SoVote

Decentralized Democracy
  • Apr/27/23 5:40:00 p.m.

Hon. Marty Klyne moved the adoption of the report.

He said: Honourable senators, the Standing Senate Committee on Audit and Oversight, or AOVS, is focused on ensuring that it is well positioned to provide independent and transparent oversight to support the Senate in its accountability. The committee unanimously agreed that establishing strong oversight processes is the next big step in fulfilling our mandate. In order to do so, the committee finds that it is essential to meet with its counterpart in the United Kingdom.

The U.K. House of Lords Audit and Risk Committee, the U.K. House of Commons audit committees and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, or IPSA, have a similar mandate and structures as AOVS and have been in operation for over a decade now.

AOVS is at an important and high-profile stage in its work as a new committee: hiring a chief audit executive, establishing a new internal audit function, providing direction on improving and approving a risk-based internal audit plan, approving internal audit resource needs and setting other new practices, for example, an internal audit charter establishing how to liaise with Internal Economy on internal audit matters and so on. The committee is looking to the practices in some comparable models that would help to inform this next phase.

The committee is particularly interested in the lessons learned and best practices from IPSA and the Speaker’s Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, or SCIPSA; the House of Commons audit committees, which are the Administration Estimate Audit and Risk Assurance Committee and the Members Estimate Audit Committee; and the House of Lords Audit and Risk Committee — each of which have external members. The purpose of these meetings would be to have candid, in-person discussions on various audit and oversight matters, many of which would be sensitive or confidential in nature. The audit committees and IPSA do not hold public meetings.

All members of the committee would participate in a full week of meetings. From a business continuity perspective, the members feel it is important for the full committee — especially the external members and chief audit executive, who are not impacted by the election cycle — to participate in this important knowledge transfer from the committee’s counterparts in the U.K.

Colleagues, for this purpose and for these reasons, I hope you will consider this budget. The knowledge that would be gained on this trip is integral to the committee’s mandate, and it would help guide the committee’s future work and ensure it is well positioned to fulfill its essential and independent oversight responsibilities.

Thank you.

436 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 5:40:00 p.m.

Hon. Frances Lankin: Will the honourable senator take a question please?

Senator Klyne: Absolutely.

14 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 5:50:00 p.m.

An Hon. Senator: On division.

(Motion agreed to, on division, and report adopted.)

[Translation]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Boyer, calling the attention of the Senate to the positive contributions and impacts that Métis, Inuit, and First Nations have made to Canada, and the world.

(On motion of Senator Petitclerc, debate adjourned.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Woo, calling the attention of the Senate to the one hundredth anniversary of the Chinese Exclusion Act, the contributions that Chinese Canadians have made to our country, and the need to combat contemporary forms of exclusion and discrimination faced by Canadians of Asian descent.

116 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 5:50:00 p.m.

Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Inquiry No. 11 concerning the historical treatment of our Chinese brothers and sisters. It is critical that we, as senators and citizens of Canada, understand how immigration policies have continued to shape racism within our country.

I want to thank Senator Woo for bringing forward this inquiry, and for highlighting the need to combat contemporary forms of exclusion and discrimination still faced by Canadians of Asian descent today.

Colleagues, in the 1983 book entitled Racial Minorities in Multicultural Canada by editors Peter S. Li and B. Singh Bolaria, author Gurcharn Basran from the University of Saskatchewan states:

Racism in Canada is not the product of the seventies and eighties. It has been practised systematically by the Canadian government and people in general from the very beginning of Canadian history. . . . It has been institutionalized throughout our history. It has been directed mainly against non-white populations in Canada. The chronology of the development of Canada immigration and ethnic policies is the chronology of the discriminatory policies followed by the Canadian government in relation to non-white populations.

The author continues:

Chinese were brought in to work on the construction of the Canadian Pacific line. It was difficult to secure white labour for this purpose. Woodsworth, in his book, Strangers Within Our Gates, points out:

“The Chinese, in any number, were first brought in when the Canadian Pacific Railway was being built, in order to work on the construction on that line when it was next to impossible to secure white labour.”

While discussing the contributions of Chinese labour to the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, or CPR, John Porter emphasizes:

Without Chinese labour the construction and completion of the CPR would have been indefinitely postponed. Not until 1962 were coloured people from Commonwealth countries looked upon as possible immigrants, except for small numbers who were allowed in to work as domestic servants, an entrance status previously held by lower class British and eastern European females.

