Letter contained inaccuracies about Canada’s Prime Minister
By Lethbridge Herald on April 21, 2022.
Editor:
Mr. Yeoman wrote that Prime Minister Trudeau did not get a good reception to his recent speech to the European Parliament – in fact even that “outspoken parliamentarians denounced him.”
This is opposite to the truth. It was reported that he got a standing ovation and the couple of detractors were political extremists upset with the Prime Minister for cracking down on the truck convoys in Ottawa and elsewhere in Canada.
Yeoman’s claim that our Prime Minister basically just wants power is perilously akin to the Fox “News” silly notion that our Prime Minister is a dictator.
Unlike the U.S. system, the Canadian parliamentary system has “responsible government” where the federal cabinet is responsible to the House of Commons. Cabinet committees discuss things before they go to cabinet and only then usually to the full House of Commons.
No political party or leader is perfect but our Prime Minister has done a good job on the major issues of the day including addressing climate change and dealing with the COVID pandemic.
Contrary to Mr. Yeoman’s view, my MLA Shannon Phillips is also a very competent legislator.
Every Parliament needs a good Official Opposition. Unfortunately the federal Tories are a confused bunch.
While many are decent Canadians, there is a big loud chunk of them who are Trump Tories. In a poll taken after the 2021 federal Tory policy conference, shockingly almost half the Tories polled supported Trump over Biden for U.S. President.
Our provincial Tories are likewise in a big mess. Alberta families don’t deserve either.
Ken Kyle
Lethbridge
13-12
if you watched his “standing ovation” on live video you would realize that the 10% left of the people remaining in the audience were standing and leaving the assembly with no one clapping. So the standing ovation was a media blurb from Trudeau controlled media
Your paranoid bleating will eventually catch up to you.
Hey loser what’s up?
So who’s the loser when you fools are backing a Liberal turned Reformer that 75% of Albertans want kicked out of office. Apparently you don’t care that he has never been a true Conservative but don’t worry the true Conservatives have someone to give them a good laugh, thanks.
If I have learned anything from lawyers , you had better have concrete proof before making any sarcastic remarks at anyone. Can you prove your remarks? I doubt it.
Retired lawyers in the Edmonton area have been warning seniors to stop repeating the stupid lies Jason Kenney has been feeding them, and that includes ones that he has hurled at Trudeau, or you could find yourselves in court trying to prove them. You don’t know who is out there, who has a bone to pick with what these politicians have done to them, or their families, and if it looks like you are supporting them watch out. My senior friends and I think it is good advise.
One of their major concerns was for anyone to repeat the lies Kenney has spread about Notley when Notley is a lawyer with lots of lawyer friends including them.
go home
I am not a Trudeau fan but I saw what Ken pointed out. So lets stop creating these lies, like Kenney wants us to do, about a guy that has saved our province, whether we like it or not. If you don’t think pouring an extra $30 billion into Alberta didn’t save us wake up.
In addition watching these fools going around making sarcastic remarks about some of the antics Trudeau has displayed , like black-face, while they ignore the stupidity of Ralph Klein certainly makes them look really stupid.
I realize we; the people are supposed to have some degree of respect for our “leaders.” I know we are supposed to call Mr. Trudeau; “The Right Honorable Prime Minister.” I apologize but I just can’t do it. I have tried, but am unable to find anything “right or honorable” about what he has done. No one is perfect, the job is yes complex. So I ask myself when is enough, enough?
When do we say; one ethics violations is too much, never mind three, when do we say; black face is unacceptable;… period no excuses, when do we say; no more government scandals like; SNC-Lavalin, or The WE charity scandal ( that we will never answers for), when do we say “the economy taking care of itself or fixing itself, will probably not happen, when do we say no more corporate welfare ie Loblaws refrigeration scandal, Bombardier etc.
When do we say 33% 0f the vote is not enough to form a government?
I agree the PC’s both Federally and Provincially (UCP) have been their own worst enemies due to the incessant back stabbing and infighting. It seems like we are constantly watching a Shakespearean play and that the real quest for political power has not changed for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years in all governments.
It appears we may be getting hung up on semantics, on the definition of dictator. Most understand the definition and no;
Mr. Trudeau has not conducted the evil activities that so many of the real dictators found in countries such as China and Cuba conduct on a daily basis. Mr. Trudeau has repetitively, admitted his admiration, for these people and their style of government.
https://youtu.be/0mJLZweiNDE
He has repetitively and proudly admitted his admiration for these tyrannical dictators who appear to have absolutely no respect for human rights and human life.
