Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Deputy Leader of the Opposition), pursuant to notice of September 28, 2023, moved:

That the Senate take note of:

(a)the deteriorating humanitarian crisis occurring in Nagorno-Karabakh as a result of Azerbaijan’s ongoing blockade of the Lachin corridor and increased military aggression against indigenous Armenian civilians in the region; and

(b)the actions of the Aliyev regime as being dictatorial, and in violation of international law; and

That the Senate call on the Government of Canada:

(a)to support the liberty of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh and their right to self-determination;

(b)to immediately impose sanctions against the Azeri regime;

(c)to demand the immediate reopening of the Lachin corridor and the release of Armenian Prisoners of War;

(d)to provide a significant aid package through NGOs to those Armenian people forcefully displaced from their indigenous land; and

(e)to protect the Armenian people of Nagorno-Karabakh through the presence of international peacekeeping forces.

He said: Honourable senators, today we find ourselves facing a grave and urgent situation that demands our immediate attention and action. The Indigenous Armenian population living in the Republic of Artsakh, known by some as Nagorno-Karabakh, is currently enduring a crisis of unimaginable proportions. It is our moral duty to respond to their plight — not just with words but with meaningful action. What we cannot do is continue to look away or bury our heads in the sand.

Since the end of the 44-day war in September 2020, and particularly since December 12, 2022, when Azerbaijani government violated international agreements by blocking the Lachin corridor, a humanitarian catastrophe has been unfolding. This act severed Artsakh’s only connection to Armenia and the outside world, cutting off vital supplies of food, medicine, natural gas, electricity and the internet. The consequences have been dire, leading to cases of famine, malnutrition and death.

On September 19, 2023, Azerbaijan escalated this crisis with brutal military force by shelling civilians and civilian infrastructure. This resulted in more than 200 casualties in just 24 hours, including children, women and elderly. Villages have been cut off, roads taken under Azerbaijani control, and the gruesome acts of violence have shocked those of us who are actually taking the time to watch.

In just one week, more than 120,000 innocent civilians have been forced to flee their homes, creating a humanitarian catastrophe not only in Artsakh but also in Armenia, which has had to absorb these refugees almost overnight.

Genocide Watch and the Lemkin Institute have classified this situation as genocide. Legal expert Luis Moreno Ocampo, former International Criminal Court chief prosecutor, asserts that what happened in Artsakh amounts to genocide.

Our own ambassador to the United Nations, the Honourable Bob Rae, called it a total failure of global diplomacy, forcible deportation and a potential crime against humanity. The Honourable Bob Rae was absolutely right, and one of the few who had the courage to stand up and call this out.

Canada, guided by its commitment to the United Nations’ Responsibility to Protect, or R2P, has a moral obligation to intervene and protect populations from ethnic cleansing and genocide. This is a defining moment for Canada and, for that matter, democracies around the world. It is a test of our dedication to upholding the UN R2P commitment and supporting democracies like Armenia, Artsakh and so many that are under siege right now around the world.

Our response must extend beyond mere words and expressions of concern. It requires concrete and meaningful action. It also sometimes requires sacrifice, such as diplomatic and economic sanctions against the Azerbaijani government officials; legal action against President Aliyev at the International Criminal Court; humanitarian assistance for genocide survivors in Armenia; and the recognition of the self-determination of the Indigenous Artsakh population.

We must not repeat the mistakes of history. The Indigenous Armenian community of Artsakh, with a heritage spanning over 4,000 years, inherently possesses the right to self-determination and remedial secession.

Canada must impose sanctions against Azerbaijan government officials and enhance coordination with like-minded states. Canada must participate in an international peacekeeping force in Artsakh to ensure the safety of Artsakh Armenians as they return to their ancestral homes; provide substantial humanitarian assistance to alleviate the suffering of innocent populations; and recognize the right to self-determination of Artsakh’s Armenian population.

These actions require political courage and a commitment to establish procedures to get it done, and a real commitment if we believe in the international rule of law and human rights and democracy.

Canada has an opportunity to lead on the global stage, to be a beacon of hope and justice, as we once were a few decades ago. We must regain our status as leaders — not followers — and leave a lasting legacy that reflects our commitment to democracy, freedom and human rights.

Colleagues, democracy has never lived such difficult and precarious moments as we’re going through right now. I don’t need to remind anyone in this institution that there are more countries that are not democratic than countries which respect democracy, international rule of law and human rights.

