Anita Anand

Anita Anand spoke 120 times across 1 day of testimony.

  1. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    My name is Indira Anita Anand, I-N-D-I-R-A A-N-I-T-A A-N-A-N-D.


  2. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did.


  3. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    It is. Thank you.


  4. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, I can.


  5. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  6. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Well, I’d like to be a little bit more specific than that in section ---


  7. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And Section 4 of the National Defence specifies that the Minister of National Defence has management and direction of the Canadian Armed Forces. I work very closely with a senior team and in particular the Chief of Defence staff who under section 18 of the National Defence Act has control and administration of the Canadian Armed Forces. I also work closely with my Deputy Minister who under section 7 is appointed and the Deputy Minister has jurisdiction over running the Department of National Defence, Human Resources in that Department, as well as advising the Minister on decisions. And that is the –- I would say the “Triumvirate” within which we work and the framework for the decision-making in the Department of National Defence, with of course me as Minister at the Apex.


  8. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I certainly can. I will say that that process is not run out of the Department of National Defence although we sometimes are the subject matter of a request for assistance that may come to Minister Blair who is the Minister responsible for the RFA process and under section 4(h) of the Emergency Management Act has the jurisdiction to continue to address request for assistance. And so in terms of the Department of National Defence, as I said, sometimes the Canadian Armed Forces and the resources of the Forces are the subject matter of requests for assistance. So for example, in hurricanes and floods, during Covid, for example the Canadian Armed Forces have been the subject of request for assistance from the provinces and we do our very best to respond in whatever way we can.


  9. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Could you clarify the question? Sorry.


  10. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Under section 273.6 of the National Defence Act the Minister of National Defence can authorize any duty involving public service. And under (2) of that Act it is in the case of law enforcement, only if it is in the national interest to do so and only if all other means have been exhausted. That is one particular way in which I, as Minister, can authorize the use of the Armed Forces and the other way is the aid to civil power. I will say, it’s very, very important to clarify that under 273 of the National Defence Act the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last resort. What that means is, that the matter cannot be effectively dealt with other than the assistance of the Canadian Armed Forces. That is almost verbatim from the Act. And I take that very seriously. It was the main framework in which I operated as Minister, not only during the months of February and March of 2022, but since the inception of my role as Minister. It’s a very important section and we have to remember its import in all circumstances.


  11. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Most definitely. First of all we have to remember that this is a regular process, that receiving requests for assistance at the Federal Government occurs quite often and where the request concerns the Canadian Armed Forces, Minister Blair will typically have a conversation with me. I will also task my officials with questions relating to whether we can fulfill the request for assistance, understanding at all times that my goal is to ensure that we can be as helpful as possible to the entity or the person or the Governmental body requesting assistance for the purposes of serving the Canadian public.


  12. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    In each of those circumstances, my officials asked me whether I agreed with providing assistance of the forms you mentioned, the parking lot, firstly, the food rations, secondly, and I, of course, asked questions as to our ability, our resources to provide that assistance. And once I was satisfied that the resources were there for us, for example, a parking lot that was not otherwise being used and of the other example being food rations, over 1,000 packages of rations being available to the Parliamentary Protective Service, those were items that we had on hand and we could easily provide them. I want to make two further points, the first being that that triumvirate that I outlined at the beginning relating to the decision-making structure in the Department of National Defence is extremely important. Decisions that I make are based on information and advice that I receive from my officials and in particular, the Chief of Defence staff and my deputy minister. So in each of the cases that you are highlighting, I received and considered their advice before making the final decision on the RFA that came to me. Furthermore, I will say that the RFA process is one that works very well. It is robust in the sense that it is a vehicle for the federal government to offer assistance. And as I said, most recently, during Hurricane Fiona, it was the vehicle through which we at the Canadian Armed Forces were able to deliver assistance to the provinces of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island.


