The LPoC wishes to express its support for the legitimacy for the protest taking place in Ottawa as long as it’s done without violating the non-aggression principle and private property rights. We applaud that, with a few minor exceptions, it has been done in that manner.

We recognize that the protestors have very legitimate concerns. Contrary to the constant misrepresentation by the government and main stream media, this is not an anti-vaccination protest but rather an anti-mandate protest. This is attested by the fact that the majority of the protestors are vaccinated. What people want is their freedom and liberty back. We completely support this desire in light of the following evidence.

• A few months ago, Douglas Allen of Simon Fraser University published the result of a study that found that:
• The lockdowns have had, at best, a marginal effect on the number of Covid-19 deaths and
• the cost/benefit ratio of lockdowns in terms of life-years saved was at least 3.6. That is, for every life-year saved, 3.6 were lost.
• In January, Johns Hopkins University published the result of a meta-analysis of the impact of lockdowns on Covid-19 deaths and stated: “While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument”

Justin Trudeau made the classic mistake of acting on a narrow scope (Covid-19 deaths) as opposed to a comprehensive and holistic approach that would have included all aspects of life. Therefore, his actions were and continue to be completely inappropriate.

We also strongly condemn his on-going efforts to demonize the protestors who, as we just showed, have perfectly valid concerns particularly since many countries (UK, Netherlands and Denmark to name a few) are now lifting most restrictions.

Also, his efforts to dismiss them as a “small fringe” betrays his appalling lack of knowledge of history and ethics. According to his world view the only acceptable opinion is that of the majority. Let us remind him of a few instances where movements that became accepted by the majority started out as fringe movement:

• Nelson Mandela and the resistance to apartheid
• William Wilberforce and the resistance to slavery
• The White Rose movement and the resistance to the Nazi regime

In doing so, he’s confusing what is legal with was is moral. The examples above ought to remind him of how often that has not been the case.

We strongly oppose his describing the protestors’ views as “unacceptable” particularly when mentioned in a sentence about freedom. Apparently the irony is lost on him. Freedom includes the right to be able to express views that are disagreeable to others. We also note that, given Trudeau’s many instances of ethics violations, black face incidents, groping episode and his praises for totalitarian regimes like Cuba and China, he has zero credibility to appoint himself judge of what is acceptable.

Finally, we urge him to show some courage and meet with the protestors. His cowardly behaviour is unacceptable.

Let us end by quoting Sophie Scholl (White Rose movement) who a few moments before being executed by the Nazi at the age of 21 said: “How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause?”

We recognize the sacrifices made by many of the protestors and support their efforts for freedom and liberty. Your cause is a righteous one. God speed.

Jacques Y Boudreau
Leader, Libertarian Party of Canada
[email protected]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Déclaration officielle du Parti Libertarien du Canada (PLdC) sur la manifestation Freedom Convoy 2022 à Ottawa

Le PLdC souhaite exprimer son soutien à la légitimité de la manifestation qui se déroule à Ottawa tant qu'elle se fait sans violer le principe de non-agression et les droits de propriété privée. Nous sommes heureux de voir qu’à part quelques exceptions mineures, cela ait été fait de cette manière.

Nous reconnaissons que les manifestants ont des préoccupations très légitimes. Contrairement aux fausses déclarations constantes du gouvernement et des principaux médias, il ne s'agit pas d'une manifestation anti-vaccination mais plutôt d'une manifestation anti-mandat. Ceci est attesté par le fait que la majorité des manifestants sont vaccinés. Ce que les gens veulent, c'est le retour de leur liberté. Nous appuyons entièrement ce désir à la lumière des preuves suivantes.

• Il y a quelques mois, Douglas Allen de l'Université Simon Fraser a publié le résultat d'une étude qui a révélé que :
• Les confinements ont eu, au mieux, un effet marginal sur le nombre de décès de Covid-19 et
• le rapport coût/bénéfice du confinement en termes d'années de vie gagnées était d'au moins 3,6. Autrement dit, pour chaque année de vie sauvée, 3,6 ont été perdues.
• En janvier, l'Université Johns Hopkins a publié le résultat d'une méta-analyse de l'impact des confinements sur les décès de Covid-19 et a déclaré : "Bien que cette méta-analyse conclue que les confinements n'ont eu que peu ou pas d'effets sur la santé publique, ils ont imposé d'énormes coûts économiques et sociaux là où ils ont été adoptés. En conséquence, les politiques de confinement sont mal fondées et doivent être rejetées en tant qu'instrument de politique en cas de pandémie »

Justin Trudeau a commis l'erreur classique d'agir sur un périmètre étroit (décès de Covid-19) par opposition à une approche globale et holistique qui aurait inclus tous les aspects de la vie. Par conséquent, ses actions étaient et continuent d'être totalement inappropriées.

