Public Safety Committee on Feb. 25th, 2022

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Can you provide that list? I think it's important that the committee and parliamentarians are aware of what specific emergency powers the RCMP used. Can you commit to providing that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much—

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Perhaps he could just answer my question, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

We're out of time, but if he could give a yes or a no, that would be fine.

[D/Commr Michael Duheme]

I can look into it to see if it's doable.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you.

Mr. McKinnon, I will turn the floor over to you for the last five minutes of this meeting. Please go ahead.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Dickson, Mr. Lloyd focused a great deal of his questioning on the notion of the seizure of bank accounts. The rest of the discussion generally speaks of frozen accounts.

I wonder if you could explain the difference between those two situations. Was there in fact any authorization for the seizure of bank accounts under the Emergencies Act?

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

That is indeed accurate. The powers that were provided through the emergency economic measures order were to freeze accounts, to prevent access to them. They were not seized in any way in order for the government or any other party to take possession of them. They were simply inaccessible for a temporary period of time.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

There is a legal difference, then, between seizing and freezing. Could you outline that, please?

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

Absolutely. Seizing has to occur pursuant to authorities to do that. It often results in the person who has seized taking possession, although not in all circumstances. In the case of freezing, it is the banking institution.

I would turn to my Finance colleagues to speak more about it in terms of the mechanisms of how it took place. It was simply not rendering the accounts accessible. They may have additional details to offer.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Lloyd also spoke about the requirements for seizing such assets. I'm wondering what might be the normal recourse to pursue for engaging in the freezing of assets.

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

Ontario sought an injunction against a number of accounts pursuant to a provision of the Criminal Code that wasn't available to the federal Crown.

I would note that in the case of the protesters we were witnessing, there were a number of injunctions in place, one by private citizens in Ottawa and another by the City of Ottawa, that were not being abided by, notwithstanding there having been court authorization.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

What I'm hearing as the bottom line is that the invocation of the Emergencies Act did not, in fact, authorize any seizures, and in fact no seizures of bank accounts transpired under this invocation.

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

The authority that was granted pursuant to the order was to freeze. I'll let my colleague from Finance explain what the effects of that were.

[Richard Bilodeau]

Ms. Dickson's description is accurate. The banks rendered those accounts inaccessible for the duration of the freezing, if we can call it that. There was never any seizure of those funds, as far as I understand it, not under the Emergencies Act order.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

I'll move on here a bit and go back to Ms. Dickson.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms provisions for peaceful assembly are certainly important. I'm wondering whether there was anything in the invocation of the Emergencies Act that constrained peaceful assembly.

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

No. It was not targeted in any way, shape or form at peaceful assembly. It was specifically with respect to the criteria set out in section 2 of the emergency measures regulation.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

For assemblies that are essentially peaceful, protests that are peaceful and protests that are basically law-abiding, there is no way that those particular kinds of circumstances would have been brought into the umbrella of the Emergencies Act.

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

That is accurate. Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly are fundamental freedoms that are indeed protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Yes, so I guess that's really important in the writing of the Emergencies Act and, of course, the implication of it is that it explicitly guarantees the continuance of the rights that are laid out in the charter. Would you agree with that?

[Samantha Maislin Dickson]

Absolutely, and we know that its predecessor, the War Measures Act, did not have that explicit provision. It's my understanding that it was made explicit in the Emergencies Act to provide that contrast, but I would also offer, as I indicated earlier, that all government actions, from the making of laws to regulations to implementation, are always subject to charter compliance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much. That takes us to the end of the session.

I'd like to thank the witnesses. I can only imagine how busy this time has been for all of you, and you've been generous with your time. On behalf of the members of the committee and all parliamentarians, thank you for your public service, and thank you for your appearance this afternoon or this morning, depending on where you are in this country.

Colleagues, is the committee in agreement to adjourn the meeting before I say that I look forward to the weekend and I really look forward to seeing all of you on Tuesday morning?

The meeting is adjourned.