SoVote

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

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

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

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

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

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

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

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

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

Mr. Kevin Waugh (Saskatoon—Grasswood, CPC)

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

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

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

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

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

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

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

Gaps
Steps

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ)

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

Mr. Arnold Viersen (Peace River—Westlock, CPC)

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

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

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

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

May/8/23 9:08:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are having a very important debate tonight. We have been discussing the topic of foreign interference for a couple of days and the importance of protecting democracy. During these days, I have heard heckling across the floor and name-calling. At a time when we see threats to our democracy, now is not a time for that. Now is a time for all of us to come together to protect democracy but also to protect each other as members of Parliament. We have a right to do this job and be safe, and I certainly would not want to see any violence perpetrated on any of my colleagues. This is not partisan for me, which is one of the reasons why the NDP, and certainly the member for Vancouver East, called on the leaders of all parties to come together to pick an independent person, to pick somebody who could oversee an independent public inquiry. I am wondering if my hon. colleague agrees with me that we need an independent public inquiry and that the person to oversee it should be chosen by all parties so that we can work together across party lines to protect democracy.

200 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

May/8/23 9:09:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that was the very essence of what we recommended. When I speak to my children, I tell them that if they want impartiality, they must agree to choose a person who will get to the bottom of things. Otherwise, if one person chooses someone, there is something fishy going on. It is possible that everything will be fine in the end, but there is too much ambiguity. Had we in the House chosen from the outset an independent person to get to the bottom of things, we would already have introduced a bill and worked on it to create the registry. We have been wasting time and that has affected people's trust. It is going to take a lot to recover from this, because this situation has been dragging on for 182 days.

136 words

Hon. Greg Fergus (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.)

May/8/23 9:11:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have the pleasure of serving on several committees with the hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle. I would like to ask her a simple question. She said that she would have preferred to see the Prime Minister launch a public inquiry. Would she have been on board with the idea of the Prime Minister determining the parameters of that public inquiry she is calling for?

68 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

May/8/23 9:11:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there are many worthwhile suggestions, but if the government wants to instill confidence, then it needs to be more neutral. If the government wants to show that what it is doing is not partisan, then it needs to be as neutral and impartial as possible for the sake of democracy and for the sake of all Quebeckers and Canadians. In order to do that, the first step is for the House to choose an individual that everyone can agree on. Then, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs or another committee can look at the rules regarding state secrets, because it is only appropriate that they be respected. If the government had done it this way from the start, we would not be here tonight until midnight.

130 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

May/8/23 9:12:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Laurentides—Labelle for painting such a clear picture of the doubts that unfortunately prevail in the House. As she indicated, the government has certainly taken its sweet time on this. We were told that Ottawa could not act quickly because of the potential consequences. Obviously, every action has consequences. They are actually part of the action itself. It seems to me that any government must be prepared to accept the consequences of its action or inaction in terms of protecting democracy. I would like to know what the government will have to do when it gets to that point. It has appointed a so-called independent rapporteur, so at least it has begun to take action. What can the government do to really remove all doubt?

136 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

May/8/23 9:13:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in my opinion, and I believe in the opinion of many leaders who have walked this earth, humility is about saying what is going on, presenting the facts and indicating what needs to be done, while respecting the wishes of the House of Commons. Each party has made proposals. As I have said several times in question period, I look forward to getting another registry because I am very concerned, as are our constituents. Frankly, an independent public inquiry would be the first step to having other recommendations, such as legislation to create a foreign agent registry. From the outset, if the government is worthy of a true leader, it will say what is going on and it will describe exactly what will happen in the coming weeks, in all humility and in the name of our democracy.

140 words

Mr. Arnold Viersen

May/8/23 9:14:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her interventions on this, and I want to reference the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. He has been here for a very long time. His experience as a parliamentarian is something we all look to. His defence of democracy has been profound. Does my hon. colleague have any comments about her relationship with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills?

71 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

May/8/23 9:15:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, given what is happening here tonight, the situation is critical. I have been here since 2019. Unfortunately, every time this government has taken real action to ensure that Canadians continue to have confidence in our institutions, it was because we made every effort to keep the issue in the spotlight and make sure that the government could not avoid it. Unfortunately, I feel like I am reliving the WE Charity events of 2020 with what is happening today. That was my first experience. They filibustered for over 40 hours until the noose tightened, and then they chose to prorogue. I had no idea what it meant to prorogue a Parliament. I came to understand that they were putting the lid on a pot that was about to boil over. We need to act now before we are forced to tell our constituents that something has happened, that the pot was about to boil over. We still have a few weeks left. We can do it before June 23. We need concrete results so that we can reassure our constituents.

184 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 192