44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 8, 2023 11:00AM
- May/8/23 8:17:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we are at a pivotal moment in our democracy, because the threats we talk about, the threats to our core institutions, our members of Parliament and this very institution, are real. They are playing themselves out on a daily basis and there is no greater priority, or should be no greater priority, from a national government than our national sovereignty, than the safety and security of all our citizens.
It really does not matter when one became a citizen and whether one is a citizen by birthright or if one came here later on in life, maybe as a child with one's family and became a citizen or if one became a citizen as an adult. Having made the difficult decision to either leave or flee from one's country of origin, one became a citizen of Canada. As a citizen, this should mean something. What it should primarily mean is the government of one's new country, of the country one is now proud to say one is a citizen of, is there to protect one's interests, whatever they may be. This could be safe streets in communities at a very local level or on the macro level we find ourselves debating tonight, with threats from foreign governments or foreign entities, those who are adverse in interest to Canada.
I still am a lawyer, I confess, but in my active law practice days, we often would say that it was very important in any form of litigation, negotiation or mediation to understand who is adverse in interest to someone, or if one is a representative, adverse in interest to one's client. It is only with understanding that can one look to motivation, intent and how this may play itself out. We find ourselves in these kinds of moments here.
There are a couple of arguments I keep hearing put forward by government members. One is that the earlier government, the government of former prime minister Stephen Harper, the Conservative government, has known all about this. They say that it knew this was going on and did not do enough. We certainly did not know, and how could we know, there were specific threats against the families of members of Parliament or that there were members of Parliament who CSIS, which is charged with our international security, at the time was concerned about being so compromised by a foreign country that they really should not be running as a candidate in an election or should be somehow more thoroughly vetted.
We did not have those kinds of situations brought before us at the time. Did we know there were foreign actors out there often adverse in interest to Canada who might play out their extraterritorial ambitions through proxies, money or through compromising Canadian citizens? Yes, we knew those general things.
Just before the 2021 election, I was one of the members of Parliament who had a general defensive briefing from CSIS. I received a call one day and someone said they wanted to meet me in my office. I asked if this was a secret meeting. They said no but that it was an important meeting and they wanted me to make myself available, which I did right away. That briefing, frankly, was not that detailed. It was a briefing about foreign governments attempting to influence our elections and our governments, and how they might go about doing that.
It might be something that seems like just a social invitation to go have dinner with a new friend. It might be through one's staff who they might befriend, and then that person might volunteer in one's campaign or have a paid position in one's campaign and then seek to have a position in one's constituency office or maybe one's Hill office, where they might have access to sensitive information.
Of course, depending on our role here in this Parliament or any other, the information one has coming into one's office may be more or less sensitive. I assumed at the time that they were speaking to me because we have in my area a large diaspora that came from or has the ethnicity of India and China. Those were two of the countries mentioned, as was Iran. These are places that may seek to influence what happens here in Canada because they are not our natural allies.
With that information, they asked me to speak to my staff to inform them about and give them these broad parameters. I did that. I understand now, from disclosures in this House, that approximately 49 MPs had these same kinds of briefings, but certainly on nothing specific at all.
What I saw play out in the 2021 election, and was aware of in the 2019 election but not to the same degree, was that citizens of Canada of Chinese ancestry in my riding and in neighbouring ridings around mine, where I was helping on campaigns, felt very much under threat from their country of origin. It was not even necessarily those born outside of Canada. Some had parents who were born outside of Canada but were of ancestry from China in particular.
They are very proud Canadians. I have often said that some of the proudest Canadians are those who have come here and become Canadians. They are very proud of the country they have come to, and they are very proud to say, “I am a Canadian.” That is how they see themselves. They do not see themselves as dual citizens and they do not see themselves as citizens of other countries. They see themselves as citizens of Canada, with all that that should entail.
It was an event that happened to me in my riding in particular that brought this home to me. In fact, our leader alluded to it in his speech earlier. We were asked to turn off our phones and go outside into the backyard of one of my constituents. With tears in his eyes he said he could not talk to me inside his home because he believed his home was being monitored. That was very upsetting because I could see the pain this man felt. He said he had voted for the Conservatives in the past, but he simply could not in that election because his family was under threat and he believed they would know if he voted Conservative.
I was also sent translated screenshots from WeChat where it was made very clear that even the idea of a foreign lobby registry was being painted as an attempt to register everyone of Chinese ethnicity in Canada, because it was our intent to round them up, just as Japanese citizens were rounded up in World War II, and confiscate their assets. That was the long-term plan.