How could anyone be surprised he gets described as dictatorial; when his first response in dealing with the Trucker Convoy after coming out of hiding; was to impose the illegal and unconstitutional Emergency Act. It certainly provides and indication of how his mind works, when there are those openly opposing his policies. I wonder who and what may his next targets?
Fortunately the Canadian Senate was aware enough to realize, the Emergency Act could not be imposed into law.
https://youtu.be/WO_NMu9ZOTU
https://youtu.be/C2NKCBqfWFA
Perhaps instead we should ask ourselves whether the definition of “democracy” has changed or is changing subtlety around us.
It just, sure seems democracy in Canada today does not feel like it used to.
No, Mr. Trudeau has not silenced the media. He has bought the media, and new proposed legislation will dictate who can become his chosen media source or may become considered a journalist; as well as possibly eliminate free speech and the expression of any dissenting viewpoints other than his.
No he did not imprison, create Gulags or Re-education camps. Instead he illegally froze the bank accounts of those who disagreed with him. And no he did not get a standing ovation during the EU speeches. You can find numerous real media clips regarding this on You Tube and I suspect Facebook or Twitter (which I do not pay attention to). Main stream Canadian media did not present the accurate event. Some may consider this to be dictatorial like.
Please consider viewing the You Tube videos.
Respectfully,
Les Elford
Respectfully Les, you can find whatever you want to believe in on “Youtube” if you go searching.
After all these years do you still have N.E.P trauma?
“Those were the days my friend
We thought they’d never end”.
(three cubicles down and one over, tsbh)
Actually, you don’t really have to go searching on YouTube. Like Facebook, the algorithms used by YouTube track your views and feed you more of the same. The profit-based objective is to keep as many eyeballs in play as possible, but it also feeds confirmation bias.
Please explain why the Emergencies Act is illegal and unconstitutional?
Sir:
I am not aware of the intricacy of law. Following this overreach of power, I attempted to become more informed. I was most curious of the government’s reaction. Since after doing nothing about this well advertised protest for weeks, the final reaction was most curious indeed.
Consequently I began to seek out specific information pertaining to the legality of having average Canadian citizen’s assets frozen.
Please consider the following as just a sampling of articles written regarding this subject from reputable news sources and people who probably know the law.
https://lawoffojo.substack.com/p/justin-trudeaus-illegal-power-grab
https://www.newsweek.com/opinion
https://theccf.ca/why-were-still-suing-the-trudeau-government-over-its-use-of-the-emergencies-act
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/goldstein-the-legal-case-against-trudeaus-use-of-the-emergencies-act
https://capforcanada.com/justin-trudeau-attempts-totalitarian-style-crackdown-with-emergency-act/
Respectfully;
Les Elford
Thanks for your reply, and although you did not answer my question it was instructive, especially your first sentence.
So, to be clear, you may think that the situation in Ottawa did not meet the legal standard set out in the Emergencies Act for its invocation. And to quote my late father: “You are free to shout that opinion from the top of the barn until milking time”; but you stated the legislation is illegal and unconstitutional, which it clearly is not.
You are correct, we are all free to form our own opinions (thankfully). Obviously I guess we disagree. You asked, I respectfully answered. I am sorry you don’t agree with these objective third party opinions. So to be clear; I am forming my opinion on objective third party legal and constitutional experts.
The Emergency Act was never passed into law by the Senate
My simple understanding of this fact, leads me to believe; yes, it is illegal; as the legal experts previously referred to indicate.
To think anything else would in fact reinforce the concept that the Prime Minister is enacting dictatorial- like actions on the common people of Canada as the Prime Minister would have enacted something never consider legal by the Senate.
If I understand what you are stating correctly; you believe the Emergency Act is/was legal. Can you please tell me objectively and factually how /why you believe that? If there is something I am missing, I would be more than willing to listen.
Respectfully;
Les Elford
The Emergencies Act, which replaced the War Measures Act (1914), received Royal Assent on July 21, 1988. There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about that piece of legislation.
You are confusing passage of the Act in 1988 with the declaration on February 14 of a national emergency, and subsequent actions by the police and other authorities, done pursuant to the Act.
The argument that invocation of the Act was illegal because the state of emergency was not confirmed by the Senate is misleading, and perhaps disingenuous. A motion was put before the Senate within the seven-day period required by the Act (see Part VI), but the matter was resolved before the Senate had an opportunity to debate and vote on the motion.
The issue that remains is whether the declaration of a national emergency was justified or constituted state over reach. The answer to that question should become clearer after the Parliamentary Inquiry, which is required under the Act. And, as far as I know, Alberta’s legal challenge is still in play, so a decision in that case will shed additional light on the legality or illegality of invoking the Act.
