Bill S-8

An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations

This enactment amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) reorganize existing inadmissibility provisions relating to sanctions to establish a distinct ground of inadmissibility based on sanctions;
(b) expand the scope of inadmissibility based on sanctions to include not only sanctions imposed on a country but also those imposed on an entity or a person; and
(c) expand the scope of inadmissibility based on sanctions to include all orders and regulations made under section 4 of the Special Economic Measures Act .
It also makes consequential amendments to the Citizenship Act and the Emergencies Act .
Finally, it amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations to, among other things, provide that the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, instead of the Immigration Division, will have the authority to issue a removal order on grounds of inadmissibility based on sanctions under new paragraph 35.1(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act .

Foreign Affairs

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Madam Speaker, Canada is committed to holding the Iranian regime accountable for its terrorist activities and gross violations of human rights. The government is exploring all possible measures to constrain the activities of the Iranian regime, and recognizes its disregard for peace and stability in the region. The government uses multiple instruments and has measures in place to hold Iran accountable for its actions, including listing key entities and proxy actors pursuant to its Criminal Code terrorist-listing regime.

In 2012, Canada listed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Qods Force as a terrorist entity. The Qods Force is known to be responsible for terrorist operations and for providing arms, funding and paramilitary training to other terrorist groups, including the Taliban, Hizballah, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

I would like to reiterate the various measures Canada is imposing against Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC. They include vigorous sanctions under the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA, explicitly targeting the IRGC, its leadership and several sub-organizations, including the IRGC air force and the air force missile command.

To date, Canada has sanctioned 442 Iranian individuals and entities under SEMA. Since October 2022, Canada has imposed 16 rounds of sanctions under the act, targeting 153 individuals and 87 entities at all levels of Iran's security, intelligence and economic apparatus. These measures effectively freeze any assets that the listed individuals and entities may hold in Canada.

Canada has also taken inadmissibility measures through Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, and the CBSA. For example, in November 2022, Canada designated Iran as a country that has engaged in terrorism and systematic and gross human rights violations under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or IRPA. As a result, thousands of Iranian senior officials, including high-profile leaders, are now banned from entering Canada if they apply for a visa or seek to enter the country. Current and former senior officials who are here in Canada may be investigated and removed from the country.

As of March 2024, approximately 17,800 applications had been reviewed for potential inadmissibility under the IRPA, and IRCC had cancelled 82 visas under the act. The CBSA had launched 86 investigations, and additional investigations were to be launched as new information became available. Forty-three investigations had been closed, and 13 individuals had been deemed inadmissible to Canada.

Since June 2023, when Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, received royal assent, the IRPA has been aligned with SEMA to ensure that all foreign nationals subject to sanctions under SEMA are also inadmissible to Canada.

Finally, Canada lists Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act. This designation, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, allows victims to bring civil actions against Iran for losses or damages relating to terrorism—

Justice and Human Rights

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join this debate, but before going any further, I want to mention that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from the Standing Committee on Finance, the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley.

As this motion points out, recent events have brought renewed focus on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or the IRGC. Canada strongly condemns the blatant disregard for human rights and human life shown by the IRGC in recent acts against Iranians. We continue to listen to and join our voices with those who are demanding better in Iran.

Here in Canada, we are continuing to take decisive action against this regime. On November 14, 2022, the Government of Canada announced the designation of Iran as a regime that has engaged in terrorism and systemic and gross human rights violations under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

As a result, senior officials of the regime are now permanently inadmissible to Canada. This includes tens of thousands of Iranians, such as the head of state, senior IRGC members, intelligence operatives, senior government officials, diplomats and judges. The government also announced significantly expanded sanctions against those responsible for the Iranian regime's egregious human rights violations.

Those new sanctions would build on our existing sanctions. All told, these measures amount to the most robust and comprehensive set of sanctions in the world against Iran and the IRGC.

I would also like to point out that the Government of Canada announced its intention to pursue legislation intended to ensure that no sanctioned individual connected to the IRGC can enter Canada.

Thanks to the passage of Bill S-8, the law now aligns the IRPA with the Special Economic Measures Act to ensure that all foreign nationals subject to sanctions under SEMA will also be inadmissible to Canada. This designation means thousands of members of the regime, including many members of the IRGC, intelligence operatives, government officials and judges, among others, are now inadmissible in Canada.

The government also announced it would invest $76 million to strengthen Canada's capacity to implement sanctions and to ensure we can move more quickly to freeze and seize sanctioned individuals' assets. This includes a dedicated bureau at Global Affairs Canada. It also includes additional support to the RCMP to investigate and identify assets and gather evidence, building on authorities announced in budget 2022. It is a suite of measures that will help hold the Iranian regime to account for its egregious actions, and we are going to continue to pursue all the tools at our disposal.

I will highlight that we already have a strong foundation. That is a result of our previous actions, which were already some of the strongest in the world. They include designating the state of Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under Canada's State Immunity Act, and this allows civil actions to be taken against it under the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act.

We also announced additional sanctions against senior Iranian officials and prominent entities who directly implement repressive measures, violate human rights and spread the Iranian regime's propaganda. These sanctions effectively froze any assets these individuals may hold in Canada.

As I note, Canada continues to have in place a series of strong measures to hold both Iran and the IRGC accountable. In November 2022, the then minister of public safety implemented the designation of the Iranian regime, pursuant to paragraph 35(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This renders all senior officials in the service of the Iranian regime inadmissible to Canada from November 15, 2019, onward. This designation also acts as a prevention tool, as it ensures that prescribed senior officials will not be granted a Canadian visa in the first place. The fact that the regime has been designated also serves to discourage Iranian senior officials from attempting to travel to Canada.

Under this designation, as of November 20, 2023, approximately 17,800 visa applications had been reviewed for potential inadmissibility, and 78 individuals had been denied access to Canada. Dozens of Iranian regime officials have been denied entry to Canada, and Canada has deported several former Iranian officials, including Majid Iranmanesh, who is the first to face deportation under sanctions adopted in November 2022.

Further, based on referrals from IRCC and tips from the public, 141 cases are now being investigated by the CBSA and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. So far, 38 investigations were closed by the CBSA for individuals who were either out of the country or deemed not inadmissible to Canada.

In June 2019, Canada added three new Iran-backed groups to the terrorist list under the Criminal Code, including the Fatemiyoun Division, known to recruit soldiers from Afghanistan. Iran has provided these groups with substantial resources, including training and weapons to carry out terrorist acts that advance its goals in the region. Canada continues to list the IRGC Quds Force and a number of terrorist entities that have benefited from the force's patronage, including arms, funding and paramilitary training, and that help advance Iran's interests and foreign policy. These include Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Taliban.

