Sandra Finley

Apr 072022
 

It is essential to help make Rod Cumberland known  AND to communicate support to him.

Two articles:

 

From: Sandra Finley     With some edits.
Sent: April 4, 2022
To: friendsofrodcumberland@gmail.com

Subject: Support, Rod Cumberland

 

Dear Friends of Rod Cumberland,

I am extremely grateful to you for your work in support of Rod Cumberland.

And to Rod Cumberland himself.  Words cannot tell how much.

 

ONE ANECDOTE TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL:

 

I was flying out of Saskatoon a few years ago.  The woman beside me was from Seattle.

Why had she been in Saskatoon?  . . . the company she worked for was under contract to the Saskatoon Health District to find efficiencies in its operations.  She commuted every weekend back to her home in Seattle.

 

Before we went our separate ways, this Seattleite had a perplexing observation she wished me to know.  I estimated her to be in her fifties.  She had always worked in some capacity in health care in the U.S..

NEVER in her life had she seen the concentration of children with disease (cancers, etc.) and developmental problems that she was witnessing in Saskatoon.  (Kids are sent to either Saskatoon or Regina for medical treatment, from around the province.)

 

Her comment did not surprise me.   It reinforced what I knew to be the case, from my experience working with the normalization of corruption in Canadian institutions (governmental, regulatory, university, health, research).   The stories, true and documented, that I could pass along to you would reinforce what you know to be true.

 

An old figure: one third of the agricultural chemicals sold in Canada are sold in Saskatchewan.  David Suzuki’s “Toxic Legacies” (2003) is a devastating documentary on the consequences of the ag chemicals for children.  The film is based on the work of Dr. Elizabeth Guillette from Florida State University (passed away in 2015).  I helped bring her to Saskatchewan.  One learns a lot from people like Dr. Guillette.

 

J.D Irving (the New Brunswick industrialist, info in the 2 articles) has some accounting to do.  I wish I had faith in the N.B. judiciary to deliver.   Rod Cumberland – – please know there are thousands more people standing solidly behind you.

 

New Brunswick and the Federal Govt also have on their rap sheet, the failure to protect Canadian military personnel at Camp Gagetown from the trials of Monsanto’s Agent Orange.   Another travesty.

 

Our economic prowess lies in the poisoning of ourselves and then the creation of remedial industries (big pharma, medical care).  Almost NEVER will we address removal of cause.   Stop the poisoning.  The same story is repeated over and over again.  There is always a Mr. Irving involved.   And his many courtiers.   Such betrayal of young people.

 

Movies are being made – that’s helpful.  I happened to watch “Dark Waters”, the Dupont Teflon story yesterday.  Robert F Kennedy Jr is making a big difference through the Children’s Health Defense Fund (DeWayne Johnson and Monsanto’s glyphosate).

The battles are decades in the fighting.  Rod Cumberland delivers an opportunity for a knock-down round.   With a little help from his friends!

I wish to send a contribution to your legal fund.    You have no idea how happy I will be to do that.

(It was easy through the email address, friendsofrodcumberland@gmail.com)

In case you do not know this excellent book:

A Bitter Fog: Herbicides and Human Rights

by  Carol Van Strum (Goodreads Author)

 

This book tells the story of the people who lived in those forests and became active . . . This book was written in the early 80s about the herbicide wars that took …

I would like to tell Carol Van Strum about Rod Cumberland’s continuation of  her work – – but I couldn’t find contact info for her.   A google search is interesting nonetheless.    A movie has been made.

 

I have been on this Planet for 70 plus years, and am originally from Saskatchewan.   People cannot live in good health in poisoned environments.   “A Bitter Fog” is excellent testimony.

 

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

Apr 052022
 

RECOMMEND:   the interview of Amy Bohn is most important.

