SoVote

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

May/4/23 4:45:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am going to paraphrase an expression to avoid using unparliamentary language. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. There is something here that looks a lot like foreign interference, and the facts are piling up. After everything we have learned in the last few weeks, should there not be an independent, transparent inquiry to shed light on foreign interference? We need to restore the public's confidence in democracy, our institutions, the Prime Minister's Office and our security services.

98 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/4/23 4:46:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, which is very important. As to whether there should be a public inquiry or not, an individual who is held in very high esteem will be making that determination and the determination on a number of recommendations the government will follow. I look forward to seeing those recommendations. What we need to ensure is that all Canadians, the almost 40 million of us, have confidence in our electoral system, that there is no election interference and that we understand that in the world we live in, we must deal with foreign actors who do not have the best intentions here in Canada and in other parts of the world.

118 words

Mr. Kevin Vuong (Spadina—Fort York, Ind.)

May/4/23 4:47:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to read article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations into the record. It states: The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata or that any other member of the staff of the mission is not acceptable. I would ask my colleague who sits on the government benches this: If setting up illegal police stations on Canadian soil or attacking or targeting a member of this House does not meet the threshold, what does meet the threshold to be able to kick someone out of our country?

122 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/4/23 4:48:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the issues and matters in front of the government and all members of this House are of very important, even critically important consideration. Obviously, whatever decisions are made will meet the proper threshold. I am not privy to all the information regarding what has transpired, so for me to opine on that would be—

57 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/4/23 4:48:35 p.m.
Watch

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Scarborough—Guildwood.

9 words

Hon. John McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood, Lib.)

May/4/23 4:48:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge for setting me up. I can hardly wait to hear what I have to say. I was literally sitting here wondering what I could contribute to this debate. One of the hon. members talked about the chaos in this chamber. It is true. Question period was chaotic, and I have never seen the Speaker quite so animated or so angry. We have all contributed to the chaos that is here. I actually wonder what Beijing thinks. In some respects, Beijing is having a good day, because we are fighting among ourselves. However, I have some confidence in colleagues that we can actually come to some point of resolution not only on the motion but also on the way in which we face the existential threat to the nation of Canada that is the government of China. I think it is a fair observation that, as a nation, we have never faced such a threat from another nation. Another government wishes to turn us into a vassal, subservient state, a state where the belt and road literally apply to us. All roads lead to Beijing, and the belt is for our neck. That is the ultimate goal of the government of Beijing; stirring up chaos in our country is the technique. Part of me regrets participating in this debate, because in some manner, I am contributing to that chaos. As I said, I am rather hoping that by the end of the day, we may have some resolution or may at least be starting to move toward some resolution on how to deal with this existential threat. I had the privilege of travelling to Taiwan with the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills a couple of weeks ago. I regard that member as a friend. I think that may be one of the first things that we could deal with. We are a little too partisan here. There are not many on that side who can say they have friends on this side, and there are not many on this side who can say that they have friends on that side. However, I do regard the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills as a friend. As a consequence of travelling with him in a delegation of 10 to Taiwan, all senior members of four parties, we had what I regard as an exemplary way in which Canadian parliamentarians can do good diplomacy and actually move the yardsticks in a serious area of diplomacy. The hon. member and I, and other members of the delegation, I am sure, discussed the last election. Obviously, we did not get as far as some of the material that has come out in the last little while, but he was aware at the time that there were people who, strangely, were part of public events for him. We all live in a political environment. There are times when I do not know who is supporting me. I do not even know who is not supporting me. Sometimes, there are a lot of people who are not supporting me. That does not happen to anybody else, of course. The point I want to make about the unanimity that is required in order to face this existential threat and to move our diplomatic interests forward is that we based part of our time in Taiwan on a unanimous report generated by the Canada-China committee. There are times when reports of committees hit the floor of the House and that is it. We never hear about them again. Interestingly, we took this report to Taiwan, and it was literally presented to the president by the chair of the committee. I will not say that she clutched it, but it was not too far from that. It was a show of unanimity by this Parliament and these parliamentarians, as well as a friendship to a government that is literally under an existential threat. When we arrived, there were warplanes overhead, and there were warships surrounding the island. We all concluded that, frankly, one could learn a lot from the Taiwanese government and the Taiwanese people in terms of how to respond to existential threats by the People's Republic of China. That is the first point I want to make. We do, for the sake of our nation, need to come to ground on the way in which we respond to misinformation, disinformation, interference and intimidation. One of the points that comes up in the motion is the issue of police stations. There is one in my community. From all reports that we can gather in the public domain, it is an intimidation operation run from local Chinese diplomatic authorities, and it affects the diaspora community in ways that we probably cannot even imagine. In that respect, I think the motion has merit. However, I would just point out to colleagues that if we are to have integrity ourselves, then we also need to let the police move as police move, which is basically on the basis of evidence. As much as I would like to light a fire under police authorities in my community, or the RCMP, as the case may be, using the rule of law is the way we operate in this country. I do not think that we should deviate from the rule of law and the way in which we prosecute, even if we are virtually unanimous in our view that these police stations need to be shut down. The other area in which I agree is the foreign agent registry. I think we are moving forward on that. The minister is moving forward. I do not know if it is the be-all and end-all, but I think it is a useful thing to do. Other nations have adopted it. I just take note that the same Canada-China committee has adopted a motion that calls for the Government of Canada to prioritize the introduction of legislation to establish a foreign agent registry. Interestingly, that was a Liberal motion. I hope that I have contributed to the conversation here today.

