Debates of June 1st, 2022

Canada National Parks Act

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to join my colleagues as we resume debate on Bill C-248 this evening. As members are well aware, this is in act to amend the Canada National Parks Act or the Ojibway national urban park of Canada. It is a great honour to join all of my colleagues here this evening.

Allow me to begin by acknowledging that I am joining this discussion from the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe.

In earlier contributions we saw in the debate with respect to this park, as well as what we have heard this evening, what has certainly emerged is that there is consensus in this chamber that it is imperative that we move forward with this specific park. I must say that it is great, on an evening like this, to see that there is consensus in this chamber.

It is important to emphasize that Windsor is one of seven cities where work is currently under way to create national urban parks. In fact, it falls under a new $130-million program that has the aim of designating up to six new national urban parks across Canada by the year 2026. Canadians expect us to be bold, and that is why we are fully committed to moving in the right direction with a time frame in place by 2026.

The national urban parks program is being led by Parks Canada and I should emphasize that it cannot be short-circuited. At the heart of the process led by Parks Canada, in this particular case and in others, is the premise that we should not forget that there needs to be partnership and collaboration between stakeholders and communities. Every one of us is committed to partnering and working hand in hand to explore opportunities and define boundaries and governance structures, as well as to achieve a shared vision. The process must be grassroots and bottom-up as well.

Since this process began, Parks Canada has been actively collaborating with key partners in the Windsor area, including, as was alluded to, the City of Windsor, Caldwell First Nation and Walpole Island First Nation. Engagement with key stakeholders has also begun, including with conservation and heritage groups, as well as universities, tourism stakeholders and economic development shareholders. I emphasize engagement and collaboration because I want to highlight one of the obvious weaknesses of the bill before us.

Though I think we can all agree the bill has very good, laudable intentions, the process is top-down and totally bypasses grassroots and bottom-up engagement. The failure to undertake appropriate engagement with indigenous peoples specifically on whose traditional lands the proposed park will occur violates the very spirit of reconciliation and risks undermining new relationships and the requisite trust that must always underpin such developments. Creating a national urban park without proper engagement with indigenous partners from the very start would be an unfortunate setback and would get in the way of achieving an important objective.

Bringing together communities and stakeholders to develop a shared vision would ensure that a national urban park is created that endures as a special place that would allow all of us to come together for generations. At this preliminary stage, key decisions require careful consideration and engagement, particularly with respect to the extent of lands to be included within the boundaries. The bill before us prematurely presupposes the precise limits of the park. Furthermore, the bill's identification of these lands, which includes lands currently owned by the provincial government, amounts to a taking of lands without consent and without consultation.

I re-emphasize that a robust, consultative process is being short-circuited. Imagine supporting a bill, for example, in which Ottawa automatically takes control of a park in Quebec or in one of our western provinces without a single conversation or negotiation with the relevant provincial authorities. This is not the spirit with which to launch an enduring national urban park, and it lacks respect for key partners who have ensured the conservation of the subject lands in the face of significant urban development pressures.

Although the lands identified in the bill may be those that should be included in the park, we must take the time and work collaboratively with our local partners to properly assess this question and to explore whether there are other lands that might be considered. This needs to happen before the boundaries of a proposed park are finalized. The bill before us defines the boundaries prematurely. It also closes the door on the possibility that private landowners or adjacent municipalities may identify lands that could be added to the Ojibway footprint. The bill would close the door to that.

We are already building an Ojibway national urban park. Last summer, over 50 local partners stood in Ojibway with my colleagues, the member for Windsor—Tecumseh and the Minister of Families, to declare our ironclad commitment to establish an Ojibway national urban park. A few months later, we announced over $580,000 in Parks Canada funding for the City of Windsor to begin pre-consultations. Just two weeks ago, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change announced to the House of Commons that we have an MOU in place between Parks Canada and Transport Canada to work together on transferring the Ojibway Shores lands from the Windsor Port Authority to Parks Canada for inclusion in the eventual Ojibway national urban park.

