Chris Alexander

[Situation in Ukraine, January 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, is the hon. member aware that, according to our current immigration laws, people from Ukraine—or anywhere else in the world—are not eligible to come to Canada if they have committed a crime against humanity or a war crime, if they are a member of a spy or intelligence agency that is targeting Canada, or if they have been involved in incidents that would be considered crimes in Canada?

That is the system that currently applies to anyone who requires a visa to come to Canada.

Instead of talking about measures that Canada can take and that we will continue to consider in partnership with our allies, is the member ready to say that enough is enough, that Russia is interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs, and that Ukrainians have the right to be in charge of their own affairs without Moscow's input and without nostalgia for the former U.S.S.R.? Does she agree that part of the real problem is Moscow?

[Situation in Ukraine, January 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member certainly knows Ukraine and she certainly knows Russia, and that knowledge will continue to be relevant to the development of Canadian policy in the months and years to come.

We have said very clearly that all options are on the table. That includes dramatic options. That includes options that have been suggested by members on this side and by our friends and allies. We look forward to being able to return to this place to say exactly what course of action we as a government recommend.

We have also been unambiguous in condemning the government of President Yanukovych for its use of violence, for the command and control arrangements that allowed that violence to be used against innocent protesters, for the lack of due process in passing repressive laws, and we stand by those condemnations with our friends and allies across NATO and beyond.

It is very important to understand the weight of our words and actions and the weight we will have as an international community if we act in concert, in unity. We have seen President Putin gain a certain amount of diplomatic prestige with his work in Syria, where he seems to care nothing for the fate of that civilian population. We have seen him sometimes side with the Iranian regime, countered only by united western pressure to impose some of the toughest sanctions in a generation in that country, which has changed the atmosphere and may yet still lead to a better result in Iran.

On Ukraine, the stakes are as high or even higher, and we, as I think any Liberal government in the past would have recognized, have a strong interest in consulting with our allies and making sure the actions we take hit as hard and serve as truly the interests of Ukrainian people as we can possibly ensure.

[Situation in Ukraine, January 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, of course my hon. colleague is aware of Canada's offer to provide health care to Mrs. Tymoshenko and to play a primary role in protecting human rights in Ukraine.

In that regard, when Canada talks, people listen. Our development assistance programs have always played a central role when it comes to human rights in Ukraine and the development of justice institutions in Ukraine. Our asylum and immigration programs, including our humanitarian programs are open to Ukrainians at a time when their needs are great.

What we will not do is put ourselves between the two sides, in a void reminiscent of the worst days of the Trudeau regime, when the Government of Canada's policy involved the appeasement of the Soviet Union, which had a policy to integrate Ukraine and a number of other countries into a system based on violence.

We are siding with democracy, the opposition and human rights, and we are not afraid to say so.

[Situation in Ukraine, January 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the very hon. member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, whose speech will be much more worth listening to than mine.

I recommend that all members stay tuned to this space at the centre of Canada's democracy as we discuss an issue of global moment and importance. It is a political crisis in Ukraine, but is one that has significance for all of us who care about freedom, democracy, and the spread of values that Canadians hold dear in Europe and around the world, and above all, for the people of Ukraine who are living in fear again. They are living in fear that the achievements of well over two decades, and the achievements of Ukrainian civilization over centuries and millennia, may once again be under threat because of arbitrary decisions and because of violence that has been used against them, against ordinary citizens exercising their democratic right to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in that place that is sacred to all Ukrainians, the Maidan at the centre of Kiev.

I am honoured to be here with so many distinguished colleagues following such an informative debate that has shown how much Canada cares. In asking ourselves why we are here tonight, why this debate is taking place on the first day of this new session in 2014 in Canada's Parliament, we have to look no further than our own history, our own roots, and our own core.

I am looking over at the member of Parliament for Toronto Centre, a new member in this place, who speaks a high quality of Ukrainian. I think her Russian is quite good, too. I can understand her Russian, but the quality of her Ukrainian is certainly second to none in this place and is probably second to none among parliamentarians in NATO countries. That speaks to us as a nation in understanding what Ukraine is going through and in living that reality because of who we are.

Before 1914, 170,000 Ukrainians called Canada home. They opened the west. They settled parts of this country that others were not willing to settle. It was quite cold, from what I understand, even then, and still is. The sod had to be turned. The railway had just been built. Spurs were still under construction.

