I received an e-mail from a constituent this week who disagrees with the government’s intent to revive an anti-terrorism measures from the Anti-Terrorism Act  passed in 2001 by Parliament.

The measures allow for the detention of an individual over a period of up to 72 hours and an investigative hearing before the courts if an officer believes, on reasonable grounds, that a serious terrorist offence is about to take place and suspects that the arrest of a particular person would prevent it.

Great care was taken by Parliament when it originally drafted this measure  to ensure that it would only be available under strictly defined conditions and would be subject to numerous procedural safeguards including a sunset clause which allowed the measures to expire in 2007.

Debate at the time was robust with members from all sides affirming that such legislation must maintain a balance between a firm commitment to eradicate terrorism and the protection of civil liberties for all Canadians.

The measure for an investigative hearing came under scrutiny by the Supreme Court of Canada and was upheld.

The discussion, whether to renew these measures or not, is timely coming as it does following the 10^th anniversary of 9/11.

The anniversary was a reminder of the immense responsibility we have to  protect the public against the kind of terrorist activity we saw that day.

How best to do so however, raises ethical questions about the rights of the individual versus the right of society to be protected:  How far do we need to go to ensure the safety of the public?  What kind of powers should be given to law enforcement and the courts?  How do we ensure that any measures we take are directed against terrorist acts, not against the members of a specific community, ethnicity, or religion?

I have given it much thought and I will likely support the decision to revive the measure but I would welcome feedback from more constituents.

I encourage people to avoid making the discussion partisan.  I do not believe that it is realistic or fair to divide Canadians by defining them as those who respect civil liberties and those who do not.

Canada is and remains a democratic society which respects the rights and freedoms of its citizens.  But with rights come responsibility and while it is reasonable to expect to  have the freedom to express individual beliefs, the right to do so ends when there is an intent to harm others and to undermine the welfare and security of Canadians.

It’s difficult to acknowledge that  the events of 9/11, the arrest of the Toronto 18, the car bomb placed in Times Square in 2010 or the fear that a terrorist act is possible at any time has robbed us of some of our freedom.

Under these conditions, it is reasonable, within strict limits, to provide law enforcement and the courts with the ability to act and take pre-emptive measures when there is evidence that a terrorist act is taking place, and have the confidence that they will do so responsibly.

Trust in our ability to make good laws is the best assurance of preserving all that we value in a civil society.

Ron Cannan is the Member of Parliament for Kelowna-Lake Country.  If you wish to discuss this or any other issue related to the federal government please contact his office at 470-5075 or ron@cannan.ca .