $5 billion investment announced in March through
00:51:27.620 a joint venture between Stellantis and LG Energy Solutions to establish a battery manufacturing
00:51:33.100 plant in the region. You're aware of that investment? Extremely. So this will be the
00:51:38.940 first Canadian electric vehicle battery manufacturing facility? Well, let's get it
00:51:45.040 off the ground, but I'm very optimistic about it. And Mayor Dilkens testified that these discussions
00:51:51.820 and pre-planning about this investment was underway at the time of the blockade.
00:51:57.140 Yes, I believe that's the case. Is this the kind of investment that you were concerned about that
00:52:01.540 you were talking about earlier today? A hundred percent. The commission has heard evidence about
00:52:07.240 the response in Windsor, Windsor Police and its policing partners to peacefully clear the blockade
00:52:11.880 of the bridge. Are you aware at the time that the necessary policing efforts to maintain access to
00:52:17.000 the bridge after the blockade impacted Windsorites? Yes. Deputy Minister Sabia agreed that the
00:52:24.000 reopening of the bridge was key to avoiding greater damage to Canada's reputation as a good
00:52:28.760 place to invest, Canada's reputation as a reliable trading partner. Do you agree? Yes, I do. For
00:52:35.480 Windsorites, this isn't, of course, not about just what happened in February. Windsor has been host
00:52:40.280 to this critical piece of infrastructure for almost a century.
00:52:44.240 And Windsor keeps traffic flowing to this bridge every day,
00:52:47.340 and that benefits the entire country, doesn't it?
00:52:51.240 100%. It helped us get the 3M masks, in fact.
00:52:56.040 Right. So we've heard a number of witnesses recommend
00:52:58.760 that the frameworks and laws to protect critical infrastructure
00:53:01.820 should be studied and strengthened. Do you agree?
00:53:04.520 I do.
00:53:05.580 Would you also agree that Windsor is not only a stakeholder
00:53:08.540 in debriefing the lessons learned
00:53:10.620 and in developing these frameworks,
00:53:13.120 but also an important partner?
00:53:16.700 Yes, Windsor is definitely an important partner.
00:53:19.340 Okay, thank you.
00:53:20.040 Those are all my questions.
00:53:21.100 Okay, thank you.
00:53:22.260 Thank you.
00:53:22.880 Next is the Windsor Police Service.
00:53:29.400 Hi there, Heather Patterson
00:53:31.120 for the Windsor Police Service.
00:53:33.100 We have no questions for Minister Freeland
00:53:35.520 and have ceded our time
00:53:36.740 to the government of Saskatchewan.
00:53:38.540 I guess then we go to the government of Saskatchewan. Good afternoon my name is
00:53:46.100 Mike Morris and I'm counsel for the government of Saskatchewan. Minister
00:53:50.980 spoiler alert I hope to get you to agree with me as much as my colleague did just
00:53:55.580 a couple minutes ago I guess we'll see where we get to. Minister I think I can
00:54:02.420 start out with some easy ones you're familiar with Farm Credit Canada which
00:54:05.900 is a federal crown corporation is that fair not intimately but i know it exists
00:54:15.500 you grew up on the prairies it used to be called farm credit corporation
00:54:19.500 if i call it fcc you'll understand what i mean is that fair yes okay and are you aware
00:54:26.220 that fcc is headquartered in regina yes okay and that it provides loans to farmers correct yes
00:54:35.900 And Farm Credit Canada would have been a financial institution subject to the Emergency Economic Measures Order, correct?
00:54:44.020 I believe so.
00:54:45.860 And if I just call that the order, you'll understand what I mean. Is that fair?
00:54:52.240 Yes.
00:54:53.540 Okay. I want to refer you to an article from Farmers Forum, which is self-described as the largest circulation farm newspaper in Ontario.
00:55:06.060 so i'm going to ask the clerk to pull up a document it's p o e s a s seven zeros three
00:55:16.620 and just while we're pulling this up it's the may 3rd 2022 article from farmers forum entitled
00:55:25.420 read the documents farm credit compiled list of nine names for possible black listing so we can
00:55:31.740 see that on the screen there now and i'm just going to read from the first three paragraphs of
00:55:37.340 the article um so we'll just have to go down there perfect farm credit canada compiled a
00:55:45.420 list of nine people to be potentially blacklisted because of possible participation in the freedom
00:55:51.180 convoy protest in february according to internal fcc emails acquired by farmer forum through an
00:55:58.220 access to information requests the access to information documents revealed that fcc
00:56:04.460 employees were instructed to report the names of customers who were involved in the freedom
00:56:09.580 convoy in ottawa after the emergencies act was enacted on feb 14. the federal lending agency
00:56:18.140 compiled a list of nine people by viewing twitter accounts and online media posts
00:56:23.180 as well as drawing from conversations with customers now i expect we can agree that it's
00:56:31.500 not surprising that fcc instructed its employees to report in this manner because fcc was required
00:56:38.860 to do so under the terms of the order is that fair well maybe not entirely and i will say
00:56:51.180 I am reading this news report for the first time as I see it on my screen.
00:57:00.680 So my response is a little bit limited.
00:57:04.940 But even in the paragraphs that you've displayed for us,
00:57:11.540 there is a misunderstanding if this email is genuine.
00:57:18.600 And I'm just saying because I haven't seen it, right?
00:57:24.620 We can look at the emails.
00:57:26.420 No, no, no. Reporting is a hard thing to do.
00:57:29.880 I used to be a reporter.
00:57:31.880 But the email that is reported on here saying, if the federal government directs us to, that is a misunderstanding of how the order worked.
00:57:48.600 We were always very conscious that it wasn't the job of the federal government or the Ministry of Finance to name specific names or to even know which names were involved.
00:58:05.120 The way the order worked was that that was to be a communication between law enforcement and the financial institutions.
00:58:12.720 And I know it's not my job to ask you to agree with me, but I hope you will agree with me.
00:58:19.360 These lawyers need to be there in person.
00:58:23.720 Ministers shouldn't be involved in naming specific names.
00:58:26.980 So that was a misunderstanding.
00:58:29.160 I think we should look at the documents referred to from that access to information request.
00:58:34.400 So I'm going to ask the clerk to bring up POE SAS 704.
00:58:42.500 and these are the documents which were obtained by farmers forum and that are referred to in this
00:58:48.820 article and i'm just going to ask that we go to the third page of this pdf please
00:58:58.180 there perfect so we can see this is an email with a subject line how the emergencies
00:59:04.900 act effects fcc and its two operations field staff dated february 23rd 2022 so i'd just
00:59:14.260 like us to scroll down to the third paragraph please stop there the third paragraph begins
00:59:21.140 if you become aware of potential customer involvement in blockades occupations and
00:59:25.780 other supportive activity related to the freedom convoy you must submit a tip to the customer
00:59:31.220 diligence center brackets cdc so this is the morning of february 23rd and we know that the
00:59:38.580 order was no longer in place later that day because of course uh the the emergency declaration
00:59:45.620 was revoked on february 23rd later that day is that fair minister that yes yes exactly okay i'd
00:59:54.740 just like us to scroll down to page five of the pdf now please and this should be an email dated
01:00:01.300 february 25th yes there it is so we see this is an email dated february 25th with the subject
01:00:08.020 emergencies act customers identified and the content of the email indicates that the senator
01:00:14.180 is telling the recipient that they'd like to follow up regarding customers that have been
01:00:18.660 identified as possibly participating in the 2022 freedom convoy so we've agreed i think or we can
01:00:27.220 agree that as of february 25th there was no requirement under the order to conduct this
01:00:32.500 follow-up is that fair so let me say a couple of things first of all i'm seeing this email now for
01:00:40.500 the first time and as far as i know it had nothing to do with me um second of all it's certainly the
01:00:49.460 case that the order was ceased to apply after february 23rd and maybe the third thing for
01:00:57.780 people who are listening that it's worth pointing out is all the accounts were unfrozen around that
01:01:08.340 time okay i just want to continue on to the next page of the pdf which is page six
01:01:16.260 and i i appreciate you're seeing this for the first time minister and i understand that's
01:01:20.900 difficult but this appears to be a spreadsheet entitled 2022 freedom convoy tips has a column
01:01:27.460 for tip for date for customer name and preliminary findings and i'd just like us to slowly scroll
01:01:35.700 to the very end of all of these pdfs looking at the dates as we can um as it goes by yeah you
01:01:42.660 can keep scrolling that's a good pace so we've seen february 23rd keep scrolling now we see
01:01:49.140 february 24th and keep scrolling i think there's one more page we'll get to the end here
01:01:57.060 oh another page more february 24th keep going yeah so the last one is number nine okay go up a little
01:02:04.420 bit and this would appear to indicate that the last tip in the spreadsheet was received february
01:02:11.540 25th there's a description i gather of the preliminary investigation at this point so
01:02:19.620 you know it appears and i appreciate your viewing this for the first time that fcc
01:02:26.500 was still investigating tips relating to the freedom convoy 2022 as of february 25th
01:02:34.420 And I don't know when it stopped investigating tips, and I expect you may not know either. Is that fair, Minister?
01:02:43.820 With real respect, I have to say, I think these are questions for FCC and not for me.
01:02:52.600 Okay, I expected you might answer that, and that's a fair answer.
01:02:56.800 um aside from fcc can you identify any other federal financial institutions which were
01:03:03.760 subject to the order for us the order applied to all financial institutions across the country
01:03:15.360 okay no that's fair um it was a privilege to to speak with you minister um thank you very much
01:03:23.120 for answering my questions okay thank you uh so we now turn to the government of canada please
01:03:41.600 good afternoon deputy prime minister as you know my name is stephen albert i'm one of the lawyers
01:03:45.760 for the government of Canada. My friend for the government of Saskatchewan just now took
01:03:55.300 you to a news article that referred to the blacklisting of account holders or borrowers
01:04:02.240 under a federal program. Is there anything in the emergency economic measures order that
01:04:07.960 authorized or required financial institutions to blacklist uh an individual no there was not
01:04:17.000 was there anything that prescribed any lasting impacts beyond the expiry of the designation of
01:04:23.880 a person as a designated determination that a person was a designated person or
01:04:28.280 the expiry of the emergencies act there absolutely was not
01:04:31.880 um earlier my friend for commission council uh put it to you that on the issue of foreign funding
01:04:42.680 that there was no information that the government had in relation to foreign funding at the time of
01:04:48.120 the declaration of the emergency in your response you mentioned open source information i take it
01:04:55.000 it, that would have included news articles? Yes, it would. Okay, and I won't take you to them,
01:05:01.820 but I'm just going to read into the record the names of two such articles, pb.can.401755
01:05:08.880 and pb.can401756.
01:05:16.820 My friend for the Democracy Fund mentioned to you certain letters
01:05:27.880 from the Canadian Truckers Association in which they expressed concern
01:05:32.020 in December of 2021 over the removal of the exemption
01:05:35.660 for cross-border trucking.
01:05:40.160 Do you recall that?
01:05:41.360 I do.
01:05:43.300 And if we could pull up, Mr. Clerk,
01:05:48.140 SSM.CAN.50335.
01:05:54.140 And this document that's pulling up
01:05:57.080 is a statement from the same organization
01:06:00.560 that was made in January of 2022.
01:06:05.660 and if you see there the statement says the CTA does not support and strongly disapproves
01:06:18.220 of any protests on public roadways, highways, and bridges.
01:06:24.640 CTA believes such actions, especially those that interfere with public safety, are not
01:06:49.880 how disagreements uh with governments should be expressed uh were you aware of that being
01:06:58.520 the position of the canadian truckers association at the time yes i was
01:07:04.280 and indeed if we could go to ssm.can.50987
01:07:11.080 this is a letter dated february 10th 2022 again from the canadian truckers association
01:07:21.240 and in this letter the canadian truckers association is asking the federal government
01:07:27.160 to take action uh to address the issue with the border blockades or were you aware it's a letter
01:07:33.240 addressed to the prime minister and uh minister al gabra but i'll just ask were you aware of the
01:07:39.320 Canadian Truckers Association making such a request at the time? I can't pretend to have
01:07:47.140 memorized the exact date and content of the letter, but I was aware that Minister Al-Ghabra was in
01:07:54.660 touch with the Truckers Association and that they were very concerned. Okay, so if we talk about
01:08:02.380 economic impacts uh for a moment um you discussed with commission council earlier the uh a bloomberg
01:08:13.500 a briefing and as well a bloomberg article um if we could just pull up the news article uh com
01:08:21.340 five zeros eight three nine please and if we could go to the third page of that document when it's
01:08:29.500 ready. This is the news article, and apart from the reference to the 0.1% that you were
01:08:35.400 discussing earlier, there are some reporting in here about other individuals that were
01:08:47.320 commenting on the situation of the border blockades at the time. And if you look under
01:08:53.600 Under the heading there, we don't need this, there's a quote attributed to the Governor
01:09:05.080 of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklin, that was made on the Wednesday, so that would have
01:09:09.080 been the day before this article, so on Wednesday, February 9th, in which the Governor of the
01:09:17.080 Bank of Canada noted that we've already got a strained global supply chain. We don't need this
01:09:27.900 in reference to the border blockade. Do you remember being aware of the comments of the
01:09:32.480 Governor of the Bank of Canada at the time? I absolutely do, and that's in my timeline.
01:09:38.840 I think it's in my notebook that when we spoke earlier today about concerns around achieving a soft landing for the Canadian economy, concerns about rising inflation, concerns about the rise in interest rates, which the Bank of Canada, with which the Bank of Canada would respond to rising inflation.
01:10:07.900 That was very much on my mind. And I mentioned that we had already had a January inflation number, which was elevated. We expected inflation. We expected an elevated number. The number that we had in January was for December. We expected in February to learn of an elevated number for January. We were aware that the bank was concerned, and that made us concerned, definitely.
01:10:35.500 Okay, so you spoke earlier about some of your concerns around comments by public officials
01:10:42.500 in the United States.
01:10:43.500 I'd just like to go through the timeline of some of those statements, because I think
01:10:47.400 we've heard a bit about them, but I think it's helpful to look at actually-
01:10:49.900 Sure, and if I could just say one more thing on the Bank of Canada, that wasn't in an interview
01:10:54.160 with Bloomberg.
01:10:55.540 Governor Macklem spoke at a press conference about it, so that was widely reported.
01:10:59.260 No, indeed.
01:11:00.260 That was just one instance of a document that's in the record that records that statement.
01:11:05.500 So, February 7th, we know, is the day that the blockade begins at the Ambassador Bridge.
01:11:15.520 And so, on February 9th, this is day three, that's the date of those comments by the Governor
01:11:24.100 of the Bank of Canada.
01:11:25.100 It's also the date of several statements by U.S. public officials.
01:11:29.600 If we could pull up pb.can.6023.
01:11:35.500 and go to page three this is a tweet by representative elissa slotkin and i believe
01:11:47.580 you may have indirectly made reference to this earlier this morning but i'd just like to put the
01:11:55.020 tweet up. And if you can see there, we have the representative
01:12:06.620 Slotkin saying, Slotkin saying, if we need another example of why
01:12:12.020 supply chains matter, look no further than the Ambassador
01:12:15.680 Bridge, the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge, then it
01:12:19.640 continues. And if you look at the second installation of the thread or the second part
01:12:26.180 of the thread, it says, it doesn't matter if it's an adversary or an ally. We can't
01:12:35.920 be this reliant on parts coming from foreign countries. Was that the comment that you were
01:12:45.460 referencing earlier in your testimony? Yes, it was. And I remember when that came out very,
01:12:55.880 very clearly. And, you know, what was being publicly said by U.S. officials,
01:13:04.800 all of it worried me. But I think if I had to identify for people here one particular line
01:13:13.900 that worried me the most, it's those two sentences. And in particular, it doesn't matter if it's an
01:13:22.700 adversary or an ally. We can't be this reliant on parts coming from foreign countries. That is
01:13:31.180 a huge threat to Canada's entire auto sector. And the point especially there that she's
01:13:42.140 underscoring adversary or ally. Because a point that we had been making, and actually we made
01:13:49.720 successfully, for example, with the 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, was those were inappropriately
01:13:57.300 levied against Canada by the US because we were an ally. And so you could rely on us. And that
01:14:06.820 point there is saying, you know what, you shouldn't differentiate between, for example, Canada and
01:14:14.640 China. The United States is equally at risk if it has an economic dependency. And having US elected
01:14:23.620 representatives assert that publicly and connect it to this blockade and say, look, by relying on
01:14:32.660 Canada, you're going to lose your job. That was very, very dangerous for us. And I will also just
01:14:40.020 point out this was a Democratic member of the Michigan delegation. And I think later on in the
01:14:50.880 tweet, Representative Slotkin talks about being in touch with the White House. These were the people
01:14:57.100 that the White House was talking to about this situation,
01:15:02.660 but also about the EV incentives.
01:15:05.660 And their views mattered very, very much.
01:15:10.760 And on the White House point, if we look just further down this page,
01:15:14.160 the last line on this page of the document,
01:15:16.540 it's a headline from an article from the Detroit News,
01:15:19.980 White House worries about Ambassador Bridge blockade.
01:15:24.240 And that article, we don't need to go through the text, but it references a statement by then Press Secretary Jen Psaki commenting on White House concern.
01:15:36.260 And I take it you were aware of those comments at the time as well.
01:15:40.500 Yes, I was.
01:15:43.520 And so then we go to February 10th.
01:15:45.380 That's day four of the blockades.
01:15:47.820 commission council mentioned earlier that the department of finance prepared an economic
01:15:53.800 analysis on february 10th that day and we looked at it the other day with the department of
01:15:59.920 finance officials and that backgrounder noted that by the at that time as as of the fourth day
01:16:11.060 There were auto plant shutdowns at Ford, Stellantis, and Toyota plants that were caused by the Ambassador Bridge blockade.
01:16:25.080 Were you aware of that, and were you surprised at how quickly those shutdowns occurred?
01:16:29.840 um I was aware of that and we spoke earlier this morning about my conversation that day the 10th
01:16:41.060 of February with Brian Deese where he said and I can't recall exactly but something like another
01:16:47.180 12 hours and all the northeast will shut down so I was aware of the impact and at some level
01:16:57.540 I wasn't surprised because I did know, I knew two things, that the auto sector is so hugely
01:17:05.580 integrated and, you know, the U.S. plants are dependent on us, but we're also dependent on
01:17:11.520 the U.S. plants. Those parts go across six times, right? So I knew that. And the other thing,
01:17:19.820 which I think Reese Mendes spoke to you guys about, but is very true, is the auto sector
01:17:26.220 operates on a just-in-time production process. They don't like to hold big stores of parts
01:17:36.580 because that's expensive. And so the industry requires very reliable and very speedy supply
01:17:47.620 chains. And if there's a break in them, yes, it stops production. So I knew that intellectually.
01:17:53.940 Um, I would say though, at a kind of emotional level, um, it still, you know, was breathtaking
01:18:04.760 how quickly it had happened, how quickly the effect mounted, how swift the political impact
01:18:13.300 was.
01:18:14.260 And I think that was the case also for the White House.
01:18:17.660 And that was reflected in my Brian Deese conversation where he sort of said, yeah, you've
01:18:23.440 been telling us about the integration, but now I really see it. And so you mentioned you spoke
01:18:30.360 to Brian Deese, and part of that was setting up a call with the president, between the president
01:18:34.620 and the prime minister, which then took place the following day. What was your reaction when you
01:18:41.060 heard that the call, that that call had taken place the next day after the process, you'd begun
01:18:48.480 the process to set it up? So I was glad that the conversation happened because I knew it was
01:18:58.060 important and valuable for the prime minister to have a chance to explain the situation,
01:19:04.180 to discuss the situation directly with the president. So that was good. And I had asked
01:19:12.220 Brian, for that call to happen. But at another level, I was quite concerned by how quickly the
01:19:19.900 call was set up, because the speed of response spoke to me about the degree of concern.
01:19:28.760 We've heard earlier in this proceeding about a statement that was released by Governor Whitmer
01:19:34.200 on February 10th. There was a second statement that Governor Whitmer released on February
01:19:42.200 11th. And if we could just pull that one up, it's pb.can.401840. And as part of that statement,
01:20:04.560 Governor Whitmer said, we cannot allow another minute to go by unnecessarily calling on the
01:20:10.520 Canadian government to act. Was it unusual for Governor Wintner to be issuing two statements
01:20:17.260 on the same topic one day after the next? Very unusual. And the content of her statement
01:20:30.920 um was also very striking so she makes the point first of all that she is talking to the White
01:20:44.220 House she's talking to the congressional delegation the people who we've been speaking
01:20:48.760 about there is a real concerted push um and then I can't quite see it um here yeah this um
01:20:59.500 we can't let another minute go by unnecessarily. That was also striking to me and speaks to
01:21:12.660 how I perceived, and I believe rightly, the economic situation, that every minute,
01:21:21.460 every hour counted, that the situation was deteriorating really hour by hour,
01:21:29.440 and Canada was being very harmed. And so that speaks to why I believed, and I think it was
01:21:41.480 the right judgment, we needed to act really swiftly. And if we fast forward then to after
01:21:49.500 the events of January and February. Have you heard anything from business leaders since that time
01:21:57.080 about the impacts of the blockades? I have.
