44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 1, 2022 10:00AM
- Mar/1/22 10:17:40 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, despite the temptation to do otherwise, I will try to maintain what little positive atmosphere we have here. I understand that the member's question was written before he rose and before he even heard the opening of my brief speech.
Of course members will say that now is not the right time. It is never the right time. It will never be the right time for the Quebec nation to have more influence.
However, it is always the right time. In fact, there is no better time, given my colleague's shameful reference to Ukraine. I say “shameful” because we are talking about the right to self-determination, a legitimate right. Self-determination is acquired, but it also must be defended, and Quebec is in an excellent position, as a nation, to tell Ukraine that we stand with them in friendship and solidarity.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:19:54 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it is so profound that we are discussing our democracy in Canada, the voices we can have and who should be at the table as we watch the horrific violence being perpetrated against the democratic people of Ukraine by Putin in Russia. It reminds us in this House how precious and fragile democracy is.
I would like to ask my hon. colleague about this historic moment in our nation and around the world, where we have come together to say that the violence that is being perpetrated against the Ukrainian people must be fought at every level. Canada has to have a coherent plan in order to support the people of Ukraine, support refugees, support democracy and ensure that Russia pays a serious price for this attack on the democratic rights of an independent nation.
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:37:53 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in this important debate. I will be sharing my time with my wonderful colleague, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, who will have some very interesting things to say. I look forward to hearing him.
Like many of my colleagues in the House, I would like to take a few moments to express our solidarity with the Ukrainian people who have been living through very dark days for almost a week. They have been suffering a brutal assault by a dictator, Vladimir Putin. I feel especially concerned, as the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, since my riding is the area in Montreal where there is the Parc de l'Ukraine, the Ukrainian Orthodox Basilica and the Ukrainian Festival every year, which I attend with Quebeckers and Montrealers of Ukrainian origin. We are all very shaken. We are here to support Ukrainians as well as to support the peace process.
Today’s debate is important because it brings up the question of Quebec’s place in the federation and Quebec’s signing of the Constitution, as well as Quebec’s political weight in the House and in Parliament. I will come back to that a little later.
This raises fundamental questions about democracy and the equality of citizens. We are lucky enough to live in a democratic system in which people express themselves because of a notion of popular sovereignty that leaves it up to the people to decide. We must respect the equality of people, of men and women. The notion of democracy stems from the principle that human beings are born free and equal in rights.
The democratic notion of equality—one citizen, one vote—is not always observed in a certain sense, sometimes for the wrong reasons, but sometimes for the right ones. We tend to forget the bad reasons because we are all too often used to them, unfortunately. Our electoral system is designed so that not all votes are equal. Some votes are lost or do not count in a first-past-the-post system like ours, rather than in a proportional system. Many votes do not make it to Parliament and do not get expressed.
I will use Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie as an example. Last fall, there was a general election. I was lucky enough to be re-elected for a fourth time, but with just under 50% of the votes, 49%, to be exact. This means that 50% of the people of Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie did not vote for the NDP. Are these people represented in the House of Commons? Hopefully, their vote was taken up elsewhere in other ridings.
Since members can be elected with 35% or 40% of the votes, the majority of citizens who voted in an election are often not represented by the members sitting here, in the House. This is becoming more common and, very often—this is practically the rule—we end up with a government that represents a minority of citizens who voted for it. A party can win an election with 37% or 38% of the vote and have a majority government with 65% of the seats in the House and impose its views on Parliament for four years.
If we had a proportional system, if the Liberals had kept their promise and changed the electoral system as they promised in 2015, we might not be where we are today. There have even been situations in our history, on a number of occasions, where the party with the most votes did not form the government. The party that came second, based on the total number of votes, had the majority of the seats. This is an absurd democratic contradiction. I do not understand why the Conservative Party does not get more worked up; the Conservatives got more votes than the Liberals in the last two elections and yet they are in opposition, instead of forming the government. That does not seem to bother them. We in the NDP are troubled by this because it touches on a fundamental issue, the equality of citizens.
