• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Trudeau justified in using the Emergency Measures Act?

Was the Emergency Measures Act needed?


  • Total voters
    78

Allan

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
27,783
Reaction score
31,978
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm interested in what people think of PM Trudeau invoking provisions of the Emergency Measures Act to deal with protests in Ottawa. If you want to read the provisions of the Act before you vote it can be viewed here.

I've left the poll choices visible because I'd like to see how Canadians vote, but everyone please feel free to weigh in with your opinion and vote.
 
I'd say that when its a large group of people, truckers in this instance, that purposefully block public roads and crossings in order to wreak havoc and inconvenience other people and also hurt commerce and normal business, then its not really a "protest", its domestic coercion. You can tolerate so much of that, and then eventually it has to end.
The authorities in the USA should have been far harsher on the domestic black supremacy riots of BLM, imo. Lots of people were ruined by that, it was even way worse than Ottawa imo.
Ya gotta have law and order, and ya gotta have your roadways and border crossings etc open. Do whatever it takes. This "cause" is dumb to begin with. ffs people.

*edit: voted yes
 
I'm interested in what people think of PM Trudeau invoking provisions of the Emergency Measures Act to deal with protests in Ottawa. If you want to read the provisions of the Act before you vote it can be viewed here.

I've left the poll choices visible because I'd like to see how Canadians vote, but everyone please feel free to weigh in with your opinion and vote.

After a quick reading of the law and while stating I am not a lawyer my assessment is a follows:

- Blocking of the bridge between the U.S. and Canada may be a close call for allowing of this emergency measure.

- Blocking some streets in Ottawa does not seem to me to allow for this measure to be used.
 
I'm interested in what people think of PM Trudeau invoking provisions of the Emergency Measures Act to deal with protests in Ottawa. If you want to read the provisions of the Act before you vote it can be viewed here.

I've left the poll choices visible because I'd like to see how Canadians vote, but everyone please feel free to weigh in with your opinion and vote.
I'm just curious why you didn't try and work with them? He made no attempt to hear and understand the trucker's side if you can't do that you have no business leading a country.

Instead he labeled them extremists and then pursued to take extreme actions against them.

I'm left scratching my head. This protest wasn't violent in with the truckers wanted didn't even seen that unreasonable
 
I chose other because while the protest was obviously a large inconvenience, I would have really liked for Trudeau to actually have addressed the situation in the first week and try to come to an agreement. Instead, IMO it's like he laughed off the capability of those people to make a stand and that's what allowed it to continue growing. And then when everything was spiraling out of his control he had to take a heavy handed approach. I mentioned probably two weeks ago that I've never had any opinion of him either way, but now I'm firm that he failed on this miserably.
 
I won't screw up your poll by voting, but without freezing some of the organizers' accounts, how were they going to cut off supplies and get the protesters to leave? I guess actually, they're clearing them out without cutting supplies like food, fuel and hotel rooms. But probably they're dealing with a much smaller crowd because of the frozen funds. It does seem like a lot of accounts have been frozen, though--76? And officials say there are more to come. I don't think it should be used as a punishment, but as a strategy to end the occupation only.
 
I'm a no and I think it will be quite a stain on Canada going forth. I think Canada has an all new (and quite unbecoming) look to it - not unlike Australia, which I think also has a new image due the last couple years. A few weeks ago, I didn't think Canada had gone nearly as far as Australia has - but in the last few weeks, I think Canada ran right past Australia and took a big lead in the authoritarian government race.
 
Seems this applies> Especially 17---(2)....(c) RED

Declaration of a Public Order Emergency​

Marginal note OFDeclaration of a public order emergency

  • 17 (1) When the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, that a public order emergency exists and necessitates the taking of special temporary measures for dealing with the emergency, the Governor in Council, after such consultation as is required by section 25, may, by proclamation, so declare.
  • Marginal note:Contents
    (2) A declaration of a public order emergency shall specify
    • (a) concisely the state of affairs constituting the emergency;
    • (b) the special temporary measures that the Governor in Council anticipates may be necessary for dealing with the emergency; and
    • (c) if the effects of the emergency do not extend to the whole of Canada, the area of Canada to which the effects of the emergency.
  • AND>>>>>In RED
  • Orders and Regulations​

    Marginal note:Orders and regulations
    • 19(1) While a declaration of a public order emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
      • (a) the regulation or prohibition of
        • (i) any public assembly that may reasonably be expected to lead to a breach of the peace,
 
I'm a no and I think it will be quite a stain on Canada going forth. I think Canada has an all new (and quite unbecoming) look to it - not unlike Australia, which I think also has a new image due the last couple years. A few weeks ago, I didn't think Canada had gone nearly as far as Australia has - but in the last few weeks, I think Canada ran right past Australia and took a big lead in the authoritarian government race.
How is this different than large riots that have occurred here, or the FLQ crisis? We survived all that.
 
What Trudea did amounts to driving a thumbtack into a cork board using a sledgehammer.

