House of Commons photo

Track John

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is liberals.

Conservative MP for New Brunswick Southwest (New Brunswick)

Won his last election, in 2021, with 50% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, to date that has not been the case. I have no problems doing my work in my riding.

That said, we can think of Kenny Chiu, a former member of the House of Commons who was targeted by Beijing's attacks. There are some very serious examples. Some members are no longer in this place because of the Communist Party's efforts to ensure that they lost their election and could no longer return to the House to defend their political ideas.

That is very serious. The government says that this did not influence the election, that it did not really change anything. However, some members are not here because of the Communists.

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, again, I could not agree more. Our strength as a country and a democracy rests on our openness. The weakness of the Communist regime is its insistence on lies and keeping things hidden. We must, as a democracy, ensure that what has happened is known by Canadians so they can hold those who failed in their duty accountable and ensure we have a government here that will stand up for the interests of this country and voters right across the country.

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, there is a brief answer to that excellent question, which is to give them a platform to speak, to give Canadians who have faced intimidation and threats from Beijing a platform through Parliament and the Canadian government, and give them the opportunity to stand up and be heard. That would do more to help rectify the situation and correct the many errors that the government made.

We must not forget, and I will remind my colleagues, that the Liberal government actually sued the Speaker prior to the last election, to prevent information that the Canada-China committee had discovered, an outrageous move to protect itself and not ensure that Canadians had the truth.

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, the member's point is spot-on. That is one of the benefits of having a proper public consultation. We would hear from the public, and more and more Canadians would come to realize that the primary target of mainland China, the Communist regime, has been Canadians of Chinese heritage. Those are the people who are not able to fulfill their democratic rights because of intimidation from police stations that operate here illegally, because of intimidation tactics from Beijing's diplomats.

I appreciate the question. It is a great point. We want to make sure this is about the regime in Beijing, and we will hear from Canadians of Chinese descent, who will reinforce the message that they, too, support democracy and freedoms that are the bedrock of this country.

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, I completely agree with the member. I think this is a very serious issue, but the government is not taking it seriously.

This is something that I think the government has known about for far too long and has preferred to turn the other way, to ignore it, because it was either not capable of dealing with this or was not willing to make some of the tough decisions that are required to ensure that Canadians remain safe. However, there is no doubt it is a mess, and it is one that has unfolded slowly. This did not just appear one day, but it is story upon story. We must get to the bottom of it.

Privilege May 9th, 2023

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin my remarks this evening by thanking our Speaker for yesterday's ruling on the question of privilege from the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

This was an important moment and important decision because it brought into sharp focus the intimidation by foreign agents operating in Canada. Even tonight, the House, a day later, is still gripped by this decision. That is relevant to members who are participating here tonight and who have participated up until now on this question.

As a past member of the Canada-China special committee, I know from the evidence submitted to Parliament that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills is not the only Canadian to be targeted. At committee, we heard from Canadians, particularly from Canadians of Chinese ancestry, about tactics used by the Chinese Communist Party to intimidate and silence our democracy.

We have witnessed, over the past two decades, how Beijing's Communist Party revealed itself not only to be at odds with international laws and norms, but also be opposed to accountability, openness and even the basic rights of people, including mainland China's own citizens.

Like a few other members of Parliament, and many hundreds of thousands of Canadians, I have had the pleasure and privilege of living in Hong Kong. That territory is an amazing place. I was fortunate enough to be on hand for the handover from Britain's rule to the People's Republic of China on July 1, 1997. It was a heavy moment with feelings of both apprehension and opportunity.

Afterward, I visited Asia frequently once I returned to Canada a year later, and I have fond memories of both rural and urban mainland China, energetic Hong Kong and even remote Tibet.

Today, sadly, I would not travel to any part of mainland China. This saddens me because I have deep affection for the Chinese people. One cannot travel for days, weeks or months at a time and leave untouched by their hospitality, fondness for family, tradition and remarkable cuisine. I also deeply admire China's culture and long history of struggle, perseverance and many great accomplishments.

However, I know that travelling to mainland China is something I cannot do anymore because of my committee work in Parliament. Today, I am prohibited by Beijing from entering the country. I called for a free and democratic China, and because of that, I am in violation of Beijing's draconian national security law.

I uttered the words that I believe China would be better served by being democratic and by directly electing its leaders. I said these words on Canadian soil and in Parliament, yet the national security law, according to the regime in Beijing, applies anywhere around the world. By uttering those words, a call for democracy in China, I have broken that law. I view it as an immoral law, but as we saw with the two Michaels who were arrested and detained, that means nothing when faced with the dictators in Beijing.

I know that many members on this side of the chamber, and probably many who have served with the government since 2015, would have never believed that it could take the Government of Canada two years to expel a foreign diplomat sent here by Beijing's Communist Party who planned and executed an intimidation and harassment campaign against the family and loved ones of a fellow parliamentarian, our colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills.