  13. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    It did follow the same process. As I mentioned, Minister Blair will initially ask me about CAF resources, as he did in the case of the Alberta request for assistance. When I received an inquiry from Minister Blair relating to the use of CAF resources in Alberta, and in particular, the tow trucks, I then asked my officials, and particularly the chief of defence staff, to provide me with information relating to the number of trucks, the utility or usability of those trucks, and the consequences of providing that assistance. And he did provide me with his advice, and it was that advice upon which I made a preliminary decision about whether we could accede to what I heard from Minister Blair was a request.


  14. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    First of all, I’ll expand on the answer to that specific question about suitability because the response that I received from my team was broader. It didn’t only relate to suitability. So first and foremost, the number of trucks that the Canadian Armed Forces had available to assist were very few in number. Second of all, is the suitability point, that being that these vehicles were not suitable for the task at hand. These vehicles are typically used for very very large scale purposes. For example, pulling a tank out of the ditch, is the type of mission that we would typically use those vehicles for. And thirdly, because they are so large and so heavy, thee would be likely considerable damage to any roads on which they travelled. And then finally, using these vehicles, even if we got past the first three points that I just mentioned, would likely cause some escalation because the Canadian Armed Forces would be therefore involved in a personnel capacity and we have not discussed this yet, but I did have concerns about deploying the Canadian Armed Forces as did my chief of defence staff, as did my deputy minister for escalatory reasons.


  15. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And so for all of those four reasons, that decision relating to the suitability of acceding to the request from Alberta did not go the same way as the first two requests for assistance.


  16. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I’d like to take a step back to give some more context to why I made the point about potential escalation which I sense is your -- the gist of your question. Any Minister of National Defence in a democracy would be loath to deploy the Canadian Armed Forces except in the most dire of circumstances. Our country’s soldiers are not police officers. They are not trained in crowd control. They are not trained in protest management. They are not law enforcement. And that reality was one that the chief of defence staff and my deputy minister and I carried with us throughout this time. Furthermore, the National Defence Act itself specifically states that the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last resort. And I've already taken you through the legal analysis there. But if you put those two points together, we need -- and we need to make sure that the Canadian Armed Forces are not deployed in cases where we are addressing protest management or anything related to that, given the potential for escalation.


  17. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I like to look at it in terms of what they are trained to do. They are trained to protect our country. they are trained to ensure the sovereignty and the security of our country. They are trained for combat. And that is why I make the point that any Minister of National Defence would be loathe to deploy the military, except in the most dire of circumstances, especially in a case like this.


  18. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    My concern is escalation, yes.


  19. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And a potential heightened threat to protestors, Canadians. And so my view across the board was while we need to ensure that the Canadian Armed Forces are understood to be the force of last resort, we must also, at the Department of National Defence, do what we can to support the Government of Canada in its response to the protests. And so providing the parking lot, the food rations, offering to transport RCMP officers, those were the types of supports that we were able to offer. In other words, it wasn’t simply the case that we said we are the force of last resort and therefore we can do nothing. It was more how can we be helpful within the confines of the legal parameters that define our role in the National Defence Act?


  20. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    So simply because you’re the force of last resort doesn’t mean you’re the force of no resort. In other words, of course it is important to undertake some contingency planning in case there is the moment where you are called upon. And the Canadian Armed Forces are excellent planner. And there was work going on in the background at a conceptual level in case that need for options arose. But it was not formulated, it was not brought to me, given that we were still in the mode of we are the force of last resort. And that was well understood by my colleagues as we structured the Government’s response to the protests.


  21. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I can.


  22. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    If I could specify in response to your question, you are correct. I will provide information as to the length of time that I was actually out of the country. I was in Ukraine, I was in Latvia, and I was in Belgium. This was just before the onset of the further illegal invasion by Russia of Ukraine. We had been following intelligence that there was a build up of Russian troops at the Ukrainian border and it was important for me to have discussions with my counterparts in those three countries to ensure that they were aware of Canada’s support for Ukraine through Operation UNIFIER and further donations of lethal and non-lethal aid.


