- Member of Parliament
- Member of the Board of Internal Economy
Deputy House leader of the government
- Liberal
- Kingston and the Islands
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $112,228.33
- Government Page
- Jun/3/24 1:43:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader of the NDP for his intervention today. More importantly, I thank him and our NDP colleagues for being adults in the room and for working with the government to bring forward meaningful legislation.
Although I get laughs from across the way, we see this quite a bit, where it is NDP members who are actually helping to make meaningful changes. They have come to this chamber with the objective of improving the lives of Canadians, and I think that needs to be applauded, despite the fact that, in theory, it is what we are all supposed to be doing here.
We have been hearing all day, and indeed, every time this debate has been going on, from Conservatives, that this would not have a big impact on Canadians, that it would not make a big difference because so many people are already covered and that what we are seeing through this legislation would not really do much for Canadians. I completely disagree with that. I would like to hear the leader of the NDP's thoughts on that.
184 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/9/24 12:02:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my comment is similar to the one made by my NDP colleague; if you would allow us the opportunity to do the same, it would be appreciated.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/24 5:25:28 p.m.
- Watch
On that point of order, Mr. Speaker, it is of public record how a member voted, whether in person or on the app. All the House leader did was reference that.
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 12:49:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what I found most shocking was that, when the parliamentary secretary was trying to deliver his remarks, the member for Cumberland—Colchester immediately started heckling and yelling at him.
It reminded me of when the member for Cumberland—Colchester, on October 25 at the health committee, said, “Don't worry, Canadians, because when you're addicted to these opioids that this Liberal-NDP coalition is giving you for free in its crazed experiment, what are they going to do? They're going to kill you.” Now Conservatives are clapping for his comments on that.
I am wondering if—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member said “round of applause, everybody”. He should know that he cannot talk to other members in the House. He can talk only to you.
I am more than willing to accept and recognize the fact that they balanced the budget in 2015 on the backs of veterans.
53 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 1:55:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, talk about walking on eggshells. I have not even gotten to that point yet. The member is trying to predict where I am going in my speech and is rising on a point of order pre-emptively because he is afraid I am going to make a comparison between the approach of Russia and the approach of the Conservative Party of Canada. I have not even gotten to that yet. All I said was that the member was afraid I would do that. I did not even actually make the comparison.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/23 2:14:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for the introduction of Bill C-353, the foreign hostage takers accountability act.
Canada's promotion of human rights and a rules-based international order are pillars of our foreign policy. The practice of arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations undermines our democratic values and our security and threatens the foundation of our international system, which is based on trust and amicable relations between states. Incidents of hostage-taking by terrorist groups often ensnare innocent civilians and pose significant threat to national security. We also recognize the immeasurable impacts that these practices have, not only on victims but also on their families, their friends and their supporters around the world.
This is why Canada has responded. Almost three years ago, we launched the initiative against arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations, and we have been playing a leadership role in the fight against arbitrary detention. In addition, to deal with instances of hostage-taking by terrorist groups, we have put in place a robust system and most recently named a senior official for hostage affairs. Our government continues to explore all options to deter, prevent and respond to these egregious acts and to defend the rights of Canadians.
I welcome this opportunity to discuss the proposals in the private member's bill introduced by the member for Thornhill. I believe that all members in this House agree that Canada must continue to uphold its firm commitment to protect Canadians, to defend human rights and international peace and security, and to respond to cases of wrongful detention and hostage-taking in an effective and meaningful way.
To respond effectively to the egregious practices of arbitrary detention and hostage-taking, we must have the appropriate tools and services in place. These issues are incredibly complex, and any response must be very carefully considered. Bill C-353 focuses on the tools at the government's disposal to combat arbitrary detention for diplomatic leverage as well as hostage-taking of Canadians, permanent residents or eligible protected persons outside Canada. We agree on the importance of enhancing the tools available to the government and of refining our approach. However, these issues are incredibly complex and any response must be carefully considered in order to minimize any potential harm to victims. Our overriding concern must always be the well-being of the detainees. Therefore, my remarks today will focus primarily on this consideration.
This bill addresses two extremely serious but distinct issues: arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and international hostage-taking. The motivations, tactics and risks of harm to the victims can vary greatly. For example, while a state may be more receptive to diplomatic pressure to release a hostage, non-state actors may be less responsive to this type of pressure. Also, the risks of serious harm to the victim may vary across such cases. Every situation is unique and each case therefore requires a sophisticated and tailored response.
