44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 17, 2024 10:00AM
- Sep/17/24 10:40:40 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, with respect to affordability, his party brought in the GST. Later, under Stephen Harper, it brought in the HST, bribing other provinces to the tune of $6 billion in historic deficits and borrowing. Maybe my colleague can explain how the HST helps seniors with affordability, because it is a tax that was put on consumers instead of the businesses to which it gave corporate tax cut reductions.
Could the party responsible for the GST and HST please explain how that has helped consumers by putting that debt on them versus the companies?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 12:22:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have no idea what that has to do with the motion the Conservatives put forth, but that is not surprising from the member and from the way the members opposite are behaving. I am glad to have the floor.
If I had unanimous consent, I could go on longer, because I have, right here, the Harper government's record in scandals. I have the last 10 years of Stephen Harper scandals. I have the Conservative collection of Harper government scandals as well. I have lots here to go on.
I want to go specifically to the motion. Here is the Auditor General's office, to cut 60 jobs, a reduced number of audits, thanks to the Conservative government, thanks to Stephen Harper, thanks to their agenda, which they never told the public when they went to the polls. They never told the public they were going to raise retirement from 65 to 67. They never told the public they were going to cut $100 million from border services. They never told my community they were going to close the veterans office and the recruiting office, which they did. They never said any of those things. I would love to have the floor to talk about those things more.
211 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 12:56:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is one fundamental flaw in what the member is trying to portray. He is attempting to mislead Canadians, quite frankly. The member knows full well that inappropriate behaviour has not been condoned in any form by this government. In fact, when it was discovered that there was inappropriate behaviour, the government acted quickly by ensuring there was a process to assure Canadians, the taxpayers, that there would be accountability and there would be a consequence for those who had violated the procedures in place to protect the taxpayer.
The member intentionally tried to give the impression that it is the Liberal Party or the government, the politicians, that has not protected the interests of the taxpayer when that is just not true. If we want to look at a scandal where politicians were trying to cover something up, look at the $400-million ETS scandal of the Harper era, which the Conservatives across the way are absolutely silent on.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 1:19:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will just say to anybody who is actually paying attention to the debate and reading the legislation, that there is a substantial connection test to ensure that people do have strong ties to Canada.
I would like to take this opportunity to do a public service announcement. We just had a Conservative member of Parliament stand up concerned that Canadians might exercise their right to vote. The Conservative history has always been to suppress the vote. If they can give Canadians a reason to stay home and not vote, they know they will do well in the polls. Former prime minister Harper had two minority governments, and then Canadians trusted him with a majority. Canadians quickly learned what Conservatives do with power. They will abuse it time and time again.
Canadians, these people, have the right. As the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has ruled, they are Canadians, they should be Canadians, and we should encourage them to advance Canadian values and participate in the democratic process. Nobody, especially the Conservatives, should be scared of a Canadian exercising their rights and freedoms.
185 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 1:21:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we agree that the current bill comes in response to an Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruling that struck down provisions in the act and put pressure on the federal government.
However, the discussion here concerns a citizenship issue debated in the House over 15 years ago. It affects the lives of Canadians who arrived here after the war, and who could well be over 80 by now. Why was it necessary to wait for the court's ruling? Why did the Liberal government not show some leadership during its nine years in power while this issue was being addressed?
Instead of the current Prime Minister's mandate, we could just as easily say the Harper mandate, or the mandates of previous governments. We have been talking about this issue for decades. Why wait for a court ruling?
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 1:28:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have been quite forthright in saying this is about Canadian citizenship. We can all work together to ensure that we are protecting Canadian citizenship.
Let us look at the Conservative approach. Right away, the fingers come out. It is a pointing game. It is somebody's problem. The member might have been here or might not have been here, but what he does not realize is my grandfather came to this country. I was born and raised in this country and I have a lot of regard for this place and our rights and freedoms.
The member is yelling at me like Conservatives do at women all the time. Perhaps if a man had put forward the motion, they would have accepted it, but God forbid a woman does.
At that time, former prime minister Harper was very clear. He basically told all members in this place that if they did not support this, nothing would happen. That was the Conservative way then; it remains the Conservative way now. Canadians should be watching.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I appreciate that you did try to remind me and the member why we were here, and the fact that the member did not actually talk about Canadian citizenship.
It is important for us to come back to Bill C-71 and to understand that, under the amendments under Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government, for Canadians serving in the Canadian Forces who had their babies on a Canadian Forces base abroad, those children had their citizenships stripped from them. How are those children not Canadians when their parents are serving in the Canadian forces, proud Canadians? We really need to come back to this legislation.
