House of Commons Hansard #118 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was genocide.

Topics

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, for the record, on this bill, we actually introduced it in the Senate, as we had done in the previous Parliament, because we thought that was an appropriate place in order to manage our time efficiently. However, we had a ruling from the Speaker that it had to be introduced here because of the financial impact it might have. That explains the delay: We tried to introduce it in the other place before we introduced it here.

That being said, we use both houses as best we can, and as a minister I certainly try to use both houses and get legislation through as fast as I can. I do my best to make sure I have dialogue with my colleagues across the way, so we get legislation through more quickly, and I think my colleagues across the way have responded positively on a number of different occasions. We have come together in the House precisely to pass legislation in the criminal law sphere that is important to Canadians.

As a minister, I am doing my best to work with the opposition. Some days we run out of time.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Scarborough—Rouge Park Ontario

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, since we are talking about amendments to the Judges Act, I want to comment on and put on the record the number of people who have given me feedback on the appointment of exceptional judges over the past couple of years. I want to congratulate the minister on his hard work to make sure our bench represents the breadth of Canada. It is something that has been noticed across Canada.

On that point, as we have new judges who are appointed, it will be important to have the Judges Act modernized to reflect the general consensus that has been built among the judiciary, including the Canadian Judicial Council. I am wondering if the minister could comment on that.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, the quality and diversity of appointments is an important part of the picture, and this piece of legislation is an important part of the picture, because it reinforces the principle of judicial independence. It reinforces the principle of judicial responsibility in the management and maintenance of high standards, which helps the administration of justice and the confidence Canadians have in the justice system.

I would also add that we have added, as a government, based on a private member's bill from Rona Ambrose, former member of Parliament and former interim leader of the Conservative Party, measures to better train judges at the outset, so they will be better judges when cases come before them.

When we put all that together, we are putting together a justice system that not only reflects the diversity of Canada but also reflects the quality and the competence of Canadians and gives us better justice.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to challenge the fact that we are doing this today. The minister mentioned that people stand up and repeat and repeat and repeat. It is really important to me to have the opportunity to represent my constituents in this place and speak on issues that are important to me and to them, regardless of who else has spoken on them already. Quite often in this House, different people are in the room at different times, and it is an opportunity to continue that conversation.

As well, this rush the government seems to find itself in so often is because of mismanagement of its programs. An example would be its decision on COVID wage support. It came up with a percentage. We worked hard to convince the government this was not going to be effective enough, and we had to turn around and come back to this place and go through the motions again because of a change there.

On providing loans through the banks, it did not include the credit unions as a means of doing that, and it took time for our constituents and the credit unions to bring that to the forefront. That is why we needed to continue: to ensure things were being handled in certain ways. That is our responsibility in this place.

I am just wondering what the minister's views would be on the fact that these are things the opposition needs to have the opportunity to do.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, again, I appreciate the very sincere place whence the question comes. When those kinds of suggestions are being made, whether it is here in this House or in committee, when that kind of constructive dialogue that makes legislation better is the subject matter of debate, I am all for it.

However, when debate is done and procedural shenanigans are added simply for the purpose of slowing down the passage of legislation, when it is no longer the case that bettering the bill or furthering debate is the point of the exercise, then it is time to have a vote and move on. We are not serving Canadians by just putting sand in the machinery, by putting sand in the cogs. We are serving Canadians when we are trying to better pieces of legislation and when we are playing our various roles as parliamentarians.

I agree with the hon. member if that is the sentiment, but far too often that is not the sentiment from the other side. It is merely shutdown tactics to try to slow or stop the government from moving forward.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is a rare opportunity for me to speak to this kind of motion and follow up on something the minister said.

I think we all agree that we would like to see the smoother operation of this place. I have had the honour of working in and around Parliament Hill for a number of decades. We used to have more co-operation among the House leaders. We used to have better scheduling of debates so that bills that had virtually unanimous support, like Bill C-9, did not need to have repetitive speeches.

I put to the hon. member, as I have before in this place, the solution is not closure motions, but to fully use the rules of Westminster parliamentary democracy and not allow the reading of speeches, which will then have a very salutary effect on the number of members who are prepared to stand up and speak to an issue. They would have to know it well enough to speak without reading a written speech and especially not a written speech prepared by somebody else.

I urge the hon. minister and all members of the front bench of the government to strongly consider working with the Speaker and other House leaders to find ways for this place to work better through co-operation and respect for our rules.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's sentiment. In fact, she has inspired me to try to use speaking notes less over the course of my career here. I am not perfect, but I do my best to speak without the aid of notes when I can and to give my own thoughts when I can. It is something more difficult when the matter is a technical one, and I have to rely on some of the legal expertise that exists either in my department or in my ministry. However, I think she is correct.

