Debates of March 21st, 2016

Business of Supply

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Speaker, in response to my colleague's comments, we are certainly disgusted by the violence being committed in these conflict-ridden countries. I do not think any member in the House could see such images and think they were acceptable.

However, with respect to the member's examples, as I said in my speech, yes, certain religious minorities are being attacked, but other minorities are as well, such as members of the LGBT community. Are we also going to create an office to protect the rights of the LGBT community?

We are not saying that we do not want to protect these denominational minorities. What we are saying is that Canada is equipped to take a comprehensive approach, which includes all of these rights.

It is interesting to hear the Conservatives say that the NDP is pitting rights against each other, and I would venture to say that they will say the same about the Liberals. In reality, it is the Conservatives' approach that is pitting rights against each other.

We had institutions and we still have institutions to protect not only the minorities that my colleague mentioned, but also those persecuted by the very groups committing this violence, and that is the approach we want to take.

If we want to ensure that these groups are protected in the long term and indefinitely, these countries need democratic reform, and this must also be part of the approach. That is not the case right now.

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am very interested in the comments on both sides of the argument. However, I want to point out that the idea of religious freedom is nominally accepted in many countries in the world, and I would be interested in the comments of our speaker in that regard.

Amnesty International is in many of those countries trying to resolve problems with respect to the lack of religious freedom of those particular people. The simplest way for me to phrase it would be to look at the Roma people, the gypsies, whose religion takes on wherever they may be. They are Catholic, orthodox, Muslim, Anglican, and so on. Yet we know that this is one of the most repressed groups wherever they go. Therefore, their issue is not so much the freedom of practising their religion, but rather the human rights aspect. I wonder if the speaker would comment on that.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's question because it illustrates exactly what we are trying to help our Conservative colleagues understand.

I am not sure whether he will agree with me when I say that, in the example he just gave, freedom of religion is not even the issue. The issue is a group of people experiencing racism and hatred. That is exactly the challenge we are dealing with. Hatred and violence show up in different ways against different groups.

This is the third time I have said this since the beginning of my speech, but at the risk of repeating myself, we have the tools, we have the institutions, and we have the people to help us combat hatred and violence and find long-term solutions.

Let us put the tools in place to do that.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking my colleague, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, for bringing this important motion to the House. I will also be splitting my time with my hon. colleague and geographic neighbour from Durham.

The Office of Religious Freedom was established, as we know, as a division of the Department of Foreign Affairs on February 19, 2013. It was created to address the increasing threat of religious intolerance and extremism around the world. Since its creation, the office has worked across the globe to promote tolerance, pluralism, and communal harmony. It works on an annual budget of $5 million. With a budget that is forecast to push Canada into $30 billion of potential debt, I sincerely hope that the current government will continue to fund the Office of Religious Freedom to allow it to continue doing its important work right across the globe.

The office plays an important role as a non-partisan, multi-faceted organization that supports all faiths. Violations of religious freedom can and do touch religious communities from all of the world's major faith traditions, including Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and even those who profess no faith at all. I would therefore ask my colleagues in this House to support the motion to recognize the good work being done by Canada's Office of Religious Freedom, and I call on the government to renew the mandate of that office.

In order to express the importance of the work done by the Office of Religious Freedom, we must first take a look at the office itself. The mandate of the Office of Religious Freedom speaks directly to the importance of the office as a tool for both the Government of Canada and for organizations to protect and promote minority groups: “The Office of Religious Freedom fulfills the Government of Canada’s pledge to speak out and to protect and promote religious freedom around the world.”

The right to freedom of religion is one of Canada's fundamental founding principles. Canada and Canadians have a duty to help protect those who have this fundamental right restricted or are persecuted because of it.

Another quote from the office's mandate is the following: “The Office will promote freedom of religion or belief as a Canadian foreign policy priority. The Office will be an important vehicle through which Canada can advance fundamental Canadian values, including freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law....”

The office provides important advice and understanding of religious traditions that may not be understood by officials. In their roles specifically dealing with religion, the office is uniquely positioned to provide high-quality, in-depth information. The office also focuses on advocacy, analysis, policy development and programming relating to protecting and advocating on behalf of religious minorities under threat, opposing religious hatred and intolerance, and promoting pluralism abroad.