I recognize and hear the concerns that the member is raising on other matters. We should discuss and debate them. The Conservatives spent the morning talking about some concurrence motion, and I am sure they will do it again tomorrow. However, right now, let us debate Bill C-71. Let us get our points on the record and then let us get to the vote so we can get the bill to committee and get this legislation either passed or not. Members can vote.
193 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 1:53:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this will be the second consecutive Conservative that has spoken in regard to the immigration system as a whole and has tried to give glorification to Stephen Harper, who was a disaster on immigration. What those members are glorifying is the fact that Stephen Harper, for example, cancelled the sponsoring of parents and grandparents. They literally deleted hundreds of thousands of people who were under the process of becoming permanent residents.
If we want to talk about cold immigration policies, we should go back to the Conservative years. What is important is the mixture of immigrants who are coming for permanent residence. We have annual targets that are set. That annual target is going to be coming out again. We will find that there is a great benefit through immigration to Canada. The Conservatives of late are trying to give the impression that it is us versus them. We should be proud of the diversity. Look at the immigration programs—
163 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 2:47:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to answer an expert on austerity infrastructure and measures.
Here is what the Conservatives did to the fisheries industry in the regions. Under Harper, they cut the budget of Fisheries and Oceans Canada scientists by $80 million. They voted against investing in small craft harbours. They voted against helping families and against programs for seniors. All they have to offer Canadians is austerity.
70 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 3:19:10 p.m.
- Watch
He was named Deputy Speaker of the House and Chair of Committees of the Whole in October 2004. In that role, he earned the respect of all parliamentary groups and the esteem of Speaker Milliken and all the table officers who had the privilege of working with him every day. As a member of Parliament, he served the people of Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, and before that, Fraser Valley, for 18 years, through six consecutive elections.
He was guided more by principles and by faith than by politics. Those qualities made him an extraordinary leader who never shied away from what he knew to be right, what he knew to be just. He served many years in cabinet and was notably Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians. He was by the side of the former prime minister, the Right Hon. Stephen Harper, during the historic statement of apology to former students of Indian residential schools in the House of Commons on June 11, 2008.
His love of Canada and his dedication to his constituents came second only to his devotion to his wife, Deb, and his children. He was also a man of deep faith who was always guided by his love and trust in God. He stayed so strong for so many years after being diagnosed with cancer.
His determination and courage in the face of adversity says so much about his love of family, his devotion to Canada and his dedication to public service. A man like Chuck Strahl inspires, and we have only to see his legacy live on in his son, the hon. member for Chilliwack—Hope, who serves so ably in this place.
Chuck Strahl left us too soon, but he will always be remembered as an exemplary Canadian and a wonderful parliamentarian who had a lasting impact. I extend my deepest condolences to Mrs. Strahl, his wife of almost 50 years, our esteemed colleague from Chilliwack—Hope, his other children, grandchildren and his many friends.
348 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 3:36:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, who among us can claim to have run against the devil himself? This was one of the exploits of the Hon. Chuck Strahl, a former Conservative cabinet minister who died of cancer on August 13 at just 67 years of age.
In the 1997 election, Chuck really did face off with a man by the name of Sa Tan. He had a gift for telling this anecdote in a humorous way, although it did make him wonder whether it was possible to run for office in Canada under a pseudonym.
Chuck Strahl proudly represented Chilliwack and the Fraser Valley region in the House for nearly two decades, from his first election in 1993 until 2011.
After starting his career in forestry and business, he made his mark in politics. He served in various capacities in the House before becoming a minister, taking on the agriculture, indigenous affairs and transport portfolios. He was, without a doubt, one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's most trusted advisers.
On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I would like to thank Chuck Strahl for his years of public service. I want to offer my deepest condolences to the woman with whom he shared his life for almost 50 years, as well as to his three daughters and 13 grandchildren. It is with the utmost empathy that I also extend my condolences to his worthy successor in the riding of Chilliwack—Hope, his favourite MP, his son Mark, who helps to keep the memory of his wonderful father alive through his presence in the House.
Although he decided not to run for office again in 2011, Chuck Strahl never really left politics. People continued to turn to him for advice. In an open letter to The Globe and Mail in 2011, he shared his advice with his son and successor. Although this public message was meant to be personal, every man and woman working in politics would be well advised to learn from it.
