As extortion grips Surrey, B.C., critics question why emergency powers used swiftly in 2021 are missing when small businesses face real criminal threats.
A Familiar Playbook—Used Selectively
Governments across Canada proved in 2021 that they can move fast. In fact, when political disruption rattled the country, leaders acted with urgency. They invoked emergency powers. They rolled out sweeping financial measures. They even froze bank accounts. At the time, officials argued that such steps protected public order. Therefore, the actions moved forward quickly and decisively.
However, fast forward to today, and the sense of urgency has vanished.
In Surrey, British Columbia, small businesses now face something far more tangible than political noise. They face organized criminal extortion. Owners report threats to their lives. Families describe fear at their doorsteps. Communities feel the pressure daily. Yet, despite the severity, the response remains strikingly muted.
Crime in Plain Sight
Right now, Surrey business owners describe a troubling pattern. Criminal groups demand money. They threaten violence. They intimidate workers and relatives. As a result, many owners operate in fear, unsure whether the next phone call will bring danger.
Moreover, this is not a theoretical risk. It is ongoing. It is organized. And it is criminal.
Meanwhile, community members say the atmosphere has changed. Fear spreads quickly. Trust erodes. Neighbours worry not only about livelihoods but also about personal safety. Therefore, the issue has moved beyond commerce and into the realm of public safety.
A Thin Response to a Serious Threat
Despite these reports, the official response has stayed limited. Approximately 20 police officers have been assigned to the situation. That number, while not meaningless, hardly matches the scale of organized crime.
Notably, no emergency declaration has followed. No extraordinary enforcement tools have appeared. No financial or regulatory measures have disrupted criminal networks. Instead, the approach feels cautious and restrained.
Yet, when compared to 2021, the contrast feels stark.
Back then, governments, including the NDP government in British Columbia, justified extraordinary action in the name of urgency. Now, when small businesses and families ask for protection, that same urgency seems to fade.
A Question That Won’t Go Away
This difference raises an uncomfortable question: why does urgency depend on who benefits?
When political or economic interests faced disruption, governments acted swiftly. When organized crime targets everyday Canadians, the response slows. Therefore, many residents now wonder whether emergency powers exist only when they serve government priorities.
Public safety, after all, should not depend on optics. Nor should it hinge on convenience. Instead, it should respond to real harm, especially when civilians face credible threats.
Furthermore, the current approach sends a message. Twenty officers suggest a problem acknowledged but not fully confronted. For many, that signal feels troubling.
The Cost of Delay
While governments hesitate, the damage continues. Businesses weigh whether to close. Families consider leaving neighbourhoods they once trusted. Communities lose confidence in protection systems meant to serve them.
At the same time, criminal groups gain ground. They test boundaries. They measure responses. If resistance looks weak, pressure grows stronger. Consequently, delay carries a cost that compounds over time.
Therefore, critics argue that stronger action now could prevent deeper harm later. Financial investigations could disrupt extortion networks. Regulatory tools could expose laundering operations. Coordinated enforcement could restore confidence.
Fairness, Responsibility, and Trust
At its core, this issue is about fairness. If extraordinary powers can protect governments during protests, they should also protect citizens during criminal campaigns.
Moreover, responsibility matters. Governments hold tools that ordinary people do not. When leaders choose not to use them, they must explain why.
Transparency builds trust. Silence erodes it.
As a result, residents now demand clarity. Why do emergency powers appear available in political crises but absent in public safety emergencies? Why does organized crime not trigger the same decisive response?
The Public Wants Answers
Surrey’s situation has become a test case. It asks whether public safety truly comes first. It challenges leaders to align words with actions. And it forces a reckoning with how power gets used.
Ultimately, Canadians expect consistency. They expect protection. And they expect governments to act when harm is real and ongoing.
Until clear answers arrive, the contrast remains impossible to ignore. And the question lingers: if not now, then when?