They stood that test and built a great society in western Canada. Today at least 1.3 million Canadians trace their ancestry to Ukraine. We are proud of their contribution. As the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, I am very proud that in our Discover Canada guide, brought forward by my predecessor, now the Minister of Employment and Social Development, we recall that the first Victoria Cross anywhere in the British Empire awarded to one who was not born in that empire went to Corporal Filip Konowal, born in Ukraine, who showed exceptional courage in the battle of Hill 70 in 1917. He was the first member of the Canadian Corps not born in the British Empire to be awarded the Victoria Cross.

We on this side of the House are proud that Michael Starr, my neighbour, who represented part of what is now my riding, was the first member of a Canadian cabinet with Ukrainian roots. That was way back in 1957 under the great Right Hon. John George Diefenbaker.

We think of Ivan Pylypiw and Wasyl Eleniak, the first Ukrainian immigrants to Canada in 1891. There may have been others before them, but that is what our history records. They were the first we have a record of. Thousands, indeed millions, came later. Today the tradition continues in that we have a first-rate immigration program in Kiev. We have welcomed more students in the past year than ever before in history. Our approval rate from visitors from Ukraine is higher than ever.

A record number of visitors came from Ukraine in 2012 and 2013, getting into five figures. All of this is because we believe in Ukraine's vocation as a member of a greater Europe and as a member of a greater global community dedicated to the principles of peace, freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

That is why we are here tonight. We are here tonight because of their determination and their sacrifice to which we have been connected every step of the way.

It was not yesterday, and certainly not only in 1991, that Ukraine began its march to statehood. There have been four or five different initiatives and attempts to establish Ukrainian statehood on a firm foundation in the 20th century, and even earlier.

The 1991 experience is important to us, because we understand Ukraine's role in world civilization and in European civilization. It was because of this that Canada was the first country out of the gate. It took some doing, in those dark days at the end of 1991, to be the first at the door of the new Ukrainian state to say, “We recognize your independence. We recognize your dignity among the community of nations. We recognize your aspiration to live the values of democracy to their full potential”. Canada was the first country to recognize a free Ukrainian state in 1991. That is why we are one of the first countries to have a debate in a democratic forum, with all parties agreeing on the thrust of our concern about the current crisis in Ukraine.

Why has it come about? It is very simple. The aspiration of a people to reclaim their birthright and their historical tradition of being at the centre of European and global civilization has been thwarted and is under threat of being put on a side track and taken off course for a long period of time if we all stand idle.

I had the honour of serving our country on two occasions in the Russian Federation. It was a country itself dedicated, at least starting in 1990 and 1991, to democracy in its constitution. Elections have been held. Many Russians, some of whom have demonstrated in recent years, are absolutely determined to see democracy embraced in their country.

The current President of the Russian Federation made a claim some years back that I think all members of the House would find outrageous. He said that the greatest crime, the greatest disaster, the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union. Shame. Shame on any world leader who would say that. Shame on President Vladimir Putin for having said that in the face of victims of the Holodomor, victims of repression inside and outside the Soviet Union, and victims of sectarian wars to establish one-party violent communist state regimes in all parts of the world. Shame on anyone who would see that legacy, the disappearance of that legacy, and the holding to account of that legacy as a catastrophe.

On the contrary, we on this side of the House, and I hope all members of this place, understand that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the breakup of the Soviet Union were great moments for the triumph of the human spirit and the triumph of values in which we believe. It is those values for which individual Ukrainian civilians are standing up on the Maidan. They are standing up, through their collective aspiration to have an association agreement with Europe, to have their rights protected and to continue the freedom of speech that flourished in Ukraine over the past 20 years but which now has been curtailed and is under threat.

It is for that reason we are here tonight, together, to contemplate what options Canada and other democracies have should negotiations fail and should the blackmail that has been coming from some quarters in Russia, and elsewhere beyond Ukraine's borders, succeed in thwarting the dreams and aspirations of an entire people.

Canada is a country whose foreign policy has always succeeded when we take positions of principle, when we take positions that reflect our own success as a nation, as an economy, and as a free people. It is that position we are taking tonight. It is that principle upon which we are standing tonight, and I am proud to be here with all of my colleagues to speak in favour of a free Ukraine. Slava Ukraini.

We must stand up to bullying in our streets and communities, in Europe, in eastern Europe, and around the world. This is one case when we, as Canadians, must stand up and be counted.

