SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 292 - Mar/20/24

Mar/20/24 7:40:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, Canada has certainly given plenty of aid to Ukraine, but it has largely been humanitarian aid. That aid is obviously necessary, but right now, the issue is military assistance. Ukraine's security is seriously threatened by Russia. Ukraine needs more military aid, more ammunition and more military equipment. In my opinion, the Canadian government must take action now to give Ukraine help in this area. There are four things we currently have, as a country, in our Canadian forces. We have surplus equipment that we can give to Ukraine now. We have asked the government to send that now. The biggest crisis in Ukraine right now is a security crisis. In my opinion, it is bigger than the humanitarian crisis.

122 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Mar/20/24 7:42:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I thank the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, who I believe is a good member of Parliament who often provides the chamber with good advice and, in this particular instance, a good history lesson. I am from the province of Alberta, the very same province from which the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney actually pledged recognition of the independence of Ukraine, which was a momentous moment for Alberta and one we are tremendously proud of. To lean in on the question of our Bloc colleague a bit more, I do think that Ukrainians, at least the Ukrainians I know from Alberta, have been a bit nervous and a bit scared of the partisanship throughout this 44th Parliament, particularly when it came to the free trade agreement and the votes by the Conservative Party related to the support for that agreement. I think it is important for the security of Ukraine that we have an all-party approach to actually find unity in the chamber in our support for Ukraine. However, one of the biggest ways to support Ukraine today is to actually ensure that the American security agreement, which would commit up to $60 billion in support, including military aid, is actually passed in the United States. Republicans are withholding support on that right now. Considering the member opposite is a member of the Conservative Party and likely knows many members of the Republican Party as well, would it not be important for us to actually reach out, as America's close ally, to find ways to close the gap, the unfortunate partisanship, that is affecting our allies in Ukraine?

272 words

Hon. Michael Chong

Mar/20/24 7:44:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, the member is right to note that Alberta has always been a proud part of our federation and home to millions of Ukrainian Canadians. In fact the deputy prime minister under Brian Mulroney, Don Mazankowski, whom I got to know a little bit, was a proud Ukrainian Canadian. I think many Ukrainians across the country burst with pride when he took on that role in the government of the late prime minister. With respect to our opposition to the free trade agreement, we indicated it was on a very narrow basis that had to do with the carbon pricing provisions in the agreement. We indicated at the time, in December 2023 when it was in front of the House, that while we were opposed to the agreement, we were not going to obstruct its passage through either the House or the Senate, and I think we have been true to our word. The bill has become law in Canada, so that is also evidence of our constructive approach to Ukraine. We in the House all support Ukraine, but that does not mean there is going to be unanimity on every single aspect of the government's policy with respect to Ukraine. However, I cannot think of many other areas in foreign policy where there has been such multipartisan support as there has been for Ukraine. With respect to the path forward, I think the immediate need is a military need. It is clear that Ukraine's offensive stalled. It is clear that the Russian offensive is counterattacking and that territory is being lost as we speak, which is why I think that, even more than humanitarian need, there is a need for military kit and equipment right now for Ukraine. If the U.S. Congress is mired in legislative gridlock on these sorts of issues, then other NATO members should be stepping up to the plate to provide the funds and the equipment that Ukraine needs. As I said earlier, there are four easy things we think the government could transfer immediately, and actually some of them are surplus in the Canadian Armed Forces. One is surplus Light Armoured Vehicles that Ukraine has indicated it could use. Another is the surplus 83,000 rockets that are to be decommissioned. The NASAMS air defence system that the government announced support for about a year ago is another thing that we believe could be provided to Ukraine. The fourth item is the excess Role 3 mobile hospitals that the Canadian Forces acquired, I believe, in response to the pandemic. These are things we could transfer right now that could provide additional support for Ukraine. Finally, in addition to all of those things, we really feel the need for the government to step up procurement and production of munitions here in Canada, which not only Ukraine needs but the western alliance also needs to recapitalize its stocks.

