44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 19, 2023 10:00AM
- Sep/19/23 6:48:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, in my riding of Brampton East, the South Asian community, Sikhs, Hindu, Muslims and various diasporas in my riding, have reached out with various degrees of concern about foreign interference. I would like to hear from the member if he has heard the same thing from some of his constituents in Mississauga—Malton?
56 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:49:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the member's riding is a neighbour to my riding, and we share some of the same communities. I have heard the same concerns from folks with family member abroad, both immigrants and individuals who were born in Canada who have families overseas. Individuals fundamentally respect the rule of law no matter where they come from or where they are, and the rule of law is what this country stands for as well.
We will continue to advocate on behalf of the constituents of Brampton East, as well as for the constituents of Mississauga—Malton.
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:50:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I would like to ask my colleague opposite how he can explain the lack of reaction from Canada's partners, who were so quick to react regarding the two Michaels. Apparently, no one is standing up this time.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:50:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, my answer to the member is an resounding yes. We should call on our partners who respect the rule of law to hold countries that engage in foreign interference to account.
33 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:50:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, yesterday we learned from the Prime Minister that the Government of Canada had intelligence that linked the Indian government to the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar outside a Surrey gurdwara in June.
First of all, I would like to take this opportunity to offer and convey my sincere condolences to the family of Mr. Nijjar for their loss. I know that it must be incredibly difficult, especially given the circumstances that have since unfolded and the horrific public nature of this murder.
One thing is clear. If the allegations that have come to light are true, they not only represent a murder, but also an egregious violation of Canada's sovereignty. Canadian citizens and all persons in Canada must be safe from interference from foreign governments, and they certainly must be protected from extrajudicial killings. There must be no question that Canadians on Canadian soil should not have to worry about their safety in relation to authorities beyond our borders.
If these allegations are true, they represent an outrageous affront to Canada's sovereignty. Our citizens must be safe from extrajudicial killings of all kinds, most of all from foreign governments. Canadians deserve to be protected on Canadian soil.
We call on the Indian government to act with the utmost transparency as authorities investigate this murder, because the truth must come out. We must know who performed the assassination and who was behind the assassination. The Conservatives will continue to work to get these answers.
Canadians deserve the facts of what happened here. They must be provided with the truth. That means that the Canadian government must share the evidence that it has. It also means that the Indian government must provide transparency and co-operate with authorities as this murder is investigated. The public deserves to know who was responsible for this murder and why it occurred. Canadians can rest assured that Conservatives will not rest until we get these answers.
Conservatives and all Canadians stand with those diaspora communities of Indian origin who have been impacted so directly by these tragic events. We appeal for calm as we navigate these difficult circumstances. We also must stand for the rule of law, one of the foundational principles of Canada. We must defend it vigorously so that no Canadian is deprived of it.
All Canadians now stand with diaspora communities of Indian origin. At this time, the official opposition makes an appeal for calm.
We are all Canadians. This is our country. We must be united for our home and for each other. Let us all lock arms and join hands in condemning this murder, standing with the family and friends of its victim. Let us all put aside our differences to stand up for the rule of law, one law for all of our people, a law made in this chamber by Canadians for Canadians.
No matter our background, we are all Canadians. Canada is our country and we must be united as we confront these challenges. We all condemn this murder, and we all stand with the families and friends of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. That is the Canadian way.
523 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:55:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I thank the hon. member for his important remarks today.
Would the hon. member agree that we need to stand together against all forms of foreign interference?
When families in my riding came to this country, including my own family, we came to this country because of our respect for international law, our rules and principles. I am hoping the member can expand on standing up together against foreign interference as we saw yesterday in the chamber.
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:55:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, of course, Conservatives have been calling for stronger measures to protect Canada against foreign interference.
My hon. colleague is correct, people come to Canada from all around the world because of what Canada offers. We are a diverse country, because people come to Canada for our freedoms; for the ability to live their lives the way they choose; to raise their children the way they want; and to pass down their culture, faith and language to the next generation of their families. That is why so many people come from all over the world. All different backgrounds, all different cultures come to Canada, and we are united in that freedom. So, absolutely, Conservatives believe in taking strong measures to defend our institutions, our country and our people against any form of foreign interference, especially when it comes to a tragic situation like this.
145 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:56:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I was listening to my colleague's speech and it made me realize that I am going to get some mileage out of the speeches made by my Bloc Québécois colleagues. They took turns asking questions that seem important, at least to me, yet I have not heard any answers.
First, my colleague from Montarville asked how it is possible that the Prime Minister, who has known about this for some time, waited until yesterday before announcing it in the House. There may be a good reason, but I would like to hear it.
The other question is the one from my colleague from Trois-Rivières. Perhaps the previous speaker can answer. Why are other governments not supporting our Prime Minister's statement and his request to get to the bottom of this matter? I am curious and trying to understand the dynamic.
151 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:57:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I thank my colleague for his questions. However, these great questions should be directed at the government. I am an official opposition member and I do not have the information that the Prime Minister has. I do not have access to the information from our intelligence agencies.
