House of Commons Hansard #137 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was national.

Topics

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

I noticed the same thing. Indeed, members must take care when they are holding their papers near the microphones. It can be very disruptive.

Resuming debate. The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Seniors.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Dartmouth—Cole Harbour Nova Scotia

Liberal

Darren Fisher LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Seniors

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the good people of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, the greatest riding in the country.

I want to take a quick moment to thank the member for Vancouver Centre for this very important private member's bill, this very important piece of legislation. I am glad to hear that many of the folks in this room who have been speaking tonight are in support of this legislation.

Today's debate is about elder abuse. What is elder abuse? According to the World Health Organization, abuse of older people is:

...a single or repeated act, or lack of appropriate action, occurring within any relationship where there is an expectation of trust, which causes harm or distress to an older person. This type of violence constitutes a violation of human rights and includes physical, sexual, psychological and emotional abuse; financial and material abuse; abandonment; neglect; and serious loss of dignity and respect.

Currently there is no standard definition in Canada. It can mean different things to different people, depending on their life and ethnocultural experience.

The government is committed to strengthening Canada's approach to elder abuse. This includes creating a policy definition. The creation of a policy definition would provide a common understanding of the issue. Having the same understanding would help raise public awareness and support cultural change in hopes of preventing elder abuse. This would also help the Government of Canada to better target its programs and policies directed at addressing the topic.

To support the development of the policy definition, in the summer of 2021, the government held nationwide consultations, seeking feedback from experts, stakeholders and Canadians on a definition. Activities included an online consultation and targeted round table discussions. The Government of Canada is taking concrete measures to prevent and combat elder abuse.

In addition to cofacilitating the regional round tables on a federal policy definition of elder abuse last year, since its inception in 2017, the national seniors council has provided multiple recommendations to the Government of Canada and has examined issues related, notably, to elder and financial abuse.

Their first report on the issue was published in 2007 and led to inform the Government of Canada's awareness campaign on elder abuse. In March of 2019, the council hosted an expert round table and a town hall on financial scams and harms targeting seniors perpetuated by strangers or by someone they know. The council concluded its work on this topic with the release of a “what we heard” report, summarizing the discussions as well as a number of federal initiatives that currently address the issue. The report was published on the Government of Canada website in August 2019.

The Government of Canada also participates in the federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for seniors forum, which works to discuss issues of importance to seniors, advance issues of common concern and focus on concrete collaborative projects. For this work cycle, one of the key priorities established by the forum is addressing abuse experienced by seniors during the pandemic and beyond. This is key in our fight against senior abuse and critical to ensuring that we collaborate with our provincial and territorial colleagues to develop policies that reflect the needs of seniors and ultimately promote their full social inclusion.

Most recently we launched the 2022-23 New Horizons for Seniors program call for proposals for community-based projects. This call for proposals closed November 1, 2022, and included a specific national priority for projects that help to prevent elder abuse. For members' awareness, the 2021-22 New Horizons for Seniors program call for proposals for community-based projects resulted in providing almost $13 million in funding to 607 organizations that identified that their project would have a focus on the national priority of preventing elder abuse and fraud. Of the 607 organizations, 419 projects have programming on elder abuse awareness as a key objective.

Through the New Horizons for Seniors program, the Government of Canada is investing in projects that address one or more of the program's five objectives, which include expanding awareness of elder abuse. In 2020-21, Justice Canada approved more than $800,000 through its victims fund to support public legal education information projects with nine organizations across Canada. With this support, these organizations produced clear, accurate and informative material on elder abuse and neglect, specifically designed to reach seniors and those responsible for their care.

I should also mention that budget 2021 invested $50 million for the Public Health Agency of Canada to design and deliver interventions that promote safe relationships and prevent family violence, including elder abuse and other forms of violence, such as child maltreatment and intimate partner violence, that put Canadians at a higher risk of experiencing elder abuse later in life.

Our top priority remains to protect Canadians' health and safety. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted long-standing and systemic challenges in infection prevention and control, staffing, infrastructure, and quality of care in long-term care homes across Canada. Canadians were really concerned and so were we.