It works specifically in countries that violate the right to freedom of religion, which, according to the Office of Religious Freedom, represent nearly 77% of the world's population. In addition, with approximately 84% of the world's population in 2010 affiliated with religious tradition, the impact the Office of Religious Freedom can have in the policy-making field is yet another asset to the government.

The religious freedom fund is the vehicle that the government uses to fund projects outside Canada to help religious communities facing intolerance or persecution in their country. The fund supports projects according to the following criteria: raising awareness about issues related to freedom of religion or belief, conducting research on freedom of religion or belief that provides governments and decision-makers around the world with relevant information and analysis, supporting dialogue among different religious groups, and providing legal and legislative or related forms of support on issues of freedom of religion or belief. The wide range of support of these programs allows the fund to support a wide variety of programs across the globe. These projects are located in Bangladesh, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Indonesia. That is only naming a few.

Just as in the case of our embassies abroad, the ambassador plays a crucial role in representing Canada. Dr. Andrew Bennett was appointed Canada's first Ambassador for Religious Freedom on February 19, 2013. Ambassador Bennett has a significant amount of experience both here in Canada and abroad. He is a public servant and an academic with an extensive educational background in history, political science, and theology. He received a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Edinburgh in 2002 and is in the process of completing a degree in theology in eastern Christian studies.

Since March 2014, he has also served as Canada's head of delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The ambassador is a sub-deacon and a cantor with Holy Cross Eastern Catholic Chaplaincy and St. John the Baptist Ukrainian-Catholic Shrine.

The Office of Religious Freedom has placed a high degree of importance on transparency and accountability. It has an external advisory committee composed of 23 prominent religious leaders from a wide variety of Canadian faith and belief communities. The first meeting of the advisory committee was held in June 2015, and it meets regularly to advise the office on the exercise of its mandate.

In Canada, we enjoy many fundamental rights and freedoms. They are part of what makes Canada so great. However, in many areas of the world people are not as blessed as we are. It is, therefore, that much more important that the Office of Religious Freedom be recognized for the great work it is doing and to have its mandate renewed.

To quote the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

The belief that everyone has the right to freedom of religion is what is needed to guide us as we move forward to promote and protect people abroad.

While other nations are not subject to the charter, there is no reason to de-fund an organization that promotes the exact beliefs and values that Canadians hold strongly. These are some of the founding principles of Canada and of democratic governance. These are the same rights and freedoms that Canadians have fought and died to protect.

It is not only Canada that has recognized the increasing importance of promoting religious freedom abroad. The United States Department of State also has an Office of International Religious Freedom. It has also been recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in many other documents as well, and by organizations across the world.

The office works collaboratively with other nations to support projects that mobilize capacity to respond to local challenges. The work done by the office has earned it great esteem internationally and within communities across Canada.

I could speak at length about all the important work being done by the office, but I will limit myself to just three examples as time runs out. These include both bilateral and multilateral work.

The work of the office spans the globe, and there is a range of support in terms of size and dollar value. In the first example, on June 15, 2015, Ambassador Bennett hosted the inaugural meeting of the International Contact Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief, a group that was initiated by Canada. This contact group brings together government representatives of over 20 countries in a diverse and multilateral effort to facilitate networking, co-operation, and collaboration to address the challenge posed by international religious persecution.

It includes, and this is very interesting, non-traditional members, such as Cameroon, Chile, and Morocco. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom and many others have praised Canada's initiative to convene the contact group.

Some of the work done in Europe includes working in Ukraine to facilitate leadership courses and exchange programs that bring together Ukrainian youth from various backgrounds to promote tolerance and deepen intercultural awareness.

Some of the work done in Southeast Asia supports sustainable monitoring and reporting on freedom of religion or belief in Indonesia, increasing understanding by religious minorities of their constitutional rights and building their capacity to advocate for tolerance and pluralism.

The Office of Religious Freedom was created to address a growing problem that affects countries and people all across the globe. Canada needs to continue to speak out on discrimination against those who simply wish to practice their faith in safety and security.

The office not only has a humanitarian importance, but has also shown, because of its unique mandate, that it has insight into nations and religious traditions that can be used by Global Affairs to strengthen our diplomatic ties and relationships with other nations.