It would be like sending troops to our southern border and deterring illegal crossings by using live ammo on the invaders.
 
What Trudea did amounts to driving a thumbtack into a cork board using a sledgehammer.

It would be like sending troops to our southern border and deterring illegal crossings by using live ammo on the invaders.
Where have we heard that before?


:unsure:
 
I'm interested in what people think of PM Trudeau invoking provisions of the Emergency Measures Act to deal with protests in Ottawa. If you want to read the provisions of the Act before you vote it can be viewed here.

I've left the poll choices visible because I'd like to see how Canadians vote, but everyone please feel free to weigh in with your opinion and vote.
I'm going to reply to your thread title, not your poll question.

Canadians seemed to overwhelmingly support the government's position while the protesters announced their demands were unconditional, so the answer seems to be he was "justified" in the social sense of the word, but in the historical sense, he setup a hasty precedent which seems ominous.
 
I'm going to reply to your thread title, not your poll question.

Canadians seemed to overwhelmingly support the government's position while the protesters announced their demands were unconditional, so the answer seems to be he was "justified" in the social sense of the word, but in the historical sense, he setup a hasty precedent which seems ominous.
It's not quite a precedent. His father did a similar thing to deal with the FLQ. In that situation the War Measures Act was used to put troops in the streets and arrest hundreds of people, most of whom were never charged with a crime. This Act replaced the War Measures Act because many people thought Pierre Trudeau misused his authority.

Justin's reputation may be tarnished forever for this. I already don't like him so my opinion won't change but it may very well be that the current Act is reviewed in the future to find a way to prevent its misuse.
 
I'd say that when its a large group of people, truckers in this instance, that purposefully block public roads and crossings in order to wreak havoc and inconvenience other people and also hurt commerce and normal business, then its not really a "protest", its domestic coercion. You can tolerate so much of that, and then eventually it has to end.
The authorities in the USA should have been far harsher on the domestic black supremacy riots of BLM, imo. Lots of people were ruined by that, it was even way worse than Ottawa imo.
Ya gotta have law and order, and ya gotta have your roadways and border crossings etc open. Do whatever it takes. This "cause" is dumb to begin with. ffs people.

*edit: voted yes
This in a nutshell. The protests became coercive and unlawful and at that point emergency powers were justified.
 
It's not quite a precedent. His father did a similar thing to deal with the FLQ. In that situation the War Measures Act was used to put troops in the streets and arrest hundreds of people, most of whom were never charged with a crime. This Act replaced the War Measures Act because many people thought Pierre Trudeau misused his authority.

Justin's reputation may be tarnished forever for this. I already don't like him so my opinion won't change but it may very well be that the current Act is reviewed in the future to find a way to prevent its misuse.
The FLQ kidnapped a premier and diplomat. These protestors were peaceful instead.
 
I vote "No." This was not the Free Quebec movement killing government officials and setting off car bombs in crowded population centers. Such measures are not necessary and should not be used when dealing with non-violent civil disobedience in a law-governed democracy. By all mean, arrest the protesters blocking the roads and if they refuse to move their vehicles have them held in civil contempt to the tune of thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. But there is no need to suspend civil rights or order people to be unbanked in order for order to be restored.
 
The FLQ kidnapped a premier and diplomat. These protestors were peaceful instead.
Yes they were very different situations. But Pierre Trudeau still took heat for this response. In this case the situation is orders of magnitude less serious and again I think the public view is going to be similar - overreach.
 
How is this different than large riots that have occurred here, or the FLQ crisis? We survived all that.
For better or worse our gov has not been nearly as heavy handed as either Australia or Canada.
 
Trudeau and his liberal brown shirts don't just want to restore order, they want to punish protestors, freeze their bank accounts, suspend their licenses, and destroy their lives. Further, anyone financially chipping in $10 for the cause are targets of doxxing and harassment as well as frozen accounts and destroyed lives.

America: This is who liberals are both here and in Canada. Never forget.
 
I saw no police spraying them with gas or fire hoses, no beating with batons, etc, like they did here during BLM protests and they've been blocking roads for awhile now. Some accounts were frozen because of funding from people on Canada's terrorist list.

This whole thing was started by a QAnon guy, who was anti vax and fueled on FB by foreigners. I'm not sure what they all found but enough to justify this outcome. I heard 90% of their truckers have the vaccine already. Seems like a mountain made from a molehill to me.

When is it starting in America? FOX seems pumped for it!!
 
I vote "No." This was not the Free Quebec movement killing government officials and setting off car bombs in crowded population centers. Such measures are not necessary and should not be used when dealing with non-violent civil disobedience in a law-governed democracy. By all mean, arrest the protesters blocking the roads and if they refuse to move their vehicles have them held in civil contempt to the tune of thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. But there is no need to suspend civil rights or order people to be unbanked in order for order to be restored.
I can respect that, but the protests that involved explicitly illegal disruptions and other like activities absolutely had to go.
 
Back
Top Bottom