We now have a perfect political storm. Susan Delacourt writes:
Two sharply divergent views of those convoy protests, two opposite rulings from judges. Not surprisingly, each side will now be able to claim vindication, as well as grievance.
That was evident in the immediate aftermath of the ruling by Federal Court Judge Richard Mosley on Tuesday, with Conservatives and convoy supporters claiming victory, while Trudeau’s government wasted no time in announcing it will appeal the decision all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada if it must.
In short, those extraordinary weeks in early 2022, which so divided the country, continue to pitch politics into two, polar-opposite camps.
And The Right is having a field day:
No question, it is looking like a good week for the anti-Trudeau right, what with convoy supporters getting to run a victory lap, Conservatives getting to rail against Trudeau “breaking the law” and, in a bonus of timing, former Fox News darling Tucker Carlson arriving in Alberta to appear at a bash-the-Liberals event with Premier Danielle Smith.
“I’m going to go liberate Canada,” Carlson said in an interview with Politico as he was getting ready to board his plane.
Smith believes the Federal Court has handed her another way to bludgeon Trudeau’s Liberals in her mind-your-own-business crusade against Ottawa. In a post on X on Tuesday, Smith said: “Whether it’s today’s court decision, or their defeat on plastics or the Impact Assessment Act, it is clear the Trudeau Liberal government simply does not understand or respect the Constitution of Canada.”
But things are not that simple:
Convoy supporters, for instance — and all of those people who said this was just a spirited party with bouncy castles and hot tubs on Wellington Street, should take note of this blunt statement from Mosley: “I considered the events that occurred in Ottawa and other locations in January and February 2022 went beyond legitimate protest and reflected an unacceptable breakdown of public order.”
Mosley goes on to say that he might have made the same decision himself to invoke the emergency legislation. But he has two fundamental problems with how the government used the emergency law: one with the argument for using it, the other with the scope of it.
In politics, where everyone wants to choose their own opinions — and facts — these days, the only certain outcome of the Federal Court decision is new life into a two-year-old fight over those convoy protests. There is a middle to be found between the two judges’ rulings, between Rouleau and Mosley — but don’t expect to hear too much of that in the polarized political arena.
If the Ottawa police had acted earlier, things might have been different.
Oliver Wendall Holmes famously said that freedom of speech does not mean that you have the right to yell fire in a crowded theatre. These days, the wisdom of that position is forgotten. For that reason, I still side with the government.
Image: NBC News
10 comments:
The government had better get this in the supreme court asap. We cannot be left in limbo for too long on this. I too felt the government was right for using the act and hoped they would have done it sooner. Actually, I just wish the local and provincial police had just done their job and we could have avoided the entire silly episode.
As someone who has been to and who has observed a few protests in my time I wondered why there was hesitation to move these so called protesters out. Any protest I had seen was moved out very quickly if it got out of hand. The large majority though came, said their piece, and left. At most they would last a day and they were generally NOT trying to inconvenience the locals.
The only ones that lasted longer would be those out on rural or forest service roads with the intent to slow or stop destructive resource extraction. Many of those protesters have been pushed aside or removed or arrested when presented with a court order. Why was that so difficult to do in this case? These “freedom” convoy donkeys aren’t very tough at all. I’ve literally seen grandmothers put up with far worse in the name of their protest and in the course of their action they weren’t rude and condescending and threatening. These “freedom” whiners were treated with kid gloves for the most part and were warned days in advance of what would happen, finally, if they didn’t move along. Guess what? Not one person who left after the warning after three weeks was arrested or had their bank accounts frozen or had their drivers license suspended.
Get this to the highest court in the land and get this settled once and for all.
Support for the emergency order is high. Telling this 66% that they are wrong may not help Pollievre, but solidify resistance to his policies.
The protesters were not treated unfairly, Graham. They were given a very long time to make their point.
Poilevre strikes me as someone who simply isn't very bright, rumley.
Your reply to rumley about pp is putting it very nicely.
That’s what I like about you Owen, you seem like a very nice man, fair, considered and measured in your posts and replies on your blog.
Not everyone would agree with you about me, Graham. But what you say about the people who comment on this blog is true. They are fair and measured.
The Ottawa police failed big time and Doug Ford sabotaged the necessary 'senior government ' response to that.
I think this judge got it wrong.
Funny how the crowd that decries judges suddenly supports one.
I agree, Anon. Please initial your next comment.
Apologies Owen.
That was me from my phone.
I suspected that was a regular commenter who simply forgot to initial, PoV. Keep them coming.
Post a Comment