  23. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    That is correct.


  24. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did not see it. I heard Minister Lametti’s voice in the background. There was a TV. I heard my name mentioned. But I was trying to prepare for these questions.


  25. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    That is something that I was very concerned about. The safety and security of my staff is something that concerns me greatly. You know, we work together every day. They’re family.


  26. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And very concerned. Yes.


  27. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Minister Lametti not being in Ottawa? I do recall that.


  28. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I remember reading it, yes.


  29. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I do recall that. But I will say that there was a lot of literature being written about the protests during this time and it continues. And I don’t base any government decision making on articles in the press. I’m focused on intelligence. I’m focused on advice based on the intelligence that comes forward. It’s fair peripheral, I would say, an article like that.


  30. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Well, I’m a rational decision-maker so I do welcome advice from experts, and I make my decisions based on the advice that I am provided with. Many times, my decisions accord with the advice that I am given. Sometimes, they don’t. But I always take information that is provided to me into account and that is why I am always asking my officials for the most amount of information they have as earlier as possible.


  31. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I do. I tend not to, again, make decisions about my security or decisions relating to my portfolio based on a like on a tweet, so I will definitely be searching for in-depth substantive information before making any decisions. Having said that, this was a time when I was concerned for the safety of my staff and myself, and I encouraged my staff to work at home. For example, the Department of National Defence was surrounded by protesters and it was a time where we did need to be concerned for our safety, including my safety in going to the West Block.


  32. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I do not have a direct line to the RCMP and CSIS in my decision-making. So the assumption, it appears, in your questions is that they are feeding into my decision-making, and they are not. They fall under the Minister of Public Safety’s portfolio. My decision- making is based on the information that that -- I’m not sure if you heard the first part of my testimony -- that that triumvirate of decision-makers forms, the deputy minister, the chief of defence staff, and both of those individuals feeding information to me for my decisions.


  33. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    That is correct.


  34. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, but the advice was not coming to me directly. The advice was by way of reports to the table. So I want to be clear that I was not having a one- on-one conversation with either of those organizations.


  35. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I am a Minister of the Crown, and I am executing my duties as such, and I am a person who undertakes due diligence in all circumstances, and I was listening intently to whomever it was reporting in those meetings.


  36. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  37. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Thank you.


  38. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Merci, ça marche.


  39. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I do not agree with that.


  40. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I am.


  41. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did.


  42. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I have the oath in front of me if you want pursue it.


  43. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I assume. I was pretty nervous that day. I was focused on what I was going to try to say.


  44. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I assume.


  45. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes. And I also committed to ensure that those shall be secretly treated of in-council and I would do so as a faithful and true servant ought to do for, now, His Majesty.


  46. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The principle is based on the idea that a full-fledged discussion can only occur if those matters are kept confidential. The rationale is important to remember.


  47. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The executive branch of government in a democracy.


  48. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Our collective decisions as the executive branch of government in a parliamentary democracy, yes.


  49. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    They are collective decisions.


  50. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, it was.


  51. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Of the executive branch of government.


  52. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The importance of the declaration of a public order emergency is one with which I agree, one I support. Given the circumstances of the time, the inability of children to go to school, the inability of people to go to work, the inability of trade to cross the border, the inability of citizens to live peacefully in certain of our country, the build-up of arms in certain areas, certainly the threats that were present, led me to the conclusion that this was the right approach for our government.


  53. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    That is a hypothetical that I do not need to respond to given that I agreed with the decision and I agreed with the principle embedded in our Parliamentary democracy that the executive branch of government makes decisions collectively.


  54. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I believe that we are all committed to our oath and we will make decisions, as I said, on a collective basis. We've done that to date and we will continue to do that. That is foundational to the way in which decisions are made in this country as part of our Parliamentary democracy.