I am also aware from other campaigns that there were people of Chinese ethnicity standing outside polling booth areas watching and even taking pictures of people of Chinese ancestry who were in line to vote. Some of those people turned around and went home. It is hard to brave that kind of intimidation.
A foreign government does not even actually have to do all those things. It just needs to make people believe that it can or it will. That is enough to make people afraid, enough to bring a grown man to tears in his backyard and enough to get to citizens of Chinese ancestry who are trying very hard to fit in here in Canada and become part of our life here. It is easy to have them think this is possible.
I have another example. We have a group in my riding, an educational group that is actually an incorporated society, made up of people of Chinese ancestry. They invite speakers from all parties. They have heard from all federal, municipal and provincial parties about how government in Canada works, what our various jurisdictions are and how we go about our business, that sort of thing. I was told, first, that they have disbanded their WeChat group because they felt it was being monitored, and they now communicate in another way. Second, two of their board of directors stepped away because they felt families were under threat simply because they were engaging in educational activities to learn more about their new country.
I had a volunteer on my 2021 campaign who was Uyghur. Just before the campaign, his mother went back to China because her father was ill. She felt it was her familial duty to go back, even though there were some dangers involved, in order to tend to her ailing father, who passed away at some point. When she got there, everything was taken away from her: her ID, her documents and everything that showed her citizenship status in Canada.
When she went there, she had permanent resident status but had not yet had her citizenship ceremony. As we know, during COVID, a lot of them were suspended. She was waiting to hear the date of her citizenship ceremony, but when she arrived in China, all her documentation was taken away. She had no way to appear for her citizenship ceremony in Canada. She had no way to leave China. It was very difficult to even communicate with her family back in Canada, who were all waiting for her return. What was supposed to be a six-month trip turned out to be an almost three-year trip by the time she was able to find a way to get some place where she could be communicated with in order to get the documents to get back to Canada.
These are real examples of how the Chinese government in particular is affecting what we do here.
When a threat is made against a member of Parliament, as chief opposition whip, it is my heightened duty to stand up for all members of Parliament, but particularly those in His Majesty's loyal opposition. I stand up for their privilege in this House and their right to vote and to exercise all the requirements of their duties as members of Parliament. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills is suffering through this, but then added to that is government members suggesting that his general briefing two years ago, which was the same as mine, should have somehow put him on specific alert about his family members. That is a false narrative. It is impossible to put those two things together. That is victim-blaming in the classic sense, or gaslighting, as we often hear the term used now.
The very person who is under threat and told that the exercise of his franchise in this House is somehow compromised is being told that he should have done something about it, he should have brought it to the attention of the House and he should have done more. Well, we can only do more if we actually know that we have something to deal with, and he did not know that until last week through a news article.
I am not surprised CSIS is frustrated and talking to the press, and I know the government has had a strong reaction to that. Its reaction was to try to figure out who the whistle-blowers were in CSIS and go after them. Instead of praising the whistle-blowers and saying there is a problem here and that it needs to get on it as a government to protect our citizens and do more to protect members of Parliament, it was upset that the stories were getting out.
I go back to a report by Liberal member David McGuinty—
1954 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:32:34 p.m.
- Watch
The member knows that we cannot mention current members of the House by name.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:32:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I go back to a report from the chair of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. It was submitted to the Prime Minister on August 30, 2019, so in our 42nd Parliament, before I returned to this place.
A study was done and recommendations were made. I would like to read some of those recommendations, because they alerted this Parliament to some of the problems we are seeing roll out now. The report reads:
In the interest of national security, members of the House of Commons and Senate should be briefed upon being sworn-in and regularly thereafter on the risks of foreign interference and extremism in Canada.
That does not happen.
It continues:
In addition, Cabinet Ministers should be reminded of the expectations described in the Government's Open and Accountable Government, including that Ministers exercise discretion with whom they meet or associate, and clearly distinguish between official and private media messaging, and be reminded that, consistent with the Conflict of Interest Act, public office holders must always place the public interest before private interests.
It continues:
The targeting and manipulation of ethnocultural communities is the primary means through which these states control messages and seek to influence decision-making at all levels of government.
This was two and a half years ago.
It goes on to say:
Some individuals willingly act as agents of a foreign power for a variety of reasons including patriotism or the expectation of reciprocal favours. These states also co-opt individuals inside and outside of ethnocultural communities through flattery, bribery, threats and manipulation.
