SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Sep/19/23 7:54:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, yes, I said that in my speech. I am from Brampton, and Bramptonians are concerned, like other Canadians are. That is why the Prime Minister made the statement. Let us remain calm and steadfast in our commitment to our democratic principles. We have full trust in our law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies, and they are working hard on that. In the meantime, we all stand together. That is what all Canadians expect us to do and that is what we are ready to do.

87 words

All Topics

Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)

Sep/19/23 7:55:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, from the beginning of this debate, we in the Bloc and the other parties have deplored the events that have taken place. My colleague opposite is from the region where the crime in question took place. I would like to hear her thoughts on our concerns. While we sympathize with everyone affected, and despite our desire to learn more, does my colleague have any idea why the Prime Minister waited until Monday to make the statement? Also, is she aware of any discussions the Prime Minister may be holding with leaders of other countries to find out why we did not receive the support of other countries in this matter initiated by the Prime Minister yesterday?

119 words

All Topics

Ms. Sonia Sidhu

Sep/19/23 7:56:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, wherever the crime is committed, it was committed on Canadian soil. I am from Brampton. It was committed on the west side of Canada, but it is in Canada. Wherever it was committed, we are all Canadians and it is unacceptable on Canadian soil. That is why I mentioned that the Prime Minister is so transparent and our government is transparent. The hon. member knows that we cannot comment when the investigation is going on. Our number one priority is to protect Canadians. That is what our government has committed to do. We all committed to do that. That is what Canadians expect from us and that is what we are doing.

114 words

All Topics

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

Sep/19/23 7:57:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, these credible allegations of a link between the Government of India and the killing of my constituent, Mr. Nijjar, are immensely troubling. It is a substantial attack directly on Canadians and Canadian values, with a specific focus on Sikh Canadians. Can the member speak to the importance of all Canadians coming together to denounce this and affirm shared Canadian values?

62 words

All Topics

Ms. Sonia Sidhu

Sep/19/23 7:57:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, no matter where we come from, no matter what our background is, safety and security is the main thing. We all share these sentiments and we all stand together, and that is why the debate is happening. The investigation is going on and we are all looking forward to that.

52 words

All Topics

Hon. Anita Anand (President of the Treasury Board, Lib.)

Sep/19/23 7:58:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, as you may be aware, I come from a family originally from India. Both of my parents came from India. They have passed now, but my father was from Tamil Nadu and my mother was from Jandiala Guru, a small town outside Amritsar. Many years ago, they immigrated to the province where you hail from, Mr. Chair, Nova Scotia, and settled in a small rural town of 5,000 people. I was born there. Life was good there. I really like the province of Nova Scotia. I want to say that, regardless of where we hail from, we all in this country should always defend the rule of law, human rights and Canadian sovereignty free from foreign interference. That is ironclad and what I am here to speak about this evening. When I was young, we were one of the very few South Asian families in the province at the time. That did not matter because the people of Kemptville, Nova Scotia, embraced our family and we had a wonderful childhood there. I will say that is the story of towns and cities across this country. In fact, it defines Canada, and we need to hang on to the respect and integrity that typifies so many towns and cities across our country. My parents' way of raising us was to enrol us in all of the extracurricular activities they possibly could so that we felt as though we were very much a part of the community, but I, like many children of immigrants, understand the anxiety, emotions and affinity people have regarding their ancestral home. We have all learned to embrace our backgrounds and all they entail as part of the Canadian identity. Diversity and inclusion are our biggest strengths. My ethnic background is part and parcel of my entire identity, which is made up of different components, including being a mother, a professor, now a member of Parliament, a Canadian and a Canadian of Indian origin in fact. I am a Canadian who is very proud of my Punjabi and Tamil heritage. Yesterday, like so many, I was appalled to learn about the credible allegations of possible involvement by a foreign government in the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar. I want to extend my deepest sympathies to the family and loved ones of Hardeep who are having to relive this horrific incident. My thoughts are with them and, today especially, I am thinking about my parents and what this means for so many of us who have our roots in India. I know this is a very difficult time and as the process unfolds it will continue to be difficult, but I want to be very clear that our government takes any and all allegations of foreign actor interference in Canada extremely seriously. Canada is a country that is governed by the rule of law, and the protection of our citizens and the defence of our sovereignty are fundamental to our society, to our security and indeed to our very being. As the Prime Minister said, we must let law enforcement and security agencies take their course for the continued safety of all Canadians and we must take all necessary steps to hold the perpetrators to account. Today I have shared things that I have never shared in this House of Commons before, because we do need to remain unified and empathetic, and we must remain a country where our democratic principles and the rule of law are protected. All Canadians have the right to feel safe in their communities and free to practise their religion of their choice, and our government will always protect this right. I hope that we can remain united and allow the justice system to run its course, but I want to echo what the Prime Minister said. We will remain committed to democratic principles, the rule of law and human rights.

