The Rouleau Commission vindicates the federal government—and everyone who warned about the convoy and ensuing occupation of Ottawa.
What I found interesting during the commission hearings was the testimony by various police officials, such as Ontario Provincial Police Interim Superintendent Marcel Beaudin who on October 25th said, “I don't think charging someone with a jerry can offence is going to open roads or get people to leave.” [Transcript lines 15-17] In questioning about what the police could and could not do, Government of Canada counsel Andrea Gonsalves said that the police could not undertake actions which were “inconsistent our constitutional structure” [Transcript line 18-19], which I understand to mean actions that would violate protections guaranteed to Canadian citizens under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This was confirmed by Interim Superintendent Marcel Beaudin [Transcript line 21 “There's limitations to the Constitution for sure.”].
What made me want to scream from the rooftops was the fact that six months earlier at Fairy Creek the RCMP C-IRG unit had no hesitation at all in establishing an exclusion zone of several hundred square kilometres and setting up checkpoints to search the bags of everyone who wished to enter the area. I know this happened because I was arrested for refusing to allow my bag to be searched (I was released without charges).
In Volume 2, p. 61-2 of his report Commissioner Rouleau note: 'Over the course of the public hearings, one of the topics discussed was the authority of the police to create a large exclusion zone in downtown Ottawa in order to keep protesters from arriving. While at least some police officials believed that they had such an authority at common law, it is fair to say that the full extent of that authority was uncertain.’
So why were police actions taken at Fairy Creek not applied in Ottawa, Windsor and Coutts? Because what happened at Fairy Creek in the summer of 2021 took place on a logging road in British Columbia where the RCMP could control media access, whereas in downtown Ottawa actions of 'uncertain' legality' would take place with a great deal of media scrutiny.
All true, David. A victory lap is entirely appropriate. Naturally one expects the mad raving and full-on crackpottery responses from the conspiracy folks, but I am very disturbed now that so-called credible news sources have started to soft pedal the disruption issues, dilute the Rouleau Report, question the legitimate grievances of the 'sitting duck' victims of the convoy, and maliciously exaggerate the rather nuanced language of a besieged Prime Minister.
I’d really like to hear Balcony Guy’s reaction to the Rouleau ruling. Also, the Truck Stopping Grannies. These people gave us hope.
Thank you for your voice of reason, David. Indeed, the Rouleau report , provided a great sense of relief that the institutions of government can and will work when called upon. I agree with Rosie's comment that there is a serious attempt by certain people to dilute the report and exaggerate the P.M.'s comments.
Thank you for saying how there is no left right equivalence between this and say water defenders... and that we don’t need to start weaponizing the emergencies act to include Indigenous protests which bear no resemblance in form or function to what happened with the convoy in Ottawa.
How typical of us not to pay attention to what was happening and not support Trudeau when he called for the Emergency Measures Act. He was right....and so were you.