House of Commons Hansard #191 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was interference.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

NDP

Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, in the House today and in committee meetings, we have seen the Conservatives and the Liberals proving that a public inquiry is the best place for this investigation. We have seen committee filibusters and hyperpartisan attacks instead of discussing the issues that matter to Canadians. From the member for Vancouver East, we have heard of many of the impacts on Chinese Canadians from these hyperpartisan attacks. They need to stop.

My question to the member is this: When will we see the Conservatives finally stop the partisan games and start working together towards solutions?

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, it will not surprise the member that I do not agree with her characterization of the Conservatives' role in this. We have been putting forward constructive solutions from the beginning. We have been proposing policy ideas that the government could take. Our motion is very clear in putting forward policy solutions. It does not contain any shots at the government in terms of the policy proposals that are being put forward. It proposes solutions. If the House could get behind these solutions, then I think we would have a clear road map for going forward. I am proud of the role we have played in holding the government accountable and also in being constructive in the approach we are taking.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, it has been an interesting debate thus far. I hope to be able to contribute to it in a relatively positive way. At least that is my initial intent.

I reflect on what the New Democratic member put on the record regarding the impact it is having in one community. It is a good starting point, recognizing that international interference takes all sorts of different forms and comes from a wide variety of other countries. It is not just from one country. That is important for us to understand and appreciate as we continue the debate today.

It is also important for us to realize that Canada is not alone. It is not as if Canada is the only democracy in the world being looked at as a country that is vulnerable to foreign interference. We can talk about the U.S.A., Australia and France. We can talk about other democracies where the same sorts of attempts are being made in different ways by different countries. It is an intentional attack to try to undermine the things that Canadians value so much: our democracy, our freedoms. These are the things that are important to Canadians and to all members of the House. At the end of the day, it is important that we recognize those two facts.

The other really important thing for all of us to recognize is that members of Parliament have been targeted in a very real and tangible way. It is not only members of Parliament, but also members of legislatures across Canada, councillors and others. A CSIS report gave some numbers for 2022. There were threats against 49 members of Parliament; 26 provincial threats, which I cannot say with certainty were against MLAs, but I am pretty sure they were MLAs; and threats against 17 municipal councillors. These were cases that CSIS was involved in. It affects all of us when one person, let alone dozens of elected officials, is being made vulnerable, being manipulated or threatened in any fashion.

In my political career, I have had one or two occasions when my life was threatened. I like to think, whether it is a minister, a prime minister, leaders of political parties or others in the chamber, that we would all get behind the member and their right to represent the constituents to whom they are assigned through our electoral process.

There are mechanisms in place. When members of the New Democratic Party stand and say that we need to dial it down and make it less political, there are mechanisms to make it less political. It is not the governing party that is bringing the issues up. In many ways, the governing party has been listening and has even been taking serious and significant verbal abuse on the issue. All one needs to do is look at the question periods from earlier this week.

However, the government continues to respect the work that CSIS has done. I think it is important to recognize the role that CSIS plays in this whole area. When we really get down to the nuts and bolts of it, it is a question of whether we have confidence and faith in CSIS. The Government of Canada does. That is why we have seen people, whether the Prime Minister, the minister responsible or others, reflect as much as possible on what they know through CSIS, as far as their participation in CSIS allows.

When the Prime Minister said that he was made aware of it on Monday, all the allegations, the heckling and the words being said on the record, by the Conservative Party primarily, I would suggest, did politicize the issue.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, as they continue to want to heckle, they can look and review.

The government, in a very real way, has been clear. An attack against one member of Parliament, in any form, is an attack on all members of Parliament. When the Prime Minister found out about it earlier this week, he ensured that CSIS would have meetings with the member in question, like the other 49 members in 2022. I do not know the content, but I understand that there have been numerous members to whom CSIS has provided a general briefing.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, the member who is heckling now does not know the content of those briefings, just as I do not know. I do not know, and the member should admit he does not know either.

It was on Monday that the Prime Minister found out about it, and he took immediate action. If we want to start to depoliticize, as some in the chamber are saying is so important for us to do, we need to look at what it is.

Do they support CSIS? Let us put it into perspective the work that CSIS does. Let me read from the CSIS report. It says:

In an increasingly dangerous and polarized world, Canada faces multiple threats to our security, sovereignty, national interests, and values. CSIS is committed to keeping Canada and Canadians safe from all threats to our national security.

In doing so, CSIS investigates activities that fall within the definition of threats to the security of Canada as outlined in the CSIS Act. Specifically, CSIS is authorized to investigate espionage and sabotage, foreign interference, terrorism and extremism, and subversion. Importantly, CSIS is prohibited from investigating lawful advocacy, protest or dissent—except when it is carried out in conjunction with activities that constitute a threat to the security of Canada.

