- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Louis-Saint-Laurent
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $128,105.00
- Government Page
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on legislation concerning the free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine, for a variety of reasons. I love my country, I love Ukraine and I am a strong supporter of free trade. This agreement was created under a Conservative government. Later we will have the opportunity to come back to that. As a good Conservative, I support entering into free trade agreements with as many countries as possible, provided they are good countries, of course.
When we talk about Ukraine, we cannot disregard the fact that this country has proven to humanity as a whole that resilience is the defining trait of these people and this nation, or that their strength of character only grew clearer when the Russian ogre outrageously invited itself into that country. Putin's illegal attack on Ukraine made people realize that, unfortunately, in the 21st century, we can still experience the same atrocities as in the First and Second World Wars, what we would call traditional wars. Nevertheless, the strong, proud people of Ukraine have been able to withstand the crass and heinous attacks from Putin's Russia, and they are heading for victory. We are all hoping for that outcome, and above all, we are hoping for an end to the hostilities, because there are no winners in war. There are only losers who lose friends, loved ones, family, and people who suffer under the illegal bombing. When we think of Ukraine, our thoughts are with the people who are currently experiencing the horrors of the war.
As a resident of Quebec City, I was very touched by the young pee-wee hockey players who came to Quebec City despite the war, to play in the cadet league hockey tournament. In front of a very emotional and united crowd of Quebec City residents, they demonstrated that kids can still be kids and still have fun, even if their country is at war. That also reminds me that I invited two young players from the pee-wee tournament, two Ukrainians, to be here in the House when President Zelenskyy addressed Canadians. They also had the privilege of shaking hands with their president, and I was very proud of that moment, which was tremendously emotional for these young people.
Ukraine and Canada have a lot in common. We obviously have the same climate. We also have a very strong agricultural tradition. It is not for nothing that the Ukrainian flag represents the sky and the land, using the same colours we find in Saskatchewan. It is no fluke. There is wheat, of course, but beyond that, there are historical connections that unite us through immigration. Several speakers today reiterated that Canada has the third-largest Ukrainian population after Ukraine and Russia, with 1.3 million Ukrainian Canadians. Some are descendants of the huge community that came to settle here in Canada at the turn of the 20th century and in the 1920s and 1930s. They have enriched Canada with their presence, their culture and especially their extraordinary work effort. It has to be said that we also share a passion for hockey. We are not Nordic countries for nothing. We are not countries that love the snow for nothing. We have this fine tradition, as I was saying earlier, that was beautifully highlighted at the International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament.
I cannot help but think that Canada could be doing even more for Ukraine. If we had made the necessary decisions seven or eight years ago, we could have helped Ukraine tremendously with the economic aspect of its war against Russia, and we could have helped our allies, especially European countries, support Ukraine instead of helping Russia by buying its natural resources. In that regard, I have to point out how painful it is to recall that, eight years ago, there were nearly 15 liquefied natural gas projects and ports to export it. Unfortunately, for eight years, for dogmatic and ideological reasons, the current government has done everything in its power to ensure that these 15 projects would not succeed. Imagine if, instead, we had been led for eight years by a government with a vision for the future, one that wanted the whole world to benefit from the bounty we have here when it comes to natural resources. We know how to develop them in an intelligent and environmentally friendly way, with the ethics that have always characterized Canadians. No, instead of having access to our natural resources, countries now have to knock on Russia's door to get liquefied natural gas.
That is crazy. We could be a source of pride on the international stage, but this government did nothing to properly develop Canada's liquefied natural gas potential for eight years because of ideological reasons. We may be speaking with emotion about Ukraine today, but we cannot turn a blind eye to that reality. The great country of Germany is caught between a rock and a hard place and has no choice but to ask Russia for energy, when we have energy but prefer to keep it under the ground. That is unfortunate. It is not just Canada and Canadians who are losing out, but also the people of Ukraine and Germany, who would have been happy to have access to our natural resources.