It goes on:
A great deal of foreign interference has the goal of creating a single narrative or consistent message that helps to ensure the survival and prosperity of the foreign state.... However, ethnocultural communities are not homogeneous and individuals or groups may not want to get involved or do not support the foreign state's goals. Therefore, foreign states utilize a range of tactics to enforce a single narrative. Those tactics include:
threats;
harassment;
detention of family members abroad; and
refusal to issue travel documents or visas.
Many ethnocultural community members are also monitored for what the foreign state considers to be dissident views or activities.
It also says:
States engage in foreign interference activities to support their national interests. These interests include regime protection and domestic legitimacy; strategic advantages and spheres of influence (such as their economic, political or security agendas); projection of power and deterrence....
It continues:
PCO and CSIS assess that Canada is a target due to its global standing; robust and diverse economy; large ethnocultural communities; membership in key multilateral organizations such as the Five Eyes, G7 and NATO; and close relationship with the United States.
It goes on:
The PRC utilizes its growing economic wealth to mobilize interference operations: “with deep coffers and the help of Western enablers, the Chinese Communist Party uses money, rather than Communist ideology, as a powerful source of influence, creating parasitic relationships of long-term dependence.”
The report goes on and on in the recommendations to point out that, yes, these are very real risks.
In a general sense, of course, we know that there are foreign countries with adverse interests to ours that try to gain influence here through money, through relationships, through threats and through intimidation. However, to do so specifically against a member of Parliament based on a vote taken in this House, particularly a vote on human rights, is outrageous. That is why we stand in support of the question of privilege by the member for Wellington—Halton Hills asking that our PROC committee study this and look at it. It is also why a motion was passed in the House today asking the government to create the foreign registry that I spoke of earlier, to establish an independent public inquiry on the matter of foreign election interference, to close down Beijing-run police stations and to expel other operatives, not just the one we were told about today.
671 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:37:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, foreign interference has been reported publicly through CSIS since as early as 2013, when Conservatives were in power. The member for Carleton, the Leader of the Opposition, was then the minister responsible for receiving that report. Conservatives did nothing for two years.
Since then, we brought in Bill C-76, the Elections Modernization Act, which tightened up rules around donations to campaigns, specifically limiting foreign donations. We brought in Bill C-59, which established NSIRA, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency. We brought in NSICOP, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, to oversee national security.
Conservatives voted against all of that, everything, and at times they would not even vote to let the bills go to committee. How is it they can come in here and be so interested and speak so passionately about protecting democracy against foreign interference when they have routinely and systematically voted against every single initiative?
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:39:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I first want to thank the member for the unreserved apology he gave last week. When I brought up a point of order with respect to him victim blaming the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, he got up and apologized, which his colleague did not do. I thank him for that.
With respect to the—
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:39:44 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. parliamentary secretary is rising on a point of order.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:39:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, although I am very appreciative of that recognition, I did not apologize for victim blaming. I was not victim blaming anybody, and the member is impugning my character by suggesting that.
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:40:04 p.m.
- Watch
This is a play on words to provoke and to bring up things that were not said. Let us just stick to the thanks. It was very much appreciated.
The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:40:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can correct that, if I have used the wrong turn of phrase. However, the member did apologize for suggesting that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills knew of the specific threat two years ago. I appreciate his apologizing unreservedly for that.
With respect to the comments on what we have done and what they have done, we are where we are today because, no matter what long list or short list the member comes up with, the current government has not done enough. It has not done enough on a specific threat that was made to a member of Parliament, something that goes to the core of our democracy, which is the ability to debate and vote in this House. We know now, even after the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety denied that they had any prior knowledge, that those reports at least reached the Prime Minister's national security adviser. Therefore, if the mechanisms are not in place in the government to have a serious matter of national security go from the national security adviser to the Prime Minister and in fact go to the Prime Minister, then there is something very wrong with the way they are administering the government.
209 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:41:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very enlightening speech. I am listening to my colleagues discuss this matter, and I am wondering what explanation there could be for the government's weakness or laziness in responding to such events.
Can my colleague explain that?
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:42:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I wish I could explain it. It makes no sense to me, because the number one priority of any national government is the safety and security of its citizens and the defence of our national sovereignty. If we do not have that, we really do not have a country. I do not understand. Whether it was laziness, lack of interest, incompetence or just not paying attention to the signals that were there, the mechanisms that needed to be there to protect us were not there.
