44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 20, 2024 02:00PM
- Mar/20/24 4:10:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to add my comments and agree with the question of privilege that was raised.
In general, what happened on Monday night was a gross and disgusting violation of the principle of the House being a deliberative assembly of members. The fact that the government put forward a last-minute, very substantive amendment, which was not at all debated in the House, is disgusting, and it would not be acceptable in any legislature around the world. It was particularly unfair, for the reasons my colleague explained, to our francophone colleagues because of the lack of translation available.
In general, the timeline and the process presented by the government seemed to try to reduce Parliament to pageantry and theatre, rather than recognize our substantive role as the deliberative assembly of one nation in both official languages. This was wrong and unfair in general, but it was particularly unfair to our francophone colleagues. I hope you will find in favour of this question of privilege.
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 8:14:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, Conservatives strongly support Ukraine. We supported sending lethal weapons to Ukraine even before the war, at a time when the NDP opposed it and spoke out against it. We supported consistent sanctions against Russia, even when the Liberals were granting sanctions exemptions to Russia.
I want to ask the member about the seizure of Russian assets. This is mentioned in the co-operation agreement, in section N. There is very important language there about seizing Russian assets and using them to support Ukraine.
One great way that we can continue to ensure Ukraine has the financial support it requires to fight the war and rebuild is to repurpose Russian assets, and, frankly, the government has been behind on this. I wonder if the member would support our call to repurpose confiscated Russian assets and use them to support Ukraine.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 8:21:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the member is eager to politicize these issues, sadly, and cast aspersions on others. I want to point out that in February 2022, this member, on behalf of the NDP, spoke out against sending lethal weapons to Ukraine. I will read a quote from her in committee.
She said:
Some people in this committee and some members of our Parliament have been calling on the government to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine. I have some concerns about that, obviously.
Do you believe there are risks to providing those lethal weapons to Ukraine? This applies in terms of keeping track of those weapons, but more importantly, I'd like some information on how Russia would perceive that. Would they perceive that as an escalation instead of a de-escalation?
These are unbelievable comments from the member, opposing sending lethal weapons to Ukraine for fear of how Russia would react. Conservatives stand with Ukraine. We have been in favour of sanctions and in favour of sending weapons to Ukraine from the earliest days. The NDP spoke out against sending Ukraine the weapons they needed to fight back against aggression.
Will that NDP member, instead of casting aspersions everywhere else, look at her own conscience and apologize for those pro-Russian sentiments she expressed two years ago?
216 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 8:26:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I would like to request the unanimous consent of the House to table the editorial I wrote immediately after that interview, which actually outlined and responded directly to some of the claims in it. If there is agreement, would the House allow me to table it to show the member what I actually said?
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Chair, the member knows the answer to the question. I have repeated it and explained it ad nauseam in this House.
I want to ask why Liberals opposed the amendments that I brought forward to Bill C-57 at committee. Those amendments were specific things that the arms manufacturing industry in Canada had proposed would be helpful. It asked the Government of Canada to establish a clear plan and send clear signals about its commitments to, over the longer term, acquire the munitions required for Canada's own needs and to support Ukraine.
The government has taken no action to send the right signals and provide the necessary support to ramp up our own domestic production of munitions. I believe this is an opportunity for Canada, and it is an urgent issue for supporting Ukraine.
Personally, I put forward six different amendments to this bill at committee that would have strengthened the export of munitions to Ukraine. The Liberals blocked those amendments at every turn. Actually, the Liberals and the NDP members were working together. They presented us from passing a motion in the House to allow those amendments to move forward, and they blocked those amendments at committee.
It is really shameful for the Liberals to, on the one hand, try to virtue-signal on this issue while continuously blocking efforts to get weapons to move forward. They make announcements but fail to follow through on them. It is not enough to talk about victory at some distant point in the future. We need urgent victory through the urgent delivery of required munitions. The government likes to wrap itself in blue and yellow, but it fails to deliver when it really counts.
284 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 9:48:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I am not sure precisely what comments the member is referring to in terms of the timelines. If I understand the question, he is talking about the period in the lead-up to the initial further invasion. I know there was controversy around some of the decisions allegedly made by Canada in the context of embassy personnel. This is something we did ask questions about at the time at the foreign affairs committee, trying to get some responses from the minister on it.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 9:49:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, Canada has a unique opportunity and responsibility among democratic nations. Many of our democratic partners are geographically small, densely populated nations endowed with few natural resources. Canada is blessed with an abundance of natural resources, which we could use to support our allies by improving their energy security.