As the motion before us today suggests, the listing regime is one important tool for countering terrorism in Canada and globally and is part of the government's commitment to keeping Canadians safe. The listing process is ongoing and vigorous, but it is of course just one of our many tools. We need to stay adaptable and change with the times. Global instability and the rapid changes we are seeing demonstrate, again and again, how we need to work every day to retain the democratic values we cherish.

Our collective efforts to counter terrorism reflect the fact that we must think and co-operate globally. For Canada, for example, one of the main terrorist threats stems from violent extremists inspired by terrorist groups. We must continue to take seriously the threat of those espousing extremist views who may be travelling or returning to our countries. Canada has a robust approach in place to address this issue as well. In fact, it is a Criminal Code offence for any Canadian citizen or permanent resident to travel abroad to support or engage in a terrorist activity or the activities of a terrorist group. Law enforcement conducts criminal investigations to the fullest extent they are able, with a view to supporting criminal charges and prosecutions of Canadian extremist travellers and returnees.

When charges cannot be laid, a number of other tools are considered, including surveillance and monitoring; terrorism peace bonds; no-fly listings; refusals, cancellations or revocations of passports; and other threat reduction measures. Canadians who involve themselves in terrorism and violent extremism can expect to be investigated, arrested, charged and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. That is the government's prime objective and priority.

As with many other security issues, we continue our multilateral partnerships to improve coordination, information flow and capacity building. Our principles in countering terrorism affirm Canada's democratic values. They provide a clear articulation of how Canada conducts its work. Colleagues can be assured that Canada is looking at all possible options to constrain the activities of Iran that threaten national security.

From an operational perspective, the RCMP has investigated numerous areas in relation to Iran pertaining to its federally mandated activities. These include national security, transnational organized crime, money laundering, sanctions violations, threats of harm to individuals in Canada or elsewhere, instances of transnational repression and other national security offences.

This is a time of tension and uncertainty, but Canadians can rest assured their government is working for them on all fronts. As my colleagues will point to, we are actively getting funding to communities through programs like the security infrastructure program, funding mechanisms like the community resilience fund and anti-hate initiatives across the government.

I am sure they will also highlight that the Minister of Public Safety is committed to continuing to engage communities directly. He met with federal, provincial and territorial leaders to discuss this urgent matter. He has met with universities to discuss needs on campus as well. He met recently with the cross-cultural round table on security, or CCRS. The CCRS an important mechanism for the minister to hear directly from diverse community members on the topics concerning their safety. Tensions in the Middle East, along with their impacts on our communities, were a key topic of discussion.

In sum, there is a remarkable amount of work being done across government to counter acts and words of hate and violence, and we need to continue to do more.

(Bill C-9. On the Order: Government Orders)

June 21, 2023—Third reading of Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act.

(Motion respecting Senate amendments agreed to)

(Bill S-8: On the Order: Government Orders)

June 21, 2023—Third reading of Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

(Bill read the third time and passed)

(Bill C-40: On the Order: Government Orders)

June 21, 2023—Second reading of Bill C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews).

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

(Bill C-53: On the Order: Government Orders)

June 21, 2023—Second reading of Bill C-53, An Act respecting the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan, to give effect to treaties with those governments and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move that notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House:

(a) on the last allotted day in the supply period ending June 23, 2023, the proceedings on the opposition day motion shall conclude no later than 10:30 p.m., the House shall then proceed to the putting of the question on the motion and then, if required, the taking of any division or divisions necessary to dispose of the motion, and the Speaker shall then put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment, every question necessary to dispose of the motions to concur in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, and to the Supplementary Estimates (A) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, and for the passage at all stages of any bill based on the said estimates;

(b) notices of opposed items in relation to the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, and to the Supplementary Estimates (A) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, listed on the Notice Paper be deemed withdrawn;

(c) the recorded divisions on government legislation currently deferred to the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions today be deemed further deferred to the conclusion of all proceedings in relation to the estimates tonight;

(d) the motion standing on the Order Paper in the name of the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons related to the appointment of Harriet Solloway as Public Sector Integrity Commissioner pursuant to Standing Order 111.1(2) be deemed moved, a recorded vote be deemed requested and deferred after the recorded division on the motion for third reading of Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Canada Business Corporations Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts;

(e) in relation to Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act, the amendment to the motion respecting Senate amendments made to the bill be deemed withdrawn and the motion respecting Senate amendments made to the bill, standing on the Notice Paper, be deemed adopted;

(f) Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, be deemed read a third time and passed;

(g) Bill C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews), be deemed read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights;

(h) Ways and Means Motion No. 18, notice of which was tabled on June 16, 2023, be deemed concurred in, a bill based thereon standing on the Order Paper in the name of the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, entitled “An Act respecting the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan, to give effect to treaties with those governments and to make consequential amendments to other Acts”, be deemed to have been introduced and read a first time, deemed read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs; and

(i) the written questions dated June 20, 2023, standing on the Notice Paper, be deemed to have been transferred to the Order Paper on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, for the purposes of Standing Order 39.

Bill S-8—Time Allocation Motion

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, though my colleague may be a new member, I can say she provides immense value to the debates that take place in this chamber, and I thank her for her presence here and the representation of her community. The member has learned a lesson, though she may be in her first term, far more quickly than I did when I was in my first term.

When I was first elected, I wanted to chase every car, make every argument and take part in every single debate. What I came to understand was that the greatest currency we have as parliamentarians is the time during which we can put forward the arguments that support our communities. Every minute that we spend on one issue is a minute we do not spend on another.

When we are dealing with an issue such as in Bill S-8, something a simple as rendering inadmissible some of the worst criminals who are responsible, in this case, for the latest invasion into Ukraine by Russia, and when we are dealing with the people who are responsible for the persecution of innocent people in Iran, following the death of Mahsa Amini, because they had the audacity to protest this egregious behaviour by their government, I think we can agree that we have had the debate we needed to have and that now we have the ability to move on to deal with other pressing issues, such as those the member referenced in her question. I look forward to hearing her perspective on those important debates as soon as we are able to wrap up this measure as quickly as possible.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for his informed responses to all of our questions.

I still feel quite new as an MP, with this being my first term, so sometimes it feels like it takes me a while to learn some of these procedures, and time allocation is something that I am still getting myself familiar with. When I think about the last two years that we have sat here, with all the filibustering that we have seen and all the opportunities when we could have had more informed debates on important issues like addressing indigenous housing, indigenous poverty and the justice system that is very unfair to indigenous people, I wonder if the minister can explain, especially with Bill S-8, why time allocation is so important and what led up to this debate today.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to share my opinion on the gag orders, because judging by what the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader and the minister are saying, one would have to wonder whether gag orders are not the best thing since sliced bread. I consider gag orders to be a technique used to systematically muzzle the elected members of the House, which is unacceptable.

