SoVote

Mr. Mel Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap, CPC)

May/9/23 10:21:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a very concerning issue that we are dealing with here. Basically, it was an attack on one member of this Parliament. This being an attack on one member of Parliament, is it viewed as an attack on all members of Parliament?

45 words

Mrs. Karen Vecchio

May/9/23 10:22:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the answer is very simple: absolutely. When one member is being attacked, it is an attack on us all. I look at our relationship with the member of Parliament. There is a closeness we have when we work within caucuses. The discussions that we have are on a very different level when working with caucus members. We are trying to make sure there is good legislation and laws for Canadians. The impact to this member impacts us all. We know that if his leadership is squashed, it hurts the entire country.

93 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

May/9/23 10:22:40 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-27

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean. Like my colleagues, I rise today to speak about China's interference in political and public affairs and the breach of privilege of a member of this House. Obviously, it is one member, but all of us are under attack in this situation. I will try to make this quick because I understand that people are waiting to hear from my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, whose expertise is in great demand. I think that there are some things that need to be said. As we know, for several years now, a number of expert reports have highlighted China's actions, going so far as to accuse it of interfering in the political affairs of several countries, including our own. There have been reports of cyber-attacks on Canadian government institutions, businesses and universities, as well as other suspicious activities, such as manipulating social media and disseminating disinformation. There are Chinese police stations that are operating while the Prime Minister looks on. There have been debates in the House on the active participation of Chinese government agents in the federal election and the controversial $200,000 donation to the Trudeau Foundation, which raises many questions about how much the Prime Minister knew about these matters. These activities are extremely disturbing and raise questions about the integrity of our democracy and our electoral processes. We cannot allow foreign powers, no matter how big or how influential, to interfere in our political affairs and disrupt our democratic process. The Liberal government has gone from being disconcertingly naive about the Chinese Communist regime to inexplicably inactive in the face of China's repeated attacks on our democracy. The straw that broke the camel's back was The Globe and Mail article about a CSIS report from 2021 stating that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and his family in Hong Kong were being threatened by a Chinese diplomat who was still in Canada. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills had just voted in favour of a motion condemning the genocide of the Uyghurs by the Communist Party of China. These are all very serious allegations involving troubling information that could have a potential impact on our parliamentary duties. The Speaker's ruling on this matter is exemplary, and I agree with the conclusion that an entity like China intervening with retaliatory measures against an MP and his or her family represents an attack on our collective ability to carry out our parliamentary duties unimpeded. That is simply unacceptable and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. It is our duty to protect our democracy and defend our colleagues' privileges. We must work together to strengthen our national security and protect our democratic institutions from outside threats. We must also support our colleagues and give them the means to fulfill their democratic mandate without fear or intimidation. The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this motion because it has already debated these issues favourably in the public arena. First, when it comes to the foreign agent registry, I will not list all of the opportunities that the government has had for serious reflection since the member for Wellington—Halton Hills moved a motion in 2020 concerning Huawei's involvement in Canada's 5G network. Obviously, time has proven him right. The Bloc Québécois has expressed its support for an independent public commission of inquiry into foreign election interference. That position is shared by other opposition parties that think that the recent leaks about China's attempts to interfere in our elections require an independent public inquiry. Former chief electoral officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley has expressed his support for such an inquiry. According to him, Canadians have the right to know everything about what happened, and the lack of a public inquiry will only prolong the consequences for those who were affected. Kingsley also rejected the argument that a public inquiry could compromise public safety. He stated that public safety is there to protect democracy, not the other way around. The government has sought to put off a public inquiry for a long time citing public security concerns. However, that has not prevented many people, including the former director of CSIS, Richard Fadden, from joining in the call for a public inquiry. Overall, it is clear that the calls for a public inquiry into foreign interference in elections are growing stronger. Canadians have the right to know if their democratic process is under threat from foreign actors and what steps their government is taking to protect democracy and the interests of their country. Can we get the truth on the closure of the covert police stations in Canada and on the threats against people who return to China or who have family in China? This is not the first report we have heard about persecution and repression of certain people who criticized the Chinese government or who were considered dissidents. The Chinese government also brought in a social credit system that can affect people's ability to travel, find work and access certain services based on their behaviour and their political leanings. It is important to note that these operations are often carried out covertly and the information is often difficult to verify. However, there is enough evidence to suggest that these threats exist and that governments and citizens should be aware of these risks. The government's attempts to lower the temperature and stonewall are eroding our confidence in it. Its handling of the expulsion of Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei has been embarrassing. We must be proactive. We must take steps to strengthen our national security, and we must shield ourselves from foreign attacks. We must also continue to strengthen our ability to identify, report, monitor and counter cyber-attacks. They can be extremely difficult to detect and thwart, but we must be ready to face these threats and to protect our institutions against malicious attacks. The case of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills raises a bigger problem in a world that is becoming more complex. With the growth of social networks, it is getting easier and easier for malicious people to target and harass elected officials, journalists and other public figures. The threats and attacks can be deeply disturbing and have real consequences for the safety of the individuals concerned. This is our cue to rethink our society and even our use of social media. Increasingly, we tolerate threats because they are just threats. If we do not tolerate threats towards our colleague, we should not tolerate the threats we are subjected to on social media, either. Our world is entering a new era. China may be using an old way of doing things right now, but new ways of influencing our elected officials will be found. They will become increasingly insidious. Our lives are showcased on social media. Hackers are finding new ways to go even further in getting data. Just imagine. A fraudster can practically create a new identity for themselves using data leaked from a bank or government. If a member of Parliament is targeted, what impact will that fake identity have? How will a new power be able to influence elected officials? I serve on the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, and these are issues that must be discussed during our study of Bill C-27. We need to ask ourselves whether the government has really made all of the connections that need to be made between all of the laws in order to strengthen the protection of Quebeckers and Canadians. When it comes to protecting ourselves from China, there is also the Investment Canada Act, which may not go far enough in protecting our vital areas, our supply chains. These are things that I have a lot of questions about. With the arrival of even more powerful technologies, such as quantum computing, we know that a lot of our data is stored on servers and that China will not hesitate to check that data and use it against us, of course. Consequently, and in conclusion, we have to equip ourselves with all the tools available to fight foreign interference. That starts with solidarity with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

