Canadian Heritage Committee on May 9th, 2024

[Michael Coteau, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

But it's very simple.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You are suggesting that certain things be added. Is that going to be an amendment to—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

It likely will culminate in an amendment. I do want to put down the context. This is extremely important, and I will not back off from talking about the importance of anti-Semitism. I certainly hope no one here would get in the way of my talking about the important fight against anti-Semitism. That would be wrong. Quite frankly, members of your caucus have told me that they would be very disappointed.

The fight against anti-Semitism continues on here.

Police-reported hate crime data indicates that there were 608 hate crimes targeting religion as of May 2021. Of that number, 296 were incidents targeting the Jewish people.

I want to be clear: Whether you're targeting a Sikh, a Muslim or a Jew, an attack on one faith is an attack on all Canadians.

Of those incidents, 296 were targeting the Jewish population. That represented a decrease from incidents in 2018, so, as I said, progress was being made. Unfortunately in recent months it's been rough. It's been harsh for folks of the Jewish faith.

I would actually, at this point, like to propose my amendment. I will propose two amendments here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm afraid you can propose only one at a time.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

I'm aware that you can bring only one amendment. I should have been more careful in my words. I apologize, Madam Chair.

You can obviously amend multiple phrases within one amendment, and that's what I'm trying to do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right, go ahead.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

To start, we are going to move it down from four meetings to two meetings, just because we have a very full schedule.

I see Mr. Serré there. He's desperately trying to get to this important bill. In addition to that, we also have safety in sport. We, of course, as a committee, had training with respect to being better listeners and sensitivity, which was important. We also have very critical work to do, including this study. I believe we have five weeks left here, Madam Chair, with a total of 10 meetings, and I would like to see our business be done.

I would move that we reduce the number of meetings from four to two. At this point, I will cede the floor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

We have an amendment on the floor, and it reads, “That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of no less than two meetings.”.

Oh, you have your hand up, Mrs. Thomas. Is it to discuss the amendment?

Michael, go ahead, and then it will be Niki.

[Michael Coteau, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I'm going to speak to the main motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right.

Niki, are you speaking to the main motion or the amendment?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

It's for an amendment to the main motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I have Mrs. Thomas on the amendment.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

The motion put forward asks for a four-meeting study looking at extremism in Canada—in particular, far-right extremism in Canada—and the impact that has on some communities that have been selected here by the Liberal Party of Canada, including “journalists, women, indigenous peoples, Black and racialized communities, members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community and religious minorities”.

As you can see from this list, there many folks who are omitted. Among them, of course, would be the Jewish community in Canada, which is actually the most harassed community in our nation at the moment and has been for quite some time. If we look at the crime rate and the hate crimes that are committed against folks, certainly Jewish individuals are the most targeted. Therefore, I'm confused as to why they're not on this list.

Nevertheless, the amendment we have moved here today calls for a two-meeting study. The reason for that is this: This committee is already undertaking quite a bit of work. The Liberal members have said again and again that their supposed priority is the safe sports study, yet they continue to move motions like the one we have in front of us, which take up time and take precedence over the safe sports study.

We spent quite a bit of time hearing from witnesses with regard to the impact that abuse in sport had on them. That report was drafted once and then some edits were made. Then it was redrafted. That second version is now in front of the committee and we're waiting to review it. That review is not scheduled for the next meeting, but the meeting after.

Therefore, accepting this motion in front of us would actually delay that report further. As the Liberals have highlighted in the past—and I'm not sure if it was genuine or disingenuous, given the conversation today—that report is a priority for them and is of utmost importance, yet again they continue to put hurdles in front of the completion of that report.

That baffles me. I think it baffles a lot of other folks who took the time out of their busy schedules to come and testify here and share their stories with us concerning the impact that abuse in sport had on them.

Now this committee continues to delay and to not complete that report and get it into the hands of the public. I think that's unfortunate. I think that's a misuse of those individuals' time, energy and emotional investment. I think it's actually an abuse of their trust in this committee and our ability to get things done.

The safe sports study is meant to take precedence, after completing the bill that is in front of us, so I am confused as to why we wouldn't make that happen.

Changing this study that has been proposed—to move it from four meetings to two meetings—would allow us to get on with the business of this committee, I guess, and to complete that report with regard to safe sport in Canada. This would be respectful of the witnesses who came and shared with us their testimony concerning their experiences within sport. It would be respectful of the members of this committee who have invested over two years in this study.

I will observe that there is only one permanent member of this committee at this table right now.

Therefore, to be respectful of those who have invested a great deal of time and energy and to be respectful of those witnesses who showed great vulnerability in sharing their stories with us, I do believe we should prioritize the completion of that report. That would require a shortening of the study that is being proposed here today by Mrs. Romanado by way of moving Mr. Noormohamed's motion.

Further to that, I would highlight to the committee that once the safe sport study has been completed and that report has been drafted, the next study on the docket has to do with online harms. That is a study having to do with women and girls, who have been subjected to immense harm online. For many, it's because images were taken of them without their consent and then plastered—

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Niki, go ahead.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I think we're all familiar with what's on the docket. We're all a part of this committee.

I think what we're seeing here is a continued attempt by the Conservatives to filibuster a motion to study the rise of the far right—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Chair, this is not a point of order.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

This requires more than two sessions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm sorry; I decide whether it's a point of order or not. I need to hear Ms. Ashton out. She is speaking to the order of the day, which is that we have an amendment on the table. She is speaking to that, so I think she has a point of order.

Go ahead, Ms. Ashton, and finish what you were saying.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

To conclude, we all know what's on the docket. We're talking about four sessions for a scourge that we're seeing across the country, the rise of the far right.

I just don't understand why the Conservatives have such a problem with spending four sessions to look into the rise of the far right. When will they stop filibustering? Let's get to a vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton, for your point of order.

Now, Mrs. Thomas, do you wish to continue?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As I was saying before being interrupted on a non-point of order, the next study that is coming up after the safe sport study, should we complete that, is an online harm study.

That study is a two-meeting study; it's very short. It's been on the docket for almost three years. However, due to the Liberals' gamesmanship, it has been punted numerous times out of a refusal to study, which I think is really sad. At the end of the day, that study is about women and children who have been violated because images of them have been shared online without their consent.

It also looks at children who have been subjected to the creation of pornography and then having those videos or those images shared online, again, of course, without their consent. It's true that it wouldn't matter if they consented or not; it's child pornography. That's disgusting and that's illegal.

These things, the illegal creation of child pornography and the spreading of images of individuals without their consent, are causing irreparable harm to women and girls in this country. There are dozens of stories that have been shared in Parliament to this effect. There are many who have committed suicide because they could not handle the degradation that was coming their way because of the bullying or mistreatment.

A study was brought forward, again, almost three years ago to look at this issue because it matters. That's a Conservative motion that was brought forward, and it was determined, through all-party support, that it mattered enough to study.

Again, here we are with the Liberals having put forward yet another motion that punts that study further down the road.

[Michael Coteau, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, Mr. Coteau, go ahead.

[Michael Coteau, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Considering that we have half an hour left, do you think that, at this point, we should ask the witnesses to leave? It's obvious what the Conservatives are doing.