I believe that when the government invokes closure, it is because the government House leader has mismanaged the time spent on House business. All parties support Bill S‑8. We are now at third reading, the committee did a good job, everything is going well, and I do not think that there were many members who wanted to speak at this stage.

I will give an example. Last night, until midnight, we discussed Bill C‑9. We have discussed this several times before, even before the last election. Why has the government House leader not been able to say that this is important, that it enjoys a fairly broad consensus and that it will be implemented quickly? Instead, it takes years to be adopted and implemented.

I have two other examples. Closure was also invoked for Bill C‑47, the budget implementation bill. It is hundreds of pages long and all the organizations that wanted to delve into it would have needed time to do so. Imposing closure on such a bill limits the amount of time available to go through it and the ability to correct the flaws in committee.

One last and extreme example dates back to the pandemic, when the government was not taking action. At one point, it came up with a bill that was to go through all stages immediately. We asked for a few weeks to study it. We wanted it to be introduced so that people could go through it and improve it. However, the government did not want to do that and said that everything had to be passed as soon as possible, without any study or review. Well, it then had to present other bills to fix the first one. That is an unacceptable and absolutely amateurish way of doing things.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy questions from the hon. member. I find them to be thoughtful, even though we often find ourselves in disagreement. I think to have respectful engagement on issues that matter is very important.

With respect, there are a number of different kinds of sanctions that may be most appropriate for different kinds of scenarios. In fact, before the changes to Bill S-8, there are certain kinds, including for human rights abuses, that could be launched more through our sanctions regime. We also had the opportunity to sanction individuals for significant acts of corruption, both of which could have rendered a person inadmissible. Going forward, we will be able to render people inadmissible as well for violations that cause interruptions to global peace and security. For what it is worth, there is another expansion that will ensure that we are not just dealing with acts committed by countries but also substate actors and terror organizations.

I think, going forward, when the facts justify it, it may be most appropriate to use sanctions for human rights abuses, but in the present instance we have seen a significant increase, as a result, in particular, of Russia's latest invasion into Ukraine, of bad actors who I think are complicit in those kinds of actions that have interrupted global peace and security. Whether it is for gross and systematic human rights violations, whether it is for significant acts of corruption or whether it is for this new power that will be rendering people inadmissible based on their erosion of international peace and security, I think all of those groups deserve to be sanctioned with inadmissibility, not just the pre-existing consequences that were available under the particular piece of legislation that is at issue in this particular debate.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it has been said many times that there are two Bloc parties in the House of Commons. There is the Bloc Québécois and the “block everything” party. The “block everything” party, the Conservatives, have blocked everything from dental care to the grocery rebate to affordable housing. Yesterday, we will remember, they blocked the hybrid Parliament, except that two-thirds of Conservatives used the hybrid provisions to vote against the hybrid Parliament. We just cannot make this stuff up. Now they are blocking Bill S-8.

My question to my hon. colleague is simply this. Why is the “block everything” party blocking everything that would actually help their constituents, including dental care, which would help about 10,000 people in each and every Conservative riding?

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my hon. colleague and had the opportunity to spend my first few years as a member of Parliament on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities with him. Unfortunately, in this particular instance I have a different perspective.

The use of time allocation, I remind him, was a routine part of proceedings before we formed government in 2015. There are many hundreds of examples when former House leader Peter Van Loan used the exact same tool to put forward significant omnibus legislation when the opposition wanted to have a say.

The reality is that, as a result of our trying to get a number of things done as we approach the summer session and as a result of certain tactics being deployed by His Majesty's loyal opposition, we found ourselves in a scenario where we were being threatened with filibusters that would potentially continue through to the end of the session and that were going to delay important things from getting done.

This is a particular piece of legislation that has been well litigated in this chamber and the other, and we now have an opportunity to move forward on an issue for which I expect there is largely agreement between multiple parties. This will enable us to move over to other priorities I know people in parts of Canada care deeply about, whether it is protecting the environment, advancing health care reforms or including investments that will make life more affordable.

We need to be able to have these debates and complete legislation in a timely way, and I am going to be pleased to see Bill S-8 form part of Canadian law hopefully in the very near future.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Minister of Seniors]

moved:

That in relation to Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the report stage and five hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at report stage and the five hours provided for the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

Bill S-8—Notice of Time Allocation Motion

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the report stage and third reading stage of Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the respective stages of the said bill.

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to respond on behalf of the government.

This afternoon we will continue debate on Government Business No. 26, concerning amendments to the Standing Orders. When debate concludes later this evening, we will consider Bill C-35, respecting early learning and child care, followed by Senate amendments to Bill C-9, concerning the Judges Act.

Tomorrow we will consider Bill C-42, respecting the Canada Business Corporations Act, at report stage and third reading, and Bill S-8, respecting sanctions.

The priorities for next week shall include Bill S-8, on sanctions; Senate amendments to Bill C-18, respecting online news; Bill C-40, concerning the miscarriage of justice review commission act, also known as David and Joyce Milgaard's Law; and Bill C-33, which strengthens the port system and railway safety.

Thursday shall be an allotted day.

Finally, I request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the next sitting be 12 midnight, pursuant to order made Tuesday, November 15, 2022.

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would say it is a pleasure to be able to rise and speak today, but I was actually expecting that we would be debating Bill S-8. Bill S-8 deals with sanctions on foreign nationals.

A member from the Conservative Party yells, “Surprise.” It is no surprise. This does not surprise me. What it does is really, once again, just demonstrate the Conservative Party of Canada's lack of respect in terms of what Canadians expect of legislators, which is to be able to deal with issues that are important.

Today, the Conservative Party says, “Well, housing is an important issue.” Yes, we concur. There is no doubt that housing is an important issue. In fact, we have been dealing with this issue for years now, unlike the Conservative Party. The reality is that this is just an attempt at a filibuster coming from the Conservative Party. It is interesting that Conservatives say housing is an important issue, yet they had 10 opposition days when they could have decided on the kind of vote or question. They could have had the “whereases” explaining the issues. Out of the last 10 opposition days, what did they choose? They chose to talk about the price on pollution, opposition day after opposition day. Now they try to say, “Well, know what? We are concerned about housing.” Where was that concern on opposition days? It did not exist. That was the reality for the Conservative Party, but today it says it does not want to address the government legislation, so what it will do is bring in yet another concurrence report and will say it is about housing. This way, government members and other opposition members will say that housing is an important issue and that we should be debating it today. I would argue that we could have been debating from an opposition perspective on many of the other opportunities by which the Conservatives could have brought it forward.