1407 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)

May/9/23 10:32:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I look around, I have to wonder how seriously the government is taking Chinese interference here in Parliament. I think it is a serious issue. I wonder how seriously the government is taking it. I have a question for my hon. colleague. How seriously does he think the Liberal caucus is taking what is going on with Chinese interference in our Parliament?

65 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

May/9/23 10:33:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent question. I think that in the current context, his question answers itself. It is extremely worrisome. I admit that, as an MP, I feel concerned. Obviously, I have no ties to China. However, I am not surprised by the example from the member for Lac-Saint-Jean and his leadership on the issue of the Uyghurs and protecting these people. The Uyghurs are under pressure because the Chinese regime is trying to wipe them out, and their safety and survival are truly at risk. As a Parliament, we are going to need to take strong positions and accept the consequences, as the member for Lac-Saint-Jean did. The member for Lac-Saint-Jean is leading by example. Obviously, he can no longer visit China, and these types of threats are absolutely unacceptable. We must stand firm in solidarity.

148 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

May/9/23 10:33:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that may be the only time my friend from Lac-Saint-Jean is ever on the government's side, but I know there was a lot of space over there he was doing his best to fill. I want to ask about the Hong Kong national security law, because this is an important aspect of the issue of foreign interference. Many flights transit through Hong Kong, of course, and Hong Kong's national security law effectively claims a universal jurisdiction. If I get up and give a speech in this House and say certain things about the democracy movement in Hong Kong, theoretically that law claims the right to arrest and prosecute me if I transit through Hong Kong. It is really an incredible disregard for national sovereignty in other countries shown through this law and is an explicit in-statute claim to interfere in the affairs of other states. We heard during previous testimony at the Special Committee on the Canada–People’s Republic of China Relationship how indeed this national security is a threat to members of Parliament in every part of the world as it is in particular a threat to the people of Hong Kong. What should we be doing to respond to this law and to stand up for the freedom of people in Hong Kong?