We immediately knew that something had to be done, so we took action. To keep older Canadians safe and improve their quality of life, the federal government has been working collaboratively with provinces and territories, while respecting their jurisdiction over health care.

Through the 2020 fall economic statement, we invested up to $1 billion for the safe long-term care fund. This funding supported the provinces and territories in protecting those living and working in long-term care settings, as well as improve infection prevention and control measures.

Some of the other actions to support provinces' and territories' long-term care facilities during this time included creating volunteer inventories to support the public health response, including in the long-term care sector; deploying the Canadian Armed Forces and the Canadian Red Cross to long-term care homes to respond to urgent needs; and accelerating training for up to 4,000 personal support worker interns to address critical labour shortages in long-term care facilities and home care.

Through budget 2021, an additional $3-billion investment will further support provinces and territories in their efforts to ensure that standards for long-term care are applied and permanent changes are made. This includes improving the quality and availability of long-term care homes and beds, as well as workforce stability measures such as wage top-ups and improvements to workplace conditions. Palliative care is also a vital service for people living with life-limiting illness, often elders, and those delivering that care.

We are committed to improving the quality and availability of palliative care for all people in Canada. Budget 2021 provided nearly $30 million to help advance the government's action plan on palliative care and build a better foundation for coordinated action on long-term and supportive care needs.

I promise that we are committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to ensure the quality and availability of palliative care for everyone in Canada, including people living with life-limiting illnesses, caregivers, stakeholders, and communities, as well as those who are most vulnerable.

We know that better care throughout the entire health care continuum, especially supporting home and community care and long-term care, is a key component of addressing elder abuse. We also know that seniors want to stay in their homes for as long as possible when it is safe to do so.

We created the age well at home initiative, which provides practical supports to seniors who want to continue living in their own homes. This $90-million incentive, from budget 2021, helps community-based organizations provide practical support to help low-income and otherwise vulnerable seniors stay in their home, again, for as long as possible.

Elder abuse is an important human rights issue, as well as a social and public health issue. Elder abuse can undermine an older person's quality of life, autonomy, dignity and sense of security. All Canadians and levels of governments play a role in preventing elder abuse. That is why we have been taking action to ensure Canadians can age with dignity and respect.

Older adults are among the fastest growing demographic groups in Canada. Data from the latest Canadian census shows that from 2016 to 2021, the number of persons aged 65 and older rose 18.3% to seven million Canadians. According to population projections, in 2051, one-quarter of the population could be 65 and older. That is why it is all the more important that we take concrete and effective prevention efforts to address elder abuse.

In the future, our actions will become more and more important as we progress in our work to better target our programming and policies directed at addressing elder abuse.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

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

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Edmonton West for a very short minute.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Madam Speaker, I would have had longer, I am sure, if the member for Kingston and the Islands had not stood on a point of order, and probably the most ridiculous one I have heard in seven years here in the House.

Now, I am glad that at least one member of the Liberal Party is bringing forward some legislation that would help seniors. It had been promised in the government's throne speech, but of course we have not seen anything.

I am very proud to be speaking in support of the bill. Before I joined the House as the member of Parliament for Edmonton West, I lived in Victoria, where I was very proudly vice-president and then president of the greater Victoria Eldercare Foundation, Victoria's and Vancouver Island's largest seniors foundation, assisting six seniors homes.

Apparently my time is up already, but I just want to give a quick plug to—

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

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

The hon. member will have a full nine minutes once the bill comes back for debate.

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

TaxationAdjournment Proceedings

6:50 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, on behalf of the overtaxed residents of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I asked this government if Canadians could expect any tax relief.

Taxes on fertilizer and fuel are making food more expensive. The government's plan to enact the biggest excise tax in Canadian history will punish the hospitality sector before it has had a chance to recover from the government lockdowns.

Seniors are asking how they are going to be able to afford to heat their homes this winter, and what was the government's response? The member for Winnipeg South stood in the House and questioned why Conservatives had not spent taxpayer dollars to fly on a junket to a luxury resort town in Egypt. Canadians are worried about freezing in their homes, and the government complains that Conservatives are not enjoying Egyptian beaches.