Let us talk about hypocrisy. I think most Canadians would be somewhat surprised that, during the 90s, we had the Charlottetown accord, and, within the Charlottetown accord, we had every political party in the House of Commons ultimately advocating that Ottawa should not be playing a role in housing, that it was provincial jurisdiction. I know that because I was in the north end of Winnipeg debating Bill Blaikie, advocating that we needed to have a presence in national housing. Only one political party has consistently, over the years, advocated that the federal government play virtually no role in housing, and that is the Conservative Party of Canada. That is the only party. Through the last eight years, as we have been bringing forward numerous housing policies, we have seen the Conservative Party continuously arguing or voting against them. Understanding jurisdictional responsibilities and understanding what role the federal government can actually play in housing is, I would suggest, relatively important. I have not witnessed that from the Conservative Party of Canada, and I do not say that lightly.

I was first elected in 1988. My first responsibility was as the official opposition whip, along with having housing as my critic portfolio. Even through those years, every year I invested a great deal of my energy into the issue of housing. I have seen the rises and the falls of the industry. I understand what it is that the federal government can and cannot do. I also see the lack of interest from the Conservative Party.

Now, Conservatives understand and they see the anxiety that is out there because of issues like interest, because of the demand there is for housing, and now they want to make it an issue and they want to blame everything on Ottawa, as if Ottawa were to blame for the housing crisis. I hate to think what issues and crises there would be if it were not for Canadians' kicking Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada out in 2015.

Let us take a look at some of the things we have done in the last five to seven years. In the history of Canada, never before have we seen more money invested into the housing file than by the current Prime Minister and government. We have adopted the first national housing strategy, which not only establishes a framework but also invests billions of dollars into housing. Every region of our country has benefited from it.

If we look at the province of Manitoba and the makeup of housing there, most people would be surprised. It has been a while, but I would guesstimate that we are probably talking somewhere in the neighbourhood of 20,000-plus units that the federal government directly subsidizes every month to ensure that housing is more affordable.

These are the types of commitments that have been made over the years, even by previous governments, to support non-profit housing. This is complemented by the national housing strategy, which is there to support not only expanding the housing stock in Canada, but also to improve its quality.

A good example is a program that I think we underestimate the true value of, which is the greener homes grant. There are homes that are in need of repair throughout our communities, whether urban or rural, in every area of the country. We have a program that provides encouragement for people to fix up their homes. Every time there is a grant issued, a home is being repaired, jobs are being created, the home is becoming more energy-efficient and the quality of Canada's housing stock is improving. This is something we should all be concerned about. At the very least, I can assure members that the government has demonstrated this by bringing forward the program.

There are other aspects. I love the program that deals with the multi-generational home renovation tax credit. I look at the community I represent and the number of families that choose to support their parents, grandparents or children with disabilities as dependents. They are not forced to do it. We are providing them the opportunity of a tax credit to create a special space to accommodate them. Again, this is something that complements the housing stock in Canada. We do not hear about it much, but I think it is important for us to emphasize it. I would suggest that it is part of the solution.

The Minister of Finance, who is working with the Minister of Housing, and is supported by members of this caucus, has recognized the true value of housing co-ops. Housing co-ops are a viable and healthy alternative to buying a home, because they are co-operatives.

I am a big fan of housing co-ops. During the eighties, I played a role in the community of Weston in developing the Weston housing co-op. There is a difference between someone who lives in a housing co-op and someone who lives in an apartment. The biggest difference would likely be the word “profit”, but the real difference is that the person is not a tenant; they are a resident.

Once again, under the Prime Minister, we have a government that is committed to looking at ways we can expand housing co-ops. By doing that, we are expanding the housing supply. We can encourage individuals and groups to look at ways in which housing co-ops can be established, so that individuals will be able to have that joint ownership. That is something we never heard about under Stephen Harper and the Conservatives.

There is the idea of supporting infill housing in a non-traditional way, and that would factor in Habitat for Humanity. I have said this before. Habitat for Humanity has likely done more for infill housing in the city of Winnipeg than any government program has. I suggest that governments, at all different levels, need to support organizations like Habitat for Humanity. It has built hundreds of homes in the province of Manitoba alone, and it is a national organization.

In advocating with other caucus colleagues, we have seen federal support go towards Habitat for Humanity. I do not recall seeing that under Stephen Harper. This is building homes and making homes available for people who would never really get the opportunity to own a home. They do it through sweat equity, as well as the work and efforts of the community as a whole.

It is far better than the infill programs the government used to support during the nineties. I still think we could probably support municipalities in looking at ways of doing that. I think all sorts of opportunities are still there. For the first time in a generation, we have a government that is proactive and is looking to support the industry with things like infill houses.

When listening to the Conservatives, we find they are now saying that they need to pass the blame on to Ottawa or the government, even though the current government and Prime Minister have done far more on the housing file than any other government in generations has. Of the ideas that come from the Conservatives, the only one that comes to mind is in the last election, when they said they would give tax breaks to our wealthiest landlords.

The Conservatives stand up and say that wherever we subsidize or provide funds for public transit, where there are hubs, there should be residential housing, with a higher concentration and density of people. They have been saying this for a while. Of course that should be happening. In fact, it has been happening. It is working with municipalities.

Someone does not have to be a genius to understand the concept of having a hub, where a subway, train or high-speed bus will stop, and the advantages of having towers or a higher density located there. It only makes sense to do that. This is the irony: How much money did the Conservatives and Stephen Harper invest in supporting public transit compared with the current government?

Once again, where the Conservatives failed, the current government has risen to the occasion. We continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into public transit. We continue to work with municipalities, in particular, our bigger cities of Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and Winnipeg, as well as the east coast, to support public transit. I suspect that we will continue to see higher-density housing where it makes sense.

The Conservatives take an approach in which they have to be negative and hit hard on what they call the “gatekeepers”, which are the municipalities, mayors, reeves, city councillors and so forth, for not doing what they should be doing. I believe, as the government believes, that the federal government needs to demonstrate leadership, as we have, and work with provinces and municipalities, large and small, to ensure that we can build more homes and improve our current housing stock. That has been amplified, given the crisis situation we are in, through programs like the rapid housing initiative. I have seen the Minister of Housing stop into Winnipeg on several occasions. I have made announcements and dealt with press releases in Manitoba, both in urban and rural areas, dealing with things through the rapid housing initiative. We continue to work with the provinces and the municipalities on these types of programs, because they are making a difference.

We need to be able to support municipalities and encourage areas that can be developed in a relatively quick fashion. We have indicated that it is our objective to see the number of new home constructions double over the next decade. In provinces like mine, in Manitoba, we want to see more immigration come into our province and an expanded economy. To succeed in this, it will take all three levels of government working together. That means that, on certain files, it is absolutely critical that there is a high sense of co-operation. I would suggest that housing is one of those files. I can say that we do not get that co-operation if all we are doing is consistently slamming another level of government. Yes, there will be disagreements at times, and there is a negotiating process in many different ways. However, on the housing file, I believe that what is expected of the national government is actually being delivered, especially if one compares us to any other government in the last generations over 50 years. We have shown that we are greatly concerned about this issue.

