Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 421 - 434 of 434
View Steven Blaney Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, who said that there was no human-to-human transmission of COVID-19, that people did not need to wear masks and that we did not need to close our borders? The government. Was any of that true? Sadly, no, and now we are paying the price.
Now the Liberals want to make it an offence to spread misinformation. Are they going to throw themselves in jail?
What is going on with our democracy? Are the Liberals in charge of telling Canadians what they can and cannot read, what is true and what is false? Why is the government attacking freedom of expression right in the middle of a pandemic?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of our officials and our government for adapting to science as it has evolved. As the member knows, COVID-19 has only been with humans for about four and a half months. We have learned a lot in that time. As new evidence has come forward, we have of course adjusted our advice to Canadians to best protect them.
In terms of disinformation, it is extremely dangerous that Canadians are being fed information that is false, that is misleading and that can increase risk to themselves and to their loved ones. We will make sure that Canadians have access to credible information about how to protect themselves and their families.
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
View Rachael Harder Profile
2020-05-26 15:04 [p.2445]
Mr. Speaker, this is the government that said human-to-human contact did not transmit the disease. It said that the border did not need to be closed. It said that wearing a face mask would not help.
The minister opposite now is saying that the Liberals will make sure that misinformation is not spreading, “Don't worry, Canadians”. Really? These are the individuals who we are going to trust to make sure that false information does not land in the hands of Canadians. They are spending $3.5 million to shut down voices across the country.
Since when is that okay?
View Patty Hajdu Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be part of a government that believes in investing in science, that believes in investing in research, that understands that science evolves and that a response needs to evolve with it.
We are part of a government that actually unmuzzled government scientists, that made sure we restored funding in the agencies that support our understanding, not only of this disease but many other diseases that threaten Canadians.
We will always stand up for credible information that can actually support Canadians to make wise choices about how to protect themselves and their families.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
View Matthew Green Profile
2020-02-07 11:43 [p.1090]
Madam Speaker, the Liberals propped up the Conservatives' draconian Bill C-51, which essentially included economic disruption as a form of domestic terrorism. The Prime Minister ran and was elected to amend Bill C-51 and protect Canada's civil liberties, but he broke that promise. Indigenous communities, environmentalists, workers and anybody standing up for social justice are still the target of anti-terrorism protocols.
Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that people peacefully protesting in Canada are not in fact terrorists?
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Joël Lightbound Profile
2020-02-07 11:44 [p.1090]
Madam Speaker, I think that many of my colleagues, like millions of Canadians, shared the same feelings of outrage when we saw the Conservative government bring in their Bill C-51 at the time.
That is why we have added certain mechanisms, including a parliamentary committee that oversees the activities of our security and intelligence agencies. It is a given that we, on this side of the House, will always defend the right to peaceful demonstration and freedom of expression in this country.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
2020-01-31 11:54 [p.767]
Madam Speaker, on Saturday, Raif Badawi and his former attorney, political prisoners in Saudi Arabia since 2012, were rushed to the hospital. They had been on a hunger strike in protest of their mistreatment.
Mr. Badawi's current lawyer, Irwin Cotler, asked for urgent, immediate intervention by the UN in order to save the lives of these two men.
Does the government acknowledge, as the former Liberal justice minister does, that there is an urgent need for action?
Will it join its voice to that of Mr. Cotler in demanding urgent and immediate intervention by the UN to save the life of Mr. Badawi?
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Robert Oliphant Profile
2020-01-31 11:55 [p.767]
Madam Speaker, our hearts go out to Mr. Badawi and his family.
The Prime Minister has spoken directly to the Saudi Crown Prince and to the King of Saudi Arabia about this particular case. We have raised the case directly to the Saudi minister of foreign affairs. Our goal is to have Mr. Badawi reunited with his family.
View Brenda Shanahan Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, very few people have the honour of receiving an award as prestigious as the Governor General's Literary Award. An author from my community of Châteauguay, Anne-Marie Voisard, took home the award in the non-fiction category for her book entitled Le droit du plus fort. Nos dommages, leurs intérêts, which was published by Écosociété. As she mentioned in an interview with the newspaper Coup d’œil, the jury made a bold decision by choosing such a daring critique, a plea in favour of freedom of speech, including in print. Anne-Marie Voisard had the courage to call into question our ideas about what is considered acceptable because it is within the law. Her many years of hard work have paid off.
On behalf of the people of Châteauguay—Lacolle, I congratulate her on helping to build a fairer society.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
2019-12-12 14:55 [p.350]
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Raif Badawi began another hunger strike to draw the world's attention to his wrongful imprisonment in Saudi Arabia. He has begun another hunger strike to draw the attention of Canada, which has left him languishing in prison for seven years. He has begun another hunger strike that will cause even more worry for his wife, Ensaf Haidar, whom I salute, and their children. They miss him.
