I thank you for that, Minister, because, really, that's what I'm referring to. On February 17 a Mareva injunction was brought forward by a local lawyer and a group of business people that did exactly the same thing the Emergencies Act did, so, certainly, it should have been considered an option.
I don't think the RCMP actually ever discussed recommending the Emergencies Act a week prior when we had them before us. It will be interesting when we get them back.
Since the goal wasn't to seize the assets but only to freeze them, I guess my question really was why the government didn't take that step, and you've answered that, thank you.
Can you offer to us what options were contemplated, other than the invocation of the act, for some of the other assets required? An example would be aid to civil power by a police agency, in particular the RCMP, who use the civil power probably multiple times every year, typically for equipment. Was that considered in the absence of the invocation of the act? If it was, what made the government decide not to use it?