My colleague asked about Alberta and the issue of rent control. We appreciate that rents are going up in many areas of the country. We are concerned about that, but, as has been very clearly demonstrated, that area is in the provincial jurisdiction. It is great that the member raises the issue here, but she should also be raising it with the Alberta government. As I said, we have a role; we are fulfilling that role, and we are constantly looking at ways in which we can enhance our leadership role, but all levels of government need to be working together in order to properly deal with this crisis. I am confident that we are doing all we can as a national government. However, we are always open to listening to what Canadians have to say on the issue.

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, inflation is a global phenomenon. It is good that Canada is below the OECD average. It is also below the G7 average, the G20 average, the U.S., the U.K., Spain, Germany and many other countries. Of course, that is not good enough. We have to continue to lead and do everything we can. That is why I am so proud that this House just adopted a budget with critical measures to help Canadians in every corner of this country with affordability, because we are not going to fix the problem of global inflation by slashing support to the most vulnerable.

After passing the budget, this House has important work to do over the next two weeks.

It will start this evening as we resume debate on Bill C-35, on early learning and child care, at report stage. Once that debate is done, we will resume debate on Bill C-33, on railway safety. Tomorrow, we will debate Bill C-41, on humanitarian aid. On Monday at noon, we will begin second reading debate of Bill C-48 concerning bail reform, and then we will go to Bill C-35 at third reading after question period. On Tuesday we will call Bill S-8, on sanctions, at report stage and third reading.

On top of this, priority will be given to Bill C-22, the disability benefit, and Bill C-40 regarding miscarriage of justice reviews, as well as our proposal to implement changes to the Standing Orders, which were tabled earlier today, to render provisions with respect to hybrid Parliament permanent in this House.

Furthermore, I have a unanimous consent motion that I would like to propose in relation to the debate tomorrow.

I move:

That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, in relation to Bill C-41, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other Acts:

(a) the amendment in Clause 1 adopted by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, which reads as follows:

“(a) by adding after line 26 on page 1 the following:

(4) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to a person who carries out any of the acts referred to in those subsections for the sole purpose of carrying out humanitarian assistance activities conducted under the auspices of impartial humanitarian organizations in accordance with international law while using reasonable efforts to minimize any benefit to terrorist groups.

“(b) by deleting lines 15 to 19 on page 2.”

be deemed within the principle of the bill; and

(b) when the bill is taken up at report stage:

(i) it be deemed concurred in, as amended, on division, after which the bill shall be immediately ordered for consideration at the third reading stage,

(ii) not more than one sitting day or five hours of debate, whichever is the shortest, shall be allotted for consideration at the third reading stage,

(iii) five minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government orders that day, at the conclusion of the five hours allocated for the debate, or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith without further debate or amendment, provided that, if a recorded division is requested, it shall be deferred pursuant to order made Thursday, June 23, 2022.

Foreign Affairs and International Development

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 18th report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development in relation to Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, Humber River—Black Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as much as it was unexpected this morning to be dealing with this rather than the Order Paper items and the work of the government, I think it is a very important debate. I would like to see us have a take-note debate in an evening when we could talk a lot more about the issues that we are all talking about.

I believe all of us stand against this terrible regime, and stand with the Iranian community who are fighting for their freedom, especially the protesting women and students in Iran. The Government of Canada has designated the Iranian regime as a regime that has engaged in terrorism, as well as systemic and gross human rights violations. We hear about it every day on the news, the number of people who are murdered senselessly for nothing more than wanting to stand up for their freedom and the freedom of the Iranian people.

As a result, senior officials, including those from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its top leaders, are now inadmissible to Canada under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. There is an important distinction here, from the blanket covering of everyone. The government is targeting all senior officials with decision-making power, not innocent Iranians, as one of my colleagues was referring to earlier today, many of whom are actually the victims of this horrific regime.

It is an important and effective measure. We do not want former Iranian IRGC and military leaders to be able to claim asylum in our country. The designation the government has put on the Islamic Republic of Iran as a regime means that all senior officials in the country are inadmissible. This includes heads of state, military leaders, intelligence officials, senior public servants, diplomats and members of the judiciary.

To further strengthen our ability to hold Iran accountable, last May the government tabled Bill S-8 in the Senate to make changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This legislation addresses an important gap in our framework to hold foreign governments accountable, whether we are talking about Iran or interference from China or Russia. I believe there are many countries that are looking to find ways to intimidate Canadians and Canadian parliamentarians, and to interfere in a variety of ways, which is why we are having many discussions here in the Government of Canada.

The amendments placed expand the scope for inadmissibility to Canada based on sanctions imposed on a country, entity or person. Right now, individuals, organizations, state entities and businesses named or listed in Canada's economic sanctions are not automatically inadmissible to Canada. Bill S-8 is going to fix that and tighten up the loophole that is there. It means that corrupt officials may still be eligible for a travel visa, even if they are sanctioned under the current laws.

Bill S-8 would fix this legislative oversight and empower Canadian officials to refuse visas to any Iranian regime leader, as well as any other individuals and groups sanctioned in the future. Again, this is another step forward to try to put down the kind of conditions that we want to see against Iran, and to try to help bring down the regime, ultimately, which I believe should be everybody's goal.

Bill S-8 was reported to the House in October of last year, but it is not yet before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. I do hope, especially given today's debate, that Bill S-8 gets there sooner rather than later, so that we could strengthen all the tools we have to try to help defeat the mullahs who are currently causing such terror throughout Iran and elsewhere. We know that the Iranian mullahs are helping to provide drones to Russia to continue to help with the destruction in Ukraine. They continue to murder their own people in a very clear way.

I want to share with the House that last year I had an opportunity, together with several of my colleagues from other parties, to attend a meeting with representatives of the NCRI to talk about democracy and their quest for freedom for the Iranian people.

For over 40 years, the NCRI has been standing and protesting against this brutal regime. Their dream, and the dream of most Iranians, is to have a free and democratic secular Iran. That is what people want. That is what NCRI wants. That is what the United States wants. Two weeks ago, I believe, Congress passed the motion for House Resolution 100, which was endorsed by hundreds of congressmen and senators, supporting the 10-point plan put forward by NCRI. Again, the goal is to have a free and democratic Iran. That is what we all want to see, and an end to the brutality.

We are so fortunate to live in this wonderful country of ours and to have the freedom to come and go as we please, to say the things that need to be said, to have our freedom of speech and freedom of dress, all those things we take for granted. That is what the Iranian people are fighting for now. I think it is critically important that we, together, as parliamentarians of all stripes, continue to be their voice to continue to keep that pressure on Iran so that, ultimately, there will be many parties to choose from, whether it is NCRI or others that get together. It will be up to the Iranian people, who do not want to have a dictatorship and who want the freedom that we have. I hear that so many times: The Iranian people want what we have, that freedom of choice and the freedom to vote for whomever they want.

