SoVote

Oct/3/23 6:38:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the saying goes that one eats an elephant one bite at a time, and I am happy to hear from the parliamentary secretary that we have convinced the government to take a small bite, but what we need to know is when. When is it going to implement that foreign agent registry? One needs to be registered in this country to lobby for the food bank, but we do not register, or require registration of, people who are paid by foreign governments and are operating on our soil with the interests of their foreign government, like the dictatorship in Beijing. It took the Liberals the better part of a year, with all kinds of time wasted on their special rapporteur process, to actually name the justice who is going to be responsible for the inquiry into foreign interference. What I would like from the parliamentary secretary this evening is for her to reassure Canadians. On what date will they introduce legislation for the foreign agent registry?

168 words

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell

Oct/3/23 6:39:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak once again on this important issue. We have already identified that we will be moving forward with a foreign agent registry. We have mentioned many steps we are taking to protect our democracy, as it is incredibly important to us. It is not new to Canada. What I find interesting about the member opposite's speech is that just some weeks ago, we had a very serious presentation by the Prime Minister on very serious allegations about questions of democracy and about the murder of a Canadian taking place on Canadian soil. We had a take-note debate, and on those grounds of an attempted foreign interference in our democracy, why were Conservatives silent in that debate? Why has the member opposite not even mentioned what has happened here or the potential impacts of India's involvement in that murder?

148 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Oct/3/23 6:40:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise virtually this evening to pursue a question I initially asked on May 8, 2023. That question related to electoral reform, and specifically, I was picking up on the fact that, just in the previous weekend, at the Liberal Party policy convention, the Liberals had adopted a resolution very close to a motion that had been put forward by my Green colleague, the hon. member for Kitchener Centre. Now the NDP has put forward another motion that is very similar, from the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, calling for a citizens' assembly. The Liberal Party gathered in Ottawa and voted for holding a citizens' assembly to investigate electoral reform. The Prime Minister's initial response to the media was that there was “no consensus”, in his language, to pursue a citizens' assembly on electoral reform. When the hon. Minister of Democratic Institutions, the member of Parliament for Beauséjour, responded to me on that day back in May, he reiterated this notion that there was no consensus for a citizens' assembly, so let us just frame tonight's debate around this central point. I do want to stop and thank the grassroots campaigners, who are non-partisan citizen activists of Fair Vote Canada, for pursuing this matter and demonstrating that the majority of Canadians want to see a citizens' assembly. To say there is no consensus around getting rid of first past the post, as the Prime Minister says, I think is debatable, but it is a move to a different voting system. To say there is no consensus and that therefore we will not pursue a method to find consensus is absurd. A citizens' assembly, a non-partisan citizens' assembly, on electoral reform is for the very purpose of finding consensus. Bringing Canadians together who are chosen randomly, citizens' assemblies are a really fascinating tool in democracies. Canada has used them on this topic but only at the provincial level. There is great support for moving to a citizens' assembly on electoral reform. By the way, eight times since 1921, this House or various law commissions have studied first past the post, and in every instance since 1921 no body, as in a group of people, a House of Commons committee and so on, has ever found that first past the post is an appropriate system for Canada. That is because ever since the early 1920s, we have not been a two-party system. We have had three, four and, now in this House, five parties. Therefore, in an electoral system with a first-past-the-post system, inevitably and invariably the vote is distorted between the popular vote and the seat count. Especially, as I said, since 1921, every authority that has studied the matter has said that first past the post does not work for Canada. However, to find the new system, to develop consensus, a citizens' assembly is an excellent tool. I found it bizarre to be told in question period that we did not have consensus on the tool to find consensus. I note parenthetically that it appears to me the Prime Minister will not think there is consensus on anything until everyone agrees with him, and that is not a tool for consensus. We absolutely must have fair voting so that Canadians have confidence that the way they cast their vote has an impact on the result.

574 words

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs (Cybersecurity), Lib.)

