Emergencies Act Review: Canadians divided whether ‘Freedom Convoy’ could have been dispersed without it

Nearly half say use of Act was necessary (46 per cent), but others preferred alternative paths to resolution

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau waited until the final day legally allowable before launching a compulsory review of the federal government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act in March. The Act was triggered by the government and approved by Parliament after members of the so-called Freedom Convoy blocked streets with vehicles and occupied downtown Ottawa in opposition to vaccine mandates and pandemic-related restrictions.

A new study from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds that Canadians remain unsure whether this was the best path to resolution in breaking up the protests that besieged Ottawa.

The largest group – close to half (46 per cent) – say that this was necessary to give police the tools and resources necessary to quell protests. Four-in-five (79 per cent) past Liberal voters and threein-five (58 per cent) past New Democrats bolster the ranks of those in support of using the Act. That said, more than one-in-three (34 per cent) Canadians and half of past CPC voters (51 per cent) disagree, and feel it was unnecessary and police already had the powers they needed to complete the job.

A considerable group – 15 per cent – say that they don’t think any action was necessary by any level of government or policing, and that protests should have been allowed to continue unbothered.

As the Public Order Emergency Commission continues its investigation into the decisions that were made and how the Act was used, Canadians are deeply divided about the future of this never-before-used lever of Parliament. An equal number say that the use of this mechanism was a good example of how it should be done for other governments to follow (45 per cent) or that it sets a bad precedent for future governments and may lead to abuse (44 per cent). This, too, is subject to stark political divides.

More Key Findings:

- Residents in Ontario (50 per cent), B.C. (49 per cent), and Atlantic Canada (49 per cent) are most likely to say that invoking the Emergencies Act was necessary. Those in Alberta (21 per cent) and Saskatchewan (23 per cent) are most likely to say that no action was necessary, and protests should have been allowed to continue.

- Men are much more concerned about the precedent that invocation sets and the potential of abuse by future governments. Slightly more than half (53 per cent) of men say this is a concern, compared to 34 per cent of women. Half of women (52 per cent) say this was a good example of how the Act can be effectively used, compared to 38 per cent of men.

- On a key faceoff question, younger people (18-34) are more likely to say that the right to protest outweighs the economic disruption it may cause (60 per cent to 40 per cent). Those 35-54 years of age are divided close to evenly, while those 55 years of age and older lean heavily toward protecting economic interests even if it means limiting protests at times (71 per cent to 29 per cent).

The full poll can be viewed online at https://angusreid.org/emergency-act-review-freedom-convoy/