- Member of Parliament
- Member of the Joint Interparliamentary Council
Whip of the New Democratic Party
Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees
- NDP
- Edmonton Strathcona
- Alberta
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $141,604.97
- Government Page
- Oct/24/22 7:10:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I apologize for earlier drawing attention to the fact that there were no members of the official opposition in the House for the member's speech. I apologize for saying that.
33 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/28/23 2:29:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Ukrainians fleeing from Russia's brutal illegal war are looking to start over and build a new life in Canada.
However, the Liberals' emergency travel measures have a three-year limit, meaning that Ukrainians cannot participate in most trade apprenticeships. Ukrainians are effectively being shut out of the trades because of this limit. It is wrong, and union leaders like Scott Crichton from IBEW 424 want this to change.
Will the Liberal government remove the limit so that Ukrainians could train and work in Canada?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have a couple of things to say.
First of all, my colleague referred to Ukrainian refugees, but I am not sure if he perhaps failed to understand that the government does not list them as refugees, so they are not given the protection that refugees should have in our community.
The other thing he talked about is Afghan refugees. I have to tell him that I was in my office during the last constituency week talking to interpreters who have had their families and co-workers left behind by this government. I have talked to interpreters who supported our military, who supported our country, who have been left behind.
Yes, absolutely, I will say that we have been able to bring many people here from Afghanistan and from Ukraine, but I will not say that we have done a good job of it, that we have not left behind people to whom we had deep obligations. That is not anything to do with Bill C-41, which is an entirely different thing.
If we are not going to bring people out of their country so they can survive a genocidal terrorist regime in their own country, I do have to tell the member that humanitarian aid is the support we can give them.
216 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/23 10:58:23 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Madam Speaker, I wrote to the then minister of foreign affairs in February of 2021 to demand he take action so that we would not have been in a situation where people were not able to get out of Afghanistan when Kabul fell. Of course, nothing was done. An election was called instead.
However, I wonder if the member agrees we should have the current Minister of Public Safety, the current Minister of International Development and the previous minister of foreign affairs give some testimony in this place so we can be assured that no fraud took place.
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/23 10:23:54 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Madam Speaker, I am quite shocked that the member could speak for 20 minutes about how effective the sanctions regime when he knows very well that we have 1,600 people on our sanctions regime. We have no transparency and have no enforcement. We have seized $121 million over six months. The entire Russian Federation could be put on the sanctions list, but if they are not going to enforce the them they do not matter.
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:58:16 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for the important work he has been doing in the committee on public safety as well.
Realistically, one of the key ways we ensure the legislation we pass in the House is as strong as possible is by hearing from experts, by inviting experts who know more about the topics we are legislating upon than perhaps some of us may know. The idea that this has to come forward, that we need to take that time and do that due diligence, is very important. It will, of course, inform my strategy.
100 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:56:46 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, the member perhaps did not listen to my speech and does not know that we were debating Bill S-8 today, which is about sanctions, our sanction regime and how to strengthen our sanction regime. It is not really about my Christmas wish list, although I will say that dental care, pharmacare and sick days for workers are super important to me, and I am glad that she brought them up.
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:55:32 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat myself, as I have said it many times already, but it is very important that the members of the IRGC who are responsible for the human rights abuses against their citizens be held accountable and that they be sanctioned. It is also important that we do everything we can to ensure they cannot come to Canada, that their assets are seized and that they be expelled from Canada.
I am very concerned as well about the potential for innocent people to be harmed by sanctions. We have seen that happen in Iran before and I, for one, will do everything I can to ensure those who are guilty are held accountable and those who are innocent do not have to pay that price.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:54:19 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was not a member in 2017, so I was not part of the foreign affairs committee at that time. I was not elected until 2019.
However, my colleague Hélène Laverdière, who sat on the committee at the time, was an extremely vocal advocate for the sanction regime. She did an awful lot of work bringing forward the recommendations. While I am happy that debate happened in the House, one of the recommendations was that there would be a five-year review, and we are almost at the end of five years.
While the parliamentary secretary is interested in getting this bill passed by the end of this week, just as we all are, by the end of this week we also lose the opportunity for the five-year review for the sanction regime, something that has not happened. I hope at the very beginning of 2023, when we all come back refreshed and full of energy, we will be looking at our sanction regime.