654 words

All Topics

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Sep/19/23 8:04:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, speaking about sharing things that have never been shared in the House and the kinds of feelings this is bringing up, in my riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam I have had a lot of community outreach this week: people reaching out to me and sharing their stories. I wonder if the member would not mind expanding on the impacts of what kinds of feelings are coming out from Canadians and immigrant Canadians who have come here for safety in Canada.

83 words

All Topics

Hon. Anita Anand

Sep/19/23 8:05:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her service to her community on behalf of all Canadians. I have heard from many constituents as well as members of the broader South Asian community, and I will say that there is concern coming from the community and Canadians generally about the Prime Minister's words yesterday, especially because people want, need and should be able to feel safe in their own communities. It is for that reason that I thought I would stand in this House this evening to express how important it is for us to have confidence in a government that will always protect the rule of law, democratic principles and human rights.

115 words

All Topics

Mr. Randeep Sarai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, Lib.)

Sep/19/23 8:06:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, as I scope the room and have been listening to this, I unfortunately have not heard too many of my Conservative colleagues speaking. However, the one who spoke, the opposition House leader, brought up some legal questions and said we need more evidence and that the Prime Minister should share what he knows with this House and with Canadians. My good friend, the President of the Treasury Board, has been my professor. She is a legal eagle and she has also been part of the cabinet and knows what is said in cabinet as well as evidentiary laws. I would like to ask the President of the Treasury Board to reiterate about the only thing the Conservative caucus members have asked, which is whether the Prime Minister can reveal information in an ongoing investigation. Has the Prime Minister, without credible evidence, ever made a statement such as this before?

151 words

All Topics

Hon. Anita Anand

Sep/19/23 8:07:34 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I can confirm the veracity of the statement made by my hon. colleague just now relating to our past collegial relationship as professor and student. I will say that it would be highly imprudent for anyone to comment on potential or actual evidence in the process of an ongoing investigation. Therefore, the question for us to adduce such evidence while an ongoing investigation is occurring is simply inappropriate. We cannot and should not be involved in an independent investigation, which must take its course, especially for the grieving families of the victim.

94 words

All Topics

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Sep/19/23 8:08:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, we are hearing from diaspora communities that they are afraid. They are afraid of violence being perpetrated against them and their loved ones. The threat against this particular individual was known, yet this individual still lost his life, was still murdered. I am just wondering what the government can do to reassure members of the diaspora community. What can the government do to make Canadians feel safe again in their homes, in their communities and in their places of faith?

82 words

All Topics

Hon. Anita Anand

Sep/19/23 8:09:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, of course, this affects not only members of the Sikh community but every single person in Canada. Every individual, regardless of age, ethnicity, cultural background or religion, must feel safe and secure in their own community. That is fundamental to our democracy, it is fundamental to a country governed by the rule of law and it is absolutely central to the Canada that we know and love. In this instance and every other, we need to make sure that law enforcement can take its course and can bring perpetrators of illegal actions to justice. That is fundamental to operating and living in a country governed by the rule of law. Such is the country of Canada.