486 words

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ)

Mar/20/24 7:47:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I think this take-note debate is timely because it allows us to take stock of how Canada and Ukraine have been collaborating since Russia's large-scale invasion of that country in 2022. What can I say, other than this agreement, the Canada-Ukraine strategic security partnership, was signed on February 24, 2024, when the Prime Minister visited Kyiv with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. My hope is that this partnership will bear fruit. My fear is that it will be on par with what we have done so far, meaning that it will fall short. Let me back up a bit. I think the fatal error that western countries made from the get-go was to suggest that, no matter what, we were not going to intervene. In my opinion, that gave Vladimir Putin license to do just about anything he wanted to do. I think we dropped the ball right from the get-go. When the conflict began, members will recall that we were quick to deliver humanitarian aid. Militarily, we delivered what we called non-lethal weapons to Ukraine at that time: helmets, bulletproof vests, night vision goggles. Imagine being Ukrainian, seeing Russian troops coming in, and Canada sending helmets, bulletproof vests and night vision goggles. Obviously, we quickly realized—I think the goal was to avoid provoking Russia—that this was not exactly what Ukraine needed. We began sending them ammunition, and before long, we were sending machine guns. Then, after a while, we started sending artillery, and some time after that, anti-aircraft defence weapons. Then, after a while, we sent them tanks, and after that we started sending fighter jets. A few weeks after the conflict began, I went to NATO headquarters in Brussels and I asked the military command what was happening with the fighter jets. I was told that it takes six months to train a pilot. I went back to NATO headquarters a few months later and asked the military command the same question, and I was once again told that it takes six months to train a pilot. That is when I took the liberty of telling NATO's commander-in-chief that, if we had started training pilots from the get-go, then maybe we would have been able to prevent the Russians from settling into and fortifying their positions to the point where it is now almost impossible to get them out and maybe we would not be in the situation that we are in now. I think that we misjudged the threshold beyond which we would risk provoking the Russians. Honestly, just between us, Madam Chair, the Russians already had their hands full with the Ukrainians, and I do not think that they would have engaged in a large-scale conflict with NATO. I think that the NATO countries misjudged the situation from the beginning, which means that we basically allowed Russia to really gain a foothold in Ukraine. That is extremely unfortunate. I want to come back to the Canada-Ukraine strategic security partnership, which will apparently be in effect for 10 years. This agreement will increase information sharing, co-operation and military support, help Ukraine join NATO and help Ukraine rebuild. That is all well and good, but what is in the agreement that goes beyond appearances and image? I remember that extremely striking image of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of National Defence and the Prime Minister going to Kyiv. It is a spectacular image. A flag was raised on the flagpole at the Canadian embassy, indicating that the embassy was open. However, that is no longer the case today. Of course, we have staff working within Ukraine's borders, at home and in hotels, but not at the embassy. In addition, when it comes to visa applications, Ukrainians are still being asked to leave the country and go to other countries in Europe to apply for a visa, because the embassy in Kyiv is still unable to welcome Ukrainian citizens who would like to apply for a visa. I am all in favour of having a joint declaration of support for Ukraine. I hope it will help Ukrainians. We know that all political parties in the House want to support Ukraine, if we exclude the minor episode where the Conservatives were perhaps not up to the task of supporting the free trade agreement. Support is unanimous on the matter before us. However, everyone needs to walk the talk. We need to put our words into action. Right now there is a lot of talk and no action. The proof lies in the fact that the Ukrainian defence minister said, “At the moment...50% of [weapons] commitments are not delivered on time.” Because of these delays, he said, “we lose people, we lose territory”. It may seem awful that western nations are failing to deliver on 50% of their commitments. It is appalling that 50% of their commitments are not being met. In Canada's case, however, the figure is almost 60%. On February 19, Le Devoir published an article on Canada's failure to meet its commitments to provide assistance to Ukraine. The article said, “almost 60% of the value of the military equipment that Canada promised Ukraine after the outbreak of Russia's war of invasion two years ago has still not been honoured.... Of the $2.4 billion in military aid promised by Ottawa since February 24, 2022, $1.4 billion has still not made it to the front lines”. That means that 58% of everything promised to Ukraine has not been delivered. I am sure someone is going to tell me that these are only numbers. I will continue. “The National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS) and associated munitions, at a cost of $406 million”, has not been delivered. “The 35 high-resolution drone cameras valued at $76 million”, have yet to be delivered. “The promised winter clothing, worth $25 million”, which would supply 2,000 Ukrainian soldiers with “boots, thermal layers, winter sleeping bags and patterned military uniforms”, according to the announcement made at the time, have yet to be delivered. Ukraine is still waiting for small arms and ammunition worth $60 million that the Canadian Commercial Corporation is trying to procure from an arms manufacturer in Ontario. The same goes for 10,000 rounds of 105mm ammunition, 76mm naval ammunition, 277 1,000-pound aircraft bombs and associated fuse assemblies, 955 rounds of 155mm artillery smoke and over 2,000 rounds of 81mm mortar smoke, and 2,260 gas masks, which were supposed to be sourced from the Canadian Armed Forces' inventory. We know that our inventory is not especially well stocked, but what we do have, we could send right away. That has not been done. We are still fiddling around while the Ukrainians are in an absolutely terrible situation. More tragic still is the fact that, for want of weaponry, Ukrainian soldiers are being subjected to wave upon wave of Russian attacks. The Russians have troops to spare, but the Ukrainians do not have the firepower to repel their attacks. I support a strategic security partnership agreement between Canada and Ukraine. I am all for any measure that can really help Ukraine. Again, it is time to stop posturing, spouting good intentions, and paying lip service. It is time to make sure these promises are actually kept.