174 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:52:39 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, as I said in my comments today, we got appalling news from Iran just this morning that more protesters are being killed by the horrific IRGC regime. Everything must be done. Every possible thing must be done to hold those committing these human rights atrocities accountable. Everything also must be done to ensure that no innocent person is harmed, that innocent people are not being put at risk.
I would absolutely support using every tool we can for holding those at the top of the IRGC accountable for their terrorist, murderous actions and the horrific things they are doing against the people of Iran.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:51:25 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, one of the ways we could do it is by having a parliamentary group, which would be made up of all parties, that would have the ability to scrutinize how these names are put on our list. If we had members from all parties, we would have the ability to work collaboratively and bring in experts. There are people in the world who know this work very well. Bill Browder is a perfect example.
Another thing that we need to do is work with our allies, ensuring we are working with like-minded democracies, and that our lists align with those of our allies.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:50:11 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, there is a system in this place where we send legislation to committee to look at it, examine it and hear from experts on it. Unfortunately, the last two bills that came before the foreign affairs committee were not given that due diligence. We were not allowed to do the required due diligence. It is the job of parliamentarians to have the strongest legislation possible. It is not the job of parliamentarians to allow the government to bring things in at the last minute and try to rush them through. Our job is to look at it, hear from experts on it and do what we can within the constraints of our time to ensure we produce adequate legislation.
121 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/22 1:31:26 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-8
Mr. Speaker, it is always a great honour to stand in this place to speak on behalf of the residents and constituents of Edmonton Strathcona. I am particularly delighted to stand today to speak about our sanctions regime and the work that needs to be done to strengthen it and ensure it is as adequate and as strong as it can be.
We know that sanctions are one of the tools we have to hold governments and individuals around the world to the rule of law, to human rights, to democracy and to fairness and justice for their citizens. For a very long time, many members in this place have worked very hard and well together to try to increase the effectiveness of our sanctions regime and the ability of sanctions to do what we hope they will do, which is to change the course of governments and individuals, to change their behaviour and punish them for the harms they have caused without harming and punishing innocent people and citizens.
The act we are debating today is Bill S-8. This act would amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.
The proposed legislation amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or the IRPA, and it provides Canada with much-needed abilities to better link government sanctions with authorities related to immigration enforcement. I think we can all agree that this means that not only will foreign nationals sanctioned due to the invasion of Ukraine be inadmissible to Canada, but it will also stop all previously sanctioned individuals from places like Iran, Myanmar or Burma, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Zimbabwe among others.
I and the NDP are very supportive of the bill, but we need to consider, and most of my comments today will be on this, that this is a small piece of what needs to be done to strengthen Canada's sanctions regime.
The bill would not fix some of the things for which we have been calling for some time; for example, the absence of parliamentary oversight. We have very little parliamentary oversight of our sanctions regime, and I will speak to that a bit later.
This would also not fix the enforcement in areas that are not immigration related, for example, the seizure of assets. Again, I will speak to this in more depth later on, but I would raise again in the House that to date about $121 million has been seized from Russian oligarchs as part of our sanctions regime to force Russia to stop its illegal war in Ukraine. While that $121 million is an awful lot to me and probably an awful lot to most of us in this room and in the country, it is not an awful lot for Russian oligarchs.
The bill would also not fix the challenge that we as parliamentarians have with clarity. We still do not have a good system in this place that explains why the government chooses to add some people to the list to be sanctioned, how those decisions are made and how the timing of those decisions is determined. We know we work with our allies and other countries. That is very important for sanctions to be effective. However, as parliamentarians, we need to have more clarity on how those decisions are made.
As we go forward in looking at strengthening the sanctions regime, there are people in the House who have been doing very important work on this. I have to call out my colleague from the Conservative Party, the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, for his excellent work on the Magnitsky sanctions. The Deputy Prime Minister also did great work on ensuring the Magnitsky act was put in place. Of course, as some people have mentioned before, and my colleague from the Bloc mentioned just previously, the challenge is that putting a law in place does not actually matter if we do not enforce it or if we do not ensure it is adequately applied.
