44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 20, 2023 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to rise today to speak to Bill C-18, the online news act. As members have heard, I am a former broadcast and newspaper journalist, and I am also currently a member of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Therefore, this bill really is important to me. I am very proud of the work that we did as a committee and that we are one step closer to this legislation's actually passing now that we have received amendments from the Senate.
I am so grateful for the work of the Senate, and I would like to thank the senators for their thorough debate and their thoughtful consideration of the legislation. I would also like to thank my colleagues on the heritage committee for working collaboratively across party lines and listening compassionately to all the groups and individuals who came to committee to tell us just how important Bill C-18 would be for them.
Before I get into the substance of the Senate amendments, I would like to explain why this bill is so crucial for small local Canadian news outlets. These outlets at one time told the stories in and about every little corner of our country, but they have been shuttering, one after the other, and the trend is accelerating. I witnessed it first-hand in my more than 20 years as a journalist, surviving mass layoff after mass layoff and watching talented and bright colleagues have to go off and find their next dream job.
Just last week, Bell Media laid off some 1,300 employees from its broadcast division on Parliament Hill. We lost journalists like Joyce Napier and Glen McGregor. These journalists are institutions within this institution. Their deep knowledge, gained from years of experience, and the context they bring to their reporting has been lost. It is a loss to us who work in this place and it is a loss to our constituents who are trying to understand federal politics.
It is not just in Parliament buildings in federal and provincial capitals where journalists have become scarce. It is our city halls, our courtrooms, our legions, our school boards and our local sporting events. We used to have reporters in all those places, listening to people, sharing stories and giving us a real sense of community. They are mostly not there anymore.
As we have heard already today, since 2008, more than 500 Canadian news outlets have closed in 335 communities across Canada. Three hundred and fifty-nine of these are community newspapers. Sixty-three closed since the start of the pandemic.
Since 2010, the number of jobs in the newspaper industry saw a 45% decrease. Thousands of journalism jobs have been lost permanently from all the mediums. This means that many communities do not have local news to rely on. They are left unaware when they could have helped someone in need. They are left in danger when there is an impending natural disaster. They have no way to know how their city, or province or country is performing, whether there is corruption or a policy that causes harm to vulnerable people.
News producers told us at committee that news had never been profitable, that it was expensive, that it was hard work. It takes a person at least a full day, sitting through meetings, coming up with an angle, conducting interviews and writing a story for print or broadcast, just for one piece of content. However, news is so valuable that it was always worth the trouble. Companies would advertise. There were classified ads or obituaries. News producers could survive. Now all those sources of revenue are gone.
Eighty per cent of all advertising revenue goes to Google and Facebook, two companies. They do not employ journalists or ask reporters to gather news, but the content produced by reporters is still important to these online giants. These are the stories people share on Facebook. This is the data scraped from the Internet, when artificial intelligence is being developed. The news content creators are dwindling, but the content itself is going further than it ever has before. What happens when we do not have any more reporters to share our stories? Democracy dies in darkness, as I am sure members are aware.
In order to secure a future for local news, we must ask Facebook and Google to pay their share, to contribute to Canadian journalism. We must ensure that we continue to have journalists and that they are paid fairly for their long, uncomfortable, highly scrutinized and yet sorely needed work. That is why we need to pass Bill C-18. This bill would require the tech giants to fairly compensate publishers for the content distributed on their platforms.
My riding of Hamilton Mountain is particularly well served by local news outlets. There are radio stations, magazines, local web-based reporters, The Hamilton Spectator, Hamilton Mountain newspapers and CHCH TV, with hard-working reporters, editors, photographers and a myriad of other people with the skills required to make it all work, ensuring that the people of Hamilton know when there is something they need to know.
Bill C-18 would help smaller outlets. They can work together to negotiate collectively with big tech giants. Bill C-18 would require these tech giants to broker deals with smaller outlets. If a fair deal cannot be reached, the negotiations would move to final-offer arbitration.
We need to acknowledge and mitigate the threat that tech giants pose to our local news outlets based on the balance of power they hold. We need to empower and strengthen our local news teams. Most news organizations in Canada, which produce journalism as already defined under the Income Tax Act, will be eligible for the online news act, whether they are big or small, local or national.