In case there was any confusion about how the Liberals really feel about the great white north, just look at the Minister of Labour. Last week he said he was sick and tired of people complaining about the cold winter. It is almost as though the Liberal caucus has a bet to see who can be the most arrogant and dismissive of Canadians.

It is obvious from their responses in question period that the Liberals would rather be sitting on a sunny beach, sipping margaritas and mai tais. It is ironic that the member for Winnipeg South would talk about the COP27 meeting instead of taxes, unless it is an admission that COP27 is all about ways to crank out new taxes.

Less than a month ago, during these same adjournment proceedings, I asked the Liberals how many envirocrats and climate groupies would be going to COP27. Did they answer? Of course they did not. They never answer the question. We ask now how many people they sent to COP27, and they answer that zero Conservatives attended. They attack us for not attending, yet refuse to answer how many Liberals attended. COP27 is just a distraction from the carbon tax being imposed on Atlantic Canada.

The Liberals' new fuel standards regulations clearly state that the cost will be borne disproportionately by rural Atlantic Canadians, yet Liberals claim that nobody uses home heating oil any more. The Liberals are clearly gaslighting Atlantic Canadians, then charging them a carbon tax on that same gas.

Before any of the Liberals get up to spread more misinformation, I challenge them to read their own regulatory analysis. This is not Conservatives saying it, and it is not the Parliamentary Budget Officer. These are the Liberal government's own words. It said:

It is estimated that provinces in Atlantic Canada would be more negatively affected by the proposed Regulations. This is largely because the Atlantic provinces use more [light fuel oil] for home heating than other provinces.

It later said:

This may be most acute for seniors living in the Atlantic provinces, where they account for a higher share of the total population compared to other Canadian provinces and are also more likely to experience some of the highest energy expenditures in Canada proportional to income.

The carbon tax is bad for everyone, but it is worse for Canadians in rural and remote communities. It is worse for Canadians on fixed incomes. For seniors living on fixed incomes in rural and remote communities, it could very well mean the end. Faced with a choice between heating and eating, at least rural Canadians had the option of hunting. Now this socialist government and its urban, vegan, elite base of voters want to take that away too.

The government has been clear. It does not care about the costs it imposes on Canadians, and it is tired of hearing people complain about it. Will the parliamentary secretary disavow the Minister of Labour's statement, or is he also tired of Canadians complaining about being left out in the cold?

TaxationAdjournment Proceedings

6:50 p.m.

Burnaby North—Seymour B.C.

Liberal

Terry Beech LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, first, I would like to address the question of pollution pricing.

Our government knows that putting a price on pollution remains the most effective way to fight climate change while making life more affordable for Canadians. Not only does pollution pricing ensure it is no longer free to pollute anywhere in Canada, but for eight out of 10 Canadians who receive the climate action incentive payments, the federal pollution pricing system actually puts more money back into their pockets.

Climate action is no longer a theoretical political debate; addressing it is an economic necessity. The reality is that Canadians are confronted every day with more extreme events, such as floods, hurricanes and wildfires. A few months ago, the Parliamentary Budget Officer published an analysis showing that climate change has negatively impacted and will continue to negatively impact the Canadian economy. Responsible governments can only grow the economy and make life more affordable for Canadians if they have a responsible climate plan. The member opposite, respectfully, has neither a credible plan for the environment nor the economy.

However, I would also like to reassure my hon. colleagues that our government understands that many Canadians are struggling to make ends meet and that many are worried as our country's economy faces a period of slower economic growth due to the global challenge of high inflation and higher interest rates. Still, inflation in Canada is high and we know that Canadians are feeling it when they go to the grocery store, fill up their tanks and pay their rent. The good news is that there is no country better placed than Canada to weather the coming global economic slowdown and thrive in the years ahead. Our country has an AAA credit rating, has the strongest economic growth in the G7 so far this year, and the lowest deficit and net debt-to-GDP ratios in the G7. In fact, we have strengthened that advantage over the pandemic. Also, our unemployment rate continues to be near its record low.

