In the midst of cries for individual ‘freedoms,’ Canadian collectivism prevails

John Manley is the former deputy prime minister and a current senior adviser with Bennett Jones LLP.

Like my fellow citizens of Ottawa, I feel a combination of anger, frustration and helplessness about the occupation of the downtown core of my city. Much of this derives from a sense that my governments are incapable of setting self-interest aside and acting together in a timely and decisive manner to preserve peace and ensure the safety and security of citizens.

It fell in great measure to me, in the aftermath of 9/11, to address the fear among Canadians that our society was under a real threat. We could all agree that the ability to go about our daily lives without fear for personal safety was the absolute minimum required of our government; of “peace, order and good government,” the first two items were mandatory.

It may be that most of the occupiers who have now departed Ottawa are peaceful people whose grievances are disparate but – to them at least – genuine. They have bunched these perceived affronts together and tied a bow around them, labelling the entire package “freedom.”

It is therefore unsurprising that they are sometimes seen displaying U.S. flags. The United States was born of revolution. Its core beliefs reflect its founders’ desire to throw off the yoke of Britain’s claim to its colonies in the New World. “Give me liberty, or give me death!” was Patrick Henry’s famous cry in 1775. The Declaration of Independence proclaims “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” as inalienable rights, which government exists to protect.

The United States has been a great and successful democracy, but its founding DNA differs from Canada. Not revolution, but an act of the British Parliament gave birth to Canada, whose political structure assumes government to be benign, not resisted and contained. American rugged individualism differs from Canadian collectivism in fundamental ways – thus the incomprehension that many of us feel at the protesters’ affront to the belief that we are a diverse, but mutually supportive, community in which our collective interests as citizens take precedence over an individual’s freedom.

I don’t understand why some people refuse vaccinations. I shudder at some of the outrageous conspiracy theories that otherwise functioning adults seem to accept. I find such behaviours during the pandemic to be not only selfish but reckless. But I am prepared to accept reluctance to be vaccinated at face value, especially as governments have done a poor job justifying and explaining some of the rules and mandates imposed and often modified throughout these past two years.

The Prime Minister is by no means the only politician to have sometimes shown a willingness to divide rather than unite, but with his office comes the greatest responsibility. I acknowledge that managing COVID-19 has been complex and difficult. But trust needs to be earned and re-earned in our modern society. Our laws and institutions bestow authority upon government, but that is not the same as imbuing it with the trust of its citizens. Citizens can smell partisanship a mile away, and apply a trust discount to words they view as pursuing self-interest.

Governments and laws do not exist in nature; rather, they are the creations of humans. Their existence has benefitted humanity by enabling societies in which rules are understood and enforced for collective well-being.

In a democracy, protests and civil disobedience are essential. Vocal dissent should be permitted and indeed encouraged. But peaceful and orderly is the way in Canada. An individual’s freedom to dissent ends where the peace and security of others begins. To permit willful and flagrant disobedience of the law, and allow infringements on the rights of innocent citizens, will lead in time to chaos and fear, rather than security.

I was proud of my fellow citizens for blocking the protest on a street not far from my home. But it should not be necessary that brave citizens risk personal harm to do what we have authorized and empowered law enforcement agencies to take care of. The confrontation could have ended badly, and vigilantism is not something we want to encourage. But this is what can happen when governments – which we elect and empower to make the rules, and to which we bestow the right to use reasonable force when necessary – fail to act.

Though not as timely as residents might have hoped for, the success of the police this past weekend in removing the Ottawa demonstration in a careful, methodical and largely peaceful manner is worthy of grateful recognition. The proclamations of a state of emergency by Ontario and the Emergencies Act by the federal government were notable, but surely what we lacked was not more laws with more draconian consequences, but the enforcement of existing laws. Without confidence that this will be the case in the future, our citizens, our trading partners and indeed the world will question Canada’s reliability as a rule-of-law country.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.