SoVote

Mar/29/22 11:14:41 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think it is inappropriate for a member to suggest that the Speaker will not allow fulsome answers to questions. I see no evidence that this is true of this Speaker or any other occupant of the chair. I am sure that my colleague will want to reconsider that use of language.

54 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/29/22 11:14:59 a.m.
Watch

I understood that he was looking more at the time frame, but I do appreciate the hon. member's point of order. If the parliamentary secretary can, he should wrap it up so I can get a couple more questions in.

41 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Mar/29/22 11:15:16 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I meant no disrespect to you; it is more that I have a 20-minute answer for the question. Suffice it to say that we are making progress. That is one of the reasons we have invested tens of millions of dollars in additional resources for immigration to speed up our processes.

54 words

All Topics

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Mar/29/22 11:15:40 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we rarely have the opportunity to draw attention to certain things, and I would like to do that now. Earlier, my colleague from Jonquière asked two simple questions to my colleague from Winnipeg North, the same questions that our colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean has been asking for two weeks: Will the government commit to airlifting people and extending the operating hours of its office in Warsaw, Poland, which, at last report, has only been open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.? As my colleague from Jonquière pointed out earlier, my colleague from Winnipeg North continued to boast about a whole lot of vague actions his government has taken, instead of answering the questions. Can he answer these two simple questions?

132 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Mar/29/22 11:16:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, whether it is the Minister of Immigration, his department, the cabinet or caucus discussions, I would like to think that all things are on the table. We are looking to explore ways to ensure that Canada is able to maximize the number of people who are seeking a safe haven by opening our doors and putting into place policies that will support those who are coming to Canada, whether through settlement programs or through enabling them to have a job, to study or to be among friends. As we all know, there are hundreds of people, and ideally, if I could just wave a wand, we would have thousands of people coming into Canada every day. However, I do not have that wand to wave. I have faith in our minister and our system to ensure that we are able to maximize the numbers coming into Canada, because I know that providing a safe haven is important not only to me personally, but to all of my colleagues in the government.

173 words

All Topics

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/29/22 11:17:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one thing that has been brought to my attention is the issue around biometrics and the fact that the government has not released that restriction or requirement for people coming into Canada. Is it not possible that they could do the biometric scan and tracking here in Canada once they are here and safe, as opposed to making them do that in problematic areas and places they have to travel to for quite some time? It is really quite impossible for them to get an appointment at an embassy, so would it not be better if they had that requirement here in Canada?

105 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Mar/29/22 11:18:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, one thing I know is that the government, through the Minister of Immigration, has put into place a team of individuals to ensure that we are able to maximize the number of people able to come to Canada, which is a safe haven. A number of things have been established to accommodate that. Part of the current requirement is the biometrics. I do not know, at the ground level, if or to what degree that is posing a serious problem in preventing individuals from being able to come to Canada. I am sure if it is, the Minister of Immigration will be looking at it.

107 words

All Topics

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ)

