44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 24, 2022 11:00AM
- Oct/24/22 7:11:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I recognize that for many of us, having our family in town is a very special event. My son, Maclean, is in town today. My nephew, William, is in town. Of course, I will not be seeing them this evening because I am participating in this debate.
However, the importance of what is happening in China with the Uighur people is vital. I was part of the subcommittee that brought forward this report. I wonder if the member could talk a little about the motion that we will be debating tomorrow on the Uighur genocide and the impacts that debate will have on how our Parliament can move forward.
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 7:12:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciated that the member worked into his speech on this motion this evening the importance of the United Nations in multilateral work. It is the definition of multilateral work that we have a United Nations and that we are able to work within it even in times when the world is in graver crises than we have seen, I think, in my whole lifetime. We are closer to nuclear war, and we have more conflicts around the world.
I would ask the hon. member whether the United Nations cannot do more to speak out and to ensure that we protect the Uighur Muslim population from genocide.
109 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 7:17:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sure he will not mind.
It goes without saying that the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of all measures seeking to protect Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in China by resettling them in Canada. We are prepared to go even further. As a result of the member's discussions with some Uighur groups, we think the motion needs to be improved. We need to increase the number of refugees the committee has asked the government to approve, through this motion, from 10,000 to 15,000.
As I said earlier, without mentioning his absence, the member for Lac-Saint-Jean made a point of talking to all the members of our political party about what is happening to Uighurs in Xinjiang.
I would remind the House that it was the Bloc Québécois that drew attention to the Chinese genocide by trying to amend a motion moved in February 2021 in an effort to force the government to demand that the Olympic Games be moved from China. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful in that endeavour, and the government settled for a diplomatic boycott, which had no effect.
The member for Lac-Saint-Jean moved the amendment and the motion in 2021 to clearly demonstrate that China was trying to use the Olympic Games as propaganda. Unfortunately, the government did not denounce the situation as firmly as we would have liked.
I also want to highlight the participation of the member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean in a meeting in Prague with the Uighurs at a time when the member's motion on the possibility of moving the Olympic Games was recognized. I know that the member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean will be in Belgium next month, once again to support the Uighurs.
Now that I am done praising the member, let us move on to other matters.
I believe that the government is demonstrating a lack of courage on the issue of the Uighurs. It is rather ironic to see that Motion No. 62 was moved by the member for Pierrefonds—Dollard even though that Liberal member is part of the very government that hesitated to acknowledge the Uighur genocide. I remind members that the Prime Minister and ministers did not want to recognize the genocide. They did not speak up.
Something rather unfortunate happened earlier. I really like the member for Winnipeg North, but I get the impression that he was being excessively partisan when he pointed out what he felt were the Conservatives' misguided intentions by making this debate about an issue as vital as the situation of the Uighurs. What the member for Winnipeg North is doing is engaging in partisanship.
We could accuse him of the same thing, since his government preferred to resort to subterfuge because it did not want to offend China. I was texting with the member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean earlier and he was telling me that some Uighur people are listening to the debate we are having right now and they are very disappointed with the government's response.
If we do not want to play partisan games, then we cannot use something like a genocide to say that this issue is not important and can be put off until later. I really like the member for Winnipeg North, but that was completely unacceptable to me, and I think that is the message that the Uighurs want us to pass on to the government today.
In my opinion, lack of recognition is a big problem for the Uighurs. I recently read La leçon de Rosalinde, a book written by Mustapha Fahmi, a former university colleague and Shakespearean expert. A Shakespearean expert is always interesting. He gave a definition of recognition that I want to share with you.
I will quote Mr. Fahmi, as follows: Recognizing a person or a community does not mean recognizing their existence, let alone tolerating them. Recognition is a complete and unmasked presence before the problems of others. In other words, to recognize someone is, above all, to recognize their pain and suffering.
I want to focus on this quote from Mr. Fahmi. I like the bit about recognition being a complete and unmasked presence. I get the impression that the government was not unmasked in dealing with the Uighurs. Why did that mask not come off? It was because the government never allowed the executive, the ministers and the Prime Minister to offer this recognition to the Uighurs. It wanted to score political points with China, for strategic and economic purposes.
In my opinion, recognizing someone cannot involve this subterfuge of lying low to avoid strategic or economic setbacks. That holds especially true with this situation the Uighurs find themselves in. I say that because I was able to meet with some Uighur activists through the member for Lac-Saint-Jean. The recognition I would like to offer today is to those activists, especially to Mehmet Tohti.
Mr. Tohti is a Uighur Canadian activist who has campaigned for the rights of Uighurs for over a decade. Born in the ancient city of Kashgar in northwestern China, Mr. Tohti studied biology at Kashgar University, then went on to teach the subject. When Mr. Tohti was 26, with conditions worsening for Uighurs, he was forced to leave China for Turkey, eventually making his way to Canada. He served as co-founder and vice-president of the World Uyghur Congress and is now the executive director of the Ottawa-based Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project. We met him on on numerous occasions, and he helped us understand what is happening to the Uighurs.