225 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

May/9/23 10:35:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for his comments and his foresight, and especially for his willingness to educate all Canadians and members of the House of Commons about the importance of protecting themselves. I do not think that denying this information is the answer. On the contrary, I think we need to pass it on and address it. As far as China is concerned, I cannot help but think of all the facial recognition systems that can identify and register individuals as they pass through an area. Police officers can quickly descend on a location to intercept and arrest these people. We know about the arrest of the two Michaels and all the arbitrary processes they faced. Now there is a third Michael, the member for Wellington-Halton Hills, who is also being subjected to retaliation. Everyone must be extremely vigilant. They must think about their own safety, but under no circumstances should silence be part of the solution.

167 words

Ms. Rachel Blaney (North Island—Powell River, NDP)

May/9/23 10:36:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is a serious issue. I think everyone in this House is very concerned with this. We know this is a serious issue that keeps coming up again and again and again. What we need is transparency. Could the member talk about why a public inquiry is so important, even more so now as we discuss this matter of privilege?

62 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire

May/9/23 10:36:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her concern for this issue. Yes, transparency is part of the solution, because without transparency, we are sure to repeat past mistakes. Let me draw a parallel with the holding of a public inquiry in the world of sports. We want this kind of inquiry because we want strong recommendations that will have the force of law. We want to get to the bottom of things and encourage people to come forward who may be too scared to speak publicly but who can confide in an authority they trust. We need a robust system, reliable mechanisms and independent people. A public inquiry can do this, but what we really need is for a country like Canada to take a strong stand.

128 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)

May/9/23 10:37:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to point out that the speeches in the House today are excellent. I want to congratulate my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue for the overview he just provided. What happened is serious. I will try to summarize what happened recently, but also what happened in the years that we have been talking about interference here in the House. Yesterday, in the late afternoon, diplomat Zhao Wei was declared persona non grata in Canada by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We believe that was a very wise decision. We applaud the government's decision, even though it was made two years too late. Now that it has been made, we must say that it was the right thing to do. I believe that is what all opposition parties were asking for. The Conservative Party and the Bloc Québécois were asking for it and, I believe that the NDP also supported this decision, which we applaud. Now we are talking about a member of Parliament who is being threatened with retaliation. Honestly, there is reason to be concerned about more parliamentarians and about democracy in Quebec and Canada. The article in The Globe and Mail referred to a number of MPs in connection with the motion on the Uyghur genocide. I had the honour and privilege of making an amendment to that motion in 2021. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills allowed me to do that. That amendment was adopted and then the motion was unanimously adopted, even though all of the government members just happened to abstain from voting. Perhaps they had a stomach ache that day. Let us review the facts. It seems as though the main person involved, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, has been targeted by the Chinese Communist Party since he sponsored that motion in 2021. Let us recall that the motion described the treatment of Uyghurs in China by the Chinese Communist Party in power as a genocide. As I said, an overwhelming majority supported that motion. Once again, it is important to point out that the government members showed a complete lack of courage by choosing to abstain from the vote. I have the good fortune of representing my political party on international human rights. I am a member of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. I had the opportunity to be invited by my Uyghur friends to attend various panels abroad, including in Europe twice. I can say that the government's lack of courage has reverberated around the world. The people I talk to on these panels come from different parliaments around the world, including in the United States, but also many parliaments in Europe and even in Asia and in Africa. These are people who come together to discuss the situation of the Uyghurs in China. They are very aware that when the motion was moved in the House, the Liberal government ensured that its executive, or the ministers, the Prime Minister and the parliamentary secretaries, abstained from voting. That was noted around the world. That is Canada's international reputation, now. It has a reputation as a government that lacks courage when the time comes to stand up to torturers and dictators who violate human rights, as the Chinese regime in power is currently doing against Uyghur minorities. I want to note that it is also committing these acts against other Turkic peoples in Xinjiang, which my Uyghur friends call East Turkestan. Simply put, this government lacks courage in every regard and on many files. I could talk about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, we are not here to talk about that, we are here to talk about Chinese interference. This shows that the government lacks courage. However, back in 2015, when talking about Canada's international reputation, this Prime Minister said loud and clear, “Canada is back”. Some people believed him. Let me share a little secret: I believed him, too. The Conservative government's nearly 10-year reign had just ended, and that government had failed to distinguish itself internationally or in terms of human rights. After years of the Harper government, we thought that Canada would finally regain its place on the international stage and restore its historic reputation in the area of international human rights. This is coming from a Quebec sovereignist. We know that Canada is not considered a military power. We know that it is not considered an economic power. However, Canada, and therefore Quebec, does have a history of leadership in the area of human rights when we had to stand up to state criminals. I will give an example. Lester B. Pearson was a Liberal. The idea for peacekeepers came from Canada. As a kindness to my Conservative friends, I will cite the example of Brian Mulroney, who took a stand when the time came to condemn the odious apartheid system in South Africa. The first person to take a stand was a Quebecker. It was the mayor of Montreal, Jean Doré. He was the first to stand up against apartheid in South Africa. Brian Mulroney took up the cause and amplified it around the world. He convinced the United States and Great Britain. At the time, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were not exactly keen on opposing apartheid, but Brian Mulroney finally convinced them. Then history took its course. After Nelson Mandela was released, the first trip he took was to Canada. Believe it or not, his plane was scheduled to land in Ottawa, but while he was en route, he asked to land in Montreal so he could meet Jean Doré, the mayor of Montreal, the person who got the ball rolling. It might seem like I am getting off topic, but this is in my speech, and it is related. I am making a link with what is happening right now in terms of Chinese interference. What happened to my good friend from Wellington—Halton Hills is awful. Imagine being in his shoes. I think that is the problem. The Liberals are good at lecturing anyone who will listen, but they are not so good at putting themselves in the shoes of anyone who is suffering. I have to wonder about something. When they heard about the CSIS reports aimed directly at my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills two years ago, I wonder whether things would have been different if it had been a Liberal member. I will say it again, but not too loudly: I doubt it. I have a feeling that if a CSIS report had found that a Liberal MP and his family in Hong Kong were being targeted by the Chinese authorities, we would not be here today, because the government would have acted much more quickly. I am sure of that. It makes us think. It shows that the government is simply not serious about dealing with Chinese interference and that it does not concern the Liberal Party. It is pretty shocking. When the Liberals found out that a Liberal candidate might have been funded by the Chinese Communist regime, they did nothing and said nothing. They let him get elected. When a Conservative candidate like my friend Kenny Chiu was defeated in the election, presumably because the Chinese Communist regime financed his defeat, they did nothing either. It all worked out for them because he is no longer in the House to defend himself. Then, when it happens to our Wellington—Halton Hills friend, no one says anything, even though his family was allegedly targeted. Frankly, that is not acceptable. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills is a sincere and respected individual. He and I are at odds over only one thing: My friend voted against the motion that recognized the Quebec nation. We will not go down that road. He and I still have to have a conversation on that. Let us remember one thing. We were elected. We were trusted. One of the first things we were elected to do is to uphold democracy and institutions in our country, and to defend democracy, freedom and our democratic institutions. Right now, we need an independent public inquiry because this government is not getting the job done.