This is bigger than just Canada. We are following in the footsteps of other countries, such as Australia and France. The online news act is based on the Australian model, where digital platforms that have a bargaining imbalance with news media are required to make fair commercial deals. As we saw in Australia, collective bargaining was essential for ensuring that small publishers got good deals. That is why this legislation does the same. Other countries are watching what we in Canada do in order to follow in our footsteps, because they also see the dire need to protect their journalism.
Regrettably, there has been a campaign of misinformation surrounding this bill. Tech giants have tried to convince small news outlets that Bill C-18 will hurt them. The opposite is true. This bill is good for local news. News producers maintain their freedom of expression and their editorial and financial independence. Bill C-18 is about supporting fact-based local Canadian journalism in a fair digital marketplace.
To hear tech giants and opposition members spread misinformation about this bill really gets to me. It is appalling. I have heard this called a “link tax”. There is nothing in Bill C-18 that makes platforms pay per click. There is no tax. The government is not collecting any money. Now more than ever, as we face rampant disinformation and lost trust in our institutions, we need quality, fact-based, objective news reporting at local, national and international levels.
The intimidation tactics that we have seen from tech giants are quite troubling. From February 9 until March 16 of this year, Google ran tests that dangerously blocked and censored news from more than a million Canadians. When Google ran similar tests in Australia, it blocked access to other institutions too, like a hospital and a shelter for women escaping violence. Instead of directing people to those sources, Google directed its algorithm to promote sources of questionable quality, sources known for conspiracy theories, for example.
When Google uses tactics like blocking Canadians' access to news and information, it fails to be a reliable service for consumers. By running tests that block access to news, Google is hurting Canadians and damaging Canadian democracy. Rather than being good corporate citizens and working with legislators, tech giants have been trying to strong-arm and intimidate us. There is derision in lieu of thoughtful, meaningful engagement with the parliamentary process.
Our government supports journalism, full stop. We have the local journalism initiative, the Canada periodical fund, the journalism tax credit and the digital news subscription tax credit. With Bill C-18, we are taking another step to encourage, support and stand up for our local news outlets.
A free and independent press is absolutely essential to Canadian democracy. I am proud of the work I did for more than 20 years as a journalist. To come full circle, I am equally proud of the work we have done as a committee and as a government on this piece of legislation.
Let me just talk briefly about the Senate amendments to this bill. I am encouraged that we agree with the majority of amendments made by the Senate. Out of the 12 it suggested, we accepted 10. It is very reassuring.
The government respectfully disagrees with amendments four and five. These changes would undermine the objectives of the bill, which focus on encouraging fair deals. The amendments would narrow the scope of the bargaining process between platforms and news outlets. We cannot add an amendment that would limit the ability of news publishers to negotiate fair compensation with large tech giants. A main component of this bill is a fair and independent framework for Canadian publishers and journalists to bargain with tech giants. Amendment five would improperly benefit the platform at the expense of the publisher.
Once again, I thank my colleagues at the Canadian heritage committee and thank the Senate for its thoughtful deliberations.
1636 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite, who sits on the Canadian heritage committee with me.
She alluded in her speech to the fact that Facebook and Google will block Canadians from being able to share news links. We know that originally in Australia, the same thing was tried, but Australia granted them an exemption and worked with Facebook and Google to make sure citizens were not going to be blocked. Why did the government not do the same?
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, this government really believes in supporting journalists and sticking up for them in the face of intimidation tactics by tech giants.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I believe that my colleague and I agree that we absolutely must protect our local media outlets. There is currently a crisis. People are losing their jobs, and we must stand up for them.
Bill C-18 is a good step, but unfortunately it will not fix everything in this time of crisis. That is why the Bloc Québécois, and especially my colleague, the member for Drummond, is working very hard to ensure that a special fund for local media is created.
Recently, media outlets in our ridings contacted us again about this matter. I am thinking of the Voix de l'Est, Granby Express, Journal de Chambly, Val-Ouest and M105. They are closely following the debates on Bill C‑18 and want an additional fund to give them a boost. All these media outlets need an extra boost.