Currently, I am working on a letter to send out to parliamentarians to try to keep up the pressure, as many Canadians are protesting at rallies every weekend. I think it is important, if there is going to be a collapse of this regime, for all of us to do whatever we can, so I have been putting together a communication. I will summarize a bit of it, because it will go to all 338 members. It is calling for support for the Iranian people in their quest for a secular and democratic republic. It talks about the past six months and the terrible things that have happened. It acknowledges that we stand in solidarity with the people of Iran in their desire for a secular and democratic republic in which no individual, regardless of religious beliefs or birthright, has any privileges over others. Through their slogans, which we have heard many nights on the nightly news, the Iranian people have made it clear that they reject all forms of dictatorship, be it in the form of the deposed shah or the current theocratic regime, and reject any association with any of the others.

The goal here, I think for all of us, is to see a free and democratic Iran. We are looking today, in this discussion, for other ways to strengthen sanctions. Putting the IRGC on the terrorist list, yes, I support that. I am known to support that it should be listed as a terrorist organization, but I think we need to do more than that. We need to have more voices out there supporting and fighting for a free and democratic Iran. That has to be the goal, and whatever all of us can do as parliamentarians to advance that, whether it is in our own communications to each other or out to the community, I think is very important.

I am thankful for the opportunity to participate in this important debate today, and I am happy to take some questions.

Foreign Affairs

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, our government is committed to holding Iran accountable for its shameless disregard for human rights and the regime's support for terrorism.

I would like to emphasize the robust measures that Canada has in place against Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. These measures were undertaken in response to recent incidents, as well as Iran's long-term systemic human rights violations and ongoing behaviour that destabilizes regional security.

Canada has designated the Islamic Republic of Iran under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or IRPA, for the regime's engagement in terrorism and continuous and gross human rights violations. As a result, tens of thousands of prominent Iranian government officials, including IRGC senior officials, are now permanently inadmissible to Canada. In addition to being banned from entering Canada, current and former senior officials who are presently in the country may be investigated and deported.

Furthermore, Canada has imposed vigorous sanctions against the Iranian regime and its leadership under the Special Economic Measures Act, which explicitly targets the IRGC and several sub-organizations. These measures ensure that all of designated individuals' assets in Canada are effectively frozen.

Once Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, becomes law, it would also align IRPA with the SEMA to ensure that all foreign nationals subject to sanctions will also be inadmissible to Canada.

Yesterday, the House unanimously voted to send Bill S-8 to committee, and I trust that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development will review this bill expeditiously.

Additionally, Canada lists Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act. The listing, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, allows victims to bring civil actions against Iran for losses or damages relating to terrorism.

The Criminal Code also sets out a terrorist listing regime to help prevent the use of Canada's financial system to further terrorist activity and to assist in the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences. Several of Iran's key proxy actors are captured by this scheme.

For example, Canada has listed the IRGC Qods Force as a terrorist entity since 2012. It is a group recognized as responsible for terrorist operations and providing arms, funding and training to other terrorist groups.

The Government of Canada has also listed terrorist entities that have benefited from Qods Force patronage, including Hizballah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Taliban, and three Iran-backed regional militias that were added to the Criminal Code in 2019.

We are committed to holding the Iranian regime accountable for their crimes, human rights violations and threats against regional peace and security.

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, as somebody who has had a battle with mental health issues, I can tell the hon. member that this bill, for our government, for myself and I believe for every member in this House, is something that is exceptionally important and something that we want to get right. We have had very good and deliberative discussions among all parties, and I think we have the opportunity to continue those deliberations to make sure that we get that balance right and that we meet the objective we all have of ensuring that we protect vulnerable people.

Tomorrow we will resume the second reading debate of Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. On Monday and Wednesday, further to the opposition House leader's question, we will call Bill C-39, which extends the temporary exclusion of eligibility for medical assistance in dying where a person's sole medical condition is a mental illness until March 17, 2024. I would also like to inform the House that Tuesday and Thursday of next week shall be allotted days.

Foreign Affairs and International Development

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, before I start today I would also like to express my deep condolences to the friends and family members of our colleague, Jim Carr. As members can see, I sit very close to where the member sat. I know he was a strong parliamentarian, and I thank his family for sharing him with us. I am very happy we were able to pass his private member's bill before he passed.

I would also like to express my condolences to those who worked quite closely with Mr. Carr in this place. I know many members, both of his own caucus and from all parties, were very close colleagues of his, and I give my sympathies to them as well.

Today we are speaking about Tibet and the challenges the Tibetan people are facing. I welcome every opportunity to speak about human rights, to speak about the rights of people around the world and to speak about the rights that are being denied to the people of Tibet. It is vitally important that as parliamentarians in Canada we are constantly aware of the human rights abuses that are taking place around the world and that we use whatever power and voice we have to raise those human rights abuses.

I was a member of the foreign affairs committee that did this recent study on Tibet and the Sino-Tibet dialogue, and I heard testimony from numerous people who told us about the challenges the Tibetan people are facing, so I am very happy to be able to stand and to speak about the need for continued dialogue and the need for Canada to continue to support the Tibetan people.

We are seeing the Chinese Communist party perpetrating human rights abuses among a number of different groups and a number of different people. There are definitely parallels, when we see the suppression of rights of the Tibetan people, with regard to the Uighur people. There are definitely parallels when we see how the Chinese government is shutting down dissidents and silencing dissidents within its population.

Therefore, of course the opportunity to speak to this is very important, and I know others before me have said this, but I want to also acknowledge that December 10 was international Human Rights Day. It is a day to acknowledge the importance of protecting human rights and a day to recognize those who defend human rights at risk to their own safety.

I am going to give a few examples of people who have done that. In the Philippines, Cristina Palabay has suffered serious threats from her government after she testified before our parliamentary committee, the international human rights subcommittee. The government is threatening her; her life is at risk; there are risks to her of being red-tagged by the Philippine government.

In Iran, the IRGC is executing protesters and arresting artists, human rights defenders and all those protesting for freedom. Semiramis Babaei is one of those artists. I know her cousin, a Canadian citizen, is deeply concerned about her safety.

In China, Huseyin Celil, a Uighur activist, has been illegally incarcerated for 16 years. For 16 years his wife and children have not heard from him and have not known how he is. Even now, Dong Guangping, who spoke against the Chinese government, is missing, and his family, his wife and daughter who live in Canada, have no idea of his whereabouts.

In Russia, we have Vladimir Kara-Murza, who has been imprisoned because he spoke out against Putin's brutal attack on Ukraine.