We do appreciate that this will continue to be a difficult time for a lot of Canadians. It is a difficult time for our families, friends and neighbours. That is why the government is supporting Canadians who are most affected by inflation. For example, by doubling the GST credit for six months, we will deliver $2.5 billion in additional targeted support to roughly 11 million individuals and families, including more than 50% of Canada's seniors. I thank the member opposite for supporting that measure.

Canadians will even start to see some more of these targeted measures this week. On Thursday, December 1, Canadians can begin applying for the Canada dental benefit. That means the parents of kids under the age of 12 will be able to claim $650 per child for visits to the dentist.

We are also moving forward with new measures introduced in our fall economic statement a few weeks ago. For example, Bill C-32 would make the federal portion of all Canada student loans and Canada apprenticeship loans permanently interest-free, including those that are currently being repaid. We are making major investments in housing affordability, and our key benefits are indexed to inflation. We have a world-class child care program and have cut costs by more than 50% just this year, and we have reduced taxes for the middle class and for small businesses.

We will continue to work hard to make sure that life is more affordable in Canada and to grow an economy that works for everyone.

TaxationAdjournment Proceedings

6:55 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, with every word the parliamentary secretary just uttered, he emitted carbon dioxide. If Canadians could charge a carbon tax on Liberal speeches, we would retire the national debt. Sadly, the Liberals never pay the price for their verbal pollution.

This climate cult is intoxicated on green Kool-Aid. It fervently believes the end is near and we must repent for the sins of capitalism. Only by adopting the communism which the current Prime Minister openly admires can we be saved by the ravages of a warmer climate.

The Minister of Labour is obviously tired of reality not conforming to his climate creed. He is not truly tired of Canadians complaining about the winter; he is tired of winter undermining the precepts of his climate cult. Canadians are tired of the current arrogant, entitled government.

TaxationAdjournment Proceedings

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC

Madam Speaker, I think Canadians can count on this government to continue supporting those who need it the most through targeted and fiscally responsible measures while running a tight fiscal ship. In the months ahead, we will continue to work hard to build an economy that works for everyone, to create good jobs, to make life more affordable for Canadians. Our government believes that our country is the best place in the world to live, work and thrive, and we will work hard every day to make sure we keep it that way.

Small BusinessAdjournment Proceedings

6:55 p.m.

Independent

Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my colleague for spending his evening with me on this very important matter. Last month, on October 24, I raised the issue of increasing EI premiums, particularly at a time when in Canada, Canadian workers and small business owners are just fighting to stay afloat.

I know there has been some debate in this place back and forth on whether it is a direct payroll tax increase. We are going to put that aside because we know that even the Prime Minister, then the member of Parliament for Papineau in 2013, described it as such. What is important is that the definition does not matter. What matters is the impact that workers and small business owners from across my riding and the country are worried about.

In this place, we have discussed the headwinds that workers are facing: rampant inflation, skyrocketing costs of living, the continued record setting of new highs by food banks, and so on. Therefore, instead I want to read into the record the other side of the equation, which is the state of our small businesses, which employ over 88% of all Canadian workers in the private labour force. I am afraid to report that it is grim.

Last week, I met with people from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business who provided an update that, as I had feared, showed that Canadian small businesses continue to fight for survival. Nearly two-thirds have pandemic debt, with an average pandemic-related debt amount of $145,660. One-sixth of small business owners have considered permanently closing.

Therefore, I want to put into context what that means for workers. If we use Statistics Canada's definition of a small business as being any business with fewer than 100 employees, and the most recent employment figures by Statistics Canada, it shows that almost 6.2 million Canadian workers are employed by small businesses. That means that if one-sixth of small business owners have considered permanently closing, over one million Canadian workers are at risk.

Surely, then, considering the macro and microeconomic situation that our nation is in and the inflationary environment that workers and small business owners are facing, would my hon. colleague not agree that now is not the time to raise EI payroll taxes?

Small BusinessAdjournment Proceedings

7 p.m.

Burnaby North—Seymour B.C.

