SoVote

Mr. Michael Kram (Regina—Wascana, CPC)

Feb/5/24 4:25:37 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-57

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak to Bill C-57, an act to implement the 2023 free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine. I have to admit that, when I first glanced at the title of this bill when it was tabled in the House of Commons last fall, I was glad to see it for a few reasons. The first reason was that Conservatives support Ukraine. Ever since Russia's illegal invasion of that country two years ago, it has become imperative that all countries support Ukraine to preserve the rules-based international order. Otherwise, the international community risks backsliding into a pre-World War II era in which large, powerful countries are able to invade and annex their smaller neighbours with no repercussions. This is a concern I have heard many times in my riding of Regina—Wascana, not just from the many Ukrainian refugees who have moved to Saskatchewan, but also from ordinary citizens with no particular connection to Ukraine. Therefore, anything that we can do to support Ukraine is a good thing. The second reason I had high hopes for this bill is that Conservatives support free trade. Long gone are the days of economic nationalism when governments insisted on an unlevel playing field to protect domestic companies at the expense of consumers. Instead, Canadians and the international community have come to recognize the benefits of free trade. It allows Canadian companies to pursue new opportunities and to find new customers for their products and services, and it allows Canadian consumers to enjoy a variety of products and services from all around the world at the lowest possible prices. In fact, Conservatives' support for free trade goes back many years to the times of former prime ministers Stephen Harper and Brian Mulroney. Finally, I thought that, if nothing else, the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement would give us something different to talk about. For example, we have had many, many debates in the chamber about the Liberals' carbon tax. I know I have received many emails and phone calls from my constituents about the carbon tax and how it is making life more expensive every time they fill up their tanks with gas, go to the grocery store to do their shopping and pay their home heating bills. I thought that this bill would give us a break from talking about the carbon tax because a free trade agreement should have nothing to do with the carbon tax. Therefore, I have to say that I was surprised and disappointed to find that the Liberals' carbon tax has made its way into our free trade agreement with Ukraine. In chapter 13 of the agreement, which is the environment chapter, under article 10, Ukraine would be required to “promote carbon pricing and measures to mitigate carbon leakage”. Free trade agreements are supposed to be about trade and encouraging the free flow of goods and services between two countries. The free trade agreement should not be about imposing a carbon tax on Ukraine. The same Liberal carbon tax that has been making life more difficult for Canadians would soon be making life more difficult for Ukrainians, assuming this bill were to pass. Not only is a carbon tax the last thing Canadians want, but it is also the last thing Ukrainians need, given that they are in the middle of a war. It would make infinitely more sense to help Ukrainians win the war first and remove every Russian soldier from Ukrainian soil before beginning any talk about a carbon tax and how to implement a carbon tax in the middle of a war zone. I was also hoping that this bill would give us a break from talking about the Liberals' unrealistic net-zero emissions targets. Over the last eight years, the Liberals have come up with a long list of very expensive net-zero emissions targets, including phasing out fossil fuels, restricting fertilizers for farmers and ending the sale of gas-powered cars, which are all initiatives that would make life less affordable for Canadians. Therefore, I thought that this bill would give us a break from talking about these net-zero emissions targets because, obviously, free trade should have nothing to do with net-zero emissions targets. I have to say again that I was disappointed that the Liberals' net-zero emissions targets have made their way into our free trade agreement with Ukraine. Under chapter 13, article 10, Ukraine would be required to “transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.” Transitioning to net-zero emissions has proven difficult enough for Canadians to do, and we do not have a war going on in this country. We do not have the Russians bombing us every day as the Ukrainians do. It is ridiculous to expect Ukrainians to meet this goal given what they are going through right now. It has also been well documented that the Russians have been targeting the Ukrainian power grid to maximize human suffering. If the Ukrainian power grid is going to be in shambles for the foreseeable future, one can reasonably expect that they will have to rely on various backup diesel generators and gas-powered vehicles for some time to come. It is not realistic to expect them to switch to electric cars. It is not realistic to expect them to switch to electric tanks or electric armoured personnel carriers. It is not realistic to expect Ukrainian rockets to stop burning rocket fuel, Ukrainian jets to stop burning jet fuel or Ukrainian helicopters to stop burning fuel any time soon. I was also hoping that the debate over this free trade agreement would give us a break from the debate over the phase-out of coal because a free trade agreement should have nothing to do with the phase-out of coal. However, once again, the Liberals' plan to phase out coal has made its way into the free trade agreement with Ukraine. In chapter 13, article 10, Ukraine would be required to “promote the rapid transition from unabated coal power”. It should be plain to see that imposing the phase out of coal will be a major burden to the Ukrainian people, who quite frankly, have more pressing concerns. Approximately 25% of Ukraine's electricity comes from coal, although that number is very volatile, given that they are in the middle of a war and that the Russians have been consistently targeting Ukrainians' power grid. It is very conceivable that Ukraine may have to rely on coal for quite some time to come. When President Zelenskyy addressed Parliament last fall, he could not have been more clear that fighting and winning the war was his number one priority. There are questions that have to be asked. How would this free trade agreement help Ukraine to win the war? How would imposing a carbon tax on Ukraine help them stop more Russian soldiers from occupying Ukrainian soil? How would imposing net-zero targets on Ukraine destroy more Russian tanks? How would shutting down Ukrainian coal plants sink more Russian ships in the Black Sea? Of course, the sad answer is that these measures would not be helpful to the Ukrainian war effort. Therefore, they should not be in this free trade agreement, and they should not be supported. Another topic that President Zelenskyy addressed in his speech in this chamber last September was Russia's weaponization of its energy exports. One of the best things Canada could do to help Ukraine win the war would be to increase Canadian oil and gas exports to western Europe so they can stop buying from Russia. Every dollar that western Europe spends on Russian oil and gas only enables Vladimir Putin to buy more bombs, planes and tanks to use against the Ukrainians. This Liberal government should be embarrassed for not doing more to increase Canadian oil and gas exports to Europe. I think that I can best summarize the differences between the parties in their support Ukraine in this way: Conservatives support Ukraine unconditionally, while the Liberals support Ukraine with strings attached. There is no reason for this free trade agreement to be pushed forward now. The current free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine, which was signed in 2017, can stay in place until after the Ukrainians have won the war and are ready to sit down with us. In the meantime, Canada should continue to be generous in welcoming Ukrainian refugees to our country, and we should continue to be generous in our economic and military aid to Ukraine. As for Bill C-57, I believe that we should not be in favour of the bill. The Liberals should withdraw the bill, and we should let the current free trade agreement stay in place until the war is won. After the war is over—