Since we are talking about free trade, I would remind the House that free trade is a defining feature of the party that I represent, the Conservative Party. Let us remember that the key steps toward free trade began with the free trade agreement with the United States. In 1988 and 1989, we had a prime minister who had vision and who put everything in place for an agreement with the United States. The free trade agreement was approved by the public in the 1988 election. We are grateful to the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney for his vision. He was likely the greatest prime minister of the 20th century.
Later on, there were the colossal efforts made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to sign free trade agreements with other countries. I want to commend the outstanding contribution of the member for Abbotsford. During the final five years of the Conservative Party's time in government, he was the architect of our country's exceptional development in the area of free trade. He was the one who succeeded in negotiating agreements with Europe, America and the Pacific.
Under the direction of the former minister of international trade, the current member for Abbotsford, we made our mark on nearly five continents. The sun almost never set on this empire of positive economic free trade and wealth creation. We believe in free trade because our country is a large, wonderful place, brimming with natural resources. Above all, we are proud of how smart and hard-working Canada's 40 million citizens are.
Let us keep one thing in mind, though. When a local market has 40 million people in it and a nearby neighbour has almost 350 million, maybe it takes a bit more. That is why our country is, in a sense, condemned to always having free trade agreements so we can open up our market and export Canada's know-how, our natural resources, our energy and our products, which are produced so efficiently thanks to Canadian workers and Canadian ingenuity. That means we need free trade agreements.
Our party, the Conservative Party, was the architect of free trade in the 20th and early 21st centuries. It is the party of free trade. As everyone knows, we are always open to the idea of win-win agreements. That is key to a good free trade agreement. As one of my old bosses used to tell me all the time, a good agreement is an honest agreement. The idea is not to make sneaky attempts to put one over on the other party. The whole point is for it to be win-win. That is how outstanding free trade agreements, like the ones the member for Abbotsford negotiated when he was international trade minister, are made.
I see that time has run out. How very sad that I have to stop there.
1379 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I wanted to pay my respects to my hon. colleague from Foothills.
He demonstrates, without a shadow of the doubt, with real clarity, how important it is for our farmers to have the free facility to address some issues, compared to what they have in our counterpart, in America, or somewhere else, with fertilizer, just to give one example.
How could Canada have helped Ukraine and the world if this government had not shut down 15 projects of LNG that we had eight years ago? None of them have been accomplished under the watch of this Liberal government.
100 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to greet my colleague from Pontiac, with whom I am pleased and honoured to sit on the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. The hon. member rightly said that this free trade agreement deals with a number of issues, in particular the environment.
We are all aware of the effects of climate change that must be addressed, and since humans helped create climate change, humans must take steps to reduce pollution.
Based on what my colleague knows about what is happening in Ukraine, what should be the main focus of Canada's action to help Ukraine rebuild, from an environmental perspective?
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 8:55:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to both thank and congratulate the member for Lac-Saint-Jean once again for the quality of his speech. He talked a lot about leadership. I would be remiss if I did not point out the leadership he showed some time ago in pushing for an airlift to bring refugees here. I say that with all the pride and honesty that comes with being a member of Parliament. We are all very pleased that three planes have arrived. As the saying goes, this is just the tip of the iceberg. We hope it is just the beginning.
The member highlighted the fact that Canada has distinguished itself over the years by always being on the right side of history and in fact by leading the charge on the right side. One example that comes to mind is Mr. Pearson and the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney's efforts to fight apartheid, even though it upset our main allies, namely England and the U.S.
The member spoke about leadership. What urgent action does he think the government should be taking to help the Ukrainian people?
190 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/22 11:39:06 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the House leader for the official opposition, for his very informative speech on parliamentary procedure, which is what we are talking about today.
Today we are debating a change to Standing Order 30 from the Standing Orders of the House of Commons. This standing order, which has been around since 1927, provides for the Speaker to read a four-sentence prayer. This has been a tradition in the House since 1877.
Yesterday I timed how long it takes to read the prayer. It took exactly 28 seconds. If I stumbled in reading it, it took 31 seconds. That is what we are debating today.
