SoVote

Feb/7/22 10:06:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would simply say to the member opposite that yesterday we had an announcement from the Prime Minister that a table is being struck with respect to leadership from all three levels of government. That is exactly the type of co-operation we need, because we are seeing a situation that is very concerning for the city of Ottawa, all Ontarians and all Canadians.

66 words

Mr. Scot Davidson (York—Simcoe, CPC)

Feb/7/22 10:07:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Brandon—Souris. I am glad we are having this debate this evening. It is a very important issue, and it is necessary to address the growing sentiment that exists right here across this great country. Canadians are frustrated. They are sick and tired. Constant shutdowns, lockdowns, restrictions and mandates are having a terrible toll on our country's population. This toll is now going far beyond that of COVID-19 itself. After two years, we know that COVID-19 is not going away. That is why we have to use all the tools at our disposal for Canadians to live healthy normal lives and for businesses to reopen. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has failed in its handling of the pandemic, and now it is failing to provide Canadians with a credible plan to get life back to normal. Even as countries around the world drop their restrictions and mandates, even as they put forward plans to help their citizens learn to live with COVID, the federal Liberal government persists with policies and practices here in Canada that no longer make sense. Over 90% of the population has been vaccinated already, and we know that vaccines have limited utility in preventing the transmission of the omicron variant. Instead of putting forth a credible plan, the Liberals continue to sow division and resentment among Canadians. They ignore the widening gap between those on guaranteed government salaries like themselves and those who are only able to work if the government lets them. There is a widening gap between those who live in rural Canada and everyone else, a gap between low-income workers and those at the very top, between home owners and renters, and between the haves and the have-nots. It is no wonder Canadians are angry and frustrated. It is no wonder that after two years that frustration has led to one of the most significant protests Parliament Hill has ever seen. The “freedom convoy” of trucks and other vehicles are assembled outside from coast to coast. They are here at Parliament, as is their right, protesting the policies of the federal government. They are doing this outside the federal building and protesting provincial policies outside legislative buildings across the country. I would note that this is the appropriate place to do that. They are not outside private homes, or cottages of MPs or premiers' homes. The Prime Minister may not want to speak to those protesters, but I have. I have spoken to many of them. I have read their signs and listened to what they are saying and one thing is abundantly clear. It is not just the protesters outside in the provincial capitals across the country who have these so-called unacceptable views. These views are not held by some fringe minority. I have heard these opinions from my own constituents. Canadians from all walks of life have real concerns about how the Liberals have handled this pandemic. They want to know what the government is doing to put COVID-19 behind us. Instead of addressing these concerns, the Prime Minister, his government and some in the mainstream media have labelled them as racist, misogynist and extremist just to avoid scrutiny for the Liberal government's numerous failures. Unlike the Prime Minister, I believe the most important job I have as an elected representative is to listen to the residents of my community, just as it is his job to listen to the citizens of this great country. Over the past few weeks, I have heard from the owner of a local gym in Bradford, 9Round. She was in tears. She has been shut down so many times she cannot even count. She now owes thousands of dollars in rent with no relief available to her and no confidence that anything will be changing any time soon. I have heard from an elderly man in Keswick who was eligible for no COVID-19 support and has been forced to eat Kraft Dinner five days a week for supper because he cannot afford to buy proper groceries as inflation continues to rise. He told me he never thought his retirement would look like this. I have heard from a couple in Jacksons Point who returned from a cruise near Egypt, only to be locked up in a quarantine hotel for days on end with no clothes and no access to life-saving medication. I have heard from families in Mount Albert who have experienced the pain of losing a loved one to COVID-19, and from seniors in Sutton who have been isolated in long-term care homes and other facilities for the past two years without the ability to see their families or the outside world. I have heard from an expectant single mother in Holland Landing who provided for her family through her job in a federally regulated industry but was fired because she made the decision to wait to get vaccinated after she had her child. I have heard from parents in Bond Head whose son has not been to school in 18 months. Every single one of these people have real stories and valid concerns about where our country is after two years of COVID-19. Many Canadians are hurting right now. Many have lost their jobs, friends or family members, and they have lost faith in their government and institutions. They deserve to be heard. My constituents in York—Simcoe, and Canadians across the country, have diligently followed public health advice, made sacrifices and done what is necessary to keep their families and communities safe throughout this pandemic. They have done their part, now it is time for the Liberal government to do its part. It is time for a re-examination of the government's COVID-19 response in a more sustainable path that gets life back to normal and gives Canadians hope for the future. What does that path look like? It is clear that more must be done to ensure that those most vulnerable are protected as best we can from the coronavirus, but that can be done without devastating, ineffective lockdowns and mandates that cripple the economy and impact the lives and livelihoods of Canadians. I spent most of my life working as a restauranteur, and I know the challenges and triumphs that exist in the industry. It can be hard to make ends meet and keep the doors open in the best of times, but when the government shuts them down and prevents patrons from coming in, it is no wonder many have closed their doors for good. Instead, we need to be looking at alternative policy approaches that will keep Canadians safe while strengthening our economy and respecting individuals freedoms. In the summer of 2020, my colleagues and I in the Ontario Conservative caucus were criticized by state media, the Liberals and the NDP for examining an innovative rapid test that Health Canada had not approved after months of delays, despite it being available in the U.S. and across Europe. We were looking for solutions and to hold the government to account so that it could be the best it could be, but instead of addressing the long delays at Health Canada, and instead of looking at best practices of other countries, government members opted to criticize, ridicule and ignore. That is why it is no surprise that those same rapid tests, and many like them, are still hard to come by for most Canadians today, two years later. However, it is not just rapid tests. We need better medical approaches that focus on treating those who are suffering from COVID and not just fruitlessly trying to stop its transmission. Right now, we have some of the worst health care capacity in the G7, and our system will remain strained because of delayed surgeries and other procedures. Where is the plan for that? Where is the funding for the provinces? No matter what is done to specifically address COVID-19 going forward, one fact remains: Most of us hate to see the country in the state it is in today. It is hurt, and it has divided us. That is why it is important that we restore a sense of unity in Canada and a shared commitment to one another. It is time to put aside the divisive rhetoric and policies and politics that drive wedges between neighbours, family members and friends. There needs to be a recognition that we are all in this together as we look towards a future. This is what our country needs, and it requires the right kind of leadership to make this happen. Canadians are telling us that they want this Parliament, and they want it to work together while representing every part of this country and the people who live here. They are telling us that they want to see a government that is committed to collaboration, accommodation and a willingness to listen. I hope the Prime Minister is listening.