A perfect example of this is that with the Magnitsky sanctions, we are supposed to do a five-year review. Five years is 2022. There is some review being done in the Senate, but we have not done any review within the foreign affairs committee or within this Parliament. For me, that is the challenge we have.
I spoke briefly about the need to strengthen our sanctions regime. For years, the NDP has been pushing for a stronger sanctions regime. We are happy to see some of the important changes that this bill would bring forward, but there are things we have been asking for for years, including in the 2017 foreign affairs committee study on Canada's sanctions regime. Many of the recommendations from that study have not been implemented. We look forward to the government moving somewhat faster than it has to date to make sure those are implemented, especially considering that right now what we are seeing in Ukraine is a vital need for sanctions to be a key piece of our response to the Ukrainian war.
Another example of why our sanctions regime has not been as effective as it could be is the waiver. We saw the government in the summer, in the middle of July, put a waiver in place that would cancel some of the important sanctions we put in place against Russia. I am not going to stand here and pretend that would not have been a very difficult decision for the government to make. Our German allies and Ukrainian allies were asking for different things, and that is a very difficult situation to be in. While I did not agree with the decision that was made by the government, I do accept it was a difficult decision to make.
That said, first of all, the pipeline the waiver was supporting was a piece of equipment returned to Germany to be returned to Russia, and Russia did not pick it up. The second thing is that the pipeline it was meant to be used on has now been blown up. There is no reason whatsoever for us to still have this waiver in place and still have this lessening of our sanctions against Russia, yet we still do.
The Government of Canada has still not cancelled the waiver, which is appalling. It is something it should be doing immediately. I know the foreign affairs committee will be recommending that, if we can get out of the filibuster that has been put in place by some of our colleagues in the Conservative Party.
The other piece of our sanctions regime that I want to know about is how we can double-check it to see that what is happening is adequate and being done properly. I have talked a bit about sanctions oversight, and we know that after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, sanctions were put in place. However, we also know that those sanctions trickled out after months and months. We learned that many oligarchs had the opportunity to move their assets from Canada so they would not have those assets seized. That is a missed opportunity since those assets were supposed to help rebuild Ukraine and help with the rebuilding initiatives.
We also know that the government has failed to provide the clarity on sanctions that we have hoped for. For example, I have asked about this multiple times in the House and through Order Paper questions to get more information and details on who is being sanctioned, what is being sanctioned, what has been seized, how it is being seized and what processes are being used. However, I have never been able to get an adequate answer from the government.
In fact, one of the Order Paper questions was returned to me with a response that said the government was not 100% sure that it would be able to give me accurate information, so it provided me with no information at all. That is an interesting tactic. I would love to see somebody try to say in a high school or university course that since they are not sure they are giving all the information, they will give none at all. That is something we have problems with. We still do not have that level of clarity.
I have another concern. When the government introduced the last budget implementation act, there was a change to the way that sanctions were dealt with. In the past, there was parliamentary oversight because the government needed to record the use of the sanctions regime or the sanctions act and needed to report it to Parliament. It needed to be tabled with Parliament.
In the Budget Implementation Act, that requirement was removed. Therefore, it is now no longer the government's obligation to tell Parliament what those sanctions are or what has been seized. We could find out if we took the government to court and used a judicial remedy, but we cannot find out just through parliamentary processes.
This is taking away the right of all parliamentarians to have that transparency and to have that understanding of how our sanctions are being chosen, how they are being enforced and if they are working. A sanction is not that useful if it is not being enforced. A sanction is not that important if countries or individuals understand that it will not be enforced in Canada.
There is an interesting thing I found out as I was doing some digging around sanctions. If we want to find out what goods are coming into Canada from Russia, we can look at Russian shipping records. We cannot find that out by looking at Canadian shipping records.
It is very interesting to me that there is transparency that can be found in the U.S., the U.K., the EU and Russia, but we cannot find it here.
That is another challenge I have with our sanction regime. As I said at the beginning, this particular bill would help with some aspects of our sanction regime. I am very happy to support this legislation. I am very happy to see that it would be fixing some of those holes around our sanction regime. However, this seems very much, to me, like tinkering around the edges.
