44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 17, 2023 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party supports a strong economy and well-paying jobs for all Canadians, regardless of their ethnicity or anything else, in all parts of our country. That is key. However, we believe that we perhaps need to look for other sources and other purchasers, rather than state-run companies, for such things as strategic mines. That is for our own and our partners' national security.
68 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, recommendation number one in the industry committee's report, which unfortunately did not get picked up in Bill C-34, is that the threshold for a takeover of assets, or of corporate chairs, by a state-owned enterprise should be set to zero. This would require a deep review of any such acquisition.
Could my colleague comment on whether that is a gap in the bill that should be fixed?
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with this recommendation. I believe I said it in French, but there should not be a threshold of $400 million or something before the review kicks in. It should start right at zero, not only for a company that is a new purchaser but also for acquisitions of another friendly company, a state-owned Canadian company, moving into purchasing in other strategic industries. I think any industry and purchases need to be considered.
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to take the floor today to talk about a very important subject for Canada. It is near and dear to my heart because of the significant ramifications it has for our political system. I will get to the somewhat shocking news we read in The Globe and Mail earlier today, but first I will talk a little about how this bill is lacking and what Conservatives would like to see at committee to strengthen this bill.
I will start with the motivation or what has been driving this. Why are we so concerned about the friends and insiders of the Liberal Party getting rich for the past eight years? This includes not just the government's Liberal friends who live in Canada but the ones who live in far-off lands as well.
I have a level of admiration for China because of its basic dictatorship, foreshadowing what these last eight years have been about. We have a Prime Minister who admires a foreign dictatorship, the People's Republic of China. Now, if the stories in The Globe and Mail are true, although I know the government likes to dismiss them as false, what has been discovered is very scary. This is that the Chinese Communist Party influenced the last two elections here in Canada.
What is worse is that the Prime Minister knew about this. This is our democracy. It is for the people who come to this room to determine the direction of our country, and I am deeply concerned about the influence of foreign actors. Conservatives support this bill going to committee so we can fix it. It needs to address that glaring hole of why things have been going the way they have in Canada. I believe any state-owned enterprise needs to have an analysis done on those transactions, especially for China.
The People's Republic of China has been gobbling up companies around the world. We do not have to look too far. If we look at Africa, we will see the influence it now has on those countries. Obviously, the Chinese Communist Party wants influence in Canada. It appears it already has influence with the government because it illegally supported the government in the last election by donating money to 11 candidates. We do not yet know who these candidates are. Is it the Prime Minister? Is it a cabinet minister? Is it a member of an opposition? There is no reason why we cannot find out.
420 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We are extremely off topic right now, and if the member wants to go off topic, I would love to talk about Justice Rouleau's report that was just tabled. I would love to have a discussion about that right now. However, it is important that we stick to what is actually at hand, this piece of legislation, and not go off on tangents like the member is doing.
78 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/23 1:10:23 p.m.
- Watch
I would remind all members that the topic at hand is Bill C-34.
The hon. member for Saskatoon—University.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the bill is about national security. I cannot think of a more important national security issue than a foreign country influencing our election. It is absolutely tied to this because we know that this is—
38 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/23 1:10:49 p.m.
- Watch
There is another point of order by the hon. parliamentary secretary.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member appears to be challenging your ruling. If that is the case, he should challenge the Chair, and we will allow that process to take place. It is incumbent upon all members to respect the position of the Chair and your authority. You have made a ruling on this, and now the member is challenging it.
59 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member appears to be challenging your ruling. If that is the case, he should challenge the Chair, and we will allow that process to take place. It is incumbent upon all members to respect the position of the Chair and your authority. You have made a ruling on this, and now the member is challenging it.
59 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/23 1:11:07 p.m.
- Watch
I will again remind everybody that we are speaking to Bill C-34. While we do give a lot of leeway on what we debate and discuss in this chamber, I would remind the member to come back to the bill at hand.
The hon. member for Saskatoon—University.
50 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am not challenging the authority of your chair. How this ties into the Republic of China is that it is influencing our elections, and the bill is about stopping the influence of countries like that in our economy. That is the connection. It is as clear as day.
The member across the way is engaging in distraction, suggesting that it is somehow wrong to talk about the influence China has had on two elections. Eleven candidates received illegal donations, and we have yet to find out who these individuals are. Who is protecting those 11 individuals? What are they hiding? We know this is coming from a country we have concerns with.
The bill would try to stop the undue influence on our economy, and there are reports out today saying that this country went one step further. We know that the People's Republic of China is influencing other countries through economic purchases in their economies. However, it just bypassed it all and bought a government with illegal donations, hiring people to work in elections and then sending those volunteers off to work on Liberal-friendly campaigns. Those are the reports in The Globe and Mail that are so troubling. It goes to the root of why we are are here.
