- Member of Parliament
- Member of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
- Bloc Québécois
- Montarville
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 59%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $115,582.71
- Government Page
- Jun/5/24 2:23:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the war grinds on in Ukraine. The horrors continue for the Ukrainian people, and we want them to know that we stand with them. It is against that backdrop that Canada is welcoming Oleksandra Matviichuk this week. She is a human rights activist and winner of the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize.
The Prime Minister met her on Monday and the Bloc Québécois had that honour this morning. Her message is clear: There is a need for more weapons and more justice for Ukrainians. She is asking Canada to increase its military aid. She is also asking Canada to take up her call for justice on behalf of the 72,000 victims of war crimes. She is calling for the Russian barbarians who committed and ordered these atrocities to be brought to justice before a special tribunal. As she said, “We need Canada's weight to convince other countries that the time has come.”
We want to assure Ms. Matviichuk that she and Ukraine can count on the weight and support of the Bloc Québécois. In the name of peace and justice, Slava Ukraini!
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/27/24 2:05:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, two years ago, Putin's Russia once again invaded Ukraine, which has resisted with an admirable show of courage. As yet, the conflict remains confined within its borders, although a front line has undeniably opened up between democracies and dictatorships. Ukraine wants to remain free and democratic. Putin's Russia is jeopardizing not only Ukraine's sovereignty, but also the Ukrainian people's ability to live in their language and culture.
As Quebeckers, we cannot help but feel a special affinity with a nation that lives beside a giant and still holds out against the invaders. Amid their devastated cities, the Ukrainian people are giving the whole world a demonstration of the resolve it takes to defend democracy against totalitarianism. Although other conflicts have tragically captured the world's attention, let us not forget the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Now more than ever, let us reiterate our full support for the Ukrainian nation, because by defending its territory and freedom, it is also defending ours. Everything remains possible.
Slava Ukraini.
172 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/21/23 3:17:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion:
That, given that,
(i) according to a report by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, thousands of children have been forcibly deported by Russia from Ukraine to the Russian Federation,
(ii) the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova for the war crime of illegally deporting Ukrainian children to the territory of the Russian Federation,
(iii) the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe have strongly condemned the practice of forced transfers and deportation of civilians, including children, by the Russian Federation,
the House:
(a) condemn, with equal firmness, the Russian authorities for the war crimes and genocide constituted by the forced deportation of Ukrainian children to the territory of the Russian Federation, in particular through an abusive selection process known as “filtration” and “re-education camps”; and
(b) call for an immediate end to this practice, and for Ukrainian children to be returned safely to Ukraine by the Russian Federation.
205 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 11:24:59 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the answer is simple. Realistically, there are only so many resources, technically speaking, that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development can devote to addressing these topics and issues. Right now, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is getting a lot of attention. There are plenty of people and conflicts elsewhere in the world that have suddenly been forgotten because this conflict in Ukraine is getting all the attention and sucking up all the oxygen. There are only so many issues that can be addressed by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. The same is true of the Standing Committee on Health, where it was decided to create a special committee to conduct a special study on medical assistance in dying.
In relation to the People's Republic of China, given its importance, we think that there must be—
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/29/22 11:19:06 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I must admit that I am a bit surprised by the direction this debate has taken. Frankly, I was not expecting that there would be so much agreement on this motion. I listened to our Liberal colleague's passionate speech and I found myself wondering what, exactly, we disagree on. I took another look at the motion we are debating today.
It states, and I quote:
That the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration report the following to the House: We (a) condemn the unwarranted and unprovoked attack on Ukraine, which was ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a clear violation of international law....
Unless I am mistaken, we all appear to agree on this part, so that is clearly not where the issue is.
I will continue reading the motion, as follows:
(b) call on the Government of Canada to support Ukrainians and people residing in Ukraine who are impacted by this conflict and ensure that it is prepared to process immigration applications on an urgent basis without compromising needs in other areas....
It states, “on an urgent basis without compromising needs in other areas”. Perhaps this is where things start to become problematic, but it seems to me that the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration set out an important parameter in this second point, so I do not think that should be the case. What then do the Liberals have a problem with?
In the next point, it states:
(c) implement visa-free travel from Ukraine to Canada, including by the rapid issuance of an electronic travel authorization (eTA), and increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis.
Before I comment on that, I would like to point out the extraordinary work that our colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean has done on this file. Unfortunately, he is unable to be with us today because he is being cautious, I would say.