1518 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Feb/7/22 10:16:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, members will forgive me if they thought I was sitting in Queen's Park, as the hon. colleague for York—Simcoe opposite highlighted school closures, the gym that was facing troubles and, of course, businesses. I presume he will not be voting for Doug Ford in the upcoming election in Ontario, because that is the government that is imposing those elements. However, I will agree with the member opposite that we do need to transition beyond COVID. Dr. Theresa Tam is talking about that right now, as are other chief medical health officers. Going back to the protest, in February 2020, the member highlighted the Wet'suwet'en protest and the economic cost that those blockades represented. He said that in committee, and it is on the blues for the record. My questions to him today are these: Is the member not concerned about the economic cost of the blockades that we are seeing in Ottawa, and indeed in other places, and why has he not spoken up for these protesters to go back home?

178 words

Mr. Scot Davidson

Feb/7/22 10:17:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, he is pointing out the provincial lockdowns. I am trying to show the government that the people who are outside right now are hurting. This is what has all led to this. This is the frustration that people have. People are crying in their businesses right now. They are literally crying. The gym owner I talked about, who the member alluded to, owes $40,000. She showed me that her payment is $831, but she has $600 in her account and she is shut. She cannot make money, and she is sitting there crying in front of me. This is the frustration out there on the streets right now, and I wish my hon. colleague would go out to talk to some of these people and listen to them.