He pushed, he lobbied, he spared no effort to ensure that an overwhelming majority of members of the House of Commons voted in favour of the motion recognizing China's genocide against the Uighur minority. Unfortunately, the executive branch turned a deaf ear. He is under constant threat, but he continues to pressure the government and Canadian businesses to boycott goods made by Uighur slaves. I encourage my colleagues to meet him. They can look forward to very interesting discussions.
I am also thinking about Mr. Dolkun Isa, a physician who founded a student union in 1985. In 1988, after some demonstrations, he was kicked out of university. He has fully experienced the discrimination against the Uighurs. He was arrested in Beijing and was forced to flee to Turkey before seeking asylum in Germany in 1996. He was in Ottawa a few months ago and we had a chance to talk to him. He is wanted by China. In 1997, Interpol issued a red notice against him based on false accusations. It was later retracted in 2018.
I am also thinking about Mr. Kayum Masimov, who lives in Quebec. He is a Montrealer of Uighur origin who is also advocating for the rights of Uighurs. He talked to us about certain mining companies that apparently have their headquarters in Montreal and who use Uighur labour in the form of slavery. He talked to us about that. He often works as a Uighur interpreter at meetings of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. He is married to a Quebec woman and is very well established in Quebec. He has first-hand experience of what Uighurs are going through and he deserves this recognition.
I am saying that this recognition is important. If we want to do something for Mr. Tohti and Mr. Masimov, the best thing we can do is to quickly adopt Motion No. 62 without playing partisan politics and support the proposal made by our colleague from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
This is a good example of working together. The member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan and the member for Pierrefonds—Dollard did this great work together in committee.
What was the result?
The first request that is being made is to recognize that the Uighurs and other Muslim minorities from China emigrated in order to flee the Chinese government's repression and intimidation to force them to come back to China.
As members know, the House recognized the genocide in February 2021. There is therefore no doubt in the minds of most people, except perhaps the executive of the Liberal Party, that many Muslims are fleeing China to escape the brutal repression that extends well beyond China's borders.
A recent example of such repression is the police stations that China opened. There are three in Canada and about 50 around the world. China opened these illegal police stations without any kind of bilateral agreement in order to harass the diaspora and refugees to try to force them back to China, usually by threatening reprisal against their families if they do not. The people I was talking about earlier have experienced these types of threats.
China claims that these stations merely provide administrative services for Chinese nationals abroad, for example to renew a driver's licence. However, when abroad, that would be a consular activity, not a police activity. The Chinese government's subterfuge is clear. China also claims that it plans on repatriating Chinese nationals accused of corruption, but several documented cases of opponents being abducted prove that China aims to crack down on dissidents abroad.
The committee's second request is to recognize that many third countries are under pressure from China to repatriate Chinese dissidents and Muslims to China. In several neighbouring countries, such as Mongolia, which has no access to the sea and is 100% dependent on China and Russia for its exports and to maintain its economy, Uighur minorities are very vulnerable, as these countries sometimes bear the brunt of Chinese government pressure.
Many activists have been arrested in these third countries, including activists from Vietnam, Thailand and Uzbekistan. There is also the case of Uighur Canadian Huseyin Celil, who was arrested in Uzbekistan and sent to China, where he was sentenced to life in prison. As China does not recognize dual citizenship, he was not given access to consular information.
A 2019 Radio-Canada article painted a very clear picture of how China harasses Uighur nationals in Quebec using Chinese diplomatic services, which are often covers for sophisticated spying operations. We know that. It is public knowledge.
Canada is not immune to this pressure. In 2020, the House of Commons passed a motion calling on the federal government to adopt a plan to counter foreign interference, but once again, nothing was done.
The third request is that Canada take in 10,000 Chinese Uighur and Muslim refugees over a two-year period, beginning in 2024. Much like the member for Lac-Saint-Jean, I have to wonder why the limit is 10,000 refugees. Why not 20,000? It is a rather arbitrary number. The member for Lac-Saint-Jean committed to advancing the idea that we should take in 15,000 Uighur refugees. Uighur advocacy groups are clearly saying that 10,000 is not enough and more should be taken in, hence the idea of increasing it to 15,000.
I would point out that Canada already has programs for Afghans and for Ukrainians, so I do not see why it would not have the same kind of program for Uighurs. Some organizations have criticized Ottawa's favouritism for some nationals over others. For instance, Yemen is suffering terribly from armed conflict, but Ottawa has no specific program for the Yemeni people and is even selling arms to Saudi Arabia. Ironically, that country was lambasted in a UN report for its abuses in Yemen.
What we are really denouncing is the double standard, which is clearly the result of political decisions rather than humanitarian ones. I think this is where the problem lies, and perhaps why the member for Winnipeg North was annoyed earlier. Instead of showing some compassion, which is what the situation called for this evening, the member for Winnipeg North chose to indulge in political discussions.
