SoVote

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

May/4/23 10:17:32 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am shocked that the Leader of the Opposition, who is making such a big deal of this, or the member who is supposedly affected by this, is not the one leading off the discussion today. Nonetheless, my question for the member is this. I will start with a statement of fact— Mr. Garnett Genuis: Supposedly affected?

60 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/4/23 10:17:50 a.m.
Watch

Order. It is not the proper time for the hon. member to be yelling across the way when I have not recognized him. The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

32 words

Secretary

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

May/4/23 10:18:11 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will start with a statement of fact. The Prime Minister first heard about this incident earlier this week, when it was reported in the media, as did everybody else. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills had a defence briefing on this two years ago, so he knew about this when it actually happened. My question for the member is this. When did he find out about it? Did the member for Wellington—Halton Hills bring it to his attention at any time prior to the media doing so?

93 words

Mr. Michael Cooper

May/4/23 10:18:39 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, yesterday in the House, I asked the Minister of Public Safety twice, as did other members, when his office learned of this, and he refused to answer. I learned about it in The Globe and Mail, but CSIS told the committee that it most definitely briefs the government about instances when politicians are targeted by hostile foreign governments. Therefore, it is simply not credible for the government to claim that it found out about it from The Globe and Mail. The minister's office knew about it two years ago. That is why he will not say when his office learned of it, because it has been two years and the Liberals did nothing.

116 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

May/4/23 10:19:50 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton for his speech. Clearly we are in for quite a debate today. I encourage members to focus on the matter at hand, which is an extremely serious one, rather than trying to silence the member opposite. My colleague painted a clear picture of the crisis we are in and the importance of holding an independent public inquiry. However, I would have liked to hear him say more about what thePrime Minister has done since the beginning of this crisis to protect his image. For example, he has dropped the names of various friends—people like Mr. Rosenberg and Mr. Johnston, who have close ties to the Trudeau Foundation—in an attempt to cool things down and convince us that someone is handling the problem. Because of that, people are wondering whether the Prime Minister is protecting Canadians and democracy or whether he is protecting the Trudeau Foundation. I would like my colleague to tell us more about that.

173 words

Mr. Michael Cooper

May/4/23 10:20:57 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is no coincidence that the Prime Minister appointed Rosenberg, the past president of the Trudeau Foundation, to investigate the 2021 election, an election in which Beijing interfered to assist the Liberals in winning a re-election. It is no coincidence. As far as the appointment of a special rapporteur is concerned, it is no coincidence that he appointed a member of the Trudeau Foundation. A special rapporteur is nothing more than an attempt by the Prime Minister to appoint his friends to provide delays so he can cover up this interference in the hope that it goes away. Guess what? It is not. Canadians are demanding answers and in order to get them we need a public inquiry and we need it now.

126 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

May/4/23 10:21:54 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the NDP agrees. There is no question that there needs to be a public inquiry, one that is completely independent and transparent. To that end, my question for the member is this. What does he think is necessary in order to ensure the process is one that all parties could agree to? For example, would the commissioner be chosen with the participation of all leaders in the House to make sure that it is something that we believe will be completely independent?

84 words

Mr. Michael Cooper

May/4/23 10:22:36 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, if a public inquiry is to have any credibility, whoever leads that inquiry must not only be independent but also must be seen to be independent, which is why Conservatives, along with all of the opposition parties, have called on the Liberal government to establish a process whereby the House leaders of all the parties agree and consent to whoever is appointed to lead such an inquiry. First, however, we need an inquiry.