131 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Feb/7/22 10:18:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I appreciated his tone, and I thought he did a nice job evaluating the situation that many of his constituents are going through. However, I do not get the impression that we are finding a solution to the current crisis. This evening, I am hearing politicians throwing the ball back and forth in the House because we all have different visions. I am talking about us, but I am also talking about our constituents. Everyone has a different vision of what measures should be in place and how we should deal with the situation. In the short term, I think the fact that politicians are using the crisis to their advantage will not send the trucks away tomorrow morning. I would like my colleague's opinion on this. Does he think that seeing politicians capitalize on this crisis may have added fuel to the fire?

154 words

Mr. Scot Davidson

Feb/7/22 10:19:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, no one should be making political games of this. Again, and I spoke to it in my speech, we are in a minority Parliament. Canadians have sent us here to work together and come up with a solution for this. Today, our leader put forth a suggestion to the Prime Minister that we should go out and meet with these people. Canadians do not want to see these convoys anymore. These are the conversations about new government policy and mandates we all have to have together. The government will keep alluding to 92% of Canadians being vaccinated and 90% of truckers being vaccinated. People will ask the question, and it is okay to ask that question now. Why are people being put in a corner? If it is 90%, why are there mandates? The Liberals keep alluding to the United States. I do not take my marching orders from the U.S.

154 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Feb/7/22 10:21:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member says he does not take his marching orders from the United States. With the convoy, what we are understanding is that there is a lot of money coming from the United States. Does he agree that should be stopped? In fact, this is going to be brought up at committee as an issue from the NDP. Would he agree that funding from the United States should not be going to the convoy and that it should be stopped?

82 words

All Topics

Mr. Scot Davidson

Feb/7/22 10:21:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that this is being studied at this time and being looked at.

18 words

All Topics

Mr. Larry Maguire (Brandon—Souris, CPC)