Ojibway Shores is the last remaining underdeveloped shoreline and natural habitat along the Detroit River, and it would connect the Ojibway Prairie Complex to the Detroit River. It has significant environmental value. It is an essential ecological gem and concentrates in its 33 acres some of the most diverse plants, as was alluded to earlier this evening, insects and animal species in North America. Many of them are rare and at risk.

The Windsor community has been fighting for 20 years to preserve Ojibway Shores. Our government got it done. Ojibway Shores will be preserved forever, and it will be part of a national urban park for generations of residents and visitors to enjoy.

This MOU that I refer to is a major step forward. It underscores the importance and the value of collaboration and consultation in setting the ground work for the national urban park. We are on the cusp of achieving something that everyone wants: A national urban park that will benefit the people of Windsor and all Canadians, contribute to our ongoing efforts to protect the environment and advance reconciliation with indigenous peoples.

Bill C-248 is well-meaning, but it is contemplating the wrong approach, and it sends the wrong message. That is why the House should not support this piece of legislation.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise this evening to speak with respect to Bill C-248, the private member's bill put forward by the member for Windsor West to create a national urban park, Ojibway urban park in particular.

I want to start by highlighting that this park would not involve any private property whatsoever. It would connect several pieces of publicly owned lands that, if connected, would create one larger 900-acre national urban park. It is important to pause to share more about why national urban parks are so important.

As we have heard, not only are they home in this case to hundreds of endangered species, but they also provide mitigation of flooding due to climate change, providing a natural heritage area that the community can enjoy, appreciate and use with respect to healthy living and ecotourism. It is also worth pausing to reflect on nature deficit disorder, a term that refers to what happens when people are disconnected from their natural surroundings.

If we had more national urban parks, I wonder how this might affect the thinking even in this very place. Given the larger systemic challenges we face, such as the climate crisis, if we had more urban green space that Canadians across the country and parliamentarians were enjoying, I wonder how that might affect some of the thinking that goes into decisions we are making with respect to the climate crisis, for example, or decisions we are not making.

It is also important to point out how this aligns with what Parks Canada has already put forward with respect to their interests in establishing at least one new national park in every province or territory across the country and how it aligns with existing plans from the governing party and commitments it has made to protect up to 25% of land by 2025 and up to 30% by 2030. It strikes me that we ought to be making the most of every opportunity we have to go more quickly in protecting biodiversity across the country.

I also want to pause to give kudos to the member for Windsor West for bringing forward legislation like this. In my view, this is actually how democracy is supposed to function. The member has been advocating with respect to this national urban park since 2013, when he made the first request of the federal government, listening to the interests of those across his community and collaborating with others to find consensus to move forward. I will point out that he has received the support of Caldwell First Nation and of Chief Duckworth in particular in a letter shared on April 11 that encourages all parliamentarians to support Bill C-248.

I will point out it has also been unanimously supported by Windsor City Council. In my view, these are exactly the kinds of indications for why a parliamentarian should look to choose a topic such as this, knowing that work has been put in, that consultations have been had, that members here should be listening to their communities first and foremost. It should also be community ahead of party, and that members, based on what they hear, should then be advocating in support of those interests. In my view, that is exactly what the member for Windsor West has done, and doing the same would allow us to move more quickly toward ensuring we have more nationally protected areas and a new national urban park.

I am less interested in who gets the credit for it and more in ensuring we support whoever is bringing forward ideas to this place to ensure that we move more quickly to protect urban areas. It is for this reason that the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands and I will both be supporting this legislation. I was encouraged to hear the member for Essex supporting it as well, and I am encouraged to hear a biologist among us, the member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay, also voicing his support.

I will point out that in some ways this has been a difficult day, that there were some votes in which there was not as much alignment as I would have liked, but at least consensus can be achieved on this debate, and I am hopeful that the bill will go to committee as quickly as possible.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Seeing that there are no other intervenors, I will recognize the hon. member for Windsor West for his right of reply.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues and you for being part of this. Bill C-248 is really from the community. It is not my idea. It is something that we have been fighting for, and for a long period of time.

As a member who has been here for 20-plus years now, it is exciting to me when we can actually bring unity to the House and work on projects that can help define our country and our communities.

I have a list of people to thank, and some of them I am going to have to abandon because I do not have enough time.