If you have time for more,  listen to other parts of   Episode 261:

 

——- Original Message ——-
On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 9:07 PM, The HighWire <info@thehighwire.com> wrote:

 

 

THE HIGHWIRE INSIDERS REPORT 

 

FULL LENGTH EPISODE
EPISODE 261: CALIFORNIA SCREAMIN’
California’s 10 Tyrannical Bills; FDA Shows Cards in Booster Approval; Ex-Sky News Exec Blows Whistle on Government Censorship; V is for Vaccine; A Doc Who Wants to Defeat The Mandates

Guests: Amy Bohn, Mark Sharman, Josh Coleman, Jeffrey Barke, MD

 

INDIVIDUAL HIGHLIGHTS

 

AS CALIFORNIA GOES, SO GOES THE WORLD
THE CA LAWMAKER TARGETING OUR CHILDREN

 

CA DOCTORS SOUND THE ALARM
FDA APPROVES 5TH COVID BOOSTER

 

THE HUNTER BIDEN MEDIA COVER-UP

 

TV EXEC REVEALS SHOCKING CENSORSHIP OF MEDIA

 

 

THE SHOW NOTES ARCHIVE
EPISODE LINKS:

 

Our show airs every Thursday at 11:00 AM PST/2:00 PM EST. To keep up with breaking news and events visit our website at TheHighwire.com

 

Feb 252022
 

The previous “For your selection” emailed was   For your selection, February 09.  Stoked

Groupings:
  1.  THE RULE OF LAW

An excellent Q & A on the Constitutional Challenge launched at the end of January to the legality of the covid mandates.   

Brian Peckford (the third premier of Newfoundland, premier from March 1979 to March 1989) one of the creators of the Constitution Act 1982.  Mr. Peckford is the last surviving of the first ministers – the federal government and nine of the 10 provincial governments (all but Quebec) signed the Constitution Act 1982.

2.     ALL CANADIANS,  PAY ATTENTION!    IF YOU DO NOT KNOW THE ROLE OF KLAUS SCHWAB, THE AGA KHAN, THE WEF (WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM) AND “THE GREAT RESET” IN THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA,  READ ON:

3 pieces of evidence:

i.       2022-02-12 Where is Chrystia Freeland’s priority? Niagara Independent, Chris George

. . .   For the past three years, she has sat as a trustee on (WEF) Board. She was placed on the Board by celebrated globalist Klaus Schwab, who is principal architect of The Great Reset. As an executive member of the WEF now, Freeland is committed to advancing its global agenda and she works closely with Schwab.   . . . 

ii.    2022-01-26 Klaus Schwab: half of the Canadian Cabinet are from the “Young Global Leaders” programme of the WEF

iii.   2022-02-17 Great Reset: Trudeau Agenda.    Jason Kenney explains the Great Reset just as covid 19 pandemic was unleashed in early 2020

(Video statement by Jason Kenney:  Klaus Schwab sent  a copy of his book, “The Great Reset” to Kenney)

When asked by Canadians for Tax Fairness to participate in a survey . . .

2022-02-20 Postings re the WEF and The Great Reset (book by Klaus Schwab). It’s real and it’s who is running the Canadian Government. Letter to NGO. Traditional strategies do not work in corrupted institutions.

Trudeau’s terrible conflicts-of-interest, the Aga Khan’s island in the Bahamas, are WEF corruption:

2017-12-20 Trudeau. Aga Khan, member of the WEF. Canada’s Conflict-of-interest Commissioner Report. Federal funding $50 million in 2016 to Aga Khan. Plus $15 million.   Related to Trudeau & WEF Klaus Schwab.

And guess what?  SNC Lavalin is also part of the cozy WEF globalist “Great Reset”.   Jodi Wilson-Raybould, Canada’s Attorney General under Trudeau was thwarted from carrying out the duties of her office – – prosecution of SNC Lavalin.

https://www.weforum.org/organizations/snc-lavalin-group-inc

2022-02-22 Canadian Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland, defends the freezing of hundreds of bank accounts     (incomplete.)

 

2021-12-`17 Minister Freeland fueling an inflation fire in a house that is burning down

. . .    The federal government’s fiscal plan is unaffordable and it is irresponsible, claims the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF). The organization was quick to attack the finance ministers’ update. CTF federal director Franco Terrazzano was critical of the government’s unbridled spending that has resulted in a national debt of $1.2 trillion. He pointed out that government debt will have a serious impact on future policy options and Canadians’ prosperity.

“Years of borrowing means taxpayers will lose out on nearly $200 billion by 2027 just to pay for interest charges on Canada’s debt. That’s money we can’t use to hire more nurses or lower taxes because it’s going to bond fund managers to service the government’s debt,” said the CTF head.