Feb/7/22 10:21:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heightened awareness of just how divided Canadians have become. This emergency debate is predicated on that very reality. A lot of people are angry right now. On any given day, I hear from people who think that we have too many restrictions, and I also hear from those who want further restrictions imposed. In all my years in politics, I have never seen such heated debates. They have caused a lot of tension in families and in communities throughout Canada. To clear up any misunderstanding, I am vaccinated. I believe vaccines are safe and have helped to reduce hospitalizations. I believe they have saved lives, particularly of those who are older and those who have underlying health conditions. I have also encouraged others to get vaccinated. However, I want to be able to question the Liberal government's COVID policies without being labelled anti-science and anti-vaccination, and without being discredited because I have the audacity to criticize government policies. For too long we have been given a false choice that either we acquiesce to every government measure or we are only lending credibility to those who spread false information. The one thing I know for sure is that the political environment we now find ourselves in is directly related to this mindset. Without a doubt, COVID-19 has been hard on all of us. Families have lost loved ones, and many individuals have suffered or are suffering illness. Families in my constituency have been prevented from driving across the border to be with loved ones. University students have been unable to set foot in a real classroom to take advantage of a full educational experience. Health care staff, in particular, have been pressing on for two years to care for those with COVID and all other health care concerns. They provide an essential service, and we are grateful for their commitment and sacrifices on behalf of their fellow Canadians. To those who think that protesting in front of hospitals is a good idea, I can assure them it is not. The doctors and nurses working in those hospitals are busy saving lives, not setting government policy. The last thing they should have to deal with, when coming off a long shift, is the sight of angry placards or shouting protesters. Grocery store staff immediately come to mind, as do all those involved in our supply chain, including truckers. It may seem thankless to work in these positions during a time like this, but I hope every single one of them knows how critical they have been. It was on this understanding that governments made a point of underscoring which workers were essential at various times throughout the pandemic. We all understand that we owe a debt of gratitude to these workers. We all want them to know how their contributions have helped all of us through this time, yet here we are today. After two years of truckers being deemed essential workers, the Liberals decided they no longer were. After two years of praising their efforts of doing what they do best, delivering the goods we rely on, the Liberals decided truckers were really not essential after all. The obvious question is: Why? What changed? I get the fact that many do not understand why a certain percentage of truckers do not want to get vaccinated. I get the argument that the vast majority of other Canadians have gotten vaccinated, so why would the others not? Regardless of the frustration with those who would not get vaccinated, we all must have compassion and try to understand that no matter the mandate imposed upon them, they simply will not. At this stage of the pandemic, we must ask ourselves what reasonable benefit society and our economy could attain from the trucker mandate. The Liberals have failed to give any rationale whatsoever for the decision. If they are holding on to data indicating that the truckers have been responsible for COVID outbreaks, they have never shared it with Canadians. This lack of transparency is unfortunate. Canadians deserve to know whether the mandate on truckers is justified. They deserve to know whether the benefit of taking truckers off the road outweighs the impact to our economy. Worse yet, the government either has no framework for lifting mandates, or if it does, it sure has a funny way of communicating it to the public. We can all appreciate that this situation is fluid, but the government should be able to explain what metrics it is using to determine the scope and speed for removing mandates. On what basis is it making its decisions? There is nothing strange about Canadians wanting transparency from their government. In fact, had the government been more open with us with its federal response, perhaps we would not have seen the same levels of angst among Canadians. Perhaps we would not have seen the same levels of frustration from millions of Canadians who were eagerly awaiting an end to lockdowns and restrictions. It should go without saying at this point, but people are tired. People are frustrated. After two years of personal sacrifices, many are looking to the government to explain the path forward, but to date it seems like they are waiting in vain. Many Canadian public health officials are signalling they want to make a shift in policy. B.C.'s chief medical officer has indicated that the province's COVID response is transitioning to become “much more like how we manage influenza”. She stated: We cannot eliminate all risk.... And I think that's something that we need to understand and accept. As this virus has changed, it's become part of what we will be living with for years to come. In reply to the last question asked of my colleague, Ontario's chief medical officer also said something similar when he stated: I absolutely think we have to start to learn to live with this virus and we’ve let our lives be controlled for the last two years in a significant amount of fear. As well, Canada's top doctor is noting the need “to be able to address the ongoing presence of COVID-19 in a more sustainable way.” Looking around the world, we see that many countries are removing restrictions or laying out their framework to do so. In the United Kingdom, vaccine passports have been dropped. This has been mentioned in the House many times today. Sweden is removing entry restrictions and domestic rules. Denmark ended its COVID restrictions last week. A recent Angus Reid poll showed that a majority of Canadians “now say it is time to remove restrictions and let Canadians manage their own level of risk”. If the Prime Minister disagrees with most Canadians, then it is incumbent upon him to explain his rationale. I doubt the Prime Minister wants to unfairly label millions of Canadians as quickly as he labelled those who partook in the convoy as it made its way through Canada. Protests are occurring in communities across the country, but none is more pronounced than what we have seen outside this very place. The Prime Minister is painting every protester with a broad brush, name-calling and dismissing even the most genuine concerns about his government's actions over the last two years. There were literally thousands of people lined up on highways in support of the convoys. The only message they are hearing from the Prime Minister is that because they are supporting the convoy, they, too, must be beyond redemption. Make no mistake: I denounce all symbols of hate and have zero tolerance for illegal behaviour. Anyone who participated in that manner should be ashamed of themselves. Moreover, everyone outside should immediately minimize their impact on those who live downtown here in Ottawa. My message to both the government and to the protesters is to turn down the rhetoric. Turn down the heat. We must remember we are all citizens and will remain so after this. We cannot continue to just talk past each other. We will get nowhere if we continue this. The leader of the official opposition has requested a meeting with the Prime Minister and other party leaders so we can come together, depoliticize the response to the pandemic and talk about where we go from here. Canadians need leadership. They need to see a plan. They need hope. On this side of the House, we are prepared to work together to end this protest and help families and communities return to their normal lives. I hope all parties will join in this effort.

1450 words

All Topics

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Feb/7/22 10:31:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, a little over an hour ago, one of the member's Conservative colleagues, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, gave a very passionate speech in the House. Though I did not agree with everything he said, he made it very clear that the blockade going on outside is illegal. As a matter of fact, he posted the video of his speech, and on Twitter he has already received well over a thousand retweets and likes of that. The approach to the issue being taken by the member for Wellington—Halton Hills is very different from what we have seen from the vast majority of Conservatives. I would like to ask this member how he feels about what the member for Wellington—Halton Hills said about this blockade being illegal. Does he agree that it is illegal?

