SoVote

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

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

Apologize

Mar/20/24 10:40:28 p.m.
Watch

The member for Miramichi—Grand Lake was asked to apologize for saying something very similar to, I think, what the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona said. The hon. member should retract that and apologize for it. Then we can go on and ask questions. The hon. member for Etobicoke Centre.

51 words

Mr. Yvan Baker

Mar/20/24 10:40:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, what I said was fact. What I said was not in breach of the Speaker's ruling— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

25 words

Mr. Yvan Baker

Mar/20/24 10:40:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I will not apologize for speaking the truth.

10 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:40:42 p.m.
Watch

I have asked you to retract it. Please retract it and apologize, or your evening is going to come to an end. The hon. member for Etobicoke Centre.

28 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:41:01 p.m.
Watch

I will make this easy. The hon. member will not be recognized until he apologizes. We will go on to the next speaker, the hon. member for Jonquière.

30 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Mar/20/24 10:41:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I would just like clarification, because this could set a regrettable precedent. If any member of this Parliament told NDP members that they are pro-Palestinian, would that member be silenced and accused of using unparliamentary language? If any one of us told other members that they are pro-Israeli, would that be cause for expulsion? We need to be careful about using ideologies. I certainly understand that, but sometimes we have to take controversial positions. Some members of the Conservative Party may have controversial views; indeed, one might say that some of them are pro-life and others are pro-choice. We would be playing a very dangerous game if we were to expel MPs for saying things that align with ideological leanings expressed in the House.

130 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:42:14 p.m.
Watch

I believe the Speaker's ruling had to do with the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake saying that the New Democrats support Hamas. That is very close to what the hon. member said this evening. I would therefore like the hon. member to withdraw his remarks. If he declines to do so, I will go to the next person on the list of those who want to speak. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona.

76 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Mar/20/24 10:42:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I just want to illustrate that when the Conservatives accused members of the House of supporting Hamas, that was a very different thing, because Hamas is an illegal terrorist organization. We actually do not have that designation right now, and maybe we should, for the Russian Federation, and we certainly do not have it for the People's Party. I think we can say that many members of the Conservative Party have shown they are much closer in values to the PPC than they are to perhaps a progressive conservative movement. I think it is fair for the member to say that. However, when there is a member who calls somebody out for being associated with an illegal terrorist organization, that is a very different thing.

128 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:43:52 p.m.
Watch

Ultimately, it is this: When something is causing disorder in the House, we have to find a mechanism in which to put that disorder aside so that we can continue the debate that is scheduled for this evening. The statement was causing tremendous disorder, just like when the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake did something very similar. The hon. member for Drummond.

64 words

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Mar/20/24 10:44:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, this is turning into a debate as interesting as it is worrisome. On the one hand, you referred to a member's remarks causing disorder in the House. Any statement, whether members agree with it or not, can cause disorder in the House. Is the Chair going to crack down on every statement that causes disorder in the House? That is my first point. My second point is that there is currently a conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Russia launched a massive invasion of Ukraine, an action we vigorously condemn. We support Ukraine, and I believe the entire House of Commons supports Ukraine. That does not mean it is illegal, unthinkable or impossible to hold a different opinion. People could, quite legitimately, support Putin and be pro-Russian. That is not a crime. It is not an opinion I share or agree with. I can see why Conservative members would take offence at being associated with that. I can see why the member for Etobicoke Centre might consider a particular wing of the Conservative Party to be pro-Russian. That does not make saying so unparliamentary. I think that, as my colleague from Jonquière pointed out earlier, we are walking a very thin line right now. I feel this could set a very dangerous precedent. Freedom of expression is at stake. Freedom of opinion is at stake. I think the Chair will have to consider that when ruling on this point of order.

247 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

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

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/20/24 10:47:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I certainly do not want to repeat what has already been said, but I do want to raise my concern as well that there is a bit of a precedent here that we need to be worried about. There are a lot of big feelings in the House, but the problem is that it should not be those who scream the loudest or light their hair on fire who get the most attention. When one is in a grocery store and a kid is on the floor kicking and screaming, one does not feed that fire. I would ask that we be more cautious, absolutely, with the words we use, but it should not be those who kick and scream the loudest who get their way all the time.

131 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Mar/20/24 10:48:34 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I would like to make one last comment. I understand that we all want to get to bed tonight. However, we have heard comments that I find worrisome, for example, when people say that if all parliamentarians are of one opinion or if all Canadians are of one opinion, other opinions should not be allowed. We nearly got to that point. When there is an international conflict like the one between Ukraine and Russia or the one between Israel and Palestine, I think that all opinions should be heard in the House. The same thing goes for internal matters. All opinions should be heard. We are here to debate things. We might take offence. We can shout all we want, but no opinions on an international conflict should be considered unparliamentary.

134 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:49:27 p.m.
Watch

We have to be very judicious in the words we are using and how we are talking, especially when we are talking about things that are so important to the world at the moment. I want to make sure we are giving respect to the debate we are having tonight. That is what I am really trying to accomplish this evening. We will move on to the next speaker, who is the hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

78 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.)

