44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 1, 2022 02:00PM
- Jun/1/22 3:02:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, once again, yesterday, the Prime Minister refused to give Quebec the immigration powers it is asking for. He justified it by saying that it was “because protecting French and francophone immigration is very important”. Of course it is important. That is exactly why Quebec wants to be responsible for all its immigration. Quebec's future as a nation, where French is the common and official language, hinges on protecting French and francophone immigration.
Does anyone here seriously believe that the federal government is in a better position than Quebec to provide this protection?
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 3:03:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, let us recap. The Prime Minister says that he will challenge Bill 21 and that Canada must be able to dictate Quebec's vision on state secularism. He then says that he wants to limit the scope of the notwithstanding clause to ensure that Quebeckers will never again have the right to adopt legislation that upsets Canada. He is saying that Quebec will never get the immigration powers it is calling for so that it can better integrate newcomers.
At this point, what does the Prime Minister have to say to the Quebeckers who want to make their own democratic choices? Is the only option independence?
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 7:38:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois support this motion and, of course, we support Finland and Sweden in their bids to join NATO.
There is one problem, however, that everyone will need to work on collaboratively. That problem is Turkey. Turkey is opposed to Finland and especially Sweden joining NATO because of diplomatic frictions related to certain Kurdish groups.
I would like to know how the government plans to address this issue. Will it show leadership in relation to Turkey and its opposition to Sweden and Finland joining NATO?
94 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 7:52:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. We have heard two speeches from the government and we have been told twice that we must act as quickly as possible. I agree with that, but we have not yet heard how the government is going to deal with Turkey, apart from mentions of talking to people.
The member tells me that we need to act as quickly as possible. We know that it took the government three months to charter three planes to help Ukrainian refugees get out of the countries bordering Ukraine. If that is what the government calls acting quickly, is it going to take that long in this case, or is there actually a plan in terms of the timeline for Sweden and Finland to join NATO?
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:10:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills has once again demonstrated his thorough understanding of international geopolitical matters. It is a pleasure to hear him speak.
He talked about how Turkey is a problem in the context of the motion we are debating. Today, he said the government should take the lead on resolving this issue. My colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills knows more about the government's leadership on international matters than most members of the House. In February 2021, when he moved his motion to denounce and condemn the Uighur genocide, all the ministers and the Prime Minister abstained from voting. That is not what I call leadership.
How confident is my colleague that the government will show leadership and deal with the problem with Turkey?
131 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:44:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is difficult to speak after my colleague from Saint-Jean. We can see how knowledgeable she is about this file. Although it would be impossible for me to match her presentation, I will try my best.
I just want to say that having this debate tonight is a good thing. It has been quite some time since we have had a debate where the five parties in the House, and I imagine that this is also the case for the Greens, all agree. We can really feel it. Yes, there are some details that will have to be worked out, but I believe that everyone here is ready to work together on that. It is fantastic, because this has not happened for a long time.
Unfortunately, it took a war to get everyone to agree. That is not as pleasant, but I will get back to my speech.
I think that the debate over allowing a new country to join NATO will be the hot topic of 2022. There was the west's dithering over Ukraine's future in NATO. Vladimir Putin may have used that as an excuse, but we are learning. I join all of my hon. colleagues in welcoming Sweden and Finland to our alliance. Based on what I have heard tonight, it is pretty clear that everyone agrees on this.
A number of people expressed doubts about this alliance recently. Now it is hard to question why it exists. It is more relevant than ever, especially in the face of a rogue state that is disrupting the world order we have been working to build for the past 30 years. NATO now serves as an umbrella organization for our allies to guarantee the safety of Europe, the Atlantic and, as my Conservative colleague mentioned, soon enough the Arctic.
The two membership applications that were submitted come from allies to Quebec and Canada. These countries are objective allies of NATO and of our interests in the Far North. Their application also serves as a powerful message against Putin's authoritarianism and the warmongering policies of his Kremlin. I say that it is his Kremlin, because it certainly does not reflect the people of Russia.
Traditionally, Finland and Sweden have been non-aligned countries. For more than 75 years, they have held fast to their neutrality—all through the Cold War, the fall of the USSR and the realignment of world powers. Setting aside this policy of neutrality is not insignificant. It is evidence of how serious the situation is and how important it is for countries bordering the Russian behemoth to ensure their security and safety. Considering the recent history and geopolitics of the region, it is clear that this is a legitimate and well-founded concern.
Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin said it better than I can. She says that everything changed when Russia attacked Ukraine. She personally thinks that no one can assume a peaceful future on Russia's borders. In her opinion, joining NATO is an act of peace so that there will never be another war in Finland.
The Swedish Prime Minister also sums it up well. To paraphrase her words, the best way to ensure the security and safety of the Swedish people is to join NATO with Finland.
When I hear these women say they want to join us, to join NATO, I have no choice but to listen. We all have to listen. To the south of us, the U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, also said that the United States supports Sweden's and Finland's applications. This is a strong endorsement that reaffirms my position and that of my political party. We must allow Sweden and Finland into our alliance.
The truth is, they already have a foot in the door. There is no reason to oppose this, because it is what they want and they meet the conditions. More importantly, their troops have already been participating in NATO exercises for decades. If these two allies join, it would certainly be a historic event that will define the political dynamics of the region. Hopefully, this will be the case for a long time to come. Let us also hope that it will curb Vladimir Putin's madness.
The strategy of accommodating Russia and pandering to its interests is well and truly over, and of course must never be repeated. Pressure on Russia is turning the tide in the war. The entire mobilization of the west for an independent, whole and sovereign Ukraine is our most powerful weapon. Dictators cannot imagine the power of unity. It is our duty to show them.