1258 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Mar/20/24 7:57:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech. We were both members of the committee that must not be named. It was very interesting. What struck me was how we, as Canadians, take our safety here in Canada for granted. We have welcomed more than 100 Ukrainian families to Châteauguay—Lacolle, and they are fitting right in. These wonderful people work in our communities, and we are happy to have them. In his speech, my colleague said that NATO should maybe have intervened sooner following the Russian invasion. I would like him to expand on that. Does he think Canada was ready to send troops to Ukraine?

111 words

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/20/24 7:58:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, what an interesting question. The idea is not to say that we are going to send troops. The idea is to remain artfully vague about our intentions, if I can put it that way. However, we telegraphed our intentions from the outset, making it clear to the Kremlin that we were not going to intervene. Russia was free to proceed, because we were not going to intervene. I want to point out that, a few weeks back, after a meeting attended by representatives from a number of allied countries, President Macron said that sending troops to Ukraine should not be ruled out. Following the same pattern that western countries have been following from the start, several nations, including Canada, rushed to say that President Macron was totally out to lunch, that his suggestion was ridiculous and that naturally, no troops would be sent. All of a sudden, the western nations had blown any chance they had left of creating doubt about their intentions when it comes to what is happening in Ukraine. I applaud the courage of President Macron, who was not afraid to stick his neck out. Obviously, everyone thought that, since they had been talking all day, this was no slip of the tongue. I agree that it was not a slip of the tongue, far from it, but once again, there was not much solidarity from the other western countries, which once again brings us back to how slow we have been to actually help Ukraine. I want to come back to the fact that we started out by sending helmets and that Ukraine is still waiting for fighter jets. When will we deliver the fighter jets?

284 words

Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC)

Mar/20/24 8:01:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I have a comment and a question for my hon. colleague. First, I said something earlier that I want to correct. I said earlier that Don Mazankowski was a Ukrainian Canadian. What I should have said is that he was married to a Ukrainian Canadian and that he represented the most Ukrainian Canadian riding in Canada, which at the time was Vegreville. I just wanted to make sure the record was corrected on that. That being said, I have a question for my colleague. He said that half of the aid that the government announced was not delivered to Ukraine. Can he explain why that is the case? What is the holdup? He said that the government announced a lot of aid for Ukraine but that only 50% or 60% of it was actually provided to Ukraine. What is the holdup?

143 words

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/20/24 8:02:20 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, in fact, it is even worse than that. Some 58% of the aid has not been delivered. I am not very good at math, but if my calculations are correct, that means that only 42% of aid has been delivered so far. My colleague has asked me a question I simply cannot answer. It is like trying to fit a round peg in a square hole. He has asked me to explain the inexplicable. Why has Canada not kept its word? Why has the Canadian Armed Forces equipment we promised to Ukraine not been delivered? Is it because we no longer have it? Is it because, when we promised it, we thought we still had it? It has gotten to the point where we are asking ourselves these kinds of questions because it is so incomprehensible. It is one thing to have to buy equipment on international markets and wait for it to be ready. However, not even being able to deliver what we had in stock and had promised to deliver is completely incomprehensible. It raises other questions. Was the equipment not in good condition? Did we no longer have the equipment? In short, why was this equipment not delivered? I am answering my colleague's question with a question, because I do not have the answer to his question.