We have heard from the Senate. One of the key quotations from the Senate hearings on Bill S-8, from Canada's foremost expert on sanctions policy, Andrea Charron, was this:
While there is nothing wrong with highlighting in the Immigration and Refugee Act that inadmissibility due to sanctions is possible, this repeats a pattern whereby Canada tinkers on the margins of legislation without addressing core policy and process issues. If we are to continue to sanction autonomously with allies, we need to fix fundamental issues of policy and [fundamental issues of] process.
I believe that we have many things we still need to do. We need to have a comprehensive review of Canada's sanction regime. The NDP has proposed a study at the foreign affairs committee on Canada's sanction regime. That study was meant to have taken place during this fall's session. We are very hopeful that it will take place very quickly once the winter session begins. I urge my colleagues in the Conservative Party to stop filibustering our committee so that we can get on with the very important work of foreign affairs.
We can ensure that our sanctions are being more effectively applied. We can bring forward legislation that would align with the recommendations in the 2017 foreign affairs committee report that called for greater transparency. It called for a review of our sanctions regime and called for a parliamentary body of all parties that would assist in identifying which names and which individuals should be on the Magnitsky list and should be sanctioned by the Government of Canada.
One of our biggest problems, and I have said this many times, is that if we cannot fix our sanction regime, our sanction regime very quickly becomes not as effective and not as useful as we need it to be.
I think that members of the House have brought up circumstances where that is the case. We know that, for example, in Ukraine, sanctions are one of the key tools we have to hold Russia to account for its illegal invasion in Ukraine. It is one of the key levers that Canada can pull to force the Russian Federation to rethink this horrific and illegal attack on civilians.
It is also one of the things that we can use when other human rights abuses are raised around the world. We are seeing horrific attacks on protesters in Iran. Just this morning, I woke up to another horrific example of a protester being executed because he was fighting for his freedom. We know that there are many Iranians who are in grave danger right now. If this sanction regime can be fixed and can help the people in Iran even a little bit, it has to be done.
I am interested in looking at sanctioning a whole range of characters around the world who we know have been responsible for atrocious human rights abuses, such as what we see in Yemen and from members of Saudi Arabia. We need to be ensuring that, as a country, we are standing up for human rights, using the tools we have at our disposal for those efforts.
I also want to point out that the sanctions regime is a tool we also have to use for our feminist international assistance policy and for the feminist foreign policy that we certainly hope the government tables in Parliament very soon. We know that a huge percentage of the people who are identified by the Magnitsky sanctions and the other SEMA sanction measures are perpetrating human rights abuses that are disproportionately impacting women and girls around the world. We know that sexual violence and gender-based violence have been used as a tool to silence journalists and human rights defenders around the world. We know that rape has been used. This violence does not align with a country like Canada, which has a feminist foreign policy and a feminist international assistance policy, and we need to be looking at our foreign responses through that lens.
I would like to end my comments with this. As I was travelling here from Edmonton yesterday, I took some time to read some of the speeches from the Nobel Peace Prize winners, and I want to read a quote to the House. It is by Oleksandra Matviichuk from the Center for Civil Liberties, the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize winner. She spoke to me about the need for sanctions and why it was so important that we work with our allies to make our sanctions regime stronger.
She stated:
Peace, progress and human rights are inextricably linked. A state that kills journalists, imprisons activists, or disperses peaceful demonstrations poses a threat not only to its citizens. Such a state poses a threat to the entire region and peace in the world as a whole. Therefore, the world must adequately respond to systemic violations. In political decision-making, human rights must be as important as economic benefits or security. This approach {must} be applied in foreign policy...
2570 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/26/22 6:46:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank all of my colleagues who are standing in the House tonight defending the Uighur people. I agree with many of my colleagues when they say this is an issue that is beyond partisan politics. This is not an issue that we should be bickering about. This is an issue that all parliamentarians must come together for.
I was elected in 2019 and the very first committee I was put on was the international human rights subcommittee. I was put on that committee, I believe, because I have done work in international human rights for most of my career. One of the very first studies we undertook within that committee was to look at what was happening to the Uighur people, to the people in Xinjiang. It was very difficult testimony. I have said that in this House before. It was among the most difficult things I have heard, the stories of torture, of rape, of forced sterilization; of surveillance. The horrific testimony that we heard from people who had escaped was almost impossible to hear.