118 words

All Topics

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Sep/19/23 8:10:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I will begin by offering my sincerest condolences, and those of the Bloc Québécois, to Mr. Nijjar's family as well as to the Sikh community. In my riding, there are not many people who belong to the Sikh community as such, yet I have still received many calls in the past day from people who tell me that these things should not be happening. They are asking why the diaspora community is not protected. Certainly, that is one of the first questions we must ask ourselves, but we must also take a step back and look at the big picture for a moment. We did not just start hearing about foreign interference yesterday. There were many discussions in the spring, of course, but the topic has been on many lips for a few years now. Last spring, I asked dozens of questions, all of which went unanswered. The government downplayed the situation and said to be patient. We rose numerous times to call for an independent public inquiry, a request that was repeatedly refused. Most days this spring, the government denied that an inquiry was important or needed. Our requests were brushed aside until it was impossible to brush them away any further. The government has been “actively passive”, to use a phrase I am fond of. It was quick to do nothing. However, its “do nothing” approach became an “allow interference” approach. It is a sad observation to make today when we look at the state of the world, particularly with the situation in Ukraine, with Armenia. The world today is not as idyllic as it once was. There are rogue states. If we take off our rose-coloured glasses for a moment, we will realize that some of these rogue states are our partners. Some of our partners are rogue states. Interference can take several forms. Of course, there is social media propaganda, for example. People can be manipulated into believing a lot of things. There is also corruption among elected officials, like we discussed at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, or the infiltration of institutions. Some people thought that the Trudeau Foundation had been infiltrated, which may or may not have been true. There can also be direct action, as we saw in Vancouver in the case at hand. Throughout the spring of this year, we talked about Chinese interference, although my colleague mentioned China, Iran, Russia and India, which are the four countries in question. Witnesses told the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and the Standing Committee on Ethics that they were getting FaceTime calls in the middle of the day showing them their grandmother back in China and that they were scared. I myself saw and heard from frightened witnesses at the Standing Committee on Ethics. We called for a public inquiry until this one could start. The commissioner was appointed recently. September 18 marked the start of the commission's activities. That same day, however, the Prime Minister told the House of Commons what happened in British Columbia in June. It was a rude awakening for several people who believed that this kind of thing only happened in other countries. This incident happened here at home. We found out that Mr. Nijjar was killed on June 18, 2023, and that the Government of India was alleged to be behind the killing. How is that possible when India is our partner? How is it possible when Canada is investing so much money with India under the Indo-Pacific strategy? It is impossible but true. According to Sam Cooper, in 2017, the Prime Minister's Office apparently blocked a CSIS operation due to “political sensitivity” on the eve of his trip to India, which has since become famous for a variety of reasons. That is not all. In 2019, CSIS reiterated in a classified report marked “Canadian Eyes Only” that Indian interference had continued unabated. It has been mentioned often this evening, but we cannot help but wonder why. Why is this information tolerated, downplayed and kept secret when, as we now know, people's lives are on the line? People may escape death, yet still have their lives ruined. These kinds of things are not acceptable, and we cannot pretend that we did not know. The government was notified. The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians also said that the government usually discounted warnings from CSIS about the behaviour of China and India toward diaspora communities. That goes to show that CSIS, the Prime Minister's Office and NSICOP all knew about it. Honestly, it is hard not to wonder whether foreign interference is a sign of the times. It is happening more frequently now. Is it due to a lack of awareness about the importance of international relations? Is it due to a lack of courage by government? Is it purely, simply and unfortunately the product of indifference, neglect and tolerance of interference? A fundamental distinction must be made, given everything that has been said so far. Intelligence must not be confused with evidence. We cannot jump to conclusions. We need to understand that intelligence suggests something, whereas evidence demonstrates something. The two concepts are not one and the same; they are on different levels. However, when I read the reports, I saw that they contained a lot of intelligence. A lot of intelligence does not equal evidence, but it should give one pause. It would seem, however, that despite the amount of intelligence at its disposal, the government once again decided not to listen to CSIS. I want to say it again: We are not in a world where everything is rosy. There are rogue states that no longer hesitate to use any means necessary to advance their own interests. One example is surveillance. At the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, we conducted a study on Pegasus, a powerful surveillance tool used mainly by rogue states. There are ways of manipulating peoples' thoughts, as I was saying earlier, with propaganda and the conspiracy theories that abound these days. In the present case, it is important to note that after yesterday's condemnation in the House of Commons, Canada's friends, allies and partners did not appear to step up to support the Prime Minister. This surprises me, because when the two Michaels were detained, allied states quickly rose up in unison and supported him unreservedly. However, in that case, we were dealing with evidence, not with intelligence or allegations. There is a distinction there. I wonder why no one is stepping up to support Canada this time. To move the debate forward, the government will have to present credible, irrefutable evidence. If it must act, it must do so in the public interest and set aside partisan interests. Speaking of partisanship, as my colleague from Montarville pointed out earlier, these allegations are coming at a very opportune time for the government, which was embroiled in all kinds of problems. That has been completely overshadowed by the matter before us this evening. At the end of the day, the problem is that the relationship of trust between the public and the current government has been damaged. Trust is what makes it possible to believe without requiring proof. When we do not believe, we demand proof. Because of the government's laissez-faire attitude toward foreign interference, people doubt its intention to act. That distrust is harmful to the public interest. Members of diaspora communities need to know that the government will protect them. They need to know that it will take swift and sure action in response to foreign interference and protect them. The people of Quebec and Canada need to know that the government has a credible plan to address foreign interference and that it is not just avoiding the issue, as we saw last spring. In conclusion, we cannot put the economy ahead of security. Even though Adam Smith said that trade is security, this is about an economic partnership with a state that interferes in our affairs. That is not sustainable. We are just putting off dealing with the problem. We can no longer afford to be naive. We need to tell it like it is: The world is a tough place. We need to face the facts and take action. The government has to maintain both security and the sense of security.