This is what I really want to emphasize, just so that members have a sense of the reporting and how important it is that we have a protocol put in place. The report states, “In undertaking its work, CSIS reports on these threats by providing advice to the Government of Canada, including through the production of intelligence assessments and reports”, like the one I am citing right now. CSIS has produced over 2,500 intelligence reports. That is, I would argue, one of the reasons that it is CSIS's responsibility to recognize those issues that need to be elevated. It has a responsibility to all members of the House. If there are concerns in regard to their safety or something that it believes that a member should be aware of, it can have that consultation. I have never had that consultation. Maybe that is something that, as a standard rule, CSIS should provide in the future for all members of Parliament. I think it might be something worthwhile.

Every member has the opportunity to ensure that they have that discussion, and it is CSIS that determines what information it is prepared to release, whether to the individual in question or whether to someone higher up. Like the rest of the House, we just found out about the case regarding the particular member. The Prime Minister has now indicated that all cases, and I would assume that would include the 49 in 2022 that CSIS looked into, should be brought to the attention of the PMO. I see that as a tangible action, just like I see a tangible action where we have the Minister of Foreign Affairs now calling upon the ambassador to come before the government.

We constantly hear from the Conservatives, “Expel the diplomat, expel the diplomat.” They do not even know the content, yet they feel that they can be judge, jury and whatever else. They have made the determination. That could be the determination, but I do not know the facts. How could the opposition know the facts? Do they know something that we do not know? Maybe the members of the opposition should be a little more transparent. If they know something, they should tell us. All they are saying is that we must get rid of the diplomat. That could ultimately be the case, but I think we have to go through the process and have confidence in CSIS.

We can take a look at a government that has been proactive on the issue of political interference. In the days of Stephen Harper, not all of those days but a good number of them, I sat in opposition. What did Harper actually do? Let me tell members some of the things that the Government of Canada has done since we have been in government. We established a national security and intelligence committee of parliamentarians. When we were in opposition, we called, virtually begged, for prime minister Harper to bring in that committee. We attempted to get that committee. It was one of the big pushes that we made.

Shortly after getting elected, we instituted that committee. The Conservatives even protested it for a while. There was about a year during which they would not even participate in the committee. What does that committee actually do? It would address the issues we are talking about today. The committee could actually have CSIS come before it and obligate CSIS to share the information. The individuals who sit on that committee are Conservatives, Bloc members, Liberals, NDP members, I believe, and members of the Senate. That is something that we put into place shortly after the election.

What about the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency, again, bringing together an organization to ensure that there is a proper review in process to protect the integrity and the safety of our freedoms and our democracy? That is a substantial initiative by the government. We had a critical election incident public protocol put into place, with top civil servants, so if something does happen during an election, in terms of foreign interference, there is something tangible through the group that deals with security, intelligence and threats during elections.

We established the rapid response mechanism for sharing intelligence with our G7 partners. Because Canada has made significant progress, a lot of the knowledge that has been gathered to date is now being shared among our allied countries.

Those are some of the initiatives we have taken as a government, because we take the issue seriously. Let us compare that to Stephen Harper.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, it is the ghost of Harper.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Yes, the ghost of Harper. He is haunting. He is kind of spooky, I agree.

Mr. Speaker, look at what Stephen Harper did. Let me think about what he did. I could not come up with anything because there was nothing that the former prime minister did. The ultimate irony is in who was responsible for democratic reform at the time, when CSIS first raised the issue of foreign interference. Let us think about who it was. It is almost like a Trivial Pursuit question. I think my colleague from Kingston and the Islands knows the answer.

What we find is that it was the Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada. That is why it is difficult, when we see the members of the political party opposite feeling they can be as political as they want. They can take all the cheap shots and say whatever they want, and there is no recourse. Heaven forbid they are called out on it. If I point out some of the obvious things, then I am the bad guy.

In fact, I listened to Conservatives this week, and the language they were using this week—

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Going back to the Hansard, the member member for Winnipeg North said earlier, “The member for Wellington—Halton Hills has known for two years.” That has already been proven to be false.

The member opposite has not apologized for misleading the House. The member for Wellington—Halton Hills has the utmost integrity, and all members of this House respect him. We all agree on that. He openly stated that there was a general briefing, and there were no specific details in it.

The member opposite has not yet apologized for misleading the House and impugning the integrity and honour of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. He should apologize right now.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

That is not a point of order.

