Emergencies Act Inquiry

Truths the Emergencies Act Inquiry Must Reveal 

Jim Mason
October 26, 2022
The Freedom Convoy became not just a conveyance to bring protesters to Ottawa but, for whatever reason, a kind of magnet for lies. Falsehoods, misdirection and dissembling proliferated about everything from alleged racism and violence to whether or not downtown Ottawa was actually “occupied” or “blockaded” to the technicalities of who even wanted the Emergencies Act and who actually ordered the freezing of bank accounts. Now, writes Jim Mason, it’s time for the truth – all of it, every material piece. In Mason’s view, the commission of inquiry needs to look back well beyond the Convoy’s arrival and assess decisions and claims by the Trudeau government that, Mason argues, set the conditions for the Convoy itself.
Emergencies Act Inquiry

Truths the Emergencies Act Inquiry Must Reveal 

Jim Mason
October 26, 2022
The Freedom Convoy became not just a conveyance to bring protesters to Ottawa but, for whatever reason, a kind of magnet for lies. Falsehoods, misdirection and dissembling proliferated about everything from alleged racism and violence to whether or not downtown Ottawa was actually “occupied” or “blockaded” to the technicalities of who even wanted the Emergencies Act and who actually ordered the freezing of bank accounts. Now, writes Jim Mason, it’s time for the truth – all of it, every material piece. In Mason’s view, the commission of inquiry needs to look back well beyond the Convoy’s arrival and assess decisions and claims by the Trudeau government that, Mason argues, set the conditions for the Convoy itself.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

The inquiry into Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s use of the Emergencies Act is finally underway. Much has come to light since those tumultuous events in February suggesting the Liberal government’s drastic action was unjustified. This is mostly thanks to the non-legacy media – see this, for example. Time will tell whether the Public Order Emergency Commission will reach the same conclusion.

Although the Liberal government is doing all it can to divert attention away from its decisions and whether these were justified, and onto the truckers and their various blemishes and missteps, there is reason for cautious optimism. Commissioner Paul Rouleau, who is heading the inquiry, said in his opening remarks that, Uncovering the truth is an important goal. When difficult events occur that impact the lives of Canadians, the public has a right to know what happened.”

In opening the Public Order Emergency Commission, Justice Paul Rouleau called uncovering the truth “an important goal”, adding that “the public has a right to know what happened.” (Source of photo: The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld)

Rouleau is of course correct. Witnesses at the inquiry, unlike those at parliamentary committees, testify under oath and are required by the Canada Evidence Act to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Still, government and sympathetic witnesses are trying to keep the inquiry’s scope as narrow as possible. Consequently, the public may learn only portions of the whole truth concerning events of which they “have a right to know.”

This dynamic plus the Inquiry’s heavy workload and comparatively tight deadline reduce the likelihood that it will delve into a couple of truths which, while in the public domain, have not yet attracted the attention they deserve. They are important, however, because they were fundamental to creating the conditions that led to the government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, and are indicative of the mindset and character of the people who made it.

Truth #1

At the time Trudeau imposed the cross-border vaccination mandate (effective January 15, 2022) which became the proximate cause of the Freedom Convoy, it had been evident for several weeks that the fully vaccinated were becoming infected at a greater rate than the unvaccinated, as measured by new daily cases per 100,000 of each group. This was crystal-clear from the graphs published at the time on the Government of Ontario’s Covid-19 webpages.

The phenomenon of collapsing vaccine effectiveness had been reported in at least two papers published in scientific journals, one based on the Ontario data, the other based on Danish data, as well as conveyed to a wider audience via an article in The Wall Street Journal co-authored by a Nobel laureate in medicine. A detailed original analysis of the Ontario data that was consistent with and expanded upon these reports was subsequently published by C2C Journal. The evaporating effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccines had stunning implications which, had North American governments been paying attention (there is evidence that some other governments, like Denmark’s and Sweden’s, were), should have triggered major changes to pandemic management no later than early 2022.
Truth #1: Weeks before the federal vaccination mandate on cross-border truckers (top) came into effect in mid-January 2022, the Government of Ontario’s Covid-19 website revealed that the fully vaccinated (abbreviated as FV in the chart) had become more susceptible to infection than the unvaccinated (UF). (Sources: (photo) Ontario Trucking Association; (chart) Jim Mason)

For the Inquiry’s purposes, however, let’s focus on this key fact: these data mean that unvaccinated truckers who reluctantly got vaccinated in response to Trudeaus mandate became more susceptible to Covid-19 infection as they travelled back and forth between Canada and the U.S. This would increase the likelihood that new cases would be imported into Canada. The truckers’ vaccination mandate therefore was a nonsensical public health measure that not only had nothing to do with keeping Canadians “safe” but cannot be demonstrably justified” as a reasonable limitation” of a Charter right, as the Charter requires for infringements of rights.