First and foremost, I want to start by thanking Janet and Dave from the Wildlands League. They were part of this process from the beginning and helped give inspiration. They understand the park system's green spaces connectivity and have been very special and very positive going through this. On top of that, I want to also thank Chief Mary Duckworth. Chief Duckworth was here in the House of Commons, outside this chamber with me, to push this issue before.

For this to be made up as some type of thing that is circumventing first nations is unbelievable to hear. It is terribly disrespectful. I brought Caldwell First Nation people down to this site as they were deciding about where they were setting up their reserve. Now it is actually closer to Point Pelee, which ironically is the place that they should have had historically. It is one of the most beautiful stories that we have of reconciliation taking place, and it is amazing.

Chief Duckworth and all of the energy there are supporting this, and they explicitly asked to go to committee to tell the story of why they support this. This is part of their heritage, and they want to share it through the vision of a national urban park for all. It is a terrific story in itself because of the tragedy of the way it started, but also it is where they are going in the future.

It has been interesting, because Mayor Dilkens and the city council have been working on trying to get this land on the Ojibway shoreline protected for a number of years. It was going to be bulldozed and cut down. Finally, during this process, after seven years, I was told that they could not transfer it to Environment Canada. A few weeks ago, they finally transferred it to Environment Canada.

We are happy for that. They wanted the city of Windsor residents, at one point, to pay millions of dollars and then give it back to the federal government. How absurd is that? How absurd is what the Liberals wanted to do with that? I am thankful that they finally reversed their position on that.

The reason this bill is necessary is that every national park has its own legislation. Every national park is secured in that way. What we have done is put the pieces of property together, and there has been consultation constantly. Most importantly, there has been consultation with the children, the youth, the advocates, the environmental people, the unions and the companies, all in Windsor for several different years. That is why we actually have the defined geography in the bill to start with.

I do not understand the Liberals who are opposing this. Why not send it to committee? Why is there resentment from some, maybe not all, members of the Liberal government over actually sending this bill to committee to bring up concerns?

The Conservatives had some concerns about private property being involved; we did not include that. In the case of the Bloc, we want to make sure this is a special thing because the Bloc members have some very legitimate questions about the province. Those things have been taken care of as well.

The province right now is going through an election, but provincial officials have been talking about this and supporting it. The local member of the provincial parliament, Lisa Gretzky, is in favour of it, and of course the City of Windsor. We are looking now at getting this to committee to define those areas and have a chance to speak and to showcase why this is so important.

I do not understand. I have been here for a while. I have been trying to work, especially when we were sent back to Parliament, in a constructive way, and that is why I chose this bill. I chose it because it should survive the test of mettle to get to committee at least. How could they want to shut down this beautiful process, which has been grassroots every single step along the way, without even allowing people from Windsor and Essex to have their voice?

I will conclude with this. There have been so many people. Some of them even passed away during this process. It is going to be right next to the Gordie Howe international bridge.

I had my first public meeting for a new border crossing back in 1998 at Marlborough Public School as a city councillor. We are finally getting a bill. We do not need another 20 years to do the obvious. This should be done. It is grassroots and, most importantly, it defines us on the doorstep of America.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I thank everyone for their interventions. The question is on the motion.

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

The hon. deputy House leader.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

I request a recorded division.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, June 8, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

Public Safety and National Security

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, May 31, the House will now proceed to the consideration of a motion to concur in the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, presented on Monday, May 30.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all members of this House for taking the time to hold a debate on what our government sees as a critical priority for Canada's foreign policy: our strong support for Finland and Sweden's accession to NATO.

However, I want to begin by speaking to the gravest threat to international peace today: Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It has been months since President Putin unleashed his war of choice on Ukraine. With every day that passes, the number of civilians, including children, killed and wounded continues to climb. We have witnessed Russian attacks on apartment buildings, public squares, theatres and maternity hospitals. In addition, the reports and images of what Russian forces carried out in Bucha are horrifying and deeply shameful.