In that letter, he emphasized the importance of keeping one's word and listening to one's voters, to local residents. He believed that our constituents are always our best advisers. He also advocated solidarity. Even when debates become heated and potentially divide political families, it is essential that colleagues know they can always count on each other. Above all, he stressed the importance of family, because outside the political arena, family is our main anchor. Though the brouhaha of politics all too often requires us to live at a frantic pace, it is important that we not forget ourselves and, above all, that we never forget our loved ones.
This is sound advice that is still as relevant today as it was then, and it speaks volumes about Chuck Strahl as a politician and as a family man, as well as the values that he cherished and that live on today in people like his son in the House and his family outside the House.
I recognize the man I worked closely with and had the great pleasure of working with when we both served as chief whip of our respective political parties. I will always remember him as an affable, funny, reliable and efficient man, a man who fought tooth and nail for the values he held dear and the ideas he put forward, but always in a respectful manner.
When he left politics for health reasons, I admit that I was worried about him. Then, as time passed and I saw him make occasional public appearances, I came to believe—wrongly, obviously—that he was doing quite well. His passing came as a shock to me and to many of his former colleagues and constituents. I cannot imagine how tough it must have been for his loved ones, for whom I have enormous sympathy.
I would like to think that Chuck will continue to look down on us and inspire us with his wise counsel. I am positive he is up there now, and for good reason, because did he not beat the devil himself in an election?
Thank you for everything, Chuck, my dear friend. Now try to get some rest, because you have earned it.
717 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 3:41:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my New Democratic colleagues to remember the late Chuck Strahl, whom I served with for several years.
Let me begin by extending my deepest condolences to the member for Chilliwack—Hope and also to the family and friends of Chuck Strahl. We thank them for sharing him with this place, with our Canada. We are better for it.
Mr. Strahl's legacy is well known. First elected as a member of the Reform Party, Mr. Strahl was also a member of the Canadian Alliance. He was also leader of the Democratic Representative Caucus and then a cabinet minister in the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. Mr. Strahl also served as deputy speaker and chair of the committee of the whole. That is quite a record for political parties. The fact that Mr. Strahl was elected and served under all these political affiliations is a real testament to his effectiveness as a member of Parliament and as a person who made contributions in the chamber every single day.
I also wish to point out that during his time as minister of Indian affairs and northern development, he helped negotiate the Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement among the first nations, Canada and B.C., which outlines the nation's jurisdiction, doing something that had not been done before.
It is important to note that Mr. Strahl served in various cabinet portfolios after he was diagnosed with lung cancer as a result of his exposure to asbestos many years prior. Upon announcing his diagnosis, Mr. Strahl said, “Cancer is a serious disease, but those of us diagnosed with cancer don't want to be rushed off the playing field and sidelined any too soon”, and he did that every day as he worked here.
Sadly, he lost his fight with cancer last month, but he is respected in the chamber to this day by all political opponents. He was actually appointed as a Trudeau mentor in 2012 and joined the Trudeau Foundation board of directors in 2014, until stepping down in November of 2016.
Let me end by quoting a cabinet colleague of his, someone I also served with, John Baird, who said Strahl was “among the most honourable, decent (and) respectable people I have ever met,” and that his “good nature” and “infectious humour” would be missed. I could not agree more.
I thank the Strahl family very much for sharing Chuck with all of us for Canada.
423 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I really do appreciate the shout-out that was given to Don Chapman. As I mentioned today and yesterday, I came to know Don Chapman when I worked for Andrew Telegdi, the former member of Parliament for Waterloo.
I also really appreciated the member's insights at countering this false narrative by the Conservatives regarding Bill C-37, who then are intentionally choosing to forget that former prime minister Stephen Harper basically gave an ultimatum to members to either take this step that lost Canadians were fighting for or none of it would happen. People like Don Chapman were leading the charge to ask for this step to at least be taken, because we were never going to get the Conservatives to truly be inclusive. They are the most uninclusive party possible.
My question to the member is in regard to the Ontario court ruling and the fact that this legislation would make Canadian citizenship more equal, especially when it comes to kids being adopted or who are born abroad. I would like to hear what the member thinks the benefits are of having legislation that would be constitutional. What kind of value does that have when it comes to Canadians and the pride we share?
208 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 5:11:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague. This historical error caused people to lose their citizenship, their rights and access to services. They became second-class citizens. Children became stateless and were stuck in limbo, although limbo apparently no longer exists because the church officially abolished it.