I would like to know if my colleague's government is prepared to go that far, on top of passing Bill C‑18.
174 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I completely agree that journalists and small media outlets need support. At the same time, Bill C‑18 gives them the autonomy to negotiate directly with major tech companies. Some do not want money from the government.
We must continue to talk about all the ways in which we can support journalists, but I believe that Bill C‑18 is a good start.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I will ask the member a question that she did not really talk about and that not enough members talked about regarding Bill C-18. What I like about this bill is that the support provisions will provide for indigenous production. I wonder if she could help describe why Bill C-18 would be important for indigenous news outlets.
60 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, that is a very important question. I did meet with stakeholders who were indigenous journalists. They told us about how important it was for them to tell their stories in their own way from their own voice and to not have a definition of journalism imposed upon them that would not feel natural for their lifestyle. We incorporated their suggestions into our legislation. I thank them again for their input, because it led to very valuable amendments to this legislation.
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, constituents from the riding of Waterloo appreciate their media sources. While they do continue to support traditional sources, we are going more and more online.
I would like to hear from the member what it is about this legislation and these amendments that is essential for Canadians to know. There is a lot of misinformation and disinformation out there. What is the importance of this legislation, and what is it that constituents from the riding of Waterloo and Canadians need to know about the importance of advancing this legislation and seeing it passed?
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I agree that Canadians take their news in all forms. Like many people, I enjoy reading lots of news from online journalism sources.
What people need to know is that the government is not getting involved in censoring the Internet. There is nothing like that at all. All this legislation does is allow news organizations in Canada to have a business negotiation process with tech giants for an exchange of goods where they both benefit.
77 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in this House and address not only my constituents in Calgary Midnapore but also Canadians. The matter at hand today is Bill C-18, which seems to go hand in hand with Bill C-11, the unfortunate legislation we saw this House pass that attempts to silence Canadians.
Before I get to my speech, I want to take a moment to recognize the member for Lethbridge, who, as the Conservative shadow minister for heritage, has done an incredible job of standing up not only for content creators and all Canadians, but especially for those who want their voices heard, whom the government, hand in hand with its government partner the NDP, is not allowing to be heard. Let us hear it for them being the opposition someday soon. It will happen when the member for Carleton becomes prime minister.
Today we are discussing Bill C-18. I am not as familiar with this bill as the member for Lethbridge, who, again, has done such a fantastic job of championing our opposition to this bill and to Bill C-11, but after my review of the bill and the information I have seen online, which I do not believe is misinformation, I have some significant concerns. It seems that the government's reasoning for this bill is in alignment with a lot of its other legislation. I am going to go over some troubling points that I see and then conclude with how I feel this points in the same negative direction that we see the government often take.
Apparently, according to this bill, the government would be able to determine who eligible news businesses are. That is very unfortunate, because if anyone has something to say, then that is news, that is their news and that is their voice. It really should not fall to the government to determine who eligible news businesses are. The government would also mandate payments for links, so in addition to controlling who is saying what and what they are saying, it is controlling the money of who is saying what and what is being said.
Also, the CRTC would be judging the agreements. The CRTC has been given incredible oversight, and I would almost say overreach, with Bill C-11, and this is continuing with Bill C-18. I have seen several articles that indicate Bill C-18 risks creating no independence within the press. That is also very concerning.
What all of these concerns I have just listed point to is a theme with the Liberals: They want to control everything. That is exactly what they do. They absolutely want to control everything. Whenever there is something they do not agree with, they label it as misinformation. This is what they do, and Bill C-18 is just another example of the government's attempt to control Canadians.
However, members should not just take my word for it. Michael Geist noted, “The Globe and Mail's Phillip Crawley warned against the intrusion of the CRTC into the news business, calling it a “threat to the independence of media”, something I just mentioned. Virtually everyone admitted—
535 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:28:41 p.m.
- Watch
We have a point of order by the hon. Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard.
18 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:28:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and I would ask for unanimous consent to adopt the following motion. I move that, pursuant to Standing Order 111.1(2), the House approve the reappointment of Heather P. Lank as Parliamentary Librarian for a term of 16 months.