Today, we are seeing tragedy unfolding in so many parts of the world. We see tyrant regimes like China putting the boot to the throat of the people of Hong Kong, threatening a vibrant democracy — a beautiful democracy just over the Taiwan Strait — just because they want to for their own political and economic ambitions.

We see the treachery going on against the Ukrainian people by a brutal dictator called Russia. The truth of the matter is we have waited too long to call out Mr. Putin and to hold him to account. That’s why we’re suffering the consequences that we are today, and the people of Ukraine are suffering those consequences. Sanctions should have been placed on that brutal regime years ago before they went to Ukraine.

The Indigenous people in Artsakh are being exterminated and thrown out of their homes just because they are Armenian. This is the second tragedy in a century. We stood up and gave gallant speeches in the House of Commons and in this chamber when we recognized the Armenian genocide. We said we’ll stand steadfast so these tragedies never occur again. They are happening right now as we speak, but everyone has forgotten about them because there are so many crises to pick from; the media entertains us with them.

There will be other crises that pile on because there never seems to be a resolve on the part of democracies to fight back against these tyrants with tangible actions, not just press releases of concern or “We’re monitoring the situation.” Perhaps, after this tragedy, we can send a few million dollars in humanitarian aid — it’s too late. These people are suffering those consequences, and a few million dollars announced by the Minister of Foreign Affairs to help these displaced people — it is shameful to be honest with you; it’s embarrassing.

What is happening in Israel today? We have a terrorist organization going against an Indigenous people and trying to brutally remove them from their homeland just because they are Jews.

It amazes me how this movie replays itself over and over again. We never seem to learn from history that if you don’t push back on dictators and tyrants, punch them in the nose and tell them we’re not going to accept this, they will continue to be emboldened and move the yardsticks forward.

I want to draw attention to just one more crisis going on in the world and call on our government and those of western democracies to show some resolve. Just because the people of Artsakh and the people of Armenia don’t have oil and gas, they shouldn’t be less important to us than other regimes.

The action we can take is obviously going to be a sacrifice on our side because a lot of these rogue countries — if it’s China, Russia, Iran, Cuba or Turkey — we do business with them. We’re facing a crisis right now in Israel. Hamas didn’t occur last week. Hamas has been supported by nations like Qatar from where we are importing hundreds of millions of dollars of their oil and gas. We’re buying it in Quebec when I go to the gas pump. What do you think they are doing with the proceeds of that revenue? They are funnelling it to organizations like Hamas.

Hamas has no food, water and medication for the Palestinian people in Gaza, but they have tons of rockets. They are not running out of rockets, are they? Why? We are contributing to that process.

The people of Cuba are suffering, but we are still doing business in Cuba because it’s helping a few of our investors and a few of our companies are profiting from it.

Right now, we’re still dealing with nations like Turkey, which has more journalists in prison than any other country on earth, but we close a blind eye to all this.

Colleagues, if I’m a little bit passionate about it, it’s because I really believe that we need to be consistent. If we do genuinely care about democracy, freedom, human rights and the cause of humanity, we have to stand up and fight for these values. It doesn’t matter if it’s in Ukraine, in Hong Kong or in defending Taiwan or Israel, legitimately, we have to also defend the people of Artsakh who are being displaced.

I remind every single person that when Adolf Hitler was sitting around the table with his final brutal solution, they asked him, “If we carry on with this extermination of innocent people just because they are Jews, what is going to happen?” Hitler said, “Who remembers the Armenians?” Right? That genocide happened only 25 years earlier.

This is what is going on again. We are repeating history. We are forgetting these people again. I repeat: Why? Because they are surrounded by bullies and it’s a too much of an effort? I think we have to stand up as parliamentarians. We have to draw attention to this human tragedy. We have to take action and call on our governments.

This cannot be resolved only by the Government of Canada. Every single western democracy that genuinely believes in democracy — not just navel-gazing — has to take action. It is called economic action, diplomatic action and even more if required to protect these innocent people in Artsakh. Today, they have been moved out of their homes, and no one around the world is talking about it. Thank you for listening to me on this Thursday afternoon. I thought these people needed to have a voice. Thank you so much.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved the adoption of the report.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to speak to the sixth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications. This report summarizes our committee’s study of and amendments to Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada, or in short, the online news act.

This bill was referred to committee for study on April 18, 2023. We held nine meetings in total, heard from 58 witnesses, including departmental officials who were on hand during our clause-by-clause consideration. There were also 27 written briefs submitted.