75 words

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie (Calgary Midnapore, CPC)

May/4/23 10:23:18 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in 2002, I accepted an invitation to join the Canadian foreign service. My motivation was to serve the country I loved and to promote the values of freedom, the rule of law and democracy. My guiding document was the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, a document revered by all nations, a universally codified agreement. The statutes within it allow the nations to conduct their diplomatic functions in a safe and mutually agreed-upon manner. To operate within it meant security, fidelity and continuity of business abroad. For me, to violate it was unthinkable. To honour it meant safe care of citizens, both at home and abroad. In 2018, I was asked to serve as shadow minister for democratic institutions. My pleas to the then minister of democratic institutions, now Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, to protect our democracy at all costs fell on deaf ears. I am particularly offended that our current leader is accused of having done nothing, when she held the pen leading up to the 2019 and subsequent 2021 elections. In 2018, I questioned the Prime Minister in the House, and the minister responded. I asked: Mr. Speaker, in response to a question in New York this week, the Prime Minister admitted to knowing that foreign money had influenced the 2015 federal election. Bill C-76 was supposed to close the loopholes in the election legislation, but it does nothing to stop foreign money from influencing our elections. When is the Prime Minister going to take this issue seriously and stop foreign interests from influencing our elections? The minister replied: Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. It is vital that everyone in the House work together to avoid and prevent foreign influence and interference in our elections. I am excited to work with everyone in the House to make sure we pass Bill C-76. In Bill C-76 are tangible measures to ensure we can prevent foreign interference. I hope my colleagues on the other side will work with us to get this legislation passed quickly to ensure that our next elections are protected. In addition to the toothless Bill C-76, the then minister gloated about the creation and implementation of the critical election incident protocol, a government body composed of five senior civil servants who all reported to the Liberal government. Be it incompetence or intention, the Liberal minister also failed, along with the Prime Minister, to keep Canadians safe and to protect our democratic institutions, but she refused to believe otherwise. Nonetheless, here we are today, with revelations of significant interference in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections by the People's Republic of China, reports of money being funnelled to candidates and Canadians being intimidated. Canada's election law is very clear: “No person who does not reside in Canada shall, during an election period, in any way induce electors to vote or refrain from voting or vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate”. The Prime Minister continues to avoid questions and dismisses concerns as ill-informed or even racist. When questioned by the official opposition in November, he stated that he was never briefed on election candidates receiving money from Beijing. This was even while Global News was reporting that intelligence memos had been given to the Prime Minister months before, outlining how Beijing's consulate directed the funnelling of a large sum of money to 11 candidates in the 2019 election. When the former head of CSIS called for a public inquiry into election interference, the Prime Minister labelled that suggestion as undermining democracy. As well, after Global News alleged, in late February, that the member for Don Valley North was aided in 2019 by the Chinese consulate in Toronto, the Prime Minister dismissed questions about the situation, coming close to accusing the media of racism for even daring to ask about it, and to accusing those who were trying to get to the truth of damaging confidence in Canada's democratic institutions. Most recently, a report published by The Globe and Mail on May 1 made the claim that CSIS documents from 2021 state that China sees Canada as a prime target for interference. It also states that the member of Parliament for Wellington—Halton Hills's family was targeted by Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei. The diplomat faced no repercussions, and the member was not made aware until the Globe and Mail story two years later. This is why Conservatives, the final defenders of freedom in this nation, have presented this motion here today. I will now discuss each part in more detail. The motion states, “(a) create a foreign agent registry similar to Australia and the United States of America”. We have had, on this side of the House, a member bring legislation to the House, only to have it defeated by the current government, and now we see why. In 2019, the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke brought similar legislation to the House, and it was voted down by the current government. The irony of other nations' having implemented such registries is that, in June 2018, the government announced, at the G7 Charlevoix summit, that it would lead on the commitment by G7 leaders with respect to the protection of democracy, by playing and coordinating a leadership function for the broader G7 network. Most recently, we have seen the Liberal member for Nepean refute the necessity of such a registry. Given the discoveries over the last few weeks, we can see why. The motion continues with “(b) establish a national public inquiry on the matter of foreign election interference”. All parties except the government, including its coalition partners from the NDP, are calling for this clause, yet we have learned that the government will kick and scream to avoid transparency, and, even when this is brought to pass by the House with opposition parties in agreement, will refuse to comply to provide information. The motion then states, “(c) close down the People's Republic of China run police stations operating in Canada”. I am sure that Canadians were in disbelief that police stations, not only from another nation but from a nation that has no regard for human rights or the rule of law, were operating within our borders, and that, in fact, the Minister of Public Safety gave us the assurance that all of these stations had been closed, yet we found out on May 1 that these continue to operate in Quebec. Part (d) of the motion is to “expel all of the People's Republic of China diplomats responsible for and involved in these affronts to Canadian democracy.” The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is a cornerstone of modern international relations and international law. It states that the host nation at any time and for any reason can declare a diplomatic staff member to be persona non grata. It further states that the sending state, in that case, must recall this person within a reasonable period of time; otherwise, this person may lose their diplomatic immunity. This is something that should have happened by now, yet the Prime Minister and the government have failed to do so for this individual. If the member for Wellington—Halton Hills is not safe, how do we know that all members of the House and their families are safe? The Vienna Convention is about honour, and so, I thought, is the House. However, in the words of the great author Lord Jeffrey Archer, there is no honour among thieves. The government should recognize the reprehensible violation of diplomatic immunity and declare Zhao Wei persona non grata. As a former diplomat for Canada, my desire for freedom, democracy and the rule of law will never be hampered, not even by the current government. It is the raison d’être for my being here in the House of Commons and it is why I stand in support of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. The Conservative Party will never back down from those who attempt to impede the fundamental freedoms of Canadians: truth, freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. If other members believe in those as well, they will support this legislation.