I have mentioned in this place before that for me, my job was to bear witness. My job was to hear that testimony. I did not have to endure what we have asked the Uighur people to endure. I was elected in 2019, so I am a relatively new parliamentarian, but I have to say that it has been three years. I have been a member for three years and I have not seen the action that we need to see to protect the Uighur people. We have not seen action by the government that would make me think it is taking this genocide seriously, that it is acting with the urgency that is required.
There are many people in this place right now that have loved ones who are still in concentration camps, that they may not know where they are, that they know have been tortured, that they know have had to endure horrific experiences. To those people, as a parliamentarian in Canada, I have to say I am sorry. I am sorry that we have let them down, that we have not done everything we can to stop the genocide that we all have agreed is happening to their people. I am sorry that we have not been strong enough, that we have not done what we needed to do.
We did declare this a genocide. This Parliament did say that this is a genocide and we do have obligations when we recognize that; every one of us. We all look at the horrific genocides that have happened in history. We said never again; never will we put the lives of people at risk this way; never will we turn a blind eye to the death of a people, and yet for three years we have been doing that. For longer than three years we have been doing that.
I am extremely proud to support the motion that has been brought forward by my colleague from Pierrefonds—Dollard. I am very happy that I have been able to work with him at the international human rights subcommittee. I am very happy that I have been able to work with members from all parties on this important work.
I am extremely proud of my colleague for the work that he has done and what he has brought forward. Of course I am concerned about the fact that when we have votes in the House, cabinet does not participate. Of course I am concerned that this is a motion. We know that a motion is not binding. We know that a motion is not legislation. It is not protecting Uighurs the way we need to. I understand this may be what he felt he was able to achieve at this point with the government, but it is not enough. It is not near enough. This does not go far enough to protect the people. As parliamentarians, as people who believe in human rights, as people who believe in human dignity, it does not go as far as we need it to go.
I will say that in terms of the immigration issues that this motion brings forward, bringing 10,000 people to Canada who are fleeing violence, of course I support that. I do not understand and never will understand why every single persecuted group in the world is not given the unlimited number that certain persecuted groups in the world are given.
I will never understand why it is unlimited Ukrainians, and I am a hundred per cent in support of unlimited Ukrainians coming to Canada to flee persecution from the Russian war in their country. However, I do not understand why it is not unlimited people coming from other countries as well. I do not understand how we can put that value in place, how we can say that for some it is unlimited and for some we have a 10,000 limit. I do not understand it.
The other piece that we really need to talk about here tonight is that this motion calls for allowing 10,000 Uighurs fleeing violence to come to Canada, but we are not doing enough to make sure that the Uighurs in concentration camps, the Uighurs in China, can actually come to Canada. They are being held in concentration camps and tortured in China, and many of them are unable to get to safety.
As a member of the international community, we also have a very big obligation to be doing what we can to ensure that the government in China is being held to account. Canada used to be a diplomatic powerhouse. We are not a giant powerhouse. We are not a massive economy or whatnot. However, we used to be seen as a convenor, a clear diplomat, a leader in terms of diplomacy. We used to have an ability to bring countries together, to bring groups forward to work together and to bring action.
Unfortunately, I do not feel like Canada has the ability to do that anymore. I feel like we have undermined our ability to do that, that we have in fact put trade at the top of all our relationships to the detriment of our relationships with regard to diplomacy, to the detriment of our relationships with development. We do not have relationships anymore that we can use to push things forward.
A perfect example for me is that the human rights council was going to have a debate on the Uighur genocide. They really did need to get the votes from countries around the world to participate. China has a massive power, and it used that massive power to cajole, bully, force and make other countries vote on its side. It used all these different tricks and tools. As a country, we do not have the ability to push back on that any longer. That is a mistake. That is a place we have failed to be able to protect the Uighur people.
I would like to see us invest in diplomacy. I would like to see us invest in building those relationships so we can bring our allies and other democracies together, and so that as a common voice we are standing up for the Uighur people. As a common voice we have more ability to put pressure on the Chinese government to ensure that it is stopping the genocide against the Uighur people.
