And the thing is, AFAICT there is no “guy who PayPal’d $10 and got his accounts frozen”, so if there’s no outcry, if people like me dismiss it, that might be because it didn’t happen.

From here it looks like you bought into the ‘freedumb!’ narrative, that any action taken to deal with the situation was bad. We had people here on HN lamenting that with the invocation of emergency powers, Canada had seen it’s last election, they would never be rescinded and that Trudeau was now a dictator for life. The whole thing is ridiculous hyperbole built on very childish notions of freedom that are pretty incompatible with the democratic functioning of a country.

The Deputy Minister of Finance said they had that power.

And instead of being pissed your government can lock your bank account down with no evidence, no trial, no ability to defend yourself and your response is “you bought into the ‘freedunb!’ narrative.

Yikes.

The theoretical but non-exercised power to put a temporary freeze on the bank account of someone contributing to a blockade which is being dismantled under the provisions of a national emergency, with both democratic and judicial oversight …

Yeah there are bigger things to get worked up about. I would expect national emergency legislation to come with all sorts of powers, and only the appropriate ones to be exercised, with Parliamentary and democratic accountability down the line for those doing the exercising.

Yikes indeed, that people are surprised by the availability of financial interventions available to governments, in extremis.

As a Canadian citizen, your bank account cannot be arbitrarily frozen by the RCMP and some politician because they feel like it.

Your bank can do it, but no the government cant without evidence, a court order and your right to argue your case before a judge. It’s called “due process”.

How do you not know that?

I think I get it now. You’re not upset because you didn't even understand the rights you had before they were taken away.

Perhaps that is different in Canada. It’s certainly the case in the US, AU and UK.

I’m not upset because it’s not unreasonable to grant powers to perform an emergency breakup of a blockade, particularly when not all of those powers are going to be exercised (as they weren’t here), and when under the scrutiny of parliament and with democratic accountability.

Were I Canadian I’d be more upset at the clusterfuck that led to the invocation of emergency powers on the first place. The city police should have had it handled.

The banks can and will freeze accounts when the police or other agencies raise suspicions with them in most western nations

The police or a politician cannot arbitrarily order a bank account frozen without a court order (again due process). Sure, the police could say "hey that looks suspicious", but the bank is under no obligation to do anything.

You say there is no distinction there - I'd say it's a massive distinction.

I’m not upset because it’s not unreasonable to grant powers to perform an emergency breakup of a blockade, particularly when not all of those powers are going to be exercised (as they weren’t here), and when under the scrutiny of parliament and with democratic accountability.

What scrutiny of Parliament? The decision to enact the Emergencies Act was a decision by the Prime Minister, done with his cabinet, and those discussions were secret.

Sure, there was a inquiry after the fact, but hey, the horse is already out the barn by then.