1392 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/4/23 10:33:28 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, unlike the Conservative Party, this government truly believes in doing what it can to combat foreign interference and intimidation. It is very interesting how the Conservatives, on the other hand, play politics with the issue. It is important that Canadians who follow the debate today realize that CSIS is the deciding authority as to when and how things are brought up. The Prime Minister found out on Monday. The Prime Minister then followed up by saying that he wanted to have updates on the issue whenever MPs were brought to the attention of CSIS. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills has known for two years. The question is whether that member has brought it up with the member for Calgary Midnapore or any member of the Conservative caucus. Has he brought it up inside the chamber? Has he done anything on the issue? Why has the member— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

156 words

Calgary

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/4/23 10:34:23 a.m.
Watch

I again want to remind members, especially those who have already had an opportunity to make a speech, to wait until it is questions and comments, if they wish to try to be recognized for input. The hon. member for Calgary Midnapore.

42 words

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

May/4/23 10:34:45 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is very clear that Canadians cannot have confidence in the government to protect democracy. They cannot have confidence in the government to protect our democratic institutions. They cannot have confidence in the government to protect the members in the House, their families and their loved ones abroad. We will take no lessons from the government. It had its opportunity leading up to 2019, and it failed.

69 words

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

May/4/23 10:35:22 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I like the subject of our Conservative colleagues' opposition day today. Their motion includes a number of the Bloc Québécois's concerns. I listened carefully to my colleague's speech, and I heard her concerns. I would say that almost everyone on the opposition benches shares those concerns. However, I am also concerned about the entire situation. I would like to hear the member's thoughts on Alexandre Trudeau's appearance before the committee yesterday. His arrogant attitude seems to be a family trait. He even accused the press of poor journalism. That is a big deal. He also accused the foundation's former CEO of spreading misinformation to sway the debate, no less. I am very confused and very concerned about this situation. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about that.

144 words

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

May/4/23 10:36:31 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the official opposition is also really confused, because we found out about the foreign interference and about what was happening to the member from Wellington—Halton Hills in the news. We agree with what the member said. What has come out in the media is really important for our democracy and it affects all Canadians, members of the House and the government. It is really unbelievable. I am asking myself the same question as my colleague.

79 words

Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, NDP)

May/4/23 10:37:34 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as a New Democrat, I am concerned about foreign election interference. We were the first party to suggest a public inquiry. However, I have two concerns, and the member's speech raises both of them for me. One is that if we turn this into a bitter partisan issue, we actually will be doing the work of the foreign agents who seek to disrupt our democracy instead of working to solve the problem. The second one is that if we exclusively focus on China, we will miss other attempts to interfere in our democracy, including things like the convoy that the member supported, where a million dollars flowed from the U.S. to try to overthrow the government here. Mr. Kelly McCauley: What a clown.