The support from multilateral institutions is key to making sure those institutions have unfettered access. That is a key thing that Canada can do to make sure we are able to report adequately on what is happening in China and invest in support for human rights activists.
The incredible human rights activists who are part of the Uighur population, who are standing up for Uighurs around the world, have raised their voices for years to get support, and Canada could play an important role in protecting them while they fight for their people, while they fight for the people in their communities.
Finally, I have to say that as a Parliament, as a government, as a country, we must all stand and be very unified in condemning what is happening in China against the Uighur people. That includes our cabinet. That includes the government. That includes every member of the House of Commons. We need to stand together, condemn what is happening there and raise our voices to say, “No, we are not putting trade ahead of human lives. No, we are not going to say that money is more important than people. Not this time. Not anymore.”
1454 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 9:06:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about the importance of not recognizing lesser humans. He spoke of lesser humans, how there is this hierarchy and how dangerous that is.
One of the concerns I have, as I have mentioned in this place, is that we pick and choose which human rights to protect. Children are, of course, innocent regardless of the circumstances they find themselves in.
I wonder if my colleague is supportive of the notion that children need to be protected regardless. Would he stand with the NDP in calling for a special envoy for children in Palestine who are the victims of violence in Palestine?
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:51:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, I do worry about genocides happening around the world in many different locations, including in Xinjiang with the Uighur people. There is a need for us to say, and mean, “never again”.
We were able to vote on the motion to declare the Uighur genocide years ago. The Subcommittee on International Human Rights declared it a genocide years ago, yet the government has still taken very little action to both condemn and stop the genocide, as well as to help the Uighur people come to Canada to escape persecution.
Can he talk about why it has taken so long?
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:38:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for persevering through that speech. I hope he gets a lozenge by Wednesday, so he can be in better shape as we all discuss his motion, which of course I will be supporting. I am incredibly honoured to be able to work with the member as he brings this motion forward.
I bring some legitimate concerns that the governing party is not acting on this and that it has taken a private member's motion to bring this forward rather than government legislation, which we know could also be done. I wonder why the member thinks that so long into this, after we have done the work, and I did this work with the member at the international human rights subcommittee, it is still on a private member's motion that we are acting.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:24:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's intervention today was very interesting, very heartfelt and very intelligently delivered.
I have some concerns about what Canada can do in addition to the efforts to allow Uighurs to come to Canada to flee persecution. However, I wonder whether the member can talk a bit about the potential for the government to impose sanctions on those responsible for this genocide and what additional steps the Canadian government can take to ensure those sanctions are not just put in place and named, but also enforced and made effective.
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:10:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I absolutely can. Something I reflect on a great deal is how Canada can play a better role, how we can play a bigger role as a country that is respected around the world, and as a country that is seen as a champion of human rights. There are many ways we can do that. One is we can have a bigger role geopolitically.
We really, for the most part, have abandoned our obligations to be a peacekeeping nation, to have peacekeepers in the field. We have never reached the obligations we promised under the Pearson Commission to reach 0.7% of ODA. We have repeatedly spoken about having a feminist government, yet we do not have a feminist foreign policy. There are many ways Canada can play an increasingly important role in the world. We just need the focus, the bravery and political will to do so.
150 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/22 8:08:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important conversation that we need to have as we go forward. We know that in the United States, in the next two years, there will be elections as another superpower. One of the ways Canada can help with this is to reduce our dependency on superpowers and to, in fact, diversify our relationships and have more relationships with different partners, with different members of the Indo-Pacific. I look very much forward to hearing what the Indo-Pacific strategy looks like for the government.
The fact that we should be working more with Arctic countries, the northern countries, is very important. Increasing our ties and our ability to trade and work with European countries is very important. That is one of the ways, as a medium-power country, I guess I could say, we can work with the current changing geopolitical climate.
We can expand so we are not so dependent on the United States, and become perhaps dependent on many other countries and expand our relationships, but we also need to make sure we are not so dependent on China and that we are working with some of our like-minded democracies, such as Japan and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region.
210 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