49 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:10 p.m.
- Watch
1 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:10 p.m.
- Watch
All those opposed to the hon. minister's moving the motion will please say nay.
Some hon. members: Nay.
19 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rising to apologize. My apologies to the member across the way.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:38 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Calgary Centre is rising to apologize, I hope.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:38 p.m.
- Watch
Grow up.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Grow up?
Mr. Greg McLean: You heard me. Jackass.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:29:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, all parties have been consulted, and if you seek it, I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, the motion that, pursuant to Standing Order 111.1(2), the House approve the reappointment of Heather P. Lank as Parliamentary Librarian for a term of 16 months be deemed moved, the question be deemed put, and a recorded division be deemed demanded and deferred to the expiry of the time provided for Private Members' Business today.
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/23 5:30:30 p.m.
- Watch
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.
Some hon. members: Nay.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès): SpeakerIt being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.
53 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved that Bill C-278, An Act to prevent the imposition by the federal government of vaccination mandates for employment and travel, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
He said: Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House of Commons and represent the people of Niagara West. I appreciate their support for the past 19 years, and I want to make sure they know I never take it for granted. They sent me here to be their voice in Parliament, to speak to issues important to them and our beautiful riding of Niagara West.
I proudly rise to introduce a private member's bill that is important not only to my constituents but also to over six million Canadians. The bill reads:
This enactment amends the Financial Administration Act to provide that the Treasury Board may not require as a condition of employment in the federal public administration that a person receive a vaccine against COVID-19. It also amends the Canada Labour Code to provide that regulations may not be made that require, as a term or condition of employment in or in connection with the operation of a federal work, undertaking or business, that a person receive a vaccine against COVID-19.
In addition, the enactment amends the Aeronautics Act, the Railway Safety Act and the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 to provide that no regulation, order or other instrument made under any of those Acts to prevent the introduction or spread of COVID-19 may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting a person from boarding an aircraft, a train or a vessel solely on the ground that they have not received a vaccine against that disease.
The title of the bill is “an act to prevent the imposition by the federal government of vaccination mandates for employment and travel”, or simply, the “prevention of government-imposed vaccination mandates act.” As I said earlier, this bill is incredibly important to my constituents and more than six million Canadians across the country, more than actually voted for the Liberal government in 2021. This bill is about freedom. It is about reining in the ballooning and intrusive government that got used to interfering in Canadians' lives with extreme outreach. The bill was initially introduced by our Conservative leader, the member for Carleton, and because there was quite a bit of overlap between his bill and my previous bill, we agreed I would go forward with his. I am grateful that his views are aligned with mine on this issue of freedom. After all, freedom is at the core of our Conservative way of thinking and is essential to governing and to government.
This bill, if passed, would prohibit the federal government from discriminating against federal public servants, federally regulated workers and federally regulated travel based on health status. Specifically, it would prohibit the federal government from mandating COVID vaccines for employment and travel.
For far too many Canadians, the last three years has been among the most difficult times in their lives. During the pandemic, many Canadians made the personal choice of remaining unvaccinated, specifically and only with respect to COVID. Their personal choice about their health put them in opposition to the views of the Prime Minister. As a consequence of this, they suffered deeply. They were shut out of their churches, banned from travelling, banned from seeing their loved ones and fired from their jobs. Some Canadians were stripped of their employment insurance benefits.
I know that, to many, this seems like it was long ago, so let me refresh people's memories of these egregious government actions. It was May 2021. While the country was going through the COVID pandemic, the Prime Minister said in an interview, “We are not a country that makes vaccinations mandatory.” The Prime Minister clearly stated that he did not support vaccine mandates in May 2021. That all changed after he saw the political opportunity and after he saw the polls. He saw an opportunity to win a majority government by wedging voters on their personal health choices. He saw that he might gain votes if he divided Canadians and pitted them against each other. He did this by putting in place mandates that restricted the freedoms of Canadians. When Canadians disagreed with the Prime Minister's policy, he appeared on television, calling them misogynists and racists. He also said that they held unacceptable views.