Nous condamnons également fermement ses efforts continus pour diaboliser les manifestants qui, comme nous venons de le montrer, ont des préoccupations parfaitement valables, d'autant plus que de nombreux pays (Royaume-Uni, Pays-Bas et Danemark pour n'en nommer que quelques-uns) lèvent désormais la plupart des restrictions.

Aussi, ses efforts pour les rejeter comme une « petite frange » trahissent son épouvantable manque de connaissance de l'histoire et de l'éthique. Selon sa vision du monde, la seule opinion acceptable est celle de la majorité. Rappelons-lui quelques cas où des mouvements qui ont été acceptés par la majorité ont commencé comme des mouvements marginaux :

• Nelson Mandela et la résistance à l'apartheid
• William Wilberforce et la résistance à l'esclavage
• Le mouvement de la Rose Blanche et la résistance au régime nazi

Ce faisant, il confond ce qui est légal avec ce qui est moral. Les exemples ci-dessus devraient lui rappeler combien de fois cela n'a pas été le cas.

Nous nous opposons fermement à sa description des opinions des manifestants comme "inacceptables", en particulier lorsqu'elles sont mentionnées dans une phrase sur la liberté. Apparemment, l'ironie est perdue pour lui. La liberté comprend le droit de pouvoir exprimer des opinions qui sont désagréables pour les autres. Nous notons également que, compte tenu de ces nombreux cas de violations de l'éthique, d'incidents de visage noir, d'épisode de tâtonnements et de ses louanges pour des régimes totalitaires comme Cuba et la Chine, Trudeau n'a aucune crédibilité pour se nommer juge de ce qui est acceptable.

Enfin, nous l'exhortons à faire preuve de courage et à rencontrer les manifestants. Son comportement lâche est inacceptable.

Terminons en citant Sophie Scholl (mouvement de la Rose Blanche) qui, quelques instants avant d'être exécutée par les nazis à l'âge de 21 ans, a déclaré : « Comment peut-on s'attendre à ce que la droiture prévale alors qu'il n'y a presque personne qui veuille se sacrifier individuellement à une cause juste?

Nous reconnaissons les sacrifices consentis par de nombreux manifestants et soutenons leurs efforts pour la liberté. Votre cause est juste. Bravo !

Jacques Y Boudreau
Chef, Parti Libertarien du Canada
[email protected]

Statement: The Libertarian Party of Canada strongly condemns the following government actions:

• The enacting of the Emergencies Act by the Federal Government
• The declaration of a State of Emergency by the Province of Ontario
• The extension of the vaccine passports in BC to the end of June

Over the last two years, our civil liberties have been repeatedly violated by the imposition of lockdowns and restrictions. Many of these government actions at both the federal and provincial levels have been in direct violation of Canadians’ protected rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (CORF).

For example, the Right Honorable Brian Peckford is suing the Federal Government over article 6 of the charter, which guarantees Canadians the right of movement within and in and out of the country.  Brian Peckford, the last living signatory of the original CORF, recognizes the abuses of power levied against the Canadian people, arguing that various governments have failed to justify the use of limits as described in article 1. Another example is that even the VP of Public Health and Chief Medical Officer of Vancouver Coastal Health admitted that the vaccine passport program was a coercive technique and not about public health.

People have had enough and to participate in mass demonstration is their fundamental right to protest the egregious actions of governments that affect them. When governments overreach their authority, the people can assemble to react through peaceful protest.

The current Freedom Convoy 2022, is a grassroots movement that is people driven. It is a cry out by the people of Canada who have had enough by showing their displeasure across Canada. It is incumbent to governments to listen to the will of the people and correct the mistakes they have made in policies that have harmed the people.

The legislative actions on the part of governments to willfully remove peoples rights, by creating zones, by seizing private property, bank accounts and private donations are both illegal and immoral, and is an egregious overstep by governments in a last ditch effort to thwart the will of the people.  The actions of the governments are akin to terrified dictators who, by using state powers, suppress basic human rights as protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We note that the Canadian Civil Liberties Association “does not believe the high and clear threshold needed to invoke the Emergencies Act has been met” and that the Canadian Constitution Foundation stated that “it is concerned by the federal government’s historic invocation of the Emergencies Act today. The government has set a dangerous precedent for the right to free assembly and protest, declaring the protests occurring in Ottawa and elsewhere across the country to be unlawful without any further explanation”.

Let’s not forget why we are in these government contrived lockdowns and violations of Canadians personal medical autonomy. The reason for these impositions is the abject and complete failure of our publicly funded healthcare institutions, which in spite of years of warnings, still failed to protect the people.  It is the continuous healthcare failures of governments, which have created the violations of our rights today.

The actions of the governments have been at their own making. We have been locked down and controlled leading to huge economic losses, despair, mental illness, educational impairment, postponed diagnostics, surgeries and treatment etc.  Governments have not only failed the people but they have punished them and have now granted themselves the legislative authority to inflict violence on them.  This is not democracy.

Jacques Y Boudreau
Leader, Libertarian party of Canada
[email protected]