44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/13/23 4:06:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things I have been very concerned about is whether our sanction regime is actually being enforced. The easy part of sanctions is to put people on the list. The hard part is to actually enforce those sanctions and to make sure that they are transparent and enforced, as well as that we are following through with action.
We know, because we heard testimony from the RCMP at the foreign affairs committee, that there are very few resources allocated to our sanction enforcement in this country.
Would the member agree that if the government is just putting names on a list and does not actually enforce those sanctions, it is just committing political theatre?
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:36:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my problem continues to be on the implementation of our sanction regime. Of course, there should be no one in this House who wants people who have been sanctioned to be able to come to Canada, such as people who have committed human rights abuses or perhaps taken part in the illegal war in Ukraine and the genocide against the Ukrainian people. However, the problem is that the bill would do very little to fix the sanction regime, which provides no clarity to parliamentarians and provides no transparency.
We have asked time and time again about the seized assets, and I have brought a question forward through the Order Paper on this aspect. The government has made quite a big show out of saying it is going to be using those assets to help Ukraine rebuild. However, we have not been able to get any information from the government on what those seized assets are.
Why does that member believe the government is finding it so difficult to share that information, and why is the number of assets seized so incredibly low?
184 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is 2023 and we are in the House again debating something that should not be up for debate: Bill C-311.
While the member for Yorkton—Melville claims that this bill is about protecting women from violence, no organizations that actually work to support and protect women from violence are endorsing this bill. Why is that? It is because the people who care about violence being perpetrated against women understand what is needed to protect and support women. Those are the things that my fellow New Democrats and I have been fighting for in this House for years and the very things that the member and the Conservative Party have refused to support.
They are things like implementing the calls for justice from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. They are things like legislation that would limit assault-style weapons. They are things like a whole range of economic measures that would support women, including dental care, child care and pay equity. They are things like adequately and comprehensively supporting the full range of reproductive rights and health care in all regions of Canada, particularly in northern and remote regions.
They are things like listening to experts like Julia Anderson, the CEO of CanWaCH, who told the foreign affairs committee just weeks ago, “a 12% average decline in access to modern contraception would result in an additional 734,000 unintended pregnancies.” She also indicated, “A 23% shift from safe to unsafe abortions will lead to an additional 491,000 unsafe abortions.” Acting to provide more access to birth control, abortion and maternal health care would save lives.
They are things like ensuring that Canada adheres to the feminist international assistance program and lives up to the commitments it has made to support sexual and reproductive health rights for women and girls throughout the world by funding health care services like abortion. In fact, this bill, Bill C-311, would do nothing to protect women or to support them. It is nothing more than an attempt to undermine women's rights in Canada, including the right to a safe and accessible abortion. It would take away health care services from women, because abortion is health care. Taking away access to safe abortions does not stop abortions from happening. It stops safe abortions from happening and it costs women their lives.
The right to control our reproductive health is fundamental to our rights as women. This is not the first time the member for Yorkton—Melville has attempted to undermine the right to an abortion and other women's rights. However, I think this may be the first time that we have seen this kind of violence washing: using violence against women as an excuse and a disguise for chipping away at women's rights.
This bill pretends that judges do not already have the discretion to apply greater penalties for aggravating circumstances. This is completely false, and there is no valid justification for this legislation. Our legal system is already more than capable of ensuring that women are protected. Judges already have the ability to add additional punishment.
In fact, there is only one reason for this bill to exist. It is designed to create a legal recognition for the fetus. I will quote the member for Yorkton—Melville's own words: “Canada has no abortion law. The legal void is so extreme that we do not even recognize preborn children when they are victims of violent crimes.”
It is my sincere hope that when members table bills for consideration, they do so truthfully and honestly and they legitimately believe in what they say about their bills. This bill is a blatant attempt to mislead this House and Canadians. There is no need for this bill. There is no rationale for this bill. In fact, this bill is dangerous to women. It is dangerous to women in Canada and it is dangerous to women around the world. It is actually harmful, because we know that at least 40,000 women are dying annually around the world because of unsafe abortions. I want to say it one more time: When we criminalize abortion, we do not stop abortion and we do not stop women accessing abortion; we stop safe abortion and women die.