223 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/20/24 8:03:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I am a little concerned, so I would love some clarification from the member. He spoke about how supportive he was of the actions of Emmanuel Macron. In response to Macron calling for soldiers to enter into Ukraine's land, the temperature was raised by Putin, in terms of threats of further nuclear responses. I would love to hear the member's clarification on that. It seems to me that is not helping what we are trying to accomplish. We want to ensure that Ukrainians have a peaceful, fast resolution to this, as opposed to raising the temperature.

100 words

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

Mar/20/24 8:04:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I would simply like to say that just because Putin says that things will escalate does not necessarily mean that things will escalate. From the start, Putin said that if we helped Ukraine, things would escalate. That is why we started by sending helmets and bulletproof vests. Then we tried sending ammunition. We checked for an escalation but there was none, so we decided to send machine guns. Again, we wondered if things would escalate, and when they did not, we decided we could send some artillery. No escalation followed, so we decided we could send some anti-aircraft systems. Again, there was no escalation, so we decided to repeat the process by sending tanks. I think that Russia was basically blackmailing and threatening us the whole time, but it was never really in a position to follow through on its threats. As I said earlier, the Russians already had their hands full with Ukraine. It would have been surprising if they had decided to engage NATO countries in combat too. I am not saying that we need to send troops. That is not what I am saying. I am saying that the mistake in the beginning was to tell Putin that we would not intervene. That left things wide open. We gave him carte blanche. We allowed him to do anything he wanted. The goal was to go back to keeping things vague, create a situation where the Kremlin would be on the ropes again, not knowing what the NATO countries were going to do. However, on day one, we telegraphed the Kremlin what we were and were not planning to do, which was a mistake in my opinion.

282 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/20/24 8:06:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Edmonton Strathcona. It has been more than two years since Putin began his full-scale, illegal invasion of Ukraine. Today, New Democrats want to reaffirm our solidarity with Ukraine and Ukrainians. Putin's genocide has killed and injured tens of thousands of Ukrainians and displaced hundreds of thousands more. However, through it all, Ukrainians have maintained their courage in fighting for Ukraine, for democracy, for international law and for an international order based on justice and accountability. Their spirit and resilience in the face of this war shines bright, and they do it for all of us. Since Parliament's last take-note debate on Ukraine, much has changed. The unanimous solidarity among democratic countries is beginning to crack. The long-awaited strategic security partnership package from the United States has been held hostage by far-right Republicans who seek to undermine Ukraine's fight. Hungary's Viktor Orbán has repeatedly blocked Ukraine's membership in NATO and the European Union. At a time when the far right is increasingly listening to Putin, Ukraine needs Canada to step up and support its fight. That is why it is so painful to see what is happening here in Canada. First, we have seen the government not meet the urgency of Ukraine's fight. Time after time, the government announces a new aid package to Ukraine, whether it is for air defence systems, light armoured vehicles, funding toward demining activities, or seized Russian assets, only to have the promise left unfilled. While the government delays its delivery of aid, Ukraine is being bombed and Putin's attacks continue. We must demand that the government quickly deliver on all promised aid packages and find new ways to deliver aid quickly. Second, what is truly painful to see is the erosion of our unanimous solidarity within this very chamber. I know the pride many members of the Conservative Party had when thinking they were champions for Ukraine. However, recently, I was shocked to see the shift in positioning from the official opposition, and Canadian Ukrainians have spoken to me in my riding about how they feel abandoned by this. Not only did the Conservatives vote against the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, but they put up delay after delay on the bill. After President Zelenskyy specifically asked us to support the deal, Conservatives did everything they could to block it. Even last night, the Conservative Party senators teamed up for one last attempt to block the bill. Conservatives also voted against additional monetary supports for Ukraine, with millions of dollars in humanitarian aid and the monies required by Operation Unifier so Canadian Armed Forces members can continue to train Ukrainians. The Conservatives voted against those measures. Canada is not immune to American-style far-right politics. We know that the dog whistles we hear from the Conservatives about cutting foreign aid, refusing to commit to honour the security guarantee and calling Ukraine some “faraway” land are playing to a dark side of their base that we have to call out. As this war continues and we hear more and more escalatory rhetoric from Russia, Canada needs to take a leadership role on the world stage. Last week, Putin openly declared Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons. This was far from the first time the world has heard those threats, but we need to continue to take them seriously. The nuclear threat is the highest it has ever been. The tensions between NATO, Russia and China are constantly rising, and diplomacy between countries is at an all-time low. Canada has a role to play in restarting the necessary talks on nuclear disarmament. Canada could join the 93 other countries that have signed on to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We can use our voice on the international stage to push for disarmament negotiations so that Ukraine and our allies are not faced with nuclear blackmail and bullying by nuclear superpowers. This is a moment for all of us to reiterate our commitment to supporting Ukraine and supporting the fight to create a peaceful, just world.