1490 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/5/24 4:35:48 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member is out of time by quite a bit. The hon. member for Guelph has the floor.

19 words

Mr. Lloyd Longfield (Guelph, Lib.)

Feb/5/24 4:35:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member sits with me on the environment committee. During the committee discussions we have talked about carbon pricing mechanisms around the world. Something we have not talked about explicitly is that Ukraine has had a carbon price mechanism with a net effective carbon rate since 2018 and that the EU is working on carbon border adjustment mechanisms that Ukraine is aligning itself with so that countries that do not have carbon pricing mechanisms will effectively be charged a tariff as they export to countries with carbon pricing. Could the hon. member comment on how, if we did not have carbon pricing in Canada, we would actually end up hurting our trade with countries that do have carbon pricing, such as Ukraine?

125 words

Mr. Michael Kram

Feb/5/24 4:36:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I enjoy working with that hon. colleague on the environment committee as well. The last time I checked, Ukraine's carbon tax was about one dollar per tonne. Canada's carbon tax is $65 per tonne, and is scheduled to increase to a $130 per tonne by the end of the decade, so I think it is plain to see that expecting the Ukrainians to increase their carbon tax by 130-fold would have a very negative effect on their ability to win the war.

87 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Feb/5/24 4:37:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am always amazed to hear that we support Ukraine, that they support Ukraine, that everyone supports Ukraine, yet we always find ourselves debating the carbon tax. The Conservative Party's relationship with the carbon tax worries me. Is my colleague's relationship with the carbon tax one of obsession, hyper-fixation, anxiety or insanity?