What will it take for the government to take action and finally get Raif Badawi released?
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Robert Oliphant Profile
2019-12-12 14:56 [p.350]
Mr. Speaker, the promotion and protection of human rights, including the right to freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion or belief, are an integral part of Canadian foreign policy. We remain extremely concerned about Raif Badawi's situation.
We have raised it at the highest levels. We have repeatedly called for clemency to be granted. We will stand with Mr. Badawi. We will stand with people facing human rights atrocities around the world.
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
BQ (QC)
View Stéphane Bergeron Profile
2019-12-12 14:56 [p.350]
Mr. Speaker, the time for talk is over.
It is scandalous that Raif Badawi is still languishing in prison after seven years without having committed any crime. If the government can sit down and work with Saudi Arabia at the G20, if it can sit down with Saudi Arabia to do business and sell the country weapons, then it can certainly sit down with Saudi Arabia to demand the release of Raif Badawi.
What meaningful action does the government intend to take to finally have Raif Badawi released?
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Robert Oliphant Profile
2019-12-12 14:57 [p.350]
Mr. Speaker, let me assure all members of the House that our hearts go out to Mr. Badawi and his family. The Prime Minister has spoken directly to the Saudi Crown Prince and to the King of Saudi Arabia about this particular case. We have raised the case directly to the Saudi minister of foreign affairs.
Our goal is not to grandstand; it is to work persistently, calmly and patiently to have Mr. Badawi reunited with his family.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the excellent member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola.
As the party that received the most votes in the last election, the Conservative Party is working hard to lead constructively in this minority Parliament and use its increased clout to drive conversation and solutions on vital challenges facing this country. One of those is the Canada-China relationship. Recognizing that our existing standing committees often have a full agenda, are designed to focus on specific individual policy areas, and very likely will not start their operations until well into the new year, we believe that this Parliament must strike a special committee right now to study all aspects of the Canada-China relationship, and to study them on an ongoing basis. Of particular importance to me would be the way that Canada can be a stronger voice on the world stage for human rights and to counter the efforts of China's government throughout its repressive political model around the world.
China's current political model is straight out of George Orwell's book, 1984, with constant surveillance and a system of social credit where one's every action is monitored, and the ability to do any basic activity is dependent on a social score assigned by the party. All activity, all investment, all speech, all opinion, everything, is intended to be under the thumb of the state. The state does not recognize the bounds of the law or commitment, including commitments to other countries.
The Prime Minister has expressed admiration for China's so-called basic dictatorship and his hand-picked ambassador led a company which was heavily dependent on contracts from Chinese state-owned companies. I wonder if Dominic Barton and our Prime Minister read 1984 during their childhood and thought that it sounded like a great place to live.
China's repressive political system is not what the Chinese people want. It is not what the people of other Asian and African nations want, even though citizens of other nations face the increasing imposition of Chinese government-backed actors on their countries. Orwellian authoritarianism is not what Canadians want. It is not what almost anyone wants. Therefore, we must stand together against this oppressive political model. Our party stands unapologetically for the advancement of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. This is in our interests and is reflective of our values.
I would like to highlight some of the key problems we see today which necessitate the engagement of this Parliament through the creation of this special committee. I will comment on the situation of Uighurs, Tibetans, Christians, Hong Kongers, students, Taiwanese Falun Gong practitioners and people in neighbouring and regional countries.
The Chinese government is detaining Uighur Muslims in concentration camps. This is a further step in a long-running effort to destroy their culture and their faith. Every Ramadan, Uighur Muslims have faced repression of their right to fast in an attempt to impede this important expression of personal piety.
Under the Liberal government, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board put over $48 million of Canadian pension money into Hikvision and Dahua, companies that are working closely with China's military and playing a significant role in Uighur imprisonment. When this was raised in question period earlier this year by my colleague from Calgary Shepard, the government said that the pension board's job is to focus on return on investment, but I believe that the government should hold our pension board to basic standards of morality.
As the grandson of a Holocaust survivor, I cannot accept the government's blasé attitude toward our pension fund's participation in the construction of mass detention and concentration camps in our own time. This is precisely the kind of Islamophobia that the government should be seized with.
We are seeing the escalating persecution of Tibetans, including the continuation of a long-standing policy of repression of religious, cultural and linguistic freedoms. One of the latest developments is the effort by China's government to control the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama. Essentially, the atheist, materialist, Marxist government purports to be able to determine the Dalai Lama's succession by knowing and identifying his reincarnation. This would be comical if it was not deadly serious. Indeed, we have seen this before with the real Panchen Lama being disappeared and the Chinese government advancing its own candidate instead. This is one of many serious violations of religious freedom that we see in Tibet.