During clause by clause, which was completed in one meeting this past Tuesday, June 13, 2023, there were 18 amendments proposed by Senators Carignan, Clement, Cormier, Dasko, Miville-Dechêne, Simons, Wallin and the government itself. Of those proposed, 12 amendments were adopted. I have to say, like its predecessor Bill C-11, perhaps what I found most interesting about the bill was that even its most ardent supporters came to committee drawing attention to flaws in the legislation and seeking amendment.

While I do believe that some small changes of improvement have been made to the bill through some of the amendments we adopted at committee, I believe others run the risk of further complicating an already convoluted bill and making it even more unworkable.

While other reasonable amendments that were proposed and defeated were missed opportunities to vastly improve this flawed legislation, perhaps the most egregious of those missed opportunities was an amendment put forward by Senator Carignan that would have safeguarded against forcing platforms to pay for hyperlinks, including links that the news outlets themselves proactively post on those platforms.

This isn’t a practice where a news item is reproduced. The item appears on Facebook, for example, as a link that goes directly to the website of the news outlet. Facebook is actually providing the news outlet the vehicle with which to drive more traffic to their own sites. That’s why it’s the news outlets themselves who post these links on these platforms and encourage others to do so as well. Had this amendment been adopted, it would have removed perhaps one of the main criticisms of this legislation. A failure to fix this not only cripples the legislation, but may very well result in platforms not allowing that practice and thus crippling the very industry this bill is supposed to protect.

Another opportunity gravely missed was one that would have removed the eligibility of CBC to take part in the scheme. As Senator Carignan pointed out in moving this amendment — and I wholeheartedly concur in my comments — the CBC can hardly be described as a struggling news outlet. Yet this whole bill is predicated supposedly on the government’s desire to throw a lifeline to struggling media.

Smaller, independent and ethnic media outlets in this country already have to compete against the behemoth that is the publicly funded CBC for ad dollars. That’s already an unfair advantage to CBC. Now they are getting a significantly larger piece of the pie from this funding scheme. It boggles the mind that they would be included, and even more so that Senator Carignan’s amendment was defeated.

As for the 12 amendments that were adopted at committee, they include amending language in clause 2 that will expand the definition to specifically include official language minority community news outlets; amending clause 2 to limit the definition of Indigenous news outlets to one whose primary purpose is to produce news content. This was an amendment by Senator Simons that I would be surprised if it is supported by Indigenous media, and certainly seems to be at odds with the emphasis typically placed, in theory, by the Trudeau-appointed senators on listening and taking into consideration Indigenous input.

There were several others from Senators Clement, Cormier and Miville-Dechêne that were adopted, including, as previously mentioned, some that further complicate an already convoluted bill.

One of the most meaningful amendments, as far as improving this deeply flawed bill, came from Senator Dasko in clause 27, page 11, thus limiting the CRTC’s discretionary power as it relates to designating an eligible news business. This will leave it to news outlets themselves to determine if they wish to apply to be part of this program rather than having it forced on them.

Another important amendment came from the government, and it struck me that the bill made it as far as it did without this much-needed correction. That correction was in clause 36, page 15, line 11, which was amended to address a major gap to properly protect confidential information from being exposed during arbitration. This amendment adds further requirements and sanctions related to the improper disclosure of information by the arbitration panel or each individual arbitrator.

In fact, I was surprised that the government supported as many of the committee’s amendments as they did. Despite all time they had to draft this bill and all the months it has been in the House of Commons, it’s like they realized that it is really a bad bill, but they made promises to certain stakeholders to have this done so here it is.

Here we are, both chambers, in quite the spot at the end of the session, with only days left on the calendar. We will be rushing through third reading, with limited debate, in order to send an amended bill back to the other place so they have time to reply and we have time to accept their message before we all go home for the summer.

This is not the way Parliament should be conducting itself, but has become a hallmark of how it has been conducting itself. They make grand promises and either fail to deliver them altogether or throw together a piece of legislation at the last minute, resulting in poor drafting. Then it’s up to Parliament to fix it, but doing so in a rush to meet the government’s self-imposed deadline.

So now, despite all of the concerns raised by witnesses, committee members and many senators, the government wishes to move this bill into law as quickly as possible with the content of the bill itself becoming almost secondary.

That brings us to the last amendment adopted by our committee in clause 93, page 39, after line 26, that changes the coming-into-force provision. It now requires that the entire bill come into force within six months of receiving Royal Assent, which I have no doubt will happen in the next few days. When it does, the government will then have to show exactly how it will support small businesses, possibly without the involvement of large platforms and possibly in the face of significant trade implications.