There may be good reasons for not observing that equality of votes. The electoral system is a very bad reason, because it could be changed quite easily. Most democracies in the world have done so. However, there are good reasons. There are criteria we can use to decide how and when people will be represented.
As mentioned earlier in this debate, certain criteria already exist in our system. For example, we have to evaluate a number of things. Some of my colleagues from the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party have mentioned the senatorial clause, which ensures that Prince Edward Island, for example, cannot have fewer MPs than it has senators. In fact, that was a condition for its entry into Confederation. There is the grandfathering clause that applies to certain provinces; this has also come up. Finally, we have the territorial clause, which says that the territories must be represented even though they have far fewer constituents than more densely populated ridings like mine. I must also point out that Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is a tiny riding, but 110,000 people live there. That is a lot of people per square kilometre. The territories should have their own MPs even though they have less than half that population spread over a huge area often as big as a number of European countries. These MPs also represent indigenous and Inuit communities, who must be represented to have a voice in the House.
All these criteria need to be examined, which is perfectly normal. That is why an automatic demographic formula is not applied as a basic mathematical rule, but rather a series of exceptions. More criteria are applied, and sometimes for very good reasons.
This system of accommodation means that we can and we must have this kind of discussion, which was brought about by today's motion.
I will refrain from giving a long history lesson and going back to Upper and Lower Canada, but let us not forget that Quebec did not sign the Constitution of 1982. That is problematic. I am very proud of my party leader, who said at a federal NDP convention that that was a historic mistake, which must be resolved one day, one way or another. That said, attempts have been made to heal the scars, the wounds inflicted on René Lévesque and the entire Quebec population. There were two attempts during my teenage years, just as I was beginning to take an interest in politics. There was the Meech Lake Accord attempt between 1987 and 1990, which was rejected, and the Charlottetown Accord that was negotiated afterwards.
I will not rehash all of Quebec’s historical claims and the criteria. There are a number of them, and they are not all mutually exclusive. However, one of the considerations in the Charlottetown Accord was Quebec’s political weight in Parliament, which was set at 25%. This was negotiated by the Conservative government of then prime minister Brian Mulroney. This agreement was approved by my party, the NDP. This is nothing new. The issue of Quebec’s political weight in the House should not be seen as something original or new. There are precedents that were negotiated by the Conservatives and supported by the NDP. I think that this needs to be part of our debate on this motion.
Since the House formally recognized Quebec as a nation, I think that we could have a Quebec clause recognizing that Quebec is a nation and that, as a result, like other Senate provisions, territorial provisions or grandfathering provisions, could be applied to the distribution of seats and that this would not come at the expense of the representation of other provinces. Since Parliament recognized that Quebec is a nation, and that Quebeckers or French Canadians were one of the two founding peoples, then this needs to be meaningfully expressed and have an impact. It would make sense that a Quebec provision—I am not saying it would be the only one—would be one of them.
As a proud Quebecker, I will be pleased to support this motion. I would not want to support the political undermining of Quebec.
I hope that my Liberal and Conservative colleagues in Quebec feel the same way. Immigration is an important and necessary tool to maintain Quebec’s demographic weight, but there are also other ways to do it, and this one would be very effective.
1451 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 1:32:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Shefford for her question.
I am disappointed to hear that anyone would try to minimize the impact of the Bloc Québécois's actions or accuse us of picking a fight. I think that is intellectually dishonest. I could make an analogy here, but like any analogy, it may be murky or flawed. Still, Ukraine is not picking a fight right now.
We want to stand up for our nation, our people, our values, our self-government and our integrity, and I think that is legitimate. It is legitimate for others, and it is legitimate for Quebec. Standing up for one's rights is not picking a fight.
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 1:32:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Laurent.