Let me be clear: We believe that this amounts to war crimes and crimes against humanity, and we are committed to holding President Putin and those supporting him accountable for their actions. Canada and our NATO allies are responding to Putin's aggression with unprecedented coordination, as we continue to support the men and women of Ukraine as they defend themselves and fight for their country, communities and families. We have announced round after round of sanctions and will continue working across our alliance and with international partners to suffocate the Putin regime. This reality provides even greater urgency to the debate we are having tonight.

I forgot to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Cambridge.

Since its foundation in 1949, NATO has been a cornerstone of Canada's international security policy. Along with 11 other founding nations, we established the alliance to promote the collective defence of its members, maintain peace and security in the North Atlantic area, and safeguard the freedom of its people based on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.

Since then, the alliance has increased from 12 to 30 allies. NATO's door is open to any European country in a position to undertake the commitments and obligations of membership and contribute to Euro-Atlantic security. Canada has a long tradition of fully supporting NATO's “open door policy”, based on article 10 of the Washington treaty. This is why we strongly support Finland and Sweden's decision to pursue NATO membership, and we wholeheartedly endorse their application without reservation. We also believe that every country has the sovereign right to chose its own path and its own security arrangements, and we stand with the people of Finland and Sweden, who have made their choice clear.

We have always welcomed Finland and Sweden's close partnership with NATO and their contributions to Euro-Atlantic security. We enjoy a long history of excellent bilateral relations with both countries, as demonstrated by our extensive co-operation and our shared values and priorities. The Canadian Armed Forces has worked extensively with their armed forces on training exercises, as well as in NATO's training mission in Iraq. Our troops have also fought alongside one another on operations from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Kosovo, Afghanistan and Libya.

Canada also has a strong presence in Europe, and we are currently deploying 1,375 Canadian Armed Forces members across NATO's eastern flank, along with two frigates and accompanying patrol aircraft, in support of the alliance's strengthened deterrence and defence posture. These deployments fall under Canada's Operation Reassurance, which includes NATO's enhanced forward presence, the standing NATO maritime groups and NATO air policing.

Canada has full confidence in Finland and Sweden's ability to integrate immediately into NATO and make meaningful contributions to our collective security. Both their militaries are strong and, in areas such as whole-of-society engagement on security, allies have much to learn from them. Finland and Sweden are some of the alliance's closest and most active security and defence partners. They share the alliance's commitment to upholding the rules-based international order. They are committed to the principles of state sovereignty and territorial integrity, and their militaries are highly qualified and very capable.

Sweden and Finland are also strong proponents of advancing the women, peace and security agenda. Gender equality and inclusive peace processes build more stable societies and are critical preconditions for a peaceful world for people of all genders. The full, equal, and meaningful participation of all women and girls in preventing, ending and recovering from conflict benefits us all and is essential in achieving sustainable peace.

As a close friend and security partner, Canada will support Finland and Sweden through the accession process, including against threats to their security. We are working to expedite our domestic processes in order to facilitate the accession of both countries without delay. We encourage all allies to do the same and approve their application for NATO membership as quickly as possible. Finland and Sweden are strong champions of the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law that the alliance was founded upon. Their accession will strengthen our collective defence.

The consequences of President Putin's reckless war of aggression extend far beyond Ukraine's borders. His unprovoked and unjustifiable invasion of Ukraine constitutes a significant threat to Euro-Atlantic security and the rules-based international order as a whole. Putin's brazen attack on a neighbour, on a sovereign country, supported by a campaign of lies and disinformation and carried out with devastating impact on civilians, has shattered peace in Europe. This is not just an attack on Ukraine. This does not only impact Europe. This is an attack on the UN charter and the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, and it impacts democracy, freedom and human rights for the foreseeable future.

However, in the face of this war, NATO's resolve is as strong as ever. NATO allies and partners, including Finland and Sweden, are increasing their support for Ukraine as it continues to defend itself against Russia's full-scale invasion. Thousands of anti-tank weapons, hundreds of air defence missiles and thousands of small arms and ammunition stocks are being sent to Ukraine bilaterally by Canada, our allies and our partners. Sweden has provided anti-tank weapons, demining equipment, personal protective equipment and financial aid to Ukraine. Finland has sent small arms, ammunition, anti-tank weapons and personal protective equipment.