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:42:46 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for contributing to this important debate.
There is a part of the motion that we have not heard very much about; this is the foreign agent registry, which would be similar to what Australia and the U.S. have. Could the member describe the effectiveness of the registries in these other countries and how such a registry would protect Canadians from foreign interference?
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:43:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the foreign agent registry is extremely important.
We demand and require that lobbyists register when they come to the government to discuss matters that might influence members' decisions. This relates to any member, but particularly to members of cabinet. We have been doing that for a very long time.
As the Leader of the Opposition mentioned earlier today, if someone wants to lobby on behalf of a food bank, they have to register. The whole idea of this registry is for people who are here attempting to influence our government on matters that are in the interest of another country to be registered. It is not the whole answer, but it is one measure of control that allows us to know who is talking to whom, when they are talking to them, in what context and in what way.
We need to know these things as one measure of protection for all of us and for all citizens of Canada. That is why these other countries have adopted similar legislation, and it is working in those countries.
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:44:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, two years ago, in June 2021, I sat with the member for Steveston—Richmond East right here. He was giving a passionate speech in the House of Commons, in which he talked about being targeted. That member is no longer here. In fact, he has come to committee a couple of times, talking about what he thought was Beijing interference.
We do need an inquiry. We do need a registry. We have more than one MP who was here in 2021 and, quite frankly, is not here today. I can think of Alice Wong, Bob Saroya and Kenny Chiu.
It is about democracy. Before the last election, the member from B.C. was standing right here, in the middle of June, talking about interference from Beijing. Does the member from British Columbia want to comment on this?
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:45:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I know that former member very well. He is in a neighbouring riding to mine. In fact, I used to represent his riding in another configuration, before redistribution.
I know the riding and its makeup well. I saw a lot of the comments that were made in the last election about that former member, on various platforms, such as that he was a traitor to his own ethnicity.
Currently, there is a campaign in British Columbia and nationally to call the request for a foreign agent registry “Chinese exclusion 2.0”. Nothing could be further from the truth. That is not what we are talking about in this request. However, these are the kinds of allegations that were thrown against the former member. He had a very hard time combatting them, because it was so pervasive that a lot of voters of Chinese ethnicity simply stayed home. They were too afraid to vote and certainly too afraid to vote for him.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:47:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for the response to my last question. She indicated that the Prime Minister and his chief of staff did not know, and she questioned why on earth this information would not have made it up there, as it relates to any MP.
I think that is a very good question and something that, when this gets to committee, the committee could seek to clarify and understand. I certainly do not think it is something that just started. It is not as though the Prime Minister told CSIS not to bother telling him about anything that has to do with an MP. There were obviously thresholds and benchmarks that CSIS determined it needed to meet in order to elevate things to certain levels.
There may be other avenues we could explore to further enhance our protection and ensure that interference like this does not occur. In the vein of trying to better protect members of Parliament in relation to these types of activities, could the member comment on other avenues that the PROC committee might want to explore when doing their work?
189 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:48:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is an excellent suggestion that it go to this particular committee, because this committee has dealt with these issues and similar ones before. Of course, I do not suggest what questions they would ask, but they need to explore how this all came about in the first place, where the gaps are in knowledge, why those gaps exist, why steps were not taken when they needed to be taken and what mechanisms need to be in place to make sure that the decision-makers know what they need to know to protect us in this House.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 8:49:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, exactly 182 days have passed since November 7, the date on which Global News reporter Sam Cooper informed the public that China's united front work department had attempted to influence the 2019 election. Then, we learned from other media outlets that China had also attempted to influence the 2021 election.
I cannot emphasize enough how serious these allegations are. The cornerstone of our society is that we are a strong, proud democracy that has thrived for over one hundred years. There are 338 MPs in the House of Commons, and we represent the people.
I am a sovereignist who serves as a member of a Parliament that I do not really want to serve in because I want Quebec to be independent. Everyone knows that. If I am in the House today, it is because our democracy is mature enough and healthy enough that I can stand before you and be heard without being booed or removed because I am free to speak my mind, just as all members in the House should always be. What is happening right now? Where are we at today?
We know that a whistle-blower, who is said to be a Liberal, felt he had to disclose information to the mainstream media because he was concerned that the government was not doing enough. This CSIS official is watching the debates—especially now, with everything that is happening with respect to my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills—and can see how the Liberal Party is treating this file with disdain.