1030 words

Mr. Michael Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton, CPC)

May/4/23 4:58:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member mentioned that there is an illegal Beijing police station operating in his riding. I presume that he has brought that to the attention of the Minister of Public Safety. Last week, when the minister appeared before the procedure and House affairs committee, he repeatedly claimed that the RCMP had shut down all illegal police stations. That is not true. Either the minister does not know what is going on or he intentionally misled the committee. Does the hon. member have concerns about that, and did he alert the minister to the illegal police station in his riding?

102 words

Hon. John McKay

May/4/23 4:59:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it was not in my riding; it was in my community. Having said that, I had received assurances from the minister, as it is of concern, that the one in Scarborough has been dealt with. As far as I know, that is true.

45 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

May/4/23 4:59:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is not every day that we hear members waxing existential or philosophical. Unfortunately, that does not happen often enough in the House. All of that raises the question of why. Why are we here? Why are we taking action? Rather than reducing the question to a vague “how-to”, I want to ask the member the following. Does he not believe that today's Conservative motion is an excellent opportunity to think about the reason for our action and to turn the chaos that I was talking about earlier when I mentioned the Chinese ideogram into an opportunity to reclaim control over our destiny?

109 words

Hon. John McKay

May/4/23 5:00:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's question, which is a good one: Why are we here? The larger answer is that we as a nation, we as parliamentarians and even we as a government are flummoxed by how to deal with the way in which China intervenes routinely, regularly and massively in the fabric of our society. We have never, ever in the history of our nation faced such a threat. That is why we are here. I want to stress how important this motion is and it is symptomatic of our somewhat chaotic response to the threat to our democracy. Again, I thank the hon. member for his question. I have asked myself “why?” a few times myself.

123 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

May/4/23 5:01:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was one of the members who travelled with my colleague to Taiwan on that recent trip. My concern now as we go forward is, how we deal with this perception by Canadians, and real perception, that our democracy is at risk, that our institutions are under attack and that Canadians are being threatened. When we hear things like the member just said, that there was a police station in his riding and he does not know what happened but he has been told it has been dealt with, it does not seem like that is the way that we are going to give Canadians confidence that this has actually been accurately taken care of. From my understanding, no one has been charged, there have been no arrests and nothing has been done. I wonder what the member would suggest we do in order to rebuild confidence in our institutions, in order to rebuild confidence in our democracy and in order for Canadians of backgrounds from a variety of different countries to feel safe in our country again.

180 words

Hon. John McKay

May/4/23 5:02:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciated the hon. member's contribution to our delegation in Taiwan. The short answer is that I do not know how to answer the question. I know that is strange in this place. Everybody answers the questions and even answers questions that are not asked. It is kind of trite, but true. We are at a bit of an inflection point on how to move forward democratically. I was asked by the press yesterday how I would conduct a future election and I now have to think about that. I now have to think about who is supporting me, who is contributing—

106 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/4/23 5:03:48 p.m.
Watch

We will leave it at those questions. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

18 words

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC)