01:22:07.560 The, and I'll give you a couple of examples. PDAC is a big annual Toronto mining conference.
01:22:19.500 Um, if you're in the mining industry, you will have heard of it. It's famous among miners and Canada is rightly proud to host it every year and to be the mining capital of the world.
01:22:30.720 Um, PDAC this year, uh, because of COVID restrictions, it's normally held in the winter, but it was held in June.
01:22:37.720 And at PDAC in Toronto in June, Jonathan Wilkinson, the Minister of Natural Resources, and I convened a table to talk about critical minerals and metals and electric vehicles.
01:22:53.540 and one thing that really struck me was and we had sort of miners there processors and also
01:23:03.060 car companies and car parts people sort of the full circle of that sector um one of the people
01:23:10.100 there the canadian ceo of a japanese car company um proactively sort of went around the table
01:23:17.940 everyone raised their points about critical minerals and metals and evs and opportunities
01:23:22.700 in Canada. And this CEO, who, you know, is a guy whose job is to get his Japanese headquarters to
01:23:32.100 invest in Canada. And he raised in his remarks, I think it was the first thing he said,
01:23:41.720 I'm still getting questions around the blockades and the occupation.
01:23:46.660 and I need to be able to say to my headquarters in Japan that this is not going to happen again
01:23:56.560 in Canada, that they can be confident that that access to the US market is not going to be
01:24:04.180 impeded. So that was very striking to me that still in June, even after our action, which worked,
01:24:12.960 um there were still those lingering concerns um and it made me glad that we had acted when we did
01:24:20.980 and not later um and then in just in October uh I was in Windsor um which we've heard so much
01:24:31.180 about earlier today um speaking about the economy actually at a big car parts event
01:24:38.360 And one of the car industry journalists asked me a question, and it's on the public record exactly what he said, but I'm just recalling broadly.
01:24:54.500 His question was basically, can you offer assurances that something like the convoy and the blockade won't happen again?
01:25:04.080 it continues to be a major concern in the car industry here.
01:25:10.380 And again, I was surprised that someone in October
01:25:15.940 was still asking the question.
01:25:18.120 And it was further evidence to me
01:25:23.060 of how serious the threat had been.
01:25:29.240 And, you know, while taking very seriously
01:25:31.840 the magnitude of our action and the reluctance that any government should have
01:25:41.500 on ultimately acting as we did. That question was a confirmation for me
01:25:48.340 that there was very great harm that was in the process of being done. And I was glad that we
01:25:55.580 acted to stop the harm. Thank you. Shifting gears, if we talk about the economic measures
01:26:00.940 for my friend from the government of Alberta put it to you that the there was no need to adopt the
01:26:11.060 economic measures that police had adequate tools to clear the blockades without them
01:26:17.580 I take it that you did not direct the commissioner of the RCMP to use any of the tools made available
01:26:28.400 in the Emergency Economic Measures Order?
01:26:32.040 I absolutely did not.
01:26:34.740 And so to the extent that police made use of those tools,
01:26:39.120 that was because they believed in their judgment
01:26:41.680 that it would be a useful thing to do in carrying out their duties?
01:26:48.740 Yes, that would be correct.
01:26:51.320 And have you heard anything from police officers
01:26:53.860 about whether they in fact found those tools to be effective
01:26:57.080 in dealing with the situation i'm not the main person who speaks to or hears from police officers
01:27:04.080 but it is my understanding that the tools were used and that they were effective
01:27:08.800 i'd like to ask you a couple more questions about the readout of the february 13th
01:27:16.960 banks call that we uh that commission council went through with you earlier this morning
01:27:23.020 first commission council took you to the email setting up that call from tyler meredith in which
01:27:33.880 he alluded to previous communications with the canadian bankers association in which he relayed
01:27:40.140 that the message from the industry mainly speaking for their legal councils is that we have this
01:27:46.680 under control and we're generally feeling comfortable with the existing with the current
01:27:52.420 regime. Do you remember that exchange? I remember that exchange from this morning. I didn't
01:27:58.260 remember that email from the time, but I remember our conversation this morning.
01:28:02.800 So my question is just, in light of your call on February 13th with the bank CEOs,
01:28:13.800 do you believe that statement as expressed in the email that the banks believe they have
01:28:19.300 the situation under control and are comfortable with the current regime. Do you believe that was
01:28:25.180 an accurate statement based on the reaction of the bank CEOs on that call? I didn't write it,
01:28:31.700 and I can't remember whether I read it at the time or not, but what I can say 100%
01:28:38.860 based on the conversation that I had, which I both recorded and remember certainly parts of it
01:28:49.400 with striking kind of branded on my brain clarity, is when I spoke to the bank CEOs on the Sunday,
01:28:58.420 they were very, very concerned. They did not feel the situation was under control.
01:29:06.420 We did not discuss with them specific measures.
01:29:09.600 I was sort of in listening mode, apart from kind of saying to them, you know, buck up,
01:29:15.760 gentlemen, and do tell your investors that Canada is great, and sort of wanting to give
01:29:23.360 them confidence in our leadership.
01:29:28.360 But as you have seen from the transcript, they volunteered, a number of them.
01:29:35.820 Two things. One, grave concern about the economic situation, and two, absolute concern, and I would even say frustration, that the tools available to them were both inadequate.
01:29:54.020 You remember from that transcript, there was the point made of, we tried to get a court order, but it took four hours, and by the time we tracked it down, the money had moved to another account.
01:30:05.820 And then also the concern, which I did take seriously, about the banks being concerned that acting absent some form of government instruction would put them in jeopardy, the Fox News point that was there.
01:30:24.820 And so the banks were effectively asking for more government regulation.
01:30:31.460 I suppose you could put it that way.
01:30:35.220 And I think what the banks were saying, and not I think,
01:30:42.340 I mean, people can read through the transcript,
01:30:44.660 is they were saying this is a real threat to our economy
01:30:49.320 and you, the government, need to act.
01:30:53.080 And I think they were right.
01:30:54.820 And the other thing that I will say there is it's not...
01:31:04.220 in the ordinary way of things, for leaders of big Canadian businesses to want the government
01:31:16.160 to do more in the economy. I would say quite the contrary. And at this particular moment,
01:31:25.880 the banks had reason to not be so happy about things the government was doing.
01:31:33.660 This followed our election, during which we had campaigned on the 15% COVID recovery dividend,
01:31:41.300 which would be levied on banks and financial institutions, and we had campaigned on a permanent
01:31:46.160 tax on the banks. So I would guess, and you could speak to them, but I would guess
01:31:53.020 that if you had spoken to the bank CEOs at the beginning of January and said, would you like
01:32:00.080 the liberal government to take a more active position when it comes to economic management
01:32:08.460 of Canada? They would say, no, we wouldn't like that. And we would certainly like them not to
01:32:14.680 impose these taxes. So I just say that because the fact that they were saying the tools were
01:32:25.100 not adequate and you need to do more was particularly compelling to me because they
01:32:31.600 were not a constituency that was inclined to seek strong government action in the economy.
01:32:38.780 Just on the Fox News point that you just mentioned, in the Commission's overview report on fundraising, they trace the flow of funds through the crowdfunding platforms and show that there was a million dollars raised through the GoFundMe campaign that was paid into a TD bank account, and that TD froze that account on Thursday, February 10th, so before the phone call.
01:33:04.500 And there's, so the Fox News coverage, when it says on the readout of there having been Fox News coverage that Friday of an incident, you're aware that was in reference to TD freezing that million dollars from the GoFundMe campaign?
01:33:23.860 Yeah, that makes sense. That makes sense that it was Bharat Masrani speaking.
01:33:29.160 And Bharat Masrani, that would be the CEO of TD Bank?
01:33:32.180 Yes.
01:33:33.180 And so the concern was putting on any individual bank the potential for backlash of public opinion of taking that step.
01:33:45.180 Yes, that was the concern.
01:33:47.720 As we have also discussed already today, a concern about tellers being in jeopardy.
01:33:55.020 And the Fox News reference there is especially significant because many Canadian banks have significant operations in the United States.
01:34:09.080 And so having Fox News attack you isn't a problem only because Canadians might be watching.
01:34:19.200 But if you have a big U.S. operation, it's a problem because your American customers will be watching.
01:34:26.560 And I do think that was a problem that was legitimate to raise, and I was concerned about it.
01:34:36.920 And so just briefly to conclude, earlier you mentioned that you had relied on certain legal advice related to matters connected with this inquiry.
01:34:47.220 I just want to confirm with you, as Deputy Prime Minister, you don't have the authority to waive solicitor-client privilege on behalf of the Government of Canada, and you weren't intending to do so?
01:34:57.340 I was not intending to do so, and to be clear, I was speaking about the advice we received, some of which I think the Commission has heard about earlier from officials.
01:35:15.060 Thank you. Those are my questions.
01:35:16.320 Thank you, Commissioner.
01:35:17.220 thank you any re-examination no re-examination commissioner okay well thank you very much
01:35:28.820 for attending and for your testimony we know you probably have other things to do but
01:35:36.040 I appreciate your coming here and taking the commission's work seriously
01:35:43.500 um i guess i should say thank you very much and i will say to you commissioner and all the lawyers
01:35:52.740 doing this work um i do think it's really important work and it's important for canadians
01:35:59.400 to be able to see and hear you asking the government and other people questions about
01:36:06.040 this very important and serious decision okay thank you we'll take a short break to prepare
01:36:14.440 for our next panel and should only be five minutes or so but i'll uh if it takes longer they'll let
01:36:23.080 Let me know.
01:36:24.080 Thank you.
01:36:25.080 All right.
01:36:41.080 I was listening to the Government of Canada cross-examine our Deputy Prime Minister there.
01:36:51.060 the same time as I was putting some interesting things together for the show tonight.
01:36:54.920 So I'm going to need, I didn't hear everything is what I'm saying.
01:36:58.120 I just, I assumed that it was going to be soft balls and I think I was probably right
01:37:02.940 from what I did hear of it.
01:37:04.740 But what did you guys think of the overall testimony today?
01:37:08.820 And I'm talking about this morning's session as well.
01:37:13.040 Did the opposing lawyers do enough to throw her off her game to make the,
01:37:21.060 middle-of-the-road Canadians, and by middle-of-the-road, I mean those Canadians who
01:37:27.580 are disengaged from the process or those who just don't know what to think. Did the opposing
01:37:35.020 lawyers do enough to make those people go, wait a minute, there's something wrong here? 0.92
01:37:42.480 And I understand that most of us are watching these proceedings going, oh, she's such a lying
01:37:50.640 key if you can take yourself out of that headspace for just a second and try and put yourself
01:37:57.280 into the position of one of these middle of the road Canadians one of these guys who just wants
01:38:02.860 to go to work have a few beers at home and then watch the hockey game and you can actually break
01:38:12.820 through to that guy for just five or ten minutes before he starts his beers his evening beers
01:38:17.180 to talk to this guy and say look at this is the person this is the per the second in command of
01:38:25.560 this country these are the people who are running the show here what would they think about today's
01:38:33.100 testimony so far and keeping in mind that katie telford and some of her staff will be testifying
01:38:39.980 next and you can bet they'll be whispering to each other and and all of that and we're going
01:38:45.060 to have to go through 90 minutes maybe two hours of commission lawyer examination before we get to
01:38:52.420 cross do you think that there was enough done today and brendan miller's cross examination
01:38:59.760 this morning was in my opinion absolutely brilliant hostile at times even and i think
01:39:05.400 it threw freeland way off her game and then i think the uh the lawyer for saskatchewan did
01:39:11.540 some things this afternoon. It blows me away that these two lawyers, the one from Alberta and the
01:39:17.660 one from Saskatchewan, are doing this via Zoom, by the way. I mean, when you're on a Zoom call,
01:39:22.620 it's not the same thing as being there in person. The intimidation factor is just not the same.
01:39:29.160 And it allows the witness to wriggle off the hook based upon communications problems. Oh,
01:39:33.820 I didn't realize you were talking. I'm sorry. That kind of thing. It's very frustrating. And
01:39:38.240 You would think that these lawyers working for provincial governments would be able to afford a flight and some hotel accommodations to appear in Ottawa, not just on Zoom.
01:39:47.480 But anyway, let's go to your comments and see what you guys have to say.
01:39:57.300 OK, Marianne says, no, Miller did great, but we needed more and more persistent questioning and cutting off her nonsense jabber jobber.
01:40:03.660 Yeah, you know, there was that one lawyer working on behalf of one of the civil liberties groups who let her go on too long.
01:40:11.040 And once again, that lawyer was on Zoom as well.
01:40:13.260 And she should have had the fortitude to step up and say, OK, I understand your answer, but you're not answering the question.
01:40:22.900 She did say, and I forget her name and which civil liberties organization she was with, but she did say, I'm trying to be respectful here.
01:40:30.820 And that should be enough, especially when your witness continues to jibber jabber, eat up your time and give you nonsensical answers to a very basic and straightforward question.
01:40:42.820 Yes or no. Did what the government do adhere to Section 2C of the CSIS rules for invocation of the Emergency Act?
01:40:52.940 Yes or no? Well, that is a multilevel answer, and I'm going to have to give it to you in phases.
01:41:00.460 What are you even talking about?
01:41:05.780 What is Rosanna saying here?
01:41:09.240 No, our side, which, as far as I can see, just does not have enough support to go up effectively against all the other lawyers.
01:41:16.320 The commissioner is just obviously much biased to the left.
01:41:20.900 Yeah, I would agree with that.
01:41:22.440 I wouldn't have said that up until this week, but he does seem to be in favor of government.
01:41:29.800 witnesses and lawyers and commission lawyers and that commission lawyer this morning was absolutely
01:41:36.060 atrocious with the coughing the constant coughing she's obviously sick with something
01:41:41.140 and you would think that all of the masked lawyers like paul champ in the room would be
01:41:48.140 getting up and jumping out of their skin oh she should be masked and she needs sick stay home
01:41:53.120 but no no they would get up and do the questioning mask take off the mask and speak into the same
01:41:59.580 microphone the commission lawyer was coughing into for three hours this morning so tell me again
01:42:06.620 how this is not mask theater it's ridiculous what does tammy say oh you guys are going too fast here
01:42:16.240 this is a long answer i haven't pre-read but let's see what gail says if the government was
01:42:20.680 that concerned about the effect of the convoy on the world stage and how it was impacting the
01:42:24.920 world view of canada they should have dropped the mandates like other governments had done
01:42:29.760 because they didn't want to face the same thing i would imagine simple solution convoy over they
01:42:35.700 had the opportunity to fix this be the hero and didn't i also couldn't believe when freeland was
01:42:42.220 going on about gst credits the liberals put through quickly stay on topic answer the questions well
01:42:47.280 yeah you know what the commission lawyers will give more latitude than the cross-examiners just
01:42:54.640 based upon the amount of time they have or you know where they lean politically i got the impression
01:43:02.880 this morning and i think i said this during the testimony that the commission lawyer this morning
01:43:07.680 the coughing one i think she has some kind of political aspiration because she was very
01:43:13.640 deferential to freeland's answers which were pretty much stump speeches campaign speeches 0.85
01:43:20.180 which were ridiculous what does cheryl say here he said he already made up his mind yesterday
01:43:26.200 or the day before no he didn't 0.73
01:43:31.160 that's not the one i sheila says wow unreal they still think they're the majority so wrong did an
01:43:42.320 about face and they also think not many people are watching maybe time to quit listening to the
01:43:46.540 media bah ha ha there are a whole lot of people listening yes worldwide i would say too that's
01:43:51.700 true shadow please confirm have any of the lawyers asked directly why did you just yes that has come
01:44:02.640 up it came up with david lametti i believe yesterday or bill blair the day before maybe
01:44:13.180 both, where they talked about going out and meeting, and they said there was actually a
01:44:17.980 plan in place to do that. But for some reason, it was never done. And you would think, I mean,
01:44:25.420 they keep talking about the Emergencies Act being the second last line of defense they had,
01:44:31.540 the last one being bringing in the military. That was actually discussed with Anita Anand
01:44:36.220 yesterday, the Minister of Defense, believe it or not, who was absolutely arrogant, thin-skinned,
01:44:41.080 got very combative when she was faced with actual lawyering but it has come up and you would think
01:44:48.580 that would have been definitely at least considered seriously considered as a way to end this
01:44:55.180 and they did say there was a plan in place for that maybe even mendocino said it on monday or
01:45:01.200 chino but it never happened for some reason now i think personally this is only my opinion here
01:45:08.400 even if that plan was in place, and I think it was.
01:45:12.900 The reason they didn't go ahead and do it was because of arrogance and for no other reason.
01:45:20.340 And when you look at the government as a whole, you can see the influence of Trudeau on them all.
01:45:31.300 And this is something that we've seen from, you know, to a lesser extent, I think, conservatives when they're in power.
01:45:38.400 but they still exude that air of arrogance when it comes to liberals in power first of all the
01:45:45.180 guy at the top is probably the most arrogant public leader that i've seen to date and they're all
01:45:52.680 pretty arrogant but of course the arrogance is going to trickle down because they believe they
01:45:59.100 are bulletproof, if you'll pardon the expression. They believe that they can't be touched. It's that
01:46:10.800 political class air of superiority. And that needs to stop. That needs to end. And I believe that's
01:46:19.780 why we've seen all this Karen-like attitude towards the convoy. They saw these people come
01:46:25.820 in the great unwashed if you will these normal canadians these normal average canadians a lot
01:46:32.280 of truckers yes but a lot of people just who do regular jobs in their regular lives from all
01:46:38.940 across the country and when they live in that ottawa bubble or a toronto bubble or a montreal
01:46:44.520 bubble they just cannot comprehend for the lives of them that these are canadians they think they're
01:46:53.300 monsters. And this is the problem with existing in any bubble. And I understand that MPs go back
01:46:59.680 to their home ridings from time to time, maybe six months of the year they do. But if their home
01:47:06.200 ridings are urban ridings like Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver specifically, even Winnipeg and
01:47:14.000 Edmonton to some extent, they're going to be existing in that same kind of bubble.
01:47:18.780 it's the rural mps those are the ones who exist in reality and this is i would suggest this is
01:47:28.140 probably the greatest divide in our country right now rural versus urban not about vaccination
01:47:36.140 status that's a temporary thing i think rural versus urban and until the electoral system in
01:47:45.940 this country has changed we're always going to have to suffer with elite laurentians running
01:47:56.840 this country now i'm working on some stories for tonight and oh hang on just a second
01:48:04.320 and there is a story about california splitting apart and becoming two or three different states
01:48:11.440 so you can see that tonight at eight o'clock central on the shadow at night live stream let's
01:48:16.940 get back to this okay good afternoon mr commissioner shantona showed me for the record
01:48:27.020 our next witnesses are from the prime minister's office mr john broadhead miss katie telford mr
01:48:33.060 Brian Clow.
01:48:37.420 Well, she's got a Halls, obviously,
01:48:39.480 and she's had a wardrobe change.
01:48:40.980 Will you swear on a religious document,
01:48:41.480 or do you wish to affirm?
01:48:42.860 I will affirm.
01:48:44.240 For the record, please state your full name
01:48:46.120 and spell it out.
01:48:47.660 First name, Brian, B-R-I-A-N,
01:48:50.220 last name, Clow, C-L-O-W.
01:48:53.820 Do you solemnly affirm that the evidence
01:48:55.840 to be given by you to this commission
01:48:57.320 shall be the truth, the whole truth,
01:48:59.060 and nothing but the truth?
01:49:00.120 I do.
01:49:00.880 Thank you.
01:49:01.920 Ms. Telford?
01:49:03.060 Will you swear on a religious document or do you wish to affirm?
01:49:06.420 A religious document.
01:49:07.740 We have the Bible, the Koran, or the Torah available?
01:49:09.920 Bible.
01:49:15.560 The epitome of liberal arrogance right here. 0.79
01:49:19.100 Unelected liberal arrogance, I might add.
01:49:21.140 Yes, ma'am.
01:49:26.160 For the record, please state your full name and spell it out.