The fact remains that Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims are being surveilled by China, which is not necessarily the case for Yemeni refugees in other countries.
Finally, the motion calls on the government to “table in the House, within 120 sitting days following the adoption of this motion, a report on how the refugee resettlement plan will be implemented”. As the Liberal government tends to ignore House of Commons motions, the Bloc Québécois believes it is necessary to require the government to table a report. We think the government must respond quickly to avoid the matter being put off indefinitely. That is what we find in the motion.
This evening as I was thinking about the Uighurs, I thought back to a book entitled De la dignité humaine, or on human dignity. It was written by my philosophy professor at Laval University, Thomas De Koninck, the wisest person I know. I think the worst thing we can do to a person is take away their dignity. Dr. De Koninck writes that every human being, whoever they may be, has their own inalienable dignity, in the unequivocal sense that Kant gave to this term: something that has no price and no equivalent, with no relative value, but rather an absolute value. The idea behind human dignity is that the individual has absolute value.
What we are hearing about the treatment of the Uighurs clearly shows that rather than having absolute value they are considered as objects. I can quickly talk about concentration camps. The Chinese Communist Party has set up concentration camps where the communists have held approximately two million Uighurs at one time or another. The number of cases has sharply increased over the years. These camps indoctrinate Muslims, who do not have the right to practice their religion or even speak their language. They are forced to eat pork. They must constantly praise the Chinese Communist Party and President Xi Jinping. Some witnesses have spoken about organ harvesting. Many women have been raped in these camps and have reported the sexual, psychological and physical abuse they experienced. Many women underwent forced sterilization. Children are separated from their families. Many children were taken away from their families and placed in orphanages or state-run schools. That includes children whose parents are in concentration camps as well as children whose family unit is intact. There is talk of slavery. Many Uighurs are taken from their homes or concentration camps and forcibly sent to factories located mainly outside Xinjiang, which further reduces the Muslim population. There is mass surveillance. China has the most advanced surveillance system in the world, particularly in Xinjiang. Cameras are installed practically everywhere, and new facial recognition technologies make it possible to identify Uighurs. Finally, the Chinese Communist Party spares no effort to poison the lives of the Uighurs to the extent that we can call it unbridled violence.
I would like to close by saying that what I have seen tonight from the member for Winnipeg North reflects how the House has dealt with the Uighur file for over two years now. The member for Winnipeg North came to say that now is not the time to debate this and that there are other priorities. This is similar to what his political party did when it came time to recognize the genocide, but the Liberals preferred to focus on Canada's economic and strategic interests in China, and that is unacceptable.
2611 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 7:37:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think that the best thing we can do is listen to the Uighurs themselves.
I think that what is proposed in this motion, namely to welcome 10,000 Uighurs over two years does not have the unanimous support of Uighurs themselves. They do not think that is enough. The best thing we can do is listen to them and shape our policies around their needs. We do not need more proof. A genocide has occurred in Xinjiang. That has been proven and we recognized that genocide here.
Now we need to take action, and what I have seen here tonight are not people who are prepared to take action, but rather people who want to use the situation of the Uighurs like any other issue to advance their political agendas. I will repeat what I said. I find that unacceptable.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, as always, it is a great honour to stand in this place and represent the people of Edmonton Strathcona.
I find this to be such an important debate for us to have, but I have to say that I am disappointed that it is happening in this manner and not when more parliamentarians can join in and there can be more people to participate in the discussion. After so many years, I think the genocide happening against the Uighur people is something every parliamentarian in this place must take with the utmost seriousness, and I worry that it is not being taken as such this evening.
I am a relatively new member of Parliament and have only been in this place for three years. One of the very first things that happened after I was elected was an appointment to the international human rights subcommittee. As I think I have brought up before in this place, my whole career has been about international development, foreign affairs and sustainable development around the world, so I was appointed to be the New Democrat member on that subcommittee. I was so happy to have that opportunity, because I feel like in my heart I have spent most of my career trying to fight for the human rights of people around the world, and this felt like an opportunity to do that and perhaps take it to the next level.
One of the very first studies we undertook looked at the genocide of the Uighur people in China. I have two brothers who are very rough and tumble with me, and I was beaten up many times as a child when I was growing up. I have lots of cousins too. I think of myself as a relatively tough and robust person, but the testimony I heard from expert witnesses, Uighurs and people who experienced the genocide was the most harrowing thing I have ever heard to date. The stories of rape, of forced sterilization, of people being surveilled and of the very systematic and cold attempts to erase a people were horrific for me to hear. It was very difficult.
Of course, I am only hearing these stories; I am not experiencing them, so I always try to imagine what it must be like to be somebody from Xinjiang who is dealing with this and is not seeing the world stand up for them and not hearing people in Canada and around the world say that they are not going to tolerate this. How difficult must it be for the Uighurs not only in China but in Canada to know their loved ones are experiencing this genocide?