1396 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

May/9/23 10:47:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his work. It is a pleasure to work with him on the matter of Uyghurs' rights and other important human rights issues. It is important to underline how the threats that were made against the member for Wellington—Halton Hills followed the leadership he showed in recognizing the Uyghur genocide issue. The fact is that Canada's Parliament was the first in the world to pass this motion. In a way, this is a recognition of how important that moment was in catalyzing the global response. It was a proposal vote that had such an impact on the discussion that it catalyzed some of these responses and threats. However, the government still has not been willing to take the step of recognizing that. Does the member think that now would be a good time for the government to recognize the importance of this issue and recognize the Uyghur genocide?

160 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe

May/9/23 10:48:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague for his question. I work with him on a lot of files. I know that he does meaningful work on those files. He is very organized and easy to work with. He makes an excellent suggestion. Unfortunately, I have to tell my colleague that we have already seen how the government reacts when we ask it to stand up and act courageously on human rights issues. I agree with my colleague that this would be a good time. It is time for the government to show that it is capable of doing something. Unfortunately, I have some bad news for my colleague. It is not going to happen. The government is not going to just suddenly find some courage hidden away in its backpack today. I am sorry. We can ask the government, but it is not going to happen.

147 words

Ms. Rachel Blaney (North Island—Powell River, NDP)

May/9/23 10:49:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as a member of PROC, I really look forward to getting this in front of us so we can do the important work that needs to be done to honour this member's privilege in this place. I am curious about whether the member could speak a bit to this: A lot of people are calling my office who are worried that this discussion around foreign interference is becoming too politicized and not really focusing on the core issue. Of course, what Canadians want to know is that they can trust their institutions and that there are actually processes in place to address this issue. Does the member agree with me and the NDP that calling a public inquiry will help take it out of this political institution and put it in a place that can be accountable to all Canadians.