Further, there are distinctions to be made among types of hostage-taking incidents. There are those involving terrorist entities versus those perpetuated by criminal groups. In general, the government considers hostage-taking by terrorist groups as a threat to national security and therefore our response differs compared to how we deal with kidnappings by criminal gangs, for instance. This bill, however, proposes the same set of tools for all of these scenarios and would mandate some actions on the part of government in response to these cases, which raises a range of concerns.
We know that an effective response must be designed to respond to each unique situation to ensure the safe release of the victim. Moreover, the imposition of sanctions must be very carefully considered. The pros and cons must be weighed in each case. Imposing sanctions during a hostage situation could, for example, increase the risk that the hostage is mistreated in retaliation by his or her captors.
The use of monetary and migratory incentives, as the bill proposes, may give rise to serious unintended consequences. It could increase the amount of false information provided by opportunistic individuals, including those associated with captor groups. This could complicate investigative work and leave families more vulnerable to scams by predatory individuals seeking a payday. In fact, there is potential that this could create a market for hostage-takings in Canada.
I think we can all agree that no member of the House wants to see taxpayer dollars ending up in the hands of terrorist organizations. No member wants to increase risk for Canadians travelling, working or studying abroad. Further, the reporting and information-sharing provisions in the bill also require careful consideration in order to avoid any potential repercussions to efforts used to secure release of detainees. In pursuing the safe release of a Canadian, we must always be very careful about how information is shared. It is imperative that we not share information that could jeopardize negotiations for the safe release of a detainee. It is also important that we have the discretion to share information with families of victims as and when appropriate. There are cases where victims do not want to have their information shared with family members, for instance. Family dynamics can be complex. We must respect their wishes.
Responding to these egregious practices and protecting Canadians are priorities for the government. As a result, many programs, policies and authorities have already been put in place and are being used to support Canadians facing arbitrary detention and hostage-taking. I am pleased to confirm that we already have, in our tool kit, many of the elements that are proposed in Bill C-353.
First, Canada already has two autonomous sanctions regimes, which have been used to respond to a variety of circumstances in the international context, including gross and systemic violations of human rights. Further, existing legislation, such as the terrorist financing provisions in the Criminal Code, and regulations regarding sanctions related to terrorist entities, already impose asset freezes and dealings prohibitions on terrorist groups.
Second, the government has an established set of mechanisms to assist victims and their families. For example, there are robust policies and practices in place to adopt a trauma-informed approach to aiding former hostages and their families.
Global Affairs Canada has implemented standard operating procedures, and works closely with other governmental organizations and external partners in efforts to resolve these cases. There are also existing programs and funding mechanisms that facilitate access to financial support, medical assistance and counselling for Canadians. We continue to refine and enhance our approach to ensure effective and tailored support to victims and their families.
No one doubts that the government must have effective tools and programs to respond to the egregious acts of hostage-taking and arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations. Bill C-353 is an example of the House's recognition of this fact. Nonetheless, we require solutions that are carefully considered and that are informed by deep knowledge and experience of the challenging, complex issues. It is clear that a one-size-fits-all solution may have unintended consequences, and that having the discretion to respond to a particular case, depending on the circumstances at hand, is key to an effective, victim-centred approach.
As debate continues, I look forward to working with the member for Thornhill and with all members of the House, to enhance the tools at Canada's disposal and to reinforce our commitment to address arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and hostage-taking.
I will just comment briefly on my intervention earlier today, when I asked the member for Thornhill about royal recommendation. Royal recommendation is something that is very rarely afforded to a private member's bill. I know this for a fact, because I brought a bill before the House early in my time as a parliamentarian that did require royal recommendation, and my very own government did not give royal recommendation to the bill. The bill did, nonetheless, still pass, as far as it could go without the royal recommendation, with the support of all members of the House. However, we cannot underestimate the importance of triggering such an action by the government. What is of critical importance is recognizing that when royal recommendation is required, it is very easy to allow it to go through in one particular case, but setting a precedent is where it becomes very dangerous.
I understand any government's reluctance, whether it is Liberal, Conservative or NDP, to use a royal recommendation based on that rationale. Nonetheless, I look forward to continuing discussion on this important bill.
1438 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we certainly were not aware of this concern. If you would afford us the opportunity to come back to you before a ruling on this to provide some comments, we would greatly appreciate it.
36 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/22/23 12:18:28 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yes, a meeting happened in the PMO, but for some reason the opposition, and this member particularly, assume that just because a meeting happened in a building that is the Prime Minister's Office, he was there. It is a wild assumption to jump to the conclusion that the Prime Minister must have been there himself. It goes without saying, and I think all members know this, that we are really beating a dead horse, so I will leave that one.
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am happy to do it anyway.