Mar/29/22 11:19:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I must admit that I am a bit surprised by the direction this debate has taken. Frankly, I was not expecting that there would be so much agreement on this motion. I listened to our Liberal colleague's passionate speech and I found myself wondering what, exactly, we disagree on. I took another look at the motion we are debating today. It states, and I quote: That the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration report the following to the House: We (a) condemn the unwarranted and unprovoked attack on Ukraine, which was ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a clear violation of international law.... Unless I am mistaken, we all appear to agree on this part, so that is clearly not where the issue is. I will continue reading the motion, as follows: (b) call on the Government of Canada to support Ukrainians and people residing in Ukraine who are impacted by this conflict and ensure that it is prepared to process immigration applications on an urgent basis without compromising needs in other areas.... It states, “on an urgent basis without compromising needs in other areas”. Perhaps this is where things start to become problematic, but it seems to me that the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration set out an important parameter in this second point, so I do not think that should be the case. What then do the Liberals have a problem with? In the next point, it states: (c) implement visa-free travel from Ukraine to Canada, including by the rapid issuance of an electronic travel authorization (eTA), and increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis. Before I comment on that, I would like to point out the extraordinary work that our colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean has done on this file. Unfortunately, he is unable to be with us today because he is being cautious, I would say. I applaud his work. Point (c), which calls on the government to “implement visa-free travel from Ukraine to Canada”, was the initial proposal. My colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean and our Liberal colleagues, among others, added “including by the rapid issuance of an electronic travel authorization”. Rather than eliminate visas entirely, this at least maintains the requirement for an electronic travel authorization. That does not seem to be good enough for our Liberal friends, who were the only committee members to vote against the motion despite the requirement introduced by our colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean. Point (c) goes on to say: “increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis”. Are we to understand, based on our colleague's fiery speech, that the Liberals have no intention of increasing resources? Are they saying that they think we have enough staff to handle this kind of situation? If so, that is worrisome, to put it mildly. The outcome of the federal government's efforts to welcome Afghan refugees is a clear indication that performance has been underwhelming so far. The Liberals promised to welcome 40,000 Afghan refugees. Fewer than 10,000 have made it to Canada so far. This means that, despite the best intentions, if the means and resources are not there, those intentions will not translate into concrete results. We do not need to wait another three months to reach this conclusion. We already know that. We only have to look at what happened with the Afghan refugees to realize that not deploying the necessary resources means that we will not achieve the objectives set. Exactly the same thing is likely to happen with Ukrainian refugees. What, then, is the government's problem? Is it related to the call for visa-free travel, while maintaining the compromise and fallback proposal made by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, namely, maintaining the requirement for electronic travel authorization? Is that the problem on the Liberal side, or do they have a problem with the second part of point (c), that is, the call to “increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis”? Frankly, if that is really the sticking point, then that worries me, to say the least. The Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and the parliamentary secretary quite rightly recognized that my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean is working very hard with them on this file. He is our citizenship and immigration critic, and from the outset, he was prepared to find solutions, collaborate and co-operate. The Liberals are not really used to that. The Prime Minister stated that things have been very tense in Parliament and that it is paralyzed, unresponsive and dysfunctional. However, what the Prime Minister may not have understood is that since the election, the Bloc Québécois has constantly repeated that it is willing to work constructively with the government. That is what motivated our colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean to respond proactively to the significant humanitarian crisis under way in Ukraine. He came up with proposals. His first proposal was a three-year extension of the work and student visas of Ukrainians already in Canada. The government acted quickly on that point. We commend and applaud it. That is wonderful. This was a Bloc Québécois proposal that quickly received a favourable response from the government. When this government is determined to act and takes its head out of the sand, it can do things quickly. The second proposal put forward by my colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean was to drop the visa requirement. This suggestion did not go anywhere and quickly faced obstacles. We then realized that the government did not really want to drop this requirement. As the leader of the Bloc Québécois pointed out, thousands of people are entering via Roxham Road without presenting any travel document, visa or biometric test whatsoever. During the entire pandemic, it was proven that it is possible to close off that route. The government has now decided to reopen the floodgates and has no security concerns about doing it. People are streaming in, no problem. The Prime Minister is rolling out the welcome mat for them. However, the same does not seem to apply to the poor Ukrainians who are fleeing their country, which has been unjustly invaded by Russia. The government said it would speed up the process, but it took weeks just to announce that accelerated process, which, by all accounts, is not that much faster anyway. Let us put ourselves in the shoes of these poor Ukrainian women, who are the most likely to have taken refuge in Poland, Moldova or Romania. They would love to come to Canada and get as far away from the conflict as possible. Canada is asking them to fill out an application for a temporary resident visa, which, according to experts, can take up to three hours for someone who is proficient in English or French. These people are unlikely to be proficient in English or French, but they are still required to fill out the form or else they will not be allowed in. Then, these people need to set up a meeting at one of the visa application centres to submit their biometrics. I remind members that this is an emergency and we need to get a huge number of people here, but they are being asked to show up between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. or between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. if they want to be able to come over here. On top of that, they are required to pay $185 in fees, even though some are destitute. They are still being asked to cough up the money. The government says that it will refund the fees, but these people still need to pay up front without knowing when or how the money will be refunded. These are the documents that the government requires: bank statement, official ID, passport and travel insurance. However, I am not sure that people took the time, especially if their house was destroyed, to collect all their documents thinking that the Canadian government might ask for them. Will these people take the time to search through the rubble of their homes for their passports and bank statements? What the government is asking the Ukrainian refugees to produce so they can access the fast-track procedure is not necessarily possible. I will point out that, to date, of the 40,000 Afghans we promised to take in, we have only welcomed 8,580 so far. There is therefore cause to worry about this fast-track procedure when it comes to visas because, in any case, it has not worked that well so far, whatever the measures implemented by the government. As for visa-free travel, there seems to be a security concern eating away at the government: It is afraid that some nasty Russians could sneak in. I figure that those who sneak in will not be on site to fight the Ukrainians, but that is another story. The government is very concerned about security. However, no fewer than 91 countries are allowing Ukrainians to cross their borders without a visa. I guess these 91 countries do not have the same security concerns as Canada. Also, the government told us that it could not really lift the visa requirement because it would take 12 weeks to adapt the IRCC’s computer system. The IRCC minister said that himself. Perhaps if it had started earlier, it would be about ready to remove the visa requirement. I would like to point out that, like Canada, Ireland normally does not authorize Ukrainian nationals to enter the country without a visa. However, Ireland was able to lift the requirement in a few hours, rather than a few days or weeks. How is it that Ireland can do in a few hours what Canada can only do in 12 weeks? Rather than working on allowing visa-free travel, IRCC has worked very hard for weeks to implement the fast-track process I just described. Perhaps it should have gotten off its butt and worked on immediately lifting the visa requirement? I think that would have been the right thing to do. The government seems to be paralyzed by the security issue, so we proposed another approach. Since the government thinks the biometrics are absolutely necessary for security reasons, we wondered whether we could avoid doing the biometric scans over there, quickly and safely bring the refugees to Canada, and then do the biometrics here. This still seems to be too complicated, though, since the government flatly opposed this other proposal from my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean. Since the Bloc is always in solution mode, we proposed a humanitarian airlift. We figured that we could ask Canadian airlines for help and they would be only too happy to oblige. For instance, Air Transat has already raised its hand and said it was prepared to send planes if the Government of Canada was interested. The Minister of International Development told us that his government wants to charter flights for medical assistance, instead of using Canadian Armed Forces planes. Air Transat raised its hand and asked what it could do. We do not know what the holdup is, but we are still looking for the answer. There is no holdup anymore, since Air Transat is prepared to volunteer. It said so publicly. The government has not yet understood that Air Transat is prepared to do it, free of charge, believe it or not. However, there seems to be some issue with the idea of arranging a humanitarian airlift by chartering planes to Poland and flying them back full of Ukrainian refugees who could quickly find refuge and safety in Canada and Quebec. I guess some people are wondering whether the planes are going to fly there empty. It would be expensive for them to fly there empty and return to Canada with people aboard. My colleague from Drummond had a brilliant idea. He said that we did not have to fly the planes empty because the Ukrainian Canadian Congress is working like mad to collect essential supplies. It has gathered tons of supplies from all over the place, and it is running out of room to store them. We are asking that it charter flights to ship the items to Poland and neighbouring countries. We could organize a humanitarian airlift by filling the planes with the supplies gathered thanks to the generosity of Canadians and Quebeckers. We could fill these planes up, send them to Poland and bring them back full of people. We could fill them with Ukrainian refugees. However, apparently, that is still too complicated. This was another proposal made by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, and it got a flat no. So far, the Canadian government has ignored the proposal to set up a humanitarian airlift, yet I find this proposal extremely reasonable. The government is losing nothing by waiting, since my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean is still looking for positive proposals. It can rest assured that he will continue to make proposals in the coming days and weeks. He will not give up in the face of the government's indolence. I had the opportunity to chat with him before coming here, and I know that he is looking for new solutions, that he is not done suggesting ideas. I am having a hard time understanding our colleague's inflamed, even incensed, response to the Conservatives' proposal. All in all, it is a very reasonable proposal. Personally, I see it as the Conservatives making an effort to reach across the aisle. The Bloc Québécois is always reaching across the aisle. How can there be a partisan debate on a motion like this one? It is just bad faith to play partisan politics with this issue and reproach the Conservatives for having dared to ask that the House concur in the report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. The Liberals see it as heresy, but it is no such thing. I read out the motion. Unless our colleague is saying that he does not want to condemn the unjustified attack or that he does not want to support the Ukrainians, we can only conclude that the problem is that we are asking the government to waive visas, while maintaining the requirement for an electronic travel authorization, which was a compromise, an alternative solution, proposed by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean. The government is unwilling to add more staff to process applications. That is the government's real problem. That is why it reacted in such an inflamed and incensed manner to the Conservatives' perfectly reasonable motion. The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of the motion.