01:49:28.620 katherine telford k-a-t-h-e-r-i-n-e telford t-e-l-f-o-r-d do you swear that the evidence
01:49:37.900 to be given by you to this commission shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
01:49:41.840 so help you god i do thank you mr broadhead will you swear on a religious document or do you wish
01:49:49.160 to affirm affirm please for the record please state your full name and spell it out john broadhead
01:49:54.620 j-o-h-n-b-r-o-d-h-e-a-d do you solemnly affirm that the evidence to be given by you to this
01:50:01.620 commission shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you
01:50:05.940 good afternoon thank you for being here um we're just going to start with a couple of routine
01:50:22.420 housekeeping items uh the first of which is introducing your interview summary so you'll
01:50:27.840 recall having sat for an interview with commission council on october 11th of this year and following
01:50:33.020 that interview commission council prepared a summary of the interview have you all three
01:50:37.400 reviewed that summary yes sorry just for the record i know it's a bit difficult with the three
01:50:43.000 of you but uh someone answer yes please yes okay and also present at that interview was your
01:50:48.800 colleague Mr. Jeremy Broadhurst and can you confirm that Mr. Broadhurst as well
01:50:53.600 has reviewed that the summary of the interview yes and that it is accurate
01:50:58.360 according to all all four of you yes perfect so Mr. Clerk for the record
01:51:03.340 that's WTS 6083 no need to call it up and then the second small order of
01:51:10.220 business is the PMO institutional report so the Prime Minister's office prepared
01:51:15.220 an institutional report for these proceedings.
01:51:18.940 The doc ID number of that is DOJIR6014.
01:51:24.900 And I'd just like you to confirm again
01:51:26.420 that that report was prepared by PCO
01:51:28.980 and that you have reviewed it
01:51:30.080 and that it is accurate to the best of your knowledge, at least.
01:51:33.380 Yes.
01:51:35.620 Okay, so the first thing I'll say is
01:51:37.500 this is one of the examinations that we're doing as a panel.
01:51:40.560 There are three of you.
01:51:41.760 And some of my questions will be directed
01:51:43.920 at one of you specifically because it's something that's within your personal knowledge or a
01:51:48.780 document or a communication that you were involved in and some of them I will throw out more generally
01:51:54.340 and the person's best place can answer and you can also feel free if it's appropriate and you
01:51:59.920 have knowledge to add to someone else's answer you're free to do that. So the first question I
01:52:06.880 think I'll address to Ms. Telford which is just can you explain the mandate and the structure at a
01:52:13.920 Thank you.
01:52:43.920 Everything from very operational work, so we have teams of tour advanced people, as we call them.
01:52:51.780 We have regional desks who coordinate with stakeholders, including different levels of government in different parts of the country.
01:52:58.780 I'm sure my colleagues can speak to John, who is our Director of Policy and can speak to the policy team.
01:53:07.040 Brian Clough is one of two Deputy Chiefs of Staff in the Prime Minister's office.
01:53:10.960 The other deputy chief of staff is Marjorie Michel, and the other chief of staff, since she's not here, is primarily responsible for a lot of the operational elements of the office, ranging from human resources, because we are an office of roughly 100.
01:53:27.680 And so the human resources side, the public appointments as well, there's hundreds and thousands of public appointments that go through government.
01:53:34.860 And so we act as a coordinating body in many ways on the political side between ministers' offices as well.
01:53:42.180 But our primary job is getting the prime minister the information that he needs, getting him the best advice from all parts of government,
01:53:50.120 but also from outside of government that he needs to be able to accomplish what he committed to Canadians he would do if he were elected.
01:53:58.280 And just building on that, I'll ask you to explain, Ms. Telford, your specific role as chief of staff.
01:54:03.320 and then I'll ask each of your colleagues to do the same.
01:54:06.540 So I view my role in two ways.
01:54:10.060 There's the day-to-day management role.
01:54:12.700 So I manage the prime minister's office
01:54:16.840 and of an extraordinary group of people
01:54:20.300 who work day and night,
01:54:21.540 particularly during this time period they did.
01:54:24.060 And so it's all the sort of operational scheduling
01:54:28.340 and day-to-day management you can imagine
01:54:32.040 of running an office of that size, as well as coordinating between other ministers' offices
01:54:36.960 as well. So we have a weekly chief of staff meeting that involves the chiefs of staff from
01:54:42.080 all of the ministers' offices across government as a way of touching base and sharing information,
01:54:47.880 sometimes best practices. And then the other hat I wear at the same time is being a senior
01:54:53.620 advisor to the prime minister. And in terms of bringing him the best advice I can from
01:54:59.000 everywhere I can, but also facilitating other people, being able to get in front of him and
01:55:05.260 provide him with all the advice and the inputs that he needs to make the best decisions he can
01:55:09.240 for Canadians. Thank you. And Mr. Broadhead, can you explain your role, please? Sure. So as Director
01:55:15.540 of Policy, one of the key pieces of my role is to kind of work with the Privy Council Office
01:55:21.860 very closely to coordinate the cabinet agenda. So as you've heard through these proceedings,
01:55:26.100 there's we have many cabinet committees um and so we work with pco to to make sure
01:55:33.140 items are ready to go forward on those agendas any any kind of remaining issues to be sorted
01:55:41.540 out between ministers or departments so that's that's one uh we have a team of uh of 14 uh
01:55:48.500 policy advisors so they cover um the all all the departments so they each have policy files so they
01:55:54.900 They become, you know, the links to the minister's offices as well as to the content experts at PCO and other departments.
01:56:02.680 And I think in that role, we provide advice to the prime minister on policy items.
01:56:08.540 So whether it's items going to cabinet, other items such as the budget, our team will often prepare memos along those lines and advise the prime minister on the policy side of these things.
01:56:21.040 Okay. And we're going to come back in a minute to, you mentioned PCO, and we've heard from a few witnesses last week from PCO. So we're going to come back to the interplay a little bit between your office and PCO. But first of all, just ask Mr. Cloud to introduce himself and describe his role.
01:56:35.120 So, I am one of two deputy chiefs of staff, as Katie laid out, and I oversee five teams
01:56:41.280 in the office. One is the policy team, which John described. Second is communications team.
01:56:47.060 It's the largest of the five. They do exactly what their name says, press releases, all
01:56:53.080 government communications, media relations for sure, quite a range of activities in that
01:56:57.560 department. Third is the issues management and parliamentary affairs team. That's one
01:57:02.560 unit. So everything that goes through Parliament, whether it's legislation, votes in the House,
01:57:08.540 debates in the House, the PMO Parliamentary Affairs team engages in that space. But they
01:57:14.060 also focus on issues management, which I like to think of it as the government has its proactive
01:57:19.560 agenda, which is largely driven out of the policy team. And then the issues management team deals
01:57:25.420 with day-to-day developments, whatever comes at us. So certainly the issues management team was
01:57:30.500 involved in what's being studied here quite early on. And then there are two more units that I
01:57:35.680 oversee. There are smaller units. One is a global affairs team. They focus on any number of
01:57:40.620 international files. And finally, there's a unit that was created a couple of years ago
01:57:45.020 to deal with the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Thank you. And I should mention that
01:57:51.320 the reason you've all been selected to be here today is you were all involved in some way in
01:57:57.620 assisting the prime minister in responding to the events of late january and february that are
01:58:02.120 before the commission certainly not just you but certainly all of you um so just going back to that
01:58:09.020 that question of the interplay between pco and pmo i'm not sure who's best place to speak to that
01:58:14.960 between the three of you um but mr broadhead you brought it up so maybe we'll start with you
01:58:19.140 so what specifically what is of interest just the general relationship yeah so that the lines of
01:58:27.300 communication and the interaction between the public service and the political side in advising
01:58:32.000 the Prime Minister? Sure. So I'll speak to my experience because I obviously cover one part of
01:58:37.620 that dynamic. And I interact with primarily two parts of Privy Council Office. One is the kind of
01:58:46.000 priorities and planning group, which is Michael Vandergrift's group. And then the other one is the
01:58:51.140 operations team which is now run by kaylee lebeck plans and priorities is really the the cabinet
01:58:57.620 side and operations is more the the execution and uh of of that so there is i would say a constant
01:59:05.780 flow of information back and forth they they provide us advice they convene meetings of
01:59:13.220 departments across the government they they really kind of hold the institutional knowledge on many of
01:59:20.900 these files. And so we kind of work very closely together to ensure we're aligned on the policy
01:59:27.180 agenda, that things are rolling out. They also have great experience in terms of execution of
01:59:33.220 policy. So it's, are things getting done? Are things happening that we brought into play? Are
01:59:38.380 they still going? Is this still moving? So it's a very constant and a very important relationship
01:59:44.480 for us. Ms. Telfer, do you have anything to add to that in terms of the lines of communication
01:59:49.580 and in providing advice to the Prime Minister?
01:59:52.080 I would just add that, and I'm sure you heard this from the clerk,
01:59:56.120 who is who I have primarily the most contact with,
01:59:59.300 is with the clerk and the National Security and Intelligence Advisor
02:00:01.820 and to only a slightly lesser degree, the Deputy Clerk.
02:00:05.340 And they're also the ones who have the most contact with the Prime Minister.
02:00:09.940 And so the clerk meets with the Prime Minister on a very regular basis,
02:00:14.460 often meets with the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister together,
02:00:17.260 and I will attend the majority of those meetings as well.
02:00:21.400 And there is, and then she and I will talk regularly
02:00:25.000 in between those meetings as well
02:00:26.880 in terms of planning out, you know,
02:00:28.560 what needs to get covered and what's going on
02:00:30.700 and prioritizing who else we might need in those meetings.
02:00:33.920 And so, as John said,
02:00:35.360 it's a very regular flow of information back and forth.
02:00:39.860 And that's true for the entire Prime Minister's office.
02:00:42.000 Everybody has counterparts of one kind or another
02:00:44.340 on the public service side.
02:00:45.900 and the flow of information is significant,
02:00:51.980 though we do have clearly different roles
02:00:54.660 in terms of what our responsibilities are to the Prime Minister
02:00:58.540 and, of course, as I said earlier, how we're employed.
02:01:03.380 Thank you.
02:01:03.980 Okay, that introduction out of the way,
02:01:07.860 we'll turn to the matters before the Commission.
02:01:12.180 And starting with the very early days of the convoy,
02:01:15.480 But can you describe to us when PMO first became aware that the convoy was a thing that was possibly rolling into Ottawa, what your initial impressions of it were, what your sources of information were, and the sort of pre-arrival early days?
02:01:33.260 So the week of January 17th, there were a few interactions.
02:01:37.020 on Monday, January 17th, there was a report sent from PCO to PMO, I think one or two people in the
02:01:45.780 prime minister's office. It might have actually come from a minister's office as a flag, that
02:01:49.840 there was some slow roll activity in Emerson, Manitoba. At that point, though, that information
02:01:55.400 was not shared beyond that. It was just one of any number of issues. As the week went on, though,
02:02:00.460 we started to hear more and see more reports of the convoy protest.
02:02:06.600 On Thursday, January 20th, there was an email that came from PCO
02:02:10.780 to a number of people in PMO that laid out,
02:02:13.120 it was an update on the convoy protest.
02:02:15.640 I think it was focused on, it named three places,
02:02:18.060 specifically Coutts, North Portal, Saskatchewan, and Ottawa.
02:02:23.380 And the update also included a press release
02:02:26.160 from the Canadian Trucking Alliance,
02:02:27.640 which condemned the convoy activity specifically proposed unlawful activity which even at that
02:02:35.320 point there what was coming out of the a number of the speakers was proposed unlawful activity
02:02:42.120 and road blockages specifically so it was that week january 17th when we started to hear about
02:02:48.280 this. That weekend, I'd say 22nd, 23rd, by then it was on everybody's radar. The week of the 24th
02:02:58.940 is when the Prime Minister started to get updated daily on it. Okay, and that takes us, Mr. Clare,
02:03:04.660 can you please bring up ssm.can.nsc402578? So, Mr. Clare, if I take this correctly, you were
02:03:13.900 speaking at that point of PMOs sort of monitoring of what was going on. And I believe the 25th was
02:03:19.580 the first time you got a briefing from the PCO. So in addition to, I'll look at this email.
02:03:30.280 So there was email traffic and there would have been phone calls the week of the 17th
02:03:37.360 between PCO and PMO, but Tuesday, the 25th, I do believe was the first meeting scheduled
02:03:44.020 with PCO and PMO staff to, to go through all of the elements as we're known at that point.
02:03:50.280 Okay. So we're just going to look at what the content of that meeting was. Mr. Clerk,
02:03:54.600 if you can scroll down, keep scrolling. Okay, there we go. So this is Mike McDonald and we know,
02:04:01.380 can you actually just refresh our memories as to who Mike McDonald is?
02:04:04.200 so he works in pco and he's part of the national national security team that's right intelligence
02:04:11.020 secretary okay so mike mcdonald is explaining and and briefing essentially on what the state
02:04:16.720 of knowledge there is at the time so he says uh latest lay of the land security coordination
02:04:22.540 national security apparatus what do we know law enforcement across the country is learning
02:04:28.060 more about the convoy and its organizers as they interact with them and then there's some
02:04:33.440 a description of where it's coming from.
02:04:36.600 The next bullet down says actively monitoring.
02:04:39.680 One thing they're picking up on is chatter on social media.
02:04:42.760 So far RCMP telling us that the convoy itself is peaceful,
02:04:47.380 not causing problems along the way.
02:04:49.320 Their goal is to get to Ottawa,
02:04:51.120 not have infractions along the way.
02:04:53.500 And then very small online chatter,
02:04:56.460 that's where people are using disturbing language.
02:04:59.660 Mr. Clerk, if you can just keep scrolling
02:05:01.380 to the next page, please.
02:05:03.440 There we go. Following January 6th events last year, which is a reference to January 6th in Capitol Hill in the United States,
02:05:13.080 NSIA worked with PPS, RCMP, and Sergeant-at-Arms for a scenario planning for regular protests.
02:05:20.400 Push boundaries and plan out for things like an insurrection. This has been done.
02:05:25.740 Then Ottawa Police and PPS have an MOU, have done exercises for these types of protests.
02:05:32.040 On the federal side, we have governance in place that is up and running, ADM, National Security Operations Centre meeting every day to ensure parts of the federal family are coordinated in efforts and can feed information through.
02:05:46.640 So does that represent essentially, first of all, the content of that briefing as you were aware of it that day?
02:05:54.300 So I wasn't a part of this specific brief, but received this email. And so I have no reason to believe it doesn't represent what was discussed there. But I would say it's only a piece of the picture of what we were watching at that time. There's a reference in there to social media chatter and disturbing comments.
02:06:11.520 And by this point, it was a very significant issue and getting a lot of coverage in media, some of those comments.
02:06:19.820 This email was sent on January 25th, which is the same day it was reported in media that some individuals who were planning to participate in the demonstration were saying they wanted this to be there January 6th.
02:06:31.680 That's why you see, I suspect you see this in this email summary, because there were individuals explicitly referencing January 6th.
02:06:40.320 And at this point as well, it was known in public that some people planning to participate in the demonstration had a proposal to replace the government by going to the governor general and the Senate.
02:06:51.900 And it was it's otherwise known as the MOU.
02:06:54.960 OK, so just scrolling down a bit again, Mr. Clerk, there's a comment at the end there.
02:06:59.640 So you'll see at the end it says questions, question mark, Zed.
02:07:03.480 And I believe that's a reference to Zeta Astrovis, Bill Blair's chief of staff.
02:07:07.100 Yes, Mr. Blair, chief of staff.
02:07:09.060 So she says, curious to know how feed into political level.
02:07:12.820 From our perspective, feel assured having worked in the space of all work being done, but ministers feeling uneasy and keen on details.
02:07:22.200 I'm wondering if you can help us understand what is meant there by sense of unease at the political level.
02:07:28.120 i think there at that point there was a lot of conversation going on about what we were seeing
02:07:38.880 and what we thought this was going to be and there were a number of updates coming through
02:07:44.060 like the one you see here but we were also seeing a lot in open source and through the media which
02:07:51.300 was very concerning already mentioned the reference to january 6th so that's what i think this speaks
02:07:57.180 Okay. So is it fair to say then in Mike McDonald's email that we just read through, the message coming through is essentially, well, we've planned for this. We did some planning after January 6th and things are sort of under control and the machine is operating as it should. But then Ms. Astrovis raises a concern saying the ministers are actually pretty worried about this.
02:08:18.220 So is it fair to say that there was some unease at the ministerial or the political level that maybe isn't reflected in the briefing?
02:08:25.840 yes okay um so then just moving thank you mr clerk you can take that document down
02:08:37.240 so that's the sort of pre-arrival state um is there unless there's anything else you'd like
02:08:44.940 to add about what was going on pre-arrival but then the chronologically the next thing that
02:08:50.140 happens is that the convoy arrives and doesn't leave when everyone expected it to do and then
02:08:55.220 we head into the first week of the protests if we can call it that um so i'd like you to pull up
02:09:02.060 now mr clerk ssm.nsc.can402941 and as that's being done maybe i can ask you to just describe
02:09:15.160 to us from your point of view what that first week was like and what was going on from your
02:09:20.040 perspective in in attempting to respond and the notes i'm pulling up here are mr clow's notes
02:09:25.100 from a February 3rd meeting, which I think can fairly be described as a brainstorming ideas kind
02:09:31.220 of meeting. But before we get into the specifics of the notes, can you fill in a bit of the narrative
02:09:36.540 of what was happening in your thinking and in your office at the time?
02:09:45.780 So we watched the convoy arrive, not only in Ottawa, but there was activity in Coutts,
02:09:51.600 very serious activity that first weekend emerson we're starting to see some blockages there it was
02:09:57.680 down to one lane would open up again some trucks would move but there was activity in emerson so
02:10:03.280 this was already a national issue in the first week and we were we continued to see very concerning
02:10:09.120 statements from some demonstrators including um from demonstrators and organizers that they were
02:10:16.160 we're not going to leave until the government changed its policy but in that first weekend
02:10:21.760 law enforcement was was responsible local law enforcement i should say and by the end of the
02:10:28.480 weekend it was clear they weren't leaving so i would say concern had increased at the end of
02:10:32.400 the weekend so we in the prime minister's office with pco with minister's offices with caucus with
02:10:38.320 others we were hearing a lot of concern and we were discussing internally and getting updates
02:10:43.840 and sharing information with each other as best we could.
02:10:47.180 Before this meeting on the 3rd, which was well into the second week,
02:10:52.200 there had been a briefing of the prime minister
02:10:54.080 by the national security advisor and the clerk.
02:10:56.840 So there were discussions happening.
02:10:59.080 What happened on February 3rd and what these notes reflect is
02:11:02.960 this was a Thursday, the second weekend was approaching,
02:11:07.600 and law enforcement had not been able to contain the various protests.
02:11:13.320 and in fact in my view they were getting worse so we assembled and basically covered the waterfront
02:11:20.440 what's going on who's talking to who what can we be doing more of what are different
02:11:25.400 provinces and municipalities asking are p are different provinces and municipalities asking
02:11:30.920 questions that if they aren't asking for support if they aren't can we have a conversation with
02:11:35.400 them to see if they should be asking for support so in these notes you'll see us cover quite a few
02:11:41.160 different ideas thank you and you'll appreciate we have an hour and a half so i'm skipping i know
02:11:46.200 i'm skipping through weeks and chronology very quickly but it's necessary and thank you for
02:11:50.920 filling that in um so here we go february 3rd there's just a few points that i want to pick
02:11:56.440 out here so the first notation says jb that's that's john broadhead mr broadhead that was
02:12:02.200 jeremy broad oh that's jeremy broadhurst okay this may get confusing all right uh jeremy broadhurst
02:12:07.400 looks like ops won't move weeks not days weird reinforcements problem or something reinforcements
02:12:14.600 problem weekend reinforcements behind scenes too deferential need bad cop you've got to use tools
02:12:22.680 you have whether to change public message is different and then um kt that's miss talford
02:12:30.440 yes okay i can't read the first part the second part says what if anything can we do what are
02:12:35.800 options. So that's introducing this as a sort of a brainstorming of ideas. And then we'll see a
02:12:40.940 variety of ideas expressed here. Mr. Clark, can you just scroll down? We see, sorry, just above
02:12:47.480 there. Anyway, we can get Bergen's help. That's a reference to Candace Bergen. I believe she had
02:12:54.060 just become leader that day. Okay. And then we have Ms. Astrovis saying Blair doesn't want to
02:13:00.600 call slowly, but he's open to calling Watson. And then RFA is a reference to a request for
02:13:07.540 assistance. And we're going to come back to these in a moment, but Ontario could only ask if they
02:13:12.200 have exhausted resources. Scrolling down again, please, Mr. Clerk, until you get to the bottom of
02:13:17.400 the page. So here we have an intervention. Many of the ideas that are expressed here we've already
02:13:23.940 heard about, so I'm skipping through them quickly. But at the bottom of the page here,
02:13:27.220 This is a Yasser, I believe.
