Debates of May 9th, 2023

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I would like him to talk about how he sees the attack on our democracy. It is something that I keep coming back to but that is essential for me.

Does my colleague see a threat? What can we do? Has he been pressured? Since it is dangerous to remain silent, how can we talk about this to ensure that precedents are not set?

We are talking about China right now, but it could be any other country. Russia is allegedly responsible for interfering in elections in the United States. Pretty much all of us have been banned from visiting Russia.

If we were the ones being threatened, how would we react? How would the member react?

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

Madam Speaker, in terms of ensuring that these things do not happen again, we have to recognize the reality that we are going to see attempts at this kind of interference. We are going to see interference in the lives of members of Parliament, but also in the lives of other figures in our society, such as elite figures, university officials, people at other levels of government and everyday citizens.

We are going to continue to see these kinds of events, because this is the new reality. It is a reality in which there is intensified competition, but also a much higher degree of mutual penetration, between the different blocs than existed in the last Cold War. We are going to see these challenges intensify, so what do we do in response to that?

We need to undertake many of the measures that have been proposed, and many more, to make our societies stronger and more resilient against these kinds of threats. It is not just a matter of policy. There are policy changes that are required, the foreign influence registry and others, but we need to build a kind of social mentality that is resilient to these kinds of threats.

On the issue of misinformation, for example, government regulation is not the solution to misinformation. The solution is an informed, engaged and aware citizenry where the government is being frank and honest about those kinds of interference. It is something we all need to collectively respond to together.

We are going to continue to see these threats. We are going to have the struggle. This is a critical challenge that Parliament must meet in the days ahead, and we can meet it together, but the government has to step up and lead.

The other thing that is frustrating is that we hear members of the government complain about partisanship, yet they are doing nothing. It is our job to challenge them to take action, and when they take action, we will celebrate that action, absolutely. It was far too late, but it was a small step in the right direction to declare the diplomat in question persona non grata, but there are so many more steps that are required.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague's very thorough speech causes all of us to take time to reflect and think about the seriousness of the matter we are facing right now, and also about the absolute critical importance of Canada to do everything it can to restore its place on the international stage. What I mean by that is so that our allies have confidence in dealing with us as it relates to security matters, and so that we will be invited back to those key tables of influence.

I wonder if the hon. member would like to share some thoughts on the importance of re-establishing our credibility as it relates to protecting our sovereignty and our security.

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

Madam Speaker, there have been many failures from the government in defending our security, as this debate demonstrates. The evidence is there in terms of how our stature in the world has not been helped by the government; however, we should not be looking at our stature in the world as an end in and of itself. We should be recognizing how strengthening our real contribution to the advancement of freedom of democracy is going to both build our stature but also advance and protect our security.

What jumps out at me most in this context is the signing of the AUKUS agreement. The United States, the U.K. and Australia are coming together and saying that they are going to have an intelligence-sharing agreement, where they are going to work together and collaborate. It is great for them to be collaborating, but that intelligence sharing is supposed to be happening at the Five Eyes. We have three of the Five Eyes coming together, apart from the other two.

This should raise important questions for Canada. Why is Canada not at that table? Why is Canada not engaged in these important discussions? Why is Canada not more engaged with the Quad? Again, it is not engagement as an end in and of itself, but as a means to effectively standing up for our democratic values. The government's focus in the world has been trying to send signals and look good, but not to actually achieve concrete results, and it shows.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise tonight in the House once again to represent the people of the North Okanagan—Shuswap.

I will also state that it is even more of an honour to rise on this occasion to speak on the important ruling of the matter of privilege raised by my colleague, the member for Wellington—Halton Hills. In this ruling, the Speaker found a prima facie case of breach of privilege. It is an honour to stand here tonight and speak to defending our democracy in Canada, for Canada and for freedom and democracy everywhere.