This is just a handful of individuals who have risked and continue to risk their lives for democracy, for human rights and for justice in their countries, and if my standing in this place and saying their names can protect them, help them, amplify their calls for justice and ensure human rights are protected around the world, then today and every day, every one of us must say their names: Cristina Palabay, Huseyin Celil, Dong Guangping, Vladimir Kara-Murza.

However, as we come together today to talk about the challenges that human rights defenders face, as we come together to talk about the challenges that the Tibetan people face, I want to raise some concerns I have about the process by which this came forward.

I have concerns that there are individuals within this place who are using tools to bring forward debate not because the debate is something that is pressing at the moment, but rather to stop the actual work of this place. I am concerned about it because we are seeing the exact same thing happening in the foreign affairs committee.

The foreign affairs committee did this important work to look at what is happening in Tibet, to examine the need for further Sino-Tibetan dialogue and to continue that dialogue, and to have Canada have a voice to press the Chinese government to act in a more ethical, more important manner. However, that same committee can no longer work. We are being prevented from doing very important work, and I will give members some examples of that.

Right now, we have yet to release a report on what is happening in Ukraine with the illegal invasion by Russia of Ukraine and the attacks on its people, on civilians, the horrendous violence that is being perpetrated against the Ukrainian people, the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, an ally of Canada, that is being done by the Russian Federation. We have not released a study on that to Parliament. We have not tabled the findings of our study, because we have not been able to get that through the foreign affairs committee.

We have a study on Pakistan. Everybody in this House should be deeply concerned about the response to the horrendous and horrific flooding in Pakistan. We should be tabling a report on the study we did on the flooding in Pakistan, on the way our development dollars are spent and the way the government is using development dollars to help people around the world. We cannot do that, because our foreign affairs committee is not able to get that work done.

I am deeply concerned about what is happening in Iran. As I mentioned in my statement, we are hearing horrendous stories of protesters being executed. People who are simply standing up for their human rights, simply asking for the right to live in their country, for the right to democracy, for the right to justice, are being executed in their countries right now. As a foreign affairs committee, we have an obligation to be examining what is happening in Iran and recommending actions for our government to take. That is vital work for the foreign affairs committee to be doing.

I, in fact, brought forward a study that I think is extremely important for the work that we do as a country, on looking at our sanctions regime. Yesterday, I spoke to Bill S-8 about the sanctions regime, about how our sanctions regime is not as effective, not as strong and not as capable as it should be. I brought a study forward at the foreign affairs committee, and we were meant to study it during the fall session, but of course that also did not happen.

Finally, I would also point out that since the spring, since April, the foreign affairs committee has attempted to look at the reproductive rights of women in every corner of the world. This, for me, is probably one of the most important issues we face. This is something that implicates almost every single human being, certainly 50% of the world. We know tens of thousands of women die each year because they do not have access to reproductive health care.

We know that what we are seeing south of us in the United States is very problematic. In fact, the Supreme Court of the United States of America has made a decision to take away the rights of women. That has implications that ripple around the world. As the foreign affairs committee, we have an obligation to examine what those impacts are.

We have an obligation to bring forward any recommendations that will help women around the world access their right to bodily autonomy and health care, but we are unable to do that right now, to be honest, because of one member of the foreign affairs committee. I will not even say it is the party, because I have worked very well with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and I have worked extremely well with the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington. However, there is one member within our committee of 11 who has completely destroyed the ability of the foreign affairs committee to do any meaningful work.

I want us to think about that for a minute. I want us to contemplate the fact that the rules of this place allow it. They allow one member to take over a committee and impose his will on that committee. However, is that democracy? Is that something in which our constituents, those of Edmonton Strathcona, or in other ridings in Alberta or around the country, would like to see their members engage? Do they want us to work collaboratively to find solutions, to find ways for us to go forward, or do they want to listen to somebody speak for hours and hours on nonsense? These are some of the questions I have for my constituents.

Speaking of my constituents, today I was supposed to have a very important meeting with the Alberta Federation of Labour. Of course, we all have very busy lives. We have our time in the House, but we also have other obligations that we undertake. One of the most-important issues for me right now is helping Albertan workers transition to a future economy, so I meet as often as I can with the Alberta Federation of Labour. I know it is at the forefront, representing the needs and rights of workers with respect to transitioning to a future-facing economy. However, I am not at that meeting today because I am in the House, again, because the Conservatives are trying to prevent the House from doing the work we had determined we would do. I have concerns about that as well.

One of the things that most bothers when I look at this is that, as a parliamentarian, I am not part of the government; I am part of the opposition. The opposition has an obligation to hold the government to account, to watch what it does, to evaluate that, to suggest changes and to call it out when we do not agree with the actions it has taken. When a member of the Conservative Party filibusters the work we are trying to do, it means that nobody is keeping an eye on the government's actions. We are not doing our job as parliamentarians to hold the government accountable.

I know that my colleagues within the Liberal Party, within the government, do not always necessarily welcome our advice, but I think they recognize the value of having a democracy where we work together on building consensus and making laws and regulations stronger. I think we all know that is the best way for us to work together.

This is all to say that I have deep concerns about why I am now giving a speech in the House on something that is interfering with some of the business of the day, which we thought we would be engaging in today.

However, I do not want to, in any way, take away from the fact that the foreign affairs committee did a study on what was happening in Tibet, and it is a very important study. I was very happy to take part in that. I was very happy to table that study to the House of Commons and have the House and the government respond to it. I was very happy to see that Tibet was included in the Indo-Pacific strategy and that the government brought forward that strategy. However, my worries on the rationale for the debate at this time still stands.

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, that is a good question. We will continue our discussions about when the House will adjourn for Christmas. This afternoon, we will continue debate on the Conservative Party's opposition day motion.

After that, we will vote on the adoption of the supply for the current period. Tomorrow, we will be begin debate at report stage of third reading of Bill C-9, the judges bill.

Next week priority will be given to Bill S-8, the sanctions legislation; Bill S-4, COVID-19 justice measures legislation; and Bill C-18, the online news act.

Foreign Affairs

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Madam Speaker, I speak today in this House in solidarity with and offering my full support to the brave men and women of Iran who are rising up against this brutal regime. For too long the Ayatollah, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and the so-called morality police have repressed the Iranian people for their own gain. The brutal killing of Mahsa Amini was a spark in a long history of repression and violence the Iranian authorities have imposed on their own people. Now people from across Iranian society have risen up to demand freedom, justice and accountability.

I want to make it clear to Iranian Canadians and Iranians abroad that the people of Canada and the Government of Canada stand with them as they fight back against the shameless disregard for human rights. Our government, along with our international partners, is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions in accordance with international law. I would like to reiterate the robust measures Canada has imposed against Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, in response to these recent incidents, as well as long-term actions against Iran's systemic human rights violations.