It happened. This is a Liberal disgrace and it must be investigated. I want to take a moment to repeat some remarks from the member for Wellington—Halton Hills when he addressed the House last week and provided the basis for our ongoing debate.

The member noted that on March 6, 2012, our then Speaker rightly said:

Those who enter political life fully expect to be able to be held accountable for their actions to their constituents and to those who are concerned with the issues and initiatives they may advocate.

In a healthy democracy, vigorous debate on issues is encouraged. In fact, the rules and procedures of this House are drafted to allow for proponents and opponents to discuss, in a respectful manner, even the most difficult and sensitive of matters.

However, when duly elected members are personally threatened for their work in Parliament, whether introducing a bill, making a statement or casting a vote, this House must take the matter very seriously.

It is right for this to be debated, it is important that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs investigate and it is necessary that Parliament gets to the bottom of this and discovers the truth.

CSIS discovered, as reported by The Globe and Mail, that multiple members of Parliament have been targeted by Beijing's Communist Party. Indeed, this privilege motion we are debating is, as we see on our screens, “Intimidation campaign against members of Parliament.” Who would have thought such a debate would be necessary in Canada or that we would be tasked with discovering what happened?

Members of all parties in the House of Commons should be questioning why the government was so keen to permit a foreign diplomat sent here by Beijing to remain here and continue intimidating and threatening the family and loved ones of not only a parliamentarian but several parliamentarians it seems, as well as Canadians across this country.

Either the government takes prompt measures to uphold our rights and protect Canadians from harassment or foreign nations that wish to undermine us and do us harm will double down and threaten more and more Canadians, yet whenever it comes to issues relating to Beijing's Communist Party, the Prime Minister does not feel any urgency to act. He deflects, denies, blames and does nothing unless absolutely forced to by opposition parties and ultimately Canadian voters.

We see this with the Uyghur genocide recognition motion that the Prime Minister and his cabinet abstained from when the vote was held in this Parliament. We see this with the Winnipeg lab document leak motion the Prime Minister and his cabinet voted against and to this day is still buried. It is an issue meant to be resolved by a special working group of parliamentarians working with an oversight committee to release documents, but that has disappeared. It is one more issue the government prefers to sweep under the rug.

We see this with the Prime Minister and his decisions not to apologize for the comments made by several Liberals in this chamber that the member for Wellington—Halton Hills knew about the threats against his family and loved ones and did nothing. It is a disgraceful misrepresentation meant to obscure what had happened.

The government's response to these allegations in The Globe and Mail has been evasive and inconsistent, with simple questions about its knowledge of the situation going unanswered. This all raises additional concerns about transparency and accountability.

At first the government announced that anyone violating the Vienna convention would be expelled, so we waited. Days passed without new information or an expulsion. Later the Prime Minister claimed to be unaware of the allegations until they actually appeared in the newspaper, asserting the same applied to other executive branch members in his cabinet. He also mentioned that CSIS determined the issue was not significant enough to warrant escalation and still no expulsions took place.

The narrative shifted again when it was revealed that the security briefings did not even leave CSIS; they did not reach the national security adviser and other government departments, the government maintained, yet of course we discovered they had reached the highest echelons of the public service, and the government was somehow in the dark.

Despite no expulsions occurring, the government raised concerns about the possible consequences of expelling a People's Republic of China diplomat, leading to questions about its intentions and resolve. More false accusations were made against the member for Wellington—Halton Hills, with the Prime Minister participating in the attempts to undermine his credibility and the seriousness of the CSIS reports. It was all, and remains, a bloody mess.

For these reasons and others, it is imperative that Parliament explore the violation of our privileges and the threat of election interference through the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. Leaving this to the government bench alone is, without question, the wrong move. The government simply cannot be trusted. It is why Conservatives also continue to call for an independent, public inquiry into Beijing's foreign interference in our elections.

There are so many inconsistencies that have surrounded the Liberal government's handling of the situation that it is right to question its judgment. For example, it is just not credible to believe that CSIS would brief the member for Wellington—Halton Hills on a serious issue of interference and intimidation without informing the national security apparatus and the political level of the current government. Of course, this was recently corroborated by Cherie Henderson, the assistant director for requirements at CSIS, who said, at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, “I can say that we definitely have seen specific cases of hostile activities of states against politicians. In those specific cases, we definitely brief our government on the challenges that are being faced.”

To be clear, the government's pattern of obfuscating information from parliamentarians has been evident in previous scandals, such as the SNC-Lavalin debacle, the WE Charity scandal, and, just last week, with the Trudeau Foundation. Why would anyone think this situation is any different?

The debate's significance lies in the need for the procedure and House affairs committee to address the issue, as well as the ethics committee's focus on foreign interference. Despite multiple committees investigating foreign interference, the government has not initiated an independent inquiry, and it should do so immediately. An independent public inquiry would help assess the impact of the Beijing Communist regime's interference in Canada.