The author continues:

There are various examples of institutionalized racism in Canada. Students of Canadian history in general, and those responsible for Canadian immigration policy in particular, are well aware of various pieces of legislation, laws, and practices that discriminate against the non-white and immigrant population. As soon as CPR construction was completed in 1885, and Chinese labour started entering into other occupations, institutional racism began in various forms. . . . A head tax of $50.00 was imposed on Chinese in 1885. It was increased to $100.00 in 1900 and $500.00 in 1903. Other Orientals were also subjected to a head tax, while passage assistance was available to the British immigrants. Chinese and East Indians had to pay a head tax in Canada and their immigration was virtually stopped after 1907. Orientals had no voting rights until World War II and were not allowed to practise certain professions in British Columbia. According to the 1906 Immigration Act, important discretionary powers were given to immigration officers, who used them against non-white immigrants in a ruthless and discriminatory manner. . . . There were race riots in British Columbia in 1907, in which Orientals were attacked and their properties, businesses, and houses destroyed.

In 1907 immigrants from Asia were required to have a minimum of $200.00 in landing money. In 1919 this account was increased to $250.00. In 1930, section 38 of the Immigration Act prohibited the landing in Canada of immigrants of any Asiatic race.

Honourable senators, the following information that I’m going to share with you is based on research done by the Library of Parliament. The first major wave of Chinese immigration began with the Fraser River Gold Rush in 1858. From 1881 to 1885, more than 15,000 Chinese labourers came to work on the construction of the CPR. Over the course of construction and by the end of 1882, 6,500 of the 9,000 railway workers were Chinese Canadians. They were employed to build the B.C. segment of the railway through the most challenging and dangerous terrain.

Chinese workers were paid a dollar a day, and, from this dollar, they had to pay for their food and gear. White workers were paid $1.50 to $2.50 per day and did not have to pay for provisions. In addition to being paid less while also incurring higher expenses, Chinese workers were given the most dangerous tasks, such as handling the explosive nitroglycerine used to break up solid rock. Due to the harsh conditions they faced, hundreds of Chinese Canadians working on the railroad died from accidents, winter cold, illness and malnutrition. Between 600 and 4,000 Chinese men died working on the CPR.

Although Chinese-Canadian workers faced and overcame great obstacles to help build the CPR, they were left out of the national celebration surrounding its completion. In the iconic and historic photograph of CPR director Donald Alexander Smith driving the ceremonial Last Spike — when the western and eastern segments of the CPR finally met in Craigellachie, British Columbia — all of the Chinese-Canadian workers were cleared from view.

Many people have pointed out the lingering injustice captured in that image. There is not a single Chinese-Canadian worker in the photograph, even though Chinese-Canadian labourers suffered, toiled and died building the railway that has come to symbolize the unity of Canada from coast to coast.

Prime Minister John A. Macdonald acknowledged the necessity of Chinese labour. When the Government of British Columbia tried to ban Chinese immigration in 1882, Macdonald rose in the House of Commons.

934 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:00:00 p.m.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, pursuant to rule 16-1(8), I wish to advise the Senate that a message from the Crown concerning Royal Assent is expected later today.

[Translation]

40 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:00:00 p.m.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: I’m sorry, I have to interrupt you.

Honourable senators, it is now six o’clock. Pursuant to rule 3-3(1), I’m obliged to leave the chair until eight o’clock, when we will resume, unless it is your wish, honourable senators, to not see the clock.

Is it agreed that we not see the clock?

64 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:00:00 p.m.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, rule 16-1(8) provides that after the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government has made such an announcement:

. . . no motion to adjourn the Senate shall be received and the rules regarding the ordinary time of adjournment or suspension, or any prior order regarding adjournment shall be suspended until the message has been received or either the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government indicates the message is no longer expected.

If the Senate completes the business for the day before the message is received, the sitting shall be suspended to the call of the Speaker, with the bells to ring for five minutes before the sitting resumes.

These provisions shall therefore govern proceedings today.

[English]

125 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:10:00 p.m.

Hon. Tony Dean, pursuant to notice of April 25, 2023, moved:

That, notwithstanding the order of the Senate adopted on Thursday, February 10, 2022, the date for the final report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs in relation to its study on:

(a)services and benefits provided to members of the Canadian Forces; to veterans who have served honourably in the Canadian Armed Forces in the past; to members and former members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and its antecedents; and all of their families;

(b)commemorative activities undertaken by the Department of Veterans Affairs Canada, to keep alive for all Canadians the memory of Canadian veterans’ achievements and sacrifices; and

(c)continuing implementation of the Veterans Well-being Act;

be extended from June 30, 2023, to December 31, 2025.

137 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:10:00 p.m.

Hon. René Cormier, pursuant to notice of April 25, 2023, moved:

That, notwithstanding the order of the Senate adopted on Tuesday, December 14, 2021, the date for the final report of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages in relation to its study on the application of the Official Languages Act be extended from June 15, 2023, to December 31, 2025.

61 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:10:00 p.m.