“The cost of living is soaring and Canadians should be worried about how the government is going to pay for its unprecedented spending and hundreds of billions of dollars in new debt. The feds need to stop dishing out cash we don’t have and pouring fuel on the inflation fire. Freeland needs to hit the brakes on this government’s runaway spending train.”   . . .  

. . . This global body also had a grim outlook for Canada. The OECD predicts that of countries in the advanced world, Canada will be the worst performing economy over the next decade. In fact, the OECD projects Canada will be the worst performing economy of its 38 members through the next three decades to 2060. It cites Ottawa’s current monetary policy and lack of fiscal discipline as contributing factors to the country’s dismally low GDP growth projection.  

Still, in interview after interview this week, Finance Minister Freeland provided reassurances that Canada’s economic future is promising and Canadians need not worry about inflation as it is only transitory.

Two in three Canadians do not believe this. Bloomberg News released a Nanos Research poll that revealed 63.5 per cent of Canadians are unconvinced Ottawa’s policy makers – from Chrystia Freeland to Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem – will be able to rein inflation back to pre-pandemic levels. 

ABOVE THE LAW.   LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO WEF- ERS.

2022-02-07 David Martin, Stand with your Tribe. I want to make sure that we understand that our struggle is not against a government because the government is, in fact, nothing more than a facade.

 

3.        PUBLIC PRESSURE IN THE U.S. ON THE FDA & PFIZER.   NO DOUBT THE CBC TOLD YOU:    PRIZER WITHDREW ITS APPLICATION FOR EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA)  FOR ITS SHOT FOR KIDS

 

 

4.       FROM THE STREETSS

2022-02-12 Top Canadian experts in the stuff of Pandemics challenged the Top Canadian Health Officials to respectful discussion.  What happened?

2022-02-10 Freedom Convoy – Address To Canadians by Tom Morazzo

2022-02-16 Freedom Convoy:   Important Information from Lawyer Keith Wilson on Peaceful Protest.

2022-02-16 Freedom Convoy:    Addressing Trudeau’s Crackdown on Peaceful Protestors.

2022-02-14 Freedom Convoy:    A “a stash of firearms” to be planted

2022-02-11 Canada WhistleBlower Canadian Army Major Stephen Chledowski Breaks ranks and spills the truth

021-12-11 Canadian Firefighter FIRED for making this video – Peter van Oordt – Puslinch Fire & Rescue Ontario

2022-02-12 Address TO CDN POLICE by Retired OPP Officer Ed Grenier

 

2022-02-17 H of Commons VOTE MONDAY, Feb 21, 8 PM. Gov’t has unlimited Emergency Powers unless . . Bank, etc accounts can be seized. What YOU CAN DO

– – – – – –

I can’t resist!   I got a big kick out of this one!

2022-02-22   Canadians hire  U.S. consultant for a “design strategy”  to promote Canada on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. “Enhance public profile” !

 

2022-02-10 Justin Trudeau is attacking human rights, Tucker Carlson

2022-02-17 Former Blackrock Portfolio Manager, Edward Dowd, Exposes Pfizer Fraud

2022-02 We Unify Canada Youtube Channel

 

To unsubscribe, reply with Subject: unsubscribe.

Feb 252022
 

by Chris George

Minister Freeland

The Trudeau government’s lack of fiscal discipline, spurred on in no small part by Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland (pictured), contributed to the OECD’s recent projection that Canada will be the worst performing economy of its 38 members through the next three decades. Photo credit: The Canadian Press/Justin Tang

 

This week, Canadians got a glimpse of the Trudeau government plan to guide the country through our pandemic recovery period. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland provided a fiscal update that emphasized the government is prepared to spend however much it needs to meet short term COVID related issues. Freeland stated the government is delaying sharing the details of its approach to reset the country’s economy until the spring budget.

Canada’s finance minister reported that the projected budget deficit for this fiscal year is lower than expected and is now $144.5 billion. This new bottom line is a result of tens of billions of dollars of new tax revenue for Ottawa — tax money on pandemic support payments that were generously given to individuals and businesses through the initial waves of COVID in 2020.

Freeland reported that almost $30 billion of the government’s new tax windfall will be spent on enhanced payments to provinces as they brace for the fallout of the Omicron variant. The money is to be spent on things such as purchasing rapid tests, tax credits to improve air quality in workplaces, and implementing proof-of-vaccination programs.