Allow me to give a little context.
Right before the doors open to visitors coming into the House of Commons and before the debates start being broadcast on TV, the Speaker enters the House and sits in the chair. The discussions happen in camera. The Speaker reads a prayer that, as I just pointed out, lasts about 30 seconds. The prayer is then followed by a moment of reflection. That is the tradition. Once that is done, the doors are opened.
I have been present for this procedure hundreds of times. I cannot recall anyone ever taking issue with it. The House reflects the Canadian mosaic in all its glory. We have people who are atheists and others who are Christian, Muslim or of any other faith. I do not recall anyone ever feeling uncomfortable during that ceremony. That is how I see this.
I have focused my attention on two aspects of the Bloc Québécois approach. The Bloc Québécois is suggesting that we abolish prayer and replace it with a moment of reflection. That would be like running headlong into an open door to try to open it. We already have a moment of reflection. The Bloc Québécois is suggesting that we replace something with something that we already have. It is not exactly a minor factor in the equation.
The other factor is that changing the Standing Orders of the House of Commons usually has to be done through the committee of the office of parliamentary operations, which meets once a week and is made up of all of the House leaders, the whips, the security teams and the Speaker. This committee meets in camera to debate certain proposals and traditionally makes decisions by consensus. This is a well-established standard procedure.
I am not saying that the Bloc Québécois is going against the rules. On the contrary, the Bloc has the right to do what it wants on its opposition day, but I will get back to that later.
As my colleague, the House leader for the official opposition, mentioned earlier, the proper course of action is to debate this topic in the appropriate forum, every week that the committee meets. The committee of the office of parliamentary operations favours consensus and lets all political parties express their opinion. The Bloc Québécois decided to do things differently.
In my opinion, there are two somewhat surprising points of view. First, I find it surprising that the Bloc Québécois chose to use such a procedure, since this decision should be made by consensus. Second, it suggests replacing the prayer with a moment of reflection, when there already is one. I find that a little surprising.
There is something even more surprising, though. I have had the great privilege of being in politics, of having been elected to represent the people of Louis-Saint-Laurent, for almost seven years. Before that, I was an member of Quebec's National Assembly. Since I was also a journalist, I have been following political news for years. I can honestly say that no one has ever mentioned the prayer in the House of Commons to me. Some people may be concerned about it, and I certainly do not want to trivialize their concerns. In my 35 or 40 years of following politics, as a journalist and an elected member, I have never had anyone tell me that there was something wrong with saying a prayer in the House of Commons. That never happened, but that does not mean it is wrong to consider the matter. Now, the Bloc Québécois has introduced a motion.
However, there is one concern we hear about often. In my opinion, the one thing all Canadians are concerned about is inflation. Everyone is affected by it.
I would have liked to see a motion moved by the hon. member for Mirabel, who is an influential Bloc Québécois recruit from the last election and a major asset for his team. We could have debated concerns about inflation, problems caused by inflation and solutions proposed by the Bloc Québécois, but that is not what happened. Rather than talking about inflation with a motion moved by the hon. member for Mirabel, we are talking about prayer in the House of Commons.
We could have been discussing housing prices, which are continuing to skyrocket and which are a concern for Canadians. Young people do not have access to the dream we have all had in our lives, the privilege we had to be able to purchase a property when it was affordable. That time has passed. What solutions would the Bloc, the governing party, the official opposition and the NDP have proposed? We could have debated the subject all day, but instead we are talking about the 28-second prayer in the House of Commons.
We could have been talking about the carbon tax or the surging gas prices. Today, Quebeckers woke up to the news that gas prices are now over $2 a litre. Who would have believed it? The hon. member for Joliette has been sitting in the House since 2015 and is doing a good job. He could have raised this issue, and we could have debated it today. However, the hon. member for Joliette cannot talk about the cost of gas or inflation, despite that fact that he is a financial expert, because today we are talking about prayer in the House of Commons.