I would like to talk about the Conservatives' position. They talk about citizenship tourism and birth tourism. That makes me think of the years of darkness under the Stephen Harper government, when Jason Kenney eliminated health care for asylum seekers and refugees, claiming that these people were leaving their countries and their families to get health care here in Quebec and Canada. It seems like more of the same with the current batch of Conservatives.
123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am so excited and happy to be back in the House of Commons to represent the good people of London West, and to also see my colleagues, who are energized and ready to serve Canadians.
I will be sharing my time with my amazing colleague, the member for Markham—Unionville.
I am very pleased to have the opportunity to participate in the second reading debate on Bill C‑71, a bill that would amend the Citizenship Act to expand access to Canadian citizenship by affiliation beyond the first generation.
I also want to thank my colleagues in the House who spoke before me and advocated on behalf of lost Canadians because of the complexity and shortcomings of previous legislative changes to the Citizenship Act under the Harper government.
Bill C-71 proposes amendments to the Canadian Citizenship Act in response to issues raised in both Parliament and the courts. These changes would restore citizenship to the remaining lost Canadians, the individuals who either could not become citizens or who lost their citizenship due to outdated legislative provisions.
While previous amendments helped many, a small cohort of lost Canadians remain. The legislative amendments outlined in Bill C-71 would help lost Canadians and their descendants regain or obtain citizenship. They also address the status of descendants impacted by the Harper Conservatives' first-generation limit. The revised law would establish clear guidelines for acquiring Canadian citizenship by descent.
Once this legislation is enacted, the harmful first-generation limit would no longer apply. It would allow Canadian citizens born abroad to pass their citizenship to their children, provided they can demonstrate a substantial connection to Canada. Canadian parents born outside the country would be able to transfer citizenship to their child if they have lived in Canada for more than three years before the child's birth. These changes would result in a more inclusive and fair Citizenship Act and would right the wrongs of the previous Conservative government.
Additionally, this new legislation would continue to reduce the differences between children born abroad and adopted by Canadians and those born abroad to Canadian parents. Any children adopted overseas by a Canadian parent before the law takes effect would be eligible for the current direct citizenship grant for adoptees, even if they were previously excluded by the first-generation limit. Once the new law is in place, the same criteria would apply to children adopted by Canadian citizens abroad. If the adoptive parent born outside of Canada can show a substantial connection to Canada, the adopted child would be eligible for citizenship as well.
Basically, we are saying that Bill C-71 would restore citizenship to those who have been wrongfully excluded and would establish consistent rules of citizenship by descent moving forward.
I would like to pause here to thank the many families who have worked alongside our committees and our staff, and the many people who have helped get us to this place where the Minister of Immigration and Citizenship has introduced this legislation.
Not only do Conservatives not want this bill to pass, they spent the whole afternoon yesterday filibustering and trying to move motions that would delay its passing and delay the many Canadians who have been harmed in the process from receiving justice. It is important to note that this legislation would not only fix the mess the Harper government created, but would also respond to the reckless government the current Leader of the Opposition was a member of.
In 2009, Harper and the Leader of the Opposition moved legislative amendments to the Citizenship Act to restrict citizenship by descent to the first generation born abroad. For many young Canadians who were perhaps too young to remember, the Leader of the Opposition was also part of the government that introduced Bill C-24. Not only did it seek to create second-class citizens, it also gave itself the power to revoke citizenship for dual citizens by targeting nearly one million Canadians. Therefore, it is not a surprise that Conservatives not only want to prevent Bill C-71, a bill that is in collaboration with all parties in the House to restore the Charter rights of Canadians, but also want to delay it even at committee.
Being a Canadian citizen is a privilege we should never take for granted. In fact, we should all advocate as strongly for our rights to citizenship as the lost Canadians have done for themselves. Canadian citizenship represents more than just a legal status. It embodies the ongoing commitment and responsibility.
What does it mean to be Canadian? There is no right answer to this question, and that is one of the great things about our country. Let us start with how our commitment defines us. One of those commitments is to understand ourselves and our history, as flawed as it is, and to work toward a better future for all. That is the oath that some of us took to become citizens, and that is the oath we should all continue to honour.
Our country has a rich and complicated history, dating from before the founding of Canada. The indigenous people who have lived on these lands since time immemorial have stewarded the country we all love and call Canada today. Since Confederation, many diverse people have chosen Canada as their new home. Apart from indigenous people, every Canadian's history begins with the story of a migrant.