Mar/20/24 10:49:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, it is great to follow my hon. colleague from the wonderful city of Etobicoke and the riding of Etobicoke—Lakeshore. I know the hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore is a proud Ukrainian Canadian. He represents the Ukrainian community, not only in Etobicoke but across Canada, with everything in his heart and everything in his soul, and he believes in the cause of defeating the Russian aggression we have seen over the last two years and the invasion of Crimea several years earlier. I am proud to stand with my hon. colleague and to be his colleague. I have known him for many years. He is an esteemed and learned member, and not only here in this House. He also served in provincial parliament. He is a good person, he means well and he believes in what he says. I know he is also the chair of the Canada-Ukraine Friendship Group and has done a lot of work there. I rise tonight to speak as an individual who supports the Ukrainian Canadian community, all one million-plus of them, but also in my role for the last few years as the chair of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association. In that role, I get to participate in the Council of Europe meetings at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France, where we hold a number of bilateral meetings with delegations, including the Ukrainian delegation. I believe the current Ukrainian defence minister was actually a member of that delegation. We had several meetings with them, and I wish Godspeed to Mariia, Ilyana and all members of the PACE delegation from Ukraine, whom I will see shortly in the month of April. I know how hard they are working to ensure the brave Ukrainian men and women fighting this unjustified barbaric invasion by Russia are going to prevail. I was watching this debate earlier on this evening, and it was great to see the non-partisan nature of what was going on, but unfortunately, I think the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan decided to make it a little more partisan than it should be. There was some banter back and forth, but let us be serious: Everyone in this House, all 338 of us, know Russia needs to be defeated. As Mario Draghi said, there is no Europe if Russia wins. Unfortunately, when the leader of the official opposition said that something was going on in a “faraway” land, it was an inappropriate remark to make, in my humble view. We are all held to account in what words we state, in our deeds in this House and as parliamentarians. I see the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, whom I have spoken to before. Much like the hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore, he is a staunch, proud Ukrainian Canadian. He wants nothing more than to see the full sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine for the Ukrainian people and the freedom of the brave men and women in Ukraine. Two years ago there were not many folks in this world who believed Ukraine would stand up to Russia the way it has, but it did for many reasons, including the participation of the Canadian Armed Forces through Operation Unifier, which has trained over 40,000 Ukrainian troops and continues to provide resources. There are 300 Canadian Armed Forces troops in Europe right now, in Poland, the U.K. and Latvia, helping out. I was doing some note-taking, because I do not sit on the defence committee or foreign affairs committee as I have other responsibilities, and I was looking at Canada's participation. We are in the Ukraine Defense Contact Group. We are in the air force capability coalition. We are in the armour capability coalition. We are in the drone capability coalition. Since February 2022, Canada has committed over $13.3 billion in funding support to Ukraine, including in 2024, when we will commit another $3.02 billion in spending. When I hear feedback from my constituents, it tends to be far-right individuals who do not believe in supporting Ukraine. It is a fact. Much like in the United States, there is an element on the political right that does not support aiding Ukraine. That is a fact. It is unfortunate, and I try to speak to them, calmly, to say that we need to stand up for Ukrainians. I also want to give a big shout-out to the President of Czechia—

760 words

The Chair

Mar/20/24 10:55:30 p.m.
Watch

I hate to interrupt, but we are out of time. Five minutes flies by pretty quickly. I will get someone to ask the hon. member a question, and maybe he could finish off his speech in his answer.

38 words

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC)

Mar/20/24 10:55:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for his kind words toward me. I do appreciate that. This is an issue that has all-party support, this new strategic security agreement between Canada and Ukraine. I was not going to ask a question, but he did raise the misinformation out there. Research has been done, both in the Ukraine by NATO itself, through its Estonia cybersecurity and misinformation centre of excellence, which I had the chance to visit this past summer, as well as here in Canada. Everybody always wants to talk about the far right, and there is no doubt. The Tucker Carlsons of the world, the PPC types out there, are actually out there promoting all the Kremlin propaganda. There is also a growing mountain of evidence to show that the far left, the alt-left, the Antifa types, are also saying that Russia is justified in its attacks on Ukraine and that Ukraine does not actually exist. It is all the same revisionist history that is pushed out by Putin and his troll farm in St. Petersburg. I just want to ask the member if he recognized the fact that there are extremes on both sides of the political equation that are squeezing all of us who are supporters of Ukraine, and it requires us to fight back even harder on the misinformation and disinformation and to unite Canada and the world, including our American cousins, in their support for Ukraine.

245 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Mar/20/24 10:57:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I will say that I do agree that there is an element of the far left, and we do see it in some of the European political parties, that are not as supportive as they should be. It is quite unfortunate. I see that in my heritage country of Italy. There are some far-right parties and some far-left parties that are not supportive. On Canada's free trade agreement with Ukraine, which I believe was originally negotiated by the official opposition, I understand their dislike of carbon pricing and of taking action on climate change. However, I really believed that was one measure, one policy, and I know it received royal assent last night, that all parties should have come together to support. I really do believe that. I was very disappointed that official opposition did not support that. At the end of the day, it was something that the Ukrainian people, Ukrainian Canadians and President Zelenskyy asked for and wanted. We should have come together, as 338 parliamentarians, to support Ukraine. Our Canadian Armed Forces are doing it. We should have done it as well. As parliamentarians, we should continue to do that going forward.

200 words

Negotiated

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Mar/20/24 10:58:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, we are talking about rebuilding Ukraine. We are talking about the support Canada should be providing. After listening to everything that was said this evening, especially by my colleagues from the Bloc Québécois and my colleague from Montarville, who gave an excellent speech with a lot of detail on the percentage of the aid Canada promised that has been delivered to Ukraine and on the delays in delivering that aid, is my colleague satisfied with the Government of Canada's response and support with respect to Ukraine? Does he, like me, think that we should get going and do more?

106 words