02:13:30.120 So that was separate from the meeting we just covered.
02:13:32.320 That was a phone call from Ottawa Centre MP Yasser NACV.
02:13:35.840 He called me and I wrote down what he told me.
02:13:37.960 Okay, that same day on February 3rd?
02:13:39.600 Same day.
02:13:40.000 Okay, so, and what he told you was,
02:13:42.440 clearly Ottawa police and city are unable to deal with this.
02:13:47.280 Reinforcements coming this weekend.
02:13:49.440 It's going to really embolden these folks,
02:13:52.600 my constituents near a breaking point.
02:13:55.260 worried people will take things into his own hands into their own hands i'm sorry so does
02:14:00.860 that reflect mr clow what what mr knackley was expressing to you absolutely and and this was on
02:14:06.900 february 3rd so by this point the ottawa convoy had been here for a full week a full seven days
02:14:12.740 and ottawa residents had experienced a lot and i think you see that reflected in mr knackley's
02:14:18.600 comments. Okay. Um, Mr. Hook, we just scroll down to the top of the next page.
02:14:30.420 Yep. There we go. Uh, so I think this is a continuation of, of the phone call with Mr.
02:14:35.600 Nockfi. What I heard from slowly plea for help. It's a plea for something, something political.
02:14:41.180 Uh, do you recall that reference, Mr. Glau? I believe that was a reference to
02:14:46.160 either the day before or earlier that week,
02:14:49.920 Chief Slowly said there was no policing solution.
02:14:54.400 That's correct.
02:14:55.140 It was the day before.
02:14:56.440 And what I'm wondering is,
02:14:57.560 what was the reaction within PMO to that statement?
02:15:03.000 Here we have Mr. Naqvi's, I think, interpretation of it,
02:15:06.560 which is it's a plea for something.
02:15:08.560 And then he says it's a plea for something political.
02:15:11.280 Does that reflect or was there any thinking
02:15:13.280 among the three of you or among your office
02:15:15.280 within your office about what Chief Slowly
02:15:18.120 may have been expressing there?
02:15:19.520 It definitely added to the concern of what we were seeing.
02:15:23.500 And to hear Ottawa police say
02:15:25.380 that this was not a policing solution was very concerning
02:15:28.320 and it told us that this was not gonna end anytime soon.
02:15:32.940 I think we can leave those notes for now.
02:15:34.700 Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
02:15:38.240 The next ones we'll pull up.
02:15:42.520 Well, it's actually the same note, sorry, Mr. Clerk.
02:15:45.280 Keep scrolling down until you see February 6th.
02:15:56.280 Yeah, there we go.
02:16:01.020 So it says p.m. February 6th, 6 to 8 p.m.
02:16:05.720 So I assume this is a meeting that was with the Prime Minister, attended by, as it says
02:16:09.600 here, the clerk, the NSIA, and then John, Janice, Jody, Sam. That would be John Broadhead, Mr.
02:16:17.340 Broadhead. Janice is the clerk, Janice Charette, Jody, Thomas, the NSIA. Sam, who's Sam?
02:16:24.220 Sam Khalil is the director of issues management. Okay. And there were probably a few other people
02:16:29.000 on that call, not many more. I'm confident Katie was on that call. Okay. So if we just scroll down
02:16:35.220 then, until we see OPS trying to reduce violence or taking some steps. And then below that,
02:16:44.460 COOTS persists, but traffic is moving. AB, this is Alberta, asked for RFA. We don't see CAF,
02:16:53.320 Canadian Armed Forces, being able to help with that. Do you remember who was making that
02:16:57.120 statement there? Is this the NSIA's update there, Mr. Klaff? So one, to situate this conversation,
02:17:03.520 this was sunday february 6th in the evening so the end of the second weekend prime minister was
02:17:08.240 updated just as he was updated the previous sunday because a second weekend had passed and ottawa had
02:17:15.360 worsened and other situations were were becoming more difficult as well and i note the nsa reported
02:17:22.640 that 11 bc community communities have protests 35 across the country um so i i can't tell from
02:17:30.160 the notes if that comment was Jody Thomas's comment of the one you asked about, but it looks
02:17:37.600 like it was part of a list of updates from Jody Thomas. Were these briefings happening daily?
02:17:43.440 There were multiple conversations happening daily at this point,
02:17:48.800 and there were interactions with the Prime Minister every day at this point in some way or another,
02:17:53.520 but this specific construct of a meeting with the Clerk, National Security Intelligence Advisor
02:17:58.960 and staff didn't happen every day, but it happened with increasing frequency. Okay. Um, so the next
02:18:04.540 point that I want to look at here is, is right at the bottom of the page here. Oh, and that's a
02:18:10.800 reference to Ontario pushed back. And then, uh, the notation is PM established list of mandates.
02:18:18.980 Uh, I can't read the next word, something vaccines, Jim's vaccines, all provincial. Okay. And then
02:18:26.380 And under that, it says DM for Solzhen, so that would be Deputy Minister, Deputy Solicitor General, pushed back.
02:18:32.980 And that takes us to an issue that we canvassed a bit here in the commission so far.
02:18:38.560 And I'd like to get your perspective on this afternoon, which is what was going on in those early days of the protest,
02:18:45.840 the first week and first week and a half, in terms of interaction between various levels of government
02:18:51.860 and the federal and provincial aspects, and especially Ontario's response
02:18:56.400 or perhaps lack of response, if we can characterize it that way.
02:19:00.760 Mr. Broadhead, I believe this is probably best put to you within your purview.
02:19:05.580 Sure, I can start, and then folks can add in.
02:19:10.060 So I would say there was lots of conversations happening at this point
02:19:15.760 with various governments at the officials' level, at the political level,
02:19:20.640 across the country as we tried to make sure we were hearing from them on what was happening on
02:19:28.040 the ground and making sure we had that intelligence. I think with respect to Ontario
02:19:35.440 specifically, I think there was at the outset a different approach to the strategy.
02:19:47.820 uh and i i think as we get to we we were quite keen on this idea of a tripartite table that
02:19:53.740 that minister blair had um had been working on and we thought that was a good way of getting
02:20:00.220 everybody at the table making sure resources were aligned making sure everyone uh looked each other
02:20:06.060 in the eyes and uh and work together and at that time ontario um was not as keen on that approach
02:20:12.780 i don't really want to you know speculate for what the solicitor general or deputy minister
02:20:17.580 solicitor general uh at this point wasn't um but from my conversations with them they did want to
02:20:23.820 have ottawa at the city of ottawa and and the ottawa police service kind of play the lead role
02:20:28.940 and and we're we're not as um interested at that time in the the collaborative tripartite
02:20:35.740 approach that that we were interested in okay um mr clerk can you take those notes down for a second
02:20:41.900 and then pull up ssm.nsc.can403015, please.
02:20:51.840 So Mr. Brodhead, I think this is a text
02:20:53.960 that goes to the point you were just elucidating.
02:20:57.900 so we don't have a confirmed date for this one but uh it must be something it's february 8th
02:21:15.420 thank you um and this is a text between you and ms astrovis a text exchange and uh she says to
02:21:22.820 you. She's in the blue here. Marco, that's a reference to Minister Mendicino, hasn't heard
02:21:27.900 back from Sylvia Jones. That's a reference to the Solicitor General of Ontario on the meeting with
02:21:33.520 the three orders of government, reference to the tripartite. And you say, yeah, because they don't
02:21:38.080 want to be a part of it. And she says, oh, I know. And you say, so anything I should do,
02:21:43.800 we should just go ahead without them. And then it goes on. So can you contextualize that for us
02:21:50.060 little bit yeah as they were getting kind of pushed back and or just not support uh from their
02:21:58.700 counterparts the solicitor general in particular they had asked me to connect with my contact in
02:22:03.420 the premier's office and to just check and see if if was was this something that the entire
02:22:09.820 government or this minister just to kind of ascertain some of those kind of contextual
02:22:14.220 detail so i did uh i chatted with with uh jamie wallace and it was clear that that they were kind
02:22:21.260 of they had a different approach and strategy um and the tripartite table was not a priority for
02:22:26.780 them at that time sorry who is jamie wallace sorry jamie wallace is the chief of staff to
02:22:31.340 premier ford okay so you had a conversation with mr wallace chief of staff premier ford and the
02:22:36.220 message coming back to you was uh was this was not a strategy they wanted to pursue at this time was
02:22:43.580 Was there any reason given for that?
02:22:46.700 It was, you know, I think, you know, my recollection of that conversation was it was really they wanted Ottawa to be the main driver of this
02:22:59.400 and did not want a kind of multi-governmental approach to this at that time.
02:23:03.860 That was the impression I got from that phone call.
02:23:06.880 Okay. Were you having interactions during this time with counterparts in other provinces as well?
02:23:15.280 Yeah. So, so previously, previous to being a director of policy, which I started in January, I was senior advisor with a focus on intergovernmental affairs.
02:23:25.440 And so through that, I got to work closely with, with a number of the provinces.
02:23:30.640 the three i was having most contact with one was that was british columbia because they were chair
02:23:37.420 of the council of federation at the time so that was an ongoing active discussion generally and i
02:23:42.280 want to be clear not just about this for example mr wallace and i were working on child care very
02:23:49.360 actively at this time as well and other other issues were very uh would come up so um and then
02:23:56.680 other provinces as well but the other part of our our pmo which is important in this is the regional
02:24:03.160 desks uh who don't report to me they're part of the operations team they have g they have
02:24:08.840 geographical areas of responsibility so they're often in touch with provinces and cities and we
02:24:15.000 have kind of information sharing between us um so i'm in touch with them a lot there they let me
02:24:20.200 know when things are happening i do i do as well so i know that from in those times there was a lot
02:24:25.000 of informal contact as well as obviously from ministers and officials okay and we may come back
02:24:32.760 to some of those interactions um but we'll stick to ontario for now uh mr clerk can you pull up
02:24:38.360 call SSM.nsc.can402935.
02:24:43.360 So Ms. Talford, this is a text exchange between you and Minister Dominique Leblanc, who we
02:25:10.320 knows the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, and he writes to you and says, just got this from
02:25:16.740 Vandergrift, so that's a reference to his Deputy Minister, Michael Vandergrift. Minister, want to
02:25:21.980 let you know that the Ontario Solicitor General has again declined the invitation to attend the
02:25:26.980 tripartite meeting today on the Ottawa occupation. You say, I think we need to shine a light on that.
02:25:32.980 He says, we'll say it. Can you explain to us what was going on in this text message and what you
02:25:38.460 meant by. I think we need to shine a light on that. So I think this was a continuation of what
02:25:45.600 John was just talking about. This was obviously a further attempt at a meeting with the three
02:25:51.480 levels of government and Ontario was continuing to decline. I don't recall when he says,
02:25:58.860 we'll say it, where that meant, but putting myself back in that time, I think when I'm saying we
02:26:06.980 should shine a light on it, it's bringing some attention to the fact that Ontario wasn't at the
02:26:12.720 table. And we really did believe it would be a more efficient and effective way to work.
02:26:18.340 Would it be fair to say that there was some frustration with Ontario's response at this point?
02:26:24.380 There was definitely some frustration because we believed it could be easier than it was,
02:26:28.720 all things being very relative at that time. But there was ongoing communication with Ontario
02:26:34.420 bilaterally throughout. It just meant that the conversations were happening between
02:26:38.420 Ottawa and the federal government, the federal government in Ontario, Ontario. And so there
02:26:43.100 were just numerous bilateral conversations that we just thought could have been better handled
02:26:48.900 and more efficient if we could have all just come together. Because as I know has come up
02:26:53.480 throughout the inquiry, there was a fair bit of confusion around numbers and requests and the RFAs,
02:27:00.120 the way they work, the request for assistance, they do need to go through the provincial level
02:27:05.120 of government. And so not having them as part of the conversation made things that bit more
02:27:09.980 complicated. That's fair. Mr. Clerk, can you please pull up ONT50159? So I'm going to ask you here
02:27:23.720 about a meeting that was held on on february 6th uh that was a sort of tripartite but not quite
02:27:30.240 uh between the city of ottawa federal government and provincial government and the exchange i'm
02:27:35.320 going to take you to we've seen this document several times in the commission so i'm not going
02:27:39.000 to go through the whole thing but at the end of the the document there's an exchange between the
02:27:43.640 national security advisor and the deputy solicitor general of ontario that i'd like to get your take
02:27:49.120 on. So it's February 6th, an 11 o'clock meeting attended by officials from three levels of
02:27:55.540 government. So Mr. Clerk, if you can scroll down to the very bottom of the document.
02:28:04.620 You'll see it says there, Jody Thomas, National Security Advisor,
02:28:09.760 noted that it was a positive meeting and regrets to end on this following point.
02:28:14.640 Would the province be looking to the federal government if this protest was happening
02:28:19.000 outside the city of Ottawa, e.g. happening in other places like Kingston.
02:28:23.720 And the response from Mr. Di Tommaso was,
02:28:26.600 this is a protest, an encampment moving against the federal mandate on trucks.
02:28:30.940 They came to Ottawa from across the country for that purpose.
02:28:36.000 Now, Mr. Di Tommaso testified at the commission approximately two weeks ago,
02:28:40.440 and he expressed that in his view,
02:28:43.700 Ms. Thomas's, he interpreted Ms. Thomas's comment as, and I'll quote the words here,
02:28:49.860 the federal government wanting to wash its hands of the entire matter. And so I'd just like to get
02:28:55.940 your reaction in terms of whether you think that was a fair assessment of what was going on,
02:29:01.400 whether you think that that was what was being expressed there, and what Ms. Thomas was trying
02:29:08.160 to express when she said, would this be, would the province be looking to the federal government if
02:29:12.520 this was somewhere other than Ottawa.
02:29:16.280 I might start,
02:29:21.520 I'm not putting too much weight into this.
02:29:23.440 I think as I read it and I wasn't there,
02:29:25.540 but this strikes me as frustration
02:29:28.780 and a bit of a back and forth
02:29:31.020 and that frustration happening
02:29:32.480 and both sides kind of articulating
02:29:34.800 some of that frustration.
02:29:35.820 I think we were trying to look for ways to work together.
02:29:40.820 There were three levels of government, and it was a challenge to get these machines working in the right direction.
02:29:51.780 I think this back and forth is a, my guess would be this is an outcrop of just a frustration around those levels of government and the two different approaches that I've outlined before.
02:30:04.540 Fair enough. And you can appreciate that one of the issues the commission is looking into is the interaction between governments, which is not always an easy thing, but how it all played out here.
02:30:16.380 Okay, so eventually, around this time, around the time of February 7th, 8th, 9th, Ontario became more engaged when the Ambassador Bridge blockade became entrenched.
02:30:29.300 and um so we know that that has happened and i'll take you at that point to
02:30:36.300 The witness summary, I'm sorry, Mr. Clerk,
02:31:00.840 it's WTS 6-0 is 14, page 11.
02:31:06.300 Oh, I'm sorry, 83, I'm sorry, I got the wrong number, 83, 14 is the IR.
02:31:36.300 So if we scroll down to page 11, please, Mr. Clerk, keep scrolling, keep scrolling, okay
02:31:56.620 scroll up a bit, please, what I'm looking for is the panel was asked what in their view
02:32:05.700 Could be that I have the wrong page number.
02:32:17.400 While they're looking for the reference,
02:32:18.760 Mr. Broadhead, what I wanna ask you about is
02:32:21.880 what in your view, you were asked this during the interview
02:32:25.080 and I'd like you to elaborate on it,
02:32:27.480 what inspired the shift from Ontario?
02:32:29.760 Why did it happen then and how did that occur?
02:32:34.700 And I'll preface my answer by saying this is me not in the government of Ontario, which I did spend a long time in the government of Ontario, but I was not there at this point.
02:32:47.360 I think it, in a sense, it started to become absolutely clear that we had to work together.
02:32:56.520 so it was almost the the increase of of things happening so you add the ambassador bridge
02:33:01.880 to the ottawa situation you have other things starting to happen around the province um
02:33:08.360 in the windsor sarnia cornwall and you know i think it became clear and i'm hypothesizing here
02:33:13.960 that um but we did see an evolution of their strategy at that time in terms of at the political
02:33:20.520 level collaboration i think there's lots going on in other places that i don't want to comment to
02:33:25.480 but just that's what I can specifically comment to.
02:33:28.720 Okay.
02:33:29.720 And we know that there were several important phone calls
02:33:32.180 that happened around that time,
02:33:34.320 certainly between the Prime Minister and Premier Ford,
02:33:38.500 which we'll talk about tomorrow
02:33:39.760 when the Prime Minister is here,
02:33:41.500 between Minister LeBlanc,
02:33:42.900 we talked about when Minister LeBlanc was here.
02:33:47.880 Leaving Ontario for a moment
02:33:49.540 and talking about engagement with other provinces,
02:33:52.440 I do want to ask you some questions
02:33:53.880 about another topic that's come up several times here,
02:33:56.440 which is Alberta's request for assistance.
02:33:59.500 So I'm gonna put to you a few facts that we know
02:34:03.980 and that have come out already at the commission
02:34:06.760 and that are also brought out in the PMO institutional report.
02:34:11.660 So there's a notation in your IR
02:34:14.380 that PMO staff engaged with Pam Livingston.
02:34:17.460 So Mr. Broadhead, maybe you can tell us
02:34:19.600 who Pam Livingstone is.
02:34:21.200 Cam Livingston at the time was Chief of Staff to Premier Kenney.
02:34:25.400 Okay, and there were two interactions apparently between PMO and Ms. Livingston about the Alberta request for assistance.
02:34:33.120 And that request for assistance we've seen several times before, so no need to pull it up,
02:34:38.160 but was for essentially assistance in tow trucks and removing vehicles from the Coutts blockade.
02:34:44.980 There's also a notation that the Prime Minister had a formal call on February 6th with Minister
02:34:51.380 Blair to discuss Alberta's request for assistance in the ongoing situation.
02:34:56.820 Then I'm going to ask the Clerk to pull up Mr. Clow's notes again, ssm.nsc.can402941.
02:35:14.100 So this is the notation I said we'd come back to.
02:35:17.560 This is the meeting that you're having with the Prime Minister on February 6th.
02:35:21.780 And the notation, there it is, thank you.
02:35:29.180 Coots persists, but traffic is moving.
02:35:32.560 Alberta asked for RFA.
02:35:34.480 We don't see CAF being able to help with that.
02:35:39.020 So at that point, it's apparently been concluded or decided in some form
02:35:43.400 that the the canadian forces is unable to assist is that correct mr quaff so the rfa came in the
02:35:49.400 day before that and it immediately spurred a number of conversations with different offices
02:35:54.440 ministers were consulted and the prime minister was consulted on a few different occasions about
02:35:59.000 this and yes there was a general sense that calf should be a last resort but also in this specific
02:36:07.080 case i think you've heard from other witnesses as well but at the time the discussion was that this
02:36:13.080 This was not an appropriate or even useful response to what the problem was.
02:36:22.260 And what I mean by that was, were these trucks actually going to be able to do the job?
02:36:26.160 That was all part of the discussion that ensued after the request came in on the 5th.
02:36:31.260 What I'm really wondering about all of these exchanges, and there was a further meeting apparently on the 9th,
02:36:36.740 where again, this time it was Ms. Telford, Ms. Charette,
02:36:42.120 the Prime Minister, and Ministers Leblanc,
02:36:44.980 and Chino and Blair all discussing the RFA
02:36:48.660 during one of the meetings that was held.
02:36:51.420 Why was this RFA treated quite differently than most are?
02:36:55.620 This was elevated to the level of the PMO
02:36:58.300 and the Prime Minister,
02:36:59.700 which most requests for assistance are not.
02:37:01.840 Can you explain or elaborate on that?
02:37:06.740 Just, and you might want to add to this,
02:37:08.160 but we are usually made aware of requests for assistance
02:37:14.760 wherever they're going in government.
02:37:17.340 And in this case, we were obviously following everything
02:37:20.300 to do with the blockades and the occupation
02:37:22.680 very, very closely.
02:37:24.680 And in this case, because the feedback from departments
02:37:27.840 was coming that there wasn't a way to help
02:37:29.800 and what we were trying to do was support anybody
02:37:34.200 who needed assistance on the ground.
02:37:36.720 And so if Alberta was asking for help,
02:37:39.100 we wanted to be able to support them.
02:37:41.300 So it just led to a lot of conversations.