This official knows the truth, the quality of the information provided and the fact that the highest levels of Canadian government are not taking this seriously. We see that even though his agency alerted the Prime Minister 100 times, nothing is being done. Yes, ministers did come to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee, of which I am a member. They told us nothing. At best, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities and the Minister of Public Safety told us that everything was fine and that they knew nothing prior to this. Afterwards, they told us that they did know and they took action. They have been telling us that, since 2015, everything is fine and that the system works.
I see this as a house under construction. Before, there were walls; then, in 2015, the government decided to install windows and doors. However, the roof is a nice tarp. Yes, they did something, but the rain still gets in.
I want to highlight the work of Robert Fife and Steven Chase who, frankly, remind me of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. They were the ones who wrote about the Watergate scandal, the story that was the downfall of Richard Nixon. I am just saying.
It took the work of a journalist, we know how it goes, to find sources, analyze what was said and understand the system. This was all done for the common good and in the collective interest. Knowing all that, I cannot look my constituents in the eye and tell them that I am reassured by the defence of our democracy. I cannot. I am saying this with an abundance of partisanship, as if we engaged in a lot of partisanship in the Bloc Québécois. Yes, I am a partisan supporter of safeguarding democracy. There, I said it.
For weeks now, the opposition parties have been calling for an independent public commission of inquiry into foreign interference in our democratic process. The government is turning a deaf ear. We are being told to wait until May 23. We will see.
The government tells us that the Rosenberg report does not point to any serious breaches or highlight any areas of concern. Then, at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, Morris Rosenberg demonstrated to us that he is definitely not the right person to analyze the issue of Chinese interference in Canada.
At the same time, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, is leaking documents to the press because the government is not taking the threat seriously. That said, it was not through leaks that we were informed that a member of Canada's House of Commons, who was duly elected in a democracy that claims to be healthy and mature, is being watched by an agent of the People's Republic of China. We did not know that.
Is this a road show? A comedy act? It feels like a bad spy movie where no one knows how to do their job.
I think that now would be a good time to launch an independent commission of public inquiry, rather than waiting for a possible May 23 announcement from the special rapporteur, Mr. Johnston. Looking at the big picture, one has to wonder how it is that Morris Rosenberg and CSIS did not come to the same conclusion. Mr. Rosenberg found that the threshold, the infamous threshold, for launching a public inquiry had not been met. As for the CSIS agents who are supposed to protect the country, they had to turn to the media because nobody was doing anything. Is anyone on the government side actually concerned? Do any of them see this as urgent?
It is not just Quebec sovereignists who are concerned. We have learned that the Americans have been interested in China's activities on Canadian soil for 20 years, because the United States considers these activities to be a threat to the security of the North American continent, pure and simple. Our closest ally, our neighbour, is worried about our ability to keep those who wish us harm at bay. For 20 years, the Americans have been worried about the presence of disruptive united front agents. Canada has had four prime ministers in the past twenty years.
One has to wonder what these four successive governments have done since 2003 to ensure Canadian sovereignty. It is crazy that a Quebec separatist is worried about Canada's sovereignty. It is laughable.
This is not just a national issue, but a continental one as well. We are responsible for securing our part of the continent. Of course, that includes physically defending it through NORAD, but also defending those things that may not be tangible but are just as important, namely, our system of laws and our democratic system.
We are talking about defending the continent but also about our standing with our Five Eyes allies. I bet that if the United States is worried, then Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom likely are as well. Are we the weakest link in the group? I would like to know.
Just today, we learned from Robert Fife and Steven Chase that the government wants to join AUKUS, the military alliance between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. We were excluded. Why? Perhaps it is because we cannot be trusted. The answer is obvious.
I do not want to know just to get on the government's case. I want to know because, as legislators, we need to know the truth about how deeply Chinese spies have infiltrated our system.
We need to get to the truth in order to work together on building a 21st century defence against disruption attempts by states that want to harm us. Australia has the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme. The United States has the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The United Kingdom has its Foreign Influence Registration Scheme. In Canada, all we know is that the clerk of the Privy Council advised the Prime Minister to put such a registry in place. She told us that in committee.
We even know, again thanks to the journalists, that the Prime Minister had an exchange on the subject with the Australian Prime Minister in June 2022 and nothing was done.