I applaud his work. Point (c), which calls on the government to “implement visa-free travel from Ukraine to Canada”, was the initial proposal. My colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean and our Liberal colleagues, among others, added “including by the rapid issuance of an electronic travel authorization”. Rather than eliminate visas entirely, this at least maintains the requirement for an electronic travel authorization. That does not seem to be good enough for our Liberal friends, who were the only committee members to vote against the motion despite the requirement introduced by our colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean.
Point (c) goes on to say: “increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis”.
Are we to understand, based on our colleague's fiery speech, that the Liberals have no intention of increasing resources? Are they saying that they think we have enough staff to handle this kind of situation?
If so, that is worrisome, to put it mildly. The outcome of the federal government's efforts to welcome Afghan refugees is a clear indication that performance has been underwhelming so far.
The Liberals promised to welcome 40,000 Afghan refugees. Fewer than 10,000 have made it to Canada so far. This means that, despite the best intentions, if the means and resources are not there, those intentions will not translate into concrete results.
We do not need to wait another three months to reach this conclusion. We already know that. We only have to look at what happened with the Afghan refugees to realize that not deploying the necessary resources means that we will not achieve the objectives set. Exactly the same thing is likely to happen with Ukrainian refugees.
What, then, is the government's problem? Is it related to the call for visa-free travel, while maintaining the compromise and fallback proposal made by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, namely, maintaining the requirement for electronic travel authorization?
Is that the problem on the Liberal side, or do they have a problem with the second part of point (c), that is, the call to “increase staffing resources so that the existing backlog for all immigration streams is not further impacted by this humanitarian crisis”? Frankly, if that is really the sticking point, then that worries me, to say the least.
The Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and the parliamentary secretary quite rightly recognized that my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean is working very hard with them on this file. He is our citizenship and immigration critic, and from the outset, he was prepared to find solutions, collaborate and co-operate.
The Liberals are not really used to that. The Prime Minister stated that things have been very tense in Parliament and that it is paralyzed, unresponsive and dysfunctional. However, what the Prime Minister may not have understood is that since the election, the Bloc Québécois has constantly repeated that it is willing to work constructively with the government. That is what motivated our colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean to respond proactively to the significant humanitarian crisis under way in Ukraine. He came up with proposals.
His first proposal was a three-year extension of the work and student visas of Ukrainians already in Canada. The government acted quickly on that point. We commend and applaud it. That is wonderful. This was a Bloc Québécois proposal that quickly received a favourable response from the government. When this government is determined to act and takes its head out of the sand, it can do things quickly.
The second proposal put forward by my colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean was to drop the visa requirement. This suggestion did not go anywhere and quickly faced obstacles. We then realized that the government did not really want to drop this requirement.
As the leader of the Bloc Québécois pointed out, thousands of people are entering via Roxham Road without presenting any travel document, visa or biometric test whatsoever. During the entire pandemic, it was proven that it is possible to close off that route. The government has now decided to reopen the floodgates and has no security concerns about doing it. People are streaming in, no problem. The Prime Minister is rolling out the welcome mat for them.
However, the same does not seem to apply to the poor Ukrainians who are fleeing their country, which has been unjustly invaded by Russia. The government said it would speed up the process, but it took weeks just to announce that accelerated process, which, by all accounts, is not that much faster anyway.
Let us put ourselves in the shoes of these poor Ukrainian women, who are the most likely to have taken refuge in Poland, Moldova or Romania. They would love to come to Canada and get as far away from the conflict as possible.
Canada is asking them to fill out an application for a temporary resident visa, which, according to experts, can take up to three hours for someone who is proficient in English or French. These people are unlikely to be proficient in English or French, but they are still required to fill out the form or else they will not be allowed in.
Then, these people need to set up a meeting at one of the visa application centres to submit their biometrics. I remind members that this is an emergency and we need to get a huge number of people here, but they are being asked to show up between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. or between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. if they want to be able to come over here.
On top of that, they are required to pay $185 in fees, even though some are destitute. They are still being asked to cough up the money. The government says that it will refund the fees, but these people still need to pay up front without knowing when or how the money will be refunded.
These are the documents that the government requires: bank statement, official ID, passport and travel insurance. However, I am not sure that people took the time, especially if their house was destroyed, to collect all their documents thinking that the Canadian government might ask for them. Will these people take the time to search through the rubble of their homes for their passports and bank statements? What the government is asking the Ukrainian refugees to produce so they can access the fast-track procedure is not necessarily possible.
