Thank you very much.
I'm going to go back to some of the definitions. You'll note that in the definition of a national emergency, underneath paragraph 3(a) and (b) there's an “and” clause that reads, “and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.”
We've heard today that expert advisers advised the government that it did not have sufficient authorities, yet there's been pretty wide reporting on perhaps there being insufficient will on the part of our public safety police.
I note that among the reasons given for the public order emergency was that convoy supporters, formerly employed in law enforcement and the military, had appeared alongside organizers and may have been providing them with logistical and security advice, which posed operational challenges. This is noted. I ask that because in section five, where it is about the potential for an increased level of unrest and violence, it is noted that there were individuals who support ideologically motivated violent extremism. This is a very serious issue to me in this particular case.
My question, through you to the honourable minister, is this. In noting that there were members of ideologically motivated violent extremist groups, and that convoy supporters had formerly employed law enforcement and military people within the organizational capacity of the occupation, would the minister agree that there could be, and evidence of, ideologically motivated elements within our law enforcement and the military?