We could have discussed the 76th day of the war in Ukraine following the Russian invasion. Our Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs travelled to Kyiv this week, so it is a topical subject. We all want this war to end but, unfortunately, the ogre in the Kremlin has decided to continue attacking Ukrainians. We could have debated that in the House, but instead, the Bloc decided to talk about the 28-second prayer that is recited in the House of Commons.
The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean has asked dozens of genuinely interesting questions about Ukraine, specifically about how to get refugees to Canada. He has been asking these questions non-stop for weeks and weeks. The Bloc could have taken the opportunity today to dedicate its entire opposition day to addressing the topic that the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean has brought up from every angle since the very start. Instead, we are talking about the prayer.
We could have addressed this issue but, unfortunately for the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean and for the entire House of Commons, we did not. It would have given us an opportunity to explain how the government mishandled the issue. Are my colleagues aware that, yesterday, Newfoundland received Ukrainian refugees who landed here in Canada, in Newfoundland, thanks to the government of that province? The federal government is dragging its feet when it comes to letting refugees in, as the hon. Bloc Québécois member for Lac-Saint-Jean brings up every day, but Newfoundland managed. It would have been interesting to hear the Bloc Québécois talk about that all day, but instead we are talking about prayer in the House of Commons.
There is not one member of Parliament in Canada right now whose riding office is not being flooded with calls from constituents having problems with their passports. We are constantly asking questions about it here in the House, and we talk about specific cases in each of our ridings. That is a topic we could have discussed, as we did yesterday, when we brought up the problems with ArriveCAN that are affecting Canadians with travel plans.
The tourist season is almost upon us. Tourism is important in my region in Quebec City. ArriveCAN has to be flexible and ready for all Canadians, but that is not the case. That is a topic we could have discussed, but, unfortunately, we will not be discussing it today.
Interestingly, yesterday during question period, two members rose, namely the Bloc Québécois whip and the hon. member for La Pointe-de-l’Île. They asked questions about anglicization and the evidence that the French language is in danger. We could have debated that today in the House, but the Bloc decided otherwise.
What about the hot topic that is sadly affecting young people in some regions of Quebec, namely gun violence? Yesterday during question period, the hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord raised the issue because there had been a shooting in the Laval region. There was another shooting yesterday in Villeray. That is a topic that the hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord, a veteran MP who has served since 2015, could very well have raised in the House for debate, so that we could get to the bottom of the issue and suggest ways to improve the situation. Instead, the Bloc decided to talk about something else entirely. That is its choice.
1648 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 12:37:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as we gather here in the House of Commons, in Ottawa, to debate funding for national defence, our thoughts are with the people of Ukraine, who, for the past 41 days, have been suffering, although very courageously, the agonizing pain inflicted by the terrible aggression of Putin's Russia. I want to emphasize that I said “Putin's Russia” because it is not the same thing as the people of Russia. We will talk about that a little later.
We are here to talk about funding for national defence and how to meet the target of 2% of gross domestic product, or GDP, set by NATO in 2014. As we debate this, we are just a few days away from commemorating the 105th anniversary of Canada's capture of Vimy Ridge. The hon. Minister of Veterans Affairs and the hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo will be in attendance to commemorate the event.
On April 9, 2014, at 5:30 in the morning, 15,000 Canadian soldiers attacked the German enemy to take Vimy Ridge, something our allies had failed to do during the many years of war. According to Brigadier-General Alexander Ross, a nation was born as a result of that battle.
In 1917, Canada engaged in direct, co-ordinated combat on a military battlefield with troops from across the nation for the first time. The four divisions of the Canadian Expeditionary Force deployed to Europe, to France, during the First World War included people from all across Canada, including British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec.
In all, 15,000 Canadian soldiers participated in this terrible battle, including Cree soldier Henry Norwest, a sniper who received the Military Medal, and Jeremiah Jones, a Black Canadian soldier who singlehandedly captured a unit of German machine gunners. For many historians, Canada was born on the Vimy battlefield.