Canada has imposed vigorous sanctions against the Iranian regime, the IRGC and their leadership under the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA. These sanctions, which explicitly target the IRGC, also target several sub-organizations, including the IRGC air force and the air force missile command directly. This freezes all assets in Canada that belong to listed individuals associated with the Iranian regime, the IRGC and their leadership. Contravention of these provisions can carry heavy criminal penalties.

Our government has also listed Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act. By doing that, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, victims of Iran's human rights abuses will be allowed to take the Iranian regime to court for damages relating to terrorism and its support of it. However, this, of course, is not enough. Once Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, becomes law, it will align the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, IRPA, with the Special Economic Measures Act, SEMA, to ensure all foreign nationals subject to sanctions under SEMA will also be inadmissible to Canada.

Furthermore, on Friday, October 7, the Prime Minister announced that Canada will work toward pursuing a listing of the Iranian regime, including the IRGC leadership, under the most powerful provision of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This means that 10,000 officers and senior members of the Iranian regime, including its top leaders, will be permanently inadmissible to Canada. We are doing this in a targeted way, making sure to punish those who are involved in these activities while ensuring we do not negatively impact those Canadians, our neighbours, who may have been forcibly conscripted into the organization a long time ago, despite having no affiliation with the regime today. Working with the international community, moreover, the UN Security Council has now passed a number of resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran, which come into effect under Canadian law through the United Nations Act.

I will end as I started by letting all Canadians know, especially our Iranian Canadian community here at home, that we will not waver in our commitment to keep Canadians safe, countering terrorist threats in Canada and around the world and holding the Iranian regime accountable for its heinous crimes, human rights violations that are oppressing the freedom-loving people of Iran. We remain unwavering in our commitment to keep Canadians safe, including by taking all appropriate action to counter terrorist threats both in Canada and right around the world.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, the brutal killing of Mahsa Amini by the so-called morality police and the Iranian regime's deadly response to the peaceful protests are once more displaying Iran's shameful disregard for human rights and the regime's support for terror. Our government, along with our international partners, are committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions in accordance with international law.

I would like to reiterate the robust measures Canada has imposed against Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or the IRGC, in response to these recent incidents as well as long-term actions against Iran's systemic human rights violations and ongoing behaviour that destabilizes regional security.

Canada imposes rigorous sanctions against the Iranian regime and its leadership under the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA, which explicitly targets the IRGC and several suborganizations, including the IRGC air force and the air force missile command. Since the beginning of October, Canada has already listed 42 individuals and 12 entities under the SEMA, in addition to the 202 previously listed Iranian entities and individuals.

Measures under the SEMA prevent Canadians from dealing in any property belonging to listed persons. This effectively freezes all assets in Canada that belong to the sanctioned persons. Contravention of these provisions can carry heavy criminal penalties.

Additionally, Canada lists Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act. This listing, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, allows victims to bring civil actions against Iran for losses or damages relating to terrorism. Once Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, becomes law, it will align the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or IRPA, with SEMA to ensure all foreign nationals subject to sanctions under SEMA will also be inadmissible to Canada.

Furthermore, on Friday, October 7, the Prime Minister announced that Canada will be pursuing a listing of the Iranian regime, including the IRGC leadership, under the most powerful provision of the IRPA. The Iranian regime, including its top leaders, more than 10,000 officers and senior members, will be inadmissible to Canada in perpetuity for their engagement in terrorism and systemic and gross human rights violations.

Moreover, the UN Security Council passed a number of resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran, which are implemented into Canadian law under the United Nations Act. As a result, 84 Iranian individuals and entities are sanctioned under this act. Similar to the Canadian measures under SEMA, engagement in certain activities and transactions involving listed individuals and entities is prohibited in Canada and for any Canadians outside of Canada.

The Criminal Code also sets out a terrorist listing regime to help prevent the use of Canada's financial system to further terrorist activity and to assist in the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences. Several of Iran's key proxy actors are captured by this scheme. For example, Canada has maintained the Criminal Code listing for the IRGC Qods Force as a terrorist entity since 2012. This force is recognized as responsible for terrorist operations and providing arms, funding and training to other terrorist groups.

The government continues to be unwavering in our commitment to keep Canadians safe, including by taking all appropriate action to counter terrorist threats in Canada and around the world.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, on October 4 we marked 1,000 days since the downing of Ukrainian International Airlines flight 752, and our thoughts continue to be with the families of those who were killed. Keeping Canadians safe is of paramount importance to this government.

Iran's nefarious influence in the region and its support of terrorism must be addressed, and we are working with like-minded countries to continue to keep pressure on Iran to cease its unlawful behaviour. The brutal killing of Mahsa Amini by the so-called morality police and the Iranian regime's deadly response to the peaceful protests are once more displaying Iran's shameless disregard for human rights and the regime's support for terror.

The government, along with its international partners, is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions in accordance with international law. I would like to reiterate the robust measures Canada has imposed against Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, in response to these recent incidents, as well as long-term actions again Iran's systemic human rights violations and ongoing behaviour that destabilizes regional security.

Canada imposes vigorous sanctions against the Iranian regime and its leadership under the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA, which explicitly targets the IRGC and several suborganizations, including the IRGC air force and air force missile command. Since the beginning of October, Canada has already listed 42 individuals and 12 entities under SEMA, in addition to the 202 previously listed Iranian entities and individuals. Measures under SEMA prevent Canadians from dealing in any property belonging to listed persons. This effectively freezes all assets in Canada that belong to the sanctioned persons. Contravention of these provisions can carry heavy criminal penalties.

Additionally, Canada lists Iran as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act. This listing, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, allows victims to bring civil actions against Iran for losses or damages related to terrorism.

Once Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, becomes law, it will align the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or IRPA, with SEMA to ensure that all foreign nationals subject to sanctions under SEMA will also be inadmissible to Canada.

Further, on Friday, October 7, the Prime Minister announced that Canada will be pursuing a listing of the Iranian regime, including the IRGC leadership, under the most powerful provision of the IRPA. The Iranian regime, including its top leaders, more than 10,000 officers and senior members, will be inadmissible to Canada in perpetuity for their engagement in terrorism and systemic and gross human rights violations. Moreover, the UN Security Council passed a number of resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran, which are implemented into Canadian law under the United Nations Act.

The Criminal Code also sets out a terrorist listing regime to help prevent the use of Canada's financial system to further terrorist activity and to assist in the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences. Several of Iran's key proxy actors are captured by this scheme.

For example, Canada has maintained the Criminal Code listing of the IRGC Quds Force as a terrorist entity since 2012. The Quds Force is recognized as responsible for terrorist operations and providing arms funding and training to other terrorist groups. We are committed to holding Iran accountable for its heinous crimes and human rights violations, and for threatening peace and security in the region and in Canada.

Message from the Senate

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

It being 5:43 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.