57 words

Mr. Michael Kram

Feb/5/24 4:38:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think we have to start by asking what the carbon tax is doing in the text of this free trade agreement. The hon. member says that we are the ones who are obsessed with the carbon tax, but we are not the ones who put it in there. What is the carbon tax doing in the text of this free trade agreement, if it has no benefit whatsoever to helping Ukrainians win the war? I wish I knew.

81 words

Mr. Richard Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay, NDP)

Feb/5/24 4:38:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would agree with some of the other questioners about this false narrative that the mention of carbon pricing in this free trade agreement has anything to do with forcing Ukraine to put a price on carbon, because Ukraine already has a price on carbon. It has had one longer than Canada. The member talks about what President Zelenskyy said. President Zelenskyy, in this place, said to please pass this free trade agreement quickly. It was signed when he was here. I met with the Ukrainian consul general in Edmonton, and he said to please tell my colleagues that they want unanimous support for this from all their supporters around the world, and especially Canadians, and he could not believe what the Conservatives were doing here.

128 words

Mr. Michael Kram

Feb/5/24 4:39:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I remember when I was here last September for President Zelenskyy's speech. He talked about the need to help Ukraine to win the war and to push the Russians back across the border. He talked about the need to stop Vladimir Putin from weaponizing his oil and gas exports and his energy exports. He talked about the need to prosecute Russian war criminals, and he had a shout-out for the Holodomor memorial in Edmonton. He did not come here to say to please impose a carbon tax on them. He did not come here to say to please phase out their coal and impose net-zero emissions targets on us. I would encourage the hon. member to go back to the video from last September and re-watch President Zelenskyy's speech.

136 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Feb/5/24 4:40:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-57

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise on behalf of my constituents in Milton on Bill C-57. I have a thriving Ukrainian diaspora in Milton. It is also a privilege to be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands. I will start with a bit of a history on this topic here in the House of Commons. On November 21, the House of Commons passed second reading on this bill, which is intended to upgrade the current Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement to reflect changes that have come about since the deal was first implemented back in 2017. Of course, the most notable of those changes has been the illegal and unjust invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The bill is now going to committee. The vote passed 205-109, with the NDP, the Bloc, the Green Party and the independents all voting in favour with the Liberals. However, all 109 Conservatives who were present for the vote opposed it back in November. Their official reason was that the bill would impose carbon taxes on Ukraine, but nothing could be farther from the truth. One does not have to take my word for it. Those are the words of New Pathway, that is, Marco Levytsky, an editorial writer. The title of that article is “Conservative Opposition to Free Trade Agreement Makes No Sense”. I could not agree more. As they go on to say in the article, “The text of the new trade deal does not commit either Canada or Ukraine to a carbon tax...As Marianna Kulava a spokesperson for the Embassy of Ukraine said in a statement e-mailed to the Globe and Mail, the 'modernized [Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement] does not include any specific instruments on decreasing carbon footprint, including specific taxation instruments.'” It is all just non-facts and fact-free rhetoric from the Conservatives on this. This article goes on to say: “[The leader of the Conservative Party] appears to be so hungry to win back the...People’s Party of Canada vote, to placate elements within his own base, and to demonstrate his unwavering opposition to carbon taxes, that he would compromise on his support for a democracy whose very existence is under threat”. I could not agree more. It is absolutely shameful. Additionally, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress was disappointed that the official opposition unanimously voted against legislation that would update the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement. That justification was absolutely nothing more than a red herring. It is shameful to see the Conservatives, time after time, stand in the House to try to justify the unjustifiable position. Again, one does not need to take my word for it. The Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association said, “Our Association is very concerned about the partisan politics displayed by the Conservative Party of Canada when voting on the Second Reading on Bill C-57, which intends to upgrade the current Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement.” Ukrainian Canadians and Ukrainians abroad have all been urging Conservatives to reconsider their lack of support for this bill. Canadians want to be able to say that support for Ukraine is unanimous in our country, both in the House of Commons and beyond. It would be great to say that but, sadly, the Conservatives are standing in the way of being able to say that support for Ukraine in Canada is unanimous. Alberta Conservatives recently hosted an infamous far right Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson at a United Conservative Party fundraiser right before Tucker jetted off to Moscow. Since the beginning of this debate, Conservatives have continually tried to tell Ukraine exactly what it needs to win this war, despite the fact that Ukrainian Canadians, the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association and many other spokespeople have been saying exactly what we all know, which is that the support for Ukraine should be unanimous. Conservatives keep “Consplaining” to Ukraine exactly what it needs and what it does not need. It is a new term, and I think it is probably going to stick because all of this fact-free Conservative rhetoric coming from the other side is really emblematic of the Conservative Party just thinking it knows better for Ukraine than Ukraine knows for itself. It would be great to say that our support for Ukraine is unanimous in the House and all across Canada. It is frankly despicable of the Conservatives to continue to spread disinformation, “Consplain” to Ukraine and, frankly, join the ranks of Tucker Carlson in questioning the motives and the necessity of the west to support Ukraine. This bill will go off to the other place, and we know that the only partisan senators in that place are Conservative. I am really hoping that the Conservatives will allow for the Conservative senators to vote with their conscience, vote for Ukraine, vote for democracy and support Bill C-57. I hope there are still some rational Conservatives on the other side who will reconsider their shameful vote, and vote in favour of Bill C-57.

