SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Heather McPherson

  • 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
  • Jun/13/23 4:06:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things I have been very concerned about is whether our sanction regime is actually being enforced. The easy part of sanctions is to put people on the list. The hard part is to actually enforce those sanctions and to make sure that they are transparent and enforced, as well as that we are following through with action. We know, because we heard testimony from the RCMP at the foreign affairs committee, that there are very few resources allocated to our sanction enforcement in this country. Would the member agree that if the government is just putting names on a list and does not actually enforce those sanctions, it is just committing political theatre?
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • 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!
  • star_border
  • Feb/9/23 6:18:41 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, putting more people on the sanctions list if there is no enforcement of the sanctions is simply meaningless political theatre. The government should be ashamed of its actions on the sanctions regime.
34 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/20/22 4:18:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I am rising pursuant to Standing Order 48 to bring to your attention what I believe to be a breach of my privilege. Standing Order 48(2) requires written notice to be given to the Speaker to outline a member's intention to raise a question of privilege. An electronic letter was provided to the Speaker's office at the earliest opportunity, that being at 3:03 this afternoon. Canadians are united in their support of Ukraine and want to know that the government is doing everything that it can to ensure that Ukraine has the support that it needs and to stop the Russians' illegal war and the genocide that is being perpetrated in Ukraine. Canadians want to know if the measures that the government has announced regarding sanctions are having the delivered or desired effect, or in fact any effect at all, on stifling the Russian economy and preventing any Canadian contributions, even in the most inadvertent and incidental way, to the unlawful war in Ukraine. Our allies who have enacted sanctions have been and are transparent. There are some countries that will officially announce when a yacht or a luxury apartment has been seized, as well as the monetary value of that item or asset. Other European allies have already publicized similar asset seizures, with over $2 billion seized by EU countries between late February and early April this year. I have repeatedly asked the government, both verbally during question period and in writing Order Paper questions to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and her parliamentary secretary, about the number of sanctions imposed and the value of the assets or property seized from the listed Russian oligarchs and their named relatives, and whether these measures have resulted in the halting of assets that could be used to purchase material or resources to harm Ukraine and Ukrainians. Canadians, of course, would very much like to know if the measures that the government is enacting and undertaking are actually working. While I understand that Speaker's rulings have stated that the Speaker is not responsible for the quality of the answer, the Speaker does have an obligation to ensure that question period meets the standards set out by Bosc and Gagnon. For example, House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Bosc and Gagnon, outlines a number of principles by which question period is governed. For example, it reads: While there may be other purposes and ambitions involved in Question Period, its primary purpose must be the seeking of information from the government and calling the government to account for its actions. If the primary purpose of question period is to seek information and call the government to account, how is it possible that the government provides incomplete or misleading answers? Further, while Speakers have traditionally been reluctant to adjudicate on the quality of answers, it is nonetheless well within the Speaker's responsibility to ensure that the rules are followed and that the answers are provided. In this context, I will draw your attention to my specific case, namely the response, which indicates that the government would not answer, simply because it did not immediately have that information. Mr. Speaker, this is not an example of an insufficient answer. It is an example of the government's abdication of its responsibility to provide an answer at all. In that context, I think it is appropriate for you to review this matter. Thus far, the Canadian government refuses to share even these basic, yet vital, details. Without this information, it feels very much like the government is hiding something. This raises concerns for me that perhaps the government has yet to take any meaningful, concrete actions, that it is just naming the names and not carrying out the enforcement. The answers that have thus far been proffered to me in response to my numerous questions have been vague, incomplete or completely without any information at all. For example, the government responded to one of my Order Paper questions by writing that because it is unable or cannot provide complete information, it will provide none. I would argue that this response constitutes improper use by the government of the process of written questions, and it infringes on the member of Parliament's rights to hold accountable the ministry. In chapter 7 of her November 20, 2004 report entitled “Process for Responding to Parliamentary Order Paper Questions”, the then auditor general wrote this: The right to seek information from the Ministry of the day and the right to hold that Ministry accountable are recognized as two of the fundamental principles of parliamentary government. Written questions are one of the tools that Canadians, via their elected representatives, can use to force the government to be accountable. I hope you will consider this matter seriously and recognize that it involves a prima facie breach of my privileges as a member of Parliament. None of the information that I have requested has been found in the government's responses.
844 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border