02:37:43.680 It kind of comes to the role that our office often plays
02:37:46.120 of coordination and facilitation,
02:37:47.760 because we then started reaching out
02:37:49.300 and asking questions of other departments saying,
02:37:51.860 does anyone else have the equipment
02:37:53.440 that they might be looking for?
02:37:55.100 It may not be appropriate for CAF
02:37:56.360 and they may not have the equipment,
02:37:58.620 but is there that equipment somewhere else
02:38:01.700 that could be found?
02:38:02.500 So I think as is in the interview summary, you know, we even went so far as to say, does Parks Canada have this kind of thing?
02:38:08.900 Because the goal was to be able to assist if we could.
02:38:13.960 Maybe if I can just add, I think that, you know, we also looked at, can we reimburse if they find them privately, can, should we reimburse that?
02:38:22.400 So it was, it was, and I kind of pushed back a little bit on that this rarely happens.
02:38:28.500 Like in a case where the process comes through and it goes to the minister, I've known of other cases where it was like, no, we can't assist.
02:38:43.360 The minister's office will often flag it to us and we'll ask questions about, well, we explored this.
02:38:50.880 And I can remember other instances where that was a case where we just pushed more to find other solutions that in the kind of narrow band of the RFA process, they may not have thought of.
02:39:02.840 Okay, that's fair.
02:39:03.880 The request for assistance that we're dealing with in the commission, it's the only one that we've seen this pattern in, but that's fair explanation.
02:39:10.160 Okay, I'm going to want to shift gears now and talk about what you were hearing during this process with various stakeholders and interlocutors, both nationally and internationally.
02:39:24.540 So, Mr. Clough, I'll start with you.
02:39:28.100 We know you had a few conversations with a man named Juan Gonzalez, who's the special advisor to President Biden.
02:39:34.740 Can you tell us about those conversations and what you were hearing from him?
02:39:37.820 Yes. So I heard from Juan Gonzalez. He is part of the national security team in the White House. And we'd interacted on a few files before the convoy protests. And he reached out, I believe, on Wednesday, February 9th.
02:39:53.020 At that point, it was a request to connect National Security Intelligence Advisor Jody Thomas with the White House Homeland Security Advisor to urgently discuss the Windsor blockade, but also other border blockades that were in effect at that time.
02:40:11.600 So Juan and I had a bit of back and forth about that.
02:40:14.240 That then led to a number of conversations, some of which you heard about this morning from the Deputy Prime Minister, but there were various interactions between the Prime Minister's office, PCO, several ministers' offices, and their counterparts in the United States in the White House and different departments in the United States because they became seized with the border blockades that were impacting them quite significantly.
02:40:38.220 So you mentioned that we heard this morning from the Deputy Prime Minister that she was hearing a lot of concern from officials in the United States about what was going on and some encouragement, if we can put it that way, to bring a swift end, given the impact this was going to have on Canada-U.S. relations and trade.
02:40:56.300 Were you hearing similar concerns from the people you were talking to in the United States and or in other countries?
02:41:03.580 Absolutely. And the concern was not only about trade, economics, dollars and cents. It was for sure. But there was also a discussion in many of these conversations, including between the Prime Minister and the President, that both countries were facing similar forces in certain ways.
02:41:21.940 For example, the United States also saw some convoy activity.
02:41:26.640 I think it was dealt with quite quickly by the Americans,
02:41:30.120 but they saw a trucker protest heading to the Super Bowl.
02:41:33.920 There was one that was trying to be assembled to head to Washington, D.C.
02:41:37.460 So these were part of the conversations as well.
02:41:39.860 It was viewed as a shared problem.
02:41:41.940 But for sure, the immediate issue was the blockades at various border crossings,
02:41:46.360 especially Windsor, and how do we sort these out quickly.
02:41:49.660 And we understand you also had some conversations with Ambassador Hillman, Ambassador to the United States.
02:41:55.420 Can you tell us about those conversations?
02:41:57.580 Well, she was one of the key principals having interactions with the White House and various departments in the United States.
02:42:04.060 and the substance, you know, one example of substance within those conversations was how
02:42:11.240 can we introduce measures to end the blockades or at least dissuade them from growing and from
02:42:18.820 new ones from popping up. For example, there was discussion of potential immigration measures or
02:42:24.120 penalties placed on people who conducted unlawful activity at these border blockades.
02:42:29.400 There was definitely discussion of whether the United States could provide tow trucks to help
02:42:33.920 given it was virtually impossible to get tow trucks on the Canadian side of the border.
02:42:38.660 So that's the kind of thing that was discussed.
02:42:40.720 Did that ever end up happening?
02:42:45.140 I don't know.
02:42:46.240 So the immigration measures, I don't believe the United States implemented any measures.
02:42:50.280 We did in the Emergencies Act.
02:42:53.820 In terms of tow trucks being provided by the United States,
02:42:56.900 there might have been some in Detroit, Windsor,
02:42:59.080 provided by Detroit or the government of Michigan.
02:43:01.840 I'm not sure about that.
02:43:03.920 Mr. Broadhead, Ms. Telford, were either of you having conversations with international counterparts?
02:43:10.200 No?
02:43:11.820 Not during the occupation or when the blockades were on.
02:43:16.080 For months afterwards, I can say, including up until recent summits, though, this is a topic that continues to come up with counterparts from various countries.
02:43:26.540 And the Prime Minister also had calls during the occupation with other world leaders where this was a topic that was coming up because they were watching what was happening in Canada and concerned that they were starting to see the same thing in some of their countries and they were concerned about copycat situations.
02:43:43.600 So this has been an ongoing conversation with international leaders.
02:43:46.580 I would just add as well, another feature of all of the conversations between the Americans and us, including the call between the Prime Minister and the President, was the fact that a lot of the support for the unlawful activity here in Canada was coming from the United States in terms of money, in terms of people, and in terms of political support from some of the most prominent U.S. political figures.
02:44:09.780 Millions of dollars came in from the United States, according to published reports.
02:44:14.800 Chiefs slowly announced that there were American citizens who had traveled to join the occupation in Ottawa.
02:44:21.480 So that was also a feature of the discussions here.
02:44:23.740 The flooding of 911 phone lines here in Ottawa came largely from Americans, as announced by Chiefs slowly and the Ottawa police.
02:44:32.020 So this was very much a shared problem, and we were talking about it in that sense.
02:44:37.400 We've heard about some of that already at the commission.
02:44:40.520 You speak of the foreign funding, and we explored that a bit this morning with the Deputy Prime Minister,
02:44:45.000 and it was found in the end that there were millions of dollars coming from the United States, from private donors.
02:44:53.420 So there was no foreign state funding coming in. Would you agree with that?
02:44:58.680 Yes.
02:44:59.160 Okay. And we've also established that there was little information available to the government at the time of the convoy of how much money was coming in from the United States. That wasn't really information that was available to the government at the time. Would you agree with that?
02:45:15.620 It definitely became more apparent as time passed. And I totally agree with you. It is cloudy and unclear. And it's concerning that it happened. But one example I would give, I mean, we felt quite strongly at the time that it was happening.
02:45:32.640 and proof of that I would say is when GoFundMe paused the account you saw some of the most
02:45:40.040 prominent American political figures attack GoFundMe and they didn't do that for no reason
02:45:46.400 they did it because it was clear to them and it was it was clear to us that a lot of the funding
02:45:52.540 was coming from Americans okay that is absolute speculation at best ask you about which is why
02:45:58.640 haven't heard much about so far is political commentary coming from the United States. So
02:46:04.060 you'd mentioned prominent political figures who are weighing in on all of this. Can you tell us
02:46:09.320 about some of that, some of what you were hearing or observing on that front?
02:46:14.820 The issue there, there were a number of examples from senators, from governors, from the former
02:46:20.400 president. And the issue there is not that individuals and politicians aren't allowed to
02:46:26.440 comment on politics and policies in other countries. It happens all the time. But the
02:46:31.640 concern for us was it was direct encouragement for unlawful activity that was hugely damaging
02:46:37.540 to the country, including the border blockades. So that's why I raise it here. And that's why
02:46:42.520 the president and the prime minister spoke about it. It was the support for unlawful activity.
02:46:47.600 Okay. Mr. Clerk, can you please pull up Mr. Clow's notes again? So that's ssm.nsc.can
02:46:56.280 four zeros two nine four one
02:47:02.200 remarkably effective note taker
02:47:12.760 now it's going to be a little challenging to find the page here because
02:47:15.960 we don't have a date for it so just keep scrolling down
02:47:19.480 until you see
02:47:22.440 talk about the Emergencies Act so scroll down again please
02:47:30.220 scroll down
02:47:35.040 keep scrolling
02:47:43.620 keep scrolling
02:47:49.320 keep going
02:47:57.760 I think it's just after this
02:48:01.640 keep going please
02:48:03.100 there's a lot of blackout in this
02:48:17.560 so it's a little challenging
02:48:18.560 oh we're at the fmm already so it must be before that
02:48:26.960 i think i saw it a few pages up yeah can you can you zoom out a little bit please mr clerk
02:48:34.040 so we can see thanks keep going up a little bit
02:48:38.900 so a little bit further up
02:48:48.220 a little bit further so i think you see yeah there we go okay so first question we don't have a date
02:48:56.820 on this because it's sort of there's some blackout before that but do you remember the date of this
02:49:00.920 mr claude i believe it was february 9th okay so it's a meeting on february 9th and um this is
02:49:07.120 various things happening over the course of the day why don't you tell us one meeting why don't
02:49:11.260 you tell us what was happening so february 9th was there were a few conversations going on i
02:49:17.420 don't specifically remember what meetings at what times, but I did write down, and it was reported
02:49:24.420 to us, that Minister Blair had spoken to the clerk about the Emergencies Act, and that was in the
02:49:32.600 lead-up, I think, just one day before the incident response group meeting where the Emergencies Act
02:49:37.000 was discussed in some detail, in addition to other things. So this was just a report to us that
02:49:42.920 that conversation had happened between the minister and the clerk.
02:49:45.420 Okay, so around February 9th, we're getting to the point, as we know, where the federal government felt a need to perhaps intervene in the situation and bring this to a close in some way.
02:49:58.160 So, as you say, Blair spoke to the clerk and talked about the Emergencies Act on the options.
02:50:03.760 Can you just read your handwriting there?
02:50:05.600 Didn't commit on the options.
02:50:07.540 Emergency could be peace if that sounds like we have authority.
02:50:11.960 and then a reference to Nathalie Trouin, the Deputy Clerk, and Fort Justice.
02:50:18.380 So I see this as discussions are happening about how we can help, what more we can be doing.
02:50:27.020 And the Emergency Act could be a piece of that.
02:50:30.260 Okay. And we know that the following day, the Prime Minister convened the first incident response group meeting.
02:50:37.280 Yes.
02:50:37.580 So I'd like you to tell us a bit about that meeting, the decision to convene the IRG and what that meant in the Prime Minister's eyes, in your eyes, and what an IRG really is.
02:50:47.740 I think as the clerk may have spoken to already, and I think as these notes show too, the meetings were becoming increasingly frequent with added ministers and different departments getting involved because of the request for assistance amongst a growing number of blockades now, as well as protests in different parts of the country.
02:51:14.840 and the occupation, of course, is now really entrenched in Ottawa.
02:51:20.300 And so as we were having these meetings, the clerk, I believe, advised the prime minister,
02:51:25.920 though it made good sense to the group of us at the time as well, that it was time to formalize
02:51:30.860 our structure moving forward and that we were at a point of national crisis.
02:51:35.020 And that's what the incident response group is put together for.
02:51:38.020 It was a group that was, it was a cabinet committee that was created, I believe, in the first mandate of the government midway through.
02:51:47.560 And it is chaired by the prime minister.
02:51:50.380 It does not have a set permanent membership.
02:51:53.620 It is convened with the ministers appropriate to whatever the incident is that is being discussed.
02:52:00.380 And the thing that makes it very different from other cabinet committees is where in another cabinet committee that tends to be policy-focused and a little longer term, this is obviously dealing with something in real time and something that's crisis-like in nature.
02:52:18.700 But the structural difference, too, is that officials lead in many ways the conversations within the IRG meetings space, and they are right at the table.
02:52:29.440 So whereas at a cabinet committee meeting, the ministers would be sitting around the cabinet table and the officials might be sitting to the side, they may very well be making presentations and then the ministers would be discussing those presentations or they might speak up to make clarification when their ministers call on them for that clarification.
02:52:46.400 At an IRG meeting, the principal presenters are officials. And so whether it's the NSIA, whether it's the commissioner of the RCMP, whether it was the head of CSIS, depending on the incident in past, it might be the CAF and the chief of defense staff.
02:53:03.520 And then the ministers are called on by the prime minister to add anything that they might see as not having been covered, to add any thoughts they have on the basis of the information that's been presented.
02:53:15.580 But they are all sitting around the same table, which makes it quite a different meeting than than really any other.
02:53:21.880 And what's the purpose of that? Why is an IRG structured like that with direct input from officials?
02:53:26.500 I think for a number of reasons, it's their expertise and getting it in real time to the prime minister and and to the to the ministers and things are moving very quickly.
02:53:40.640 And it's so it's an efficiency and an effective kind of tool to bring everybody to that same table and convene the leadership of the different security agencies for whatever the security incident is and to hear from people directly.
02:53:54.920 okay so essentially you remove the sort of the layering up and instead the prime minister has
02:54:01.260 direct access to all of the inputs that uh that you may want or need as do all of the other
02:54:07.660 ministers because they then get to hear from directly from the heads of the different agencies
02:54:12.000 or law enforcement uh heads okay fair enough um so we've been through the content of many of the
02:54:22.000 IRGs. One theme I want to pick up with you is something that was eventually brought to the IRG
02:54:27.880 on February 12th, but has been a discussion at the commission throughout, which was the idea of
02:54:35.720 whether the prime minister or anyone from the federal government should engage with the
02:54:42.180 protesters and attempt to bring this to a close through either some sort of negotiation, some
02:54:47.520 engagement, some speaking.
02:54:50.800 So the first thing I'll bring up on that point is,
02:54:54.340 Mr. Clerk, it's pb.can.401184.
02:55:17.520 It might be 1844, sorry.
02:55:38.020 Ms. Dulford, this is a text exchange on February 6th
02:55:41.340 between you and Minister Mendicino.
02:55:43.940 So it's early days, but as I said,
02:55:46.220 this theme of interaction, negotiation
02:55:50.620 is something that came up.
02:55:52.900 Okay, can we scroll down please, Mr. Clerk?
02:56:01.140 Going, keep going.
02:56:07.340 Going.
02:56:13.780 Page eight, please.
02:56:16.220 Okay. Here we go. So if we can blow that up, it's really hard to read, but you'll see a notation here, lawyer, arbitrator, mediator, author, suggested by Anne McClellan as a possible interlocutor. Again, I think it's a long shot for the reasons we discussed. Also, I noticed after we hung up that we didn't even spend a moment on politics and readiness.
02:56:40.260 Okay, so that part of it may not be all that relevant.
02:56:44.160 But can you, do you remember this tax exchange, Ms. Delford?
02:56:48.380 Now that I see it.
02:56:49.840 Okay, and do you remember the idea of discussing a possible interlocutor at that point and what was going on?
02:56:56.140 Can you fill that in for us, please?
02:56:59.180 Look, I think over the course of, right from the beginning of the occupation, when it became an occupation,
02:57:06.060 there were numerous people who were trying to suggest anything they could to try to find a way
02:57:13.160 to assist. And I think that's what Anne was doing here. And I've received, and I believe it's part
02:57:20.740 of the documents as well that you've received. I received suggestions from numerous other people
02:57:26.220 as well. MPs were raising names with us. There were suggested names of MPs from other parties
02:57:33.040 who who were coming forward wondering if they could help there was there was a lot of people
02:57:37.960 that were trying to find a way um to figure out if an engagement could work and no one was able
02:57:45.220 to take it past that first thought and so um no one could figure out who they should talk to
02:57:53.160 there was no clear leadership on the other side there was no clear understanding of what they
02:57:57.760 would even be talking about. The police were already, as we were being informed through the
02:58:03.120 incident response groups, they were already engaging at a certain level. And so it wasn't
02:58:09.960 clear what this engagement strategy would be, let alone if it could have any effect.
02:58:16.080 And, you know, I think there's a difference too between engagement and negotiation. And the
02:58:22.400 Prime Minister and the Cabinet, the government, wasn't prepared to negotiate public health
02:58:27.800 measures that were rooted in science. I'm not, I also am not sure, and I think a lot of people
02:58:35.540 weren't sure at the time, that really that that's what this was all about. And so figuring out what
02:58:40.880 the topic of the conversation could be, let alone who it could be with, that could have any effect
02:58:46.240 on changing the circumstances, when no one could answer that question, really these conversations
02:58:51.700 didn't move past the initial suggestion of, I wonder if.
02:58:56.400 Okay, so at this point, this is part of the conversation.
02:58:59.100 We're still in sort of early days of the protest.
02:59:01.040 And I think what you're taking us to now
02:59:03.080 is what's come to be known as the engagement proposal.
02:59:06.640 And we've heard some evidence on that.
02:59:08.340 And Mr. Clerk, you can take that one down, please,
02:59:10.660 and pull up.
02:59:12.700 Following.
02:59:15.060 SSM.nsc.can402958.
02:59:21.700 So, Ms. Telford, I think what you've just been referencing has been canvassed before the commission a bit.
02:59:26.760 And it's Mr. Deputy Minister Stewart's engagement proposal that he prepared with the assistance of Marcel Bowden from the OPP-PLT.
02:59:38.280 And this is now the evening of February 11th.
02:59:42.000 It's a text that Minister Mendicino sent to you saying, hey, there, we got some very last minute and thin paper tonight on an engagement strategy.
02:59:51.700 from my deputy minister apparently socialized it with several people including the ontario
02:59:57.300 government not me and we'll just scroll down and see the rest of the text please
03:00:03.620 he says it's unclear whether pco or cmp or ontario supports this but he's flagging this
03:00:09.780 as a concern about information flow and then he says at the bottom sorry but had to let you know
03:00:16.740 marco so can you tell us a bit from your perspective we've heard mr
03:00:21.700 Minister Mendicino's perspective on it.
03:00:23.760 But what was your perspective receiving this text?
03:00:27.100 And do you know why Minister Mendicino was essentially apologizing,
03:00:31.280 saying, sorry, I'm just letting you know about this?
03:00:35.800 When the IRGs began convening, just the day before, I believe,
03:00:42.320 one of the things that was stressed at the first IRG,
03:00:47.480 or in and around the IRG, really,
03:00:49.300 was just the need for appropriate information flow and for regular and constant information flow.
03:00:57.320 And so I believe that's what he's saying sorry for there is he's letting me know that there's
03:01:02.720 this information that is now floating around that has already gone to some people and it had not
03:01:07.700 kind of followed the usual channels. And I think he was sorry that it was the hour that it was
03:01:13.780 that we were all trying to grapple with what to do here. But I had also just received the paper
03:01:19.280 previously from the clerk, I think about an hour before, by the looks of this. And so
03:01:26.200 I wouldn't read too much into the story. And we were much more focused on the draft and
03:01:33.960 ultimately what was decided later that night, after I talked with the clerk and I then called
03:01:41.700 the prime minister and the prime minister agreed to put it on with the suggestion that was coming
03:01:46.140 from the clerk, he agreed to put it on the agenda for the IRG the next day for discussion.
03:01:50.560 And we've seen that it ended up on the agenda. And I think you just started to tell us a little
03:01:54.760 bit, but maybe you can finish that answer. Why ultimately it was decided not to pursue that
03:01:59.900 engagement strategy. In some ways, it's what I already touched on, which is this was one more
03:02:08.240 proposal that was not yet at the place that one could act on. There were too many unanswered
03:02:13.640 questions, there was no clarity in terms of who the discussion would be with on either side of
03:02:20.700 the discussion and what the discussion would be about and what it might result in. And so,
03:02:26.240 you know, while everyone, including the prime minister, was encouraging everyone to put every
03:02:30.700 option on the table, and it's why this was put on the agenda ultimately, there wasn't anything
03:02:36.840 further to pursue on this at that time. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. You can take that one down.
03:02:43.640 so we're going to skip a little ahead in the chronology again the following day february
03:02:53.120 13th is obviously key there's the incident response group meeting in the afternoon followed
03:02:58.220 by the cabinet meeting in the evening the decision coming out of the irg is to have the cabinet
03:03:03.520 meeting and then the decision coming out of the cabinet meeting is to have a first minister's
03:03:07.820 meeting to consult on whether or not to invoke the Emergencies Act. Mr. Clerk, can you pull up
03:03:14.600 ssm.nsc.can402941? It's Mr. Clow's notes again, this time at page 22.