Canada is known for its commitment to multiculturalism and inclusion. This commitment was made official in the 1988 Canadian Multiculturalism Act, which promotes the recognition and celebration of diversity.
Canada's approach to multiculturalism emphasizes the active integration and celebration of its citizens' diverse cultural identities. This approach creates a society in which people from different ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds can retain their identity, take pride in their roots and feel a sense of belonging in our country. Canada's communities, from coast to coast to coast, are a living example of multiculturalism.
At the heart of Canadian identity lies our commitment to human rights. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the fundamental rights and freedoms of all citizens and residents, including freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom of peaceful assembly, as well as the rights to equality and non-discrimination.
Canada also demonstrates its commitment to human rights through its support for many international human rights initiatives. Over the years, Canada has defended the rights of women and marginalized groups, both nationally and internationally.
Our citizenship provides security, rights and opportunities. It helps people to feel more included in Canadian society and gives them the opportunity to participate in it. It offers many benefits that improve the lives of individuals and communities.
One of those advantages is the fundamental right to actively participate in the country's democratic process. This includes the right to vote in federal, provincial, territorial and municipal elections, which empowers citizens to have a direct impact on government policy. It is also important to note that only citizens can run for office, giving them the opportunity to represent their communities and contribute to the governance of Canada.
All Canadian citizens also enjoy all the legal protections and rights set out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This ensures that their civil liberties and rights as individuals are protected at the highest level, in addition to providing a solid framework for justice and equality.
While we are on the subject of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I would like to remind members that the leader of the official opposition has hinted that he would use the notwithstanding clause if given the opportunity. Canadians should take note of this and of what the Conservatives have done in the past, in particular, as I mentioned earlier, what they did in 2009.
Many Canadians who are around the same age as me maybe do not remember what happened, but in 2009, the Harper government took the right to interfere with Canadians' rights. They amended the Citizenship Act to limit citizenship by descent by introducing the first-generation limit. I would also like to remind the House that the Ontario Superior Court ruled that the first-generation limit imposed by the Harper government following legislative amendments in 2009 was unconstitutional in terms of both mobility rights and equality rights, and it is a clear example of how the Conservative Party continues to disenfranchise Canadians.
Don Chapman is one of those people who were affected by this generational limit. He has dedicated his time, advocated for Bill C-71 and worked through different committees to amend it and get to the place where we are today. I just want to give him a shout-out because I know how hard he worked, how many phone calls he had to make and how many of my colleagues he called over a long period of time.
Another important advantage of Canadian citizenship is access to the Canadian passport. This passport is recognized worldwide as one of the most valuable and offers visa-free or visa-on-arrival access to many countries.
1525 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 5:28:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I deeply appreciate the opportunity that my Bloc Québécois colleague has given me to continue and to finish expressing my thoughts on this bill, which I consider very important for all Canadians everywhere in Canada.
Don Chapman is one of those Canadians who was adversely affected by what the Harper government did and what the Leader of the Opposition continues to support. Even now, during our committee meetings, when we try to advance the work, he keeps putting up roadblocks.
I am extremely grateful for the support of the Bloc Québécois, the Green Party and the NDP, who continue to support us so that we can serve Canadians. For the families we have met, the stories we have heard and the harms these families have suffered, it is our job as elected officials to fix the problem as soon as possible.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 5:42:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for speaking to this very important issue and the real impacts on Canadians and those who are denied their citizenship as a result of the outdated rules that were put into place by the Harper government.
I have an interesting point. I was given a response by the leader of the Conservative Party to a family that was asking about his stance on this exact legislation. His response, which I find is interesting, was this: “Conservatives will help preserve what it means to be a citizen of this country and fundamentally what it means to be Canadian. Please be assured that they will continue to support and advocate for this legislation to reach its third reading in the House of Commons.”
We know this is blatantly false. We know that the bill has been stalled, basically, eight times since last October by the Conservatives to prevent it from reaching third reading. Can the member please speak to why he believes the leader of the Conservative Party is misleading families that deserve to have their basic human rights met?
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/17/24 5:55:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to say how happy I am to see my colleague come back; he sits on the immigration committee with me.
I find it really interesting that he is complaining about the Liberals taking too much time to fix something that the Conservatives broke.
This is something that his Harper government, the same government that the current Leader of the Opposition sat in, did to leave Canadians behind and to create second-class citizens. Can the member opposite talk about that and why he thinks it is a Liberal problem when it is a problem that they created themselves?
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