None of this new spending relates to improving Canada’s health system – on providing necessary support for province’s hospitals and long-term care homes, or on any of the $25 billion of health care promises made by PM Justin Trudeau during the election campaign.

In fact, the finance minister’s fiscal update – which carried a price tag of $71 billion of new expenditures – did not mention any of the $78 billion of promises made by the Liberals on the hustings.

In her post-announcement interviews, Chrystia Freeland schooled those who thought she would address the Liberals’ priority issues that had prompted the mid-summer election call. She explained, “This update is what it says on the title page: It is an economic and fiscal update. This is not the master plan for the Canadian economy going forward. That will be in the budget.”

So, to recap the government’s forecasted expenditures: Freeland’s April 2021 federal budget had a $101 billion price tag attached, this update presents $71 billion of additional spending, and the government intends to introduce another $78 billion of promised programs and services in four months hence.

The federal government’s fiscal plan is unaffordable and it is irresponsible, claims the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF). The organization was quick to attack the finance ministers’ update. CTF federal director Franco Terrazzano was critical of the government’s unbridled spending that has resulted in a national debt of $1.2 trillion. He pointed out that government debt will have a serious impact on future policy options and Canadians’ prosperity.

“Years of borrowing means taxpayers will lose out on nearly $200 billion by 2027 just to pay for interest charges on Canada’s debt. That’s money we can’t use to hire more nurses or lower taxes because it’s going to bond fund managers to service the government’s debt,” said the CTF head.

“The cost of living is soaring and Canadians should be worried about how the government is going to pay for its unprecedented spending and hundreds of billions of dollars in new debt. The feds need to stop dishing out cash we don’t have and pouring fuel on the inflation fire. Freeland needs to hit the brakes on this government’s runaway spending train.”

In the House of Commons, Freeland was taken to task for her spending by Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole.

“Our country is drowning in the rising waters of debt that is being fueled by inflation and by ideological policies that are driving away investment and making Canada one of the last places people will come for their economic recovery.”

O’Toole summed up the fiscal plan as another Liberal statement of “empty promises, massive debt, higher taxes and no real economic plan.”

MP Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative finance critic, homed in on what this spending means for individual Canadians.

“A half-trillion dollars of inflationary deficits mean more money chasing fewer goods driving higher prices. Housing and gas are up a third, so youth can’t afford to get to work or buy a home. And families can’t afford the extra $1000 it will cost to feed themselves next year. Instead of reversing this high-cost, high-inflation agenda, today the government announced yet another $71 billion of inflationary spending, costing nearly $5000 for every family in Canada.”

Two separate economic reports recently released provide reason to worry about the Trudeau government’s spending. Juxtapose Freeland’s fiscal plan with the Statistics Canada consumer price index (CPI) data that indicates the official inflationary number is 4.7 per cent year-over-year. That “official number” Canadians are told is the highest rate of inflation in 30 years. The Statistics Canada release noted that inflation is running higher than wage increases, “which means the purchasing power of Canadians has diminished.”

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development stated in an international press release that inflation is the prime concern for the global economic outlook in 2022 and 2023. The OECD commented: “The main risk, however, is that inflation continues to surprise on the upside, forcing the major central banks to tighten monetary policy earlier and to a greater extent than projected.” (That translates to hikes to interest rates in the near future.)

This global body also had a grim outlook for Canada. The OECD predicts that of countries in the advanced world, Canada will be the worst performing economy over the next decade. In fact, the OECD projects Canada will be the worst performing economy of its 38 members through the next three decades to 2060. It cites Ottawa’s current monetary policy and lack of fiscal discipline as contributing factors to the country’s dismally low GDP growth projection.

Still, in interview after interview this week, Finance Minister Freeland provided reassurances that Canada’s economic future is promising and Canadians need not worry about inflation as it is only transitory.

Two in three Canadians do not believe this. Bloomberg News released a Nanos Research poll that revealed 63.5 per cent of Canadians are unconvinced Ottawa’s policy makers – from Chrystia Freeland to Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem – will be able to rein inflation back to pre-pandemic levels.

Essentially, it will come down to fiscal discipline surmises Scott Clark, a former deputy minister of finance. This week Clark gave Freeland some unsolicited advice in a media interview. He was remarking on the massive government debt and the prospect of an additional $78 billion of promises in the spring budget, “You just have to say: ‘We can’t do this right now’. You have to set priorities. No-one is going to hate her for that — she’s just doing her job.” But then, Clark frankly assessed, “I don’t think the government has the willpower to do it.”