701 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Mar/20/24 8:10:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I appreciate the member's emphasis on the importance of the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, but my question is in regard to the amount of aid. Today, the Prime Minister of Ukraine indicated that close to an additional $2 billion arrived in Ukraine, which ultimately brings aid closer to the $7-billion mark. It is important that we provide all forms of support for Ukraine. I wonder if the member can provide her thoughts on that issue. I am talking about everything from humanitarian aid to military aid to cash in hand. All of this is really important, and Canada does have a very strong and prominent role to play.

113 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

Mar/20/24 8:11:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, Ukrainians are used to all these announcements, but there is no follow-through. Canadians are used to that. There are so many projects and promises that Liberal governments have made over the years that they have never followed through on. While all of those announcements are great, I would really love to see some follow-through.

58 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Mar/20/24 8:12:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I have seen the response from Canadians from coast to coast to coast. In my riding of New Westminster—Burnaby, the Holy Eucharist Cathedral, which serves the Ukrainian community in both English and Ukrainian, and many other organizations have stepped up to fundraise in the community to provide supports for Ukrainian refugees who come to live there. There is no doubt that there is a consensus in my community of being as supportive of Ukraine as we can be. I note that my colleague said in her speech that she is very supportive of the Ukrainian community in Canada and of the fight for Ukrainian democracy against this horrible dictatorship led by Mr. Putin. I wonder to what extent Conservatives can justify their opposition to the strategic security partnership and their opposition to a trade deal with Ukraine, an opposition that seems to be systematic, when so many Canadians across the country are supportive of the Ukrainian people at this dire time, as they face this imminent threat to their country and democracy.

176 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

Mar/20/24 8:13:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I know my hon. colleague cares a great deal about those in his community who are fighting for their relatives, family members and the Ukrainian diaspora. I too have that in London—Fanshawe. In greater London, there are about 10,000 Ukrainians, and they have said the same thing to me. They are very concerned about this wavering of support they are starting to see and the lack of support for the free trade agreement with Ukraine. I am so proud of the incredible work of the local Ukrainian council and the Ukrainian Centre. There is also the Canadian Ukrainian Logistics Division, which continues to go to Ukraine to deliver much-needed aid: helmets, boots, tourniquets, just name it. They have spoken to me about how concerned they are. I can only say that I do not understand it. I hope the Conservatives see reason and come back to the solidarity that we all need to see for Ukraine.

162 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

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

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

Mar/20/24 8:15:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I would probably repeat a lot of what I said to the Liberal member. Conservative actions mean a great deal, and we have seen those actions and a lack of support. They have made their bed and they need to lie in it.