I will point out that, to date, of the 40,000 Afghans we promised to take in, we have only welcomed 8,580 so far. There is therefore cause to worry about this fast-track procedure when it comes to visas because, in any case, it has not worked that well so far, whatever the measures implemented by the government.
As for visa-free travel, there seems to be a security concern eating away at the government: It is afraid that some nasty Russians could sneak in. I figure that those who sneak in will not be on site to fight the Ukrainians, but that is another story.
The government is very concerned about security. However, no fewer than 91 countries are allowing Ukrainians to cross their borders without a visa. I guess these 91 countries do not have the same security concerns as Canada.
Also, the government told us that it could not really lift the visa requirement because it would take 12 weeks to adapt the IRCC’s computer system. The IRCC minister said that himself. Perhaps if it had started earlier, it would be about ready to remove the visa requirement.
I would like to point out that, like Canada, Ireland normally does not authorize Ukrainian nationals to enter the country without a visa. However, Ireland was able to lift the requirement in a few hours, rather than a few days or weeks. How is it that Ireland can do in a few hours what Canada can only do in 12 weeks?
Rather than working on allowing visa-free travel, IRCC has worked very hard for weeks to implement the fast-track process I just described. Perhaps it should have gotten off its butt and worked on immediately lifting the visa requirement? I think that would have been the right thing to do.
The government seems to be paralyzed by the security issue, so we proposed another approach. Since the government thinks the biometrics are absolutely necessary for security reasons, we wondered whether we could avoid doing the biometric scans over there, quickly and safely bring the refugees to Canada, and then do the biometrics here. This still seems to be too complicated, though, since the government flatly opposed this other proposal from my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean.
Since the Bloc is always in solution mode, we proposed a humanitarian airlift. We figured that we could ask Canadian airlines for help and they would be only too happy to oblige. For instance, Air Transat has already raised its hand and said it was prepared to send planes if the Government of Canada was interested.
The Minister of International Development told us that his government wants to charter flights for medical assistance, instead of using Canadian Armed Forces planes. Air Transat raised its hand and asked what it could do. We do not know what the holdup is, but we are still looking for the answer. There is no holdup anymore, since Air Transat is prepared to volunteer. It said so publicly. The government has not yet understood that Air Transat is prepared to do it, free of charge, believe it or not.
However, there seems to be some issue with the idea of arranging a humanitarian airlift by chartering planes to Poland and flying them back full of Ukrainian refugees who could quickly find refuge and safety in Canada and Quebec.
I guess some people are wondering whether the planes are going to fly there empty. It would be expensive for them to fly there empty and return to Canada with people aboard.
My colleague from Drummond had a brilliant idea. He said that we did not have to fly the planes empty because the Ukrainian Canadian Congress is working like mad to collect essential supplies. It has gathered tons of supplies from all over the place, and it is running out of room to store them. We are asking that it charter flights to ship the items to Poland and neighbouring countries.
We could organize a humanitarian airlift by filling the planes with the supplies gathered thanks to the generosity of Canadians and Quebeckers. We could fill these planes up, send them to Poland and bring them back full of people. We could fill them with Ukrainian refugees. However, apparently, that is still too complicated. This was another proposal made by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, and it got a flat no.
So far, the Canadian government has ignored the proposal to set up a humanitarian airlift, yet I find this proposal extremely reasonable.
The government is losing nothing by waiting, since my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean is still looking for positive proposals. It can rest assured that he will continue to make proposals in the coming days and weeks. He will not give up in the face of the government's indolence. I had the opportunity to chat with him before coming here, and I know that he is looking for new solutions, that he is not done suggesting ideas.
I am having a hard time understanding our colleague's inflamed, even incensed, response to the Conservatives' proposal. All in all, it is a very reasonable proposal. Personally, I see it as the Conservatives making an effort to reach across the aisle. The Bloc Québécois is always reaching across the aisle.
How can there be a partisan debate on a motion like this one? It is just bad faith to play partisan politics with this issue and reproach the Conservatives for having dared to ask that the House concur in the report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.
The Liberals see it as heresy, but it is no such thing. I read out the motion. Unless our colleague is saying that he does not want to condemn the unjustified attack or that he does not want to support the Ukrainians, we can only conclude that the problem is that we are asking the government to waive visas, while maintaining the requirement for an electronic travel authorization, which was a compromise, an alternative solution, proposed by my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean. The government is unwilling to add more staff to process applications. That is the government's real problem. That is why it reacted in such an inflamed and incensed manner to the Conservatives' perfectly reasonable motion. The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of the motion.