Instead of developing Canadian resources and playing the role we need to play in the world in the midst of this intensifying global struggle, the Liberals chose to grant a sanctions waiver to export turbines to facilitate the export of Russian gas. They were facilitating the export of Russian gas when Canada should have instead been working to export our gas. We should have been providing an alternative to Russia. Instead, the Liberals were helping the Russians fund their war by exporting turbines.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 9:51:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I hope if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for me to table the motion I moved at the end of session in December that would have allowed us to move this trade agreement to a vote right away in December. It was a unanimous consent motion that was blocked by the Liberals. It would have actually allowed us to move to a vote faster. I wonder if there would be unanimous consent to table that unanimous consent motion I tried to move at that time but was blocked by the Liberals.
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 9:56:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, tonight, we were actually supposed to have a take-note debate on the agreement on security co-operation between Canada and Ukraine, something that I think we all agree on.
This member is intent on sowing division and being hyperpartisan, so let me point something out to the member. He pointed out that President Zelenskyy may have disagreed with the position we took on a particular trade deal. Let us talk about a disagreement between President Zelenskyy and the current government. Early on in the conflict, the Canadian ambassador to Ukraine was actually summoned by the Government of Ukraine, an extraordinary step. The ambassador was summoned as a sign of the Ukrainian government's displeasure with the Liberal government's action. What was that action?
It was the Liberal government's decision to grant a waiver of sanctions regarding those Siemens turbines. It was the Liberal government trying to facilitate the export of Russian gas that was fuelling Russia's economy and Russia's invasion. The Government of Ukraine was deeply concerned that Canada was undermining global sanctions unity and was pushing toward a reality of Swiss-cheese sanctions that would be ineffective. The government should be ashamed of what it did, and it was only the Conservatives pushing back that led to the change.
Will the member apologize for his shameful role in allowing that exemption in the sanctions?
232 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 10:25:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I want to thank my colleague for his excellent speech and, certainly, for the wealth of wisdom and experience that he brings to the House.
I would like to ask him, based on his knowledge and expertise, what the best way to isolate the Russian regime is and to hold the Russian regime accountable for the crimes that they have perpetrated. We have seen crimes committed in terms of the abduction of children, systematic sexual violence and the crime of aggression in general. What steps does he see as necessary to hold the Russian regime accountable?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 10:34:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, the member is violating the rules. He knows that it is unparliamentary to make implications about the presence or absence of members in the chamber. I hope you will call him to order.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 10:37:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, members have been called to account before many times, on various sides, for suggesting that members of the House have sympathy with foreign authoritarian regimes.
The member who just spoke made an outrageous, verifiably false and unparliamentary claim. He accused members of being part of a so-called pro-Putin wing. He was not called to order by you, Mr. Chair. Now the Liberal member is continuing to cast aspersions.
Frankly, it is disgusting to see what the Liberals are doing here. They are trying to foment division when we should be trying to work together on this issue. I would ask you, Mr. Chair, to call these members to account for their unparliamentary language and their disgraceful conduct during this debate tonight.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 10:40:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, he was saying exactly the same thing about the NDP, so he should have to apologize.
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 10:45:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, let us be very clear about the precedent that was set by the Speaker's decision with respect to the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake. When there are regimes that are clearly deplored by all parliamentarians, by all Canadians, and that are subject in some way to sanctions by the Government of Canada, then casting those kinds of aspersions to say that members in the House are affiliated with or are supportive of those regimes has been deemed to be unparliamentary. Of course, it is the sort of the thing that someone has the freedom to say outside the House in the same way that someone has the freedom to call another member a “liar” outside the House. However, members do not have unlimited ability to say whatever they want while still being within the parameters of what is allowable under parliamentary procedure.
The Speaker ruled, and the Speaker has ruled in similar cases, that making the direct, clearly false claim that members of the House are affiliated with or supportive of regimes that are deplored by all parliamentarians and all Canadians, such as the Putin regime or Hamas, is deemed unparliamentary. The Chair is now applying the precedent that was set to the member for Etobicoke Centre, who claims to care about partisan unity on this issue but clearly does not. He is clearly trying to drive a partisan agenda for electoral purposes, not for principled reasons, which is unparliamentary. The member for Etobicoke Centre has rightly been called to order, and he should rethink the approach he is taking if he actually cares about advancing the cause of Ukraine.
276 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 11:15:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, the discussion that is happening, particularly what was raised by my colleague from Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, is very important.