861 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/5/24 4:45:49 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Victoria, Environment; the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, Public Services and Procurement; and the hon. member for London—Fanshawe, Labour.

60 words

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Feb/5/24 4:46:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there seems to be quite a bit of selective hearing going on on the Liberal benches. The Liberals talk about listening to Ukraine, but Ukraine specifically asked us not to send the turbine to fund the Russian war machine. The Liberals did not listen to that. The Ukrainians asked for LNG, and the Liberals did not include that in the agreement. The Ukrainians have asked us to send munitions, and the Liberals voted against our Conservative motion. Over a year ago, the Liberals promised an air defence system that still has not been delivered. Could the member tell us why the hearing over there is so selective, and when the Liberals are actually going to give Ukraine things that would help them win this war?

127 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

Feb/5/24 4:47:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what Ukraine has asked us for is free trade and an updated free trade agreement between our two nations. The President of Ukraine stood in this place and asked for our unanimous support. Apparently that was too much for the Conservatives. That was just asking too much of the Conservative Party. The President literally came to this place, stood here and said that he hoped Ukraine could count on Canada's unanimous support. This is an honest opportunity for Conservatives to demonstrate that support, to stand in support of a bill that President Zelenskyy, himself, and Ukrainian Canadians, themselves, asked for. They are in the inboxes, and Conservative members know that Ukrainian Canadians have been asking them to reconsider this shameful position on free trade with Ukraine for months now. It is up to them. Yay or nay.

140 words

Mr. Richard Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay, NDP)

Feb/5/24 4:47:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague across the way for a very good speech that called out the quite inexplicable opposition that the Conservatives have to this bill. The Conservatives talk about hearing only what we want to hear, but they are not hearing the President of Ukraine. I met with the Consul General for Ukraine. He asked why we could not pass this quickly and unanimously. He said that they need our support to show the world that Ukraine has unanimous support among its allies. It is the only the Conservatives that are blocking the support. Could the member comment on why Conservatives are taking this stand, although I am not sure how he could explain this?

121 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

Feb/5/24 4:48:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is absolutely incredible. It is impossible to rationalize why the Conservatives have made this calculation. I have gone on to their social media on occasion to see what the comments are like. It is really clear to me what those comments have led those Conservatives to believe is the right thing to do in this case. There are a lot of pro-Russia comments under the tweets and the Facebook posts of the Conservatives. None of those have been hidden by the Conservatives and none of those accounts have been blocked, despite the fact that many of them are definitely Russian trolls and people who are spreading more disinformation and misinformation. We will not fall for it. We will not placate those far right trolls on the Internet, like some of these Conservatives are so eager and willing to do. We will vote with Ukraine. We will stand with Ukraine. We will support Ukraine until they win this war.