1423 words

All Topics

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Sep/19/23 8:20:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, this matter is extremely sad. A Canadian citizen was killed on Canadian soil. The fact that the allegations and suspicions we heard in June have finally been addressed means that progress is being made. However, we must take action, and I think we all agree on that. This evening, the NDP proposed that, with the help of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, we increase protection for populations that may be vulnerable to this type of violent interference by foreign governments. We must also look at the situation of Indian diplomats and conduct a review. There are dozens and dozens of Indian diplomats, but so far, only one has been expelled. We must also ban Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a violent organization that was involved in the massacre and violence against Muslims and Sikhs in India, but that also represents a threat in Europe and North America. Of course, we also recommend that the public inquiry include India. I know that my colleague voted in favour of this motion, which includes India in the public inquiry into foreign interference. Does my colleague support this line of action? Does he agree that words are not enough and that we need to put words into action?

205 words

All Topics

Mr. René Villemure

Sep/19/23 8:22:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his wise suggestions. Many times this spring, I said that, while we were debating about whether interference had occurred, the interference was continuing to happen. While we were debating the need to appoint a commissioner or a rapporteur or what have you, the interference was continuing to happen. It continued happening and Mr. Nijjar was murdered in June. Yes, it is high time we put words into action, rather strong, rigorous action, with the specific intention of protecting the public.

88 words

All Topics

Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)

Sep/19/23 8:23:33 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from Trois‑Rivières for his speech, which, as always, was informative, sensitive and reasonable. I would say that it was an ethical speech. That being said, he raised the issue of the lack of support from other governments. He also talked about how long the Prime Minister waited to make his statement in the House after he received the information. It is possible that this delay was just fine. It may be just fine that no other country has supported the Prime Minister's position so far. That does not mean that the other countries do not agree. Maybe we will find that out later. It may also be just fine that our Conservative friends are silent on the issue. Nonetheless, this leaves me with a lot of questions. I am not sure if my colleague from Trois‑Rivières can elaborate. In his view, is there a connection between those delays? Is it possible that the information obtained is not as reliable as we would like to believe? Perhaps it is reliable and I am asking completely useless questions. I would like my colleague to say a bit more on this aspect of the issue.

207 words

All Topics

Mr. René Villemure

Sep/19/23 8:24:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I always enjoy listening to the thoughtful and, most importantly, informed, speeches of my colleague from Rivière‑du‑Nord. Was the information incomplete? Was the statement premature? Was an unsubstantiated judgment made? A lot of questions remain unanswered, and these grey areas are exactly why we find it hard to trust. The entire statement lacks sincerity. There have been so many twists over the years, sometimes it feels we are watching a terrible play. In any case, I would hazard a guess that the lack of support may be due to a lack of evidence. It may be the result of a premature statement. Many questions could be asked. Nevertheless, we really have to get to the bottom of this. Like my colleague, I would like to hear my Conservative colleagues' views on the matter.

141 words

All Topics

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Sep/19/23 8:25:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for the introduction of the reality of how this has not necessarily be taken seriously in the past, this intimidation, this interference and this potential harassment of Canadians on Canadian soil. I just wonder if the member has any other suggestions about what should be done now to protect the communities that often come to us with intelligence and stories about how they do not feel safe.

75 words

All Topics

Mr. René Villemure

Sep/19/23 8:26:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for her important question. The people who came to testify before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics told us that, first, they wanted to be heard and, second, they wanted to be believed. When people tell me they have gone to the RCMP only to be rebuffed and have no one believe them, this tells me that there must be more of an effort to listen to them, to hear what they are saying and to see what can be done. Looking away is the best way to see nothing. I think we need to make an effort to communicate and open a dialogue with the diaspora communities. That dialogue cannot take place over loudspeakers or through the media; we need to make contact and be sincere.

138 words

All Topics

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Sep/19/23 8:27:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, on issues such as this, which pertain to Canadian sovereignty, Canadian dignity and respect for our processes, safety and democratic institutions are paramount to the discussion. It is central to the need to see a consensus of members of Parliament. It is good to see the Bloc Québécois is prepared to work with parties of all stripes to ensure we can come to a unified solution on behalf of Canadians, particularly those Canadians who are right now in fear for their lives and have been raising the alarm. I am proud of the fact that the government has been honest with this information and has brought it to the House of Commons for us to delineate. Would the member comment on the absence of the Conservatives' voices on something so important as this? One would think they would want to protect our democracy and protect our institutions, and their absence in this discussion is shameful.

161 words

All Topics