Oct/3/23 6:44:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know that my hon. colleague is incredibly passionate about this topic, and I enjoy listening to her. I take her feedback very seriously. I also wish her well. We are committed to strengthening Canada's democratic institutions. Our electoral system, along with the fundamental rules that determine how votes are translated into seats in the House of Commons, is one of the most foundational pieces of our democracy. Among many things, it provides Canadians with a direct connection to their members of Parliament, who must work with each other to develop national policy and make political decisions, while engaging with and remaining accountable to their constituents in an increasingly digital and connected Canada. Our current first-past-the-post system is not perfect, as the member acknowledges. She raises crucial points. However, no system is perfect. Ours has served Canada well for over 150 years, and it continues to advance the democratic values that Canadians want reflected in their system of government. This includes strong local representation, stability and accountability. How Canadians vote and how we govern ourselves are fundamentally important points that impact us all. Given that, the government's view has been very clear: Any major reforms to the electoral system should not be made without the broad support of Canadians. We consulted very broadly with Canadians, and a clear preference for a new electoral system, let alone a consensus, did not emerge. Therefore, the government decided not to proceed. However, the government has continued to work to improve Canada's federal electoral process. Notably, in 2018, the government introduced the Elections Modernization Act, which represented a significant reform of the Canada Elections Act. Parliament passed this important legislation, which modernized the electoral process, making it easier for Canadians to participate in elections and further bolstering Canadians' trust and confidence in Canada's world-class and independently administered electoral system. For example, these changes made the federal electoral process more accessible by reducing barriers for persons with all types of disabilities, Canadians living abroad and Canadian Armed Forces members, so they can vote and participate more fully in the electoral process. It has also made it easier for Canadians to vote by giving the chief electoral officer additional flexibility to run elections more efficiently, thereby reducing wait times, and to extend the hours for advanced polls and use mobile polls to better serve remote and isolated communities. I would also note that the supply and confidence agreement established in March 2022 between the leader of the NDP and the Prime Minister included several commitments aimed at maintaining the health of Canada's democracy and removing potential barriers to voting and participation. We will continue to work with Elections Canada to explore ways to expand people's ability to vote, including by improving the mail-in ballot process. These are just some of the important issues that the government is focused on to deliver for Canadians.

490 words

Ms. Elizabeth May

Oct/3/23 6:48:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. parliamentary secretary claimed that first past the post has served Canada well. I had the honour to serve on the all-party select committee that studied the matter of electoral reform, and we heard from many experts that first past the post has not served Canada well. These experts included a former chief electoral officer, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, and a professor emeritus from the University of Toronto, Peter Russell. First past the post distorts results and leaves frustrated, unhappy voters. When the parliamentary secretary says that they are committed to strengthening democracy, I would urge her to reflect on how that contributes to public cynicism and hurts Canada's democracy. When the Liberals leapt from third place to win a majority in 2015, it was largely because they promised 2015 would be the last election under first past the post. I note they have resurrected the 2015 election promise to get rid of GST on rentals. It is time to bring back the promise to fix our voting system.

173 words

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell

Oct/3/23 6:49:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, once again, I appreciate my colleague's input. During the time when Canadians were being consulted, I too held consultations in my riding. Those meetings were very difficult, as everybody has very different opinions and is passionate about what is the best electoral process for Canada. As I stated in my earlier remarks, the government felt very strongly that unless we had widespread consensus, changing such a significant tool of our democracy would not be able to move forward. We are deeply committed to making the electoral process better and fairer. I know the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs is also looking at this, and we welcome additional comments and conversations on how we can make improvements to our electoral system.

125 words

Mr. Kevin Vuong (Spadina—Fort York, Ind.)

Oct/3/23 6:50:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on June 9, 2023, I asked the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship if Canada was operating an apartheid era visa process in our high commission in South Africa. Canadians are proud of our country's role in contributing to the end of apartheid, and I think they would be shocked to know there are high commission staff who are perpetuating the racial injustices of apartheid in our name. Canada's immigration system has been facing challenges in recent years and has been overwhelmed with visa applicants experiencing really long processing times. While there has been improvement in some countries, it seems it has worsened in South Africa. My office has been inundated with calls from family and friends of South Africans who have faced visa wait times well beyond what applicants elsewhere face. In India, a very busy mission, Canadian officials can turnaround a visa request in a month. In the Philippines, it is done in only 29 days. However, the current processing time for a visitor visa in South Africa now stands at 115 days, or nearly four months. There is something clearly wrong. Weddings and funerals are being missed. Children are fighting illnesses without their parents. This is unacceptable to me and the diverse constituents I represent. There are also real economic consequences, as visa delays and denials impact work and study permits. Canadian employers are losing critically needed South African talent. A health authority with a long backlog for surgeries lost a new surgeon it had vetted and wanted to hire and is being forced to transfer patients for treatment to the United States. Immigration insiders have referred to this as Canada's Africa problem. Indeed, accusations of systemic racism have been levied at various visa posts around the world, including in Pretoria. Sadly, systemic racism among Canadian institutions is real, and IRCC is not immune to this often invisible disease. In May 2022, the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration released a parliamentary report that revealed “systemic racism” within IRCC that actually resulted in discriminatory results against people of colour. That is unacceptable. Immigration, like everything else, should be merit-based. It should not matter what the colour of one's skin is. Canadian media has widely reported on visa issues vis-à-vis South Africa, and the Government of Canada has undertaken anti-racism training, which is great. However, we do not know the impact of the new training. One inconvenient truth is that some Canadian missions will delegate visa decision-making to locally engaged staff at non-priority visa posts. In the case of South Africa, I was told Canada relies predominantly on white local staff to accept or refuse applications from predominantly Black and Indian South Africans. On September 12, 2023, on my own personal expense, I met with Chris Cooter, Canada's high commissioner, in Pretoria, South Africa, to ascertain the reason for abnormally high visa refusal rates among Black and Indian South Africans. Unbelievably, the high commissioner informed me that he was not aware of racism issues. Understandably, I was disappointed by his response. Indeed, why would there be global anti-racism training, including in South Africa, if such training was not needed? Why would a parliamentary report talk about systemic racism within IRCC if it did not exist? The Canadian government must get to the bottom of this. Canada stood up for Africa during the dark days of apartheid, and as a son of refugees, I feel a duty to ensure that future generations of new Canadians receive the same warmth, compassion and equity that my family did. Who am I to believe, the government, an IRCC committee report or an out-of-touch high commissioner?