Why does this all matter? We are supposed to be making choices for the benefit of this country, not for a foreign country that is, for the time being, in bed with one of the parties in Canada.
The bill needs to be strengthened. We need to do a net analysis on all transactions from the People's Republic of China. We have to bring the threshold down to zero. These are recommendations we heard at committee, and when the bill does finally get to committee, I hope we do add that. We need to add teeth to the bill.
There are a couple of things that are done well in the bill so far. One is the increase in penalties, because of inflation of all things. Everything is getting hurt by inflation. However, the bill would increase the penalties given to companies that would break this proposed act, and we are happy to note that increase. There are other common-sense things we can do to protect our economy from being bought out by the People's Republic of China.
396 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's comments. The bill we are discussing is on the Investment Canada Act and whether we need to update it given some changes in the world.
I will ask a question that I asked earlier of a Conservative member.
Increasingly, foreign investors see the Canadian health sector as place in which they can invest. We have the example of Anbang, a Chinese insurance company that was later nationalized or seized by the Chinese government, which is a major investor in long-term care homes in my province. I wonder if the member agrees with us in the New Democratic Party that we need to update this piece of legislation before us to take into account investments like these, which put the health of Canadians at risk.
135 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member is right on the sector aspect of the bill. The minister is the one who would decides what sectors would be exempt and the ones that would be included in this, which is another issue we have with the bill. Things can change in the regulations without a vote in this place. However, we can see where one might pick one sector over another for political benefit. This is what I believe we have in Canada right now, with the government definitely benefiting from a close and tight relationship with the Government of China and the influence it is trying to enact on our people and our economy. That is what we need to improve on.
I really look forward to getting the bill to committee so that we can put some teeth into it to do the net benefit analysis on transactions so we can see, in a transparent way, up or down, what is taking place out there and whether there are purchases of crucial parts of our economy.
175 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, according to the latest data released, last year, there were 1,255 foreign investment projects totalling $87 billion. Only eight of those projects were reviewed. With this bill, that number would increase to 24, which is barely 2% of foreign investment projects. Does my colleague think that is enough?
54 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, no, it is not enough. We need to get it down to zero dollars.
This is the virtual signalling that we have from the Liberals. Every day they talk a big game, but when they actually introduce something that is supposed to counter or to do what they have talked about, it does not. That is the most frustrating thing about being here in Ottawa. They are all talk and no action.
Here is an example where we could actually strengthen our country, through this, to make sure that purchases from foreign state enterprises are scrutizined. For whatever reason, the Liberals do not want that scrutiny. One must ask why. Why would they be hiding from the scrutiny that would come from having that transparent process, where every transaction, not even just over a dollar amount but anything more than zero, would trigger the net benefit analysis? I hope our colleagues in the Bloc would support us at committee to strengthen these measures.
165 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, no, it is not enough. We need to get it down to zero dollars.
This is the virtual signalling that we have from the Liberals. Every day they talk a big game, but when they actually introduce something that is supposed to counter or to do what they have talked about, it does not. That is the most frustrating thing about being here in Ottawa. They are all talk and no action.
Here is an example where we could actually strengthen our country, through this, to make sure that purchases from foreign state enterprises are scrutizined. For whatever reason, the Liberals do not want that scrutiny. One must ask why. Why would they be hiding from the scrutiny that would come from having that transparent process, where every transaction, not even just over a dollar amount but anything more than zero, would trigger the net benefit analysis? I hope our colleagues in the Bloc would support us at committee to strengthen these measures.
165 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member for Kingston and the Islands seems to be confused around what the bill is about.
It is about the issue of national security and doing national security reviews of takeovers. There is a long record of the government not approving national security reviews for takeovers, such as Hytera, which was charged with espionage in the United States; the Tanco Mine; and many others, and having the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency actually buy equipment from those entities.
The security issue of state-owned enterprises and interference in our country's economy and elections is what the issue is all about. I would like to give the member an opportunity to clarify a little more what the member for Kingston and the Islands seemed to be so confused about.
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I do not think the Liberal members are confused at all. They know exactly what they are doing. They are helping a foreign state actor influence our economy and now our elections. To that point, we have an example.
In 2020, the Department of Foreign Affairs awarded a contract to the Chinese-based company Nuctech to supply X-ray equipment to, of all places, embassies. This is not a mistake. They are doing this on purpose. The only reason why this would be taking place is to let a foreign state actor into our embassies, to scan documents and articles going into embassies across the world. This is not incompetence; it is by design.
116 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I even quickly put on a tie because I was a little disappointed with the comments from the member for South Shore—St. Margarets in relation to the suggestion that any member of the House would somehow be involved with undermining Canadian democracy or the Canadian economy to any extent.
I do not know where it is exactly in the procedural rules, but I think that would perhaps be a little unwarranted. I am wondering if you might be able to address that comment.
94 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