The ineffectiveness of the mRNA vaccines against the Omicron variant rendered the Trudeau government’s vaccination mandate on cross-border truckers nonsensical. The mandate became the proximate cause of the Freedom Convoy to Ottawa. (Source of photo: Michel Elzo/Shutterstock)

This is a truth that Canadians need to know. It puts the subsequent Freedom Convoy protests, rallies and partial border blockades in the proper context. Without Trudeau’s unjustifiable mandate, there would very likely have been much less of a response – perhaps none at all – and, consequently, no need even to discuss the Emergencies Act.

This truth also raises questions about the nature of our federal government and the character of some of our politicians, the answers to which are of immense importance for Canadians.

Did Trudeau know this truth at the time and impose the mandate anyway? Did he learn of it subsequently but before invoking the Emergencies Act, failing or refusing to follow the science” and rescind the mandate? If either of these is true, the implications are highly disturbing, suggesting an autocratic, possibly even malevolent, streak in the Prime Minister’s personality. Certainly, a personality that allows ideology and political agenda to become impervious to disagreeable facts.

If Trudeau did not know this truth, the implications are also deeply unsettling. How could such vital information not come before the leader of a G-7 nation?

Although the data and scientific papers demonstrating the decline of vaccine efficacy to less than zero were publicly available, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (right) and then federal Minister of Health Patty Hajdu (left) did not “follow the science.” But did they not know, not care, did the bureaucracy withhold key information from them, or did they hide key facts from one another? (Source of photo: The Canadian Press/Adryan Wilde)

One possibility is that federal public health officials, the vast health care bureaucracy and the Prime Minister’s Office (which has significant resources of its own) all failed to come across any of this data or failed to recognize its significance if they did. Such a large blind spot would suggest serious impairment in the federal government’s information-gathering and analysis systems, perhaps outright incompetence. Keeping abreast of all relevant new information would seem foundational to crafting public health policies and measures that “follow the science.” But if they did not know any of this, how many other things of importance did they also not know?

Even more disturbing would be if one or more elements of the government’s apparatus did become aware but failed to brief the Minister of Health. A variant of this possibility is if the Minister herself was properly briefed but chose not to so advise the Prime Minister. These possibilities speak to a seriously dysfunctional and untrustworthy government and/or Minister.

As unsettling as these implications may be, it is important that Canadians know the answers.

Truth #2

The federal government unequivocally and incessantly assured Canadians that the vaccines were safe and effective.” Yet, just two days after approving the first Covid-19 vaccine on December 8, 2020, the federal government announced a Vaccine Injury Support Program. Such a program had not been considered necessary throughout the 153 years since Confederation despite numerous traditional vaccines being introduced and administered during that time.

But just two days after approval of the first mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, it was deemed necessary to compensate people “who have experienced a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine, administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020.” This implies that, already at the time of approval, the Government of Canada had reason to believe serious injuries were likely to result from these vaccines.
Truth #2: “Safe and effective”? Two days after approving the first Covid-19 vaccines in December 2020, the Liberal government quietly introduced the Vaccine Injury Support Program – the first such measure in the more than 150-year history of vaccines in Canada. How, then, could coercive vaccine mandates be justified? (Source of bottom photo: Shawn Goldberg/Shutterstock)

Canadian law is quite clear that before administering any medical treatment, the person or party doing so must obtain informed consent from the patient receiving the treatment. The law is also quite clear that in order for this to be the case, absolutely no coercion can be involved and the person receiving the treatment must be advised of all potential adverse outcomes, no matter how small the probability, especially if the outcome is severe. If this is not done, the party providing the treatment has broken the law.

When Trudeau began imposing vaccine mandates in 2021 he used coercive means – including the threat of job termination and/or the loss of mobility rights – to cause millions of Canadians to undergo a medical treatment (vaccination) which the federal bureaucracy knew and he knew (or ought to have known) posed the potential for serious injury. While he was not, himself, administering the medical procedure, he caused these procedures to commence.

The shambles: Confronted with a peaceful protest that was voicing truths about an avoidable situation, the Trudeau government decided to forcibly clear the “occupation” by imposing the Emergencies Act. (Sources of photos: (top) Bing Wen/Shutterstock; (bottom) Michel Elzo/Shutterstock)

Trudeau’s mandating of vaccination from which serious injury could occur, without itemizing the adverse outcomes, is yet another ethical lapse. His piling an additional vaccine mandate upon cross-border truckers after credible information indicated that the vaccines’ efficacy was collapsing (along with the seriousness of Covid-19 itself) is unconscionable. 

