On the three-year anniversary of the Freedom Convoy, it is crucial to revisit this pivotal moment in Canadian history. February 2022 saw a unique and unprecedented public demonstration in Ottawa, bringing to light deep-seated societal tensions that had been simmering for years. To better understand the events and their implications, I sat down with Peter Sloly, the former chief of the Ottawa Police Service, to discuss his firsthand experience leading law enforcement during the convoy protests.
Sloly brings a wealth of knowledge, having served in both the Ottawa and Toronto police forces and possessing extensive experience in public order policing. His perspective challenges many of the mainstream narratives surrounding the Freedom Convoy, offering a more nuanced understanding of what unfolded during those tense weeks.
One of the most striking takeaways from our conversation was Sloly’s insistence that there may not have been a purely policing solution to the Freedom Convoy. This echoes his broader philosophy on law enforcement’s role in society—policing alone cannot address systemic societal issues. Instead, he argues that crises like the convoy stem from long-standing structural deficits, economic disparities, and a growing sense of alienation among citizens.
Sloly described the convoy as an event that evolved beyond a standard protest. Initially, it was framed as a trucker-led demonstration against COVID-19 mandates, but it quickly transformed into a broader movement fueled by years of frustration over government policies, economic hardships, and perceived overreach by authorities. The occupation of Ottawa was more than just about vaccine mandates—it was the manifestation of a population that felt unheard and dismissed.
Despite media narratives that painted the convoy as a lawless and extremist movement, Sloly highlighted the fact that the protest did not result in deaths, large-scale riots, or widespread destruction—outcomes that are not uncommon in similarly large-scale demonstrations elsewhere. He attributes this to extensive negotiation efforts, liaison officers working with protestors, and careful coordination to prevent unnecessary escalation.
Yet, much of this dialogue was overlooked in media coverage. As Sloly noted, many early reports set a fixed narrative: that law enforcement had failed, that police leadership was sympathetic to the protestors, and that the convoy was an entirely right-wing extremist movement. This narrative, once established, became nearly impossible to challenge, even as intelligence reports suggested a more complex picture.
A crucial part of our discussion revolved around Canada’s difficulty in confronting its national identity. The convoy exposed deep fractures in how Canadians perceive government authority, law enforcement, and societal cohesion. Many protesters felt “othered” by their own government, alienated by policies they believed disproportionately harmed them. This is a broader issue that transcends the convoy—many groups across Canada, from rural communities to marginalized urban populations, feel increasingly disconnected from political decision-making.
So, where do we go from here? Sloly suggests that addressing these tensions requires long-term investments in social cohesion, economic opportunity, and transparent governance. As Canada grapples with an increasingly polarized political and social landscape, the key takeaway from the Freedom Convoy is that ignoring societal grievances only allows them to fester.
This conversation underscored the importance of understanding events beyond media soundbites and political rhetoric. The Freedom Convoy was not just about a protest—it was a reflection of a much deeper national struggle over identity, governance, and the role of law enforcement in crisis management. If Canada hopes to move forward, we must be willing to engage in difficult, honest conversations. And that is precisely what the Open Minds Podcast strives to do
