I assume this is an honest question so here's an honest answer.
The relevant bit is:
(1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15.
(2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.
(3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration.
(4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1).
(5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).
Contrary to popular belief it's not specific to Quebec, it can be undertaken by either the federal or provincial/territorial level by a simple majority of the applicable governing body. (note that it doesn't apply to municipalities, so is irrelevant in the particulars of this article)
It allows temporary suspension of some Charter rights for a period of time (again country to popular belief it's not a blank check, and can't be used to suspend, e.g. mobility rights, or democratic rights, and the Supreme Court has ruled its use invalid in the past.).
It was first used by the Yukon Territory in 1982, but was never brought into force.
It's also been used in Alberta (in an ill fated attempt to ban same sex marriages), Saskatchewan (to attempt to force through back to work legislation, and avoid a Charter challenge based on freedom of association), and Quebec (in the most famous instance, to allow the provinces french only sign law). There are not currently as far as I know any in-use cases of Section Thirty Three.