With all of that said, I would like to thank all witnesses and senators, including Mr. Owen Ripley who has been a steadfast presence in our deliberations for a number of months. I would also like to thank Marc-André Roy and David Groves from our Law Clerk office for their diligent work; Jed Chong and Khamla Heminthavong from the Library of Parliament; our committee’s administrative assistant, Natassia Ephrem; and our unflappable committee clerk, who did tremendous work both on Bill C-11 and now on Bill C-18, Mr. Vincent Labrosse.

Finally, I would like to thank all my colleagues on the committee and our excellent staff who work to support us and provide the wonderful results that we see in the work we do. Thank you very much, colleagues.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved the adoption of the report.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to speak to the Fourth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications.

Bill S-242 seeks to amend the Radiocommunication Act to require spectrum licence holders to deploy the spectrum to at least 50% of the population within the geographic area covered by the spectrum licence.

Our committee has made six amendments to this bill. The first is to clause 1, on page 1, and replaces lines 7 to 15 to ensure that those buying Tier 1 to 4 licences would not be able to meet deployment conditions by simply deploying to the urban areas within those large tiers but would also be required to provide service to the smaller, rural and remote areas nestled within in order to meet their obligations under this legislation.

It also lays the foundation for other amendments focusing on the “use it or share it” regime. Additionally, it provides ministerial flexibility to either outright revoke the licence or to reallocate Tier 5 areas within the licence to other providers who are ready and able to service the underserved areas.

The second amendment is to clause 1, on page 1, and adds language that would clarify the intent to ensure licence holders cannot sell the licences up to and including three years minus a day in an effort to avoid penalties for not complying with licence conditions.

The third amendment is to clause 1, on page 2; it replaces and adds text subsequent to the previous amendment to provide the flexibility of subordinate or subsection competition.

The fourth amendment is to clause 1, on page 2, and adds that the minister be required to start a competitive bidding process within 60 days of not only the revocation of a spectrum licence but also where the licence holder has voluntarily surrendered their licence as a result of them not being able to meet their licensing obligations.

The fifth amendment was to clause 1, on page 2, in which line 32 was replaced to address concerns over the ability of smaller proponents to raise the required capital to participate in the competitive bidding process, giving the minister the flexibility to use a competitive bidding process or other reallocation process — such as a first-come, first-served model — when a licence is revoked or surrendered.

The final amendment is to clause 1, on page 2, and adds new text after line 35 that would ensure a company doesn’t repetitively relicense spectrum in order to limit competition or stop others from licensing spectrum in a specific geographic area.

It also adds language that would prevent the company from re-bidding under a different name.

There are also observations from three members of the committee, which were endorsed by the committee as follows:

Senator Clement noted the importance of this bill in raising awareness to the major problem of connectivity in Canada and the serious impacts on communities who lack connectivity, including Indigenous communities, and the impact this plays on Canada’s reconciliation process.

Senator Clement also noted that this topic has been neglected and that this bill is a good contribution to the much-needed discussion but that it is only a small piece of the puzzle, with many valuable suggestions from witnesses falling outside the scope of this bill.

Senator Clement observed that, in recognition of the work done by our committee, we call on the Government of Canada to undertake an exhaustive review of spectrum policy in Canada.

Senator Dennis Patterson’s observations echoed many of Senator Clement’s — in particular, the need to improve rural and remote connectivity and the serious consequences of not doing so as it pertains to vital services such and health and education, as well as the enhancement of language and culture in remote Indigenous communities.

Senator Patterson also observed that the government should develop incentives and policies that foster competition and facilitate the entry of Indigenous proponents.

This is where I will make what I consider a timely observation as chair.

Colleagues, throughout a previous study by our committee, we kept hearing testimony that legislation would promote and amplify Indigenous voices, but Indigenous creators themselves told us that the biggest barrier to having their voices heard on the internet is neither the definition of CanCon nor any algorithm. It’s the inability to actually get onto the internet because of a lack of connectivity.

Finally, Senator Cormier noted that there is currently no official database of all undeployed spectrum in Canada; Canada does not have a system to ensure transparency in the secondary market for licences; and the spectrum management by auction, based on a competitive system, is not well suited to the Canadian geographic and economic reality, according to one of our witnesses.

I want to thank Senator Patterson of Nunavut for putting forward this bill. It was a very enlightening experience, I think, for the whole committee. We discovered a number of concerns. It wasn’t long ago that Canada was a world leader when it came to communications, and we’re slipping. Of course, now we’re seeing deep inequities between rural and urban Canada.