I want to reflect on something. When I was a graduate student in the U.K., I often went to see parliamentary debates, particular in the House of Lords, of all places, in the U.K. The quality of debate was simply so much better. It was, in large measure, because of what the hon. member spoke about. There was very little speaking from notes.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, we often get caught up in what is taking place inside the chamber. Outside the chamber, we could talk about the Canadian Judicial Council. There is an expectation outside the House of Commons. This legislation is something that the council is quite anxious to see pass.

We talked about stakeholders. All we are really looking at is trying to get it out of the second reading stage. There is still going to be a lot more dialogue on this. There is no doubt a lot of the stakeholders are wondering why, when it looks like there is a fairly wide spectrum of support for the legislation, we do not get it to committee stage, at the very least, as quickly as possible.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, I agree with that point. I want to list some of the groups that were consulted by the Canadian Judicial Council, like the Canadian Bar Association, the Federation of Law Societies and the Council of Canadian Law Deans.

The member is absolutely right. This will go to committee. All sides will be able to bring witnesses to see if anything was missed. I hope it will be done fairly expeditiously because I think there is a high level of general agreement on this bill.

It is something that judges, in particular, feel needs to pass quickly. They have implored us to do it. They came out in September in a press release and said they wanted us to pass this quickly. When one member of the judiciary gets criticized for behaviour that is not becoming of a judge and it brings the system of justice into disrepute, they all feel it. It is important that they exercise this responsibility and create a better system to better manage themselves and hold themselves to the highest standard. It is important for us to react to that and to change something that was originally enacted 50 years ago. Reform to it is long overdue.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the minister is looking for another party to support closure. He is not going to get it from us. Historically, the NDP has been opposed to closure.

Which party does he expect to vote with his party in order to get this through?

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, I usually leave those sorts of things to our House leaders to discuss among themselves. I am here today because this bill needs to get through. We need to get it to committee so that, if there are other improvements that can be made, they can be made.

As I said, we had the absolutely horrific case of a judge who was caught purchasing cocaine a couple of weeks before he was to be sworn in. Then when the time came that the judges took action against him, he used every single lateral procedural move he could, extended the case out over a period of years and cost the taxpayers a whole lot of money. What we are trying to do is make the system not only more just and fair but also more efficient, so that it does not bring the whole system of justice into disrepute.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for standing up in defence of law and order in the House. We can think of what the minister has done in terms of jury reform and in terms of diversity on jury panels, as well as supporting judges so that they can do their work effectively. The country relies on the House of Commons to provide guidance and direction so that our law and order system is effective. When we delay things, it really has consequences.

I know the minister has talked about the consequences, but how important is it for us, as parliamentarians, regardless of the party, to support law and order in our country?

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, again, I salute the sincere place that question comes from.

It is important we do our best. I have already mentioned there has been a large degree of agreement on a lot of the things we have brought forward on the justice agenda, from the Conservative Party, from the NDP, from the Bloc Québécois and from the Greens, and I am proud of that. One of the most formative experiences in my life was clerking for a judge at the Supreme Court of Canada, Justice Peter Cory. He remains one of my touchstones every day, in terms of how I conduct myself and what I aspire to.

I think that is the kind of inspiration that should push all of us, I hope, toward passing this kind of legislation. People will tell us that Justice Cory was the most ethical human being who ever walked this earth, and I agree with that. If this legislation, in any way, shape or form, helps us to have more Peter Corys out there, then I think the world would be a better place.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

Mr. Speaker, I happen to be one of the members who was cut off from speaking on this bill. It happened to me the other day with a programming motion as well, so I am little perturbed, because I had a question regarding an article in the Vancouver Sun today that I wanted to discuss in my debate. The residents of Vancouver feel their streets are becoming lawless and that repeat offenders are having a major impact on property crime in the province of British Columbia.

In fact, at the recent breakfast town hall hosted by the chief of the Abbotsford police, they talked about the problem dealing with repeat offenders. I hope the justice minister might be able to comment on that and the need to address repeat offenders. Hopefully something can be done to keep our streets and communities safe in B.C., because people do not feel that way right now.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC

Mr. Speaker, I was at a justice ministers FPT last week. Minister Rankin from British Columbia brought this issue forward. All the justice ministers agreed we would immediately put that to a committee to look at the question of repeat offenders and what we could do. That is on the record. We said that publicly.