2526 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Mar/29/22 11:38:37 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, whether it is expanding services in communities such as Poland or expanding the biometrics that have taken place, the government's intent is to be there in a tangible way to ensure that we can deliver for the many people who are fleeing Ukraine and who want to come to Canada in an unlimited fashion. One of the concerns, no doubt, is that as they come into Canada there needs to be support. There are two issues I would ask the member to reflect on, in terms of a provincial perspective. For example, we want Ukrainian refugees to be able to study. Does the member believe, as I believe, that they should not be charged international student rates? There is also the issue of health care. Does the member believe, as I believe, that the provinces should allow universal access to our health care system? Could the member provide his thoughts on those two points?

157 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/29/22 11:39:44 a.m.
Watch

I am sure that the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan will have an opportunity to ask questions and make comments. I would ask him to hold off. The hon. member for Montarville.

35 words

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/29/22 11:39:52 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am insulted that the federal government is using whataboutism and refusing to answer questions or explain its own failings in this matter. Instead, it is passing the buck to the Quebec and provincial governments by saying that it has no problem taking in refugees, but that it needs to know whether the provinces will be able to accommodate them. The federal government says that it would not want refugees to get here only to find out that no one can take them in. Until it gets assurances that the provinces can take them in, the federal government prefers to leave the refugees where they are. Such rhetoric is frankly indecent. I would like to remind the federal government that, at the very outset, the Quebec government said that it was prepared to take in Ukrainian refugees. It set up a system to welcome Ukrainian refugees. We are ready and waiting. With respect to providing them with health care, I would like to remind my colleagues that the provinces have long been giving health care to refugees the federal government took in without consulting the provinces at all.