Given the government’s fiscal update and the OECD forecast for our Canadian economic future, Clark’s assessment seems accurate. It is hard not to conclude that Chrystia Freeland is fueling an inflation fire in a house that is burning down.

chris george

Chris George is an advocate, government relations advisor, and writer/copy editor. As president of a public relations firm established in 1994, Chris provides discreet counsel, tactical advice and management skills to CEOs/Presidents, Boards of Directors and senior executive teams in executing public and government relations campaigns and managing issues. Prior to this PR/GR career, Chris spent seven years on Parliament Hill on staffs of Cabinet Ministers and MPs. He has served in senior campaign positions for electoral and advocacy campaigns at every level of government. Today, Chris resides in Almonte, Ontario where he and his wife manage www.cgacommunications.comContact Chris at chrisg.george@gmail.com.

Feb 252022
 

from The Canadian Encyclopedia

re  Canada:  Constitution Act, 1982

Editorial: Newfoundland’s Contribution to the Patriation of the Constitution

NOTE:  2022 Freedom Convoy, Constitutional Law.  Brian Peckford is the

In the decades since 1982, politicians and the media have recounted the same story about the patriation of Canada’s constitution and the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Most of the credit in this version goes to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. Three others are credited with breaking an impasse in the 1981 negotiations: federal justice minister Jean Chrétien, Saskatchewan attorney general Roy Romanow, and Ontario attorney general Roy McMurtry. But in his memoirs, former Newfoundland PremierBrian Peckford argues that the key intervention in the patriation process came from Peckford and the members of the Newfoundland delegation.

Brian Peckford, politician

Former Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford.The long-accepted narrative goes like this. In the early 1980s, Pierre Trudeau was determined to create a charter of rights and a procedure that would allow Canada to amend (change) its constitution without Britain’s permission. Eight provincial premiers (all but those from Ontario and New Brunswick) opposed Trudeau’s plan. They formed the Gang of Eight to advance their own decentralized vision of Canada. (See also Federalism; Federal-Provincial Relations.) After failing to come to an agreement with the provinces, Trudeau decided to proceed without them. However, the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Patriation Reference case persuaded him to come back to the table.

According to this version of history, the decisive moment came during a federal-provincial conference in November 1981. The deadlock between Ottawa and the provinces was broken when Chrétien, Romanow and McMurtry ducked into an unused kitchen pantry at the Ottawa Conference Centre. There they reached a compromise, which journalists called the “Kitchen Accord.” Seen as the backbone of the new constitution, the agreement provided for a charter of rights and a notwithstanding clause; it would allow legislatures to exempt laws from the charter’s terms. The accord also included a provision that the constitution could be amended with the approval of the federal government and two-thirds (seven) of the provinces representing at least 50 per cent of the Canadian population. This was called the 7/50 rule.

kitchen-accord-page-one

Kitchen Accord – Page 1

Page 1 of the Kitchen Accord, drafted in the kitchen of the National Conference Centre in Ottawa on 4 November 1981 by Jean Chrétien, Roy Romanow and Roy McMurtry.

(courtesy Library and Archives Canada / MIKAN no. 3912723)

However, in his 2012 memoir Some Day the Sun Will Shine and Have Not Will Be No More, Brian Peckford provides documentation to support his claim that the patriation package of 1981 evolved from a Newfoundland proposal and not from the kitchen accord. In Peckford’s account, he prepared a formal document in a meeting with delegates from several provinces. It was revised during the night of 4 November 1981, hours after the creation of the kitchen accord. The next morning, Peckford presented the agreement to the federal-provincial conference. The federal government and all the provinces except Quebec agreed to the package. With a few changes, it became Canada’s constitution.

Peckford’s account brought long-needed balance to the story. The patriation process was highly complex. Several individuals played pivotal roles. To credit only Trudeau, Chrétien, Romanow and McMurtry is to miss a large part of what happened. Many politicians and officials were present on the night of 4 November 1981 in the Chateau Laurier suite of Saskatchewan Premier Allan Blakeney. There, six provinces accepted a revised version of Peckford’s plan. Few of the participants in that historic meeting even knew about the kitchen accord.

kitchen-accord-page-two

Kitchen Accord – Page 2

Page 2 of the Kitchen Accord, drafted in the kitchen of the National Conference Centre in Ottawa on 4 November 1981 by Jean Chrétien, Roy Romanow and Roy McMurtry.