I think that my colleague raised questions that many Canadians are asking. Only the Prime Minister or a member of his team can answer those questions. The Prime Minister did not go over all the information he received that led to the statement he made yesterday.
The hon. member could ask a member of the party in power that question when he has another opportunity to do so during this debate.
120 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:58:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I would like to again state that I stand in solidarity with the South Asian, and particularly the Sikh, community in my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, and I would agree with the member. They are looking for transparency and openness during the course of this investigation.
My question to the House leader is this: If the credible allegations head toward a path where the facts become incontrovertible and we do have hard evidence of the involvement of the Indian government, does he have any ideas on what Canada's response, vis-à-vis India, should be in its international relations with that country?
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:59:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I think it is premature to talk about what might happen should information come to light. I think we should focus on the need for that information to come to light, and that is why it is our position that the Prime Minister should disclose the information he has that led to his statement yesterday. I think only then can we start to talk about what might come after that.
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 6:59:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I want to thank the leader of the official opposition for taking the tone he has taken, as did the hon. member just now, that we need to see more evidence and that we need to know. These charges are grave. I am as alarmed and aggrieved as any member in this House. I would have liked to have, right away, in response to the Prime Minister, extended condolences, support and deep sympathy for the family of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. Unfortunately the official opposition chose to deny me the unanimous consent to speak then, but that does not stop me from thanking them for taking the very sober tone that we need to see the evidence.
Would the hon. member's leader reconsider the offer to have top-secret security clearance so that those of us who are leaders of opposition parties in this place, but particularly the leader of the official opposition, have access to materials that are classified and top secret? I ask, because I think, especially given the gravity of these recent revelations from the Prime Minister that the Government of India may have committed murder on Canadian soil, we need to see all the evidence. Does this House leader believe the leader of the official opposition might reconsider rejecting the opportunity to get top-secret security clearance?
223 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:01:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands knows full well that this offer was made in relation to a different kind of foreign interference, the foreign interference by the Communist regime in Beijing, and that it was part of a multi-faceted attempt by the government to avoid transparency on that issue.
Our position is that the Prime Minister made a very public statement yesterday. He rose in this House and made a very public statement. He delivered a statement to the media. He is making very public allegations, so we do not believe there is any reason to have secret briefings where those who attend those briefings have to keep those secrets. We believe Canadians have a right to know what happened, and the evidence that led to the Prime Minister's statement yesterday should be released so that all Canadians can understand what is going on.
151 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:02:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I am listening to the House leader of the opposition, and what he has just said is that he is asking for evidence that is to go before courts for people who have not even been charged yet to be disclosed in public, so that everyone may know, and then those who are not even charged yet could possibly run away, go away and hide their deeds.
I think I have a lot of respect for the member. He has been a Speaker here. He understands the rule of law and order and knows, I hope, the basic fundamental principles of law and order and evidence in court proceedings that one cannot do that. It would be very irresponsible for a Prime Minister of any party to ever get up and give evidence in this chamber.
I think the duty in this chamber was to give reassurance, so I ask the hon. opposition House leader to clarify why he would want evidence of an ongoing investigation to be given out in public.
174 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:03:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, that is just complete nonsense. I did nothing of the sort. I said that the Prime Minister had information. He had evidence that led him to make a very public statement and a very public determination yesterday. That is all we are saying.
We are not in any way saying that something might rise to the level of an actual court proceeding. We are saying that the information that was provided to the Prime Minister that led to the statement should be made public, that the evidence that he has should be put forward so that Canadians can understand what is going on. Perhaps they are trying to dance between the semantics of certain definitions of words, but I think it is safe to say, that when the Prime Minister rises in this place and makes such a statement, the gravity of which is so profound and so serious, it does merit an explanation for Canadians.
158 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:04:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I do not think anybody is trying to dance around anything. I would just like to seek clarity on what was just said.
I know that the Leader of the Opposition issued a similar statement to what the opposition House leader is saying. Would he agree then that any evidence that would be germane to this case and that would be gathered by officials in their investigation should not be made public, even if it was given to the Prime Minister at one time? Would he agree that should remain—
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:04:47 p.m.
- Watch
A brief answer from the official opposition House leader.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:04:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I guess we could start with the government releasing some information. In all different areas the government has an aversion to transparency and accountability. It would be a great conversation to start. It can start by sharing what it believes it can at this moment. I think Canadians would welcome that.
53 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:05:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, yesterday, in a spectacular statement, the Prime Minister accused India of being behind, so to speak, the assassination last June of a Sikh separatist in Canada, Hardeep Singh Nijjar. I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of my party, to express my most sincere condolences to the members of his family, who must be going through an even more difficult time after hearing this news from the Prime Minister yesterday.
Like my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, I must say that we appreciated the transparency from the Prime Minister in this very worrisome affair.