Limiting access to abortions and reproductive health care does not stop abortions. I cannot say that more clearly. Whenever a woman is denied the power to make her own decisions about whether and how often to become pregnant, her internationally recognized human rights are violated, and her health and life are at risk. The best way to protect women and girls is to provide health care, provide support and not limit women's access to those things.
I have said this in the House before: I have a daughter. I will fight to my dying breath to ensure that she can access every health care support that she wants in her lifetime and that she will always have the right to choose when she has children, if she has children and how she has children. I would be a horrible person if I could stand in this place and want that for my daughter, and not want that for every woman and girl in this world.
I will continue to stand and protect women's rights, and no matter how many times the member brings backdoor bills forward and tries to take away the rights of women, New Democrats will not support it.
931 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:08:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I apologize very much to my colleague that I am not speaking French, but it is late in the House tonight, and my French is not up to the task. However, I work very well with the member on the ALS caucus, and I appreciate the work she does in the House very much.
Obviously, I do not agree with some of the things that the member has brought forward, but one of the things I am worried about is the health of our interpreters and the health of the people who are working to support us. It is a challenge for me and something that I struggle with, because I do not understand how the Parliament of Canada cannot adequately resource the committees for the work that we need to do. This is something that we need to get to the bottom of, and I think that there are solutions there.
I strongly believe in a hybrid Parliament, because I strongly believe that it makes it easier for women and others for whom it may not be as easy to be in this place. It makes it easier for them to be represented here. I think that is one of the most important things that we can do as parliamentarians.
I wonder if the member could talk about the fact that we do not have the resources necessary. Quebec is a lot closer to Ottawa than Alberta is. Certainly, for me, having a hybrid Parliament is really important. Is there a way for us to come up with the resources necessary to make sure that a hybrid Parliament could work?
273 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:24:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague from Alberta on being able to bring the issue of guns into the issue of a hybrid Parliament. Well done on his speech.
I listened to his speech and he talked about what is being lost with a hybrid Parliament. I recognize that he feels that this is the case, but I want him to consider those things that are being gained and I want him to perhaps consider the fact that the world does move on. We do not have Blockbusters any more. There was hockey without helmets before. There was a Parliament that did not have women's washrooms before.
I wonder if he could talk about the fact that sometimes things change, that sometimes they change for the better and that we need to be able to look at how to build change going forward that will make it easier for people to participate in our democracy and make it easier for people to participate in our—
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 11:12:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to compliment my colleague. He has a beautiful suit on today.
One of the things he spoke about was making sure that people can participate in this Parliament. I think about representatives in the Yukon and representatives in rural and remote northern communities and how difficult it is for them. It is a very different reality than when we have, for example, people representing ridings in Ottawa. I think it is important that we make sure all of those constituents are equally represented.
He brought up the idea that Canadians ultimately choose who represents them. That is the cornerstone of our democracy. People will still be able to vote if—
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 11:58:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for keeping us abreast of many situations happening around the world.
The member raised the issue of first past the post, and I obviously agree wholeheartedly with her. She also brought up an interesting idea that maybe we should sit alphabetically. I was in Finland this year, and Finland's parliamentarians sit geographically; they do not sit by party. I think that is another interesting thing. As someone who sits on both sides of the House as part of the NDP, I think it would change the way we view our colleagues, so I agree with that very much.
However, I also know that the member lives in one of the most remote ridings in this country, and it takes her an awful lot of time to get here. She has been here for some time, and I wonder if she could comment on whether or not there is a correlation between how far individuals have to travel to get to this place and how long they choose to serve, because it is a very trying thing for families. It is very difficult, and it is very different if one is a representative in Gatineau versus a representative in Yukon, for example.
210 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