45 words

Actions

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Mar/20/24 8:16:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, it is an honour, as always, to stand in this place and represent the people of Edmonton Strathcona. I am from Edmonton Strathcona, and at the very beginning of my political career, I became a member of the Canada-Ukraine parliamentary association. I followed in the footsteps of Linda Duncan, the member of Parliament for Edmonton Strathcona before me, who was also the vice-chair of the parliamentary association, the Canada-Ukraine Friendship Group. Of course, we have a very large Ukrainian population, but as I have said many times before, those of us in Edmonton all feel like we are bit Ukrainian. As one can appreciate, Heather McPherson is not a terribly Ukrainian name, but I know my way around perogies and feel very connected to the community. I am very proud of our caucus. I am very proud of the New Democratic Party for standing in solidarity steadfastly with the people of Ukraine. We know Ukraine and the Ukrainian people, who are fighting against Putin and the brutal invasion by Putin and the Russian Federation, are not just fighting for themselves. They are fighting for us. They are fighting for freedom, for democracy and for the international rules-based order, and we need to do everything we can to support them. That is why a little less than two years ago, I brought forward a unanimous consent motion in this House declaring what Russia is doing in Ukraine as a genocide. We were able to get unanimous consent to support that call. We were one of the very first countries in the world to have its Parliament declare that a genocide was taking place. I am extraordinarily proud of the New Democratic Party and being able to bring that motion forward. I am also very happy that we were able to bring a motion forward just this February, which we were able to get unanimous consent for, that talked about reaffirming Canada's support for sanctions against Russia, providing military and financial assistance to Ukraine and conducting a security guarantee agreement with Ukraine. We are here today for that security agreement. It is wonderful to stand in this place and know that New Democrats all across this country are supportive of the work happening in Ukraine. However, I have to say that I have some concerns about the support we have seen from the Liberals and the Conservatives. As my colleague from London—Fanshawe mentioned beforehand, the Liberals are very good at making promises; they are not very good at keeping them. We have seen time and time again the Liberals promise aid, sanctions and enforcement, promise all of these pieces that have never come to fruition. I went to Ukraine a year ago. I stood in Irpin and saw what the Russian Federation had done. I saw how it had targeted civilian infrastructure. I know that many mines in that country need to be cleared, and we need to support Ukraine so it can rebuild. However, at the same time as we know these needs are so great, this year the Liberal government cut official development assistance by 15% and has indicated that there will be further cuts in the budget we will see in April. This is not going to help the people of Ukraine. It is not going to help people around the world who are suffering because of the food scarcity caused by this war. Then we look at the Conservatives. I am very disappointed in their failures to support Ukraine. They will stand in this place and will tell us they are supportive of Ukraine, but actions mean more than words. It is easy to say things. However, when they vote against things like funding for Operation Unifier and things like the fair trade agreement that the President of Ukraine asked us to move forward with, those actions speak much louder. I do not want to stand in this place and claim it is all Conservatives. I know there are members of the Conservative Party who still believe in working together with all parties across this floor to support Ukraine. I know they are there. I hope they will be able to convince their leader to go from the position he has taken to the position we have held for a long time, all parties within this place, of supporting Ukraine. As I said, I am proud to be a New Democrat. I am proud that we are supporting Ukraine. However, there is more we can do. There is more we can do to help it rebuild and demine and to make sure it wins. We can make sure it gets tools quickly and urgently. We need to stop announcing and we need to start delivering, and New Democrats are here. We stand with Ukraine. We remain standing with Ukraine.

810 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

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

Ms. Heather McPherson

Mar/20/24 8:22:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I think maybe the member needs a glass of water. He seems quite upset. What I will say to him is that what we brought forward, as New Democrats, before the further invasion by the Russian Federation, was looking for peace. We were looking for a peaceful resolution. This happened before the invasion that we saw, the extension of the invasion by the Russian Federation. Of course, we are New Democrats. We are always looking to lessen the loss of life. That is in the very nature of what we do. Today, and this week, we are honouring the work of the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney. I would like the members from the Conservative Party to perhaps reflect upon some of the legacy that Brian Mulroney brought forward. He was not someone I agreed on everything with, but I will say that his support for South Africa, going against the United States at the time, against an apartheid regime was extraordinarily important. I wonder why they found it impossible for them to actually support sending humanitarian aid, perhaps going against the United States, and stopping the selling of arms to Israel, who is using them against civilians. I wonder if this particular version of Conservatism, which I think perhaps the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney would not be as impressed with, would have the courage the former prime minister had in terms of standing up for human rights. We are not seeing it from this particular opposition.

248 words