  55. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I -- again, it's a hypothetical. I am not going to respond to it. I will say the definition of Public Order Emergency being an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada and that is so serious as to be a national emergency was one that I strongly believed was met, and I am quoting from the Act itself.


  56. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I understand the oath that I took and I understand the principles on which our Parliamentary democracy are based.


  57. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And one of those principles is that the executive branch of government makes decisions collectively.


  58. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I am not aware of that principle, and I think that it is not relevant at this time.


  59. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I'm saying that I understand the way in which Parliamentary democracy works and the executive and legislative branches of government and their respective functions. And in this case and all cases in which I have been involved, that decision making process is functioning robustly.


  60. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I will continue to reiterate the point that at all times, we are able to have a full and robust discussion to satisfy ourselves that decisions that we are making are in the best interests of our country, as was the case in the Public Order Emergency.


  61. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Again, I don’t find this line of questioning relevant to the case at hand. I fully support the Public Order Emergency and the situation that was gripping our country was dire, and it was extremely important for our government to take steps after three weeks of protests where existing law enforcement had not been able to effectively respond to them.


  62. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I most definitely have not.


  63. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Two points. First, I believe Minister Lametti has mentioned that that was made in jest. Second, I have already provided my comments relating to the fact that the Canadian Armed Forces is the force of last resort, therefore, we were not considering deploying tanks in any number.


  64. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  65. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    "You need to get the police to move and --- "


  66. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Wednesday, February 2nd, 8:09 p.m.


  67. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I take no part of my role as Minister of National Defence as something in jest, obviously. I am very concerned and was very concerned, not only about the situation in Canada but about the global strategic situation that we all find ourselves in. And so I am very concerned to make sure that we are making decisions with full information, and I know that’s the case with Minister Lametti as well as the other colleagues around the table. This was a very difficult time, and we were all doing our very best in our respective portfolios.


  68. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I was actually not in Canada at the time. I was in Europe, as previously indicated, trying to launch Canada's response to a potential further invasion of Ukraine by Russia. I will say that I know that my colleagues take their work extremely seriously.


  69. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Do you mean Minister Lametti's statement or the content of his statement?


  70. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I think that is accurate.


  71. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Are you reading from a particular statutory section of the Emergencies Act?


  72. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I have it here.


  73. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    So the statute is a legal instrument, and the reference here is any other law of Canada.


  74. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Section ---


  75. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    --- 273 points to any other method of addressing law enforcement other than with the assistance of the CAF. So one deals with a statutory instrument and instruments that are available to address a particular situation, and the other deals with instances in which the CAF can be deployed.


  76. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The National Defence Act is a statute with a section that specifies that the Canadian Armed Forces will only be deployed if there is no other means of addressing a particular situation from a law enforcement perspective. Those two items are different. One deals with the activities of the Canadian Armed Forces; one deals with the potential basket of laws wherein the public emergency is the last item from a legal perspective of any other statute.


  77. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Of course, I would.


  78. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I believe you’re splitting hairs now and you’re misconceiving the point that I am making. The point that I am making is that the Emergencies Act is a legislative mechanism of last resort.


  79. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The National Defence Act in section 273 simply says that the Canadian Armed Forces cannot supersede other law enforcement mechanisms ---


  80. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    --- unless there is no other option for the law enforcement.


  81. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I believe I’ve already answered that question.


  82. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Do you mean the assessment that we made once Minister Blair had asked me to look into whether we could provide the tow trucks?


  83. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, I did.


  84. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, I did. And if I could just take a step back and clarify that at all times I was seeking to be as helpful as possible in the RFA process and certainly to the Government of Alberta in any way, shape or form. You’ll recall that I led the country’s procurement effort of PPE, vaccines and rapid tests and in that capacity we were trying our very best to supply those materials across the country in the spirit of making sure we got through the pandemic together, and that was exactly the approach that I was taking in the RFA process as well.


  85. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    We had a phone call, yes.