It is a pleasure to rise to address a number of issues with a focus on what is before us right now. I cannot help but think of what is taking place in Europe. A number of members, when they stood up, started off by commenting on it. I would also like to do that, recognizing that what is happening in Ukraine today is top of mind for millions of Canadians from coast to coast to coast. It is something that will have a profound impact throughout the world. The take-note debate last night had no shortage of members of Parliament wanting to contribute to it.
This is the type of issue that many Canadians would like to see the House possibly spend more time debating. In looking at the motion that the Bloc has brought before us today, we can kind of sense it. When the leader of the Bloc rose to speak, he made reference to Ukraine. I raise it because we should recognize that this is the very first opportunity that the Bloc has had to bring forward an opposition day motion in 2022. What makes it interesting is that the Bloc also has a private member's bill that deals with the same issue, which is also being scheduled for debate.
I am a bit confused as to why they chose this issue: whether it is because of what is happening in the world, with the real threat and possibility of World War III, and the horrendous things taking place in Ukraine today, or whether it is because of local issues. Perhaps it is the pandemic, and providing thoughts and guidance on that. We often hear about the environment. We hear a great deal about housing and so much more, yet the Bloc chose to have this particular debate. I suspect, unfortunately, that it has a lot to do with politics.
Let me provide some thoughts on this issue. Every 10 years, there is a readjustment that takes place. There is legislation that ensures there is an independent review of our boundaries and recommendations that follow. It is based, in part, on population shifts. We all know that populations change within municipalities, provinces and territories, obviously, and with interprovincial migration. That happens every year.
A couple of years back, we released, through Census Canada, a report that clearly showed that with regard to population growth in Canada, whether over the past decade or into the future, immigration had to be taken into consideration. Future population growth is going to very much depend on immigration. Looking at interprovincial immigration, or migration, to immigration, and reflecting on that over the last decade has ultimately brought us to the point where we are today. Back in October, I believe, the recommendation was to reduce a seat in the province of Quebec.
I have said this before in the House. I am very proud of my heritage and lineage that goes back to the province of Quebec. A couple of hundred years ago, my great-grandfathers and grandmothers would have been some of the pioneers in the province of Quebec. We were not the first. As we know, first nations were here before our francophone communities.
Migration, at least in some elements, went out west into the province of Manitoba, where I live today and which I proudly represent.
My passions, in terms of national policies, very much factor in the province of Quebec. I would not want any member to try to give an impression that unless one is a member of Parliament from Quebec, one does not necessarily care for what is happening in Quebec. I care for the province of Quebec in the same manner in which I care for our prairie provinces, the province of Ontario, the Atlantic provinces, our territories or B.C.
We have a lot in common, economically, in terms of things such as the aerospace industry. French is a beautiful language. It is a language that we want to encourage and promote and get more people speaking.
The province of Manitoba, and the St. Boniface community in particular, has a very healthy and growing francophone community. While Manitoba had immigration numbers during the nineties that were probably somewhere in the neighbourhood of about 3,000 to 4,000 annually, we have virtually quadrupled that number through the nominee program. Special attention was given to the francophone factor, which is very important, whether in urban Winnipeg through St. Boniface or in rural communities such as St-Pierre-Jolys, where my great-great-grandfather was born.
For me, it is taking a look at what we are actually doing. A Bloc member said that this is about action. Today, we had the minister bring forward changes that will have a very positive impact on bilingualism here in Canada with our Official Languages Act. Yesterday, we were debating Bill C-11, which deals with updating or modernizing the Broadcasting Act.
Actions do speak louder than words. I think it is important for us to recognize that the province of Quebec is in fact distinct and contributes so much to who we are overall as a nation.
That is why it is important that we support arts and culture, such as we have seen in Bill C-11. That is why, in part, we brought forward the legislation that we introduced for first reading today.
I understand the magic of 78. We see, in our history, when we have given consideration, for example, to the province of P.E.I. Because of the number of senators it has, it has to have an equal number of members of Parliament. I am very familiar with the grandfather clause that was put in in 1985.