Bringing more countries into NATO signals unity. Let us be a parliament that shows leadership on this front.
There is a reason why I am talking about leadership. Too often, this government follows in other countries' footsteps. Consider my Conservative friends' 2021 motion on the Uighur genocide, which the Prime Minister and his cabinet abstained from voting on. I would actually like to thank the member for Wellington—Halton Hills once again for kindly allowing me to amend his motion in a gesture of solidarity with the Uighur people. Unfortunately, those on the other side of the House did not do likewise.
When we requested an airlift for Ukrainian refugees, we were told it would happen soon, but it was not until April, a month after the war started, that an announcement was made. A month later, there were still no flights. The war has been going on for three months now, and there have been only three charter flights. This government has an international leadership problem.
However, I have hope, because the government was quickly on board when Finland and Sweden asked to join NATO. We are here this evening because a motion was quickly moved by a government member. There is hope, then.
Let us look at what was done in the past. It is not often that a sovereignist boasts about this country's former federalist prime ministers. There was Lester B. Pearson, a Liberal, who established peacekeeping. That is a fine example of leadership. I want to be fair towards my Conservative friends and so I will mention Brian Mulroney, who seized the opportunity after Montreal's mayor, Jean Doré, spoke out against the apartheid regime in South Africa. The mayor was the first person to declare that his city would boycott South Africa. Brian Mulroney followed suit as head of government and declared that Canadians would join the boycott. At first, Brian Mulroney had few allies, but he spoke to Great Britain and the United States. That is an example of international leadership.
Now I am pleased to see that my friends in the government want to show leadership in the debate we are having this evening. I hope that this will continue, and I hope that it is not just lip service. I think that Canada does have a role to play in convincing Turkey not to stand in the way of Finland and Sweden joining NATO.
It is vitally important for these two countries to become members of the alliance. Earlier, my colleague from Saint-Jean demonstrated the geopolitical importance of letting them join, given the message this would send to the rest of the planet, especially Russia.
What goes for Russia goes for China as well. That too is important to note. By acting quickly, we are sending a message to Russia, China and the other dictatorships in the world that are currently violating the human rights of their own people.
This would be a good way to show leadership, and I think that we are on the right track. That is why we are here in the House this evening and seeing some cohesion between all the parties.
As I often say, when I get up in the morning, I see a little note on my bedside table that says, “Who do you work for?” I work for Quebeckers and for the people of Lac-Saint-Jean.
I know that my constituents value human rights, democracy and freedom. I will continue to work in support of these values for them, and I am pleased to see that everyone in the House is doing the same.
1388 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:54:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. Leaders cannot go it alone. What we need is multilateral action, which involves several countries working together at the same time. Leaders set an example, take the lead and inspire others to join in multilateral action.
Based on what we are seeing this evening, I think Canada can be a leader and inspire others to join in. I only wish it had reacted the same way to the Uighur genocide that the current Chinese regime is committing.
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:56:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my colleague, and I sincerely thank him for his question. I am sad that he is not a member of my party, but perhaps that will happen one day.
It is an important question. What should the government do for Ukraine? We must be realistic. Canada is not a military power.
What can we do to get things moving, play a role and influence what is currently going on in Ukraine? First, we must help the refugees. Canada is a welcoming country, so we must make every effort to help them. At present, 200,000 Ukrainian refugees have applied for authorization to come to Canada. To date, about 100,000 applications have been approved, but the people are not arriving. Ukrainian mothers and their children have been authorized to come here. Unfortunately, these women have been living on their meagre savings for the past three months. They cannot afford the airfare. It is one thing to authorize people to come, but now they must get here one way or another. That is one thing we could do.
In addition, through diplomacy, Canada should obviously gather as many allies as possible to ensure that Sweden and Finland join the NATO alliance.
210 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:58:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, that is such an important question. Why was our response to the present conflict in Ukraine so rapid compared to other natural disasters and armed conflicts around the world? Right now, people are experiencing actual genocide. As a signatory to the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, there are two things we must do when we know that genocide is occurring. We must either prevent it or punish those perpetrating it. What is happening right now in the Tigray is genocide. What is happening with the Uighurs is genocide.
Many of us here voted in favour of the motion moved by my colleague from Edmonton Strathcona on the genocide in Ukraine, but when I wanted to move a motion barely three weeks ago calling on the House to unanimously condemn the Uighur genocide, the party in power rejected my motion. I am still upset about that.
154 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 9:57:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I always enjoy the speeches given by my dear colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands. I am not the only one, as my father also adores my hon. colleague, and I think they have a lovely friendship. That is one of the reasons I want to ask her the following question.
My father, who was also an MP, always told me that we are free to take whatever position we want on a motion or a bill, but it must be for the right reasons.
I really like my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands because she is always very honest and genuine when she answers questions. From what I have understood, she will support this motion because the Swedish and Finnish Greens support it. Had they not taken a position on this motion, would she still have supported it?
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 10:26:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, which was very interesting.
He talked about unity with the Ukrainians. I think everyone in the House agrees on that. He talked about territorial sovereignty and national sovereignty. I am always moved when I hear people talk about sovereignty. I dream of the day when Quebec will also be part of NATO, just like Canada. However I do not want to go there tonight, because I am on my last question of the day.
As we know, Turkey is proving to be problematic. It is one thing to say we support Sweden and Finland joining NATO. However, how does my hon. colleague think the problem with Turkey should be addressed when the time comes to do so? I think it will have to be done fairly quickly.
How should this be done?
141 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
