The widespread belief that governments’ COVID-19 protections were primarily to blame for the damage caused by the pandemic demands a citizen inquiry into that response, said former Reform Party leader Preston Manning.
The former federal opposition leader is helping to lead a proposed independent investigation in seven cities early next year into the pros and cons of how the pandemic has been treated at all levels of government, from politicians’ suspicion.
Sign up for the most productive stories from the National Post, a department of Postmedia Network Inc.
A welcome email is on the way. If you do not see it, please check your spam folder.
The next NP Published factor will soon be in your inbox.
We found a challenge in your registration. Revisit
“There’s so much skepticism about politicians,” Manning said Wednesday, referring to a recent national vote of 1,533 Canadian reviews conducted through the poll.
“The fact that 74% said they had been injured (due to government restrictions due to the pandemic) is a disappointing conclusion. . . There was a lot of pain from everyone on everyone’s part. “
This reflects Canadians’ concerns about the negative impact of pandemic policies on social, physical and economic well-being, he said.
Manning also said the national citizen poll is conducted in the absence of federal or provincial hearings on their reaction to the pandemic.
He insisted that the investigation and resulting recommendations not be considered a predetermined indictment of COVID-19 protections and how they were administered or a statement of conspiracy theories.
Witnesses will be sought from a variety of perspectives, including medical, legal, political, advertising and others, and he has no legal authority to subpoena them, he said.
“Instead of speculating in advance, why hold those hearings and draw conclusions afterwards?” said Manning.
“I hope there will be an intelligent variety of testimonials. If you feel (your comments will not be heard), pass, testify, don’t go down. “
Witnesses will be sworn in and questioned by a panel of five commissioners, who have not yet been recruited, he said.
The main focus of the research won’t be pointing fingers, Manning said, but how to better handle the next pandemic.
“At the end of the day, let it be positive, what classes can be learned?” he said.
The efforts are led by Manning, David Ross, a New Brunswick CPA and Christian charitable activist, and Andrej Litvinjenko, an Ontario business/business lawyer.
The survey provides two samples of potential witnesses, either others who claim to have been seriously injured by COVID-19 vaccines.
A photo posted on it shows a march protesting public COVID-19 measures.
He is also seeking donations to fund the seven-stage tour, with two- to three-day leg hearings. The hearing covering Alberta and Saskatchewan is expected to be held at Red Deer.
The portal presents a petition to evaluate audiences, with a link inviting the public to help decide on its members.
Manning declined to divulge her own perspectives on how COVID-19 protections were imposed, but said “there has been incorrect information on both sides,” raising what she says are exaggerated claims about the infection functions of vaccines.
A physical law expert at the University of Calgary said she will not participate in the research, given the anti-restraint bias she says is obvious in her and other facets that undermine her credibility.
“When they create an online page to ask for a safe kind of testimony, they won’t get a broad band of the population,” Hardcastle said.
The fact that the hearings will not be governed by the Federal Investigations Act and will not have independence from government investigations should not go unnoticed by the public, he said.
“It’s very different from when a government conducts an investigation, historically it’s conducted through members of the judiciary. . . (This research) acquires a specific ideological bent. “
Hardcastle also said donor-funded research puts them in danger of being compromised.
Instead, Manning and his colleagues “should bring in the provinces and the federal government for public consultations,” he said.
Among the survey’s 10 stated targets is one “to read about the liability and offender factor for any harm or injury caused by governments’ reaction to COVID-19. “
That indicates the hearings will be aimed at angry driving and are sure to divide an already polarized country more than find solutions, said Tim Caulfield, a professor of fitness law and policy at the University of Alberta.
“It plays and breeds distrust and hatred towards the public fitness formula and I don’t think it’s constructive,” he said.
Experts are already comparing the effectiveness of governments’ reaction to COVID-19, Caulfield said, a disease that has killed about 47,000 Canadians and more than 5,000 Albertans.
“No one disputes that we want to study, be informed and refine and be better next time and other people do,” he said.
He said Canada, especially in the U. S. , has “handled the pandemic pretty well,” noting that repeated studies have shown that in predominantly Republican areas of the U. S. In the U. S. where vaccination levels were lower, COVID-19 death rates were particularly higher.
While none were announced, Hardcastle said a federal investigation remained and insisted that such hearings on past fitness crises had proven independence.
In Alberta, the UCP government has resisted calls from the NDP for an investigation into its handling of the pandemic, which has been criticized by medical experts and others for being too arrogant and leading to deaths and hospitalizations.
BKaufmann@postmedia. com
Twitter: @BillKaufmannjrn
365 Bloor Street East, Toronto, ON M4W 3L4
© 2022 National Post, a department of Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized dissemination, transmission or transmission is strictly prohibited.
This uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads) and allows us to analyze our traffic. Learn more about cookies here. By continuing to use our Array, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.