When I come to this debate, that is what I bring. I bring the testimony that I heard at the international human rights subcommittee. I bring all of the stories I heard in many meetings with members of the Uighur community and with many members of the community who fight for human rights.
I think this is a vitally important debate and it is vitally important that we are all here, but it was disappointing for me that we did not vote to have a debate on the report that came out of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. There was no opportunity for that debate to happen.
Of course, we know the Uighurs have raised concerns about these issues for years. We know they have been calling for more action not only from Canadian parliamentarians but from other parliamentarians for years. In fact, the recommendations that came forward from the report of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights were very clear. We asked that the Government of China be condemned for its “actions against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang”. We asked to “work with allies and multilateral organizations to help international observers gain unfettered access to Xinjiang”. We asked to “provide support through international overseas development assistance to civil society organizations especially in countries that are geopolitically important to China's Belt and Road Initiative”.
We asked to “recognize that the acts being committed in Xinjiang against Uyghurs constitute genocide and work within legal frameworks” of what that meant. We also asked to “impose sanctions under the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act on all Government of China officials responsible for the perpetration of grave human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims.”
We brought forward these recommendations, but we have not seen the level of action from the government that I think all of us in this place should be demanding. We have not seen the empathy and care that I think we have seen for other conflicts.
One of the things I struggle with the most in this place is that we are often in a situation where we are asked to prioritize human rights, to amplify the rights of one group of people over the rights of another. I do not know how to do that. I do not know how as parliamentarians we can do that. Of course, we need to provide whatever support is necessary to help the people in Ukraine who are struggling with a genocide of their own from the Russian Federation. We need to ensure that the people in Ukraine can flee violence, that they can come to Canada and seek safety here and that they are protected and cared for 100%.
However, as parliamentarians, we need to recognize that being from Ukraine does not make someone's life more valuable than being from Afghanistan, being a Uighur from China, being from Yemen, being from Palestine or being from Tigray. We need to recognize that Canada has an important role. We are a country of such opportunity and such wealth, and we have an important role in this world to open up our doors and welcome those who are fleeing violence, those who are fleeing persecution and those who are fleeing genocide. That is such a fundamental role for Canada. That is how many of us ended up here.
I am, in fact, a settler in this country. My family came when the Scots were being persecuted in Scotland. Canada opened its doors and welcomed us here, and, of course, generations of McPhersons, and I am also a McCoy, have flourished in Canada. Providing that opportunity for people around the world is what Canada is all about and what we need to be able to do.
I support the idea of bringing Uighurs here and ensuring that Uighurs are able to flee genocide to come here, but I have deep concerns. I think everybody in the House, including members of the government, must recognize that IRCC is broken. Immigration services with the government are broken. If anyone in the House does not agree that this is a problem, they are not listening to their constituents. They are not listening to the fact that we have massive delays and massive problems.
In Edmonton, Alberta, 636 students who were approved to study at the University of Alberta could not do so this fall because they could not get a study permit. It cost the University of Alberta $6 million. These are people who wanted to come here to study. I therefore have some concerns about the IRCC's capacity to actually welcome all of the newcomers we need to be welcoming in Canada. Absolutely there are people who are suffering around the world, and the Uighurs have been suffering for years. For years they have been calling for attention to this horrific genocide. However, Canada needs to do better at welcoming people into our country. We need to be better at doing the work of government to ensure that people can come here.
For me, I do not want to say that we need to limit how many Ukrainians, Afghans, Tigrayans or Syrians come to Canada so we can make sure that Uighurs are able to come. There needs to be something done so that all people fleeing violence have access to come here, are able to be treated with respect, are able to be protected and able to be brought here. I have this deep worry that there is a Peter-Paul mentality with the government.
In August 2021, we were going to welcome a huge number of Afghans into our country. Then, of course, the horrific war started in Ukraine, and we were going to welcome an unlimited number of Ukrainians into our country. That is great, but we do not have the capacity to do that right now.
My worry is how we are going to get there. How can we work with the government? How can all of us in this place work with and reinforce to the government how important it is that it fix our broken immigration system so that we can be the country that so many Canadians believe we are, and certainly that so many Canadians believe we should be.
There is another thing I want to raise. In terms of immigration, there are things that we can do, things that need to happen and things we can expedite to make sure that Uighurs are protected, but there are other things we can do to help the people in Xinjiang who are being persecuted right now. There is legislation before the foreign affairs committee, Bill S-211, that looks at forced labour. My opinion, and members may say this is always the NDP opinion, is that the bill does not go far enough. It would not do near enough to protect people from forced labour, slave labour or child labour around the world.
My dear colleague, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, brought forward Bill C-262, which is an excellent example of what forced labour legislation could look like. It aligns very much with what is happening around the world, in Germany, the EU, France, Australia and the U.K. This country is at least a decade behind other countries in ensuring that we have good forced labour legislation in place.