During the Second World War, Canada once again played a major role in liberating the world from tyranny. A few years later, in 1949, NATO was created to bring together European countries, Canada and the United States to monitor, but not fight, the Soviet empire, whose intentions were becoming worrisome, to put it mildly.
In 2014, at the Wales Summit, a very important and historic conference and the reason behind today's debate, NATO's 30 members committed to allocating 2% of their GDP to national defence by 2024. The objective was to support the military and to ensure that it would be ready if something went wrong and war was to break out again.
Unfortunately, war did break out. A war is currently being waged, and we did not meet this NATO target. It is embarrassing for Canadians to see that we are lagging behind. Of the 30 NATO countries, Canada ranks 25th in terms of defence spending as a share of GDP.
That brings us to the crimes currently being committed by Putin's Russia in Ukraine. Just a few days ago, the entire world was shaken; men and women of goodwill were sick to discover the tragedy of mass graves and civilians killed in Bucha. We saw, in all of its ugliness and horror, the extent to which Putin's Russia went there crassly to exterminate this very strong people who are very proud and very protective of their sovereignty.
Unfortunately, war criminals will always want to conquer countries in the worst way, whether by attacking schools and hospitals or by literally sending civilians to slaughter—I am deeply sorry to use that word.
It has been 41 straight days, but fortunately, we are all moved by the extraordinary resilience of this people who are standing up for themselves. We were very proud to welcome, here in the House, President Zelenskyy, who delivered a speech that will remain etched in my memory and in the memory of all those who attended. Obviously Putin wants to recreate the power of the Soviet empire. That is where we as member countries of NATO have a responsibility. I would remind the House that NATO had its equivalent, the Warsaw Pact.
Where do things stand in Canada? Currently 1.36% of Canada's GDP is invested in national defence. That is not enough. As I mentioned earlier, we rank 25th out of 30 countries. We are seeing a decline and delays in funding but also in equipment and military force, which we should honour. We will always be indebted to these men and women who dedicate themselves to the Canadian army and put their lives at risk every day for our freedom here at home and abroad.
The government has really dropped the ball on the aviation file in recent years. Last week it announced that discussions would finally be held, over seven months, to determine whether it would buy the F-35. Need I remind members that this is the same government that made a huge fuss in 2015 about never buying the F-35? After seven years of dithering, it has finally made the right decision. However, after all this time, it wants another seven months of discussions, even though this is what we need to do. Unfortunately, it is Canada that ends up paying for the Liberals' inaction.
The exact same thing happened with the Chinooks. The Jean Chrétien Liberals swore up and down that they would not buy that helicopter only to end up purchasing it anyway. History is repeating itself, and not in positive ways, unfortunately.
As Canadians, we have a fundamental responsibility regarding equipment for NORAD, and our facilities in Canada are outdated. They were built before the Internet even existed. Updates are needed, but the government has done nothing. The same goes for establishing Arctic sovereignty, since we are still in need of icebreakers. We have gotten to this point because the Liberals have done nothing for seven years.
We cannot talk about equipment without talking about procurement. The Parliamentary Budget Officer recently released a scathing report regarding procurement, the purchase of military equipment and defence spending under this government. He found that the government, which announced investments that never materialized, was responsible for a shortfall of $10 billion between 2017 and 2021. It kept putting things off and saying it would do something later, but ultimately nothing got done. This does not come from us, it comes from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Today's debate is crucial. It is about the responsibility that we, as Canadians, have to the world. Our country made a commitment in 2014, along with all of our NATO allies, to make investments over the next 10 years with a goal of hitting 2% of GDP. Eight years later, we are at 1.36%. This government has failed, but it is never too late to do the right thing. We need spending, hiring, and careful, intelligent management—not to make us happy, but to fully ensure our soldiers' legacy. They have been serving for more than a century and have always been on the right side of history. We need to preserve their legacy and ensure that this great Canadian military tradition continues.
1199 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 12:31:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as long as we need energy, I will always fight for Canadian energy. It is not only me asking that. We have seen the Chancellor of Germany asking for support from elsewhere. We have seen the Democratic President of the United States asking to have more people working on that. We have seen the l'Union européenne asking to have partenariat with other countries.