Given all the discussion from the members opposite about inclusion, diversity, and tolerance, I sincerely hope that they will support this important motion and continue to fund this non-partisan office that is protecting and promoting one of the values that Canadians hold most important.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock on his excellent speech. The freedom to have this debate is a freedom that is dear to us all.

Do human rights begin and end with religious freedom? Not to me. I agree that the Office of Religious Freedom is inadequate on its own and that the motion therefore does not deserve our support.

Freedom is a puzzle with many pieces in addition to religion. Many kinds of freedoms make up the basic rights that, together, create a truly free society. The Conservatives' motion is not worded in a way that promotes religious freedom, so this is yet another missed opportunity for the opposition.

In my Conservative colleague's opinion, what leadership role might Canada play in the world to ensure equal protection for all freedoms? Are there any freedoms that my colleague would choose not to protect on the international stage?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I work on the procedure and House affairs committee with the member opposite. It is nice to hear him speaking again in the House.

In my previous life I was fortunate enough to go to a conference in Azerbaijan. The conference brought both developed and developing nations together to exchange best practices on how we could live in harmony and peace regardless of religion or faith. People of different backgrounds and different faiths were at the conference, all working together for the common goal, but I found that Canada was far ahead of many countries in how we live in peace and harmony regardless of religion or faith. Having the Office of Religious Freedom is a perfect example of how we as Canadians can give our best practices to other countries across the world. We are leaders in this area.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his detailed account of what the Office of Religious Freedom has achieved both nationally and internationally.

Let me tell the House a personal story that I was told when I was taking a cab here in Ottawa. As soon as the driver knew that I was a member of Parliament, he told me this sad story about his parents. They were shot when they opened their door because they were Copts in their country. The cab driver has pleaded with us as parliamentarians to do something about it because it affects not only people overseas but our own Canadians here as well.

The City of Richmond has a street called Highway to Heaven, where all our religious groups live in harmony. Unfortunately, this does not happen overseas.

How does my colleague see this important office not only being beneficial to religious groups all across the nation but being beneficial to those different faith groups in our communities as well?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Richmond for all the hard work she is doing in her riding on this file and beyond.

We need to look at the work that has been done already on a $5 million budget and the leadership that the office has taken on projects all across the world in promoting the Canadian values that we hold dear. Many countries are trying to figure out ways to live in harmony with different religions.

We should be proud of the office when we look at the projects that have already been worked on and the progress it is making in different communities and different countries. We all need to continue to show our values. We need to continue to show to countries around the world the progress that we have made in Canada.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my neighbour from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock for his remarks today, and my colleagues for bringing this important debate to the floor of the House of Commons.

Here we are within 140 or so days of a new government, and we are already fearing the elimination of something that should be a unifier, not just for Parliament but for Canadians. Yet, we brought this debate to the floor of the House of Commons because we feel that the Office of Religious Freedom and Ambassador Bennett are at risk of cancellation or at least dilution of their mandate, which is clear from some of the remarks of the government today in this debate.

Why should it be something that unifies the House? I will share with my colleagues a quote from a prominent Canadian upon news of the creation of this office. He said at the time in relation to this office, “We think an initiative like this is the kind of thing that ought to have the support of all sides in politics.” He went on to add that “The defence of religious freedom is unconditional. It applies to all religious groups... So I think a stout and courageous defence of religious freedom overseas is a good thing for Canada.”

Do members know who said that? It was the previous leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Michael Ignatieff. That was his comment with respect to the then Conservative proposal about the creation of this important office. I agree with him.

Now, I have found in these short 140 days of the current Parliament that I am quoting a lot of Liberal leaders. In relation to the withdrawal of the ISIL mission, I quoted King, Pearson, John Manley, and Lloyd Axworthy.

I am fearing that my friends, particularly my friend from Calgary Midnapore, may be questioning my bona fides as a Conservative, especially today in quoting Michael Ignatieff. However, I do that for a reason. It is because the current Liberal government under the Prime Minister is changing the Liberal Party of Canada. I do not think enough Canadians see how quickly he is doing that. The comments from Michael Ignatieff on the creation of this office demonstrate that in spades. The previous leader of the Liberals defended the creation of this important office, this important position, and the fight for religious freedom and tolerance around the world. The current leader would eliminate the position or fundamentally change it within 150 days. That should concern Canadians. That should concern people who voted for this new government.