  86. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    It was on or about February 7th or 8th.


  87. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Not at all. I went into extensive detail, as I have here. My conversations with Minister Blair tend to be extensive on requests for assistance and go into significant detail about past CAF resources. That’s the approach we’ve taken on hurricane Fiona, on floods and such was the case as well with regards to the request for assistance from Alberta.


  88. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did not.


  89. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I agree that the roads are within the property and civil rights under the constitution of the province of Alberta but I would like to highlight that the primary reason was one relating to suitability and that the trucks being requested were not only low in number, they were not suitable for the task, nor were they guaranteed to achieve the outcome that was sought.


  90. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    So I was not in direct touch with the Province of Alberta on these items. The RFA process runs through Minister Blair’s office and so my having a direct conversation with Alberta was not something that would have been in keeping with our process, and nor was I in the country at the time.


  91. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did not.


  92. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    There are two reasons. One of sufficiency for the task at hand, but also, two, for operational efficacy in maintaining sufficient resources for the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to do its role as the military of Canada.


  93. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Again, I’m the Minister of National Defence. My job is to provide information to Minister Blair when he requests information about CAF resources; that’s exactly what I did in that circumstance. I don’t tell other Ministers and my colleagues how to effectively perform their jobs and I believe Minister Blair is a very effective Minister.


  94. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Could you repeat the question? What is the precise question?


  95. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Your question focuses on quantity, whereas my response focussed on quantity, suitability, usability and efficacy to reach the expected or designed objective. And so it is the totality of those factors which led to my conclusion and I maintained that that was the right conclusion all the way along until the Government of Canada made the prudent decision to invoke the Emergencies Act.


  96. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    You’ll have to remember that an RFA did not come to me for signature and I provided this information to Minister Blair after discussion with my officials. And after I provided that information, I remained confident in its veracity and applicability and I continued going about my business at a very difficult time at the Ministry of National Defence because of external factors like the potential further invasion of Ukraine by Russia.


  97. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I believe we have reviewed this already. I have indicated there were more main factors that underpinned my decision relating to the deployment of CAF resources in Alberta. I conveyed those factors to Minister Blair in a phone call and my response rests there.


  98. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    All four items together led to the decision that we made.


  99. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    You’re putting a hypothetical to me, which I do no believe is relevant and I have no response to it.


  100. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    It would not change, primarily because I am not, I’ve said this a number of times now, separating out the various factors that led to the decision not to provide the tow trucks in Alberta. And secondly, the deployment of the Canadian Armed Forces as a general matter has the potential to be escalatory, given that the Canadian Armed Forces are not trained in crowd control or protest management and the visual of having Canadian Armed Forces was concerning in many circumstances during this time, including in this one.


  101. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Thank you.


  102. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  103. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, I do.


  104. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Of coruse I do. That’s been my testimony to date.


  105. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  106. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Never changed.


  107. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Okay. I will do that. But I want to build on my last answer relating to that sentence because I thought you were going to ask me one more question on that, and you have not, so I will just say what else I wanted to say.


  108. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    And that is that the sentence: "At no time will CAF members be employed in a security of enforcement role, nor will they conduct any assistance to law enforcement tasks." The Chief of Defence Staff knew that that was an issue that was very important to me. I had done extensive analysis and discussion relating to section 273.6(1) and (2) of the National Defence Act, and in particular, (b) of 273.6(2), which states that the matter cannot effectively be dealt with other than with the assistance of the Canadian Armed Forces. And in this email, he is, I believe, responding and addressing my concern that we are aligned on the point that the Canadian Armed Forces are the force of last resort because in a democracy the Minister of Defence, and certainly this was the case for me, would be loathe to deploy the Canadian Armed Forces in a law enforcement capacity except in the most dire circumstances. And I believe that he knew that that was my view and my interpretation of the law. It reflected our discussions, and the advice he gave me in that sentence I believe is based on those conversations that we have had and the concerns I have. And I'm sure he knew that I would -- if it wasn't in there I would have replied and indicated that it should be. Now on to the question relating to RFAs, and the substance of the RFAs. So your question is a good one. The question highlights how we have to consider each RFA on its merits, and in particular, each RFA should be evaluated on the subject matter of the RFA. The Cartier Drill Hall was a parking lot, very easily handed over for use during this time. Not being used by the Canadian Armed Forces at the time, and certainly, we wanted to support law enforcement efforts wherever possible. Et aussi, c’est la même chose avec la nourriture. We said can we help? How can we help? We have more than a thousand meal packs, and we can provide those to the Parliamentary Protective Service. And so, c’était facile avec les deux choses-là, la « calculation » et notre réponse, c’était très important d’avoir toute l’information, mais ce n’était pas le même sujet avec le troisième RFA en Alberta.