621 words

Mr. Paul Chiang (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, Lib.)

Oct/3/23 6:55:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this important issue. I want to make it clear that any instance of racism or discrimination at IRCC is absolutely unacceptable. Following the hon. member's question in June, we investigated the selection practices within the South African High Commission and determined that discrimination and racism should not be taking place as the filtering of visa applications by race does not occur. IRCC neither requests nor collects information on the race of applicants. These protocols were established to ensure maximum oversight and minimal risk of systemic discrimination in all operations. Indeed, the team in Pretoria has approved nearly nine out of 10 temporary resident applications filed by South African nationals since 2018, with the exception of the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021. Approval rates in Pretoria are higher in 2023 across all temporary resident lines of business compared to 2019. We recognize that addressing systemic racism and discrimination, whether overt or covert, requires constant and ongoing vigilance. We have a moral obligation to address institutional racism and end discrimination across government. Though we continue to make progress on this front, there is more work to be done. IRCC hired the independent research firm Pollara in 2021 and 2023 to examine the department's anti-racism efforts and how we can do better to serve clients of all backgrounds. While the results from Pollara's latest study published in August show progress, there is still more we can do to prevent discrimination and promote equity and inclusion in our staffing and procedures worldwide. We have also created action plans for each area of programming to help identify and eliminate racism in program and service delivery. We are currently analyzing disaggregated data on race and racism in our workforce collected through our surveys. We have created new impact assessment tools, bias identification methodologies, guidance and training to address racial disparities across our programs and procedures. We also announced in August the creation of an equity secretariat, with an ombudsman's office that will support safe and independent channels to report instances of racism and discrimination. This will be an accessible, neutral and respected resource for our employees worldwide. Finally, all IRCC employees receive training on inclusion and diversity. Our staff in Pretoria completed not only this comprehensive training, but also training adapted to include a specific focus on their clientele in April. The migration program manager in Pretoria additionally participated in workshops in Canada in January that included training on anti-racism. As outlined, we are taking various steps to address systemic racism within IRCC and ensure that we are promoting diversity and inclusion in all our efforts. Though there is more work to be done, IRCC takes seriously our responsibility to our employees, clients and everyone we serve.

467 words

Mr. Kevin Vuong

Oct/3/23 6:59:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary talks about training. That is great. The issue is this. What is the result? I will tell him what the result is. In May of 2022, Canada was host to the world AIDS summit. There were African delegates invited to our country on Canadian government letterhead who could not get visas, which were immensely delayed or outright rejected. In October of 2022, Toronto, my home city, was supposed to host the Gabon-Canada trade investment forum. Not a single delegate from Africa who had been invited on Canadian government letterhead was able to secure a visa. How does the parliamentary secretary reconcile these two? There is a clear problem and if the government does not act it is going to be escalated. We as a country cannot afford any more international embarrassment. More importantly, what is happening is not living up to our standards or values. What is the government going to do to address this issue before it gets worse?

166 words

Mr. Paul Chiang

Oct/3/23 7:00:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, recent investigations of the Pretoria office determined that visa applications are not and cannot be filtered by race. Its diverse selection team has, in fact, been approving nearly nine in 10 temporary resident applications filed by South African nationals since 2018, with the exception of the pandemic years of 2020-21. Approval rates are now higher across all temporary resident lines of business compared to 2019. However, IRCC is constantly working to eliminate systemic discrimination and racism and promote equity in our staffing and procedures worldwide. It is doing this through independent research, training, a newly created equity secretariat and other measures. This work remains ongoing. We will continue to address systemic racism within our institutions and ensure transparency in our progress.

124 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Oct/3/23 7:01:17 p.m.
Watch

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). (The House adjourned at 7:01 p.m.)

39 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 228