In 2018, we appointed our current librarian. I would bet that the member does not even know the librarian's name. I would bet that just about everybody in this room probably does not know the librarian's name. We just attempted to extend that appointment for 16 months through a UC motion, like we did in 2018, but the Conservatives are insisting on having a vote from the House. That is what just happened.
The member for Calgary Centre called me a—
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I certainly hope that nobody will need to go to the Library of Parliament anytime soon to look up any information on vaccines because we do not have a librarian as a result of the petty politics being played in the House.
Typically, we will just approve the librarian through a UC motion. We did it in 2018 for this particular librarian, but the Conservatives are not even willing to let us appoint a librarian. How much more political can they get on an issue than to refuse to appoint a librarian?
Moments ago, the member for Calgary Centre called me a “jack dot, dot, dot”, and members can fill in the blanks, as a result of questioning why the Conservatives would not approve a librarian, but here we are. I hope we do not have to go to the library to get any information on vaccines any time soon, because we do not have a librarian.
In any event, I am talking about Bill C-278, which has come forward, presented by the member for Niagara West moments ago. We are having second reading on this. I am particularly concerned. I do not think it should go without saying that I will not be—
210 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:41:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when the member for Perth—Wellington said, “It always begs the question, What about the next appointment? I don't think anyone has any qualms about David Johnston—”
Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Five years ago.
40 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 12:16:07 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what an extremely rhetorical question. That is just based on the trumped-up conspiracy theories that the Conservatives like to put before this House on a daily basis. The manner in which individuals are selected and appointed is through a process and through processes that ensure they meet the qualifications.
I hope that that properly addresses his extremely rhetorical question.
Not at all, except it does—
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 12:13:24 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I find it incredibly rich that the member would take the time to requote his question and then gloss over the answer he received, not bothering to even read it into the record, so I will do that for him now. The response given was, “Madam Speaker, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs recused himself from all deliberations and decisions related to the appointment of the interim Ethics Commissioner.”
The member suggested that this was just dancing around answering the question. To me, that sounds like a pretty direct answer to the question. However, what is even more important is to reflect on the fact that the individual who was appointed had a 10-year record in senior roles within the Ethics Commissioner's office, which began when Stephen Harper was the prime minister.
The truth is that the characterization being sought by the member and the Conservatives on this issue, like on so many other issues related to it, undermines the office and undermines the integrity of the work it does. Quite frankly, I find it very concerning that time after time, the Conservatives get up and do the exact same thing. However, it is exactly on brand for what they do.
206 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think everybody would agree that for Canadians to prosper and benefit from the improvements of technology, they need to have confidence in the systems. If we look at some of the new apps out there now, it is extremely easy to access information about individuals, whether that is considered to be private information or public.
Could the member expand on why he might see this as critical in making sure Canadians have that confidence to trust the technology? At the end of the day, that is what these businesses will have to rely on if they are going to be successful.
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I was sitting here quietly, not saying a word and not getting in the middle of it, and then the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South decided to get up, so I have a question.
I shared a video recently of the former leader of the Conservative Party slow-clapping Joe Biden, which was extremely disrespectful. That has already seen just under two million views on Twitter. I wonder if the member can comment as to whether I should be concerned about my content not getting views like that, two million views of the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle. Should I be concerned that if this law is passed, I will not get that kind of reach?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/13/23 3:32:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, an order in council for the interim appointment of Mr. Eric Janse as Clerk of the House of Commons.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/7/23 10:18:32 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the only thing that outdid that applause was when the member said he was splitting his time with somebody else, which goes to show how trained the seals are.
In any event, my question to the member is this: In 150 days, why has he not given a single idea to Canadians on what his plan would be for the environment?
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, time after time, the Conservatives get up and say the same thing. They say that this was Liberal-made inflation, and they suggest that it is only happening in Canada. However, the reality of the situation is that this is incredibly false. Among the G7 countries alone, Canada has the third-lowest inflation rate in the most recent summary of them. As a matter of fact, while Canada is sitting at 6.9%, the U.S. is at 7.7%, the U.K. is at 8.8%, Italy is at 8.9% and Germany is at 10%.
How is it that Conservatives say this time after time? Are they completely oblivious to what is going on in the rest of the world?
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 1:45:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, do not worry about being in disbelief. Welcome to my world for the last seven years.
The member asks about the app and the way the app was being applied. The Conservatives were calling on the government to do something about this. I read direct quotes by the member for Durham when he was the leader of the opposition, and there are quotes from the member for Carleton. They were demanding that the federal government close the borders until we could set up a secure way to let people in. That is exactly what we did. We set up a secure way and, yes, doing secure operations in a G7 country costs money. However, they will dumb it down by saying not to worry about it and that they could have done it in their basement for 200 grand.
It is up to you, Madam Speaker, who you want to take seriously on that.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
