‘What emergency exists today?’ Senators ask for more details on government’s need for special powers

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 21/02/2022 (1039 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Ahead of a crucial vote in the Senate on whether to confirm the government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, senators lamented that they’ve been kept in the dark about the ongoing need for the unprecedented measure.

Debate on the declaration of emergency kicked off in the upper chamber Tuesday with senators expressing concern about when a parliamentary committee will be struck to provide oversight of the declaration, and the limitations on information that would be provided.

“There’s no blockades today. What emergency exists today that convinces the government hour by hour that this has to continue?” said Sen. Scott Tannas in a question to government representative Sen. Marc Gold.

“What emergency exists today, other than some secret emergency that you can’t tell anybody about and our oversight committee won’t get to know about either?”

The federal government invoked the Emergencies Act for the first time in history Feb. 14 to deal with the weeks-long occupation in Ottawa by so-called Freedom Convoy protesters and blockades at border crossings. The protesters, who objected to COVID-19 vaccination requirements and pandemic-related public health restrictions, have now been cleared and ports of entry are open for trade and travel.

However, the government still needs the Senate to sign off on its declaration of an emergency. If the motion to approve it fails, the declaration will be revoked immediately. A vote is expected later this week.

A motion confirming the declaration passed in the House of Commons Monday evening in a 185-151 vote with the New Democrats voting in support of the Liberal minority government.

It’s not so clear how the Senate will vote, given that most members of the upper chamber are not affiliated with a political party and the Senate groups allow free votes. Two Senate leaders, Raymonde Saint-Germain of the Independent Senators Group and Jane Cordy of the Progressive Senate Group, said Tuesday they would support the declaration.

Gold found himself on his feet repeatedly Tuesday, responding to senators who argued they lacked access to information on the ongoing security situation.

“Are we not creating a dangerous precedent for the future?” asked Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne. “Could this exceptional law be invoked again solely on the basis of secret information, which obviously would be difficult to accept in a democracy?”

Sen. Elizabeth Marshall said it seemed like the federal government went from doing nothing at the beginning of the convoy protests to taking the “big step” of invoking the act.

“We’ve received general explanations as to the thought process that went into invoking the act,” she said, pressing Gold for specifics. “This is a serious step we’re contemplating here today. What exactly happened that the government decided to invoke the act?”

Gold reiterated throughout the day that there is plenty of information on the public record as to why the government invoked the act and feels that the declaration must remain in place for now. This includes protesters remaining in the vicinity of Ottawa, the possibility of new border blockades, and ongoing police investigations.

“The government is not relying upon a ‘Trust me, I know things you don’t know’ approach,” Gold said.

But his colleagues demanded to know why there would be limitations on the sensitive information that could be shared with a joint House-Senate committee that must be created to review the exercise of powers under the declaration. The committee would be able to revoke any order or regulation made under the declaration.

Gold said the committee would not have the required clearance to review confidential security information, in response to a question from Sen. Dennis Patterson.

“There is a certain amount of ‘trust us’ in the government’s justification for these extreme measures we are debating today,” said Patterson, who recently left the Conservative Senate caucus over that party’s support for the protests.

He later added in the debate: “I’m still really concerned about how you can have serious oversight unless you have access to all the relevant information, and I’m sorry, ‘trusting us’ is not good enough for me and probably not for many Canadians.”

Sen. Jim Quinn, who worked for decades with the Coast Guard, noted that “it’s very difficult, having worked in emergency situations in another life, to not be able to have access to all that vital information to help the decision-making process.”

A motion creating the committee needs to be passed in both chambers, and the House of Commons is off until next week. Government House Leader Mark Holland tweeted Monday that he’s had “productive discussions” on the committee’s membership, but offered no timeline for when it would be in place.

“This is extraordinarily important and we are a week or more into the application of the declaration of emergency and we do not have a committee in place,” said Sen. Frances Lankin. “I would have thought it would be up and running now.”

Lankin said she hoped the committee would be created and ready to get to work immediately by the time the Senate votes on the declaration of emergency.

Jacques Gallant is a Toronto-based reporter covering politics for the Star. Follow him on Twitter: @JacquesGallant