Next, the Liberals introduced the country's first mandates, a divisive, vindictive, stigmatizing and cruel measure. In an instant, millions of Canadians were, because of their personal medical choices, put on unpaid leave and banned from taking federal transportation. This was in addition to being ostracized by friends and strangers alike, sometimes even by their family, as a consequence of the Prime Minister's divisive rhetoric.
Let us just say it how it is. The government saw this as an opportunity for political gain and took it. Even when the world began to open up, the government kept these measures in place, continuing to restrict the personal freedoms of millions of Canadians. Soon after mandates were introduced, an election was called. The Prime Minister ran a campaign largely advocating the violation of some of the most fundamental civil liberties that Canadians have.
Not long after, mandates were extended to members of the Canadian Armed Forces. CAF members who chose to remain unvaccinated were rendered unsuitable for further service and were booted out. This decision caused turmoil among senior CAF members who questioned the legality of this. In a decision of May 30, 2023, the Military Grievances External Review Committee found that this vaccine mandate had breached the charter rights of military personnel. I am sure that, in the coming months, we will see more of this decision when it condemns the government's divisive and unscientific vaccine mandate. The Liberal government looked soldiers in the eye and said they were unsuitable because of their personal health choices. It almost sounds like a dystopian movie plot where the Liberals play the villains, punishing citizens who speak out of line or think for themselves. Quite frankly, that is a movie I would not want to see become a reality, but, unfortunately, in many ways it has become so.
This was just another display of the Prime Minister's wanting more control over Canadians. Big government overreach divided Canadians, turning neighbours and families against one another. To the Liberals, it is always about winning; it is not about Canadians, and certainly not about compassion in difficult times. For those who made different personal medical choices, the government made them outcasts in their communities, firing them from jobs, banning them from travelling and ostracizing them from their friends. Canadians should have the freedom to make personal health decisions for themselves, without social and economic threats from the government. They have the freedom to do so, a freedom that should never, ever be cast aside again. However, if one did not agree with what the Prime Minister decreed was right, one was punished. The scale of this was unprecedented in Canadian history.
Millions of Canadians voiced their worries and concerns, including hundreds to my office. They emailed, called and wrote to me and many of the MPs here in the chamber. One of the stories I listened to was from a young man named Daniel. Daniel chose to remain unvaccinated because of his own personal fears of a fairly new vaccine, especially since he had had a bad reaction to one before. Because of his personal health decision, he was scoffed at and treated differently. He watched in horror as different levels of government treated Canadians who were unvaccinated like they were some sort of criminals, all because of the example of, and the pressure to fall in line exerted by, the Prime Minister and his Liberal government. Unscientific mandates kept Daniel from seeing his friends, his family and especially his grandparents. He could not go watch a hockey game with his grandfather or go to a restaurant to celebrate his sister's birthday. Most of all, he could not see his grandmother while she sat alone in a nursing home, unable to spend the holidays with the family. Daniel spoke up and sent me a letter because he was inspired by what our current leader and many other caucus members had said. He says that he will be forever thankful that, on this side of the House, we speak up for what we truly believe in.
What happened to Daniel was not a one-time thing. I personally know of a friend incredibly close to me who also suffered. As a father, he watched as his child was banned from playing basketball, a sport they both love. His son was told he was not accepted; this was not as a player on the court, but as a person, all because of one personal choice. Outside of sports, his son was kept from playing with his friends and was even denied entry to stores, where he was forced to wait outside in -40° weather.
These Canadians were not hateful. They were not conspiracy theorists or science deniers, like the Liberals were so disgustingly saying at the time. These are labels, might I add, that some Liberals still repeat. These were good folks who just wanted to live their lives without government forcefully telling them what to do. All they asked was to be left alone, and because of that simple request, they experienced hardship like they never had before, hardship that was facilitated by legislation, and rhetoric sparked by the Liberal government.
The Liberals took not just the jobs of these Canadians; they also took their livelihoods and their reputations. One can see this with the government's invoking the Emergencies Act, where Liberals accused protesters of being arsonists and thieves. In reality, Ottawa Police Service had unequivocally said there was no connection between the fires and protesters. Despite this, the Minister of Public Safety, the leader of the NDP and Liberal members like the member for Pickering—Uxbridge shamefully used these false stories to justify their use of the Emergencies Act.