Our former colleague Kenny Chiu has discussed the fear and intimidation tactics employed by Chinese mainland officials in Beijing, including misinformation and disinformation campaigns against members of the House during recent elections. Mehmet Tohti, a leading advocate for the human rights of Uyghur Muslims in Canada, shared his experience of Beijing Communist officials monitoring his calls to relatives in China in an attempt to intimidate him. There are still an unknown number of Chinese Communist Party police stations operating in Canada. These serve one purpose, and that is to intimidate citizens and landed immigrants who live here, in what should be a free and democratic Canada.

There is a pattern of pandering to Beijing, which appears to have begun when the Prime Minister won the Liberal Party leadership. A large donation was soon made to the Trudeau Foundation, and questions have arisen about the receipt issued for the donation. Parliamentary committees are studying that as well, urging the CRA to investigate that to get to the bottom of any undue influence on our democracy and the Prime Minister.

This pattern of influence must be investigated further, because it undermines democratic institutions, the electoral process, and, of course, faith in our democracy. At the same time, it is important to recognize that many Chinese Canadians live in our country in fear, and may not participate fully in the electoral process due to potential retribution.

That is where we are today. Our government and Prime Minister took two years to act and to expel a diplomat for meddling in Canada's democracy. Because the Liberals finally declared one diplomat from Communist China not welcome in this country, they think they should be congratulated, after waiting two years. The Liberals had ample evidence of Beijing's diplomats interfering in elections, particularly from its Toronto and Vancouver offices, yet, when questioned about this at the procedure and House affairs committee, the foreign affairs minister claimed there was no evidence. However, they did possess evidence about a foreign diplomat sent here by Beijing's Communist party, which had been known for two years.

The Liberals might claim that the information never made it to the Prime Minister's desk, and that is why we need an investigation to find out what happened. If that is true, that is still the government's responsibility. If the Liberal government is not capable of overseeing the security of this country, it should be held in contempt for its inability to govern well and responsibly.

It took a report from The Globe and Mail, and pressure from the opposition and Canadians at large, for the government to finally act. Why was there this long delay? It is unacceptable for Beijing diplomats to facilitate funding for political candidates, to target Conservative candidates, or any candidates for that matter, in this country, and then to boast about defeating disliked incumbent MPs. It is equally intolerable for them to organize illegal police stations to harass and intimidate Chinese Canadians, and to threaten MPs and their families.

Canada has a long-standing commitment to accountable government. We must uphold and preserve that. Canadians should be informed of the recent security lapses. Instead, the Prime Minister continues to put electoral decisions ahead of national security. This is the most serious failing of anyone who occupies the government benches under the Liberal government.

Firearms May 3rd, 2023

Mr. Speaker, I represent thousands of law-abiding firearm owners, each of whom was approved by the RCMP to legally purchase, own and use a long gun in Canada. They follow the law, pay their taxes and enjoy time at the range and hunting in the woods. Earlier this week, the Liberal government introduced another backdoor hunting rifle ban that again targets law-abiding Canadians. This ban will not improve public safety, because criminals do not acquire their firearms legally.

Over the past eight years under the Liberals, why has violent crime increased by 32% and gang-related murders doubled? It is because the Liberals often help offenders avoid mandatory jail time for gun crimes. Why do criminals selling fentanyl and crystal meth stay in business? It is because Liberals give dealers house arrest for dealing death sentences. Why are all 13 of Canada’s premiers demanding bail reform? It is because the Liberals are soft on crime.

Ottawa’s priority must be to go after gun smugglers and criminals using illegal firearms. It is hard work but it will make Canada's cities safer.

Business of Supply May 2nd, 2023

Madam Speaker, there are two points from the hon. member that I would like to respond to.

First of all, that is what makes this problem so infuriating. What began as an issue primarily for Vancouver and Toronto has now spread across the country. Even the smallest communities in my riding on the east coast, places with populations of 6,000 and 8,000, are experiencing homelessness, a lack of affordable housing and huge, huge price increases. This has been growing and I recognize that, but what is fundamental to understand is how much worse it has become over the last eight years with home prices doubling across the country. It is a tough file and there is no doubt about it, but it has become so much worse under a government that is doing everything wrong.

Where I disagree with my hon. colleague is that the NDP views the housing stock as static, as fixed, and that we have to try to control and regulate it. Our view on this side is that we need to expand the stock of homes—

Business of Supply May 2nd, 2023

Madam Speaker, I have no idea. We would have to ask the member that question.

I am here to support this motion with the other Conservative members. I am ready to do that.

Business of Supply May 2nd, 2023

Madam Speaker, I am not sure the member was listening to my speech. Nowhere did I say the government ought to spend more and do more. If anything, the government's spending is one of the reasons that inflation has been on fire in this country and home ownership is more difficult. I am not sure where that criticism came from, or the belief that I think the Liberals are not doing enough. They are actually going in the wrong direction.

When it comes to the markets, the federal government has the most responsibility for setting the conditions for economic growth and home construction. It has failed utterly. The problem is the Liberals do not recognize they are going in the wrong direction. That is why we need a new direction, under Conservatives.