May/4/23 5:03:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am rising today in my role as the shadow minister for national defence for the official opposition. I agree with my colleague who just spoke that this is an issue that all members in this House should be engaged with. It is an issue that is definitely impacting each and everyone of us and our ability to represent our constituents without the fear of a foreign entity trying to intimidate us by threatening our families abroad. As everyone knows, I have been an incredibly outspoken critic of Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation. I was in the original tranche of 13 members of Parliament and parliamentary Canadians who were sanctioned by Russia back in 2013. We are now witnessing a situation where one of our fellow colleagues, my friend, the member of Parliament for Wellington—Halton Hills, has been targeted by the Communist regime in Beijing and its foreign agents here in Canada, threatening him and his family back in Hong Kong. Unfortunately, what we see from the government is just dithering and delaying in the typical Liberal way when it comes down to doing things that are important to each and every Canadian. National security and national defence responsibilities are paramount to the Government of Canada, yet we see a government that has not taken this issue seriously. It knew for two years that there was a legitimate threat made against the family of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. We knew that the Communist regime in Beijing did not like the way he brought forward a motion to call out its activities against the Uyghur population in China as genocide, for which it decided to intimidate and sanction his family in Hong Kong. The motion we have before us today lays out a path for our House and the government to finally act. It would create a foreign agent registry, similar to what we see in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. I would say, with respect to all the comments coming from the other side during the debate earlier today claiming that as Conservatives we did not do anything, that it only became an issue toward the end of our time in government, and that our platform for the 2015 election campaign called for the need to establish a foreign agent registry. The second part of the motion calls for the establishment of a national public independent inquiry on the matter of foreign election interference, which we have been dealing with here now for several months once we found out that the Prime Minister had been briefed that seven MPs and their ridings had been targeted for foreign interference by the Communist regime in Beijing. Instead of having that independent public inquiry that the majority of members in this House have been asking for, the government went with a Liberal insider, someone who is a family friend of the Prime Minister's, with direct ties to the Trudeau Foundation, who is the former governor general David Johnston. Everyone is questioning the independent advice that will come from that process. That is why we need to move forward with a public inquiry to establish public confidence. The motion also calls for the government to shut down all of the People's Republic of China's police stations that are operating in Canada. We know there are a couple in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal that are still open to this day. They may be observed by the RCMP, but we know for a fact that operatives of the Communist Party of China are using their diplomatic immunity in those stations to intimidate Chinese Canadians. That has to stop now. Yesterday, the Falun Dafa, who are Falun Gong practitioners, were on the Hill standing for their rights and liberties that are being denied to them in mainland China, to stop the genocide against Falun Gong practitioners, and the illicit harvesting and trafficking of organs across the planet. Of course, the source of those organs are persecuted, executed and butchered Falun Gong practitioners. Why have they been targeted by the regime in Beijing? It is because they had the right to assembly, which was denied them. They had their faith, which was denied them. They could not even come together to practise a faith that promotes tolerance, truthfulness and compassion, which are the founding principles of the Falun Gong doctrine. The fourth and final part of this motion calls for the expulsion of all diplomats from the PRC who are responsible for the affront to all Canadians, including the member of Wellington—Halton Hills, for their attack on democracy and foreign interference right here Canada. Again, the government has made the argument that it cannot do it. However, I can tell members for a fact that, under Stephen Harper when the Conservatives were in government, we had a similar situation with the Iranian regime here in Canada where it was using its diplomats to target and intimidate the Iranian diaspora right here in Canada. What did we do? We expelled every single diplomat. They were declared persona non grata. We shut down its embassy here in Ottawa. We shut down its consulates in Toronto and Vancouver. Now we have its properties that we will hopefully be able to use to actually compensate the Iranian families here in Canada who lost loved ones on the Ukrainian International Airline Flight PS752, which was shot down as a terrorist act by the Iranian regime. Of course, we continue to fight in here on having the government honour the motion that was passed in 2018 to call the IRGC a terrorist organization and that this entity should not be allowed to operate in any way, shape or form in Canada. What we are living through right now is an affront to our democracy. It is an attack not just on the member for Wellington—Halton Hills but an attack on every single minister, every single member of Parliament and every single Canadian. If we are going to protect our democratic institutions, then we have to act now. Enough is enough. Yet, we have not seen a single diplomat from Beijing expelled by this government. We have not seen the government carry through on its promise to shut down the police stations that the PRC has opened across Canada. The government has not taken a single step forward in establishing a foreign agent registry. What we saw earlier today was disgusting when the member for Winnipeg North played the victim blame game and tried to blame the member for Wellington—Halton Hills for not doing anything on information that he never received two years ago. We know that this government received information from CSIS, and we know that the government did not act upon that intelligence. CSIS said that the family of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills was being threatened through information that it had gathered through signals intelligence, and yet the member for Winnipeg North stooped to a new low by trying to say that it was the fault of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. That is ridiculous.

1197 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/4/23 5:13:31 p.m.
Watch

On a point of order, the member for Winnipeg North.

10 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/4/23 5:13:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is just outright and absolutely wrong.

9 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/4/23 5:13:41 p.m.
Watch

The Speaker has ruled on the issue right after question period and will come back to the House if necessary.

20 words

Issue

Mr. James Bezan

May/4/23 5:13:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I can quote the parliamentary secretary to the House leader for the government—

16 words

Secretary

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/4/23 5:14:02 p.m.
Watch

I remind the member that this issues was dealt with right after question period. The hon. member has the floor.

20 words

Floor

Mr. James Bezan

May/4/23 5:14:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is important to lay out what the national security adviser to the Prime Minister, Jody Thomas, said at committee back in December of 2022. She said, “The Prime Minister is briefed regularly. He's very interested in this subject and has directed work for agencies to do...We are briefing regularly, and those briefings are received and acted upon.” This is in relation to the Prime Minister getting briefed. Jody Thomas also went on to say that their are constant briefings to the Prime Minister. She said, “He's briefed on foreign interference when we have issues to raise to his attention. He has a daily foreign intelligence brief, and he has a weekly Prime Minister's intelligence brief.” I am not saying Jody Thomas was involved in this, because Jody Thomas was not the national security adviser at the time, and I know that before her, there was a revolving door of national security advisers in the PCO. The Prime Minister does get briefed. If he did not get this briefing, then shame on him. If he did not act upon it, he has responsibilities under our parliamentary process to make sure he gets that information as part of accountable government. He has not acted. He has failed Canadians, and he has not kept us safe.

224 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 191