I do not think that this bill is a magic wand that will solve the problem overnight. The problem is too profound and pronounced. Obviously, we have deep challenges and, of course, challenges of economy of scale. I do not think there is a quick fix, but I think the committee feels that this is a good first step in addressing the issue, and hopefully will serve as a basis to encourage governments to work in collaboration with stakeholders and communities in order to find a better solution to the problems. Thank you, colleagues.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved the adoption of the report.

He said: Honourable senators, your committee has completed its study on Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts. The bill’s stated intent is to modernize the Broadcasting Act by expanding the powers of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, to include regulating online streaming platforms and requiring those online undertakings to contribute, including financially, to Canadian creators and cultural systems.

Your committee was initially authorized to examine the subject matter of Bill C-11 in advance of the bill coming before the Senate on May 31, 2022, and held its first committee meeting on the subject matter on June 8, 2022. The bill was referred to the committee on October 25, 2022, and the study concluded on December 8, 2022.

During its consideration of this bill, the committee held 31 meetings, including a record 9 meetings of clause by clause, for a total of 67 hours and 30 minutes.

We received 67 briefs, heard from 138 witnesses from a variety of backgrounds including the arts and cultural sector, conventional Canadian broadcasters, big tech and streaming platforms, online content creators, unions, visible and linguistic minorities, people with disabilities, LGBTQ2+, academics and researchers.

We also heard from officials from the Department of Canadian Heritage, Justice Canada, Global Affairs Canada, as well as from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, and also from former chairs and deputy chairs of the CRTC.

It was clear from the beginning that there were two distinct viewpoints on this legislation, even amongst the sector that it purports to assist. However, even the most ardent supporters of the bill appeared before our committee seeking amendments, and some of those amendments are reflected in the bill you have before you today.

There were a total of 73 amendments proposed at committee by Senators Batters, Clement, Cormier, Dasko, Dawson, Downe, Manning, Miville-Dechêne, Plett, Quinn and Wallin. In addition to 13 subamendments, of those proposed, 26 amendments were adopted affecting 11 clauses as well as 2 subamendments.

Perhaps the areas of greatest concern to witnesses are the inclusion — unintended or otherwise — of user-generated content, the definition of Canadian content, independence and transparency of the regulator, privacy concerns for social media users and possible trade ramifications and reciprocity.

I won’t go through each one of the 26 amendments that were adopted, but I wish to highlight a few. Your committee adopted a motion in amendment moved by the Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne in cooperation with Senator Simons with the goal of ensuring user-generated content is not captured by this legislation. This amendment to clause 4 seeks to require the regulator to consider specific criteria when adjudicating the inclusion of content in its scope.

There was an amendment put forward that some senators felt would further strengthen the requirement by making the criteria cumulative and determinative, but that was not adopted by your committee.

Your committee also adopted an amendment from Senator Manning that states that no one factor in Canadian content be determinative. This is reflective of the minister’s own statement that the definition of CanCon be modernized and takes into account the investment foreign streamers are already making in Canada’s TV and film industry and telling Canadian stories.

Additionally, your committee chose to remove clause 7, which senators felt risked further politicization of the work of the CRTC. Your committee believes the independence of the regulator is vital. There were a number of government amendments adopted, including one addressing some of the concerns outlined by the Privacy Commissioner. Again, colleagues, this is but a snapshot of the 26 amendments that were adopted.

While your committee is confident that these amendments improve this legislation, it should be noted that there remained many concerns as outlined in the observations that have been included in this report from the Independent Senators Group, the Canadian Senators Group and the Conservative caucus in the Senate. We urge the government to properly consider the amendments and also the observations provided in the appendix by the committee.

In closing, I would like to thank all of my colleagues on the committee, each and every one of them, particularly the deputy chair, Senator Miville-Dechêne; my steering colleague Senator Dawson, the critic on the bill; and Senator Quinn. It was at times an acrimonious and arduous process, but I think democracy did have its voice in this particular study. You saw the exhausting number of witnesses and time that was put into it. We did our work in a diligent fashion.

I would also like to thank all stakeholders, witnesses and individual Canadians who came before the committee, because without their participation, democracy doesn’t function. I also want to thank all the staff of each and every one of our colleagues because this was a long and cumbersome process, and without their support, none of the senators would be able to do the work that we have managed to do in this report.