03:03:25.860 So when Minister LeBlanc testified a few days ago, we went through some of the comments that
03:03:31.520 with the record of the readout of the First Minister's meeting and some of what was expressed
03:03:35.920 by the provinces there and these I believe are Mr. Clow's notes of that same meeting.
03:03:42.160 And I'm wondering whether we can go through a bit of these and Mr. Broadhead maybe this is
03:03:46.160 best directed at you but whether you can fill in about a bit of the context about what was
03:03:52.080 what was being expressed during the first ministers meeting by these various premiers
03:03:56.800 and whether or not in your view it coincided with what you've been hearing up to then about
03:04:03.120 uh solving the problem of the convoy sure i'll start and then um my colleagues can uh can add
03:04:11.280 um i you know i think it was uh quite consistent with what we had heard before but i think it was
03:04:17.760 a very robust conversation um you know we had the ministers minister lametti and i believe minister
03:04:25.280 mendicino or leblanc and the prime minister speak then we went the prime minister went across the
03:04:31.680 country um in terms of making sure he heard from each of the provinces and territorial premiers
03:04:38.240 um i think you know we had we had known on where you know not that specifically on the emergencies
03:04:45.360 act um but we had known from conversations with ontario uh what they were kind of feeling
03:04:51.520 generally we had heard from a lot of the provinces so um i think it was it was quite an interesting
03:04:57.440 conversation i think um we did learn a lot and just to use you know a couple quick examples
03:05:04.400 you know some of the some of the issues around supply chain that that newfoundland and nunavut
03:05:09.680 brought up and concern from the premier in the northwest territories about a blockade
03:05:14.960 um concerns from premier horgan about rcmp being stretched too thin um as they were a contingent
03:05:22.880 had been sent to to support another part of the country and it really kind of showed that the
03:05:28.800 national nature of it and and the kind of variety of issues folks were facing um and and even the
03:05:36.000 folks who were i would say um more concerned um such as the the premier of alberta or the premier
03:05:43.040 saskatchewan you know even they had said things like well i won't quibble with the use of the
03:05:47.680 the emergencies act but i'm worried about inflaming folks which was something we were concerned about
03:05:53.520 had talked about at irgs was a real cause um of discussion um and and same with with premier mo
03:06:01.360 who said you know the the six things you've mentioned sound reasonable but i'm worried about
03:06:06.880 inflaming so um you know and and even even you know premier will go talking about um you know
03:06:13.600 the certe de quebec and um you know and the dynamic between the the certe and and the rcmp
03:06:21.520 and us having to kind of you know discuss where those boundaries were with them uh in calls mr
03:06:27.520 leblanc mentioned after with uh with minister labelle i believe it was um uh really showed
03:06:33.120 like it was a very meaty conversation i found and um but not a not a not one where i think we were
03:06:41.200 um shocked by by what we were hearing because of the outreach that had happened in advance
03:06:47.680 mr alfred i would just add that this was some i'm not sure there's a prime minister
03:06:52.160 in canadian history that has had as many first ministers meetings as this prime minister has
03:06:56.720 because of the pandemic and uh so they were such a regular occurrence and this group of premiers
03:07:03.360 know each other quite well because of that and while you know there are perhaps sometimes more
03:07:09.920 pointed and more partisan statements made in public facing environments in these meetings
03:07:16.760 that they have.
03:07:17.760 And I think you can see that in the notes and in the descriptions of it.
03:07:22.340 They really, they are thoughtful conversations and they do come at things differently.
03:07:27.340 There's no doubt they have different, you know, regional needs and we're facing different
03:07:33.240 things in different parts of the country.
03:07:35.680 But as as Premier King, I can still remember saying, you know, toward the end, he was one of the later speakers as per the notes and him saying to the prime minister, I know you don't take this lightly.
03:07:45.720 And this was a thoughtful conversation. And because they they really were grappling with, you know, even those who were concerned about the potential for inflammation, if the Emergencies Act were invoked,
03:07:58.420 even those who were concerned about it in their specific regions, understood there was a broader
03:08:04.060 national, potential national need here, and that the prime minister had the authority ultimately
03:08:11.560 and potentially, and the need to do this. And so even those who were showing some reluctance
03:08:17.920 from their kind of premier perspective of their particular province were showing an openness or
03:08:25.060 recognition, as Premier Kenney did, and sort of saying, I won't quibble with you on whatever you
03:08:30.940 have to do with the Emergencies Act, ultimately. And I think that speaks to they'd had an FMM just
03:08:36.000 a couple of weeks prior to this, that was solely focused on before all of this had started,
03:08:41.660 as part of part for the course now during the pandemic, because we need to remember the time
03:08:46.740 we were in, which was the height of Omicron. And so they'd actually had an FMM just, I think it was
03:08:51.480 January 10th, where they were talking about the new mandates that the provinces were having to
03:08:56.240 put into place. And we were looking to support them on that front. So this is a group that has
03:09:00.880 navigated crises for a couple of years together in many, if not most of their cases. That's helpful
03:09:06.120 context in understanding comments like you just brought up. I don't misprime your case. I don't
03:09:11.300 quibble with the use of the act. Mr. Cloud, do you have anything to add on that on this front?
03:09:15.860 I think it's been well covered. I would just emphasize I know it's been addressed here and
03:09:20.520 elsewhere in the past couple weeks, but Premier Kenney's comment on this phone call that there
03:09:26.920 was a potentially violent, hardcore group of individuals at the center of the Coutts blockade
03:09:33.520 who were ready to die for a cause, and we had heard that through other reports and from our
03:09:37.640 own officials, but it was a recognition that's just one example of the very serious potential
03:09:44.880 for violence that was posed by many of these demonstrations.
03:09:47.920 thank you mr clerk you can you can take that one down so we know that what happened after
03:09:55.660 the first minister's meeting which lasted about an hour um there was then i believe a call with
03:10:01.460 opposition leaders and uh then some point that afternoon the prime minister received a decision
03:10:07.580 note from the clerk and fairly shortly thereafter took the decision to invoke the emergencies act
03:10:13.680 One thing I wanted to ask from your perspective was any consideration given in any of this to holding a debate before Parliament?
03:10:22.400 Not to decide, of course, but to engage in a debate over whether the Emergencies Act should be invoked.
03:10:31.200 So there was an emergency debate about the convoy and the demonstrations about a week, about I think exactly a week before the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
03:10:40.460 The Emergencies Act itself contains parliamentary process and provisions.
03:10:44.800 That debate and the vote in the House did happen.
03:10:48.120 But the decision to invoke on February 14th was made after a series of discussions and inputs,
03:10:56.580 the FMM that morning being a critical one, the opposition leader call being a critical one.
03:11:00.440 The view was time was up and it needed to be enacted right away.
03:11:04.700 and recognizing that the parliamentary process is built into the Act and was to come in the days
03:11:09.520 ahead, we thought that that was robust. So essentially that conversation didn't happen
03:11:16.260 because it didn't have to. There was already a parliamentary process built in. Yes. Is that fair?
03:11:21.100 Okay. And I just want to turn briefly now to the topic of revocation of the Act,
03:11:27.880 which I know is skipping ahead again.
03:11:34.700 um mr clerk if you can pull up mr clow's notes again i don't know what we do without
03:11:39.020 mr clow's notes here ssm.nsc.can402941 page 28
03:11:54.540 the only thing missing from the notes is clear page numbers always number the pages
03:11:58.220 so this is february 19th uh it's a staff call and right at the bottom there you say parliament's job
03:12:06.440 is to confirm or confirm or revoke doesn't impact changes i believe after revocation what happens
03:12:13.880 to frozen accounts so that's the topic we've explored a bit with um finance at what point
03:12:19.520 do we withdraw based on what inputs um so is it fair to say at this point this is a discussion of
03:12:27.280 almost first principles. We don't really know what the criteria are to revoke. We need to
03:12:32.400 figure out what those criteria are. Was that an accurate reflection?
03:12:38.160 It's hard to say for sure what that specific note refers to, but
03:12:41.720 there was progress by that point, the February 19th. We were far from out of it. There were
03:12:49.300 still a lot of situations. There were still many threats. And if I remember correctly,
03:12:54.020 Ottawa was, there may have been the beginning of action, but it wasn't done.
03:12:59.560 So definitely at the IRGs and on staff calls and in other conversations, we were beginning
03:13:04.320 to ask ourselves, okay, what, how long is this needed?
03:13:08.320 And it was always understood and it was made clear by the prime minister, this should only
03:13:12.860 be in place as long as it's needed.
03:13:14.460 So we were constantly asking ourselves that very question, what are, what do we need to
03:13:21.180 assess and what will feed into the decision to revoke okay and there was no i think what i was
03:13:27.060 saying was there's no playbook for it so it was essentially a discussion from first principles of
03:13:31.280 trying to figure out what these criteria should be we could scroll down a bit please mr clerk
03:13:35.760 to the following day you'll see irg um not that one february 20th keep going
03:13:43.300 so the first notation there says irg february 20th rcmp officials public brief on how long
03:14:01.220 emergency act is needed now we're going to take this down and bring up a different document mr
03:14:07.000 clerk which is ssm.can.nsc402910 this isn't something that's recorded in your notes mr
03:14:16.440 cloud what i'm going to bring up is um commissioner lucky's key messages from that date so it's an
03:14:23.600 rcmp document and i'm going to take you through and ask you whether your recollection is that
03:14:28.560 that was expressed during the IRG.
03:14:35.840 So there we go.
03:14:37.700 So the key messages are, as I said yesterday,
03:14:40.480 the situation across the country remains concerning,
03:14:43.340 volatile and unpredictable.
03:14:45.540 We are continuing to see a range of protest events
03:14:48.280 and solidarity actions across the country
03:14:50.540 with Port Sventry and legislatures the key targets.
03:14:53.800 I wanna underscore two key bottom lines off the top.
03:14:57.460 First, as it relates to Ottawa and Ontario,
03:15:00.620 there is an operational need to maintain access
03:15:03.740 to these powers to ensure that we can finish
03:15:06.660 what we started and prevent any retrenchment,
03:15:10.040 even for the next two to three weeks.
03:15:12.400 And then after that, it is important
03:15:14.700 that we retain the ability to maintain the perimeter,
03:15:17.760 restrict travel, and ensure we can continue
03:15:20.580 to choke off financial support and other assistance
03:15:24.500 to the protestors in Ottawa.
03:15:26.420 and then it goes on.
03:15:27.600 Do you recall this having been expressed at the IRG
03:15:30.760 that the emergencies act should stay in place
03:15:34.020 by the RCMP, by Commissioner Luckey
03:15:35.840 for another two or three weeks?
03:15:37.980 My colleagues may have stuff to add,
03:15:40.600 but I don't know if it was conveyed on the 20th,
03:15:43.380 but that was definitely a message
03:15:45.560 right up to the revocation that the RCMP believed
03:15:47.880 that the powers were critical
03:15:50.420 and they argued that they should stay in place
03:15:53.080 for a period longer in order to prevent additional blockades
03:16:00.040 from starting or from people from returning
03:16:01.860 to the ones that existed.
03:16:03.520 Okay.
03:16:05.000 Ms. Talford, Mr. Broadhead,
03:16:06.080 do you have anything to add to that?
03:16:07.960 No, that's...
03:16:08.960 Yep.
03:16:09.800 Okay.
03:16:10.680 And as we know that that's not what happened in the end,
03:16:13.620 the act was revoked three days later.
03:16:15.300 So is it fair to say that that input was received
03:16:18.040 but not followed by, in the end, the government?
03:16:20.380 It's important to point out is that both for the invocation and the revocation, the RCMP was one of many inputs, so for sure this view would have been considered and was considered, but ultimately the Prime Minister and the IRG decided to revoke when they decided to revoke, based on what many different inputs.
03:16:42.380 Okay. One thing I wanted to ask you while about the revocation decision is there have been some suggestions that the motion to confirm the declaration of emergency had been passed through the House of Commons, but was up for vote in the Senate.
03:16:56.080 And that part of the timing of revocation may have been due to the some perhaps lack of confidence around whether the Senate would confirm the declaration. Can you speak to that?
03:17:09.480 so quite the opposite actually and and yes i am aware of that suggestion that perhaps there's an
03:17:17.580 attempt to revoke before the senate got to its vote we actually wanted the senate to move as
03:17:23.720 quickly as possible and i think it did too but as it was reported to us the senate was delayed
03:17:29.460 in convening partly because of the ottawa very significant continuing ottawa demonstrations that
03:17:35.300 happening right on the Senate's doorstep. They did begin their debate at a certain point, but
03:17:42.980 that was not considered when it came to revocation. The decisions around revocation was what's the
03:17:47.540 situation? Is this act still needed? Are these powers still needed? We would have liked the
03:17:54.020 Senate to have its vote, but I will also say I know of no reason to believe that the Senate would not
03:17:58.660 have endorsed it and i i do believe that um i'm not sure about this but i do believe that this
03:18:05.700 commission has seen evidence that the chief of staff to senator gold the government the the
03:18:11.620 government leader in the senate was doing vote counting and they were quite comfortable that
03:18:17.300 they were in a good place anything to add on that point mr offered mr brada no i i completely agree
03:18:24.420 with what brian was just saying and i would just add that it was extraordinarily important to the
03:18:29.620 prime minister that it be that he'd be true to what he said out in the beginning when he invoked
03:18:35.460 the act and that it wasn't going to last one minute longer than absolutely necessary and so
03:18:40.340 that was the entire motivation behind when the revocation happened and the same way you know
03:18:45.620 safety and security was at the core of every meeting he was having throughout the politics
03:18:50.580 and parliamentary issues,
03:18:52.400 we're on a completely separate track
03:18:54.520 from that decision-making.
03:18:55.920 Okay.
03:18:58.320 Those are actually all the questions I have for you,
03:19:00.680 since given that the prime minister
03:19:02.060 will be here tomorrow
03:19:02.920 and your boss will be speaking for himself,
03:19:04.820 those are the questions that I have for you this afternoon.
03:19:07.220 But before I sit down,
03:19:08.300 is there anything that we haven't covered here today
03:19:10.340 that you would like to say
03:19:11.660 now that you have the opportunity?
03:19:14.140 Are you kidding me?
03:19:16.240 I don't think so.
03:19:17.620 We're good.
03:19:18.000 We're all good.
03:19:18.780 Pretty quiet.
03:19:19.360 Okay, thank you.
03:19:20.580 Commissioner, those are my questions.
03:19:22.620 Okay, thank you very much.
03:19:25.800 I think probably this is a good time to take a 15-minute break.
03:19:30.360 Shocker.
03:19:31.480 And let everyone get up and stretch.
03:19:36.380 And so we'll come back in 15 minutes.
03:19:39.180 Thank you.
03:19:40.300 The commission is in recess for 15 minutes.
03:19:42.100 La commission est enlevée pour 15 minutes.
03:19:45.220 Okay.
03:19:46.480 So the commission is in recess for 15 minutes.
03:19:49.100 We're going to keep the stream open, you guys.
03:19:50.780 But I just wanted to bring your attention.
03:19:55.620 I have time.
03:19:58.340 And the reason I might not have time is because I've got Derek Smith on tonight as my guest.
03:20:02.960 He's the author of the brand-new book, One Face, Two Face, Black Face, Blue Face.
03:20:09.480 He's also the author of How the Prime Minister Stole Freedom that came out.
03:20:13.260 I'm going to say six months ago, he was the number one seller in Canada across Amazon.ca.
03:20:18.780 and his new book is also number one in its first week of release and Clyde do something from
03:20:25.840 YouTube with 98,000 followers on YouTube independent media growing in this country gang I love to see
03:20:32.740 it Clyde do something helped him out with the uh with the story so we're going to hear from Derek
03:20:38.660 tonight see how he's doing and maybe get a little bit of insight about what the book is all about
03:20:45.540 i think the i think the key the key characters in the book obviously would be trudeau freeland i
03:20:53.820 believe is one i think pierre polyev even though derek won't be able to elaborate i think pierre
03:21:01.880 polyev is one as well and possibly jagmeet singh i don't know for sure we'll find out more tonight
03:21:07.820 shadow at night live stream at eight o'clock central okay so this story comes from tnc.news
03:21:15.220 here guys and i want you to like and share this this particular stream this afternoon stream has
03:21:22.280 not gotten half the shares the morning stream did and i think it's probably because freeland was
03:21:28.100 this morning i totally understand that but katie telford understand you guys she is the one that
03:21:34.220 controls the pmo the prime minister's office and there are over 500 employees political staffers
03:21:41.340 involved in the PMO plus she's the one with all the left-wing corporate media connections she's
03:21:47.620 the one with the high-level business connections she runs Trudeau she tells him what to say who
03:21:53.520 to talk to oh yeah and when he's without her he is hopelessly lost as we saw when he met with the
03:22:01.600 Chinese president premier whatever last week at the G20 in Bali so it looks like more and more
03:22:10.680 concerned parents are starting to push back against this drag queen story time deal protests
03:22:17.500 flare outside hamilton drag queen story time uh protesters appeared outside of terry berry is that
03:22:23.780 right terry berry library in hamilton on thursday to demonstrate against drag queen story time that
03:22:29.000 had been advertised to quote gender variant unquote zero to four year olds a video posted by
03:22:37.560 Joe Warmington of the Toronto Sun, shows demonstrators facing down supporters of the
03:22:42.640 event as police watched, apparently. Let's have a look.
03:23:07.560 Obviously, the ones with masks are the supporters.
03:23:37.560 yeah obviously the ones with masks are supporters and it's becoming easier to tell who's who
03:23:46.920 who's aligned with who these days the ukraine supporters are definitely those who support
03:23:51.480 masks and more vaccines and lockdowns as first reported by true north earlier this week the
03:23:58.640 event was billed as a family-friendly drag queen story hour by the hamilton public library
03:24:04.200 Hear family-friendly, culturally diverse stories and songs in celebration of families with 2SLGBTQ plus parents and gender-variant children.
03:24:18.100 The event descriptor reads,
03:24:29.100 Videos of the incident show protesters chanting, leave the kids alone outside the event.
03:24:34.200 an advertisement posted by the official hamilton public library twitter account which is by the
03:24:42.100 way publicly funded on november 14th notes an earlier drag story time held at the bin brook
03:24:49.140 branch drag story time includes a fun performance of rainbow connection from the muppets and book
03:24:55.060 readings wrote library officials and subsequent comments to complaints from residents the library
03:24:59.300 stated that the story time aligned with the library's strategic plan to be a community hub
03:25:05.540 all right so that's that's just one of the stories that i'm looking at for tonight's show
03:25:16.040 although i thought i'd get it in now because i'm not sure if i'm going to have enough time
03:25:19.580 for it later on tonight okay so excuse me we have the set agenda for when they return from break
03:25:28.620 the first cross-examination will be by the province of alberta and that's going to be 10 minutes
03:25:36.600 and the second one it's miller time freedom convoy inc brendan miller will have 10 minutes
03:25:43.400 so we're about 15 minutes away from miller time guys like and share as much as you possibly can
03:25:50.380 let's get people watching this live i know there's a lot of other independent media streaming this
03:25:56.020 live as well the more support we can get for freedom out there the better off we're going to
03:26:02.180 be why because more of those people in the middle are going to hear finally going to hear the other
03:26:09.100 side of the story which is absolutely huge it's absolutely huge all right i'm going to break
03:26:15.780 myself and i will be right back i'll see you in just a minute i'm leaving the stream open don't
03:26:26.020 Thank you.
03:26:56.020 Thank you.
03:27:26.020 Thank you.
03:27:56.020 Thank you.
03:28:26.020 Thank you.
03:28:56.020 Thank you.
03:29:26.020 Thank you.
03:29:56.020 Thank you.
03:30:26.020 Thank you.
03:30:56.020 Thank you.
03:31:26.020 Thank you.
03:31:56.020 Thank you.
03:32:26.020 Thank you.
03:32:56.020 Thank you.
03:33:26.020 Thank you.
03:33:56.020 Thank you.
03:34:26.020 Thank you.
03:34:56.020 Thank you.
03:35:26.020 Thank you.
03:35:56.020 Thank you.
03:36:26.020 Thank you.
03:36:56.020 Thank you.
03:37:26.020 Thank you.
03:37:56.020 Thank you.
03:38:26.020 Thank you.
03:38:56.020 Order alert.
03:39:26.980 the commission is reconvened the commissioner okay
03:39:34.260 now the the next stage first i'd like to call on the government of alberta please
03:39:43.140 good evening um to this panel my name is stephanie bows i am council for the province of alberta
03:39:48.740 I just want to start with the statement in the PMO Institutional Report, which indicates that PMO staff engaged with Premier Kenney's Chief of Staff, Ms. Livingstone, on February 5th and 12th.