NATO has also increased efforts to reinforce the alliance's eastern flank to deter and defend against Russia's aggression. The alliance strengthened NATO's enhanced forward presence with additional battle groups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia. Canada remains steadfast in its commitment to bolster NATO's eastern flank and support our eastern allies.

It is the sovereign right of Finland and Sweden to choose their own security arrangements. They have made the decision to join NATO with the strong and unprecedented support of the Finnish and Swedish people. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has been in close contact with her Swedish and Finnish counterparts, as has the Prime Minister, and we have assured them of Canada's complete support through this process.

We also continue to underscore, in the face of Russian disinformation and threats, that NATO is a defensive alliance and does not seek confrontation, nor pose any threat to Russia. NATO and transatlantic security are more important than ever, and Finland's and Sweden's accession will increase our shared security, including in the Baltic Sea. Their decision to join NATO has been warmly welcomed by neighbouring allies, such as Denmark, Norway, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.

Canada will continue to support the principles that have kept the countries on both sides of the Atlantic safe, free and prosperous for over 70 years. We look forward to welcoming Finland and Sweden to the alliance and our continued close co-operation and friendship.

I will end simply by stating the facts. Time is of the essence. We encourage all NATO allies to work to support their membership rapidly. There is no time to waste.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois support this motion and, of course, we support Finland and Sweden in their bids to join NATO.

There is one problem, however, that everyone will need to work on collaboratively. That problem is Turkey. Turkey is opposed to Finland and especially Sweden joining NATO because of diplomatic frictions related to certain Kurdish groups.

I would like to know how the government plans to address this issue. Will it show leadership in relation to Turkey and its opposition to Sweden and Finland joining NATO?

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has discussed this matter with her Turkish counterparts. Sweden and Finland will undoubtedly be assets to the alliance. We encourage our allies to promptly support their membership. As I said, there is no time to waste. It is very important that we support our allies in this application.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from the Bloc touched on one of my questions. I am just wondering if the member might be able to expand a little bit more on that aspect. We see what is going on here with the great nations of Sweden and Finland. We would love to see them as part of NATO. We want them to be together. Those steps need to be done.

The member indicated that we are going to act on this as quickly as possible. I wonder if there is any way that he can possibly give us a timeline or some information about how quickly that might be.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been dealing with and speaking to her counterparts for the NATO accession. We know that in Canada here, we are fully in support of their application. We all know that both countries are strong champions of democracy and, of course, the rule of law. Their addition to NATO would be a huge benefit to many of our alliances.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member talked about gender equality. We know, for sure, that Sweden is a very strong proponent of gender equality and actually has some of the strongest percentages of women in Parliament.

I wonder if the member could speak a little bit about how the inclusion of Sweden and Finland will affect NATO in the gender equity equation.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Madam Speaker, we have a lot to learn from our allies, and the member rightly mentioned their processes and their firm commitment to gender equality and empowering women. Even when a delegation came from Sweden recently, they spoke about these things.

There is a lot we can do together, collectively, as two like-minded countries. That is why it is important that we continue to support their application.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I do not have a question, as much as just a comment for the parliamentary secretary to get on the record here.

Having served and been with the members of the armed forces of both Sweden and Finland, I can attest to their competency and professionalism and the asset they will be when they join NATO. It is just something that I warmly welcome. I know they will be a great addition to the NATO alliance, and it is something that I think is so vital, considering Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine.

I just wanted to get that on the record. I think this is the right thing for us to be doing as a Parliament and as the House of Commons. I appreciate having the opportunity to speak to it tonight.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound for his service to our country. I really do appreciate his comments and his support in terms of supporting our allies in their NATO application.

It is important that we continue having these conversations so that we can ensure that Sweden and Finland are supported.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, Canada has long held the position that, in times of uncertainty, discord and doubt, our international relationships are more important than ever.

For over 70 years, the NATO alliance has afforded member states the opportunity to work together on our largest shared defence and security challenges, both on the battlefield and in the boardroom. Its impact and influence can be felt here in North America, across Europe and beyond.

