Debates of June 14th, 2018

Foreign Affairs

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the kind words about Hong Kong, but we do have some specific questions.

The member said that the Government of Canada took note of these cases. Has the Government of Canada specifically discussed the status of Hong Kong and these particular cases with the Government of China? Have statements been made with respect to that?

Could the parliamentary secretary clearly communicate the view of the Government of Canada that these particular sentences are unacceptable, that they go outside of the framework established in Hong Kong's basic law, and that action needs to be taken to address the injustices perpetuated in these cases?

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, Canadian officials, both on the political side and our tremendous civil servants, always raise our human rights concerns and raise specific cases with our Chinese counterparts at every opportunity. As I said earlier, I have had the chance to do so. My colleague, the parliamentary secretary responsible for consular cases, has done so. The Prime Minister does when he has the opportunity to do so. Members of the government always raise our human rights concerns, as it is a core and fundamental part of our international engagement everywhere we go. Certainly that holds true in our exchanges in our relationship with our Chinese counterparts.

In addition, Canada and Hong Kong share extensive commercial, institutional, and close people-to-people ties. The ability to gather and protest peacefully is a core human right that we believe in, and we see that it must be protected.

Our long-standing position is clear. We support the one country, two systems framework. There are rights guaranteed under Hong Kong's basic law, and Canada will continue to call on China to uphold its international human rights obligations.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Calgary Shepard is not present to raise the matter for which adjournment notice has been given. Accordingly, the notice is deemed withdrawn.

May I just say before the adjournment and to reiterate comments that were reflected earlier in the debate, it has been a long 12 or so hours, and we all owe a great debt of gratitude to the amazing team that has supported this work in the last 12 hours. They include everyone from our PVOs, sound technicians, interpreters, and the amazing team at the table, to, underneath us in the floor below, a Journals branch, which has to actually transcribe all of the proceedings, and they have to keep up, and will have a great amount of work following this. It has been quite a volume of work.

Thanks to all who have participated and supported this past several hours. I say that on behalf of all our chair occupants, as each of us took a turn.

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 10:13 a.m.)