03:40:04.500 I just want to confirm that during that time, the PMO did not discuss the possible use of the Emergencies Act during those engagements. Is that correct?
03:40:14.000 It was not me having those conversations, but that is my understanding, yes.
03:40:18.380 Okay, thank you.
03:40:20.100 And with respect to the first minister's meeting, Mr. Broadhead,
03:40:23.100 you were asked about your understanding of the various positions of premiers at that meeting.
03:40:29.840 I'd like the clerk to pull up ssm.nsc.can50625.
03:40:39.260 And these are some expanded notes prepared and produced by the Government of Canada describing that meeting.
03:40:47.620 So once we have them up, I'll ask the clerk to please scroll down to page three.
03:40:56.060 Okay, so we can see here that there's some further notes about the comments of Premier
03:41:01.160 Kenney at this meeting, and I'll just walk through some of these right now.
03:41:04.820 He starts by describing the situation in Cootes and how it went from 1,000 trucks on a rolling
03:41:10.880 protest to 900 going home with 100 staying behind and then down to a group of 40 which he described
03:41:18.360 as a core group. Then you'll see him describe the arrests at the border and indicate we believe the
03:41:24.560 situation has been secured and further down there have procured on market for equipment and have
03:41:31.920 drivers in place unless an unexpected surprise should open border crossing today. A little farther
03:41:40.120 down again would be problematic to declare emergency today to take momentum of arrest last
03:41:46.100 night declaration risks further radicalizing thousands of sympathizers in alberta know you
03:41:53.740 have a lot of serious issues to balance off including in ottawa but i am suggesting this
03:41:59.360 could create a net negative for alberta if we need to seize or compel people we are prepared to use
03:42:06.040 our own Emergencies Act. So you would agree that it's fair to say that the Premier's position
03:42:12.260 at this first Minister's meeting was that invoking the Federal Emergencies Act was
03:42:17.520 neither wanted nor needed in Alberta, correct? Yeah, I would say he was definitely clear that
03:42:28.480 he did not believe it was needed in Alberta at that time. Okay, thank you. And I'd like to
03:42:34.820 switch tracks with you and ask
03:42:37.060 about what was done to prepare
03:42:39.100 the Prime Minister for the
03:42:40.880 February 13th cabinet meeting
03:42:43.060 and specifically
03:42:44.820 where his inputs of information
03:42:46.840 came from. So I'm going to ask you
03:42:48.900 you can answer yes or no
03:42:50.620 whether the PMO
03:42:52.900 was responsible
03:42:54.200 for providing the Prime Minister
03:42:56.900 with the following information
03:42:59.240 and that's about the
03:43:01.000 status of the RCMP operation
03:43:03.200 in Coups. Was it the PMO that was responsible for providing that information to the Prime Minister?
03:43:10.320 No. How about the status of Alberta's acquisition of tow trucks from the private market?
03:43:18.800 The Privy Council leads these briefings that you're referring to.
03:43:24.400 Okay, so I'll just name off a few more and maybe then you can tell me if there was anything in my
03:43:29.680 list that the PMO was responsible for providing the information to the Prime Minister.
03:43:35.640 And those are the status of the protests in Windsor at the Ambassador Bridge, the status
03:43:40.120 of opening of the Ambassador Bridge, the status of the OPS operational plan with respect to
03:43:45.960 the protests in Ottawa, or that Commissioner Luckey was of the view that not all tools
03:43:52.060 available through existing legislation had yet been exhausted.
03:43:55.320 we may have added information if we'd heard it through ministers offices or through open source
03:44:03.120 information but the briefing on all the matters you would have been led by the clerk of the privy
03:44:09.280 council the deputy clerk of the nsia okay i would just add that we heard various points in the weeks
03:44:17.480 leading up to invocation of the act that action was about to be taken in some of the places that
03:44:23.180 you mentioned and on the point about RCMP stating that not all tools have been exhausted that was
03:44:29.680 obvious to everyone in various locations law enforcement had tools that they weren't able to
03:44:35.020 enforce because there were other more serious issues preventing that and that's partly why
03:44:40.520 decision was made to invoke the act the next day. Okay and so you would agree that the prime
03:44:47.000 minister had that information as well that there were tools available but that they weren't being
03:44:50.860 used as i said that was obvious to everyone who was watching what was going on the ground
03:44:55.400 okay thank you um i would like the clerk to please pull up ssm.nsc.can402941 and this is a record that
03:45:08.460 commission council has taken you through in some detail already there's just a few places where i
03:45:14.760 hoping you could help me read some of the writing. Mr. Clerk, if you could please scroll down to page 12.
03:45:34.600 Actually, this is not something that I need clarification on the writing on,
03:45:37.320 but something I do have a question on. Let me just make sure I'm in the right place here.
03:45:44.760 so if you see on the right hand side there's a note beside brenda and i'm assuming this is
03:45:52.180 commissioner lucky is that correct yes okay and she indicates with respect to coots they were
03:45:59.820 almost gone but a pastor incited them to stay was 250 vehicles now down to 40 and weapons are in
03:46:07.780 the protest need to go slow here was the prime minister part of this conversation yes he was
03:46:14.240 this was the February 10th Incident Response Group meeting.
03:46:17.440 Okay, good. Thank you.
03:46:22.160 And then if we go to page 23,
03:46:25.200 here's where I'll need your help interpreting the writing.
03:46:30.880 Thank you. So we can see about a quarter of way down the page.
03:46:34.640 There's an arrow and it says specific.
03:46:37.200 And what's the next word after that?
03:46:44.240 to be honest i can't read it either the quality of the photocopy is not it's not strong okay
03:46:53.920 so specific something draft list using the money as uh and then what's that next word there as a
03:47:02.080 hook for the national stuff so this was a reference to there we knew and we heard on the fmm call
03:47:09.360 that some premiers and some people felt
03:47:12.500 that the act should not be applied nationally.
03:47:16.440 And this comment referred to needing to underscore
03:47:19.640 in the communications that part of the reason
03:47:21.780 the act needed to apply nationally
03:47:23.420 was so that it would apply to financial transactions
03:47:26.860 across the country,
03:47:28.040 given many of the demonstrators were from across the country.
03:47:33.080 And I think you just said that this was about
03:47:35.400 needing to refer in the communications.
03:47:37.500 What communications are you talking about?
03:47:39.360 So this was February 14th, 12.30 p.m. after the FMM, as preparations were underway for a potential prime ministerial announcement later that afternoon.
03:47:51.640 Prime Minister took the decision to invoke the act later that afternoon and he went out and announced it.
03:47:57.440 Okay.
03:47:59.460 Now I'd like to talk a little bit about that announcement.
03:48:01.820 If we can go to SSM.CAN402665, and if we go to the very last email in this record,
03:48:27.960 there's a discussion of a press conference that was at that time scheduled for noon on february
03:48:37.040 14th and we'll see the time of this email is listed as february 13th 8 p.m now i'm not sure
03:48:43.580 if this is one of the emails that's caught with the time difference related to greenwich mean time
03:48:49.240 but it's either 3 p.m or 8 p.m on the 13th in either event that's before the cabinet meeting
03:48:57.140 correct i can't i can't confirm the timing of the email but it could be okay and it indicates that
03:49:10.260 there was going to be a press conference the next day with the prime minister the deputy
03:49:15.300 prime minister minister blair minister mendicino and minister limetti there's a bit more discussion
03:49:22.900 in other emails, including that Minister Lemony is there just to answer questions and that only
03:49:28.620 the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister will provide comments. Is this because that was
03:49:33.920 the press conference that was intended to announce the invocation of the Emergencies Act?
03:49:40.540 So what I would say is at this point, there were numerous statements being made by the Prime
03:49:46.660 Minister and other ministers to media, sometimes in the form of a press conference. My recollection
03:49:52.480 was this was planning for a statement of some sort. And yes, given the Emergencies Act was
03:49:58.540 under consideration, it was a scenario at that time that they could be making announcements
03:50:03.620 about the Emergencies Act the next day. But the decision had not been taken at that point.
03:50:08.460 So you'll see that it says, as you know, the presser is to provide an update on the federal
03:50:12.540 government response to the blockades as well as the Ukraine. And I'll take it from your answer
03:50:17.180 that there was some anticipation that maybe it might be about the Emergencies Act. But
03:50:21.560 what other announcement was going to be made about the blockades the next day?
03:50:25.320 There could have been any number of measures taken. And that was the examination going on
03:50:33.440 exactly at that time. What tools could exist? Is it going to be enough? Decision was Emergencies
03:50:41.540 Act had the tools required. And that's why the decision was taken the next day.
03:50:45.260 and i understand that part of the dmo um role is to prepare speeches for the prime minister is that
03:50:53.640 correct the dpmo no the prime minister's office and pco prepare speeches for the prime minister
03:51:00.440 sorry i thought in the um institutional report that there was mention of drafting speeches by
03:51:09.760 the prime minister's oh did i'm sorry by the prime minister's office yes absolutely okay
03:51:14.200 I'm sorry I misspoke there um did the prime minister's just to let you know I think you're
03:51:21.100 over your time so you're going to have to uh wrap up pretty soon okay I'll just finish this area
03:51:26.840 did the deputy prime minister's office draft a speech for the prime minister for the press
03:51:31.380 conference on February 14th I'm not aware you're not aware okay thank you those are all my questions
03:51:37.400 tonight okay thank you next call on the convoy organizers please
03:51:46.200 okay guys i'm going to stay with this for another hour we have the jccf coming up in the ccla coming
03:51:51.880 up after brendan sir uh before i begin uh i have an issue that i need to address as you know and
03:51:59.480 and I've made applications several times,
03:52:02.860 the disclosure in the record is entirely deficient.
03:52:07.740 We've been trying to deal with these redactions.
03:52:10.580 There's still redactions for parliamentary privilege,
03:52:13.280 which the government has not removed.
03:52:15.800 There's no legal basis for, as you've already ruled,
03:52:19.660 to redact any document on the basis of parliamentary privilege.
03:52:24.440 There's also the issue, as I've re-raised by email as well,
03:52:29.480 um the issue with the notes of this witness uh the process that was used in dealing with that
03:52:36.760 needs to be reassessed these are important witnesses i need rulings and so does everyone here
03:52:45.480 the rulings on the redactions are so important and for example miss jody thomas testified
03:52:53.160 and said that she supported the invocation of the emergencies act but there's a note that we got
03:53:02.560 after we fought for the one redaction we got that said jody thomas did not and it was put up on the
03:53:11.200 screen it was notes taken it had one section 39 redaction on it so if that's a cabinet document
03:53:16.860 we can assume cabinet knew about it and it states that section two no violence and they were trying
03:53:24.260 to come up with a way how to make this work anyway that would have been very helpful
03:53:29.980 to have when she was on the stand under oath this is happening constantly there is thousands
03:53:39.320 of documents that DOJ's company?
03:53:42.100 If you can, I'm not looking for a speech.
03:53:44.960 I understand there have been issues about redactions.
03:53:49.260 I believe that one is one I ordered disclosed
03:53:51.660 and I believe you questioned somebody about it
03:53:53.820 as recently as yesterday or the day before.
03:53:59.400 I am not sure about the redactions,
03:54:02.360 certainly for just to qualify the redactions
03:54:04.820 with respect to parliamentary privilege.
03:54:06.740 I didn't say it doesn't exist.
03:54:08.440 i said i said it was novel and that the arguments presented were insufficient and i ordered the
03:54:17.440 three redactions disclosed we received something i i think it's yesterday or maybe it was even today
03:54:23.620 and i apologize i haven't yet ruled on it that's true but i do my very best to make decisions i
03:54:34.040 try my very best to make them intelligent and thoughtful and that sometimes is not done
03:54:40.120 immediately so that's that's sort of how i can respond to those points so sir i can make it very
03:54:46.500 easy and we've written your counsel uh for a set of them so the law is such that where a redaction
03:54:53.540 is sought on the basis of irrelevance it is not the onus of the person seeking to have it redacted
03:55:01.880 on the basis for the relevance it's the onus on the person is seeking for it to
03:55:06.020 be redacted and the purpose for that is is that all of the documents given to
03:55:10.320 us are subject to the implied undertaking rule so they're they don't
03:55:13.520 become public until a ruling on their relevance is made okay well I'm not in
03:55:20.380 a position to rule on that I I suspect that's the mode the the request you made
03:55:26.040 either yesterday or today I don't know which and I'm sorry I'm not in a
03:55:29.720 position to rule on it right now. So what I'd like you is if you could proceed with your
03:55:35.400 examination or that would be I think ideal at this stage and I'll do my best to deal with the
03:55:41.800 motion of the redaction issues as soon as possible. Okay but I just want to put on the record that
03:55:49.480 throughout this entire proceeding all council here and we're on national television this is supposed
03:55:56.140 to be completely transparent this is the purpose of this i'm doing my very best it's not your fault
03:56:01.980 so it's just that it's just the fault that nobody's ordering doj to actually produce what
03:56:06.460 they're obliged to do well that's something you can deal with in another forum i'm doing the best
03:56:12.780 i can here i think we've gotten very a lot of disclosure through our issues and we're dealing
03:56:18.540 with those issues that are raised as they are raised we dealt with the ones you raised i believe
03:56:24.620 at the end of last week made some orders confirmed some some of the redactions and we'll deal with
03:56:32.140 your your most current application but could you just not uh order that the redactions for
03:56:41.580 parliamentary privilege because i can tell you i studied that area in and out and the reason no
03:56:48.700 one could provide you an authority for the purpose of a redaction on the basis of parliamentary
03:56:53.660 privilege is it doesn't exist and parliamentary privilege is of course an ancient doctrine and
03:56:59.020 if you would just order the production of the records without those redactions it would remove
03:57:05.660 a whole bunch then if you would order the production of all relevant records with
03:57:12.380 respect where irrelevant is claimed those records are then subject to the implied undertaking rule
03:57:17.820 and there's no national security issue with those if they were section 38 would be claimed there's
03:57:23.100 There's no cabinet confidence, so Section 39 is not claimed.
03:57:26.600 And that has been the law.
03:57:29.620 It's time immemorial.
03:57:30.420 How can you contest if something's relevant if you don't know what it says?
03:57:38.380 And my problem is that this witness is now on the stand.
03:57:42.720 One of the documents is key in my submission.
03:57:45.620 It is the notes of Ms. Jackson, which is the office assistant to this witness.
03:57:51.520 there are redactions therein on the basis of irrelevance and there are
03:57:56.140 redactions therein also I believe on one of the other grounds that I've sent a
03:58:02.020 written motion if you will email to your council we've been asking for these
03:58:07.580 things and asking for proper production throughout this proceeding all council
03:58:12.100 are in agreement that we don't have proper production sir well I'm not sure
03:58:16.100 you can speak for all council and I'm sure they can speak for themselves as to
03:58:19.800 whether or not you've
03:58:21.840 been asking for this a long time.
03:58:23.600 I'm not aware that you asked about those
03:58:25.820 redactions,
03:58:27.280 but maybe I don't
03:58:29.780 have the records.
03:58:31.580 We're going to have to stop this
03:58:33.240 and despite your belief
03:58:35.900 that the law is always very clear,
03:58:37.740 my experience of 20 years is
03:58:39.620 that's why judges
03:58:41.520 are around. So if you
03:58:43.780 could proceed, otherwise
03:58:45.320 we're not going to get anywhere.
03:58:47.760 So if I could bring up
03:58:49.800 the notes of Ms. Jackson, which are at
03:59:03.800 ssm.can.7719.
03:59:19.800 okay so mr telford uh sarah jackson she's your office manager is this correct
03:59:28.860 uh yes all right and so obviously she's a scribe and does uh scribing for you when you're in
03:59:37.780 meetings no all right so the notes that she takes uh she has if we can scroll down
03:59:45.180 and down
03:59:49.940 right so that says kt call and i take it that's you
03:59:55.900 kt usually does refer to me right so she's taking notes of a phone call she has with you
04:00:02.400 i don't know you don't know so that's on february 4th do you remember february 4th
04:00:11.720 yes okay so what happened on february 4th
04:00:15.180 um well no i don't remember in that level of detail okay is there something you're looking
04:00:24.140 for in particular well i'm trying to find out because i have to build a record for this
04:00:29.580 do you have any idea why anything in your conversation on february 4th in that note would
04:00:36.060 be irrelevant i don't know and i take it when you spoke to miss telford or sorry to
04:00:43.180 this individual at the time there was no lawyer present was there I don't know
04:00:51.340 what this call is okay so can we scroll down then so you see there the
04:00:56.200 government has claimed solicitor-client privilege okay and you don't remember
04:01:01.540 speaking with a lawyer on February 4th do you as I said I don't know what this
04:01:06.820 call is right so how would the government know if you don't know that this is solicitor client
04:01:15.180 privileged they couldn't could they so it's redacted and this is the problem sir uh you
04:01:24.020 have irrelevant irrelevant is there a question yes and so if we can scroll down okay and in that
04:01:31.960 note on february 4th i know you don't have a good memory but in your conversation that's that's it
04:01:37.800 no i know good memory of february 4th i know she doesn't have a good memory of it but
04:01:41.720 it wasn't an insult uh blair's current strategy emergencies act right
04:01:47.380 so i take it you're understanding she's writing down what you're saying and you told her that
04:01:55.400 blair's current strategy is the emergencies act so it was ministers blair's strategy to invoke
04:02:03.280 the emergencies act on february 4th that's your understanding isn't it no that's not my
04:02:08.440 understanding so what was blair's current strategy emergencies act on february 20 or february 4th
04:02:14.620 2022 i can't speak to what's written here you don't remember no if you wanted to
04:02:25.320 pull up notes of mine from february 4th that might be helpful but i can't speak to these do you have
04:02:30.480 notes from february 4th i've got notes from a lot of days that have been provided you've been
04:02:36.480 provided okay have you provided all of them to the department of justice okay and would you say that
04:02:42.960 you provided notes from each and every single day from any day i have notes on okay this is
04:02:49.080 preposterous with respect to this meeting do you remember what you and uh miss jackson were talking
04:02:55.760 about i unfortunately don't know what meeting she's taking notes from here without more context
04:03:03.280 it may or may not even be a meeting i was in but obviously you were discussing the emergencies act
04:03:09.920 the emergencies act came up at numerous occasions as we've said earlier in okay earlier today do you
04:03:18.120 think it would assist the tribunal in this inquiry if Ms. Jackson testifies? No, I think I can answer
04:03:24.540 any questions you might have. But you can answer what that note says. Is there something you're
04:03:30.300 curious about that note in particular? Well, on February 4th of 2022, Ms. Jackson, in a conversation
04:03:36.540 with you, writes down Blair's current strategy, Emergency SAC. Right? And you hadn't even had an
04:03:43.580 IRG at that point I believe you've had an opportunity to speak with Minister Blair yeah
04:03:49.780 and I put this to him and he said that it wasn't true so wouldn't it be helpful if you can't
04:03:56.780 remember I'm not sure that was correct that he said he said that he never had I put the note to
04:04:02.740 him and he said that that's not wasn't a strategy that that's incorrect that doesn't mean it isn't
04:04:09.760 true i mean all this note says is blair's current strategy and emergency act underneath it so on
04:04:16.320 february 4th when was the first time that the government came out and spoke that they were
04:04:23.840 considering invoking the emergencies act do you remember publicly yeah um i mean there were
04:04:33.480 questions from the media uh where ministers were speaking about the emergencies act
04:04:37.700 long before it was invoked yeah and minister blair uh i had discussed this with him on february
04:04:46.520 13th for the first time he went on a show and he talked about that it was under consideration
04:04:52.540 from the outset but then when he testified here he he said it wasn't so was the invocation of
04:05:01.640 the Emergencies Act under consideration from the beginning of the protest in Ottawa?
04:05:08.240 The Emergencies Act was something that was discussed at the beginning of the pandemic,
04:05:13.080 and it was a public conversation at that time as well as a private conversation. There were
04:05:17.680 calls for the Prime Minister. If we can put the document back up, please.
04:05:22.220 Perhaps it's Brian Gover for the Government of Canada. Perhaps the witness could complete
04:05:26.440 her answer to the question without interruption. Oh, no, I've just, the document went down. I'm
04:05:30.480 not done i apologize this is terrible thank you i hope you guys understand that there was a
04:05:39.660 consideration of a public welfare emergency right that's very different than a public order
04:05:43.960 emergency you know that there doesn't have to be a section two security threat right
04:05:48.140 and are you talking about i'm not sure when you're talking about we're talking about from
04:05:54.560 covid because you said it was under consideration then they did look at the emergencies act at that
04:05:59.200 time and there was a public call for that at the time and it was determined um because the prime
04:06:04.660 minister was very reluctant as he was during the occupation uh this past february to invoke it and
04:06:11.420 um so there's been conversations on various occasions about the emergencies act over time
04:06:15.820 so when that note's taken on february 4th 2022 are you saying that you're talking about it in
04:06:23.280 in relation to COVID? I genuinely don't know what this note is, as I've already said to you a few
04:06:30.360 times. Okay. So if I can scroll up or down or up, please, or down, but we'll go down. Down's fine.