I would have welcomed debate on this when the members opposite brought forward the legislation, because we know it is going to be brought in. I question the politics in that they would choose this particular motion when there is so much happening internationally and here in Canada, and that they would use this as the most important public policy issue on their first opposition day.
It is for them to ultimately make that determination, and I look forward to seeing the private member's bill being brought forward that I understand deals with the same issue.
1069 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:06:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Vladimir Putin has chosen to walk in the footsteps of Joseph Stalin. Stalin once said that a million deaths is a statistic; a single death is a tragedy. Certainly, behind the statistic we are seeing coming out of Ukraine, there are a lot of tragedies: a mother and father being told that a child has died and a child finding out that their father will never be seen again. Ukraine, of course, has borne the vast brunt of the suffering, but let us not forget the Russian mothers and fathers who are hoping that their sons and daughters come home from Ukraine. All this tragedy has been perpetrated by Vladimir Putin and his supporters.
To all my family back in the Ukraine, many of whom are waiting with their guns for the Russians to come, to their families who are praying and hoping for them, to all the Ukrainians and to the many Russians who oppose Vladimir Putin, I support them, my family supports them and Canada supports them. In fact, all good people in the world support them and the House supports them.
Slava Ukraini.
188 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:08:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Vladimir Putin's barbaric and illegal invasion of Ukraine is an international war crime and a crime against humanity. Putin is killing civilians with carpet bombing and cluster munitions, and there are now several reports that he has used thermobaric warheads. Shopping malls, day cares and schools are among his targets, proving to the world that Putin is nothing but a despot and a warlord.
He must be made a pariah on the international stage. Russia cannot be permitted to remain in the international community. Putin and his inner circle must be investigated and swiftly brought to justice before the International Criminal Court for these atrocities.
The bravery and tenacity of the people of Ukraine attacked by Vladimir Putin are inspiring. They are fighting and dying on the front lines and must be recognized as true heroes.
Canada and our allies can leave nothing on the table in the fight for human rights, the rule of law, democracy and our collective civil liberties. We must not allow dictators like Putin to redraw borders through force. Ukraine is holding the line for western democracy and the free world. The future depends on what we do now.
197 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:10:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I stand in this House to add my voice to the countless Canadians, of all faiths and backgrounds, who are shocked and angered by Putin’s unjust, unprovoked, illegal attack on Ukraine. It is incredibly hard to see the images of families torn apart and the grave loss of lives and destruction.
This invasion has repercussions for us all because this is not an attack on one. It is an attack on democracy, on international law, on human rights and on freedom. It threatens peace and order in Europe and around the world. Canada has made it clear that these unwarranted actions will not go unpunished. We are providing financial aid, cybersecurity support and both lethal and non-lethal equipment, and we have imposed some of the severest sanctions Canada has ever imposed.
Canada must continue to do everything it can to help Ukraine in its darkest hour. I would also like to highlight that, although these days have been dark, we have seen a bright light shining strong in Ukraine and that is the light of its people, led by their extraordinary leader, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Their bravery has inspired us all.
Slava Ukraini.
198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:11:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Putin's invasion of Ukraine should be a wake-up call to all of us that we cannot take our Arctic sovereignty for granted. NORAD commander General Glen VanHerck recently warned that delaying the updating of our outdated northern defences leaves us all at risk. Canada, like Ukraine, shares a border with Russia, a border that is poorly defined and today is in dispute.
University of Calgary professor Robert Huebert said recently, “Any myth that the Russia of old, the aggressor expansionary Russia had been a thing of the past” has been laid to rest. He says, “It tells us that the Russians are, in fact, willing to use any means possible to seize the territory of a sovereign state.”
Now is the time for the government to finally start listening to the warnings of military officials and modernize, not just maintain, NORAD's early warning system. When is the government going to start taking our Arctic security and our Canadian sovereignty seriously?
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:19:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, last night, MPs came together to express their support for Ukraine and their disgust for Putin and what he is doing. One of the things that we asked the government to do to reflect that is to expel the Russian ambassador.