I appreciate the seriousness of the question and the seriousness of the situation. I will work with people in this House and also my provincial and territorial counterparts in order to hopefully find a better way forward.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion that is now before the House.

The question is on the motion. May I dispense?

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

An hon. member

No.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

[Chair read text of motion to House]

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them now to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote.

Bill C-9—Time Allocation MotionJudges ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #201

Judges ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I declare the motion carried.

It being 6:05 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

Uighurs and other Turkic MuslimsPrivate Members' Business

October 26th, 2022 / 6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

moved:

That, given the motion adopted unanimously by the House on February 22, 2021, recognizing that a genocide is currently being carried out by the People's Republic of China against Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims, in the opinion of the House, the government should:

(a) recognize that Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims that have fled to third countries face pressure and intimidation by the Chinese state to return to China, where they face the serious risk of mass arbitrary detention, mass arbitrary separation of children from their parents, forced sterilization, forced labour, torture and other atrocities;

(b) recognize that many of these third countries face continued diplomatic and economic pressure from the People's Republic of China to detain and deport Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims leaving them without a safe haven in the world;

(c) urgently leverage Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s Refugee and Humanitarian Resettlement Program to expedite the entry of 10,000 Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in need of protection, over two years starting in 2024 into Canada; and

(d) table in the House, within 120 sitting days following the adoption of this motion, a report on how the refugee resettlement plan will be implemented.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be here in the House with all members today. I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered on Algonquin territory.

Today is an important day. We will be discussing an important program that is within Motion No. 62, a motion to welcome 10,000 Uighur who are facing genocide within China right now, at this moment in time.

This motion calls for the Government of Canada to resettle 10,000 Uighur as of 2024 from third countries. Why third countries? It is because we cannot welcome, unfortunately, Uighur who are currently undergoing the genocide within China, but we can provide safe haven for vulnerable Uighur within third countries. These third countries primarily include countries from north Africa and the Arab world, but not exclusively. There are several other countries where Uighur people are living and are present.

We have heard a lot of testimony from survivors at committees and at the Subcommittee on International Human Rights. In the past we have heard horrifying nightmare stories of people being abused in unspeakable ways, of women being violated and men too. We heard about forced labour. There are over a million people currently in forced labour camps. We heard about children, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, being separated from their families when they should be in the care of their moms and dads.

We know that 20% of the world's cotton is produced in China, likely tainted by forced labour. We know that 35% of tomato products are also tainted by forced labour because they come from the Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region. We know that 45% of polyurethane, which is the base material for solar panels, as the world tries to go green, is also tainted by forced labour. This is wholly and entirely unacceptable. This is something that we, as a country and as a human family, must stand up against.

We had a motion from the benches opposite in February 2021 that called on the House to recognize that a genocide is in fact occurring. Thankfully the House voted unanimously and spoke with one voice on that matter. Not a single person voted against it. We unanimously voted to recognize that a genocide is in fact occurring toward the Uighur people.

This issue is not a partisan issue. For those who make it such, shame on them. They know who they are. This is an issue about people who are dying, who are being violated and who are being mistreated. We said after World War II that this would not happen again. After Bosnia and Yugoslavia, we also reconfirmed that intent. After what happened in Rwanda, we did the same, and with the Rohingya again. Now we know, a genocide is occurring.

What are we going to do? We heard the reports. We know the reports. Many of us have read the reports, over 50 pages long, from Michelle Bachelet, the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. She said that these allegations of the Uighur people are well-founded, and they also may amount to international crimes, including crimes against humanity. These are high crimes in international law, as is genocide.

The international community, in 2005, said that these types of international crimes must be prevented. Therefore, each and every country has a responsibility to protect when we see crimes against humanity occurring, or the threat of them occurring. When we see genocide occurring or the threat of genocide occurring, we, as a human family, as a collective of countries and as Canada, all have a responsibility to protect.

Our responsibility is engaged and we must act. One way in which we can answer this is by voting for this program to welcome 10,000 Uighurs here in Canada. We have a proud tradition in our country of welcoming refugees and asylum seekers. This is a proud Canadian tradition.

This program will not halt the genocide. It will put a slight dent in it. This program will not answer our obligation, the responsibility, to protect. It will in part answer it. This is something that speaks to our tradition. This is something that we can do, should do, must do.

In the past, we have welcomed many different people who have been fleeing for their lives from genocides, from crimes against humanity. Recently, we can think of Yazidis, Syrians and Afghans. We can think of Hongkongers. We created some special pathways. We can do this again, now, today.