We know how important this alliance is to our safety and global stability, so we, of course, welcome any changes that will make it stronger and safer, including the admission of Sweden and Finland into the alliance. As the Prime Minister recently noted, both countries have long-standing ties to NATO, making important contributions to NATO exercises and operations. We also closely align in our values, on the importance of peace, territorial integrity and upholding the rules-based international order.

It is clear that Europe and the entire world is under threat from Vladimir Putin's reckless and unprovoked war in Ukraine. This war is not just an attack on a smaller democratic neighbour. It is a very real threat to our rules-based international order, and the biggest threat since the end of the Cold War. It is also symptomatic of the resurgence of a great power competition, and the return of authoritarian states vying for influence and control through military might. These geopolitical shifts have reinforced just how important it is for all of us to work together to stand united against those who seek to redraw maps and rewrite history to suit their own needs.

In the face of these threats, the work we do as part of the NATO alliance is more important than ever. This includes the military support that Canada provides on land, sea and in the air to NATO missions in Europe and around the world. Our largest contribution is through Operation Reassurance, supporting assurance and deterrence measures in central and eastern Europe, letting our allies know that we will be there for them in good times and bad, and standing together against those who would seek to undermine our alliance or member states' security and sovereignty.

As part of this mission, we have almost 700 Canadian soldiers leading NATO's enhanced forward presence battle group in Latvia. Canadian military personnel stand shoulder-to-shoulder with soldiers from 10 NATO countries, demonstrating the strength of our alliance and protecting stability in the region.

Canada has played an important role in Latvia for five years, and we have recently expanded our efforts by deploying a battery of M777 artillery guns with forward observers and an electronic warfare troop. As part of our sea component of Operation Reassurance, we also have HMCS Montreal and HMCS Halifax deployed to Standing NATO Maritime Group One. In the air, we have a CP-140 Aurora long range patrol aircraft, and two CC-130 transport aircraft operating in the Euro-Atlantic area, and we look forward to resuming our enhanced air policing mission in Romania later this year. We also have 3,400 CAF members standing by for the NATO Response Force, should their support be required.

Our support for global peace and stability does not stop at NATO's borders. Since February 2022, we have committed hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, including anti-tank weapons, rockets, M777 howitzers, drone cameras, 155 millimetre ammunition, rifles, armoured utility vehicles, satellite imagery and communications equipment. Some of this aid has already been delivered, and we are working hard to provide the rest as quickly as possible.

I am pleased to say that some of the military aid delivered comes from the $500 million that our government announced in the last federal budget. This is the case for the 20,000 rounds of 155 millimetre artillery that the Minister of National Defence recently announced, at the cost of $98 million, which will be crucial in Ukraine's fight to defend its eastern territory.

Prior to the war, we also helped train over 33,000 members of the Ukrainian security force through Operation Unifier, learning valuable skills from one another and supporting Ukrainian efforts to become stronger and better prepared to respond to Russia's aggression.

While Ukraine's success in holding back Russia is entirely its own, I know many CAF members are proud to have worked alongside those who are now on the front lines fighting for their freedom. We are all inspired by their bravery and their dedication. As I mentioned earlier, Finland and Sweden have long-standing ties to NATO and are among the alliance's most active partners. They are two of the six countries under the partnership interoperability initiative, which includes Ukraine and which makes particularly significant contributions to NATO.

Both countries field strong and capable militaries, whose soldiers have fought alongside ours in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Libya. Other armed forces have worked extensively together on training, including NATO missions in Iraq. Our ties run even deeper. As Arctic nations, our long-standing co-operation has contributed to peace and stability in the Arctic. For these reasons and more, Canada unreservedly and enthusiastically supports Finland and Sweden's decision to pursue NATO membership.

In Ukraine, across Europe and around the globe, Canada supports our allies and partners, both on and off the battlefield. As we move forward, we will continue standing with them in the name of global peace and stability.

We know, as our biggest defence and security threats evolve, so too must the alliance evolve. To support these efforts and to keep peace with our allies, Canada is making new investments in defence, here at home, in North America and across the globe. In budget 2022, we announced a new investment package for defence worth $8 billion, as well as our plans to update Canada's defence policy, to become more responsive to the current defence and security environment.