The Deputy Prime Minister, yesterday, said, “Silence is complicity and following orders is not an excuse.” We would agree with that. In light of the silence from the Russian ambassador, will the government expel the Russian ambassador and recall our ambassador back to Canada?
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:20:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Russia's egregious and unprovoked attack on Ukraine is a direct challenge to democracy. It is why the Minister of Foreign Affairs summoned the Russian ambassador to express extreme concern and disagreement with Russia's actions.
Canada will continue to use all tools at its disposal to make sure that these illegal acts are not left unpunished. The people of Ukraine have the right to their sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right to live free without fear.
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:20:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we expect the government to take serious action and expel that ambassador.
Thousands of Ukrainians have fled their country and they are searching for safety. Ukrainians do not want to be permanent refugees. They want to return to their home, a sovereign and democratic Ukraine, but they need protection now.
Canada has always been a welcoming place for those displaced by war. Will the Prime Minister commit today to allowing visa-free travel for Ukrainians who are wanting to come to Canada and find a safe haven?
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:21:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canada is steadfast in its support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. We have been priority processing applications from Ukraine and bolstering operational capacity in the region, which has allowed us to approve more applications from Ukrainian nationals.
In addition to establishing a dedicated service channel for Ukraine, inquiries regarding Ukraine are prioritized and we are continuing to work on more measures, as the situation unfolds, that will ensure that Ukrainians can flee to safety.
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:26:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it seems the Russian tyrant's pride has been wounded and now he is waging a brutal, extremely violent attack on a peaceful people.
The international community, including Canada, has imposed very strong sanctions, which I applaud. However, those sanctions must not be temporary measures that, after a quick victory, enable the Russian tyrant to save face.
Do we agree that the sanctions must be maintained until the last Russian soldier has left Ukraine?
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:26:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and his stance.
We could not agree more. This is not just about the territorial integrity of Ukraine. It is about the rule of law and the principles behind the United Nations and the Charter. We need to be there to uphold those principles, and we will keep the sanctions in place until Russia recognizes that it made a huge mistake and withdraws its soldiers from every part of Ukraine.
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:27:25 p.m.
- Watch
I appreciate that answer, Mr. Speaker.
There is another issue.
Does the Prime Minister agree that, in any circumstance, especially given what we are witnessing in Ukraine, it would be irresponsible to use the war and its humanitarian consequences as an opportunity to promote oil exports from Western Canada?
50 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:29:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we announced sanctions against Russia several days ago, but we also added sanctions against Belarus, because we know that it was an accomplice and even a partner in this invasion of Ukraine.
Our sanctions against the Belarusian government and the oligarchs who profit from it are present and severe. We will always keep trying to do more to sanction Belarus for its complicity.
66 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:29:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are witnessing a humanitarian crisis unfold in Ukraine, and Canada has to do everything we can in our power to support people in need. One of the things we can do is support Ukrainians who are seeking refuge in Canada. Will the Prime Minister commit to a simple, straightforward, barrier-free process for Ukrainians who are seeking solace and refuge in Canada?
65 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:31:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Russia's egregious and unprovoked attack on Ukraine is a direct challenge to all of us, to the international rules-based order, to democracy and to people who care about human rights and social justice everywhere.
That is why our foreign affairs minister summoned the ambassador from Russia to hear her opinion immediately and directly. Canada will continue to have that dialogue but will also remind Russia every day of its responsibilities, of the absolute need for Russia to stand up and be accountable, and Russia will be punished.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:33:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the situation for Ukrainians is dire. Many Canadians of Ukrainian heritage are worried about their family members trying to flee the war. One person called the Ukraine hotline to ask about his parents' PR application. He was told that someone from Ukraine who applied a year or two ago had no priority.
Instead of having those in need get stuck in this Liberal-made immigration backlog, will the minister commit to visa-free travel for our Ukrainian brothers and sisters trying to flee war?
86 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
