As the Case for Invoking Emergencies Act Unravels, the Feds Double Down

Thousands gather around Parliament Hill in support of the Freedom Convoy protest in Ottawa on Feb. 5, 2022. (Minas Panagiotakis/Getty Images)

Commentary

With the benefit of hindsight and questions in parliamentary committees, the federal government’s case for invoking the Emergencies Act in response to the Freedom Convoy protest in Ottawa is unravelling.

Rather than considering some introspection and learning from their errors though, federal officials and senior bureaucrats appear determined to double down by creating and offering new, dubious justifications for the government’s actions in February.

The latest comes from Department of Public Safety manager Ryan Schwartz as he told a Commons transport committee “misinformation and disinformation” from the truckers’ convoy threatened social cohesion. Schwartz couldn’t expand upon or define exactly what this misinformation or disinformation was, nor could he define social cohesion. He did appear confident though that these things contributed to the need for invoking exceptional government powers to shut down the convoy protests.

Social cohesion is indeed a tricky concept to define. It has been used as a buzzword by public officials and policymakers for decades but they rarely expand on what it actually means. Apparently, though, it’s something in need of protection at all costs.

The most common interpretation of the concept is that it represents the strength of relationships and the sense of solidarity among members of a community. If that is the case, I would suggest that government actions presented far more harm to the social cohesion of the nation than the convoy did, particularly when it comes to the dispersal of misinformation. They singled out convoy participants and supporters for an unforgivable campaign of vilification that may leave Canadians divided for a generation.

Let’s start at the top. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau never once offered even a glimmer of respect to the truckers’ convoy and its supporters even though it was clear they represented a significant portion of the Canadian population. He went out of his way to paint supporters of the convoy as being extremists and racists.

In his fervour, Trudeau even implied that a Jewish MP stands with “people who wave swastikas.” In polls, it was found that 46 percent of Canadians were sympathetic with the convoy’s cause. That represents millions of Canadians. Do they also stand with people who wave swastikas? How does such rhetoric from the nation’s leader contribute to any national sense of social cohesion?

On misinformation and disinformation, while little could be directly attributed to the truckers’ convoy, there sure has been a lot of it exposed as having come from the legacy media, politicians, and government officials.

The CBC had to walk back claims in two stories that spread misinformation about the convoy protests. In one it was claimed that convoy funding came predominantly from foreign, anonymous, and questionable sources. Another CBC report implied that the Russians were somehow behind the support for the convoy. Both stories were proven false through testimony in committees, but the damage had, of course, already been done.

Not to be outdone, the Toronto Star reported that loaded guns had been found by police at the convoy protest. Ottawa’s police chief revealed to a committee that no guns had been found.

Both the CBC and Toronto Star stories had been used as evidence by supporters of the Emergencies Act to justify suspending civil rights.

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino even claimed that convoy participants were threatening citizens with rape. No evidence of this allegation was ever found or presented. There are few worse things to accuse somebody of than being a rapist, yet the government went there with no evidence and no apology.

Many media members and public figures took to social media to decry an apparent attempt at mass murder by a convoy participant. A Twitter thread claimed that a person self-identifying as a convoy protester had taped the doors shut to an apartment building and tried to immolate the residents. This incident was later found to have had nothing to do with the convoy.

Many times we heard from public figures that the convoy had nothing less than an agenda of sedition behind it. No evidence was presented to committees to prove this agenda or threat, however. Sedition is a serious offence carrying up to a 14-year prison term. Not one person was charged with it.

A picture of an antisemitic flyer allegedly being distributed by the convoy was revealed as being a hoax, but not before a large number of media and public officials shared it on social media. While some figures deleted their tweets on the issue, none apologized for proliferating it.

There indeed was a massive release of misinformation and disinformation related to the truckers’ convoy protests and it did weaken the social cohesion of Canada. It didn’t come from the convoy participants, however. It came from the members of the Canadian establishment opposed to the protest, and they are continuing to do it.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.