Canada is the fifth-largest producer of natural gas, and I will always fight for Canadians.
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 12:29:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for her question.
They are not mutually exclusive. As the member pointed out, there are three points in our motion. Everyone agrees with the first two. The third, however, is a global issue, a matter of global energy security, and we would be remiss if we overlooked that.
Canada has a concrete opportunity to help these people, and we are not the only ones saying this. The European Union sounded the alarm in 2015. The Democratic U.S. President himself, Joe Biden, and I do not use the word “democratic” lightly, is looking to partner with countries around the world to find a solution. The German chancellor is of a similar mind.
The Conservatives in the House of Commons are not alone in thinking this. World leaders are on the same page.
148 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 12:27:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I welcome the comments of my colleague from Winnipeg North. I know he is, as is everybody in the House, very supportive of any action in this struggle to fight Putin's aggression. We are all in solidarity. We have all shown solidarity toward the Ukrainian people here in Canada, but first and foremost toward those who are suffering under this attack. This motion is not only about the solidarity that we as Canadians have to show, but also about addressing some of the issues that have been raised by the European Union, the Biden presidency and the chancellor of Germany.
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 12:24:27 p.m.
- Watch
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is quoted in the Globe and Mail today. He stated that the events of the past few days have shown him that a responsible and forward-looking energy policy is crucial not only for Germany's economy, but also for its environment. It is also crucial for its security. He believes that his country must change course to overcome its dependency on single-source energy imports. His comments are similar to those of the Democratic U.S. President and those of the European Union in 2015.
That is why we believe that Canada, which is the fifth-largest producer of natural gas, must lend a hand in this situation to ensure global energy security. We must also remember that millions of Ukrainians are currently suffering as a result of Putin's vicious attack, and that 120 Canadian soldiers at CFB Valcartier, in the Quebec City area, will soon be deployed to Ukraine.
158 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 12:15:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the member for Thornhill.
On Thursday, February 24, moments after Vladimir Putin's deadly, bloody and unlawful invasion of Ukraine, the Canadian Army issued a statement announcing that a contingent of 120 soldiers from Valcartier's 5e Régiment d'Artillerie Légère would be deployed to Latvia within 30 days to support a battery of M777 artillery guns.
Putin's attack is having a direct impact today in my riding. CFB Valcartier is located in the riding of my valiant colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, to whom I give my regards. However, many military members from Valcartier live in my riding. These are people I run into at the corner store, the supermarket or the local café. They are men and women who put on the uniform to defend our country's honour and the values we hold dear. These individuals are in my thoughts today, especially those 120 men and women who are going to be deployed to Latvia in the wake of Putin's deadly attack on Ukraine.
Europe has not seen aggression on this scale since 1945, and all the decent countries in the world strongly condemn it. I want to make it clear that this is about Putin, not about Russians. I know some of my constituents were born in Russia and have chosen to live in Canada. These people join with everyone in condemning Putin's illegal, murderous and brutal aggression. We must distinguish the dictator, Putin, from the rest of the people of Russia, like the thousands of Russians who have bravely, honourably and nobly spoken out against their president.
This aggression has brought back the horrors of Second World War. My background is in history, and I have a particular interest in the history of the Second World War. I never thought I would live to see such horrific images of real war in real time. This is what we are dealing with.
This attack on Ukraine is an attack on the values that we, as Canadians, defend. Our values of freedom and democracy are humanitarian values that Putin so contemptuously rejects.
Like many people, I was very touched by these images. It was so inspiring to see ordinary citizens, with no armour or weapons, confronting Putin's Russian tanks. Let us applaud the courage of these individuals who, alone or with dozens or hundreds of friends, managed to block Putin's tanks to stop them from invading. That is one of the inspiring images we have seen. Unfortunately, it is a rare one, because every day we are seeing the horrors and ugliness of this war of aggression that should not even be happening. However, that is the reality.