143 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe

May/9/23 10:50:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is another excellent question. We are fortunate this evening. I think that the Bloc Québécois shares the same position as the NDP. We like working hand in hand with our NDP friends. There needs to be an independent public inquiry. This would completely depoliticize the debate since this inquiry would be independent. Appointing someone who was a director of the PM's father's foundation is not going to make the public believe in what we are doing. I think it is a mistake. There needs to be an independent public inquiry. I have had discussions with my Tibetan friends, with my Uyghur friends, with my Hong Kong friends, and they all tell me that they want this inquiry. Can we listen to the minorities who are the primary victims of this Chinese Communist regime and ensure that this inquiry is launched?

149 words

Mr. Sukh Dhaliwal (Surrey—Newton, Lib.)

May/9/23 10:51:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean for his friendship. Even though he is a sovereigntist Quebecker, I can say that I worked with him on the Special Committee on Afghanistan and the immigration committee, and it is fun to work with him. He mentioned Kenny Chiu. I want to correct him, through you, to say that the fellow who was elected in Steveston—Richmond East was born in that riding, worked hard in that riding and raised money on his own. I can say that he is a deserving candidate; the people of Steveston—Richmond East voted for him to be here, and that is why he is here.

118 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe

May/9/23 10:52:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker. I love my colleague. I understand his question. He just demonstrated why we need an independent public inquiry. Yes, he might be a good guy, but Kenny Chiu was also a good guy, and we do not know what happened because we are unable to shed light on the situation. My hon. colleague's question comes back to what we have been saying from the outset along with the Conservatives and the NDP. We need to have an independent public inquiry to clear the names of several people, but also to understand what happened so it never happens again.

101 words

Mrs. Rachael Thomas (Lethbridge, CPC)