141 words

Mr. Larry Maguire

Feb/7/22 10:32:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the fine constituents of Brandon—Souris believe that these peaceful protests are allowable, but the occupation of downtown Ottawa has been going on for some time. The reason it has been, let us face it, is because the Prime Minister will not go out and talk to the protesters. If the member wants to bring up questions about who said what, all I will say is that it is in the Prime Minister's hands. Our interim leader today has written a letter to the Prime Minister, and in the questions to the Prime Minister here this evening asked him to come together with all political party leaders to find common ground to end the situation taking place not just here on Parliament Hill and in Ottawa, but across Canada.

133 words

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Feb/7/22 10:33:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague from Brandon—Souris that it is our role as opposition members to criticize the government's policies. We must do that. It is also our role to convey the suffering of our constituents, who have paid a high price during this crisis. I commend the fact that my colleague is openly saying today that protests have to be peaceful and legal. However, we are here this evening because the protests outside are neither peaceful nor legal. I would like to ask my colleague if tolerating behaviour like this is not a way of abandoning our work as opposition members, if only implicitly, since we are here to speak for our constituents, not for those blockading the streets.

125 words

Mr. Larry Maguire

Feb/7/22 10:34:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague that there needs to be a solution to this protest that has been taking place. I have been involved in many debates on Parliament Hill, and as a lobbyist in my time as a farm leader I came to Ottawa many times to make my point, but we made it and went home. The situation here is exactly what I said in the first paragraph of my presentation tonight. It is that I rise with a heightened awareness of just how divided Canadians have become. Why is that? It is because the Prime Minister decided to put mandates on truckers in Canada after they had been deemed to be essential for 22 months since the beginning of COVID.

125 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Feb/7/22 10:35:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Brandon—Souris for his delineation between the real issues that are facing our country. On one hand is division, of course, and I believe we both condemn the hate speech and the hate symbolism that has been flaunted in our nation's capital and across the country. On the other hand, the member talked about the pandemic and issues with the pandemic. I am so encouraged to hear the member encouraging members of his constituency to get vaccinated. The question for the member is this. Considering my home province of Alberta has some of the highest numbers of COVID-19, and ICUs are still in surge capacity, would he agree that provinces also have a role to play in making sure that we can handle the pandemic but also in bringing forward a plan? The member talks about freezing restrictions, but that time is not now. Would the member agree?

161 words

Mr. Larry Maguire

Feb/7/22 10:36:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the latest news that I heard over the weekend was that Alberta had 91% vaccinations, and 87% of its population was vaccinated with two vaccines. I think the member needs to catch up on the reality that it is at least tied or maybe ahead of the rest of Canada in regard to vaccinations in Alberta now. The member has a little catching up to do, but that is not the point here. It is the fact that we need to be able to make sure that goods and services are delivered across the country, and that the Prime Minister has been dividing the country.

