44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 8, 2023 11:00AM
- May/8/23 7:37:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is right. I do not necessarily agree with her conclusions or her thoughts. I do agree with the idea that we could have been talking about a wide spectrum of different possible issues, but it is not to take away from the critical issue that we have at hand.
It is important for us to ultimately recognize that the Prime Minister found out about it, just as I and I assume most, if not all, others did, just last week. If we look at what has transpired between last week, when everyone found out about it, to today, we see that a great deal of action has taken place. If one believes the Conservative spin, one could easily draw the conclusion of being somewhat disappointed. However, I would suggest that they should not believe the Conservative spin because a lot of that spin is not true.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:38:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will start by saying that I certainly agree with the member that the level of politicization of these issues has not been helpful in getting to the truth. However, I would also say, which was reflected in my vote earlier and the vote of the New Democrats, as it has been at various times when we have presented motions and voted before for a public inquiry into this matter, that the best way to depoliticize the issue is to have a public inquiry.
I would say further, for those of us who are genuinely concerned about the level of politicization of the issue, that it was frustrating today, right after question period, at which this was the subject of much debate and questions, to have the Minister of Foreign Affairs tweet out during our vote on the motion that the government was expelling the Chinese agent whose actions are in question and who is the subject of the motion.
It feels as though, if the government were really trying to remove political gamesmanship from the issue, the minister would have been here for question period and stood up to inform the House directly of that decision during question period. Pardon me—
205 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:39:42 p.m.
- Watch
We have a point of order.
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:39:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member just referenced the absence of a minister from the House at a particular time. Perhaps he would like to rephrase that.
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:39:52 p.m.
- Watch
I did not catch that, but I am sure the hon. member caught himself. I would ask him to please be careful not to mention whether someone is or is not in the House.
The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona could please wrap it up.
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:40:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I apologize for the error. It was an absent-minded error and was not intentional.
However, it was an important announcement that the government tried to make from a point of order after question period, which it could very well have made during question period if it wanted to take some of the political gamesmanship out of it. I would ask the member why it was that the government made that decision around the timing of that announcement.
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:40:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not necessarily want to indicate that I fully understand the timing and the way in which things ultimately unfolded. However, I would like to pick up on the member's comments in regard to the public inquiry.
At the end of the day, I believe that we have an incredible individual, who was an appointment by Stephen Harper as the Governor General of Canada, an individual of impeccable credentials, who has now been assigned the task, as special rapporteur, of looking into the whole issue of foreign interference, influence and so on, and coming back with a report. I think everyone in the House has had the opportunity to express their thoughts about the public inquiry. The commitment from the Prime Minister is that, if the report comes back with that recommendation, a public inquiry will, in fact, be taking place. I would not underestimate the impact that the NDP has had on the issue.
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, let us just recap for a second.
In 2013, the Conservatives and the former democratic reform minister, the member for Carleton and Leader of the Opposition, received a report from CSIS saying that election interference was real and was going to continue. He did nothing for two years and literally sat on the report.
Later on, in 2017, after we came into government, we introduced Bill C-76, which limited funding from foreign actors. The Conservatives voted against it. We introduced Bill C-22 shortly before that, to create NSICOP. Conservatives would not even let it go to committee. They voted against it after the first or second reading.
I am wondering how the Conservatives can actually stand here and try to claim that they have any credibility on the issue of foreign interference, when they did nothing and routinely voted against every measure that we brought forward.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:42:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the member is sharing a little bit of the frustration of when we look across and see the leader of the official opposition, the Conservative Party, on this particular issue, given the fact that foreign interference and influence have been taking place for many years. Even when the leader of the Conservative Party was the minister responsible for the issue, he, let alone the prime minister at the time, chose to do nothing. That is what I mean about throwing rocks in glass houses and looking in a mirror before they make some of the statements they make inside the House.
At the end of the day, we should try to wind things down in terms of the politicization we have witnessed over the last little while on this issue and resolve it.
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:43:32 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it takes a stunning level of audacity for the member to give a lecture to the House on politicization and throwing stones in glass houses. On Thursday, he and his friend from Kingston and the Islands undertook a blatant strategy to discredit the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, in order to defend their incompetent government—
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:43:54 p.m.
- Watch
On a point of order, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.
I want to remind the member that we went through this a while ago, so I want him to be judicious with what he is going to say.
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:44:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on that point of order, I apologize if I was not here at the time, but on Thursday, after question period, I rose to clarify my comment and apologize, not only to that member but also to all members of the House and to the Speaker. I would, therefore, appreciate the member's withdrawing his characterization of me at this time.
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:44:18 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:44:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on that point of order, I did not actually reference any comments that the member made—
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: He said “Kingston and the Islands.”
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:44:46 p.m.
- Watch
This is becoming a point of debate again. I would ask the parliamentary secretary to wait until I am finished.
The hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:44:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, he did withdraw two words that I am not referencing at this point in time, but the entire strategy that they undertook is what I am taking issue with right now.
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:45:05 p.m.
- Watch
This is all becoming a point of debate.
I know the hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona also was rising on a point of order.
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:45:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on a separate point of order, I noticed that, in his remarks, the member for Kingston and the Islands made reference to his presence or absence in the House, and seeing as he is a member of the House, I think he may—
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:45:29 p.m.
- Watch
We can mention that we are in the House, but we should not mention who was not in the House.
We are going straight to the question at hand. The hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 7:45:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will note that, through the course of the debate, both of those members had to step back from the incorrect remarks that they made. We have a chance today—
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