Liberal

Terry Beech LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, Canada's small and medium-sized businesses are the heart of our economy. They define our communities, our main streets and our neighbourhoods across the country, in big cities and small villages. Helping them innovate is good for Canada, and that is why our government has addressed and continues to address barriers that are preventing them from growing.

With Bill C-32, we are proposing to cut taxes for Canada's growing small businesses, which will help them continue to grow and create good jobs. We are also working with payment card networks, financial institutions, acquirers, payment processors and businesses to lower credit card transaction fees for small businesses. We want these fees to be lowered in a manner that protects existing reward points for consumers and does not adversely affect other businesses.

We believe an agreement can be reached, but should it be the case we are not able to come to an agreement, we will introduce this legislation at the earliest possible opportunity in the new year and move forward on regulating credit card transaction fees.

We have already published draft legislation amendments to the Payment Card Networks Act, and I invite the member for Spadina—Fort York to read them and provide feedback.

We all want Canadians to have good jobs, but it is also important to keep a good social safety net, and employment insurance is certainly one aspect of it. EI is a tool that helps provide resources for people in their time of need.

I would like to remind the member for Spadina—Fort York that it is the Canada Employment Insurance Commission, not the government, that sets the annual employment insurance premium rate according to a seven-year break-even rate, as forecast by the EI senior actuary. It does this every year and has done so since 2016.

The commission is a tripartite organization representing the interests of workers, employers and government. It is mandated to represent and reflect the views of its respective constituencies. The employment insurance premium rate will be $1.63 per $100 of insurable earnings in 2023. That is 25¢ less than it was in 2013 when it was $1.88 per $100 of insurable earnings, and notably, this was under the management of the current Leader of the Opposition.

In June 2013, the national unemployment rate was 7.2%. It is now 5.2%. Over two million more Canadians are now working compared to June 2013, including 500,000 more since the beginning of the pandemic. The seven-year break-even mechanism ensures stable and predictable premium rates for Canadian workers and employers. In fact, annual changes to the premium rate are subject to a legislated limit of just 5¢. The mechanism is also intended to ensure EI contributions are only used for EI purposes.

This is a prudent and transparent way for EI premiums to be managed, and I do not understand exactly why the hon. member would be against it.

Small BusinessAdjournment Proceedings

7:05 p.m.

Independent

Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague that EI is an important tool and an important safety net. Saying this is something that is set every seven years is an easy cop-out, but the thing is that seven years ago we did not have the pandemic. Seven years ago, we were not facing the highest inflation rates and the cost of living increases in over 40 years, which is the highest it has ever been in the lifetime of half of Canadians, myself included.

Instead of his saying that this is something that is really not up to them and that it is done every seven years, I want to ask my hon. colleague to try to live in the now and the reality small businesses and workers are facing today. I will repeat the question: Will the government at least consider delaying the increase to payroll taxes to another time?

Small BusinessAdjournment Proceedings

7:05 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC

Madam Speaker, to be clear, it is set every year on a seven-year average, not set every seven years.

In addition, it is important to reiterate our government is committed to continuing to support small businesses and help Canadians cope with the rising cost of living. I spoke earlier about what we do for small businesses.

Let me remind my colleague about our affordability plan for Canadians, a suite of measures totalling $12.1 billion in new support to help make life more affordable. This includes launching dental care for half a million kids under 12, helping 1.8 million Canadians pay their rent, doubling the GST credit for six months, enhancing the Canada workers benefit, supporting affordable early learning and child care for young families and providing a 10%-increase to old age security for seniors 75 and older. In addition, government benefits that millions of Canadians rely upon are indexed to inflation to help keep up with the cost of living.

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:05 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, my question tonight is about the IRGC. The IRGC is the Iranian regime's tool of terror at home in Iran, its tool of terror in the wider region and its tool of terror around the world, including here in Canada. We know that Canadian citizens and people with close connections to Canada have been killed by the IRGC, most notably when the IRGC shot down flight PS752, murdering dozens of Canadian citizens and many more people with close connections to our country.