04:06:41.140 Okay. So that says flag to KT, February 10th. And it's written in there that this is irrelevant.
04:06:49.320 what does that mean why is it irrelevant do you know because i don't know specifically
04:06:56.600 i don't know either i could surmise that flag to katie means it's probably a bit of a to-do
04:07:02.420 list of things she wanted to flag to me okay they were obviously deemed irrelevant to what
04:07:07.180 we are talking about today okay and could we scroll down again and this one where it says
04:07:12.740 staff blockade right and then it has section 39 invoked do you know what that means i don't know
04:07:21.720 why they invoked it there right and so i take it when you were having this phone call there was no
04:07:28.860 one else present on the phone other than you and miss jackson was there i don't believe that this
04:07:33.160 is a phone call any longer well if we scroll back up this is the second page it's the way it's
04:07:37.440 It said flagged to Katie at the top.
04:07:39.440 Flagged to Katie, okay.
04:07:40.440 And so on February 10th, do you remember if Ms. Jackson was in a meeting with Cabinet?
04:07:48.440 She is not normally in meetings with Cabinet.
04:07:51.440 So how could Section 39's Cabinet confidence?
04:07:54.440 So how can, so it, this is the problem.
04:07:59.440 Those are my questions.
04:08:02.440 Thank you.
04:08:04.440 If we could now call on the Ottawa Police Service, please.
04:08:08.960 This is embarrassing.
04:08:15.940 This is embarrassing, guys.
04:08:21.300 Good evening.
04:08:22.260 My name is David Michikowska.
04:08:23.640 I'm a lawyer for Ottawa Police Service.
04:08:28.640 Ms. Telford, my questions, at least initially, will be directed to you.
04:08:32.200 I understand that the PMO relies on the RCMP.
04:08:38.560 Generally?
04:08:39.900 What do you mean?
04:08:41.240 Well, I guess the PMO relies on the RCMP to protect the Prime Minister and others.
04:08:47.260 Yes.
04:08:47.900 And you trust the RCMP?
04:08:50.640 We do.
04:08:51.780 The RCMP has kept the Prime Minister and his family safe.
04:08:55.800 They have.
04:08:57.000 And the RCMP takes security very seriously.
04:09:02.200 they do and um one of the documents i won't take you to it but i believe the commission took you to
04:09:09.240 it uh one of the documents um that you were taken to reference the intersect group you're familiar
04:09:16.840 with the intersect group can you remind me sure um it was described in that document
04:09:24.280 as a group that gets stood up and is composed of the OPS, the RCMP, PPS, OPP.
04:09:35.380 You're familiar with that?
04:09:36.460 Yes.
04:09:36.920 And all of them are involved in decisions and discussions about these types of protest events and security concerns, correct?
04:09:46.420 That sounds right.
04:09:47.120 And in fact, in that chain of emails that you were taken to, there's reference, and it was on January 25th, Ms. Powers indicates that the key will be tomorrow's intersect meeting and how law enforcement will pre-mobilize.
04:10:06.940 So you're obviously aware that the RCMP, whom you have a lot of confidence in, is monitoring the protest as it's approaching Ottawa, correct?
04:10:19.380 Yes.
04:10:20.820 And on January 27th, and I won't pull it up, but I'll give the reference for the record.
04:10:30.020 It's pb.can401844.
04:10:35.180 there's a series of text messages, I believe, between Minister Mendocino and yourself,
04:10:44.060 and you indicate that the RCMP, or he indicates to you, that the RCMP on January 27th says that
04:10:52.240 the current estimate is about 2,700 trucks, but the numbers could fluctuate. Do you recall that?
04:10:59.480 That sounds right.
04:11:00.200 and uh there's another um document um from the pmo i believe it's from miss power
04:11:08.300 um she's the issues advisor she's one of several issues advisor but she holds the file for public
04:11:16.080 safety and so there's an email from her on january 28th um again the reference number is ssm.can.nsc
04:11:27.700 four zeros two seven nine five and she gives some more uh data as to what the status is
04:11:35.060 one of the things that she references in that uh report on the latest numbers is um project
04:11:43.140 hendon and we've heard a lot about project and was that something that you were familiar with as well
04:11:50.420 not at the time i'm sorry not at the time okay subsequently you did hear about project and is
04:11:56.260 Is that right?
04:11:57.780 During the inquiry, I've heard a fair bit of it.
04:11:59.940 And so she's referring to, so obviously the RCMP,
04:12:03.520 I'm assuming has access to the same hand in data
04:12:08.080 as the other security services, fair assumption?
04:12:12.600 I couldn't speak to what information they had access to.
04:12:15.580 Okay.
04:12:16.420 And so what we see when we look at all of these documents
04:12:20.860 that I'm referring to is the numbers of vehicles,
04:12:24.960 of trucks in the convoy in the last couple days before it arrives is a constantly fluctuating
04:12:32.600 number. Nobody seems to be able to get a full grasp on it. Is that fair? It certainly felt
04:12:38.760 that way. And certainly nobody, even the RCMP, up until that day, the Friday, were saying that
04:12:47.000 this protest was going to become an occupation, correct? I will say in those updates that were
04:12:54.780 coming from Mary Liz Power and they were more than once daily by the end of the week. There
04:13:01.140 were some references, and I do believe this commission has seen in those emails, and I think
04:13:04.980 it was attributed to OP Intersect, that this could be a prolonged demonstration. But you are right,
04:13:13.600 there was a lot of uncertainty about what was coming. And so you understood that even the law
04:13:20.240 enforcement community couldn't predict exactly what occurred and what did in fact occur. Fair?
04:13:29.180 I agree this is a challenging situation for everyone.
04:13:32.280 And you wouldn't fault the RCMP for that, would you?
04:13:36.660 No.
04:13:40.280 You've talked about what you saw on social media in the days leading up to it, and CSIS has told
04:13:47.420 us that analyzing social media is rather complex and requires more than simply scrolling through
04:13:54.860 social media you you wouldn't have any reason to disagree with that would you
04:14:00.780 i think it's a fair statement but there are some things said on social media that
04:14:07.980 represent clearly the views of the person expressing it and in this case in this
04:14:14.780 demonstration. There were statements made on social media about threats of violence, threats to
04:14:20.240 individuals, and aims and motives that they had. I'm sorry, I don't mean to cut you off, but I
04:14:25.700 have a very limited amount of time. My question was more related to the numbers of people that
04:14:32.140 are coming on social media, because what Mr. Vigneault said is it is difficult to tell. It's
04:14:38.540 challenge, I think he said, to know when someone moves from the online space to physical space
04:14:44.920 and the social media is full of misinformation. Ms. Telford, you wouldn't disagree with that,
04:14:51.500 would you? I think it was challenging for everyone. And that's why it was important to
04:14:57.280 bring everyone together at various points. But I do think there was, I think, you know,
04:15:02.840 I think a number of people, including Mr. Vigneault, have spoken about how figuring out
04:15:08.120 the social media space is something that needs to be done coming out of this right um and you
04:15:13.060 recognize um just moving on to another area you recognize that police and we've heard from a
04:15:19.440 number of ministers that police need to have operational independence from governments
04:15:25.240 absolutely and that police have to make operational decisions
04:15:29.680 in real time for reasons that may not be evident to the government or to the public. Fair?
04:15:39.380 Of course, and that's something we took very, very seriously.
04:15:41.540 Everybody take a sip. Again, we respected that operational independence. You wouldn't want the
04:15:46.900 police, whether it's the Ottawa or OPP or the RCMP, to take action without considering what
04:15:53.960 impact that action would have on officer safety or crowd safety or children in the crowd.
04:16:01.520 Of course.
04:16:03.180 And in fact, one of the lessons of IPRWASH that we've heard is that governments should
04:16:08.340 not be allowed to influence specific law enforcement operational decisions.
04:16:13.760 You'd agree with that, Fair?
04:16:16.020 IPRWASH was actually something I asked after, and we got a verbal brief on very early on.
04:16:21.660 I think it was actually even before it all got, before it became even an occupation, because it was something we were very preoccupied about respecting.
04:16:31.520 And that, and it's because decisions, those type of operational decisions, belong to the police based on their expertise and their discretion, correct?
04:16:43.940 Yes.
04:16:44.460 And there's nothing to suggest that the Ottawa Police Service did not exercise their discretion legitimately and in good faith in this case. Is that fair?
04:16:55.920 Fair.
04:16:57.820 The situation we've heard in Ottawa was, I'm going to use a word that we've all heard a lot in this, was a volatile one. You wouldn't disagree with that?
04:17:08.980 It was extremely volatile.
04:17:10.420 And ultimately, that situation was diffused. But you'd agree with me that diffusing a situation
04:17:18.540 like this one is something that takes time. In fact, the prime minister in a conversation with
04:17:26.540 the governor general on February 5th specifically made that point when he said it's going to take
04:17:32.940 time to diffuse this. You wouldn't disagree with that, would you? I believe that conversation was
04:17:39.120 a ways into the occupation already. So I don't think I can agree or disagree with whether or not
04:17:47.020 these things always take time. And ultimately, in addition to time, it took a massive amount
04:17:53.220 of additional resources as well, correct? It certainly did in this instance.
04:17:59.180 And those, let me just finish off my remaining minute or two.
04:18:07.740 Negotiations, you understand that before police execute a tactical operation,
04:18:13.520 they will try and diffuse a situation and try to negotiate, right?
04:18:19.020 These were things we were briefed on, yes.
04:18:20.980 And in fact, you'll recall that the Prime Minister and Minister Blair met with opposition leaders
04:18:27.620 and provided a briefing on February 10th.
04:18:31.080 And at that briefing, the National Security and Intelligence Advisor
04:18:34.900 specifically said law enforcement activities are in line with negotiations
04:18:40.960 with organizers to ensure there's no violence.
04:18:44.380 That makes sense to you, doesn't it?
04:18:46.900 Yes.
04:18:48.360 And she also indicated that Minister Blair talked about the importance
04:18:55.060 of negotiation by the police.
04:18:56.920 And you wouldn't disagree with what Minister Blair said?
04:19:01.360 No, and I believe this was the first call with the opposition leaders that was earlier on in the occupation.
04:19:06.260 Is that right?
04:19:07.340 I'm not sure if it was the first or the second.
04:19:10.140 I'm pretty sure it was the first.
04:19:12.040 Now, we talked about the engagement proposal that was prepared as a framework for negotiation.
04:19:19.560 And I understand that Deputy Minister Stewart on February 11th advised that that engagement
04:19:26.760 proposal had been prepared and validated with the OPP expert, Marcel Beaudin. Do you recall that?
04:19:34.220 I know he worked with somebody in the OPP. And in fact, Chief Slowly had earlier on
04:19:40.620 also requested an interlocutor be used as a method of achieving a breakthrough. You're aware of that?
04:19:49.900 I'm not sure. And one of the rationales, and I'll just finish off this
04:19:56.500 point, if I may, Commissioner, one of the rationales that you mentioned in your witness statement
04:20:02.880 for why the engagement proposal went nowhere was what happened in Windsor. And when I looked at
04:20:13.520 the record, there's an indication in a document that we'd seen previously. It's pbnsc.can402963.
04:20:26.500 Three, Deputy Minister Stewart said that the reason the letter from Ontario Minister Jones didn't have much effect was owing to the late hour of the day in which it was given out and the enforcement starting the next morning.
04:20:42.920 You wouldn't have any reason to disagree with that, would you?
04:20:46.820 I do believe that's what the Deputy Minister said.
04:20:50.360 Right. And after the engagement proposal was discarded as an idea, nobody went back to the police or Marcel Beaudin and said, hey, what else should we do? Is that fair?
04:21:05.980 It wasn't discarded as an idea. There was nothing to act on. I do think those are different things.
04:21:13.220 Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.
04:21:16.120 thank you if I could now ask for the CCLA please I think the commissioner is 0.95
04:21:29.940 either woefully inept or corrupt sadly I'm gonna hang in for another 20 minutes
04:21:40.280 guys for the next two good afternoon my name is Kara Zwiebel I'm counsel for the 0.96
04:21:43.900 Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Mr. Commissioner, my friend Mr. Honner from
04:21:48.640 the Democracy Fund has given me five of his minutes and he's going to limit his
04:21:52.180 questioning to five minutes so I have 15 now by my count.
04:21:56.680 Okay. So I want to ask you about a theme that my friend Mr.
04:22:03.560 Mitjikovsky was just asking you about around sort of this question about the
04:22:11.140 proper relationship between police and government um and i would imagine that as um both you know
04:22:17.460 employees in the prime minister's office and obviously residents of ottawa um it might be
04:22:22.260 difficult to sort of separate the fact that you're looking at at what's going on both from a policy
04:22:28.500 perspective but also living through it um on right you live here i don't oh you don't live
04:22:34.900 i live in toronto oh okay um so so some of you live here um um
04:22:42.420 now i i know you have access to uh to briefings from the rcmp um i'm not sure if you get if you
04:22:49.380 get uh briefings or sit in on briefings from any of the intelligence uh bodies um but i i think
04:22:57.860 we've seen some documents that also sort of show you doing a bit a bit of your own you know getting
04:23:04.100 information, as we all do, from media sources, from social media. So for example, can we pull
04:23:11.800 up SSM NSC CAN 402940? And I think, Ms. Telford, this is a text message between you and the
04:23:23.620 prime minister um i think it's a tweet from a reporter uh an admission police can this is
04:23:36.780 february 2nd at admission police cannot control the situation this is a complete mess and textbook
04:23:42.400 mismanagement they allowed the truckers to set up shop next to the pmo and west block and where
04:23:47.480 tens of thousands of people live and now realize the problem they help create unbelievable and i
04:23:52.680 I think this is the prime minister writing to you, the PPS, I think that's Parliamentary
04:23:58.140 Protective Service, RCMP guy, and caucus said as much. He said he didn't want to let them onto
04:24:02.940 Wellington, but it wasn't his call. So are you sharing this with the prime minister as just sort
04:24:10.320 of, here's what's happening on the ground, here's what people are talking about, here's what's in
04:24:15.120 the zeitgeist? In a manner of speaking, you'll find throughout a lot of the texts that I submitted
04:24:22.480 a lot of different tweets, as well as information from the prime minister's executive assistant
04:24:32.020 who lived right in center town and was keeping him posted on what it was like on the ground.
04:24:37.240 Okay. And then can we also pull up SSM CAN 407729?
04:24:52.480 i forget that they're also here but i can't really see them so um so over here uh again i think can
04:25:08.360 we just scroll down just a little bit so this is evan solomon just walked through the protest on
04:25:12.980 parliament hill tonight and i spoke to two guys carrying fuel containers past police the police
04:25:17.980 chiefs said protesters would not be allowed to bring fuel to i think that's trucks but these two
04:25:23.100 said police aren't bothering them at all no enforcement um and i i think this is you uh sorry
04:25:29.340 can we scroll up was this one of your texts no it's not actually so what you can't see there is
04:25:33.980 that also in this chat is um is the prime minister's uh executive assistant or was executive
04:25:40.380 assistant at that time okay and so that's an example of what i was just describing okay um
04:25:45.260 And can we scroll down?
04:25:47.320 So saw this type of thing happen when I left Hill,
04:25:49.620 gas coming in and cops were just standing,
04:25:52.180 looking at them walk by.
04:25:54.120 We've heard evidence in the commission
04:25:56.360 that at some point,
04:25:57.760 protestors started filling jerry cans with water
04:26:01.140 as a bit of a tactic so that it looked like the police
04:26:04.720 weren't doing anything about gas being brought in,
04:26:06.820 but in fact, it was water.
04:26:08.860 Is that something that you were aware of
04:26:10.460 or have you heard about that
04:26:12.380 during the course of the commission?
04:26:15.260 i've heard a number of things to do with the jerry cans over the course of the commission okay um
04:26:22.940 is it fair to say that what you were seeing both on social media and in the media and on the ground
04:26:28.140 here in ottawa as as residents um or part-time residents maybe um weren't sort of matching
04:26:35.740 what you were hearing from from the police from uh briefings from the rcmp
04:26:40.700 I think especially in the early days, there were a lot of different numbers coming from what we were seeing on social media, what we were seeing reported from Main Street.
04:26:53.920 Okay, guys, you know what? I honestly, I don't see anything further happening today.
04:27:00.620 I might be wrong, but Thelma from Scooby-Doo here doesn't seem to be moving in any sort of direction that's going to catch Telford in anything.
04:27:10.700 What bothers me the most, and I'm just going to take this out now.
04:27:13.720 What bothers me the most from today, I suppose, is now having having said this just now, I mean, there was some explosive confrontations this morning.
04:27:27.880 Well, one anyway, between Brendan Miller and and Christy Freeland.
04:27:34.260 It was fantastic. I will highlight that on the show tonight, which starts in just over two hours.
04:27:40.140 but this whole thing with the redactions i mean you can see look look look here it is again like
04:27:45.640 this is this is outrageous look at that look what are you supposed to do with this
04:27:51.360 the problem is that the judge has ruled that these documents need to be unredacted
04:27:59.760 and nobody has moved to do that yet so when the time comes for miller's cross-examination or
04:28:07.980 anybody else's for that matter and they want to use these documents that they are legally entitled
04:28:12.260 to use they can't because they haven't got the material in front of them so miller is left with
04:28:17.840 saying what is the same as telford well i don't know well neither do i but it must have been
04:28:23.940 relevant in some way why else would it have been submitted into uh into proof into evidence so
04:28:32.400 somebody is not playing fair here i'm not sure if it's the commissioner or somebody in the
04:28:42.700 department of justice or somebody in trudeau's office but somebody is doing something here
04:28:55.280 and it is
04:28:56.640 it's a breach of justice really and miller's got to go in there with both hands tied behind his
04:29:06.520 back and try and question a witness without any proof of what he or she said or proof that's been
04:29:13.960 so heavily redacted that he can't use it disturbing very disturbing okay so tomorrow's the final day
04:29:23.440 this whole this whole thing i have seen a lot of your comments coming in here in the last
04:29:30.360 hour saying yeah man you know i had some hope for this commission in the first five weeks in this
04:29:35.300 past few days it's just made me go wow man like these people are so corrupt they are so
04:29:41.020 corrupt and they're allowed to hide their corruption that in itself should be enough
04:29:47.620 to convince the canadian people that we need a huge change in this country
04:29:53.440 huge.
04:29:59.420 So I'll be here tomorrow morning at 8.30 Central
04:30:02.120 for the testimony, the final day,
04:30:05.400 the testimony of Justin Trudeau.
04:30:07.960 And I am certainly hoping that Mr. Miller
04:30:11.020 and attorneys from the JCCF and the CCLA
04:30:15.060 have something they can use tomorrow against him.
04:30:19.100 Or he's just going to skate like he's always done.
04:30:23.440 and then the show tonight i've got uh derrick smith i'm sorry guys i am frazzled and i'm upset
04:30:32.340 by this probably just like you and imagine how brendan miller feels right now unbelievable
04:30:39.160 so i've got derrick smith the author of one face two face black face blue face on the show tonight
04:30:45.660 he's also the author of how the prime minister stole freedom and we're going to cover a whole
04:30:51.320 bunch of stuff and there's still stuff i have yet to go over i'm going to try and squeeze in tonight
04:30:55.080 as well so i'll see you in just over two hours right here don't forget if you haven't liked this
04:31:00.840 page yet or at least follow this page go ahead and do that and go to your notifications make sure
04:31:06.200 they're on so you get notifications for when i go live i can't even tell you how many hundreds or
04:31:11.800 thousands of times i've gotten this line sent to me in an email or a message shadow i'm not getting
04:31:17.560 getting notifications anymore. Look at your notifications. Facebook sometimes goes in and
04:31:23.480 changes them on their own. And if you don't like Facebook, if you don't want to follow me on
04:31:27.740 Facebook, rumble, go follow me on rumble. If you don't follow me on rumble, then go follow me on
04:31:34.060 Twitter at shadow Davis. Okay. That's it guys. I'll talk to you in a couple of hours. Love y'all.
04:31:40.020 Sorry. I'm upset right now, but I'll be better in a couple of hours. Going to have a hot shower.
04:31:46.700 It'll feel nice.
04:31:48.180 I'll talk to you soon.
04:31:49.100 Bye for now.