I would also like to thank the administrative staff starting with the law clerk, Isabelle Brideau; our analysts Jed Chong and Khamla Heminthavong; our administrative assistant Brigitte Martineau; and, of course, the clerk of the committee, Vincent Labrosse, for their patience, support and the due diligence they provided to this study. Thank you very much, colleagues.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Hon. Leo Housakos moved third reading of Bill S-203, An Act respecting a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder, as amended.

He said: Honourable senators, I would like to reserve the right to speak later on third reading given the fact that I am the sponsor.

Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Deputy Leader of the Opposition), pursuant to notice of November 24, 2021, moved:

That the Standing Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade be authorized to examine and report on the situation in Lebanon and determine whether Canada should appoint a special envoy, when and if the committee is formed; and

That the committee submit its final report no later than February 28, 2022.

(On motion of Senator Housakos, debate adjourned.)

(At 5 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, May 10, 2022, at 2 p.m.)

Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Leader of the Opposition), pursuant to notice of November 24, 2021, moved:

That the Senate call on the Government of Canada to:

(a)denounce the illegitimacy of the Cuban regime and recognize the Cuban opposition and civil society as valid interlocutors; and

(b)call on the Cuban regime to ensure the right of the Cuban people to protest peacefully without fear of reprisal and repudiation.

He said: Honourable senators, I move this motion as part of the Transatlantic Parliamentary Forum, a global initiative with legislators in Europe and the Americas in solidarity with the struggle of the people of Cuba for the right to live in a democracy.

Previous calls by freedom-loving Cuban Canadians to support those leading the peaceful struggle for human rights and democracy in Cuba have thus far been ignored by the Trudeau government whose policy toward Cuba has been based on silence and, even more worrisome, inaction.

I would like to highlight and recognize some Canadians of Cuban descent: Antonio Tang, Yanel Raul Nieves, Aime Calle Cabrera, Raimet Martinez Avila, Kirenia Carbonell Dieguez, Michael Lima, Manuel de Jesus Bujan, Ismary Bacallao and Andy Davila Miranda. All these are Canadians of Cuban descent who have come to this country and have built a great life for themselves and, of course, appreciate our freedom and democracy. But they have not forgotten to look back to their homeland, their friends and their families who don’t have the same privilege.

Given the new reality that the world is living with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it is more important than ever that Canada supports unity among defenders of democracy at a global level in the face of accelerated expansion of authoritarian regimes around the world. Both the violence of the war against Ukraine and the repression unleashed by the Cuban regime against those who think differently show the lack of moral and rational arguments and dictatorial impotence of those who resort to force in order to win a war or to gain or hold on to power.

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the world is entering a new era that requires new strategic thinking to redefine international relations between democracies and autocracies. Canada should take a significant step in that direction by denouncing the illegitimacy of the Cuban regime whose system and representatives have never been freely elected by the people.

Instead of supporting and legitimizing the same Cuban regime that justifies the invasion of Ukraine with Kremlin propaganda, Canada should recognize the pro-democratic opposition in Cuba as a valid interlocutor in our relationship with the island.

Globally, Canada has lagged far behind in its condemnation of the Cuban dictatorship. Instead, our current government continues with its policy of silence and inaction toward the repressive spiral that Cubans have experienced with particular brutality after the massive pro-democratic protests of July 2021. The Trudeau government continues to bet on shaking hands with Cuba’s oppressors and engaging in behind-the-scenes diplomacy. It is time to raise our voices for all to hear.

The silence and inaction of the Trudeau government combined with the almost total lack of coverage by Canada’s mainstream media makes invisible the serious and systemic violations of human rights in Cuba and the repressive spiral that Cubans are experiencing, which, after the peaceful pro-democracy protests of July 11, has acquired an intensity and scale not seen in decades.

By remaining silent in the face of this repression in Cuba, we are complicit. As bishop and human rights activist Desmond Tutu said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

After 63 years without holding free, fair, democratic and multi‑party elections, Cuba stands as one of the world’s longest-lasting human rights predatory regimes. Since 1959, the current regime has persecuted, imprisoned and marginalized human rights defenders, journalists, dissident artists, intellectuals and critics.

It is estimated that at least half a million Cubans have been arbitrarily arrested or imprisoned for political reasons in the past six decades. Cuba’s one-party regime stifles freedom of expression and assembly by locking up people for their beliefs and opposition to the government, outlaws political pluralism, prohibits independent media, criminalizes dissent and prevents the exercising of basic human rights and freedoms.

