Thank you, Madam Chair, honourable senators and colleagues in the House of Commons.
Thank you for inviting me here. Unlike my colleague Arif, this is my first time at your joint committee. It's a privilege to be here.
Madam Chair, thank you for introducing the senior officials from the public safety portfolio who are accompanying me here this evening.
I appreciate the invitation. The invitation obviously followed the Federal Court's ruling on the invocation of the Emergencies Act in 2022. I'm happy to be here with my colleague, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, who indicated the government's position with respect to ongoing litigation matters.
That said, just like my colleague, I want to seize the opportunity today to discuss with you, the members of the committee, the exceptional circumstances that led the government to invoke the Emergencies Act in February 2022.
These circumstances included unlawful, countrywide protests that presented a threat to the safety of Canadians, as well as blockades targeting essential infrastructure.
Our country was confronted with illegal blockades at border crossings and vital trade corridors. This impacted our economy and industry, and the jobs and livelihoods of many hard-working Canadians.
Indeed, the blockade of the Ambassador Bridge alone affected about $390 million in trade every day. This bridge supports 30% of all trade by road between Canada and its most important trading partner, the United States of America. I remember during those days the multiple conversations I had with the Premier of Ontario, Premier Ford, about the importance of working with his government and using every available tool to bring this to a peaceful conclusion as quickly as possible.
Coupled with the blockades, the illegal occupation of our city streets also presented very real threats to Canadian businesses, both big and small. Participants in these activities used a number of tactics to threaten and intimidate local residents and businesses. Their activities disrupted the peace and contributed to a general sense of public insecurity.
Prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act, citizens, municipalities and the Province of Ontario all participated in court proceedings seeking injunctive relief to help manage these threats, and a class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of residents of Ottawa.
Members of the committee, given these exceptional circumstances, as my colleague said, the government maintains its position that this unprecedented situation constituted a public order emergency. The government therefore also maintains that its use of the Emergencies Act was both necessary and lawful.
As you know, since you have studied the matter for quite some time, the Public Order Emergency Commission supported the decision in its final report, as my colleague clearly pointed out. After reviewing more than 85,000 documents, interviewing 139 individuals, receiving testimony from 76 witnesses and hearing from 50 experts, the Rouleau Commission concluded that the very high threshold required for the invocation of the act was met.
While the Public Order Emergency Commission found that the high threshold to invoke the act was met, the commission's report also provided recommendations that the government is carefully considering. I hope to have some details as early as next week in terms of the government's specific response to the thoughtful recommendations of the Rouleau commission. In particular, we're obviously examining recommendations to improve collaborations between jurisdictions, support community safety and help strengthen our capacity to respond to similar events of national significance in the future.
With that, Madam Chair, my colleague and I would obviously be very happy to answer any questions the committee members might have.