We must not neglect the escalating devastating persecution of Christians in China. Violations of religious freedom can take two predominant forms. One form is the old Maoist way of trying to explicitly eradicate religion. The more common current model is where religious movements are allowed to maintain the external ceremonial aspects of religion but are required to always conform their teaching to the state doctrine. Essentially, they say that it is fine to be a Christian as long as the teachings and attributes of Xi Jinping are put ahead of the teachings and attributes of Christ. Christian movements that refuse this conformist approach face repression.
We see repression of individual believers as well as the violent destruction of churches, such as the Golden Lampstand Church, and also the destruction of houses of worship for other faith communities. Efforts to eradicate religion and to co-opt and control religion are a serious violation of fundamental human rights. They are unacceptable in China, in Canada or anywhere else. Our defence of religious freedom must always include the freedoms of Christians, an aspect often left out.
Let us talk about the situation in Hong Kong. Hong Kong entered into the one country, two systems framework in 1997. The Government of China has repeatedly violated this agreement in so many respects, undermining the autonomy of Hong Kong. People in Hong Kong have highlighted to me how police there seem to have taken on the attributes of mainland military police instead of Hong Kong's own separate police force.
Protestors in Hong Kong are concerned about violation of the one country, two systems framework and have five concrete demands: the withdrawal of the extradition bill; stop labelling protestors as rioters; drop charges against protestors; conduct an independent inquiry into police behaviour; and implement genuine universal suffrage for the legislative council and the chief executive. We support these objectives and especially we wish to highlight the importance of meaningful universal suffrage.
Many of Hong Kong's legislators are elected in so-called functional constituencies, whereby essentially a few insider companies get to pick the legislators. On this side of the House, we stand with the people of Hong Kong and we support universal suffrage. I asked the minister twice today if she supports universal suffrage and real democracy in Hong Kong. She talked about the right to protest, but she refused twice to answer my question on the issue of universal suffrage.
I have many concerns about the state of freedom of speech at universities in Canada, but this challenge is made significantly worse when foreign governments act to undermine freedom of speech on Canadian campuses. The dependence of many universities on the revenue associated with international students and the dependence of academics studying China on visa access to China are points of significant vulnerability.
When a well-known Tibetan student, Chemi Lhamo, was elected as president of the U of T Scarborough student union, she faced an orchestrated campaign of harassment. When a student group called McMaster Muslims for Peace and Justice at McMaster University organized an event to highlight Uighur abuses, efforts were made to disrupt the event. The Chinese consulate in Toronto praised this action, saying, “We strongly support the just and patriotic actions of Chinese students.” There was no response from Canada to this gross abuse of our sovereignty by the consulate.
More recently, ahead of a visit to the Chinese embassy in Ottawa, members of the Carleton International Relations Society were asked not to raise controversial topics.
University students must embrace a role that they have traditionally occupied as thoughtful provocateurs for justice. We think of the freedom riders of the civil rights movements or the students who faced down tanks during the 1989 pro-democracy protest in Tiananmen Square.
University campuses and the presence there of many international students from China should create opportunities for free and open dialogue, dialogue which, when free and open, will lead to the advancement of freedom and democracy, human rights and the rule of law. However, this dialogue cannot happen if universities and student groups are subject to foreign pressure and manipulation. Preserving the integrity of our academic institutions is something in which there is a pressing national interest, and I hope this special committee would specifically take on the situation at our universities involving Canadian and international students who are studying there.
Taiwan, a free Chinese democracy, is a beacon of hope in the region. Taiwan is the example of all that China could be, a free and open society which preserves and celebrates China's ancient and beautiful civilization. However, unfortunately the Chinese government increasingly tries to interfere in the domestic affairs of Taiwan. Last year, Air Canada caved to a demand by the Chinese government to list Taiwan as part of its territory, with no response from Canada.
I have spoken frequently about the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China and particularly about the issue of organ harvesting and trafficking, which requires urgent action.
Finally, the colonial policy of the Chinese government throughout Africa and Asia is a pressing concern of many people in those countries and many Canadians from various backgrounds. It is ironic that China's government is actually using a similar colonial approach that colonial European powers used in China in the past. The Chinese government is imposing multi-decade leases on vital infrastructure, which gives it ongoing leverage over internal affairs.
The Liberal government, by pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the Chinese government-controlled Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, is not only failing to oppose this program; it is actively funding it. The government's response to our proposal of a cross-cutting committee focusing specifically on this problem is to suggest that parliamentarians or the House are ill-suited to respond to this problem. I believe that the government is ill-suited to respond to this challenge, and that is why parliamentary scrutiny is required.
We reject any admiration about basic dictatorship and we believe in the principle of parliamentary scrutiny over the executive. Thankfully, in a minority Parliament where the government got only one-third of the votes, we as the opposition have the power to assert that principle of parliamentary sovereignty and we will.
Results: 421 - 434 of 434 | Page: 29 of 29

|<
<
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data