It has been in mandate letter after mandate letter, which used to mean that action would be taken, but it does not appear to mean that any longer. I look at things like that and ask how we can make sure that Canada is not complicit in supporting forced labour, that we are ensuring that the cotton, the tomatoes and the products that come into Canada are not produced with forced or slave labour. What can we do to make that better?
There is one last thing I want to talk about today. Here is what I am struggling with in the House of Commons right now. I worry that what we are doing in this place is politicizing human rights. I worry that we are using it as a tool to cause shenanigans or gum up the work of government, and if that is the case, we should be so deeply ashamed of ourselves. Human rights are of such fundamental importance that, when they are used as a tool to gum up the work of government, it demeans every member of Parliament. When we use human rights as a trick to force things through or to stop things from going forward, we should be ashamed of ourselves.
When we talk about human rights in this place, we need to be honest with ourselves and talk about human rights across the board, because it is not okay that the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party refuses to talk about human rights in Yemen, as both of them are complicit in the selling of arms to the regime that is propping up that war.
It is not all right that neither one of them will talk about human rights in Palestine. Children in Palestine are being murdered, and neither of the parties will talk about that. That is not all right. They do not get to pick and choose human rights. They do not get to choose that the people being murdered in Tigray matter less than other people. They do not get to choose that the Uighurs do not matter because we have an economic relationship with China. That is not now human rights work. For every one of us in this place, if we believe in protecting human rights, then a human right is a human right is a human right.
It does not matter if it is a child in Palestine. It does not matter if it is a child in Yemen. It does not matter if it is a woman in Xinjiang. It does not matter if it is a woman in Ukraine. If we have a feminist foreign policy, and if we believe in human rights, all human rights matter.
I am deeply afraid that in this place we are choosing to politicize human rights. We are choosing to use human rights to forward our agenda and gum up the works of Parliament. About that, I am deeply worried.
There is a genocide happening against the Uighurs in Xinjiang. There is a genocide happening in China right now. Parliamentarians have an obligation to stand up to protect the people being persecuted. We have an obligation to welcome those people to Canada. It is not even an obligation. It is a privilege to welcome those people to Canada.
I will always stand in this place and fight for human rights. I will tell members that I will fight for all human rights, not just some of them.
2274 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:03:24 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague to be very thoughtful on issues of human rights and in his work.
As parliamentarians, we have an obligation to think about Canada's response. Obviously, there are diplomatic paths and tools we can use to work with other countries that have not come as far along in declaring a genocide. One of the things I have been pushing the government to do is to reinvest in our diplomatic core and our international development.
When Global Affairs was created, and we lost the Canadian International Development Agency, and it all became part of one pot, I feel the government prioritized trade over diplomacy and international development. That has resulted in having less ability to influence countries around the world than we used to have.
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:10:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member's speech was incredibly thoughtful. As we are having these discussions, I would like to give her an opportunity to talk about how important it is to not pick and choose when it comes to human rights.
A lot of devastating things are happening in many countries, and all of us who live in safe countries, where we largely have a good life and are not worried about genocide day to day, need to stand up to voice those things so we can encourage other countries to step up and do the same. I am wondering if this member could speak a bit about this.
109 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:12:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Pierrefonds—Dollard.
Today is Diwali. I want to first of all wish my wife and two boys, who are celebrating tonight in Toronto, a happy Diwali. Diwali is the festival of light. It is the triumph of light over darkness. When we talk about light over darkness, I think that is actually an apt metaphor for what we are talking about today. We are talking about shedding light on a global situation that has thus far not garnered enough international attention from western governments, literally across the board.
I am speaking about the debate we are having this evening about the deplorable human rights situation of Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in East Turkestan. I use that term quite deliberately, because part of the propaganda exercised by the People's Republic of China is to refer to this area as Xinjiang or the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, but for the folks who live there and have made it their home for many years, it is known as East Turkestan.
The situation is outright deplorable. We have heard commentary in this vein thus far in tonight's debate. It is an outright attack on religion under the auspices of rooting out extremism. We have heard reference to the subcommittee on international human rights, and I want to go to a report that was done not one Parliament, but two Parliaments ago by that subcommittee. It was rendered on December 19, 2018, by the subcommittee on international human rights. I am going to read part of a section of the report that talked about what was taking place. This was four years ago, and we know that the situation has only worsened since.
In section A, paragraph 3, the report reads:
While prohibitions on outward displays of religion had formerly applied only to public sector workers and to students, “now, an entire religion is criminalized.” Witnesses described prohibitions on a wide array of religious practices or expressions of Islam through anti-terror legislation. This includes a prohibition on facial hair and religious clothing. Individuals with names bearing religious significance have been forced to change their names. Qurans, religious literature and prayer mats kept at home are confiscated. Keeping Islamic dietary practices is prohibited. Halal signs are now illegal, and restaurants must stay open during Ramadan. It is also prohibited to teach Islam to children. Individuals have been detained for praying five times a day and for circulating religious text among family. Most mosques have been demolished; the Muslim call to prayer is no longer heard. Effectively, outward displays of faith among Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other Turkic Muslims in the XUAR have effectively stopped.
