SoVote

Christine Normandin

Member of Parliament
Deputy House leader of the Bloc Québécois
Bloc Québécois

Saint-Jean
Quebec
Voting Attendance: 65%
Expenses Last Quarter: $109,900.56

Government Page

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Jun/9/23 1:40:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, since we are on the second hour of considering Motion No. 63, it is important to remember when the first hour occurred. It was in December. It is said that six months is an eternity in politics. I think we had a clear example of that today. In that first hour of consideration of the motion, we did not yet have the revelations from The Globe and Mail and Global News on Beijing's interference in our elections. Not everyone was aware of all of Beijing's measures targeting people from the Chinese community here. This second hour of debate on the anti-Asian racism motion makes it clear—maybe not to parliamentarians because we were already aware of Beijing's practices in the Asian community, but to ordinary people who are probably more aware of the situation now—that members of the Asian community face a double challenge, to say it politely. In addition to being occasionally ostracized by other Canadian citizens, by other people living on Canadian soil, they are also targeted by their country of origin. The fact that we are resuming debate today, after all the information and the leaks that were reported in The Globe and Mail and by Global News, helps shed new light on the importance of this motion. Basically, the motion became essential as a result of the growing stigma that people of Asian descent were experiencing in relation to COVID‑19. Since that was the basic principle, the original reason for which the motion was tabled, I will focus on that aspect. The numbers speak for themselves when it comes to the stigma experienced by people of Asian descent during COVID‑19. Hon. members may also recall the SARS crisis in 2003, when people of Asian descent were ostracized in the same way as they have been regarding COVID‑19. It may have been a little less obvious in the case of SARS, because it was much less widespread globally than COVID‑19, but unfortunately, it was a starting point. This clearly illustrated the problem of quick, easy and deplorable stigmatization towards people who had absolutely no reason to be targeted. The COVID‑19 pandemic has magnified this problem to some extent. Analyses done with the benefit of hindsight have shown that there were indeed clear and concrete examples of much greater ostracization of the Asian population. A 2021 analysis showed that police-reported hate crimes increased between 2019 and 2020 from 3% to 100%, including hate crimes targeting people of East and Southeast Asian descent. That is huge. Statistics Canada also conducted a public survey between August 4 and 24, 2020. It found that there was a marked perception of discrimination and loss of confidence in accessing health care services. Groups designated as visible minorities, most notably Chinese, Korean and southeast Asian participants, were more likely than other groups to have perceived an increase in the frequency of harassment or attacks based on race, ethnicity or skin colour since the beginning of the pandemic. This has been empirically documented. Chinese, Korean, southeast Asian and Black participants were also twice as likely as white participants to report that they had experienced discrimination. These results are consistent with the results of a previous crowdsourcing initiative, which noted an increase in the frequency of race-based harassment or outright attacks. During the same period, Vancouver police reported a 700% increase in hate crimes against Asian communities between 2019, before the pandemic, and 2020, at the height of the pandemic. Unfortunately, this is nothing new. Discrimination is nothing new, even if its target changes. It is not related to the pandemic. It even used to be state-sanctioned. I believe it is important to remember history. My colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills talked about it. Canada was built by the railroad. People of Chinese descent were called on to work on the railroad, and discrimination already existed back then. After construction of the railroad, it continued. For example, in 1885, Canada imposed a $50 head tax on Chinese immigrants. Imagine what $50 meant in those days. To make it even more difficult for people of Chinese origin to immigrate to Canada, the tax was raised to $500 in 1903. In 1907, Japanese immigration was limited to 400 people a year because of the growing hostility towards the Asian population. This was later limited to 150 people. In 1908, the federal government said that immigrants trying to reach Canada from Asian countries could not have stopovers on their way here. However, at the time, there was no such thing as direct, non-stop travel. That was therefore an indirect way of saying that they could never set foot in Canada. In 1923, the government stopped beating around the bush and simply banned Chinese immigration through legislation. Discrimination was also woven into various laws unrelated to immigration. Election laws come to mind. Limits were placed on the ability of Chinese Canadians, among others, to participate. In 1872, for example, the government of British Columbia forbade Japanese Canadian citizens and indigenous peoples from voting in provincial elections. The goal was to keep political power exclusively in the hands of white people. In 1895, the previously established voting rights of Japanese Canadians were taken away outright. In 1907, the law was extended to include Canadians from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. A short time earlier, citizens of Chinese descent had already been barred from voting in federal elections. More laws limiting their voting rights were passed. For example, if a population were targeted by a law passed by one of the provinces, it would lose its federal voting rights too. There are many moments in history where the government demonstrated racism towards people of Asian origin. The motion is therefore welcome in that it seeks to remedy the current situation, which may stem not from the government but from the population. Educating people about what is happening may lead to change. The motion will also make it possible to conduct studies to see whether anything tangible can be done to resolve this problem. The premise of the motion is to “condemn anti-Asian hate and all forms of racism and racial discrimination”. I would encourage the committee that examines the issue to ensure that the bill is not so specific that it addresses only one form of discrimination, because all forms of discrimination should also be considered in any future anti-racism bills, studies or initiatives. That is what my colleague from Drummond said when he spoke. We hope that, if there are a whole host of bills, studies or initiatives that target specific populations, then no one will fall through the cracks. To return to what I was saying at the start about interference, I think that, aside from the racism issue, we also have to make sure that we give a voice to the public, which is currently calling for a public inquiry. Racism is not the only way to sideline people in the population. These people are asking for an inquiry. It is time we gave them a voice.

1200 words

Context: House Hansard - 210 - Jun/9/23

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Jun/9/23 11:27:39 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the situation speaks for itself. No pro-democracy groups and no representatives of the victims of the Chinese regime support the government's initiative. None. The government would know that, had its special rapporteur taken the time to talk to them before publishing his report. They are all calling for a public inquiry led by an independent commissioner with the power to issue a summons. They want the government to finally get to the bottom of things, to deal with Beijing's interference tactics. When will the government finally listen to them?

94 words

Context: House Hansard - 210 - Jun/9/23

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Jun/9/23 11:26:21 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about Chinese interference, or rather, let us talk about those who are the victims of it, those who the government refuses to talk about. Let us talk about the defenders of democracy from Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Solomon Islands. Let us talk about the Uyghurs and the Tibetans. Their representatives all rallied with the Bloc Québécois to demand a public and independent inquiry into Chinese interference, not because they are picking a side in a partisan dispute, but because they want to protect their community and they feel abandoned by this government. When will the government stop ignoring their request for a public and independent inquiry?

115 words

SoVote

Deputy House leader of the Bloc Québécois

Christine Normandin