- Member of Parliament
- Member of the Board of Internal Economy
House leader of the official opposition
- Conservative
- Regina—Qu'Appelle
- Saskatchewan
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $172,932.98
- Government Page
- Feb/29/24 2:51:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister must be confused, because it is not Conservatives making a link between these scientists and threats to national security. It is the government's own security agencies saying that these individuals were collaborating with foreign entities that presented a threat to the security of Canada.
We are talking about research with pathogens and deadly viruses, while, at the same time, these individuals were on the payroll of the People's Liberation Army and the communist regime in Beijing. Rather than inform Canadians and come clean at the outset, the government went into overdrive to cover it up.
How can the Prime Minister be so callous and selfish that he would try to protect himself rather than the security of Canadians?
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 3:04:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal-appointed board member on the Asian infrastructure bank just resigned, calling it a cesspool and saying that it was controlled by “the Chinese Communist Party crowd who operate like a secret police.”
Who could have seen this coming? Who could have predicted that a bank structured to give Beijing effective control would use the bank to expand the power and influence of the Communist regime in Beijing? Who could have possibly seen that coming? The Conservatives, that is who.
We warned the Liberals not to put tax dollars into this scam of a bank. When are they getting our money back?
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 3:09:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, for almost two years, the current government has known that an agent from the Communist regime in Beijing has been operating in Toronto. That agent orchestrated a harassment campaign against a member of Parliament because of a vote taken in this House. The government does not need to explain itself. If this does not rise to the level of expelling a diplomat, what on earth would? Why is the government more worried about the feelings of a Communist agent from Beijing than the very foundations of our democracy?
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 3:07:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the government is now trying to hide behind the Vienna Convention to explain its inaction with regard to an agent from Beijing harassing a member of Parliament's family. Let me read it. Article 9 states, “The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that...any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non-grata.... In any such case, the sending State shall...either recall the person concerned or terminate his functions”.
Why is that agent from Beijing still in Canada?
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 10:11:44 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am rising to request an emergency debate on the issue of foreign interference by the Communist regime in Beijing. The Globe and Mail published a report yesterday morning indicating that families of members of Parliament have been subjected to an intimidation campaign orchestrated by PRC officials working out of Beijing's consulate in Toronto. In at least one case, this intimidation was in direct retaliation for a member's vote on a motion that the House adopted recognizing the PRC's treatment of Uyghurs as a genocide.
The reports are informed by top secret information from Canadian intelligence services. Beijing's intimidation tactics are not limited to members of Parliament but are being deployed against many Canadians of Chinese descent in diaspora communities across the country. These allegations are widely reported and well established through House of Commons committee testimony and reports by Canada's security establishment. They report it as a matter of fact that Beijing has sought and continues to seek to influence and intimidate Canadian citizens.
The facts that this retaliation was in direct response to a vote in the House, that we just learned about this yesterday and that the Prime Minister did not answer multiple questions in the House yesterday, I believe, add weight to my request for an emergency debate. I note that there is a take-note debate this evening, Mr. Speaker, so I would encourage you to consider granting it either after that take-note debate expires or tomorrow evening at the end of Government Orders.
257 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this place to represent the interests of the good people of Regina—Qu'Appelle and represent my caucus as the opposition House leader.
We need to frame what is going on here because what we saw over the last few weeks was a despicable display at committee, a mockery of the parliamentary process. We found out that the Prime Minister has known for years about allegations of foreign interference from the Communist regime in Beijing, specifically helping the Liberal Party. Chinese representatives of that Communist regime here in Canada said they preferred a Liberal government, and there are reports coming from The Globe and Mail, citing CSIS reports and national security committee reports, indicating that there is a large “clandestine network” of funding of candidates that is coming from the Communist regime in Beijing. Conservatives have been trying to shine a light on this at committee. We have all seen the lengths that the Liberals have gone to.
Today is what is called an opposition day. Today is the supply day when opposition parties are allowed to introduce a topic and have a debate on something. Normally the government gets to set the calendar. This is its right, as it brings forward legislation, but a certain number of days throughout the year are allocated to each opposition party. For today, the Conservatives put forward a motion to call on the government to abandon its plan to increase taxes on beer, wine and spirits. That is what we are supposed to be debating right now.
On Monday, we had a fulsome debate on this whole issue of foreign interference, and I should point out that Conservatives, at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, indicated to the NDP that we are totally fine with expanding the scope of the investigation. We believe that if there are allegations of foreign interference coming from any country, they should be investigated. We were willing to work with the New Democrats on that. We were hoping that they would vote in favour of our motion on Monday calling on the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify at committee. The problem was that they did not let us know. They kept ragging the puck. It was a very simple question. It was the exact same motion that we had proposed at committee. Even the NDP House leader had indicated his support at committee.
It kind of reminds me of something that happened a little while ago. I was in the chamber and I saw the NDP House leader get up and try to indicate that the NDP opposed certain amendments at committee when it was dealing with Bill C-21. Of course, Bill C-21 is the piece of legislation that would massively expand the power of the government to take away lawful firearms from Canadians. I am not trying to mix topics too much, but the reason I am talking about this is that Conservatives recognized instantly what was going on. We saw it at committee. We said it was going to make unlawful so many firearms that hunters and indigenous communities use every season for their long-held Canadian heritage and history of using firearms legally.
What happened was that Conservatives at the committee saw that not only were these bad policy amendments, but they were also out of order, beyond the scope of the bill itself, so at the committee, almost immediately, we asked the chair to rule those amendments out of order. The chair said no. The Liberal chair said that the amendments were in order.
Why do I bring this up? At committee, the Conservatives challenged the chair. We asked our colleagues in the Bloc and the NDP to please support us on this as the amendments were out of order. The NDP voted no. The NDP voted to keep those amendments in Bill C-21, yet the NDP House leader came to this chamber and asked the Speaker to do what his team actually voted against at committee. He tried to take credit, saying they were bad. It was only after their MPs heard from their constituents, who told them how terrible it was. This is exactly what we are facing here today.
We have tried to give the opportunity to the NDP members multiple times to hold this government to account and yet, time and time again, they are showing Canadians that they would rather prop up Liberal corruption and help keep the truth covered, instead of shining a light. It is very disappointing. It is very disappointing that we see the NDP here on an opposition day move this motion. They are trying to come up with this phony story.
Conservatives want a public inquiry. We have called for it. We were trying to get this report back in the House; we could have dealt with this last week. They are the ones playing procedural games and we are not going to let them get away with it. We are going to highlight to Canadians the hypocrisy that the NDP has been showing.
I just want to indicate that I am splitting my time with the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton.
In closing, I want to make a couple of points about this. I hear from colleagues across the way who are throwing all kinds of baseless allegations that are just not backed up by facts. Conservatives have been calling for a public inquiry. The first time the Leader of the Opposition raised this issue in the House, the Prime Minister said that he did not know anything about it, so we started to press. We started to call for this. We started to call for a full, independent public inquiry. What did the government do? It appointed a special rapporteur.
I understand. I understand the hon. government House leader and I am hoping to have a discussion with him in a few moments, but it is important to set the stage for it.
I will wrap it up with this. It is impossible to restore the confidence that has been shaken by the Prime Minister's inaction on this file without a public inquiry, not a special rapporteur with close family ties to the Prime Minister, not someone on the Trudeau Foundation board. We support the call for a full public inquiry and we are just disappointed that it took so long to drag the NDP kicking and screaming to ensure that the Prime Minister's chief of staff testifies at committee.
1103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