I read that out in its entirety because it carries a lot of impact in terms of helping members of this House to understand and in terms of helping Canadians watching these parliamentary proceedings to understand exactly what is transpiring. Again, this report was rendered at the end of December 2018.
We understand this attack on Muslims in the People's Republic as part of a broader sweep of attacks. I am sure that if they have not come up yet, they are going to come up in the context of tonight's debate: attacks on Hong Kong democracy protesters, attacks on people who dare to practise Falun Gong and are members of Falun Gong, attacks on Tibetan Buddhists, of whom I represent several thousand in my riding of Parkdale—High Park, whose linguistic, religious and cultural traditions are being repressed and actively attacked. That has been the status quo since 1959.
The repression of Tibetan religious practices dates back over 60 years. The repression, in its acute form, of Uighur Muslims dates over the last 20 years, also outlined in that subcommittee report.
What is interesting is that it also spills over, so we are not talking just about an internal domestic situation within the People's Republic of China. There is pressure exercised on nations that are largely dependent economically on China to deport Uighurs back to the PRC, so they can effectively undergo persecution under the guise of re-education. There is targeting of Uighurs here in Canada, Uighurs like Mehmet Tohti, whose name has been mentioned before, who dare to speak up or to try to reach out and contact their loved ones, who have effectively disappeared into camps in China.
There is the targeting of others here, such as Tibetans, some of whom are my constituents. One of them, whom I want to mention by name, has decided not to be silenced and not to let attacks or surveillance or harassment or bullying diminish her voice. In fact, that woman, even today, is running for municipal office in the city of Toronto.
Her name is Chemi Lhamo. She is a former intern who served in my office. She is a very proud Tibetan Canadian and a very strong advocate. I salute her for having the courage to not be silenced but to continue to advocate for the causes she believes in and for seeking public office this very evening through a city council seat in Parkdale—High Park.
The human rights violations also raise grave concerns because they harken back to a different time. What am I speaking about here? I am speaking about the massive detention camps that we have learned about through human rights accounts, through parliamentary studies and through the debates that are entering this chamber this very evening. These detention camps are occurring as we speak in the People's Republic of China, housing, by some accounts, hundreds of thousands of Uighurs. By other accounts, over a million Uighurs are being housed in these detention camps.
People have used the term “concentration camps”. That harkens back to only one thing for every one of us in this chamber. That harkens back to World War II Europe and the devastation and horrific human rights abuses that were wrought by the Third Reich at that time, yet that is what we are talking about in 2022 on this planet in a country in Asia in the People's Republic of China.
What is taking place in these camps? Again, I am going to go back to this report. I am in chapter C, paragraph 17. It talks about these camps, political re-education camps. A witness named Mr. Byler described sessions where detainees were forced to publicly denounce their past crimes such as studying the Quran, learning Arabic or travelling abroad. Those who did not fully comply faced harsh punishment, including psychological measures designed to break the detainees, including the targeting of their families, their masculinity or forcing them to eat pork.
I want members to digest that. I apologize for the pun, but it is the idea of openly violating a person's religious traditions in the name of re-educating someone out of their Islamic practices, in violation of strict religious dietary laws. The punishments include beatings, stress positions and isolation. This is what is transpiring right now. This is what we are speaking about.
In these final few minutes, I want to talk about the reproductive rights of people in East Turkestan. We have heard about forced sterilization. Forced sterilization and, indeed, forced abortions were cited by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in a report that is dated this year, August 22, 2022. What they talk about is forced sterilization.
We have heard about the definition of genocide. I am going to cite it now. I do this having been a UN war crimes prosecutor on the Rwandan genocide. I think it is important to turn back to how genocide is defined. A genocide is defined in the UN convention under article II as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” and then it lists five different indicia. The fourth is “Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group”.
There is only one way to characterize a forced sterilization or a forced abortion. The rates of population growth among Uighurs in East Turkestan are one-sixth of what they are in the rest of the People's Republic of China. We know what is going on. If that can be proven as evidence and successfully prosecuted, that amounts to genocide. That is why this debate is important. That is why what this motion calls for is important.
Let me finish on this motion because it calls for understanding the pressure that Uighurs in third countries are facing in terms of their fear of deportation and making sure that Canadian immigration measures are supple and flexible enough to accept these individuals. I say this quite emotionally. We heard the member opposite talk about those who have faced safe haven or received safe haven in this country. I include myself among those persons. Fifty years ago, I came here as a Ugandan Asian refugee at the age of 10 months, fleeing the persecution of a guy named Idi Amin Dada, who decided that there was no place for Asians in Uganda at that time. If Canada did not open its doors then, I would not be standing here today.