Hon. Scott Tannas, pursuant to notice of October 19, 2022, moved:

That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs be authorized to examine and report on the operation, applicability, and functionality of the Emergencies Act in a modern context, as well as the robustness of parliamentary supervision it provides for and its interaction with the rules and procedures of the Senate; and

That the committee submit its final report no later than September 28, 2023.

(On motion of Senator Tannas, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

87 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:10:00 p.m.

Hon. Stan Kutcher, pursuant to notice of April 25, 2023, moved:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology be authorized to examine and report on the negative impact of health disinformation and misinformation on Canadian society and what effective measures can be implemented to counter this impact; and

That the committee submit its final report on this study to the Senate no later than May 31, 2024, and that the committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings for 180 days after the tabling of the final report.

He said: Honourable senators, I ask for the remainder of my time at the next sitting of the Senate.

(On motion of Senator Kutcher, debate adjourned.)

Leave having been given to revert to Motions, Order No. 102:

130 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:10:00 p.m.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar, pursuant to notice of February 14, 2023, moved:

That, given reports of human rights abuses, repression and executions of its citizens, particularly women, in Iran by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Senate call upon the government to immediately designate the IRGC as a terrorist entity.

She said: Honourable senators, the time is late and we are cold, but let me turn your hearts and minds to a place far away from us — a beautiful place with beautiful people but that has been governed with unparalleled brutality and oppression for the last 43 years: Iran.

It is also a place of courageous people, particularly the women of Iran, who have taken to the streets to fight for their freedom. They have discarded and burned their headscarves; they have cut their hair; and they have gathered in towns, villages and cities across Iran. But let there be no mistake: Their protests against the hijab are not simply about what they wear on their heads; it goes to the heart of their dissatisfaction, the despair and discrimination they face. Every time they raise their voices, they put themselves and their families at risk.

You all know that I fled from that country four decades ago, as much as I loved it, because I could not see myself or my daughter living under that regime. Making the decision to leave anywhere forever is fraught with peril and fear. But fear also releases courage.

This is the courage that is being released by Iranian women because they are leading the revolution. If I were to look for a literary proxy — an image for the fate of Iran — I would evoke the image of a modern-day The Handmaid’s Tale.

Recently at the Inter-Parliamentary Canadian Friendship Group for a Free Iran, famous actress and activist Nazanin Boniadi and human rights campaigner Masih Alinejad described Iran as a gendered apartheid state because women in Iran are not simply subject to discriminatory attitudes and behaviours; rather, their treatment is enshrined in the constitution and penal code of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

They are not allowed to wear what they want. They are not allowed to sing solo. They are not allowed to enter a sports stadium. They are not allowed to practise certain occupations. They have limited property rights, and, worse, they are forced to give up the rights to their children on divorce and are unable to travel without the permission of a father, a husband, a brother or another man who has inordinate powers over them.

Human rights organizations have reported the murder of 500 civilians in the recent past. Security forces, and especially the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, have used shotguns, assault rifles and handguns against peaceful protesters. Roughly 20,000 people have participated in protests around the country, and hear this: 74 children have been murdered.

For women, however, the IRGC prefers a special weapon: Sexual assault is a weapon of choice with debilitating effects on their victims and their families. As just one example, IranWire has reported on the assault of a young woman, Afsaneh, who was arrested for the mere crime of participating in a protest. She was imprisoned, repeatedly raped during her interrogation by the IRGC and subsequently took her life.

I have another story that I find hard to even read out. It is not in my nature to give words to the narrative of explicit violence against women, but let me say there is truth in these stories. I am not going to read out that story, because I don’t think I would be able to, and the story that I had in mind about violent sexual assault is just one of many. It is the tip of an iceberg.

Recently Iran said that it would issue pardons for prisoners, but like everything, it comes with a catch: To be pardoned, prisoners must pledge that they regret their participation in protests, or they will not be freed.

The crimes of the Islamic regime and the IRGC go beyond the borders of Iran. It is contributing to the brutal invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Iran has supplied kamikaze drones. They have been deployed more than 90 times against a civilian population. Iran and the IRGC fund and support Hamas and Hezbollah, creating significant regional instability. Iran is not a bystander in the world but has — again, I am sorry, colleagues — the Islamic Republic of Iran is not a bystander in the world. It has committed terrorist activities around it.

As pointed out by Marcus Kolga, the IRGC:

. . . has been implicated in embassy bombings, attacks on Jewish people, atrocities against Syrians, and the mass murder of Iranian protesters. It is also responsible for the downing of Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752, killing all 176 crew and passengers, including 55 Canadian citizens . . . .

I should also note that Canadian lives are at risk. The CBC has reported that at least three Canadians have had their lives threatened. For Iranian-Canadians, it is hard to see that members of the IRGC and their families are enjoying the safety of our democracy in Canada, even as the IRGC continues to threaten the lives of their compatriots in Iran.

Just for clarification, before I ask you to support my motion, let me state what the IRGC is and what it is not. It is not the professional military whose mandate is to protect the people of Iran. The IRGC is a paramilitary force whose mandate is spelled out in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and it is to protect the Islamic regime and its interests, not only within the confines of Iran, but also beyond its border, as with its support of Hezbollah. This point was forcibly made to the European Parliament by Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi. By tolerating the IRGC, the world empowers the Islamic regime, not only within the confines of Iran, but across the world.

The IRGC is pervasive. It is widespread. It reaches into every corner of Iranian life. No one is safe. There are eyes and ears everywhere. It is made up of self-styled officers, and it is fuelled by a steady stream of conscripts. Military conscription for young males is mandatory in Iran. No young man can get a job or travel without having completed this conscription.

But unlike when my husband was conscripted, there are now two paths: You can be conscripted into the professional military, or you can be routed to the IRGC. You have no say in this. This, of course, provides the IRGC with a constant replenishment of young minds and bodies. It leads to significant stigmatization of youth with unintended consequences for their families.

Does the IRGC fit the criteria for listing as a terrorist entity? According to the Criminal Code, the government may prescribe any entity if, at the recommendation of the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, the government is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that, one, the entity has knowingly carried out, attempted to carry out, participated in or facilitated a terrorist activity or, two, the entity has knowingly acted on behalf of, at the direction of or in association with such an entity.

Honourable senators, I have outlined to you who the IRGC is and what it does on behalf of the Islamic regime. I believe that they fit the definition of a terrorist entity on these conditions. Further, an Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruling concluded that the IRGC is a terrorist entity.

According to Irwin Cotler and Brandon Silver from the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, there are no legal barriers to prescribing the IRGC as a terrorist organization. The Government of Canada has already prescribed the Quds Force, which is one arm of the IRGC, as a terrorist organization, and I’m suggesting that the government list the entirety of the IRGC as a terrorist organization as opposed to just one arm of it.

Other countries are doing the following: On January 18, the European Parliament overwhelmingly approved a resolution that called on the European Union to add the IRGC and its subsidiary forces to the EU terrorist list and to ban any economic and financial activity involving businesses and commercial activities related to the IRGC or its affiliates. In early January, members in the U.K. House of Commons unanimously voted for a motion that urges the U.K. government to prescribe Iran’s IRGC as a terrorist organization. We need to add our voice in this chamber.

Colleagues, Ottawa has imposed travel bans on thousands of Iranians and has imposed sanctions on 127 individuals and 189 entities, but we need to do more. Those who are sanctioned are subject to a ban on transactions and there is a ban on their travel, but we need to also move forward and seize their assets and repurpose them to their victims. There are reports that there is lots of Iranian money in Canada and that Canada may well be awash with IRGC-tainted money.

I know that designating the IRGC comes with some issues, and I will speak just briefly to the government’s hesitation in doing so. The Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice David Lametti has said that since the IRGC is part of Iran’s military, and military service — as I described — is mandatory, it casts a very broad net. There are concerns that by casting this net, we would catch not just the shark but the little fish as well.

That should not be our intention. I agree. I have received lots of emails from former conscripts in Canada who are not able to travel to the United States or take up positions in the United States because the U.S. has decreed that the IRGC is a terrorist entity.

However, as Danny Eisen and Sheryl Saperia of the Canadian Coalition Against Terror have pointed out, Canada can list the IRGC as a terrorist entity and then deal with the issues. We can do so in a way that lets the little fish go but catches the sharks. They say:

Notably, section 42.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act contains a mechanism for overriding a finding of inadmissibility to Canada. It allows the minister to permit admission despite membership in a terrorist organization, if justified on national security and public safety grounds. Forced conscription and the absence of involvement in IRGC violence, supported by evidence, should fit these parameters. If additional carve-outs in the law are necessary, we are confident they can be quickly developed.

Honourable senators, the Islamic Republic of Iran has shown us who they are. They are a regime that represses its own people, takes away basic human rights and supports terror around the world. It is beyond time that the Government of Canada designate the IRGC as a terrorist entity. By doing so, Canada will take a firm, unequivocal and principled stand that the brutality of the Islamic regime will not be tolerated.

By doing so, we will stand with women, life and freedom.

Thank you.

1866 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:30:00 p.m.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Pursuant to rule 16-1(8), the sitting is suspended to a five-minute bell.

(The sitting of the Senate was suspended.)

[Translation]

(The sitting of the Senate was resumed.)

36 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 6:30:00 p.m.

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: Will the honourable senator allow a question?

Senator Omidvar: Of course, senator.

15 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border