Source: Angus Reid Institute
As Justice Paul Rouleau puts the final touches on his report on the inquiry into the Liberal government’s use of the Emergencies Act early last year, Canadians continue to have their own debate on the topic. A new study from the Angus Reid Institute finds Canadians divided about one of the core issues concerning the Emergencies Act – whether the protests which it was invoked to clear met the definition of a threat to the security of Canada.
Half (51%) say they believe that this threshold was met, including four-in-five past Liberal voters (81%) and two-thirds of past NDP voters (68%). Conversely, two-in-five (40%) disagree, led by three-quarters of those who supported the Conservative Party in 2021 (73%). Majorities in Alberta and Saskatchewan believe the threshold was not met, while majorities in every other region of the country disagree, and feel the protests presented a real national security threat.
That same division is noted on the government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act. Half feel that this was ultimately the right call to bring about a resolution to the protests and occupations. That said, one-quarter (27%) feel other means of resolution should have been pursued, and 15 per cent say nothing needed to be done at the time.
The six-week long inquiry into the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act featured testimony from 77 witnesses and approaching 7,000 documents for examination, including emails, texts, cabinet documents, transcripts and witness statements. At issue for much of the inquiry was whether the Freedom Convoy protest arose to a “threat to the security of Canada,” one of the thresholds laid out in the Emergencies Act to invoke it. The definition of what is a threat to the security of Canada is from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Act, which defines it as “espionage or sabotage of Canada’s interests, foreign influence, acts of serious violence against people or property with political, religious or ideological objectives, or the violent overthrow of the Canadian government.” The inquiry heard both that the CSIS threat definition was “not relevant” to the act, this from two former CSIS directors, and that CSIS itself told the government that the Freedom Convoy did not pose a national security threat before the act was invoked. Jody Thomas, security and intelligence adviser to the prime minister, told the inquiry she believed CSIS’s definition was too narrow and that it should change.
Rouleau will reportedly present his final report to cabinet on Feb. 6. Then cabinet will have until Feb. 20 to release the findings of the report.
More Key Findings:
- Public opinion has moved in favour of the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act. The percentage of Canadians saying it was the right call increased four points between May and December, while the percentage saying it was unnecessary dropped by seven.
- Men between the ages of 35 and 54 are the only age and gender grouping to say at a majority level (56%) that the protests were not a threat to national security. Women over the age of 54 are most likely to say that they indeed were (63%).
The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from Nov. 28 to Dec. 3, 2022 among a representative randomized sample of 5,030 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI.