Canada has a moral duty and an obligation to ensure we continue that humanitarian tradition. Doing so through immigration measures, such as those being proposed today, is one way we can do exactly that and show the world that the persecution being faced by Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in the People's Republic is unjust and cannot be countenanced. To go back to the metaphor of light over darkness, that is the light that we need to shine today.
1642 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:21:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it has been a pleasure working with my friend opposite on the Tibet friendship group, and I thank him for speaking to the motion today.
The motion identifies the fact that Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims face an ongoing genocide. The member quite eloquently, especially in the final minutes of his speech, made precisely the case for that genocide recognition. There was a motion in this House a year and a half ago on which the government, speaking not of the entire Liberal caucus but the government, chose to abstain. At the time, the government said it was studying the issue.
A lot has happened in the last year and a half. The member mentioned the UN human rights commissioner's report as well, which is new since the House of Commons motion. Could he clarify, if he is able to, the position of his government on this motion and, flowing from that, whether the position of the Government of Canada today is that Uighurs are subject to an ongoing genocide?
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:24:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's intervention today was very interesting, very heartfelt and very intelligently delivered.
I have some concerns about what Canada can do in addition to the efforts to allow Uighurs to come to Canada to flee persecution. However, I wonder whether the member can talk a bit about the potential for the government to impose sanctions on those responsible for this genocide and what additional steps the Canadian government can take to ensure those sanctions are not just put in place and named, but also enforced and made effective.
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:26:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I hope I am audible with the microphones here. I know my voice is gone. I do not have COVID. I tested negative, but I am here to speak to the motion the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan brought forth.
This is an important debate and, I would suggest, a preview of what we will be seeing on Wednesday and in December when we will be discussing my own motion, which is Motion No. 62. It relates to resettlement and calls upon the Government of Canada to resettle 10,000 Uighur here in our country to provide safe refuge as of 2024.
My motion calls for us as a country to welcome 10,000 from third countries, not from within China but Uighur people and other Turkic minorities who are living in, for example, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and many different countries around the world. Why? It is for the exact reason we in this House have said: They are suffering a genocide. Not only are we saying this today, but we said it in this House on February 22, 2021. We were unanimous in saying so. We spoke with one voice, and I would like us again to speak with one voice, not only here today and now but also this coming Wednesday and again when we speak in December on this exact same thing.
We are all from different political families, and we posture, position and angle in different ways in order to get our sound bite, our headline in the newspaper and our quotes, but this issue is an issue of grave importance. It is one in which we should be united, moving together in one direction. It is an issue of genocide, not only the political rhetoric of genocide but the legal definition of genocide. This has been the opinion of legal scholars and of a people's tribunal, and this is the opinion of this House.
The genocide convention of 1951 was brought into force after World War II, after the Holocaust when there was an attempt to wipe out a people. We, as an international community said never again and that we would not allow this kind of behaviour to exist on the face of our earth, but it is happening right now.
Legally, what does genocide mean? It means that there is an “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. They do not have to do it, but they have to intend to do it. There are five enumerated aspects of this legal definition. It includes killing members of the group. It includes causing serious bodily harm. It includes inflicting conditions on a group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, such as imposing measures to prevent births and forcibly transferring children of the group out of their group to another group.
Jurists have said that what is happening to the Uighur people meets all five aspects of the genocide convention. The people's tribunal, though, said specifically that, while it did not determine on all five aspects, the forced sterilizations were genocidal in intent. We heard from other members previously who talked about forced sterilizations. We heard their impact on the reduction of births in the Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region.
Thus, it is incumbent upon us in this House to speak with one voice. I would ask that members put aside the partisan angling and the jockeying, and move with one force. It is important for us as a country to have a single thrust on this issue. If we are able to do that, we can and we will, hopefully, resettle at least 10,000, if not more, Uighurs.
However, if we are going to posture and position while we are having these important debates, then we will find that our energy is not focused in one direction. Instead of fighting to save people, we are fighting ourselves. There is no dignity or respect in that. There is no honour in that. It is something that we should be ashamed of. This is a moment for us to save lives. Let us do it. Let us speak with one voice. Let us encourage each other to do it.
As we are going to enter this debate on Wednesday, I ask that people reflect on this. If we actually want to have strength as a country in terms of resettling people here, we are not dealing with a small opponent or a small country that is committing genocide. We are dealing with a juggernaut of a nation. If we hope to put a dent in that genocide, then we must move together as a single hand and not as open digits.
Where are we at right now? We are at a time of reflection. We have two days to see how we will create our next speeches, what positions we will take and how we will debate the motion that I bring forth on Wednesday. I hope, expect and believe that we will move together as one.
There are so many human rights cases on the face of this earth, which is not to say that we should not speak to them openly and publicly, but we have an opportunity right now to make an impact. Sometimes we have to focus to get success, and that is what we are doing on Wednesday. We are going to focus. I ask us to focus so that we can get success and bring this thing home. If we do speak with one voice, our government will listen. It will make it more likely for our government to listen if we do speak with one clear voice.