May/9/23 10:53:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Red Deer—Mountain View. Today, we are discussing this question of privilege. It is interesting that we use this term around privilege because the privilege that we speak of is for a member of this place to exist and do his job without any fear or intimidation from a foreign entity. That is the question of privilege. That seems like something we should be able to take for granted, something that we should just be able to count on, day in and day out, not only as members of this place but as members of the general Canadian public. Why should we be able to count on that? Why should that be our reality? It is because we belong to the country of Canada. As citizens of this fine country, we should have a government in place that prioritizes the safety and security of Canadians. Why? Because the safety and security of Canadians is the foremost job of any government, no matter its political stripe. If it does not keep its citizens safe, if it does not secure our borders, which are not just land borders but borders as in the security and safety of persons, we have little else as a country. Without safety and security being achieved, we are not able to pursue economic well-being or prosperity. We are not able to dream of a vibrant future and what is possible. We are not able to implement environmental policies. Without the very basics of safety and security it is impossible to be the prosperous nation that it should be. It is interesting that we are talking about this as if it is a privilege when in fact the safety and security of members of this place and all Canadians should simply be their right based on citizenship. What prompted this debate today? It is because a member of this House, a colleague, has come under fear and intimidation from Beijing. We know about this because the government informed this member of Parliament, though it knew about it. We know about this because of a journalist who released the story. The journalist knew about it because of a brave whistle-blower who released CSIS documents into the hands of the media, and from the media into the public. That is what has allowed us to become aware of this. As a side note what is interesting to me is that the Liberals just met this last weekend to talk about policy at a policy convention. During that convention they put forward a policy that would require journalists to give up their sources in order to be published online. If journalists chose not to give up their sources then they would not be publishable. That is a direct attack on the freedom of the press. That is a direct attack on journalistic independence. That is a direct attack, therefore, on Canadians because Canadians rely on journalists to tell stories. They rely on journalists to tell the truth, to reveal things that the government might want to hide or that other corrupt actors in this country might not want Canadians to know. When the government wants to hinder the ability of journalists to tell the stories that need to be told, that is very disconcerting not only to me as a member of this place but to Canadians at large because it concerns their freedom, their ability to access information that is then put at stake. We are here today because we found out that this colleague of mine, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, was the target of intimidation tactics and threats, as well as his family. These attacks came from Beijing. We know that the Prime Minister knew about this two years ago. We know that because intelligence documents told us that, yet the Prime Minister chose to remain silent and did not give the member a heads-up. When did the member find out? The member just found out about a week ago, when a journalist gave him a call wanting him to comment on this news. We can imagine how shocked my colleague was finding this out from a journalist. As time has gone on, more of the story has been revealed. The reality is that we know this is not the whole of the story. We know that this is actually only one part of Beijing's larger interference plan, with silence and inaction by the government. With regard to the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, what might be the reason Beijing would target him? Well, we suspect it is because of a position he took on a motion that declared the Chinese government's attack against the Uyghur people, a minority group in China, a genocide. Members of this place voted for that motion, with the exception of cabinet. Cabinet stayed silent; they stayed mum. I wonder why they failed to take a stand for this repressed group. When I say “repressed”, I do not mean a bit hard done by. When I talk about the Uyghur people of China, I am talking about a minority group that essentially lives in enslavement. They live in prison camps. I am talking about a group whose human spirit the Chinese government is looking to destroy. I am talking about a group that is forced into mass sterilization. That is genocide. I am talking about a group whose children are separated from their families. I am talking about a group that is physically tortured, mentally tortured and sexually abused. Women are raped. I am talking about all of this being done at the hands of Beijing while these individuals are huddle like cattle in these concentration camps, these encampments. This place debated this motion, and out of that, my colleague, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, took a very strong stance calling this oppression against the Uyghur people what it is: a genocide. Now, of course, from there these threats ensued. Again, I come back to the fact that the government knew for two years that this was happening and said nothing. However, it gets worse, because it is not just my colleague who came under this pressure or these threats from Beijing. We know that many Canadians reported coming under similar sorts of threats. We also know that Beijing donated $144,000 to the Trudeau Foundation. We know that the Prime Minister's brother, Mr. Alexandre Trudeau, to be clear, was the one who signed off on that donation, yet the Prime Minister claims to have no affiliation whatsoever. Further to that, we know that the Prime Minister was actually briefed through our intelligence agency in this country with regard to Beijing's interference in our 2019 and 2021 elections. We know that money was filtered illegally from Beijing businesses into Liberal campaigns in Canada. We know, again based on CSIS documents, that it was the intent of the Beijing government to make sure the Liberals won the election. I wonder why they would be silent. I wonder why they would do nothing. After all, it is the government's responsibility to keep Canadians safe and secure. However, members sat on their hands. Perhaps it was a $144,000 donation to the Trudeau Foundation. Perhaps it was the fact that Beijing was funnelling money into campaigns, hiring interns and putting them in campaign offices. Perhaps it was because Beijing was actively working to suppress candidates from other parties. Perhaps that is why the government forgot its first promise, which is to keep Canadians safe and secure and to make sure that the citizens of this great country are respected and that our democracy is upheld. Perhaps it was simply worth a piece of silver.

1306 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

May/9/23 11:02:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and her awareness of such a fundamental issue. I have asked this question several times today, but it is absolutely fundamental for me. As a member of Parliament, what aspect affects her work? Does she feel completely capable and independent to make decisions, or does she feel some pressure and a threat to her independence and her ability to make decisions? What would happen if she or members of her family received such threats? Are we adequately protected? Is the government doing enough, or should we have an independent public inquiry to make sure that we put in place the necessary framework to allow us to do our jobs properly?

119 words

Independence

Mrs. Rachael Thomas

May/9/23 11:03:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, while I appreciate the member's question, I will just take the attention off of me because it is not about me. It is about Canadians. It is about the responsibility of the government to keep Canadians safe and secure. That is the foremost job of the government. That is prime. The government has failed to do that by allowing Beijing to intimidate not only a member of this place but also many Canadians across the country. Furthermore, to intervene in our election process is absolutely wrong and should never be permitted. The larger question here is what Canadians deserve, and Canadians deserve a public inquiry.

108 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

May/9/23 11:04:17 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I appreciate that the hon. member shares the NDP's view that a public inquiry is absolutely necessary. I do have one question, though. I know transparency is super important, but one other way to protect our democracy is to make sure that we have a sense of national security. I wonder if the member could share with us how we could make sure that there is a fine balance between protecting our democracy and making sure there is a good sense of national security without sharing too much information that protects us.

94 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 193