The IRGC continues to be active, advancing terror around the world. We have seen the images out of Iran of how the IRGC is terrorizing the people of Iran. We also have heard reports of death threats that continue to be made by this organization against Canadians, so Conservatives have a simple proposition in response to this horrific reality, which is that we must do everything we can to shut down the operations of the IRGC here in Canada. That means listing the IRGC as a terrorist organization within the Criminal Code.

We have a statute in the Criminal Code that is designed to allow the listing of terrorist organizations so that we can shut down their operations in Canada, prevent them from fundraising, prevent them from recruiting and prevent any member of their organization from being here or operating here freely.

I put forward a motion four and a half years ago in this place to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization. We had a day-long debate. We had a vote on it. Every present member of the Liberal caucus actually voted in favour of my motion to list the IRGC. I thought that was great news. We had the two major parties in the House come together, recognizing that the IRGC is a terrorist organization and voting, in an admittedly non-binding motion, to call on the government to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization. It should have been a given, after cabinet ministers voted to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization, that they would have gone ahead and listed it as an organization.

In fact, on another issue we had the House unanimously call for the listing of Proud Boys as a terrorist organization, and Proud Boys was listed as a terrorist organization within a couple of months. In this case, it has been four and a half years. The government likes to talk about other things it has done on Iran, but I have been continuously asking the same question over the last four and a half years. The government voted to do this, so why has it not?

In four and a half years I have never gotten an answer. If the government has a good reason for not listing the IRGC as a terrorist organization, it should at least provide its answer and make its case, and we would have that debate. However, we have received no response, and sadly I predict we will receive no response tonight, on that basic question.

Does the government intend to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization, which is what it voted to do? If not, why not? Other measures were taken previously. The Conservative government listed the Qods Force as a terrorist organization under the Criminal Code, designated Iran as a state sponsor of terror and ended diplomatic relations with Iran.

Those policies have continued under the current government, but it has not taken any substantial new steps. The latest we have heard is the Deputy Prime Minister explicitly acknowledging in a statement about a month ago that the IRGC is a terrorist organization, but the government still has not listed it as a terrorist organization in the Criminal Code.

Hope springs eternal. I will keep asking the question. Could the government please list this terrorist organization as a terrorist organization in the Criminal Code? If it refuses, could it at least explain why it will not act?

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Burnaby North—Seymour B.C.

Liberal

Terry Beech LiberalParliamentary 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.

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, that response in this whole situation is a sad demonstration of the farce that is the government's approach to human rights. We have a parliamentary secretary reading out his lines that, yes, the government stands with the people of Iran, that it wants them to know it stands with them, but, substantively, the government refuses to do the core thing that the Iranian community is asking, which is to shut down the operations of the IRGC here in Canada.

I note as well that the person answering the question is the parliamentary secretary for finance. This is not even his file. The government representatives for public safety and foreign affairs could not even be bothered to answer the question. I have some sympathy for the parliamentary secretary. He has been asked, as the parliamentary secretary for finance, to read out a response that has nothing to do with the files that he is working on. That tells us how seriously the government takes the need to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization.

If the issue is concern about forcible conscription—

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:15 p.m.

Liberal

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:15 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC

Madam Speaker, I am happy to be here talking about this issue today. It follows up dozens of meetings I have had with Iranian Canadians in my own community and I have been following this particular issue especially closely.

Listings under the Criminal Code provide the legal and institutional framework to implement measures to freeze and forfeit terrorists' property and help investigate and potentially persecute someone for certain offences. Listing under the Criminal Code is just one instrument in Canada's international domestic counterterrorism strategy tool box in ensuring the safety of Canadians and holding the Iranian regime accountable. Canadians can have confidence in the continuing efforts of the Government of Canada to hold the Iranian regime, the IRGC and their leadership accountable for their actions.

The Iranian people have bravely stood up against the brutal dictatorship with a simple message that has resonated around the world: women, life, freedom. To the women and men of Iran demanding their rights and freedoms, we see them, stand with them and will continue to take action.

Foreign AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:15 p.m.

Liberal

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

The motion to adjourn the House is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:17 p.m.)