This misinformation and disinformation was peddled not just by government officials. The media, mostly the CBC, which is a good pal of the Liberals, tried to claim that Canadian-led fundraisers supporting the protests were being funded by foreign agents in Russia and the U.S. Later, they had to walk back those remarks because the overwhelming majority of donations, close to 90%, came from Canadians who were upset about how their fellow Canadians were being treated. The legacy media, the Liberals and the NDP did not care about the facts. All they relied on was unconfirmed online chatter. They were desperate to cling to something.
In August 2021, the front page of the Toronto Star had a now infamous opinion piece quoting the line, “I have no empathy left for the willfully unvaccinated. Let them die.” This was one of the lowest points in our country, to see something like that happen to folks, some of whom live in my riding. In January 2022, a Quebec judge ruled that a father could not see his son after the father made a post on social media that was critical of vaccine mandates. The judge labelled him a conspiracy theorist who was too dangerous to see his own son. There is even more.
Not even students were safe from being targeted. Across Canada, universities and colleges banned students from going to classes or participating in campus events. Students' chances of graduation and access to quality education were put in jeopardy because of these mandates.
Canadians were being singled out for their personal medical choices and punished because of the hateful rhetoric of the Liberal government. While protesters were outside protesting for their freedoms in the freezing cold of Ottawa, the Liberals sat in their cushy warm offices, freezing Canadians' bank accounts. The Liberals kept them from buying food, paying rent and paying for utility bills and other essentials. They wanted to paint the protesters as evil, so they falsely told Canadians the protesters were ransacking offices, another complete fabrication to justify their complete and total overreach.
While the Liberals covered their ears and called people names, I was listening to people. I knew that compassion, understanding and empathy were the way out of this Liberal-created crisis. I listened to the stories of Canadians in my communities and across the country. These stories also inspired members of the Prime Minister's own Liberal Party to speak up.
In February 2022, the member for Louis-Hébert said he was uncomfortable with how his government was handling the pandemic. He pointed out how the government had changed and taken a more stigmatizing and divisive approach to its pandemic policy. He reminded the Prime Minister to not demonize people who just disagreed with his policies. The member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin also agreed, saying that there were more in the Liberal caucus who felt the same way.
With all of this, the Liberals set an egregious example to the provinces and municipalities. Premiers and municipal politicians across the country felt forced to get in line and follow Ottawa's lead. If they did not, the legacy media, so closely aligned with the Liberals on almost everything, would have made them pay a heavy political price. Clearly this was about control.
Thankfully, members of our Conservative Party stood up and spoke their minds, including our leader. He stood up for the freedom of personal choice. We want Canada to be the freest country on earth. We must ensure that Canadians will never lose their medical freedom. I will never let people forget how the Liberal government trampled on the rights of Canadians for three long years, how the Prime Minister treated them during that time or how he froze Canadians' bank accounts, got them fired, stripped them of unemployment insurance benefits and banned them from travelling.
The Liberals did all these things to achieve one goal: political success. The Liberals capitalized on fear and made their opponents their scapegoats. These millions of Canadians deserve a voice, and they deserve accountability from the government. Only Conservatives will give these Canadians a voice and stop excessive government overreach so that they can take back control of their lives. Only the Conservatives will bring home freedom.
The COVID-19 policies put in place by the Liberal government were simply too much. It was not right. We all know that, or at least I hope we do.
We cannot go back to firing people for a personal medical choice, something so intimate to Canadians. What Canadians choose for their health is their freedom and theirs only. We cannot go back to stripping people of their employment insurance benefits because of a personal medical choice. We cannot go back to prohibiting people from travelling or working because they made a decision for themselves. It was cruel. There was no compassion for our fellow Canadians who may have thought a bit differently than the government. It violated the rights of Canadians for way too long and without any scientific basis.
I hope all members in the House will show compassion, empathy and understanding by supporting this bill and making sure that our fellow Canadians are never treated with such disdain by their government ever again.
2586 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