As with the previous truth, this raises questions. Knowing of these severe outcomes, why did Trudeau impose mandate after mandate anyway? How could he and other members of his government continue to assert that the vaccines were safe? And knowing all of this, how could they behave with such arrogance, lack of compassion and, ultimately, brutality towards those who were about to lose their livelihoods for no good reason and dared to protest the Liberal government’s actions? As with the previous truth, the implications of the answers to these questions are deeply concerning.

Whether or not the Rouleau Inquiry proves capable of fully unmasking the truths behind the Trudeau government’s behaviour, Canadians should demand answers anyway – even if they don’t much like the truckers.

Jim Mason earned a BSc in engineering physics and a PhD in experimental nuclear physics. His doctoral research and much of his career involved extensive analysis of “noisy” data to extract useful information, which was then further analyzed to identify meaningful relationships indicative of underlying causes. He is retired and living near Lakefield, Ontario.

Source of main image: The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

The (Un)Remarkable Common Sense Revolution of Mike Harris

To his fans, former Ontario premier Mike Harris is a conservative icon, a leader who cut taxes, reduced government spending, made sensible education and welfare reforms and put Canada’s biggest province back on the road to prosperity. To his enemies he was a ruthless ideologue whose “Common Sense Revolution” ignored the weak and punished the poor. A new book of essays by seasoned political campaigners and prominent policy experts re-examines this polarizing figure and finds both strengths and weaknesses. Harris’ success on the big issues of the day, finds reviewer Sam Routley, shows that when it comes to actually governing a democracy, what matters most is a clear-headed willingness to just get things done.

State of Fear: How Obsessive Demands for Police Checks are Destroying the Volunteer Sector

Everyone wants to protect children. Everyone also appreciates the benefits of a robust and engaged volunteer sector. We should be able to have both at the same time. Yet many long-time volunteers are quitting and potential new entrants are skipping the experience altogether. With safety precautions overwhelming the volunteer sector, it is becoming increasingly difficult to give away one’s own labour. Using his personal experience as a guide, Peter Shawn Taylor takes a close look at the charitable sector’s current mania for police checks and other safety measures, the costs they impose on volunteers and whether they’re actually protecting our kids from sexual predators.

Hush Money: The Untold Dangers and Delusions of Central Bank Digital Currency

Most of us might think that, what with credit cards, e-transfers and online banking, money has pretty much already gone digital. But the Bank of Canada is busily working on a much bigger transformation. Canada is one of more than 100 countries worldwide that are studying, developing or even implementing central bank digital currency (CBDC). CBDC is marketed as a convenient replacement for cash once it disappears from use, as a way to provide access to financial services for the “underbanked,” and as a bulwark against volatile cryptocurrency. Gleb Lisikh untangles this little-known phenomenon and finds that, contrary to its billing, CBDC is both unnecessary and dangerous.

More from this author

Did the Virus or Governments Kill More Canadians? A Statistical Analysis of Excess Deaths during the Pandemic

After talking about little but Covid-19 for two-and-a-half years, governments, academia and media became strangely incurious about the net effects of the pandemic on the overall mortality of Canadians. It seems a fundamental question worth asking. Learning the true toll taken by the disease and the measures meant to contain it is vital to assessing the efficacy and rationality of our responses – and whether we should do things differently next time. Using raw data from the federal government, Jim Mason, PhD, performed extensive statistical analysis of Canada’s death dynamics before and during the pandemic. Did Covid-19 raise Canada’s death numbers above normal? Was the government-imposed cure worse than the disease?

The Evaporating Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines as Shown by the Newest Ontario Government Data

As Covid-19 spreads unchecked and becomes seemingly as common as colds and flus, it’s ever-harder to maintain confidence in the mRNA vaccines developed in 2020 to combat the virus’s original strain. Yet the prevailing view still seems to be, Where’s the harm? Might as well be extra-safe and get that booster (or even second booster). But what if an objective statistical analysis of official government data showed not only that the currently available vaccines do nothing to prevent infection by Omicron and its subvariants, but actually make people more susceptible? Following on his groundbreaking analysis of Ontario infection case data in February, Jim Mason returns to the task with this evaluation of the province’s most up-to-date data. Hint: the vaccines aren’t getting any better.

Do Epidemiological Data Support the Case for Vaccine Mandates?

“Follow the science!” seems to have largely given way to “Vaccinate! Obey! Or else!” the latter threat incorporating everything up to and including martial law. Perhaps there’s no better time, then, to take a look at what the actual data say and where they might lead – if we choose to listen. In this exclusive research-based essay, Jim Mason lays out and meticulously examines the most recent three months’ worth of Ontario government Covid-19 case data. Applying accepted epidemiological formulae in his analysis, Mason vividly charts the vaccines’ increasingly worrisome performance throughout the Omicron wave.

Share This Story


Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required
By providing your email you consent to receive news and updates from C2C Journal. You may unsubscribe at any time.