  109. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Bien sûr. Il y a une différence, bien sûr, avec les soldats à l’un côté, à l’autre côté, c’est beaucoup de soldats, mais aussi l’équipement militaire pour aider les gens dans les provinces atlantiques. So in one case, we're talking about tow trucks, which were few in number, not suitable for the task and not clear that they would reach the objective desired, as well as having potential escalation by the deployment of CAF, and on the other hand, we have a natural disaster in the form of a hurricane sweeping the Atlantic provinces, and the question was can the Canadian Armed Forces help with the clearing of debris. And so as you would have seen in the news, Canadian Armed Forces were deployed in Newfoundland, PEI and Nova Scotia to make sure that the provinces had the support they needed in the clearing of debris, the restoring of power lines, the repairing of roadways and those types of undertakings. So, c’était très différent entre les deux choses et, ça, c’est le cas avec toutes les choses avec les forces armées canadiennes. À l’un côté, il y a de RFA, y’a un sujet très différent de l’autre côté, donc on doit « anhiliser » chaque RFA avec une voix différente. It's a different analysis each time.


  110. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    The nub of the issue is whether it is a law enforcement situation. And in Operation LENTUS, which is the operations that we utilise for assisting with hurricanes and floods and the like, that is all assisting citizens trying to recover from hurricanes and natural disasters. So clearing large trees off of roadways, lifting them off of power lines so that power can be restored. Ça, c’est très différent, n’est-ce pas, entre les deux choses parce qu’en Alberta, c’était un cas de camions et… and our trucks were simply not suitable for the task at hand, nor were they large in number. Also, they could lead to escalation and potentially damage roadways.


  111. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did have concern for my safety and the safety of my team, but it wasn't just about us, it was about the citizens of Ottawa writ large. It was about the safety of people going to work and a need to allow people to continue on with their daily lives. Parents were keeping their kids home from school, businesses were closed, people were not living their normal lives. Trade was not flowing across the border, Canadians couldn't travel across the border at all, and we saw and heard about weapons at Coutts. All of these were very concerning items to me from a public safety perspective. And so when you ask about my personal safety, yes, I was concerned, yes, I was concerned about the safety of my team always, but I was generally concerned about public safety writ large across our country.


  112. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Yes, it does.


  113. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    No, the importance of my analysis relating to the Emergencies Act related to Canada and, in particular, I had reference, as someone familiar with statutes to Section 16 of the Act and the definition of “public order emergency” being an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada and that is so serious as to be a national emergency, and I believed the information that I had fulfilled that definition. In terms of what we are witnessing generally around the world and including in Ukraine, with a further invasion of a sovereign democratic country, I am also concerned about that, of course ---


  114. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    --- but it is not -- it is not part of the analysis that I undertook in terms of agreeing with the decision that our government made.


  115. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    M’hm, that’s right.


  116. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)



  117. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I was not.


  118. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    I did not have any conversations relating to drivers of trucks.


  119. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Thank you so much.


  120. Anita Anand, Minister (GC-DND)

    Thank you so much. Merci beaucoup.