Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Beatty, I want to revisit subsection 17(2) and the designation of the affected area.
According to a document annexed to the proclamation declaring a public order emergency, Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador and British Columbia were in favour of invoking the Emergencies Act, but Quebec was not because doing so, in its view, would be divisive. Alberta was against invoking the act, Saskatchewan was not in favour of invoking it, and Manitoba was not convinced that it was necessary to invoke the act at the time. New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island all stated that it was not necessary to invoke the act. That means that seven of the 10 provinces consulted did not consider it necessary to invoke the Emergencies Act and did not want the government to do so.
In a situation like this, the government has an obligation to consult the provinces. Obviously, it is under no obligation to respect their wishes—I agree. Nevertheless, seven out of 10 provinces consulted were against invoking the Emergencies Act and did not want the government to declare a public order emergency in the whole country. In your view, then, doesn't the government have an obligation to explain why it extended the application of the act to the area in question, in other words, the entire country?