44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 9, 2023 10:00AM
- May/9/23 1:01:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, obviously I am appalled by this whole situation. I am concerned about our parliamentary privilege. There is also the issue of security for us and for my family members.
I would like my colleague to comment on the message that the Prime Minister's inaction is sending. How should we, as members of Parliament, interpret his inaction in relation to the fundamental public service that we perform and that serves democracy? What message does this send to any potential candidates who might decide to sacrifice part of their lives to go into politics, when that can have a dramatic impact on their safety and that of their families?
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 1:29:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am glad to find out that the member has a seat on the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, because I have some questions. What would make a Prime Minister ignore recommendations and special security intelligence concerning Canada? It all seems very alarming. I mean, is it not essential to listen to what CSIS has to say? How are we supposed to perform our duties as members if the recommendations made by the agencies created to protect us and keep us safe are ignored?
As a member of this committee, is my colleague not tempted to ask questions and make sure that the integrity of the role of member of Parliament is protected?
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 9:57:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in this debate, I would like to say that as an MP, I am very worried about the state of democracy.
Can my colleague say whether he feels any pressure? Does he feel threatened? If so, how does that affect him and his ability to perform his role as an MP? As we know, several ridings were targeted. If he were one of those targeted, how would he be able to play his role independently? Fundamentally, it is our democracy and the integrity of the House that are being attacked.
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.
Like my colleagues, I rise today to speak about China's interference in political and public affairs and the breach of privilege of a member of this House. Obviously, it is one member, but all of us are under attack in this situation.
I will try to make this quick because I understand that people are waiting to hear from my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, whose expertise is in great demand. I think that there are some things that need to be said.
As we know, for several years now, a number of expert reports have highlighted China's actions, going so far as to accuse it of interfering in the political affairs of several countries, including our own. There have been reports of cyber-attacks on Canadian government institutions, businesses and universities, as well as other suspicious activities, such as manipulating social media and disseminating disinformation.
There are Chinese police stations that are operating while the Prime Minister looks on. There have been debates in the House on the active participation of Chinese government agents in the federal election and the controversial $200,000 donation to the Trudeau Foundation, which raises many questions about how much the Prime Minister knew about these matters.
These activities are extremely disturbing and raise questions about the integrity of our democracy and our electoral processes. We cannot allow foreign powers, no matter how big or how influential, to interfere in our political affairs and disrupt our democratic process. The Liberal government has gone from being disconcertingly naive about the Chinese Communist regime to inexplicably inactive in the face of China's repeated attacks on our democracy.
The straw that broke the camel's back was The Globe and Mail article about a CSIS report from 2021 stating that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and his family in Hong Kong were being threatened by a Chinese diplomat who was still in Canada. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills had just voted in favour of a motion condemning the genocide of the Uyghurs by the Communist Party of China.
These are all very serious allegations involving troubling information that could have a potential impact on our parliamentary duties. The Speaker's ruling on this matter is exemplary, and I agree with the conclusion that an entity like China intervening with retaliatory measures against an MP and his or her family represents an attack on our collective ability to carry out our parliamentary duties unimpeded.
That is simply unacceptable and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. It is our duty to protect our democracy and defend our colleagues' privileges. We must work together to strengthen our national security and protect our democratic institutions from outside threats. We must also support our colleagues and give them the means to fulfill their democratic mandate without fear or intimidation.
The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this motion because it has already debated these issues favourably in the public arena. First, when it comes to the foreign agent registry, I will not list all of the opportunities that the government has had for serious reflection since the member for Wellington—Halton Hills moved a motion in 2020 concerning Huawei's involvement in Canada's 5G network. Obviously, time has proven him right.
The Bloc Québécois has expressed its support for an independent public commission of inquiry into foreign election interference. That position is shared by other opposition parties that think that the recent leaks about China's attempts to interfere in our elections require an independent public inquiry.
Former chief electoral officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley has expressed his support for such an inquiry. According to him, Canadians have the right to know everything about what happened, and the lack of a public inquiry will only prolong the consequences for those who were affected. Kingsley also rejected the argument that a public inquiry could compromise public safety. He stated that public safety is there to protect democracy, not the other way around.
The government has sought to put off a public inquiry for a long time citing public security concerns. However, that has not prevented many people, including the former director of CSIS, Richard Fadden, from joining in the call for a public inquiry.
Overall, it is clear that the calls for a public inquiry into foreign interference in elections are growing stronger. Canadians have the right to know if their democratic process is under threat from foreign actors and what steps their government is taking to protect democracy and the interests of their country.
Can we get the truth on the closure of the covert police stations in Canada and on the threats against people who return to China or who have family in China?
This is not the first report we have heard about persecution and repression of certain people who criticized the Chinese government or who were considered dissidents.