Things have worsened in the past 14 months as Cuban authorities have been responsible for serious and systemic human rights violations as part of a repressive policy that criminalizes peaceful protests and imprisons and mistreats Cubans from all walks of life for simply expressing their views and exercising their freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.

Human rights organizations have reported at least 10,000 repressive actions in Cuba from January 2021 to March 2022, including arbitrary detentions, imprisonment, forced house arrests, fines, sham trials, acts of repudiation, character assassination campaigns, beatings, internet cuts, forced expatriations to harass and intimidate human rights defenders, critics, independent activists, artists and journalists.

Honourable senators, by the end of 2021, the Cuban regime had arbitrarily arrested 2,717 people, forced 3,743 into house arrest and carried out 60 acts of repudiation against pro‑democracy activists. These acts are fascist by nature and constitute the greatest expression of intolerance and extremism promoted by the Cuban regime against those who think differently.

On July 11, 2021, more than 187,000 Cubans took to the streets in 45 Cuban cities in historic demonstrations to protest long-standing restrictions on human rights, simply shouting, “freedom,” “down with dictatorship,” and demanding democratic change as a solution to the country’s deep economic and health crises. The Cuban regime responded to the peaceful protests with extreme brutality and violence. With the massive deployment of special brigades and police in cities across Cuba, levels of surveillance, arbitrary arrests, persecution and repression in Cuba has reached levels “unprecedented” in 20 years, according to Amnesty International.

Security forces responded to the pro-democratic protests with extreme violence and opened fire on protesters. They used tear gas and beat protesters with batons. Those who were arrested were subjected to torture and cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment. Following these acts of brutality, Cuba surpassed Venezuela, Nicaragua, Russia and even Iran in its number of political prisoners. As of March 2022, the political imprisonment in Cuba constitutes the greatest human drama experienced by Cuban families today.

Worse still, these victims of repression in Cuba — the political prisoners — report the use of torture, as well as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in prisons, including solitary confinement, excessive use of shackles, beatings, verbal humiliation, acts of repudiation, the threat of rape and the denial of medical attention and family visits. Accounts of these methods of repression have been documented in letters and verbal reports sent by prisoners to their friends and families. Today, I raise my voice and encourage all of you to join me in denouncing the conditions of political prisoners in Cuba subjected to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

I want to take a moment to highlight the cases of some of these people. For instance, the artist and activist Maykel Osorbo, winner of a Grammy award for the song “Patria y Vida,” has been incarcerated since May 2021 in the maximum security prison of Pinar del Río. He is currently suffering from lymph node issues and has not been offered an adequate diagnosis or medical treatment for his condition.

Then there is Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, a leading figure in the San Isidro movement and one of Time’s “100 Most Influential People of 2021.” He was arrested on his way to a demonstration in Havana on July 11 and transferred without a court hearing to a maximum security prison. He has led numerous hunger strikes in protest of his unjust imprisonment that have left him in poor health.

Felix Navarro and his daughter Sayli Navarro, coordinators of the Pedro Luis Boitel movement for democracy, were recently sentenced to nine and eight years in prison respectively, not for demonstrating but for simply asking the police about the status of some of the members of their organization who had been detained on July 11.

I am concerned about the vulnerable groups that were victims of the repression stemming from the July protests. Minors at the time of detention, 33 children were criminally prosecuted with half of them facing charges of sedition. According to Article 100a) of the Cuban Penal Code, the charge of sedition carries penalties of 10 to 20 years in prison or the death penalty.

There are at least 130 women who are political prisoners in Cuba. Furthermore, all the mothers of the July 11 pro-democracy protesters are being regularly threatened by state security with imprisonment if they denounce the legitimacy of their children’s cases at the international level.

I also want to take this opportunity to condemn the hundreds of trials that have been conducted in Cuba against peaceful democratic protesters in violation of due process and Article 7(e) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Pro‑democracy protesters are also charged with articles of the Cuban criminal code, such as sedition, public disorder and insulting public officials, which violate international human rights standards as they are a legal disguise to muzzle free expression and freedom of association. Without any due process, most protesters, whose average age is 34 years old, are being sentenced to prison terms ranging from 5 to 10 to even 30 years in prison for simply recording a protest or peaceful demonstration.

What has Justin Trudeau’s government done in the face of these atrocious human rights violations in Cuba in the past year?