Through these efforts, we will ensure that our people have the modern fit-for-purpose equipment they need when they deploy. We will also keep supporting NATO's diplomatic efforts, including welcoming Sweden and Finland into the alliance. We know we are stronger and more capable of tackling our biggest defence and security challenges when we work together with our like-minded allies and partners. Canada was one of the original founding members of NATO when the organization came into existence in 1949, and we remain just as dedicated to its success and to global peace and stability today.

In missions across the globe, including in central and eastern Europe, we work alongside NATO allies and partner countries to safeguard the alliance against external threats, including those stemming from Russia's aggressive actions in Ukraine.

While we live in a defensive and security environment defined by uncertainty, I remain optimistic that the values like peace, freedom, and adherence to the rules-based international order will win out against authoritarianism, doubt and division. The addition of two like-minded countries to our alliance makes this outcome all the more likely, and we are looking forward to supporting Finland and Sweden through the accession process.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. We have heard two speeches from the government and we have been told twice that we must act as quickly as possible. I agree with that, but we have not yet heard how the government is going to deal with Turkey, apart from mentions of talking to people.

The member tells me that we need to act as quickly as possible. We know that it took the government three months to charter three planes to help Ukrainian refugees get out of the countries bordering Ukraine. If that is what the government calls acting quickly, is it going to take that long in this case, or is there actually a plan in terms of the timeline for Sweden and Finland to join NATO?

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, Sweden and Finland will undoubtedly be assets to this alliance. We know this. We encourage our allies, all of our allies, including Turkey, to promptly support their membership. We are moving quickly. I would point out that the fact we are speaking here today on this to move the process through as quickly as possible is proof of that. There is no time to waste. We know that this is usually a very lengthy process. Speeding up this process as much as we possibly can, as quickly as we can, is what we want to do here today.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Madam Speaker, the member talked a little about Latvia, about our military and their great military. My father was a major general in the Canadian Forces. My brother was a colonel. My sister was a nurse. My brother-in-law was a full a colonel. My nephews are presently serving in the Canadian Forces, and they do tremendous work. They do tremendous work with our allies in Finland and Sweden.

We have talked about how unreservedly we are here to try to support that. However, as my colleague from the Bloc has indicated, and as I think people have heard, there are concerns about how quickly this could be expedited and how quickly we can step forward with these moves that we need to do.

I am wondering if the member could indicate if there is strong support, at least within his caucus, to push this forward as quickly as possible.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, the short answer is absolutely. There is support throughout not just our caucus but I imagine throughout the House to move forward on this as quickly as possible.

If I could just take a moment here, I want to thank the member opposite and ask him to thank his family for their service. The commitment in that family sounds quite impressive.

It is that commitment that we are talking about here today. It is about recognizing the need to focus on getting this done, getting it done right and getting it done quickly.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's remarks.

Could the member provide his thoughts on what he hopes tonight's debate will result in, and what bearing it would have on the course of events over the coming weeks and months?

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, I hope I speak for all of us in the House when I say that this concurrence debate sends a very strong message to Vladimir Putin. It also sends a message to our NATO allies that they need to continue to have conversations in their houses and their parliaments that recognize the importance of getting this done.

I will go back to the fact that in the face of Russian aggression we stand united with our allies, our partners, in the defence of freedom for democracy and the right of people to determine their own futures. If not now, when would we try to band together like this? I recognize there has been criticism of NATO in the past, maybe of it being divided, but if we think of ourselves as an open hand, Vladimir Putin has accomplished making us into a fist.

We are committed. We are together. We need to move forward as quickly as possible.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.

I am in support of concurring in the fourth report of the Standing Committee of the Public Safety and National Security, which expresses its strong support for Finland's accession and Sweden's accession to the NATO alliance, and which calls on all NATO members to approve their application for NATO membership as soon as possible.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 24 was an illegal act of war. It was an unprovoked attack on a European democracy. It marks the first war between European states since 1945. It shattered the relative peace and security that we in the western alliance have enjoyed for the last eight decades, since the end of the Second World War.

Russia's war on Ukraine has actualized something that was once only theoretical. An authoritarian state led by an autocrat directly attacked—