In the European Parliament, a special committee on foreign interference was launched in 2021. The report was tabled a year ago. The facts are all there: Russia and China are among the biggest threats to western liberal democracies. The ties of high-ranking European politicians were cited in the report as being a systemic problem. Diasporas are manipulated, misinformed, used and diminished. We need to protect them.
It has been 182 days of water torture for the government. How is it managing? I do not know. The Liberals have been changing their tune for 182 days. They know, they do not know. For 182 days they have been telling us that they took action in the past. Yes, I do have the document. We would not be here today if all was well. Action must be taken to protect democracy. This prompts me to ask, what are they going to do starting now?
At the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs we have been hearing for weeks that Canada's defence system is not robust enough. David Mulroney, former ambassador to China, told us that Canada's defence system is the equivalent of the Maginot Line. For context, the Maginot Line was an array of defence structures comprised of fortifications and trenches along France's eastern border between Belgium and Italy. It was supposed to protect France from an attack from the east. How did the Nazis invade France in June 1940? They entered via the Ardennes, where the French believed there would be no threat.
Then the government members say that everything is fine. They might as well laugh in our faces. The Liberals can laugh at me all they want; I can take it and I will get over it. However, laughing at our constituents is highly problematic.
Let us get back to the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. If this ever happens to me, I hope the government, CSIS or the RCMP would tell me that I am a specific target of a foreign government, that my family is at risk. In a democracy, freedom of expression is fundamental. Still, the government is allowing an openly hostile state to intimidate the family of a Canadian MP. Is it honestly allowing this to happen because it is an opposition concern, so it is not a big deal?
I sincerely and perhaps naively thought that, across party lines, we were all democrats. This government must have the courage to act. It needs to act swiftly and firmly. We know that the government, the party in power, has been lax. How is it that an individual reported by CSIS as having close and worrisome ties to the consul general of the People's Republic of China in Toronto was allowed to run for office like everyone else who sits here and is elected as a member of a political party?
Candidates have to win the nomination for their party. At the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, we saw that, at the returning officer's office, candidates must have in their possession a declaration from their party leader indicating they are officially the candidate for that party. My question is this. Why did the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada sign a document allowing a man close to China's spy network in Canada to run for the Liberal Party?
The Prime Minister and his government will pay a high political price for their inaction and lack of consideration for voters' concerns. What is most worrisome is the heavy burden that will be placed on Canadian democracy. Democracy is being abused throughout the western world. I am very concerned and I know other people are too, but something can be done.
Everywhere, the far right is trying to restrict the right to vote, take away free speech, silence opponents. I have no desire for that here. As a legislator, I cannot betray the oath of allegiance that I personally swore to democracy and the values it represents.
Once again, Canada is falling short. Once again, Canada disappoints. Once again, I say to myself that Quebec would be so much better off if Quebec's National Assembly took the reins of our nation's destiny. The situation is critical, the allegations are serious, and subversive action is being taken against our citizens.
First, I call on the Prime Minister to immediately launch an independent public inquiry to fully and completely explore the issue of foreign interference. Second, I call on the government to introduce foreign interference legislation. Third, I call on the government to establish an independent office of inquiry into foreign political activity. Fourth, I call for the establishment of a foreign agent registry to ensure that no member of the House is ever again intimidated by a foreign state and that meaningful steps are taken to protect members of Parliament.
Finally, with respect to everything I have just said, we truly cannot wait any longer. We must act with conscience and dignity. The Prime Minister must shoulder his responsibilities. The government must shoulder its responsibilities. From this point forward, the government must act for the future.
2184 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 9:06:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I note that both Conservatives and the Bloc are calling for a national inquiry into the foreign interference. I am just wondering what she thinks the government is waiting for before it calls this national inquiry.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 9:07:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, from what I understood, they are trying to buy time. If there was any real desire to shed light on this and confidence in what has been done, they would act quickly so as to set the record straight for our constituents. Only those who are not sure whether they are sure and who now know what they did not know before need to buy time.
That is why the government delegated all this to a special rapporteur selected by the Prime Minister. The special rapporteur is being left with this responsibility and being asked to report on it. The House is being told that we will talk about it again on May 23, and until then maybe we could work on other things since there are so many other, more pressing matters. Now, however, we wait. We keep going because the situation is critical. One thing leads to another, week after week, we keep finding out more.
My answer to my colleague is this. When someone is confident that everything is fine, they have no qualms at all about calling an independent public inquiry as soon as possible to reassure the public.
196 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