[Citizenship and Immigration, December 9th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, this government is well aware of the enormous role that Canadian tourism plays. We have been working hard with our global network to ensure that even in spite of the work disruptions this summer, tourist visits to Canada continue to rise. We are working very closely with the organizers of the Pan Am Games to ensure we provide full service, better service than ever, for this unprecedented event in the greater Toronto area, to which we look forward on this side of the House with great enthusiasm.

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 29th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), prior to May 2012, the issuance of residency questionnaires, RQs, was not systematically tracked by the department; therefore, data are unavailable for the last five years.

With regard to (b), Citizenship and Immigration Canada, CIC, does not compile statistics by constituency and therefore cannot identify the total number of RQs sent to citizenship applicants living in the riding of Ottawa Centre.

With regard to (c), prior to May 2012, the issuance of RQs was not systematically tracked by the department; therefore, data are unavailable for the last five 5 years.

With regard to (d), prior to May 2012, the issuance of RQs was not systematically tracked by the department. In May 2012, CIC introduced a new version of the RQ. The RQ is issued in cases where additional information and documents are needed in order to assist in determining whether or not an applicant meets the residence requirement for citizenship. The RQ is not a new feature of the citizenship application process. It has been used in one form or another for several decades. CIC takes the issue of fraud in the immigration and citizenship programs very seriously. Our intent is to apply the full strength of Canadian law, and where evidence permits, to strip permanent resident status or citizenship, seek removal, and/or refer the matter to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the RCMP, for a criminal investigation. It is a much simpler process to be able to prevent those who are involved in residence fraud from becoming citizens in the first place than to try to revoke citizenship after they have already acquired it.

With regard to (e), the RQ is issued at various stages of the processing of applications in cases in which additional information and documents are needed in order to assist in determining whether an applicant meets the residence requirement for citizenship. The tools used to decide whether an RQ is issued are investigative tools, and as such cannot be released by CIC.

[Crisis in the Philippines, November 20th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, we join our colleagues opposite in saying mabuhay ang Pilipinas. Our thoughts are with the affected people, those who are victims of this typhoon as well as their friends and families and those most in need.

I am grateful to my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, for correcting my pronunciation. It must have been the late hour, but I was calling the island that the Canadian Forces is on by a different name. It is actually Panay.

Let us recall why we are here. It is to continue that projection of Canadian expertise and resources to those in need. The Canadian Forces are doing it. We are doing it through our immigration programs, through Canadian development assistance and humanitarian relief.

Would the parliamentary secretary agree with me though that as Canadians look to channel their generosity, in the spirit of Christmas, Hanukkah, Diwali, et cetera, that one of the ways for them to have the greatest impact is not to send that can of food or that clothing, which itself has a huge logistical cost associated with it, but to give generously to humanitarian agencies that have a proven record? The Canadian Red Cross, CARE Canada, World Vision and others are on the ground and have proven networks that can translate those funds into an immediate impact on the lives of people who still have not been reached.

[Crisis in the Philippines, November 20th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, just to clarify, yes, human resources; Canadian government presence in the Philippines has been reinforced. It is mostly, obviously, on the military side and the consular side because there was an acute need there to track Canadians, many of them still missing. That role is not a particularly large one in normal times in the Philippines. Our immigration program is a large one, one of the largest we have in the world. It is being adjusted. It is being supported, but it is handling prioritized cases within its already very large workload quite well.

There was a very important point made by the member opposite about the future for the Philippines and other countries. Would the member not agree with us that the best investment that can be made with the support of donor countries, but also by countries subject to typhoons and earthquakes and other natural disasters themselves, is to build that resilience, to build that ability to respond quickly and to prevent the kind of damage that is much worse when preparations have not been made?

Of course it takes resources. Of course it has to be done over the long term, but this has to be part of the development process, surely, in parts of the world that are subject to these acute and intense climatic phenomena like the typhoon we saw in the Philippines. Is that not something we should all work on together?

[Crisis in the Philippines, November 20th, 2013]

Mr. Chair, on the point of order, I gave a speech and there was time for questions. There was no question posed by the member for Scarborough—Agincourt. Instead, he heckled me mercilessly at a very high decibel level, making it hard to give a speech, which in a relatively late sitting of the House is inappropriate. Given all the inappropriate things he said tonight, I do not think any of us in the House will apologize for anything we have said back to him in self-defence.

[Crisis in the Philippines, November 20th, 2013]

Have another drink, Jimmy.