In fact, in Mr. Ignatieff's remarks in response to his support for the creation of this office, he mentioned, and many of my friends have mentioned, that these groups have been persecuted abroad, for years and in some cases centuries. He mentioned the Coptic Christians in Egypt. He mentioned members of the Bahá’i faith in Iran, Jews, and Christians. He mentioned China, where the rights of religious freedom are heavily restricted. Therefore, the previous Liberal leader supported the creation of this office, and it is sad that we have to bring a debate to the floor today. After just a few years, but in an exceptional mandate, Ambassador Bennett has received international recognition for his thoughtful and important interventions on this fundamental freedom.

I am going to use the next few minutes of my remarks to remind my colleagues how, as Canadians, we have this important office and an ambassador promoting religious freedom and tolerance around the world. It is a natural extension of Canadian values. What sunnier ways could there be then to preserve the freedom of worship for millions around the world? That is an essential Canadian value.

It brought to mind John Diefenbaker's speech on the night before he reconvened a special session of Parliament in 1960 on Canada Day, which was then Dominion Day.

On June 30, 1960, John Diefenbaker addressed Canadians because he intended the following day, in a special session, to introduce the Bill of Rights. In respect to religious freedom and rights to be protected and enshrined in the Bill of Rights, he said:

The experiences of many countries whose citizens have flocked to our shores in recent years...make it clear that we cannot take for granted the continuance and maintenance of those rights and freedoms.

The next day the Bill of Rights was introduced to the Parliament of the time. It was subsequently passed, and the Canadian Bill of Rights, subsection 1(c), protected the freedom of religion. It was then later enshrined in the Constitution Act of 1982, our Charter, as a fundamental freedom under subsection 2(a).

The Conservative's Bill of Rights from the Diefenbaker government, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms under the Trudeau government, secured religious freedom as a fundamental pillar of the rights and freedoms that we enjoy here, and the values we therefore promote and protect abroad.

However, this office, and the position that Ambassador Bennett fills, is not a new extension of this position internationally. We had the Bill of Rights and the Charter, but in 1981, we were a signatory to the UN declaration on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance. In fact, that UN section said that religious freedom must be fully respected and guaranteed around the world.

We were a 1951 signatory to the convention on the status of refugees. This is where I feel the hypocrisy of the new government is no more evident than by its successful integration of a Syrian refugee effort. We have complimented the government on doing it on a revised timeline to ensure the success of these new members of our family. Why are they in Canada? I would suggest, because it is hard to get data from the government, that almost all of them were fleeing religious persecution, or certainly a vast majority were. The government was good to extend the welcome and protection of religious freedom here, but it wants to eliminate our agent who is trying to promote that value abroad. I cannot square that circle.

It is a bit like its position on ISIL: We know the dislocation and threats of violence to so many people and we will help them if they come here, but we do not want to address the issues on the ground, whether it is a direct threat to life and security or it is the promotion of religious tolerance, which is usually at the root of this strife and out-migration.

It is important for us to recognize, again, that this is an area where in the past there has not been much white space between the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party. Despite some of the rhetoric at times, our record as Conservatives was actually better at helping the vulnerable.

Let us look at refugees on the government-assisted side. In the last two years of the Chrétien-Martin government, there were 7,400 refugees in each of 2004 and 2005. In the last two years of the Conservative government, there were 7,600 and 9,400 government-assisted refugees. The story is the same with private sponsorship, with about 3,000 in the previous years of the last Liberal administration. There were 5,000 and almost 10,000 private sponsorships in the last years of the Conservative government.

I am illustrating that, because one of the persecutions we allow refugees to find refuge in Canada from is religious intolerance. This is a circumstance where the work of Ambassador Bennett's committee that he helped spearhead on an international basis, with over 20 countries involved, promoting religious tolerance, understanding, and the ability for people to practice their faith in their country, is about protecting them where they live.

Why would we not both offer refuge for those who come here but promote refuge in their country? I hope they will stand up for this important office.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Durham for his fine defence of religious liberties.