(courtesy Library and Archives Canada / MIKAN no. 3912723)

This is not to say that the kitchen accord was unimportant. It might not have had any direct effect on Newfoundland or many of the other provincial delegations. But it was essential in altering the positions of Ontario and the federal government. Chrétien and McMurtry had devised an agreement that would include a notwithstanding clause to limit the force of a new charter of rights. Chrétien began to push Trudeau to accept such a deal, unknowingly preparing him for the Peckford proposal. Ontario had also come to a place where it would accept what the Newfoundland premier put forward. It was Romanow, through the kitchen accord, and not Peckford, who had forged an agreement with the governments of Canada and Ontario.

Brian Peckford deserves considerable credit for our constitution, alongside Trudeau, Chrétien, Romanow and McMurtry. Also important were Howard Leeson and Peter Meekison, the ministers of intergovernmental relations for Saskatchewan and Alberta, respectively. Countless other unelected officials who shunned the spotlight have been largely ignored in the history books.

People like simple stories, and the media and politicians oblige. Yet there was nothing simple about our constitutional drama of 1981.

See also: Constitution of Canada; Constitutional History; Constitutional Law; Constitution Act, 1867; Constitution Act, 1867 Document; Statute of Westminster; Editorial: Statute of Westminster, Canada’s Declaration of Independence; Constitution Act, 1982; Constitution Act, 1982 Document; Patriation of the Constitution; Editorial: The Canadian Constitution Comes Home.

Feb 252022
 

The declaration of a public order emergency will be seen as a grave mistake that should never be repeated

Article content

By Christine Van Geyn, Sujit Choudhry and Janani Shanmuganathan

The federal cabinet has revoked the proclamation of a public order emergency, as Justin Trudeau announced on Wednesday. But the prime minister will still need to answer in court for his illegal and unconstitutional decision to invoke the Emergencies Act.

 

On Feb. 23, the Canadian Constitution Foundation filed an urgent application for judicial review of the government’s decision to invoke this extraordinary piece of legislation. This application will still proceed because it is imperative this legislation receive scrutiny the first time it is used, especially when the circumstances of its use are so questionable.

 

The Emergencies Act gives the federal cabinet the exceptional powers to unilaterally proclaim a public order emergency. After the federal cabinet proclaims a public order emergency, vast legislative authority is delegated to the cabinet. This authority encompasses the power to create new criminal offences and police powers, without recourse to Parliament, advance notice or public debate.

 

The prime minister will still need to answer in court

In this case, the government enacted measures to limit assembly, direct people to assist the RCMP with towing vehicles, and require banks to disclose otherwise private banking information to the police. The measures captured a broad range of conduct that carried with it the threat of fine or imprisonment. In his announcement ending the public order emergency, the prime minister made it clear that any enforcement measures from when the act was invoked will continue. These are extraordinary powers, and when the Emergencies Act was enacted in 1988, it was designed to ensure that the abuses under its predecessor, the War Measures Act, never happened again. The War Measures Act was used during the Second World War to intern Japanese Canadians and Italian Canadians, and was abused during the FLQ crisis in Quebec in 1970. This is a dark and troubled history we need to remember when considering the context in which the Emergencies Act was drafted and the conditions under which it can be invoked.

 

Every provision of the Emergencies Act is designed with the intent of limiting the federal cabinet’s power to declare an emergency to only those situations where it is absolutely necessary, to grant to the cabinet only the powers it needs to deal with that particular emergency, and for the powers to exist only as long as the emergency exists.

 

The federal cabinet did not have reasonable grounds for concluding there was a public order emergency that justified invoking the Emergencies Act, no matter how challenging and difficult it perceived the ongoing protests to be. Invoking the Emergencies Act was not absolutely necessary, as the law requires. Federal, provincial and municipal law enforcement already had all of the legal tools and authorities they needed to respond to the protests, and their perceived failure to effectively respond does not mean that the government was authorized to invoke the Emergencies Act. These are the tools that the prime minister has said are now capable of addressing any ongoing or re-emerging issues. The stringent conditions set by the Emergencies Act for declaring a public order emergency were clearly not met.