On the same point of order, even though it is not a point of order, the hon. member for Winnipeg North.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, a number of Conservatives who have actually stood up for the point of order all had a piece of paper in their hand. I suspect that might be the speaking notes they have been provided, and they should not be able to use it.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

It's the blues.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, they have all been provided the blues. They all wave the blues in front of me.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

We are descending into debate. The member has a whole three minutes left in his time.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, we have to admit, it is somewhat cute. I say that they have their speaking points and that they have been assigned the responsibility. I make reference to it, and they all start waving it. They all have the same clip. I think I saw three paragraphs on each piece of paper. They have been given their directions.

At the end of the day, let us be real here. I have tried to amplify exactly what the Conservative Party did, and it is not hard to imagine it. While the Conservatives were in government, they did zero.

I gave a lengthy list of the types of things we have done. I know we could do more. That is the reason we appointed former governor general Johnston as the special rapporteur. This is something that could ultimately lead to a public inquiry. The Prime Minister has been very clear on that. If Mr. Johnston comes back saying that a public inquiry is necessary, that is what is going to happen. However, we are hoping that there will be a number of things, and that could be a part of it.

When the Conservatives talk about the registry, that is now already in the works. We have a minister who has opened up the department to getting the feedback so we can ensure that we develop a registry that is going to be effective.

Not only have we done things in the last number of years, but we are also looking forward to continuing to build on protecting Canada's democracy and rights and ensuring that whether a person is a member of Parliament or a Canadian citizen, we have a process in place to protect them. The person does not have to be an MP; they could be a Canadian citizen.

Not that long ago, I was meeting with some constituents who were fearful to have a picture taken with me. They could not afford to see it in any form on social media because of potential repercussions in another country. I do not need to be told how real it is. I will defend the rights of all members of Parliament on this issue. No one should be intimidated.

I am proud to be a part of a government that recognizes this and has actually taken tangible actions in the past and continues to do so today. In the future, we will continue to build a stronger and healthier system so that Canadians feel comfortable and know we have a democracy that works for all Canadians. We will continue to support CSIS.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, gaslighting and victim-blaming did not work. Now the member is saying that it happens in other countries too, so it does not matter as much. The member is trying to diminish the gravity of what is happening here.

However, what he fails to realize entirely is that this motion was not just brought forward on behalf of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills; rather, it has been brought forth for the millions of Canadians who have come to Canada from hostile countries and who have great fears about what is happening to their families back home and even to their families here in Canada. They have these fears because the Prime Minister has yet to close down the Chinese police stations set up by the Communists there to harass citizens living in Canada.

With the lack of importance given to securing our very own members in the House of Commons, what kind of confidence can new Canadians have in their security?

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, members will recall that I actually said in my comments that in 2022, there were 49 members of Parliament; 26 MLAs; 17 councillors or reeves, those classified as municipal; and a huge number of Canadians affected. Some of them were really tangibly affected. I just made reference to, not that long ago, meeting with individuals who were nervous to have pictures taken for the simple reason that they were concerned about repercussions back home. That is the motivating factor for the Prime Minister, the Minister of Public Safety and, indeed, I would like to think, for all of us.

No one inside this chamber, I would like to think, supports in any way whatsoever that a foreign country would try to interfere, directly or indirectly, with the lives of Canadians. This is the reason that the Prime Minister and the government take the issue seriously; this is why we have taken the actions we have taken to date. It is just the Conservatives who continue to want to politicize the issue.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, we learned a few months ago in the Journal de Montréal that there were two Chinese police stations in Brossard. However, when I asked an RCMP officer about that at a meeting of the Special Committee on the Canada–People's Republic of China Relationship at the beginning of February, he told me that there were none in Quebec. A few weeks later, we learned that there actually were.

We also learned that the woman who heads up those two Chinese police stations was a candidate in the Brossard municipal election. She was elected and we now know that the Chinese platform WeChat was sending messages in Mandarin to members of the Chinese community in Brossard. That is likely one of the reasons why she got elected.

How can we ensure that this type of interference does not occur in the federal process if we do not hold a truly independent public inquiry?

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, there is zero tolerance for international interference into Canadian society. I talked about the importance of Canadian values. I can say from a personal perspective that there is no appetite at all, as in zero tolerance, for any form of international police force being established that is not Canadian—

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

On a point of order, the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC

Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a problem with facts here. I would like the member to explain what he means by “zero tolerance”.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, “zero tolerance” is something that has been well established for many years at different levels of government. It means we do not tolerate it at all. If that helps the member, I am glad to be of assistance. I hope this did not come off my time.

Opposition Motion—Interference by the People's Republic of ChinaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

That is not a point of order.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre.