Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 76 - 90 of 497
View Jenica Atwin Profile
Lib. (NB)
View Jenica Atwin Profile
2021-06-02 19:01 [p.7858]
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. parliamentary secretary for his efforts in these adjournment proceedings. It has been a busy night for him.
If members can tell, I am extremely passionate about anti-racism, and I come to this as a cis, white ally. I will never know the full extent of the pain inflicted upon indigenous peoples, Black peoples, people of colour or 2SLGBTQIA+, and I live, work and learn with this immense privilege.
During the past weeks we have been hearing the difficult testimony, trying to piece together the death of Joyce Echaquan. I will not repeat the myriad of insults flung at her by staff who were supposed to be caring for her while she was fighting for her life. Then, of course, there are the 215 little souls whose remains have finally been discovered. There are not enough words in the English language to account for such horrors.
These are not dark chapters in Canadian history. These realities are woven throughout the whole story, and the consequences continue to play out today. This is not about guilt. It is about responsibility.
Will the government stand up and recognize the immense responsibility we have in addressing racism in all its forms? Will it stand up for the Black civil servants? Will it stand up for Joyce and all the children who never came home from residential schools?
View Adam van Koeverden Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Adam van Koeverden Profile
2021-06-02 19:02 [p.7859]
Madam Speaker, I would also like to acknowledge my role as an ally in this place. As a white, cisgendered, straight man, I have never experienced racism, homophobia or bigotry in any form, and I do feel like I have a role, as an ally, to stand up.
We are taking steps to review the Employment Equity Act, particularly in light of comments that it does not address the distinct experiences of Black employees. From the very start, our government has shown an unwavering commitment to tackling systemic racism head on, including anti-Black racism.
The data is clear. There are major systemic barriers that continue to limit opportunities for Black communities.
Here in Canada, these discrepancies are simply unacceptable.
This is why, since 2018, we have committed to investing more than $177 million in initiatives that support Black communities. We are investing in initiatives within the federal public service to create a fully diverse and inclusive workplace.
View Taylor Bachrach Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Speaker, I share my colleague's concerns with regard to the government's reluctance to produce the documents. It is a worrisome trend that we have seen over the past months.
I wonder if he could comment on one aspect of this that concerns me, which is the rise of anti-Asian racism. At the same time that we push as Parliament to get these documents and to get to the bottom of these questions around the dismissal of the two scientists at the lab in Winnipeg, what steps does the member believe the government should take to combat this worrisome rise of anti-Asian racism here in Canada?
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, while I very much welcome the questions from my NDP and Bloc colleagues, I was hoping that after my speech I would get a question from a member of the government. That is what usually happens, and hopefully one of them will actually be willing to stand and put their views on the record on this. They seem reluctant to do that.
To my colleague's very important question, I agree that we need to respond to the threat of rising anti-Asian racism. One of the most critical ways we do that is to establish a clear distinction between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese people, as well as Chinese Canadians. The CCP does not speak for the Chinese people and it does not speak for Chinese Canadians.
In fact, many Chinese Canadians are speaking out about how the Chinese Communist Party is threatening or intimidating them. We heard compelling testimony last night about violence and threats of violence that Canadians of Asian origin are experiencing from the Chinese Communist Party when they start to speak out about important human rights issues.
We need to always be clear about the distinction between this hostile, foreign political party that does not represent Chinese culture or Chinese identity and certainly does not represent Chinese Canadians. Then there is the very separate issue of affirming and appreciating the great contributions made by Asian Canadians, many of whom are very critical of the Chinese Communist Party.
View Pierre Paul-Hus Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley.
I would like to briefly come back to the Prime Minister's accusations of racism.
Let us remember one thing: Since the beginning of the debate on the problem at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, all the Prime Minister has been doing is accusing us of racism.
Every time the opposition raises an issue that deals with the Chinese Communist regime, as I did last week, the government calls us racist. As I speak, I am looking around to see whether the Prime Minister is going to stand up and accuse me of racism.
That is a serious problem. Using racism as an excuse is a really feeble defence. Racism has nothing to do with it. The Conservative Party has never attacked Chinese people. Our attacks have always been directed at the Chinese Communist regime, which is aggressive and dangerous. What we are saying has absolutely nothing to do with the people of China.
When we raise the issue of Huawei, we are accused of being racist. The Prime Minister never takes a strong stand with regard to the two Michaels, who were imprisoned on trumped-up charges. He even once said that he prefers a communist system to a democracy, which is very disturbing.
We ask questions in committee and in the House. We mostly ask questions in the House because this is where the Prime Minister answers our questions, when he feels like it, that is. This was his answer last time:
The rise in anti-Asian racism we have been seeing over the past number of months should be of concern to everyone. I would recommend that the members of the Conservative Party, in their zeal to make personal attacks, not start to push too far into intolerance towards Canadians of diverse origins.
Even The Globe and Mail said the Prime Minister's answer was a foolish thing to say.
This is not the first time the Prime Minister has called us racist. Let us not forget that, last year, early in the COVID-19 crisis, the opposition suggested it might be a good idea to cancel flights from China. What was the response? We were accused of being racist. It was not our fault the virus came from China. That is the reason we wanted to cancel flights from that country.
I know that racism is a delicate subject and that it is easy to lob such accusations. For our part, we always put public health and safety first, regardless of the origins of the virus.
Europe experienced a similar problem. Would anyone cry racism if we were speaking of European people and democracy? Absolutely not. The same is true in this case. If the problem came from Italy, we would be saying the same thing about banning flights. No matter where those flights came from, we would be saying the same thing.
The same thing applies to Huawei. We asked the government many questions in the House about Huawei's probable, possible, and indeed assured interference in our telecommunications system. Once again, we were accused of being racist.
We are not going to give up just because of the Prime Minister's accusations. We will persevere, because we are here to work on behalf of Canadian interests. This is why our motion includes the following:
That an order of the House do issue for the unredacted version of all documents produced by the Public Health Agency of Canada in response to the March 31, 2021, and May 10, 2021, orders of the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations, respecting the transfer of Ebola and Henipah viruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2019, and the subsequent revocation of security clearances for, and termination of the employment of, Dr. Xiangguo Qiu and Dr. Keding Cheng.
This is just one part of the problem that needs to be addressed.
The second problem is the following. In September 2020, the Prime Minister appointed Iain Stewart as president of the Public Health Agency of Canada. This appointment was pure and simple politics. The Prime Minister could have appointed any number of other Canadian men and women, but he chose to appoint Mr. Stewart.
Mr. Stewart recently appeared as a witness before the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations, of which I am a member. He refused to provide relevant details about the security breach at the Winnipeg laboratory. The committee members requested unredacted versions of all the documents produced by the Public Health Agency of Canada. Mr. Stewart refused and continues to refuse to provide them. Just yesterday, we received redacted documents, despite the committee's clear demands.
The problem is not simple. On the one hand, Iain Stewart is the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada for the sole reason that he was appointed by the Prime Minister. On the other hand, this same gentleman is telling us that it is impossible to provide unredacted information about the dismissal of two scientists linked to the Chinese Communist regime and the revocation of their security clearance because that would be a disclosure of personal information, which is legally prohibited by the Privacy Act.
Mr. Stewart may be deliberately ignoring subparagraph 8(2)(m)(i) of the Privacy Act, which states:
Subject to any other Act of Parliament, personal information under the control of a government institution may be disclosed
(m) for any purpose where, in the opinion of the head of the institution,
(i) the public interest in disclosure clearly outweighs any invasion of privacy that could result from the disclosure,
In other words, the head of the institution, which could include the head of the laboratory, Iain Stewart, who is the head of the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Minister of Health or the Prime Minister, may disclose personal information if they decide that it would serve the public interest better to reveal the truth than to hide it. That is what the act says.
That said, neither the Prime Minister nor the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada have any legal grounds for doing what they are currently doing, which is hiding information.
Let us not forget that documents sent to the committee that may contain sensitive national security information must first be reviewed by certain officials before they are shared with members of Parliament. It is not up to the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada to censor documents as he is doing. That is the job of the law clerk of the House. The clerks have the authority to do this work and ensure that the documents submitted to members are properly protected pursuant to the rules of the House, not Iain Stewart's rules.
The question is whether Mr. Stewart is doing this on his own initiative. Did he decide that the information should not be shared with the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations, or did the order come from the Prime Minister's Office?
Is the Prime Minister too afraid that the truth will come out? If so, what does he have to fear?
This is our national security and our country. If information from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg has been passed on to Wuhan and, for example, the Chinese People's Liberation Army has used some viruses to develop others, we have a right to know.
If the members of the House of Commons do not have the most right to know, who does?
This is about Canada's national security and best interests. The Conservative Party and I are very aware that some information must remain secret to prevent other countries from gaining access to information that is critical to our own security. However, it is not true that all of the information regarding the National Microbiology Laboratory, and especially the information that was given to the Chinese Communist regime, should be kept secret. We have the right to know.
Our request is legitimate, and I believe that the opposition parties all agree with the Conservative Party of Canada that there is nothing racist about wanting to know what the Chinese Communist regime is up to. Canadians have the right to know what happened at the Winnipeg lab.
View Jagmeet Singh Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are still reeling from the discovery of 215 indigenous children at a former residential school in Kamloops. However, while Canadians are reeling from this horror, we cannot ignore the fact that indigenous communities continue to face injustice today. The Prime Minister is fighting indigenous kids in court, and continues to fight residential school survivors in court. As Cindy Blackstock says, “We need to make sure that the injustices stop today.”
Will the Prime Minister commit to stop fighting indigenous kids and residential school survivors in court, yes or no?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear on this and many other issues in regard to the work we need to do together on reconciliation. Every survivor deserves compensation. We will be there for that. We will work with them and with communities to get there. We also need to fix child and family services. We were the first government to pass legislation to do just that.
We are on the cusp of transformative change. We have been working on it. Over the past years we have made many changes. There is more to do. We will continue to stand with indigenous communities across this country as we do that.
View Jagmeet Singh Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Speaker, the discovery of the remains of 215 indigenous children has shocked the nation. We mourn the loss of those children, but we cannot mourn this loss without acknowledging the fact that indigenous communities continue to suffer injustices today.
Will the Prime Minister commit to stop fighting indigenous kids and residential school survivors in court, yes or no?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, for the past six years, we have been working with indigenous communities and survivors across the country to heal from these tragedies and build a better present and future for all indigenous peoples.
As for compensation, we have recognized as a government that compensation will be given to residential school survivors. We are currently working on this with the community, in order to determine the correct amounts.
We will continue to be there to support indigenous communities and individuals across the country.
View Rachel Blaney Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Speaker, the bodies of 215 precious children were found at a residential school, and indigenous people are asking for justice, not words. However, the government will not stop taking first nations kids to court.
A human rights tribunal found that the government discriminated against first nations kids. It is now a choice. It is time to make it right. The government cannot have it both ways, offering sympathies for a mass grave while continuing to persecute children in court.
When will the government make the right choice and stop fighting first nations children?
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, now is in fact the time to stand with the communities that are most deeply affected and support them in their time of grieving.
On the member's question, we have said time and time again that we will compensate first nations children for the discrimination they suffered at the hands of child and family services. We continue on those paths. We continue to work with the three competing court cases to ensure fair compensation to those who have suffered harm.
We will continue on the long path toward transformative change to ensure that no child is apprehended again.
View Michael Barrett Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to follow my able colleague from Lakeland in this important debate on the House of Commons issuing an order for the production of unredacted versions of documents that have been ordered by the Canada-China committee.
We have a situation where the Liberal government is refusing to provide information that has been lawfully ordered by a parliamentary committee. We see it as a bit of a theme with the government, a bit of an air that the rules do not apply to them. We have seen that before. We saw it when this House issued an order for individuals to appear as witnesses at committee and for the production of documents to committee. The House issued the order, and the government ignored it. It went so far as to have ministers of the Crown order individuals not to appear, contrary to the order of this House.
We have parliamentary committees attempting to do their work to serve as the check against the executive, and the government is hindering that work at every turn. We saw this over the course of the last year when Parliament was prorogued after tough questions were asked of the government last summer regarding the government's fiduciary responsibilities to Canadians and a $912-million contract. It was an ethical quagmire for the Prime Minister and the then finance minister. Then we saw filibustering at committees and now, during a public health crisis, we have had government members even filibustering at the health committee.
We find ourselves on the floor of the House of Commons looking to do the work that a committee has attempted to do in ordering the production of documents on a very important matter. Twice the Canada-China committee has ordered the documents relating to the potential breach at the Winnipeg lab and twice the Liberal government has not followed through on the order of the committee. It provided blacked out documents that do not satisfy the order of a committee, which is again a bit of a theme for the government.
We saw that last summer. The government likes to cite the number of pages that they released to the finance committee during the WE scandal, but it does not talk about how much of it was blacked out or how pertinent the information was and how repetitive the information was, instead of the pertinent information that the committee was seeking and that parliamentarians had rightly requested.
The government is responsible for guarding national security. It is a task that it should hold to the highest level and apply the most serious lens to. Not surprisingly, Canadians are concerned about that. We are seeing that through reporting. That is how this issue has largely come to light, with reporting in publications such as the Globe and Mail. When parliamentarians seek answers for Canadians, the government demonstrates that it has something to hide, perhaps afraid that it has failed in its responsibility to protect the security of Canadians.
We had two scientists who were fired and escorted out of the lab that handles the most dangerous pathogens, the ones that could wipe out a population, a lab with the highest security clearance required to work there. CSIS had raised concerns about two of the individuals who were working there, individuals who were identified as collaborating with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and China's military, and there were questions about pathogens that were sent from the Winnipeg lab to the Wuhan lab.
These are questions that Canadians are concerned about. Of course, we are in the middle of a global pandemic, so Canadians have questions about this. Parliamentarians have questions about this. There have been unanimous decisions across party lines at the Canada-China committee to get answers to these questions, yet the government has refused to exercise its franchise to make sure that parliamentarians are able to do their job. When we are dealing with some of the most deadly viruses, such as Ebola, parliamentarians are going to be concerned and Canadians are going to be concerned.
When the Conservatives addressed these questions to the government, and when I addressed my questions to the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister replied that these types of questions fomented racism. I categorically reject the inference that he made not only about me but about my colleagues. When the Prime Minister conflates criticism of China's government with anti-Asian racism, he is playing right out of the propaganda playbook used by China's communist leadership. Beijing's goal is to conflate legitimate criticism of China's government with intolerance toward anyone of Chinese heritage. It is unacceptable.
My colleagues have said it best, and I will quote them. The member for Steveston—Richmond East said:
Pointing that out is not racism. Suggesting otherwise plays into the propaganda effort of our opponent. That is something of great concern in my home of Richmond. To see our national leadership downplay these concerns is simply shameful. Many critics of the CPP are of Asian descent themselves, either born as equal partners in Canada or having joined the equal partnership as immigrants.
On the same topic, the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam said:
All members should call out racism wherever it exists, but no member, especially the Prime Minister, should ever use this kind of hatred as a tool to distract from his own incompetence. As an Asian-Canadian MP who has combatted racism my whole life, I am appalled by the Prime Minister's audacity to belittle the seriousness and sensitivity of anti-Asian racism.
When the opposition dials in on an area of major concern, a serious issue, the Prime Minister deflects and launches ad hominem attacks.
Long gone are the days of sunny ways and open and transparent government by default. Transparency was a commitment by the government, and we have heard a lot of talk about previous governments. Well, I do not think that members of the government ran, first in 2015 and then again in 2019, saying that they were going to do the same or be just as good. They said, “Better is always possible.” The most transparent government in Canadian history is what they promised. Canadians are seeing anything but that. It is corruption, cover-ups and more of the same from the government.
Canadians deserve a government that is not a defender of the communist Chinese regime, but a government that will stand up for Canadian sovereignty, for national security and for the safety of all Canadians. The Liberals have been willfully blind to threats to our national security from China and are trying to cover them up, and that raises the question of why.
We have in the government the only partner of the Five Eyes that refuses to ban Huawei. Testimony at parliamentary committees yesterday highlighted the risks that are being posed by agents acting on behalf of the Government of China through partnerships with educational institutions and through technology companies. Why will the government not take the step to ban Huawei and demonstrate that it is prepared to stand up to China for Canadians' interests?
Once these documents are ordered, parliamentarians are entitled to them. The rules do apply to the Liberals. They must not only defend Canada's security interests, but also defend the confidence that Canadians have in their democratic institutions. The Conservatives will secure our future by protecting our national security and will continue to hold this corrupt government to account.
View Leah Gazan Profile
NDP (MB)
View Leah Gazan Profile
2021-06-01 19:22 [p.7787]
Mr. Chair, we have spoken a lot in the House lately about the impacts of systemic racism, particularly against indigenous peoples. Joyce Echaquan is an example of how systemic racism resulted in death, the same as the deaths that resulted from the genocide against indigenous children at residential schools.
I wonder if my hon. colleague acknowledges that what happened in residential schools, and what is currently being perpetrated against indigenous peoples is systemic racism.
View Yves-François Blanchet Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, regardless of what some colleagues who were present in the House and on the screen may say, in June 2020, I acknowledged the existence of systemic racism. On multiple occasions thereafter, I denounced the extreme and often focused politicization of the term. If it is a concept describing how institutions, rather than individuals, throughout history have systematically, which could be extrapolated to “systemically”, discriminated against communities like the first nations, who were here long before us and from whose perspective we are the migrants, the invaders, the colonizers, if that is what it means, then I do not have a shadow of a doubt that it exists.
It was when the term “systemic racism” was transposed and turned into a political weapon against the Quebec nation, which may not share certain points of view on Canadian multiculturalism, that I took exception to the glorification of the term for political purposes. This term should instead convey a message and a duty of compassion.
I acknowledged it in 2020, and I still acknowledge it today.
View Gary Vidal Profile
CPC (SK)
Madam Chair, tonight I will be sharing my time with the member for Kenora.
Normally, whether in person or virtually, I would talk about what an honour it is to rise in the House and speak on a topic. However, tonight it is not easy to speak on the horrific discovery of 215 children found buried at a former residential school in Kamloops, as the reality is indescribable.
This discovery is a sombre reminder that so much more work needs to be done to address the devastating and harmful effects that residential schools had, and still have on many survivors today. All Canadians must stop and reflect on what the truth is of our history as a country.
For far too long, Canada has ignored our own collective secrets hidden within the history of this country. The recent news from Kamloops brings that reality to the surface. When the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established in 2008, one of the outcomes of that process was the need to deal with the very first aspect: the truth. There is an old adage that the truth hurts. It unfortunately rang very true these past few days.
Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to spend some time with two vice-chiefs of the Meadow Lake Tribal Council: Vice-Chief Lawrence McIntyre and Vice-Chief Richard Derocher, both residential school survivors. In fact, Vice-Chief Lawrence McIntyre is a third-generation residential school survivor.
We had a long conversation about many topics and issues that are happening in Northern Saskatchewan, in my riding and across our country. A story that Vice-Chief Derocher shared with us that day resonated with me at the time, and with the events of this past week, I have continued to reflect upon it.
He told of how Orange Shirt Day has been an important educational tool for people to learn about the residential school system. He explained how one of the best ways to combat racism is through education, and that when we come together and see and treat each other as people, we recognize that our similarities far outweigh our differences.
Vice-Chief Derocher then told a story about how he happened to be in Saskatoon on Orange Shirt Day last September. As he made his way about the city that afternoon, he said it brought tears to his eyes as he saw people all around on the streets, walking on the sidewalks and going in and out of stores and buildings, wearing the colour orange. What he saw that day was a collective recognition of a wrong. It was a powerful statement that we are beginning to see movement in the right direction.
I also thought of the Vice-Chief's story last week when I heard about the online comments directed toward Ethan Bear. As an avid hockey fan, it was disheartening for me to see a young man who is a role model for so many young people have to endure what he did in the aftermath of the Edmonton Oilers' playoff loss. It is sad that there are still people in this world who resort to such bitterness and cruelty.
However, I could not help but notice it was also an opportunity for voices of support, of the majority, to come out in waves and drown out the voices of the uneducated. We can all take inspiration from the strength of character and the class that Ethan showed in his response to dealing with a situation he did not deserve. As a former hockey coach, I would take a team full of Ethan Bears.
These stories highlight the need for more and continued education on the truth: It is a truth that all Canadians must collectively share until we get this right. We may be moving in the right direction at times, but a more concerted effort is needed.
Yesterday, the leader of the official opposition sent a letter to the Prime Minister with recommendations that need urgent action. The first is to develop a comprehensive plan to implement TRC calls to action 71 through 76 by July 1, 2021. The second is to fund investigations at all former residential schools in Canada where unmarked graves may exist, including the site where 215 children have already been discovered. Third is to ensure that proper resources are allocated for communities to reinter, commemorate and honour any individuals discovered through this investigation according to the wishes of their families. Finally, fourth is to develop a detailed and thorough set of resources to educate Canadians of all ages on the tragic history of residential schools.
Let me end by saying that the truth is not easy. It requires courage and vulnerability. For those of us who have been tasked with an opportunity for leadership, it will take some humility and a desire to change an approach that has not been good enough.
Partisanship, by its very nature, is in direct opposition to the meaning of reconciliation. Canada needs us to be better.
Results: 76 - 90 of 497 | Page: 6 of 34

|<
<
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data