We heard about Michelle Bachelet's report, which said that the allegations of the Uighur people were well founded and that they may amount to international crimes, including crimes against humanity. We know that our country's responsibility to protect is engaged not only when we have established that crimes against humanity are occurring, but when there is the possibility of crimes against humanity occurring. This is what Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, actually said: that there may be crimes against humanity. Therefore, our responsibility to protect is engaged. This motion allows us to fulfill that responsibility in part, not in whole but in part.
To conclude, let us move together as one force so that we can have success in this. For those who are listening, I ask them to bring this to their colleagues to reflect on it personally and to come back on Wednesday with some gusto and a united front.
1120 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:35:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to speaking to my friend's motion on Wednesday, and I thank him for his work on that.
The member spoke at the end of his speech about a united front. I know that he was not referring to the United Front. Maybe we need a united front to counter the United Front.
As well, I agree with his point about the fact that, as a state party to the genocide convention, we have obligations. Those obligations are not dependent on a determination by the UN, and they are not dependent on its being definitively a genocide. Those obligations are engaged when there is a possibility of genocide. We heard this testimony very clearly from Irwin Cotler during the initial hearings that led to the recommendation by the subcommittee on human rights of the finding of genocide.
The member's motion speaks of 10,000 over two years starting in 2024. He is giving the government time, and I appreciate the member's principle and pragmatism in trying to push these things forward. Is the member hoping that the government will exceed that timeline if the motion is adopted? I wonder if the member could speak to the imminent danger certainly that many people are in right now.
213 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:37:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for that important observation, that Uighur people are right now suffering a genocide and that we need to act as soon as possible to help people. The sad reality is that we cannot go into China to stop it. We need to continue to work with the international community and call for unfettered access, because it is only with unfettered access that this will stop. We know it is occurring. The satellite images show it. The China papers have revealed the intent. We see the birth rates dropping. To the member's correct observation, it is happening right now. We must act immediately and without delay. My motion brings things forth to the earliest possible time, so that we can get this done effectively and in a fulsome manner.
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:40:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member across the way for his work on the Subcommittee on International Human Rights and for his work in passing the report through this place, calling for the government to recognize the genocide that is happening there.
I note that this member is very active on it, but my question for him is this. If we continue to wait for the government to take action on it, when does he think the government will be taking action on this declaration of Uighur genocide?
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:51:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, I do worry about genocides happening around the world in many different locations, including in Xinjiang with the Uighur people. There is a need for us to say, and mean, “never again”.
We were able to vote on the motion to declare the Uighur genocide years ago. The Subcommittee on International Human Rights declared it a genocide years ago, yet the government has still taken very little action to both condemn and stop the genocide, as well as to help the Uighur people come to Canada to escape persecution.
Can he talk about why it has taken so long?
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:52:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we cannot really control what the rest of the world does with this. We can designate this situation to be a genocide here in Canada. We can take those actions.
More importantly, actions we can take that are significant are, for example, blocking products that are made with Uighur forced labour. That is something we can do in Canada. Just last month the European Union banned exactly that. It banned products made with Uighur forced labour. That is an example of something within our control to do, and we can do it.
We can also halt complicity in organ harvesting. This is a very significant thing where organs are actually being harvested from people, such as Uighurs in China, and are being sold all around the world. This is a horrific thing that should not be happening.
There is a bill right now, Bill S-223, that is at the foreign affairs committee. That is another very important piece of legislation. It is something we can do to take action on this important file.
176 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 9:11:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will start my brief remarks by saying that I thought, at least at the onset of this debate, that there would be a great show of unity about an issue that strikes at the very core of who we are as Canadians, which means to stand up for those who are being persecuted. However, I was very disappointed, specifically by some members of the government who did not use this opportunity to make a stand of unity but instead tried to score cheap political points.
We are debating today an important issue. It is something that many Canadians are probably unaware of but have probably seen the impacts of, whether that be forced labour, human trafficking, forced organ donations or the whole host of actions that have led this place and many around the world to state very clearly that there is a genocide taking place against the Uighur and Turkic Muslim people in China.
It is especially important that we have this debate today, because we come to this debate after the Chinese Communist Party closed its five-year annual convention, where the current leadership of the People's Republic of China and the Communist Party, that one-party dictatorship, has, with a heavy hand, shut down discourse, which has led to, in this case, systematic persecution against a minority population that needs Canada's support and needs the world's support.
In the very short amount of time that I have, I would simply say that it behooves us all to ensure that we stand up for those who are being persecuted, that we stand up for human rights and that we take the actions that are outlined in this motion and with the vote that will be coming, I believe, on Wednesday, to ensure that this Parliament makes a clear statement to say that we stand for religious freedom and we stand for the rights of minorities, and to ensure that Canada's Parliament, the voice of the people in our nation, stand with the Uighur people who have faced systematic persecution.
I am thankful for the opportunity to speak, and I look forward to a strong show of support in Canada's Parliament.
370 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