Honourable senators, the Trudeau government has only made a few vague comments on the July 11, 2021, protests, mainly in response to questions from the media. Unlike when they condemned other dictatorships around the world, such as Venezuela and Belarus, these comments were not even official government statements published on the Government of Canada website. As a matter of fact, our Prime Minister made these comments mainly in response to pressure from the Conservative Party in the House. While we were quick to express solidarity with the people following the July protests, the Trudeau government merely repeated that it was aware of the situation in Cuba, but their concerns were never coupled with any action.

The initiative of the Trudeau government published in the November 16, 2016, “Fact Sheet – Strengthening Canada-Cuba relations” to accompany the Cuban regime in a supposed modernization of its system and in collaborative projects with a view to fostering inclusive and accountable governance through the exchanges with Cuba has been a catastrophic failure.

The Cuban regime has not been accountable to its people since it came to power, because it was never elected in free elections, and Cuba lacks any form of the separation of powers that is customary to us. It responds to peaceful protests with brutal repression, as seen on July 11, 2021, when the unelected president Miguel Díaz-Canel appeared on television to give a “combat order” against peaceful protesters.

Cuba today has more repressive laws than ever before in its recent history. Some recent examples in the Cuban legal framework corroborate this statement. In August 2021, the Official Gazette published Decree Laws 35 and 42 that criminalize the independent press and critics of the regime to Regulation 102 that punishes the “dissemination of information considered false or detrimental to ‘public order.’”

More recently, the draft bill for the new penal code criminalizes all civil and political liberties protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the rights to free speech, free assembly and peaceful protest, among other articles that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

I would be remiss in my remarks today if I didn’t also commit to raising awareness among my fellow Canadians about the moral and ethical implications of spending our money in Cuba, which is a beautiful island, one of the most beautiful in the world, but is governed by political regime that preys on the people’s rights.

Vacationing and investing in Cuba is tantamount to being active accomplices in financing the military conglomerate that operates hotels, financial institutions and the tourism industry. With that money we help, as Canadians, sustain in Cuba what GlobalFirepower considers the fourth-largest military force in the world.

In other words, Canadian money in Cuba does not contribute to improving the lives of citizens, but it is used by the regime to monitor, persecute and repress journalists, human rights activists and critics.

In the current global context, vacationing and investing in Cuba is tantamount to giving support to a regime that uses all its state-controlled media to reproduce the Kremlin’s disinformation machine on the invasion of Ukraine.

In doing so, we are helping the Cuban regime in its role as an active participant in a hybrid warfare that, through its disinformation, fabricates narratives that help justify Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and contribute to covering up the Russian regime’s responsibility for the perpetration of heinous war crimes against children and their civilian population.

Canada cannot forget that countries such as Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua are involved in the axis of aggression against Ukraine. Canada’s leadership in supporting the cause of human rights and democracy in Cuba is, more than ever before, vital.

In a world where the global growth of authoritarian regimes is the greatest challenge of our time, colleagues, I urge all of you to stand on the right side of history and set a historic precedent in Canada by passing this motion in solidarity with the people of Cuba who aspire to live in a free, democratic and inclusive nation, things that we take for granted that they haven’t tasted in six decades.

Canada cannot continue to launder the image of the Cuban dictatorship. It is morally questionable that we continue to vacation and invest in Cuba while ignoring the fact that the regime on that island is the largest jailer in the Americas with over 1,000 political prisoners dying in those prisons.

Cuba today is experiencing a unique historic moment because, for the first time in more than six decades, a new generation of young people has started to demand their rights in a public, peaceful and steadfast way.

This nascent culture of democratic rebellion requires international support and solidarity to be successful. The people of Cuba, the mothers of the hundreds of political prisoners, the defenceless population is crying out for international help and solidarity. Canada must listen to the spontaneous and legitimate voices of these Cuban people expressed in towns and cities all over that beautiful country on July 11, 2021.

Their peaceful demonstrations sent a loud and clear message to the illegitimate regime that is imposing itself in power that their time is over. Canada, as it has done against 21 other authoritarian regimes around the world, should impose sanctions on all the individuals within the Cuban regime responsible for the persecution, beatings and torture of the July 11 demonstrators and all those who on that and other dates have peacefully raised their voices for democracy in Cuba.

That is why I call on all of you to stand on the side of the Cuban people, not the Cuban regime, and to stand on the side of freedom, to stand on the side of democracy, to stand on the side of human rights. This is what this institution, I think, holds dear, and what Canadians hold dear. I think it’s important that we stand and make sure that they know that we are listening. We are watching. We are hearing. We’re going to be by them.

I thank you, colleagues.

Long live a free Cuba. Patria y Vida.

Thank you very much.