The global context we are in is one of a new global cold war where there are two different blocs. There is the bloc of democratic nations and a kind of anti-democratic bloc that is increasingly working together. I do not, of course, relish this reality. This is a tragic reality, but it is a reality and one that requires us to fortify our will, be strong and stand up to the opponents of democracy everywhere.
In particular, we see how the Burmese regime has been working with and assisting the Russian regime. The government has left a massive hole in our sanctions in the Burmese regime, an area where we are inconsistent with the Americans, and it is allowing the Burmese oil and gas sector to continue to fund the junta.
We have also seen failures of the government to hold the Iranian regime accountable. Drone technology from Iran is being used by Russia in the context of its invasion of Ukraine. We see these various other actors, such as North Korea, the People's Republic of China, Burma and Iran, that are engaged in supporting the Putin regime.
I would add my voice to those who are saying we need to strengthen our sanctions regime and hold anti-democratic actors accountable while fortifying our own strength to support the people of Ukraine.
248 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 11:18:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order. What you just said is not consistent with what you had previously said, nor is it consistent with the precedent set by the previous Speaker regarding the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake. I am not sure why you are saying now that you are reversing your previous decision in defiance of precedents set by the Speaker.
I would ask you to apply the precedent and hold the member for Etobicoke Centre accountable for his unparliamentary language and insist that he apologize before being recognized. That was what you said, and that was the ruling of the Speaker in regard to a Conservative member. I would expect you, or any Chair occupant, to treat all parties equally in this place, and to not give special allowances to the government on matters of amendment or on matters of the statements they make in the House. I ask you to apply the rules and the precedents of the House and to defend the privileges of all members equally and fairly.
177 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 9:39:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, Conservatives support a strong, free, independent Ukraine. We always have and we always will. This is Ukraine as defined by the borders agreed upon in the Budapest memorandum, which was signed by, among others, Russia.
It is critically important, as we reflect on our support for Ukraine, that we not just speak of seeking victory eventually but speak of the urgency of victory, a victory as soon as possible. The Ukrainian people have shown incredible resilience, and democratic populations throughout the western world have been supportive of Ukraine. However, history teaches us that there is a time horizon after which support becomes more and more difficult to sustain. That is why we as leaders need to push for the continuation of that support, but we also need to push for victory as quickly as possible. That means not just expressing aspirations about things to be done eventually, but recognizing the real urgency in delivering to Ukraine the weapons and other things it needs urgently to defeat the Russian aggressors.
As we talk about that support, I want to highlight in particular the issue of urgency. For too long, we have seen announcements made without follow-through. We have seen significant delays in Canada from the government, but in other cases as well, in delivering promised support. We, as the official opposition, have been continually pushing the government to get from announcement to results much faster.
Earlier in this debate, I challenged NDP members over the comments they made before the further invasion, which were about delivering lethal weapons. They said that, of course, they took that position at the time because they wanted to pursue peace.
I want to underline the critical importance of peace through strength. Peace through strength is something we need now more than ever in our more dangerous world, with more threats and with our new cold war adversaries working together to threaten our security. We need to have a strong military. We need to acquire the military equipment to give to our allies in need. We need to strengthen ourselves and our allies because it is through strength that we achieve peace.
The doctrine of peace through weakness has always failed. Brian Mulroney, who we honoured in a particular way this week, understood that. He, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, working, in a different sense, with spiritual strength, with Pope John Paul II, stood up to the Soviet regime. They stood up through strength, not through weakness and compromise and not through failing to hand over the weapons that were required. They achieved peace through strength, and justice through strength. This is what we need. We need to strengthen ourselves and our allies and deliver the weapons that are required urgently.
Since people are asking about the costs of this support, I want to say that the costs of inaction are much greater. I also want to highlight section N of the security agreement. We support the entire security agreement, and section N is about the seizure of Russian assets. One critical way that we can support Ukraine with its current needs and its future needs is by doing more to seize Russian assets and repurpose those assets to support Ukraine. This is a just and necessary way to support Ukraine in its time of need. Repurposing property from the Russian side can support the Ukrainian people.
At this critical time in the world, a critical time in the struggle in Ukraine and a critical time in global security, it is time for us to recognize the urgency of action, the urgency of getting support to the front lines and the urgency of establishing the munitions manufacturing systems, moving forward with manufacturing the munitions here in Canada and getting them to the front lines as quickly as possible. We must recommit ourselves to peace through strength, recognizing that peace is never achieved through weakness, that we will only achieve peace through strength.
659 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