2526 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 11:23:17 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first, it does not take a pipeline to send fertilizer to Ukraine.
Second, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz himself says that Germany should reduce its dependence on oil and start transitioning to green energy as soon as possible. The Conservatives are offering to sell him more oil. However, that is not what is needed. The Germans themselves are saying this is not the direction they should take.
Why would we not heed the advice of our European allies in the context of this crisis and provide them what they need to begin the green transition? Quebec is especially well placed to help in that regard.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 11:12:06 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to point out that I will be splitting my time with my colleague from Repentigny.
Today, we are being asked once again to participate in a very important debate on the situation unfolding in Ukraine. To present the Bloc Québécois's position on the Conservative motion, I would like to read it point by point.
The member for Wellington—Halton Hills is proposing “That the House: (a) condemn President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation for their unprovoked, illegal attack and invasion of Ukraine”.
We completely agree with point (a). However, we were expecting that, a little later, they would make suggestions about possible additional sanctions to punish Vladimir Putin and Russia for the unprovoked and illegal invasion of Ukraine. We were also expecting them to propose additional sanctions on the oligarchs.
The member then suggests that the House “(b) stand with Ukraine, the people of Ukraine and Canadians in the Ukrainian community”.
Again, no one could be against that. We have said many times over that we stand with the people of Ukraine. We are not going to stop standing with them now. We would have liked to see some proposals, though. What more can we do on top of the humanitarian assistance we have already sent to support the people of Ukraine? Will the government increase the $10 million cap it set to match the donations Canadians make to the Red Cross? We are waiting to hear.
Will the government lift the visa requirements that are still in place for Ukrainian refugees? These people are fleeing with a small suitcase, can barely find a place to sleep, and yet they are being asked to fill in 14 copies of forms in a language that is probably not their first language. They also have to pay fees to be able to seek refuge in Canada. As the Bloc Québécois leader said, Canada is allowing people to cross the border at Roxham Road without a visa but cannot lift the visa requirement for Ukrainian refugees.
We were expecting the Conservative motion to propose ways to meaningfully demonstrate our solidarity with Ukraine, the Ukrainian people and Ukrainian Canadians. We then jumped to point (c) thinking that we would see proposals for sanctions to punish Russia, Vladimir Putin and the oligarchs who support him. We expected to see proposals in point (c) to help Ukrainians, Ukraine and our fellow Canadians of Ukrainian origin, but no. What then did we find in point (c)?
It suggests that the House “(c) call on the Government of Canada to undertake measures to ensure new natural gas pipelines can be approved and built to Atlantic tidewater, recognizing energy as vital to Canadian and European defence and security, allowing Canadian natural gas to displace Russian natural gas in Europe, and being consistent with environmental goals in the transition to non-emitting sources of energy”.
If that is not a basely self-serving argument, I do not know what is. Honestly, even if we decided to go that route and build pipelines, despite the fact that it would first of all go against the idea that we need to phase out fossil fuels, the conflict would, hopefully, be long over by then.
What would be the purpose then, other than to export the dirty oil produced in western Canada? It would have no other purpose, because our German friends cannot rely on Canadian oil and gas to replace Russian oil. That is a bogus argument. What we find in point (c) is a bad idea masquerading as a solution.
More than that, it is an idea that would hurt Ukrainians. Why?
This morning, our friend Paul Journet, in La Presse, reported that some oil companies in western Canada are owned by Russian oligarchs who are still free from Canadian government sanctions.
I would have expected the Conservatives to tell us that they are also going to impose sanctions on the oligarchs who hold shares in western Canadian gas companies. No, they are not proposing sanctions against these oligarchs.
However, if we help these oligarchs, we are helping Russia and therefore hurting Ukraine. This contradicts points (a) and (b) in the motion that the House “condemn President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation for their unprovoked, illegal attack and invasion of Ukraine” and that we “stand with Ukraine, the people of Ukraine and Canadians in the Ukrainian community”.
What the Conservatives are proposing means giving more cash to Russian oligarchs who have shares in western Canadian oil companies. Is that how we want to help Ukrainians? Is that the great idea of our Conservative friends to help Ukrainians?
All the Conservatives want to do is help their oil industry, period. There is no other explanation.
