Jennifer O'Connell moved, — That the Committee move on to C-26.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:

YEAS: Chris Bittle, Iqwinder Gaheer, Ron McKinnon, Kristina Michaud, Jennifer O'Connell, Peter Schiefke — 6;

NAYS: Peter Julian, Ron Liepert, Dane Lloyd, Glen Motz — 4.

David Shipley, Ulrike Bahr-Gedalia, Tiéoulé Traoré and Daina Proctor made statements.

Glen Motz moved, — That, in light of the recent Federal Court ruling which found that the government’s use of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 to have been illegal and that the special criminal laws subsequently created by the Liberal Cabinet to have been an unconstitutional breach of Canadians’ Charter rights, the Committee undertake a study of 7 meetings, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), of the Department of Justice’s role in supporting the government’s illegal and unconstitutional decisions concerning the Emergencies Act, together with the consequences which follow the Court’s decision, provided that

(a) the Committee invite the following to appear, separately, as witnesses, for at least one hour each:

(i) the Honourable David Lametti, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada at the time,

(ii) the Honourable Marco Mendicino, the Minister of Public Safety at the time,

(iii) the Honourable Arif Virani, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada,

(iv) representatives of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and

(v) representatives of the Canadian Constitution Foundation; and

(b) an order do issue for all legal opinions which the government relied upon in determining that

(i) the threshold of “threats to security of Canada”, as defined by section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, required by section 16 of the Emergencies Act, had been met;

(ii) the thresholds required by paragraphs 3(a) or (b) of the Emergencies Act, concerning a “national emergency” had been met;

(iii) the situation could not “be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada”, as required by section 3 of the Emergencies Act;

(iv) the Emergency Measures Regulations were compliant with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the analysis relied upon by the Minister of Justice in discharging his responsibilities under section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act, and

(v) the Emergency Economic Measures Order was compliant with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the analysis relied upon by the Minister of Justice in discharging his responsibilities under section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act,

provided that these documents shall be deposited with the Clerk of the Committee, without redaction and in both official languages, within seven days of the adoption of this order..

Debate arose thereon.

Jennifer O'Connell moved, — That the debate be now adjourned.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:

YEAS: Chris Bittle, Iqwinder Gaheer, Ron McKinnon, Kristina Michaud, Jennifer O'Connell, Peter Schiefke — 6;

NAYS: Larry Brock, Peter Julian, Dane Lloyd, Glen Motz — 4.

The witnesses answered questions.

At 5:19 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 5:24 p.m., the sitting resumed.

Todd Warnell, Kate Robertson and Matthew Hatfield made statements and answered questions.

Glen Motz moved, — That, in light of the recent Federal Court ruling which found that the government’s use of the Emergencies Act in February 2022 to have been illegal and that the special criminal laws subsequently created by the Liberal Cabinet to have been an unconstitutional breach of Canadians’ Charter rights, the Committee undertake a study of 7 meetings, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), of the Department of Justice’s role in supporting the government’s illegal and unconstitutional decisions concerning the Emergencies Act, together with the consequences which follow the Court’s decision, provided that

(a) the Committee invite the following to appear, separately, as witnesses, for at least one hour each:

(i) the Honourable David Lametti, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada at the time,

(ii) the Honourable Marco Mendicino, the Minister of Public Safety at the time,

(iii) the Honourable Arif Virani, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada,

(iv) representatives of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and

(v) representatives of the Canadian Constitution Foundation; and

(b) an order do issue for all legal opinions which the government relied upon in determining that

(i) the threshold of “threats to security of Canada”, as defined by section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, required by section 16 of the Emergencies Act, had been met;

(ii) the thresholds required by paragraphs 3(a) or (b) of the Emergencies Act, concerning a “national emergency” had been met;

(iii) the situation could not “be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada”, as required by section 3 of the Emergencies Act;

(iv) the Emergency Measures Regulations were compliant with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the analysis relied upon by the Minister of Justice in discharging his responsibilities under section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act, and

(v) the Emergency Economic Measures Order was compliant with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the analysis relied upon by the Minister of Justice in discharging his responsibilities under section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act,

provided that these documents shall be deposited with the Clerk of the Committee, without redaction and in both official languages, within seven days of the adoption of this order..

RULING BY THE CHAIR

The Chair ruled the motion in order.

Whereupon, Jennifer O'Connell appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned on the following recorded division:

YEAS: Larry Brock, Dane Lloyd, Glen Motz — 3;

NAYS: Chris Bittle, Peter Julian, Ron McKinnon, Kristina Michaud, Jennifer O'Connell, Peter Schiefke, Doug Shipley — 7.

Questioning of the witnesses resumed.