The Chinese government also brought in a social credit system that can affect people's ability to travel, find work and access certain services based on their behaviour and their political leanings. It is important to note that these operations are often carried out covertly and the information is often difficult to verify. However, there is enough evidence to suggest that these threats exist and that governments and citizens should be aware of these risks.
The government's attempts to lower the temperature and stonewall are eroding our confidence in it. Its handling of the expulsion of Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei has been embarrassing.
We must be proactive. We must take steps to strengthen our national security, and we must shield ourselves from foreign attacks. We must also continue to strengthen our ability to identify, report, monitor and counter cyber-attacks. They can be extremely difficult to detect and thwart, but we must be ready to face these threats and to protect our institutions against malicious attacks.
The case of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills raises a bigger problem in a world that is becoming more complex. With the growth of social networks, it is getting easier and easier for malicious people to target and harass elected officials, journalists and other public figures. The threats and attacks can be deeply disturbing and have real consequences for the safety of the individuals concerned. This is our cue to rethink our society and even our use of social media.
Increasingly, we tolerate threats because they are just threats. If we do not tolerate threats towards our colleague, we should not tolerate the threats we are subjected to on social media, either.
Our world is entering a new era. China may be using an old way of doing things right now, but new ways of influencing our elected officials will be found. They will become increasingly insidious. Our lives are showcased on social media. Hackers are finding new ways to go even further in getting data.
Just imagine. A fraudster can practically create a new identity for themselves using data leaked from a bank or government. If a member of Parliament is targeted, what impact will that fake identity have? How will a new power be able to influence elected officials?
I serve on the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, and these are issues that must be discussed during our study of Bill C-27. We need to ask ourselves whether the government has really made all of the connections that need to be made between all of the laws in order to strengthen the protection of Quebeckers and Canadians.
When it comes to protecting ourselves from China, there is also the Investment Canada Act, which may not go far enough in protecting our vital areas, our supply chains. These are things that I have a lot of questions about.
With the arrival of even more powerful technologies, such as quantum computing, we know that a lot of our data is stored on servers and that China will not hesitate to check that data and use it against us, of course.
Consequently, and in conclusion, we have to equip ourselves with all the tools available to fight foreign interference. That starts with solidarity with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills.
1407 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 10:33:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent question. I think that in the current context, his question answers itself. It is extremely worrisome.
I admit that, as an MP, I feel concerned. Obviously, I have no ties to China. However, I am not surprised by the example from the member for Lac-Saint-Jean and his leadership on the issue of the Uyghurs and protecting these people. The Uyghurs are under pressure because the Chinese regime is trying to wipe them out, and their safety and survival are truly at risk.
As a Parliament, we are going to need to take strong positions and accept the consequences, as the member for Lac-Saint-Jean did. The member for Lac-Saint-Jean is leading by example. Obviously, he can no longer visit China, and these types of threats are absolutely unacceptable. We must stand firm in solidarity.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 10:35:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for his comments and his foresight, and especially for his willingness to educate all Canadians and members of the House of Commons about the importance of protecting themselves.
I do not think that denying this information is the answer. On the contrary, I think we need to pass it on and address it. As far as China is concerned, I cannot help but think of all the facial recognition systems that can identify and register individuals as they pass through an area. Police officers can quickly descend on a location to intercept and arrest these people. We know about the arrest of the two Michaels and all the arbitrary processes they faced.
Now there is a third Michael, the member for Wellington-Halton Hills, who is also being subjected to retaliation. Everyone must be extremely vigilant. They must think about their own safety, but under no circumstances should silence be part of the solution.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 10:36:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her concern for this issue.
Yes, transparency is part of the solution, because without transparency, we are sure to repeat past mistakes.
Let me draw a parallel with the holding of a public inquiry in the world of sports. We want this kind of inquiry because we want strong recommendations that will have the force of law. We want to get to the bottom of things and encourage people to come forward who may be too scared to speak publicly but who can confide in an authority they trust. We need a robust system, reliable mechanisms and independent people. A public inquiry can do this, but what we really need is for a country like Canada to take a strong stand.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 11:02:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and her awareness of such a fundamental issue.
I have asked this question several times today, but it is absolutely fundamental for me. As a member of Parliament, what aspect affects her work? Does she feel completely capable and independent to make decisions, or does she feel some pressure and a threat to her independence and her ability to make decisions?
What would happen if she or members of her family received such threats? Are we adequately protected?
Is the government doing enough, or should we have an independent public inquiry to make sure that we put in place the necessary framework to allow us to do our jobs properly?
119 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/23 11:31:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I would like him to talk about how he sees the attack on our democracy. It is something that I keep coming back to but that is essential for me.
Does my colleague see a threat? What can we do? Has he been pressured? Since it is dangerous to remain silent, how can we talk about this to ensure that precedents are not set?
We are talking about China right now, but it could be any other country. Russia is allegedly responsible for interfering in elections in the United States. Pretty much all of us have been banned from visiting Russia.
If we were the ones being threatened, how would we react? How would the member react?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