Thank you . That was simple. I guess time will tell us all won’t it. In watching the Senate debate it, clearly was going to be rejected. Rather than lose face it appears, Mr. Trudeau called it off before the vote.
It was pretty simple. All I had to do was to apply my knowledge of how the Canadian Parliamentary system works, which I learned in high school, and then I confirmed a few details, which I did by going to the GoC website where I read the Act and the record of the debates for both the HoC and the Senate.
I guess not everyone shares the same idea of what constitutes “research”.
I suspect I should really leave this subject alone for now.
It appears, others have as strong feelings pertaining to our country and the strength of our democracy, which in reality is great. Discussion is great, I do sometimes wonder where the adults in the room have gone though.
I guess that’s why it is suggested; one never make assumptions about
another; and why polite conversation never includes topics about
religion and politics.
Insults, put downs subtle sarcasm on the other hand … that has nothing to do with legitimate, intelligent, sound discussion, and or debate it just reflects the intelligence and ability of the speaker and comes straight out of Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Kenney’s playbook.
The creation of the most divided, divisive, tribalized; country in my lifetime.
The following represents direct quotes taken from the Senate of Canada HANSARD during Question Period February 21, 2022.
In addition, I am hoping some may take the time to read the full HANSARD report regarding the Senate debates pertaining to the Emergency Act debate and formulate your own informed opinion.
In particular, I hope you pay attention to the somewhat distressing points regarding the government’s desire and intent to retain and impose the more drastic elements of the Emergency Act’s restrictions in perpetuity.
I will forewarn you the HANSARD minutes pertaining to the Senate of Canada Emergency Act Debate are long, but it does provide a reflection and perspective of this government.
For those who subscribe to The Epoch Times of Canada, you may have already read today’s article;” Parliamentarians Were Working Behind the Scenes to Repeal State of Emergency Order: Senator”By Noé ChartierApril 22, 2022 Updated: April 22, 2022
For those so inclined; you may find the Senate of Canada HANSARD at the following address;
https://sencanada.ca/
QUESTION PERIODPublic Safety and Emergency PreparednessEmergencies ActHon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): “Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader.
(1430)
Leader, on February 10 I asked you a couple of questions. I suggested you needed to start answering the questions that we asked. At 7:40 that night, one of my granddaughters messaged me through WhatsApp.
Leader, I’m going to read this to you, and then I will ask my question. My granddaughter said:
Grandpa, I think your questions are too complex in the Senate. No one seems be able to give you an answer, let alone say anything close to what you asked.
She went on to say:
You sound tired. I would be too if I had to sit and listen to all that BS. Love you.
I love her as well.
Leader, I’m going to ask you a question. I want you to imagine you are answering Emily and give her an answer that she will understand.
Last Thursday night, a violent attack took place at the Coastal GasLink worksite near Houston, British Columbia. About 20 people, some armed with axes, attacked security guards, smashed vehicles and heavy machinery, set fires on roadways, injured an RCMP officer and traumatized workers. A statement from the B.C. RCMP said, “This is a very troubling escalation in violent criminal activity that could have resulted in serious injury or death.” And it continues:
This was a calculated and organized violent attack that left its victims shaken and a multimillion dollar path of destruction.
Leader, why does the Trudeau government believe the trucker convoy rises to the level of national emergency when this incredibly vicious and dangerous attack in B.C. hardly drew even a mention from the Prime Minister? Does the Prime Minister think it’s okay to demonize other groups of Canadians simply because he doesn’t agree with them?
Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senator, thank you for the question. I do hope your lovely granddaughter is listening.
The government condemns the violence that took place at the Coastal GasLink pipeline that took place in British Columbia. The government, as it has said on many occasions, respects everybody’s right to peacefully protest. That does not include violence and intimidation such as you very well outlined.
I am advised that the RCMP is pursuing an investigation. I am sure we all look forward to that being brought to a conclusion.
Senator Plett: Hardly a mention from the Prime Minister, though.
Leader, this is a sad moment for our country. We have been led to this point by a divisive and vindictive Prime Minister who preferred to bring forward an unprecedented power grab rather than have dialogue with fellow Canadians.
Leader, the premiers of both my province of Manitoba and your province of Quebec do not want the Emergencies Act enacted in their jurisdictions. Five other provinces say the same, including one that is suing the government.
When the Prime Minister invoked the Emergencies Act, he claimed it would be geographically targeted. In the other place on Saturday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice confirmed that the legislation applies to all of Canada.
Leader, what guidelines did the Trudeau government use before making the call to declare an historic national emergency throughout our entire country?