Protests aren’t emergencies, even if the protests are disruptive and even if the protests have illegal elements. Politicians and police must handle civil disobedience using the laws they have available to them rather than invoking emergency legislation whose criteria they do not meet and which has a dark history of abuse.

 

Additionally, the government will need to defend that the emergency measures they enacted were compliant with the Charter. There has been much punditry about the fact that the Emergencies Act is subject to the Charter. Which is, of course, true. All statutes, orders and regulations are subject to Canada’s Constitution. However, this does not mean that the government always acts in a way that is compliant with the Charter. In this case, the emergency measures violated the right to free assembly, the right to be free from unreasonable search, and the right to liberty. These violations are not minimally impairing and are not justified infringements, especially given that they have are continued even after the protests have cleared.

 

The interpretation of the Emergencies Act by the courts will be historic, and the declaration of a public order emergency will be seen as a grave mistake that should never be repeated again.

 

Special to National Post

Christine Van Geyn is the Litigation Director for the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF), one of the organizations challenging Prime Minister Trudeau’s invocation of the Emergencies Act. Sujit Choudhry is a constitutional lawyer and scholar, and Janani Shanmuganathan is a criminal defence lawyer, and they are representing the CCF in this case.

Feb 222022
 

Protesters Sue For Gov’t Files

A band of Freedom Convoy protesters is in Federal Court demanding cabinet disclose documents justifying Emergencies Act police powers. The crackdown including the freezing of trucking companies’ bank accounts was politically motivated, lawyers wrote the Court: “There is no national emergency.”

Feb 222022
 

Western Standard

A total 208 accounts worth $3.8 million have been frozen under an Emergencies Act order, by official estimate.

The Liberals say their freezing of bank accounts of some Freedom Convoy supporters is justified because they are narrow and focused,” says Blacklock’s Reporter. But one Liberal-appointed senator, a former banker, complained the

Feb 222022
 

Eight days ago, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau employed the never-before-used Emergencies Act to crackdown on peaceful protesters in Ottawa who were in Canada’s capital for nearly four weeks as part of a nationwide convoy movement in opposition to remaining COVID-19 restrictions.

The Act gives the government extraordinary powers to arrest demonstrators and seize assets, trucks, and bank accounts of those involved in anti-government protests.

The plan to distract from the Emergencies Act, first reported by Blacklock’s Reporter Monday morning, coincided with mainstream media skepticism of the Trudeau Liberals’ use of the Act.

The scheme involves a payment of $36,000 to a U.S. consultant S-3 Group LLC of Cortland, New York to “design a strategy” to promote Canada on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The firm must “enhance the public profile of the work done at the Embassy of Canada and consulates in various territories across the United States.”

S-3 Group LLC has its work cut out for them.

Nearly 300 peaceful protesters were arrested and two people were trampled on Friday night as riot control horses rode into a crowd of demonstrators, breaking the collarbone of a Mohawk elder who was using a walker.

At least two journalists — Alexa Lavoie and Guillaume Roy, both of Rebel News — were pepper-sprayed by police as the weeks-long protest was euthanized by the authorities.

Alexa was also shot at point-blank range by a riot control gun and struck three times with a baton by police Saturday morning. Her assault was caught in her livestream broadcast to Twitter and watched by hundreds of thousands of people.

Rebel News is helping Alexa sue the Ottawa police for her assault.

Feb 222022
 

by Canadian Press

Saskatchewan is considering a legal challenge of the federal government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act to try to end blockades in Ottawa protesting COVID-19 vaccine mandates and other pandemic restrictions.

A spokeswoman for Premier Scott Moe says in a statement that the province has not ruled out legal recourse.  . . .

The Saskatchewan Party government says it is evaluating what effects the Emergencies Act could have in the province.

Moe has been opposed to the law since provincial leaders were consulted about it last week.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has said his United Conservative government will file a court challenge of the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act.

The Government of Saskatchewan shares the position of other provinces that the criteria to enact the federal Emergencies Act has not been met,” Julie Leggott, press secretary to Moe, said in the statement.

“Saskatchewan is carefully evaluating the impact of the unilateral invocation of the Emergencies Act, despite the province’s clear opposition to its application in Saskatchewan during consultation.

“At this time, legal recourse is under consideration and has not been ruled out.”