162 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Feb/5/24 4:49:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, to echo my colleagues' most recent comments, I think it is a shame to see the Conservatives sending such a negative message not only to Canada and Quebec, but also to the world by saying that we are not unanimous in our support of Ukraine. This is a very simple agreement. In fact, it updates a temporary agreement that was already in place. It implements some important things, including procedures to combat corruption, which is a significant improvement. We know that there is corruption in that corner of the world too. Post-war reconstruction will be massive. It is important that this be implemented. I would like my colleague to tell us about it.

116 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

Feb/5/24 4:50:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is simple. Support for Ukraine is simple and easy. It is not very complicated or difficult to understand. Simply put, Ukraine is an ally and a friend of Canada. Supporting Ukraine is straightforward. For some reason, the Conservatives have a hard time understanding that. Why? Right now, support for this bill should be unanimous.

57 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Feb/5/24 4:51:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad that the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan is so excited to hear my speech. I will try not to let him down. Here we are again talking about a free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine. I think this is something that we never expected to be a contentious issue when we came back in the fall of 2023, at least for just about every member of each party, except for the Conservatives. However, here we are. The Conservatives have drummed up this narrative. It took them a while to do it. If we go back and look at their record on speaking to this, they did not start talking about a carbon tax or pricing pollution until well into the debate. It was as though, at some point, they realized what their angle was going to be on it and then that became their trumpeting point. I am here to tell them that nobody believes them. Nobody believes their false narrative; nobody, that is, outside of the base that they represent, the same people who went to see Tucker Carlson in Alberta. Nobody, outside of that hard-core base of all right-wing support that the Conservatives are trying to court, believes for a second that this is a real, genuine reason that they are against this. I find it quite interesting how Conservative after Conservative, as we heard from the member for Regina—Wascana moments ago, get up to say the carbon tax that Ukraine has is only this percentage of this, and it was barely nothing compared to what Canada is trying to do or what we are trying to impose. There is nothing in this agreement that says anything about it. As a matter of fact, the agreement goes beyond saying nothing about it. Rather, it actually says that neither country can impose their environmental policies on the other. What Conservatives have picked up on is a little reference to the fact that pricing pollution is something that will happen more in the future and that both countries are aware of this and will respond to it accordingly. That is it. It is in the preamble. The clause has no teeth. There is nothing. As a matter of fact, as I said, the agreement goes beyond that to actually say that neither country can impose its environmental policies or regulations. The Conservatives get up and talk about the Ukrainian people in Canada and their position on this as though they know better than President Zelenskyy and just about anybody else on this matter. Let me read something to my Conservative colleagues, who are heckling me. This is from the League of Ukrainian Canadians, who wrote a letter to the Leader of the Opposition on December 21, 2023. It reads: Not long ago, the [Conservative Party] was a global leader in support for Ukraine, as Operation Unifier was launched under...Harper...in 2015 in response to the annexation of Crimea and invasion of Donbas. Canadian Armed Forces trained over 40,000 Ukrainian soldiers, modernizing their military doctrine to NATO standards. In return, those Ukrainian soldiers did Canada proud by heroically repelling the Russian invasion forces from Kyiv in February 2022, when the world was predicting the capital would fall within days.... And yet, just weeks after voting against the renewal of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement, the CPC voted to cut funding to Operation Unifier. Clearly, the 1.36 million members of the Ukrainian Canadian community see it for what it is: A vote against Ukraine's victory.... Many...constituents have spent nearly two years volunteering, advocating, working late nights packing medical supplies into containers, spending their rent money on drones and body armor to keep their friends alive. And some made the ultimate sacrifice by traveling to Ukraine to defend it against Russian aggression. They laid down their lives in the name of freedom for Ukraine and the West, including Canada. They understood that Ukraine must win the war against Russia, otherwise Europe, Canada and the United States will be next in defending themselves against Russian aggression, with soldiers from NATO countries, including Canada, shedding their blood. If Russia is not defeated, it will be as much a threat to Canada in the future as it is to Ukraine today. We are not insisting you make Ukrainian independence your cause. We are just asking you to think through the war in Ukraine and the need to support Ukraine from the point of view of your own interests, as well as Canada's national interests. Most Canadians understand that supporting Ukraine is in Canada's security interest, except apparently the Conservative Party of Canada. That was a letter written to the Leader of the Opposition on December 21, 2023. Conservatives will come in here and say that Ukraine needs what they say it needs. The only person I know who says that what Ukraine needs is what he says it needs is Vladimir Putin; Conservatives are acting just as he acts with respect to dictating. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Madam Speaker, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan is getting a good laugh out of this, but it was just two days ago that Tucker Carlson was in Alberta with his premier. Where is Tucker Carlson now? Reportedly, he is in Russia about to interview Vladimir Putin. One would think the member would at least understand that perhaps now is not the best time to be trumpeting these lines, yet he does. I am going to end with this: I have spoken to this many times. It is time for us to finally vote on this. I know Conservatives calculated how they would try to address this in the fall. It was very deliberate: How could they ensure that they would maintain the support of that alt-right movement against Ukraine? Earlier today, I heard a Conservative talk about pining for the good old days of the Republicans and Conservatives, who came together to create these great free trade agreements. Comparing the Conservatives of today to the Brian Mulroney Conservatives is exactly like comparing Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz and Donald Trump to Ronald Reagan. It cannot be done. They are two completely different parties. Their logo might be the same colour as the one Brian Mulroney had, and they might have the same talking points, but they are certainly nothing like the Conservatives who brought in free trade, despite pining for those days, as though only they could ever protect free trade. It is quite the opposite. Conservatives are going down the exact same route as are the alt-right Republicans I previously mentioned. That is where they are going. That is the base they are trying to protect. I will remind them that nobody believes this narrative they have created around a price on pollution and not supporting Ukraine, even after the President of Ukraine himself stood five feet from where I am standing and asked us to support it. Nobody believes their false narrative on this, because they are wrong.