Like the House leader of the Bloc Québécois, I am once again offering our party's co-operation in getting to the bottom of things. We must not overlook the importance of this revelation. If it turns out to be true, it would amount to an outright, extraterritorial and extrajudicial execution on Canadian soil, in violation of the rules of international law, which is an extremely serious act. If by chance the Prime Minister's allegations, which seem to be based on intelligence information, were to turn out to be false, we would have to conclude that the Prime Minister was very imprudent, not only because of the seriousness of the charges, but also because of the importance of India and the importance of the Indian and Sikh communities within Canada.
The tone has changed since yesterday. The Prime Minister is now calling for calm, and I think that is very wise. We need to avoid histrionics and speculation. We need to get to the bottom of things. Calling for calm will force us to consider what is happening. As we know, relations between Canada and India have already been strained for several years. Canada has accused India of this extrajudicial and extraterritorial killing, and India has been accusing Canada of harbouring Sikh separatists on its soil for several years now. India is even accusing Canada of having connections to the Khalistan separatist movement.
I must admit that, as a separatist, I think the idea that the Liberal government would have any connection whatsoever to any separatist movement in the world is a bit far-fetched. That being said, I still think that we need to take a close look at what could have happened, given the gravity of the events.
I want to thank my colleague from Trois-Rivières for drawing my attention to Sam Cooper's article in The Bureau, which refers to a confidential version of the report of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, or NSICOP, on the Prime Minister's trip to India. I can talk about it more openly because I was not a member of NSICOP at the time and because that media outlet reported on it today.
According to the article, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, planned a major intervention in 2017 to shut down rapidly growing Indian intelligence networks in Vancouver that were monitoring and targeting the Sikh community. Again according to this article referring to the NSICOP report, Ottawa apparently blocked the CSIS operation because of “political sensitivity” and because Ottawa feared it would have an impact on the Prime Minister's upcoming trip to India.
As well, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians stated that, in about 2016, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, discovered, and I quote, “‘an increase in the volume’ of Indian intelligence activity in Canada, targeting the Indo-Canadian diaspora and government institutions.”
If this were true, it would also be extremely troubling. It would mean that the Liberal government deliberately interrupted a CSIS investigation to avoid impacting the success of the Prime Minister's trip to India, scheduled a few months or weeks later. We know that the trip, despite efforts by the Prime Minister and his family to dress up like our Indian friends, was not a major success.
One reason for the poor showing is that the government had inadvertently, although the RCMP was aware, invited a Sikh separatist named Jaspal Atwal to one or two receptions held in India, which had apparently angered the Indian government.
As we know, relations between Canada and India are extremely tense, so much so that it was with great interest and hope, I think, during the Prime Minister's trip to that country for the G20, that we watched the meeting that was planned between the Prime Minister and the Indian Prime Minister. We thought at the time that it would be an ideal opportunity to rebuild bridges and reopen lines of communication.
What we found out today and yesterday is that the Prime Minister instead admonished the Indian Prime Minister for this alleged killing of a Sikh separatist on Canadian soil.
I want to reiterate that we very much appreciated the Prime Minister's transparency yesterday. We expected nothing less from him, having been accused these past few months of waiting far too long to disclose sensitive information about Chinese interference in Canada.
I think he learned his lesson. He decided to inform Parliament quickly, but it depends on what is meant by “quickly”. Maybe in the wake of his meeting with the Indian Prime Minister he should have informed Parliament of this information or informed the public of this strategic or sensitive information.
When asked about this issue yesterday, the new Minister of Public Safety said that, since information was starting to leak, they thought it was a good time to tell Parliament about it. Coincidence can be an amazing thing sometimes. The government got wind of leaks just as Parliament resumed, just as it needed to get back on track because it was lagging in the polls. It needed to make an impression as Parliament got back to work.
I am not suggesting anything about anyone's motives. I am just pointing out that coincidence can do very good things. That raises another question: Why did the government wait until there were leaks to disclose the information? Had there not been a leak resulting in yesterday's announcement, might the Prime Minister have waited much longer to inform the public, thereby risking further accusations of taking too long to inform the public and Parliament of possible foreign interference on Canadian soil, this time with extremely tragic results?
Obviously, there are a lot of questions and, unfortunately, not a lot of answers.
We asked some questions earlier. Why wait until yesterday to share this information? We did not get an answer. Why are so few of Canada's allies speaking up? We did not get an answer.
I want to reiterate that we need to work together, to the extent possible, in order to get to the bottom of this situation, because this story is extremely concerning. We need to give answers to Canadians and Quebeckers.
1160 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/19/23 7:16:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, this killing, this murder, happened just a few kilometres from where I live. It has affected the entire Sikh community in the greater Vancouver area, in British Columbia and in Canada. We know that there is an extreme right-wing organization that has been repeatedly involved in killings, murders and violence, not only in India, but also in the UK and North America. I am talking about the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS. It is a right-wing organization that advocates intolerance towards religious minorities.
My question is quite simple. One of the things the NDP has been talking about since we learned this information, since yesterday, is the importance of banning this organization, the RSS, in Canada. It is about ensuring that this organization can no longer carry out its activities, its threats and all the negative things it does to target religious minorities here in Canada.
Does my Bloc Québécois colleague agree with this approach?
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