I will share some facts about the Uighur people. Who are they? We hear the term but we do not know who they are.

Like all people, they are a proud people. They live in the western part of China, what they have traditionally called East Turkestan, what we know in international law as Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region.

Xinjiang has a particular meaning. It means “new frontier” in the tongue of the majority of people within China. It is approximately, as I mentioned, one-sixth the land mass of China. It also has many vast deserts and mountains. It historically has been part of the ancient Silk Road trade route that connected China, that allowed for trade to occur to Europe and the Middle East. That trade route is being revived, but with a modern update, with highways and the free flow of goods.

That is why the supply chain issue is a big question. The current belt and road initiative runs through Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

As I mentioned earlier, 20% of the world's cotton is produced there. Eighty per cent of China's cotton actually comes from the region. I will repeat that for all of us who buy cotton. Eighty per cent of Chinese cotton comes from Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, as does 35% of tomato products, pasta and pizza.

I love pasta and pizza. Contrary to first impressions, I am actually one-quarter Italian and one-quarter Sicilian. I joke sometimes that my colour comes from my Sicilian side. It is a bad joke, but I say it sometimes.

We know that approximately 45% of the base materials for solar panels come from that region also. Minerals, such as gold, silver and zinc come from there. It is very mineral-rich.

There has been atomic testing also in the region since the 1960s. In addition to all of the horrors that we heard, these things are occurring.

These horrors are real, so real, as I mentioned, that the former high commissioner of human rights, Michelle Bachelet, said that these allegations are well-founded.

Thankfully, in addition to my motion, we had a preview this week in the House when we were discussing and then voted to concur in the immigration committee's report, which called for immigration. That report unfortunately, or fortunately, did not specify something. That report that we all unanimously concurred in this week said that we should create special immigration measures for Uighur people and other Turkic minorities, but we did not specify what those measures should be.

This motion does exactly that. It completes what happened earlier this week, when we said, “Let us do this.” This motion says how. This motion is precise. It is specific. It is time-bound. It is what we need.

In addition to this, we thankfully have a number of initiatives in the House, and I would like to see them all pass and made into law.

First is Bill S-211, which is on forced labour. It is a very important bill. Thankfully, our foreign affairs minister has said that we support it. She said that in August, when replying to Michelle Bachelet's report that there may be crimes against humanity occurring within the region, so already our foreign affairs minister has said such. This initiative started in the Senate and now is in the House. It is actually heading to committee.

We also have a second initiative on organ harvesting: Bill S-223, which is also an important piece of legislation. Organ harvesting does occur within Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region, but not exclusively there. We know that Falun Gong, or Falun Dafa, practitioners have been subject to this in the past. It is well documented.

These are a number of the initiatives that are in progress and happening right now. They are initiatives that we should all be supporting.

Our government has done a handful of things. We have implemented Magnitsky sanctions against four individuals and one entity that are active and responsible for these crimes. This was done in advance of the genocide motion of February 2021. We also have a number of advisory opinions for companies operating within Xinjiang Uighur autonomous region. As an advocate, I would like always to see that strengthened, and that must be strengthened through Bill S-211.

I would like to highlight something. While we are speaking squarely about the crimes against humanity and genocide occurring within China, we need to be careful not to fall into unconscious bias about Asians and Chinese people. That is very important, as we advocate clearly and unambiguously, to not to fall into that. At the end, I personally have, on this issue, no qualms, if and when the government in China were to stop doing what it is doing, I personally would not speak on this issue, but only if and when China does stop doing what it is doing. However, until then, all of us, including myself, must speak on this issue.

I would like to impress upon the House how we united behind my motion. I want to share something. My seconder is Rachel Bendayan, a colleague of mine in the benches.

Uighurs and other Turkic MuslimsPrivate Members' Business

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We cannot use names in the House, as the member knows.

Uighurs and other Turkic MuslimsPrivate Members' Business

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Madam Speaker, I offer my apologies.

My seconder is the member for Outremont.

I would also like to highlight that we have members from every party endorsing this motion by jointly seconding. From the benches opposite, we have the former leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Durham; a friend and colleague of mine who is very active on the Uighur file, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan; and the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. We also have the House leader of the Green Party; the immigration critic from the Bloc Québécois; the immigration critic from the NDP; the foreign affairs critic from the NDP; and another member from the Bloc, the member for Montarville. From my own party, the former foreign affairs minister has jointly seconded this motion, along with other former ministers, such as a former immigration minister, so there is broad support throughout the House.

I ask that we stay united and put aside partisanship in seeing this motion pass.