190 words

All Topics

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Mar/29/22 11:41:14 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member's speech was very much on point. The Liberals always claim that other people are being partisan when they do not want to support an obviously good idea that has the support of the rest of the House and the support of Canadians. It is important that we being forward a substantive issue at a critical time and it is too bad that it sounds like the government is not going to support it. I was struck by the last question from the member for Winnipeg North, in that he implied that more support should be offered by provinces and by universities when in fact the federal government has been criticized for not stepping up to provide basic assistance for those coming from Ukraine. Those who are coming are not technically considered refugees under the refugee category, which means they do not have access to federal programs that normally exist for people in that situation. I wonder if the member from the Bloc wants to comment on the fact that the government has been heavily criticized by the Canadian Ukrainian Congress and others for not offering support to those who come from Ukraine, and then the member is using the needs for support as an excuse for not allowing visa-free travel. The government should be offering that support, but why not let people come through the visa-free travel channel since the government is not currently offering that support as it is?

247 words

All Topics

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/29/22 11:42:28 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I touched on that a little in the answer I just gave my Liberal colleague. It is obvious to us that the federal government cannot hide behind the intake mechanisms of Quebec and the provinces to explain its own indolence in this matter. If, as my colleague so aptly suggested, the federal government feels that it cannot bring in Ukrainian refugees if they do not have the necessary support to come here, then it should give them that support. After all, the government spent two years loosening the purse strings for anything and everything. Why is the government being so stingy when it comes to Ukrainian refugees? Rather than loosening the purse strings again, why is the government asking the provinces and Quebec to cover the cost of welcoming these refugees? If the federal government will not do it, then, as I said before, Quebec will.

148 words

All Topics

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Mar/29/22 11:43:45 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague for his speech and for the points he made. He clearly showed that the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives are reaching out to help the government but that, unfortunately, the government is refusing that help. Is it because the good ideas are coming from the opposition and not the government that the government is failing to take action?

68 words

All Topics

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/29/22 11:44:19 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question. I had the privilege of being a member of Quebec's National Assembly, in addition to having the opportunity, the pleasure and the honour of being a member of this House for several years. One of the things I soon learned is that it appears to be part of the general culture of the House that an idea is necessarily bad if it comes from the opposition. Even if the opposition's idea is good, the government will reject it and then do a little cut and paste so it can propose the exact same thing. The government is unable to admit that the opposition can come up with a good idea, because it thinks all good ideas come from the government. At the National Assembly, we begin with the premise that a government is rarely elected by the majority of the population and that good ideas can come from all sides. As a result, anyone can make a positive contribution. This point of view appears to be totally foreign to the political culture of this House, and I am very disappointed about that.

191 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Mar/29/22 11:45:36 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, who am I to deny the Bloc staking claim to the idea? I can tell the member that the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and others have talked about having no visa requirements for Ukraine for many years. The discussion has been heightened because of the war, obviously, and the idea has been floated around now for many weeks. I would not want to take away from those individuals who have the idea. As I indicated, there is a streamlined process to ensure we can expedite and ultimately allow individuals who are fleeing and looking for a safe place to come to Canada and let them know that Canada is in fact open to them.

115 words

All Topics

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/29/22 11:46:34 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not know how to answer my colleague. He appears to think that if he just keeps repeating his claim that Canada is wide open, we will end up believing him. However, sincerity cannot be judged based on words, but rather on actions. I am sorry to say that the federal government does not walk the talk. It says one thing but does not follow through when it comes time to put words into action. I am sorry to say it, but you are not offering Ukrainians a safe haven from the conflict, because you have not implemented the necessary measures or conditions for Ukrainian refugees to come here.

112 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/29/22 11:47:40 a.m.
Watch

I would like to remind the hon. member that he must address his remarks to the Chair and not directly to the government. The hon. member for Brandon—Souris has time for a brief question.

36 words

Mr. Larry Maguire (Brandon—Souris, CPC)

Mar/29/22 11:47:51 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague's answer just now is along the lines that if one repeats, repeats and repeats, Canadians will start to believe it sooner or later. The member who just asked the question of him also followed on the previous environment minister from Ottawa's comments that if one yells it louder, as he did in his speech, people will get it even more. I am wondering if you could reply to the fact that Liberals already have a poor track record in regard to what happened in Afghanistan. There have been great ideas by the opposition here. Can you just expand on their poor record?

108 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Mar/29/22 11:48:32 a.m.
Watch

That was not a brief question. I want to remind the member as well that he is to address questions and comments through the Chair. We will have a very brief response from the member for Montarville, please.

38 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 48