Senator Gold: Honourable senator, thank you for the question. This is obviously a question that preoccupies us all. Indeed, we are to begin debate on this very question tomorrow. That is very much the focus of the task with which we are seized. I look forward to sharing my views and answering, in the most fulsome way I can, your question and every other question that senators may have during the debate. I also look forward to hearing your views and those of my colleagues on this most important question.”
[Translation]
Democratic InstitutionsDeterioration of Democracy in CanadaHon. Claude Carignan: “My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate.
Leader, on February 10, the Economist Intelligence Unit issued its annual index on global democracy, which showed that Canada dropped seven spots in two years, from fifth to twelfth place, just ahead of Uruguay.
According to Andrew Potter, associate professor at McGill University’s Max Bell School of Public Policy, one explanation for this situation is the way the Trudeau government managed the pandemic. He said, and I quote:
What has happened over the past two years is that the Prime Minister has basically shut down Parliament for a long time and has been keen to limit the opposition as much as he can . . .
What is more, according to the Democracy Index, the measures that were taken to fight the pandemic accelerated Canadians’ loss of confidence in their institutions. The pandemic led to the normalization of emergency powers and accustomed citizens to a huge extension of state power over large areas of public and personal life.
Aren’t you worried about Canadians’ loss of confidence in our institutions? Don’t you think that the unnecessary use of the Emergencies Act will make this already bad social situation and Canadians’ loss of confidence in our institutions even worse?
Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): You asked two questions.
With respect to your first question, everyone in this chamber must think about the public’s opinion of our institutions. Canadians must have confidence in the work we do in the Senate and in our democratic institutions. That is important. We have a role to play as parliamentarians to ensure the public is more aware of the work we do so that we can help build confidence in our work and our institutions.
With respect to your second question, the answer is no. I am proud to be a senator and to represent the government. We are about to start a historic and unprecedented debate on the application of an act that helps bolster our democracy. Our job will be to ensure that the powers of the government, in this exceptional situation, are consistent with our democracy. I will have much more to say tomorrow when I speak to this issue.
Senator Carignan: Leader, I heard you say that you are not worried. Canada dropped seven spots in the global Democracy Index and now sits just ahead of Uruguay, even though the Prime Minister claimed that Canada was back. Doesn’t it worry you that Canada has dropped from fifth to twelfth on the Democracy Index and now sits just ahead of Uruguay?
Senator Gold: With all due respect, esteemed colleague, that is not what I said. I said that Canadians should be very concerned. I am concerned by the level of confidence that Canadians have in our institutions. It is important that we all do our part to promote awareness of what we do and build the confidence we deserve.”
re:
L. Elford quoting the Epoch Times.
It’s like a distinguished Surgeon seeking advice from an Osteopath or a serial pedophile.
This is getting really silly. I can see there appears no intellect or ability here, so no need for further response.
You, my friend must be really scared or intimidated by objective reporting and quotes from Canadian Senator’s. I am truly, truly sorry for you. I hope you can/will be brave enough to consider seeking professional help
” I typically don’t respond to personal attacks.”
Famous words of Les Elford.
Epoch Times on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times
I bet you that Wikipedia has a reliability rate much higher than The Epoch Times.
Check your sources before you regurgitate folks.
Les, none of this is relevant to our conversation. I took exception with your characterization of the Emergencies Act (not the “Emergency Act”) as (a) illegal and (b) unconstitutional. Your statement was clearly and demonstrably wrong, and constituted misinformation. At no point did I offer an opinion as to whether or not the emergency declaration was warranted or if the Senate would have voted against the motion to confirm the declaration. That is a different discussion, and it is not one I am interested in engaging.
You are desperately, embarrassingly and increasingly, dangerously misinformed. You’ve been had.
Tony my friend;
I typically don’t respond to personal attacks. I guess this independent third party objective information must be hitting pretty hard.
And the Epoch Times is independent third party? You’re not fooling anybody here with your long-winded crap.
Nope.
Sorry, but it is simply not correct to claim that the Epoch Times constitutes objective reporting. That’s not a personal attack; it’s a statement of fact.
Yes, another U.S.-based paper spewing conspiracy and far right views.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/
So while police officers are praising Justin Trudeau for the way he handled the mess in Ottawa and taking steps to make certain that more weapons weren’t purchased , and to make certain a higher cost to taxpayers wasn’t incurred. The $36 million was enough but these ignorant fools are criticizing Trudeau for being a lot smarter than them and think that wasting more money by suing is somehow going to make them look like heroes but it won’t.
Have you noticed none of them is smart enough to provide a better way to do it that wouldn’t have cost Canadians a lot more or may have put lives at risk. Watch the videos on the internet of organizer Pat Burns to learn what a fool he is. This guy is likely capable of anything.