Civil Liberty vs. Civil Security

We seem to have come to a very important moment in this minority parliament. That, of course, is the very recent discussion we have been having with regards to a pair of public safety provisions that M. Dion wishes to remove from the Criminal Code. Those being (1) an allowance of police to arrest a person they suspect is about to engage in terrorist activity, and (2) an allowance to close investigative hearings into possible or past terrorist attacks. This subject, much like the last debate that split the Liberal Party into factions -- same-sex marriage -- has forced all of Liberals to take sides. Unfortunately those sides are that of the left and right flanks of the party. However, that cannot be the case this time around.

I am going to be branded as right wing for what I am about to say. But I can assure you, that is certainly not the case. And those that know me know this to be true.

We cannot afford to side against the Prime Minister. And, as I have stated in past, we as Canadians (not as Liberals) can afford to ignore the issue of our security. This cannot be about liberty vs. security. That isn't because we are forced to chose, but because we can have both. We saw that during the Chretien-Martin years following 9-11. To allow police to have these provisions at their finger tips allows them to better secure our liberty. And that is what we have to do. We have to not chose between them, but to chose both of them. And that is exactly what we do by keeping these provisions.