1190 words

Mr. Michael Kram (Regina—Wascana, CPC)

Feb/5/24 4:59:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I remember when President Zelenskyy was addressing Parliament last September. I paid very close attention to his speech. When I checked Twitter that evening, it seemed that the member for Kingston and the Islands was not paying attention to the speech; rather, he was recording a video of the leader of the official opposition and making fun of him for the way he was clapping. Could the member for Kingston and the Islands explain to Parliament how his actions have helped promote public support for Ukraine?

88 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Feb/5/24 5:00:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I can confirm that I definitely shared that video. However, I did not record it. I will say this: I find it very interesting that the member wants to talk about what the Leader of the Opposition was doing at the time when the President of Ukraine was here. Do members know that the Leader of the Opposition never once mentioned on his Twitter, Facebook or Instagram feed, or anywhere, that the President of Ukraine was here? He did not make a single reference. As a matter of fact, it was almost like an act of defiance. The member for Calgary Nose Hill had to go back a year to retweet and repost what the Leader of the Opposition had said when the President of Ukraine appeared before us virtually. This is the narrative I am talking about, of trying to deceive and suggest something else is going on. I am sure that, within their caucus meetings, they have had to battle the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman on it. He is in the front row now, but he was not before Christmas. I am sure that was the trade-off to get him to be quiet. The reality of the situation is that Conservatives have been against Ukraine because they do not support Ukraine.

219 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Feb/5/24 5:01:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I share my colleague's disdain for the Conservatives' position. It is deplorable. However, as long as we are discussing the free trade agreement, we should discuss its contents. I would like to hear him comment on a section of this agreement that still allows private companies to sue governments on the ground that they are preventing these companies from fully capitalizing on their investments. The Bloc Québécois considers this problematic, and we believe that a committee should be struck to work on it. Would the member agree that we should study this issue in detail to prevent private companies from being able to sue governments under free trade agreements?

116 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 275