I can name names. How about Roman Abramovitch, who owns 28% of Evraz, which supplies steel for pipelines? That is interesting. How about Igor Makarov, Coastal GasLink's primary shareholder? These are oligarchs who are still dodging sanctions, and we would sure like to know why the Government of Canada has not yet imposed sanctions on them.
If only the Conservatives had put forward the idea of punishing these oligarchs too. Let me reiterate: The chief of staff for Alexei Navalny gave the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development a list of oligarchs who should be sanctioned, and that was long before the invasion of Ukraine. We had that list. The Government of Canada had that list. When will it impose sanctions on all those oligarchs?
Today, the Conservatives actually want us to send more cash their way and help them help Vladimir Putin invade Ukraine. We wholeheartedly agree with parts (a) and (b) of the motion, but how could we possibly support the part (c) the Conservatives have put forward in this motion? Never in a million years would we support that kind of thing because supporting the Conservatives' proposal would hurt Ukraine.
If the Conservatives had been the slightest bit reasonable and honest in their desire to help, given the climate crisis as well, they would have said that this proposal will need to be accompanied by energetic measures, no pun intended, to undertake the green transition and significantly reduce the amount of oil and gas in our economy. Once again, they come up with no such proposal. They are simply proposing that we consume even more oil and gas and export it to other countries so they can continue consuming it, which runs completely counter to the idea that we need to start the transition immediately.
Allow me to reiterate: The Bloc Québécois is voting against this motion. We take no pleasure in doing so, but we have no choice. My colleague from Repentigny will most certainly provide even more reasons why, from an environmental perspective, the Bloc Québécois cannot subscribe to a motion like this one.
1171 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 11:10:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, in 1994, Ukraine agreed to get rid of its nuclear weapons as part of one of the three Budapest memoranda. Three world powers, namely the United States, Russia and the United Kingdom, acted as guarantors. This memorandum also stipulated that the countries were to respect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty within its existing borders and refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
Belarus is hinting that it could renounce its non-nuclear status, in violation of its commitment in the Budapest memorandum, and I would like to know whether my colleague agrees that Russia is violating the terms of the memorandum with respect to Ukraine through its present actions and that the United States and the United Kingdom have a responsibility to Ukraine under that same memorandum.
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 10:34:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I completely agree with my colleague, and I mentioned this in my speech. The problem with Ukraine and Russia is that two philosophies and two world views are clashing. We must defend the side that prioritizes human rights and the rights of peoples.
45 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 10:32:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I was speaking about cardinal values earlier. In a democracy, freedom of expression and freedom of the press are cardinal values. We must always be extremely cautious and careful when we decide to circumscribe, regulate or limit freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
As the courts have ruled over the past few decades, there comes a time when reasonable limits must be imposed. When it is clear that there is a propaganda campaign, we must intervene.
I will end by reiterating that the main victims of this propaganda, this disinformation, are not Canadians, the French or the British, but Russians themselves. We must seek to provide information about what is really happening in Ukraine at present so that Russians can clearly see just how unjust and undemocratic their government is.
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 10:13:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, God knows how much I wanted to believe in peace. I still believe in it today, because there is no other way out besides peace. We must remain hopeful that these rather strange negotiations currently taking place will bring an end to this conflict, and the suffering it is causing, as quickly as possible.
We must remember that during the previous take-note debate on the situation in Ukraine, our party and the government had some differences of opinion about the imminence of the conflict. Of course, those differences of opinion did nothing to prevent the conflict from breaking out. Ukraine has been unfairly attacked by Russia.
I told the Minister of Foreign Affairs that if conflict were to break out, the government could count on the full support of the Bloc and that we would stand in solidarity in terms of our desire to punish Russia and show our full support for the people of Ukraine. There is solidarity among us in the House, exemplary solidarity among the allies, and solidarity with the Ukrainian people, whose courage and resilience are truly admirable.
On Saturday, some colleagues and I met with Ukrainian colleagues. We spent a few minutes with some of them. One of our colleagues told us that the president and the deputies would stay in the capital. It would have been so easy for those parliamentarians to go back to their constituencies, to return to their families and the people they represent, but this is symbolic of how courageous Ukrainians are in the face of adversity, in the face of this unequal combat they are confronted with.
We simply have no choice but to support the Ukrainian people, first because this country is home to the world's third-largest Ukrainian community. These are people we connect with daily, who have family over there. We share and feel their anguish, their sadness, their concern.
We have no choice but to support the Ukrainian people because they have been subjected to an unfair attack that is also an attack against democracy, against freedom, against us.