107 words

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Feb/7/22 10:37:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an absolute privilege to rise virtually to give remarks in this emergency debate on a topic that I think is very important to our country and indeed to the people in Ottawa, particularly given what we have seen with the protests to date. I would be remiss if I did not mention that I will be splitting my time with my hon. colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge. I had the opportunity about a week ago to present in the House for 10 minutes on the reply to the Speech from the Throne. I used it as an opportunity to articulate what I was seeing vis-à-vis the protests in Ottawa. Since then, seven days have transpired, and this has given me an opportunity to refine my thoughts on what we have seen. Members have talked about MPs and the opportunity to engage. I have seen that. I have had the opportunity to walk through and engage with people on my way back and forth to my hotel. I will take this opportunity to opine on what I have seen. Let me give a synopsis on what my remarks detailed about a week ago. I explained to my colleagues that my father was a truck driver, and that one element I think is extremely important, and perhaps a silver lining of the pandemic, has been a reflection and recognition of the important role that our essential workers play, who sometimes can be unsung heroes in their own right. As I did a week ago, I will go on record to thank all those men and women who get up and make an honest living while serving society in an invaluable way. Hopefully all Canadians are able to reflect on what they are able to bring to the table, whether it be truck drivers, nurses or other professionals on the front lines of this pandemic. They are doing important work and deserve to be recognized. I reminded the House why some of the provincial and territorial measures are in place, including the measures that the Government of Canada has introduced. I would agree with my colleagues that yes, we are all tired, and yes, we want to be able to move away from COVID, and I take notice that other jurisdictions around the world are moving in that direction. However, the reality is that we are moving in this direction on some of the protocols we have in place because a disproportionate number of unvaccinated Canadians represent the ICU cases in Canadian hospitals from Newfoundland and Labrador to British Columbia. I gave a statistic, and I take notice that it may shift on a daily basis, but last week, for example, 44% of ICU cases in Nova Scotia were from the 9% of Nova Scotians who are unvaccinated. It becomes a debate, and we have heard members go through it, of individual freedoms versus collective freedoms. I will refer members back to my speech from a week ago. There was a tension. Frankly, every parliamentarian, and indeed every Canadian, is going to have a different ideological bend on where exactly that line should be. I gave the example of Mark Clarke, a dedicated volunteer in my community. Some members might have heard the S.O. 31 I gave in the House last week that was, unfortunately, about his passing. His surgery was delayed for three weeks, the open-heart surgery he needed, because there were not enough beds in the health care system in Nova Scotia to accommodate him. We can certainly reflect back and talk about the challenges that have existed in the health care system. Our government has provided supports. The provincial and territorial governments are working hard to make sure the system does not collapse. It speaks to some of the fragility that exists, but that is the situation we are in. That is why we are imposing these measures as we try to reduce the spread. We are trying to avoid situations, like Mark Clarke's situation, where people are not able to access surgeries and they unfortunately pass away as a result. There is a spectrum there in terms of individual freedoms and protection versus harm and what the line should be. Every member in the House is going to have a perspective on that, but the reality is that this is driving decision-making at this point. I also highlighted the fact that no Canadian in the country is required to take the vaccine. Again, we can weigh the consequences of the freedom to choose to vaccinate or not to vaccinate, and decide if the repercussions of such are fair and equitable. I think that is all fair game in the House. However, the idea that individuals do not have the freedom to choose whether they want a vaccine is a fallacy. Frankly, I want to be mindful of the importance of colleagues in the House in the tone and measures we set. As we have heard from colleagues who have spoken on this tonight, it is important to bring down the rhetoric. I think all parliamentarians, all 338 of us, have a role, as do elected colleagues in other places of the country. It is not one individual or one side of the House. We all have a role to play, and it is important to be mindful of that in the days ahead. I want to move to the protest in question, because that is the nexus. That is what we are talking about today. Yes, I take notice that perhaps there are very well-intentioned people. In fact, as I went through some of the protests in the last week, I saw individuals who would perhaps be reflective of people who live in my riding, individuals who had certain concerns and wanted to bring them forward. I also saw a very sinister crowd. We saw Confederate flags and swastikas. We have seen windows shattered in businesses, individuals flying pride flags in Ottawa being terrorized and individuals being shoved to the ground. I could go on and on with instances. While there may be well-intentioned individuals, and I trust there are, there are also individuals who want to do harm not just to parliamentarians or individuals, but to Canadian democracy. They are calling for the overthrow of governments and suggesting that they can go to the Governor General to dissolve Parliament. It is, frankly, insanity. Some members cannot call it what it is, but they need to do so. This brings me to my point. If people protesting here in Ottawa or elsewhere in the country fashion themselves as well-intentioned individuals who want to exercise their right to protest under subsection 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that is fine. However, they should recognize that their voices are being drowned out right now by individuals who are far more sinister and have far more sinister views. The point has been made. As other parliamentarians have said in the House, to those who are the good ones, it is time to go home. It is time to leave and let the people of Ottawa have their rights and freedoms back, their ability to go to work unhindered, their ability to go on with their lives without fireworks and horns and the whole circus that we have seen here in Ottawa. I have to be careful with my own words, but I hope everyone senses my passion. To the good ones who are watching today, it is time to go home. Indeed, members of Parliament will stand in the House, as we have seen here tonight, to continue to debate the issues that matter to them. That is what we do in a democracy. We as members of Parliament bring information back from constituents who we hear from. We bring their messages and debate them on the floor of the House of Commons. We do not clog up streets. I want to talk about the Wet'suwet'en protests that we saw in 2020. At that time, there were Conservative members of the House rightfully calling for an end to the blockade. It was disrupting the economic prosperity of the country. People were shutting down critical infrastructure. I have noticed that some Conservative members, particularly in the last few days, have started to break away and talk about that, but on the whole, there has been hypocrisy from the Conservative Party of Canada. It has not used the same language and same principle. I stand here as a member of Parliament saying that regardless of how we view the issue and regardless of what our issue may be, we do not have the right to shut down critical infrastructure in this country. We do not have the right to do what people are doing. If people want to come to Parliament Hill and protest, that is their right. It is a constitutionally protected one. However, to create the disruption and harm going on right now is not right, and every single member of the House should be calling for the same thing: for individuals to go home. Where do we go from here? Individuals have suggested the Prime Minister should negotiate or talk with protesters. Who does he negotiate with? It is mob rule right now. To the members who have suggested that here tonight, who would they suggest the Prime Minister speak to in that group? It is not clear to me who the leadership of this group is, and even those who are seemingly leading have a much more sinister view. It is time, as the ministers have indicated, for the police to use their discretion to make sure that this protest is wound down so we can carry on with the business of the nation and members of Parliament can articulate in the House what needs to be debated.