127 words

Ms. Leah Gazan

May/4/23 10:38:23 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I know it is the end of the season, but calling people “clowns” across the way and things like that, there needs to be limits here. There is nobody in the House pretty much right now. We are on duty and in the middle of debate. What we are debating right now is really serious. We are talking about threats to democracy. When we behave like this in the House, when we are talking about protecting our democracy, protecting democratic institutions, it really troubles me, because I am concerned about the state of our democracy.

106 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/4/23 10:39:02 a.m.
Watch

I appreciate the feedback that the hon. member has provided. I am not sure who may have called somebody that name, but I would remind members that we are to be respectful here. On a number of occasions, we have raised the issue that calling people names in the House of Commons is not acceptable, so I would ask individuals to be respectful. The hon. member for Calgary Midnapore, a brief answer please.

73 words

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie

May/4/23 10:39:37 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I simply have to refute the facts within that question. The truth of the matter is that the member stands in a coalition with the government that is impeding Canadians from their families, and that is giving it cover-up and not keeping members and their families safe. The member is complicit with that, and he should think about that.

62 words

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed (Vancouver Granville, Lib.)

May/4/23 10:40:11 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, given all of the conversations that have been happening this morning, I want to begin by being very clear. On this side of the House, our government has zero tolerance for foreign interference. We take any attempt to undermine our democracy seriously, and we will continue to take all the actions that are necessary to protect our institutions. This is not a partisan issue, and it should not be a partisan issue. It is a matter of upholding Canadians' confidence in our democracy. Foreign interference, as we know, is not solely a Canadian issue. Hostile state actors are targeting western democracies, whether it is Australia, the United Kingdom, France, the United States or other allies. These hostile state actors continue to do so at a rate we have not seen since the Cold War. They are working to sow distrust in our institutions, and it is very important for Canadians to see that every single member of the House is united in our actions against hostile foreign actors. Our government has already done more than any other government in the history of our country to put a stop to foreign interference. We are committed to working across the government and with all who are interested in working with us to bolster our institutions, to improve our systems and to create the tools that are required to fight and deter foreign interference. The Leader of the Opposition has made it clear that he is not here to play a constructive role or to work across party lines to fight foreign interference, and that is his choice. If members opposite choose to polarize situations and score cheap political points on the back of a serious situation, that is their choice. That is not how we choose to do things. Foreign interference is a topic that requires constant vigilance and the participation, collaboration and co-operation of governments around the world, but, most important, all members of the House. In today's uncertain and unstable global climate, I believe very strongly that it is an issue that demands the types of conversations we are having now, so long as those conversations are grounded in fact and that we choose to work toward solutions, and we know Canadians feel the same way. Canadians share this concern. Let me be clear about one thing above all else. It is Canadians and Canadians alone who decide the outcome of our elections, and we will ensure it stays that way. We have the systems and processes, the checks and balances that protect the foundations of our democracy. As I said before, we are committed to working across the government to improve and create the tools that are required to fight and deter foreign interference. Canadians want reassurance that they will not be targeted directly. That also means members of Parliament. We will do all that we can as parliamentarians, and we should do all we can, to stay ahead of the threats to our safety. Malicious interference undermines Canada's democratic institutions and public discourse. It is also used to intimidate and coerce diaspora communities in our country. Part of what hostile state actors are trying to do is to shift the narrative. By that I mean they are working to sow division to circumvent the rules-based international order. They are seeking to create confusion and mistrust, and when they look at the debate in this House and the comments that are coming from across the way, they are succeeding. To achieve their objectives, these foreign-state actors engage in hostile activities. They actively engage in spreading misinformation and disinformation in an attempt to undermine confidence in the fundamental institutions of this country, including our electoral system. They do so by cultivating witting and unwitting individuals to assist them, which enables them to operate with plausible deniability on Canadian soil. That is why it— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

656 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/4/23 10:43:45 a.m.
Watch

I am still getting some interruptions while the hon. member is speaking. There will be an opportunity for questions and answers and there will be opportunities for more speeches. I would remind members— Mr. Warren Steinley: But he said— The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Order, please. That is really disrespectful. I am speaking to the hon. member. He should be paying attention, listening and abiding by the rules of the House. If he is not happy with that, then I would ask him to maybe leave the chamber. The hon. member for Vancouver Granville.

98 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 191