I want to congratulate him as well, for having congratulated the government on how we handled the Syrian refugees, and pointing out that many, if not most, of the people who came from Syria were fleeing religious persecution. That is opposite to what one of his colleagues said earlier, who criticized the government for not protecting Christian or Yazidi refugees who were fleeing religious persecution.

I think all of us in this House care about the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, particularly in ISIL and ISIS-occupied territory in Syria. I think we all care about religious liberties. We are having almost a false debate. That side of the House is trying to put forward a motion to get us to vote against it because we are saying we want to broaden the office, and they are saying we did not support an Office of Religious Freedom. We want to support an Office of Religious Freedom within a broader context, because all fundamental freedoms are important.

I would ask the hon. member for Durham why the motion put forward is insisting on supporting the office with its current mandate, as opposed to putting forward a motion that would have said “supported all of the work of the Office of Religious Freedom in either its current form or an enhanced form”? In that case, both sides of this House would have supported it.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, the member for Mount Royal for his interjection. Certainly it seems that he respects the work being done by Ambassador Bennett. What he does not realize is that the comments from his colleagues show a willingness to dilute the mandate, if not eliminate it entirely. When we are talking of a modest $5-million budget and a focus on religious intolerance, which is at the centre of the migration crisis around the world, this should be a focused mandate. It is only on its third or so year of operation.

In the quote I gave from Michael Ignatieff at the beginning, the previous leader of their party supported this office, and at the same time that the then member and current member for Ottawa South says it was not needed because Canada has a charter.

We do have a charter, and I showed how religious freedom and respect for tolerance is part of our charter. However, our charter does not have application around the world. Yet, the fight for religious rights and freedoms associated with faith and the practice of it is fundamental, which is why Ambassador Bennett and his team's mandate cannot be diluted. It should be supported. If the government wants to do more through trade or international development on institution building and other things, it can do that concurrently.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. friend for reminding this place that the Liberal Party actually supported the creation of the Office of Religious Freedom. It did not just support it; it campaigned on that basis. I recall attending events at Coptic churches and elsewhere, where Liberal candidates who are now members of this place, and their former leader, stood up, saying they strongly supported the creation of the Office of Religious Freedom. What a canard to say one thing to those voters then and now to say another because it opposes their ideology.

The member raised a very important point about emphasizing the resettlement of refugees who are victims of persecution on the grounds of their religious convictions. When the previous government announced the creation of the Office of Religious Freedom, it also said that it would be seeking to prioritize the resettlement of vulnerable religious minorities who are refugees. The Prime Minister said that doing so is “disgusting”.

Would the member care to comment on his view that people who have been bombed out of their homes, who cannot return because of their religion, who cannot go to the UN camps because they would be vulnerable minorities in those camps, ought to be considered as priority cases for the purposes of refugee resettlement?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Durham has 52 seconds.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will use those seconds judiciously by first thanking the member for Calgary Midnapore. There has probably been no greater champion in the last decade-plus in this Parliament for freedoms of all kinds, and it is appreciated.

I think he has nailed it. The Prime Minister does not seem to understand that at the basic level the refugee and migrant crisis has a fundamental religious intolerance motif. If we do not promote a long-term strategy to address that, we are only going to see more dislocation, more violence.

While I have quoted former Liberal leaders in the House, I do not do that because I have joined the party; it is because they are moving the party. I think a lot of their own members who campaigned, as he said, in favour of this office, are now embarrassed that they are going to eliminate or dilute it.

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

Madam Speaker, when we talk about the Office of Religious Freedom, let me make it very clear that the Government of Canada is very much a very strong advocate and understands the importance of freedom of religion, of freedom of speech, of the many different freedoms that we as Canadians assign so much value and hold so close to our hearts.

It was the Liberal Party of Canada and Pierre Elliott Trudeau who brought in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We are a party of the charter of rights, so we do not need to be lectured by Conservatives about lacking faith in freedoms. It is the Liberal Party of Canada that understands the importance of religious freedom.

Earlier today, the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that we are committed to fighting for religious freedoms well into the future along with many other human rights.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

It being 6:15 p.m. and this being the final supply day in the period ending March 26, 2016, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

And the bells having rung:

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The question is on the motion.

Shall I dispense?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.