1656 words

All Topics

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Feb/7/22 10:47:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would put it to the member that it is not about negotiating, but about listening. It is about listening to the fact that there are tens of thousands of people across the country who are protesting in different ways. Some of them are driving their trucks places and going home and some of them are staying put. The point is that people are concerned about losing their jobs over mandates that need to end. I want to put a specific question to the member, and it is about the discussion around foreign funding. Many members have raised this issue, saying foreigners are donating money to this rally. The Conservatives have been talking for a very long time about the need for tough new laws to address foreign interference and address foreign funding, and that is constantly dismissed by the other parties when it comes to all kinds of other causes, including election interference. Will the member's government put forward legislation to address concerns about foreign interference in our democracy across the board? We cannot complain about it in one case and then let it go in other cases. If the government is going to put forward good-faith legislation that addresses foreign dollars coming into Canadian political debates across the board, I think there would be a lot of support for that in the House. Would the member put forward that legislation?

236 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Feb/7/22 10:48:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to address my colleague's first point about individuals who are choosing to protest. I have no issue with individuals who want to protest. I have an issue with people who are blockading highways in Alberta and people who are blockading the downtown of Ottawa. The member may be suggesting that governments should acquiesce to individuals who protest, and I understand governments need to listen and to take them into account. However, that does not always mean they have to agree. If the member opposite thinks a government should just acquiesce and do what individuals are suggesting is wrong, and that this is the way we should run our democracy in this country, that is a very poor view. In relation to the aspect of financing, I absolutely agree that if we are going to move on a law to address foreign interference, it should apply to all individuals and through all causes, if that is the true desire of where the government and parliamentarians want to go.

173 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Feb/7/22 10:49:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I agree with his point that people have the right to protest, but that the methods are somewhat questionable. What I hear from him this evening is a heartfelt message asking protesters to go home. I do not think the protesters will all of a sudden agree to go home. The federal government should have sent a clear message from the beginning that it would not let the protesters settle in. It should have worked with police, the Government of Ontario and the City of Ottawa to come up with a game plan from the beginning. Now, things have gotten bad. They have gone too far. No one knows how to get out of this situation. What does my colleague suggest? How should his government put an end to all this once and for all?

144 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois

Feb/7/22 10:50:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. Of course, the federal government's role with regard to policing matters is to be in favour of increasing the number of officers on the ground. I think that the role of the Government of Canada is to work with the City of Ottawa and the Province of Ontario to find solutions and help people on the ground. Ultimately, it is up to the Ottawa Police Service or the RCMP to find the best way to intervene in order to stop the protesters.

92 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 25