Finally, we have no choice because the courage that the Ukrainian people are showing compels us to support them. We, by which I mean the Government of Canada and the west in general, have so far deployed a battery of measures to punish Russia, but also to punish Belarus, which has been complicit in the invasion of Ukraine. I mentioned today that we might want to take that a bit further.
As I said earlier, the Russians would not be at the gates of Kyiv if President Lukachenko had not allowed Russia to use his territory as a base to attack Ukraine from the north.
I have to say that I was, quite frankly, impressed by the speed and vigour of the response by western countries. I must admit that I had doubts. In the early hours of the invasion, we were hearing some reactions from Europe. Certain countries were saying that some of their companies should be excluded from sanctions, and that if Russian banks were banned from SWIFT they would have a hard time conducting transactions. It was starting to look like there might be a chink in the armour, which was worrying, but the west pulled itself together and the allies took action. We have to admire how quickly and strongly countries have responded, but there is still a lot to do.
I heard our Green Party colleague talk about certain oligarchs. Leonid Volkov, who is Alexei Navalny's chief of staff, appeared before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade and told us that we needed to take action. He gave us a list of oligarchs who should be sanctioned. Several of those on the list have still not been sanctioned.
I am pleased to hear my colleagues in government tell us that everything is on the table. If the government decides to move forward with this, it will continue to have our support, because we must do more. We cannot tolerate this unacceptable aggression towards Ukraine.
We must definitely provide all our support to the Ukrainian people, as we have started doing. This means providing military equipment, non-lethal as well as lethal. Ukrainians need it, as they are facing the second largest army on the planet. We are also talking about foodstuffs, drugs and medical equipment. We must rise to the challenge and give Ukrainians what they need.
We must also welcome Ukrainian refugees. There are currently half a million of them gathered in neighbouring countries, and they are asking for help. The leader of the Bloc Québécois pointed out that if we can accept people at Roxham Road without a visa, why should we continue to enforce entrance formalities for Ukrainian refugees and make them complete all the formalities for receiving a visa? We must remove these requirements and make it easier for Ukrainians who wish to find refuge in Canada, temporarily or permanently, to enter our country.
We have to cut Russian propaganda off at the knees by removing Russia Today from Canadian airwaves. Speaking of Russian propaganda, the Russian people need to be informed. I cannot help but be amazed at the thousands of people in the streets of Moscow, St. Petersburg and other Russian cities risking arrest the moment they hit the streets to protest this war against a people that did nothing to deserve it, a people whose destiny they have shared for over 75 years.
Many Russians do not understand, and many of those who do not understand are speaking out against what they feel is unacceptable. How many Russian families will be bereaved? How many soldiers' bodies will be returned to their families as casualties of an unjust conflict?
As I said today, there may be hope in the Russia that is making itself heard today despite pressure from the powers that be.
In addition, as we heard from—
999 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 7:27:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was starting to feel like I was too small for you to notice me.
Anyway, earlier today I asked the government whether the same sanctions that have so far been imposed on Russia should also be imposed on Belarus, which has been complicit in this invasion. The Russians would not be at Kyiv's doorstep today if Belarus had not given them access to invade Ukraine from the north.
My question for the Bloc Québécois leader is the following. Should we not impose the same sanctions on Belarus as have so far been imposed on Russia?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 2:41:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the message sent by NATO countries must be historic and unequivocal. I will say it again: The price for starting a war must be as high as possible, and the aggressors must be isolated. All aggressors must be targeted.
Belarus has disgraced itself once again by allowing Russia to use its territory to launch its invasion of Ukraine. Minsk is reportedly even about to send in its own troops.
Will the minister take steps to convince her partners to apply each of the sanctions imposed so far on Russia on Belarus as well?
95 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 2:16:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the world has been watching what has been happening in Ukraine over the past few days with shock, concern, anger and outrage. Everyone is haunted by the ghost of war. These fears are founded, and it is hard to find hope in these dark times.
However, hope can be found where one might least expect it: in the streets of Moscow, St. Petersburg and places all across Russia, where thousands of Russians are courageously demonstrating. According to the AFP, over the past few days, Russian police have arrested 6,000 people. Nevertheless, the rallying cry of “no war” and the voices calling for peace continue to echo across the country.
The Russian people did not invade Ukraine; the Russian government did. Let us not conflate the two. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to commend these brave women and men who are risking their own freedom to march for peace, for Ukrainians, for Russians and for the world.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