My thoughts are also with the million, or almost million and a half, Ukrainian Canadians. We salute them. I know a few personally, of course, and I want to send them my regards.
From the start, the Canadian government has been taking action to address these tragic events, which unfortunately have still not come to an end. We support that action. We applaud the Canadian government for responding so quickly. The Conservatives applaud and encourage the announcements that are being made on a daily basis. We also hope that the government will do even more.
Diplomacy is a way to address an aggression, and the Putin aggression must have a diplomatic reaction from our government.
That is why the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons, in an important and heartfelt speech, talked about a few measures that the Conservatives are proposing the Government of Canada take to show its disapproval of what Putin is doing in Ukraine.
First, the government needs to expel the Russian ambassador. That is a diplomatic measure that will not affect anyone's life. However, it will send a clear message that we are opposed to what is happening. We also need to recall the Canadian Ambassador in Moscow.
The government needs to strongly suggest to the CRTC that it issue an order prohibiting our cable companies here in Canada from broadcasting programming from the Russian television network RT. We applaud the private cable companies that have already done so.
Russia must also be expelled from all international organizations. When, unfortunately, in 2015 and 2016, Putin invaded Crimea, we expelled him from the G8. It was our government that was very proactive in this area. Today, it would be an excellent idea for Russia to be expelled from the G20, among other things.
We also want to speed up the issuing of visas. We know that the government has made announcements to that effect and that they are moving in the right direction. The goal is to allow as many Ukrainian citizens as possible to come to Canada, particularly those who want to join their families.
We must also highlight the fact that this war reminds us of our dependence on our geography. The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, himself a retired lieutenant‑colonel, put it well.
When we look at the map, we think that Canada and Russia are far apart. Russia is actually not that far away, because we share a common border, the Arctic. Unfortunately, I must say that this government has not been very proactive in the Arctic. The previous government and its prime minister, however, were very proactive in ensuring a Canadian presence in the Arctic.
That also means modernizing and updating our NORAD facilities and military infrastructure, from equipping our air force with F‑35s to shipbuilding. This tragedy taking place in Ukraine calls into question our relationship as Canadians with our neighbour to the north, not our distant neighbour to the east or west.
This tragedy exposes the fact that, now more than ever, the whole world needs to ensure energy security for all. Russia supplies 40% of the natural gas consumed in Europe. Putin and his thugs are wielding this fact like weapon and have been doing so for a long time.
In 2015, the European Union, the EU, wrote a report detailing the situation we are facing now. It says that energy policy is often used as an instrument of foreign policy, especially in major oil producing and transit countries. It is talking about Russia. The report also states that the EU will use all its foreign policy instruments to establish strategic energy partnerships with producer countries and transit countries or regions that are becoming more important.
That proposal was made in 2015, but nobody listened, unfortunately. In December, Democratic U.S. President Joe Biden said there would have to be agreements with other countries, such as Norway. Canada should be part of it too. On February 24, President Biden said that his administration has been “coordinating with major oil-producing and consuming countries toward our common interest to secure global energy supplies”.
1175 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/22 2:36:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is just more talk. What Ukrainians want is real, concrete action.
According to La Presse, the diplomat who is currently working abroad for Canada said that the government is relying more on its illusory soft power, an approach based almost exclusively on image and communications rather than real action. The diplomat said that Canada continues to lecture everyone by boasting about our Canadian values ad nauseam and falling back on diplomacy by press release.
Ukrainians want more than press releases. Ukrainians want real, concrete, effective action from Canada.
When will the Prime Minister take the crisis seriously?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/22 2:35:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the events taking place right now at the Russia-Ukraine border are disturbing to all Canadians who care about world peace.
Unfortunately, Canada's reputation has been tarnished. In today's edition of La Presse, a diplomat posted abroad was extremely critical of the Canadian government's actions. She described its approach as amateurish, bordering on complacent, and said it is not taking this seriously.
When will the Canadian government and the Prime Minister take the current tragic situation in Ukraine seriously?
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