I do not know if anyone in the House ever takes for granted the significance of our roles here to carry out the business of one of the freest countries in the world. I know that I never take it for granted; what an honour it is to defend our freedoms. They are the very reason we are here as elected representatives of the common people, freely elected through a democratic process and not appointed by a dictatorship.

We are here as elected representatives because the voters in our communities have entrusted us to carry out the democratic process without undue influence of money, undue influence of power and, especially, inappropriate influence or threats to our families. However, that is why we are here tonight, late at night, debating a point of privilege raised by one of us. A fellow parliamentarian was fairly elected through our democratic process, and this member has learned of alleged attempted influence on him through his family.

There was a report in The Globe and Mail on May 1. It claimed that there were CSIS documents from 2021 stating that the Communist government of China sees Canada as a prime target for interference. That report also stated that the family of the Conservative MP for Wellington—Halton Hills was targeted by a Chinese diplomat, Zhao Wei, because of how the hon. member had voted on a motion in the House.

The Prime Minister claimed that the note did not leave the CSIS office; top security officials have confirmed that this claim is false. The note was widely dispersed among government departments and the Prime Minister's national security adviser. In addition, The Canadian Press published a story earlier this week saying that, despite what the Minister of Public Safety claims, Chinese police stations are still operating in Quebec.

What is most troubling about this situation is that we, as elected members, continued to come to the House to work in our democratic process for almost two years after CSIS raised the alert about this foreign attack on our democracy. We believed that, in a democratic country, we were safe from intimidation as elected members. From this report and subsequent releases, we learned that the threats and intimidation occurred almost two years ago, and yet the member directly affected was not informed until he learned of it in the news, nor were the remainder of parliamentarians alerted to the threat.

These alleged threats to the family of a member do more than just influencing one member of the House. Any attack on one member is an attack on all members of the House, as well as an attack on the rule of law and on Canada's democracy overall.

I cannot imagine the stress that the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills must be going through knowing what has happened. Family is our sanctity. It should always be the reason for doing what is right. It should never be the reason for feeling threatened or pressured into doing something we know is wrong.

It has been two years since the government became aware that the MP and his family were being targeted by the regime in Beijing, and a full week after the information became public. We have learned now that the government has finally made the decision that should have been made on the day it found out about this attack on a member of the House of Commons.

It is unacceptable that the government has known that an MP and his family had been targeted by the Communist regime in Beijing for two years and it did not inform the member or the members in this House about the threats posed to that member's family. It is even further unacceptable that the government continued to provide diplomatic immunity for an agent of Beijing for two years after learning he was using his position to harass Canadians and their families.

Chinese Canadians and all Canadians across the country deserve to know that the government takes their safety and security seriously. While the government has finally taken action against the diplomat who threatened the member of Parliament, it has failed to shut down Beijing's police stations operating in Canada and failed to protect members of the community from harassment and intimidation. We know the government is slow to respond to threats to our security, and this must change. It took it years to respond to concern over Huawei's influence on the 5G network, something our allies had acted upon much earlier. The government lagged behind and, no doubt, caused concerns for our allies' joint security because of Canada's failure to act.

The fact that this interference ever occurred and it took this long to take action is proof of the government's incompetence in fulfilling its basic responsibility to protect Canadians. The government must take the other steps that the House voted on this week, including a public inquiry that will lay out what the government knew about Beijing's interference in our democratic process. This is the bare minimum it must do in order to restore any amount of trust from Canadians of any and all races, ethnic backgrounds, religions and spiritual beliefs so they will be free from undue foreign government interference. I fear for what could happen to us as Canadians and freedom across the world should the government fail to act.

It is very late and there may not be many people in this country watching at home right now, but my hope is that Canadians across the country will be watching and listening and will hold the government accountable, especially its leadership, for its actions and especially its inaction on issues like this that threaten Canada's security and the freedoms that people from around the world migrate to and aspire to. My hope is that Canadians and people around the world will be watching and will hold the government accountable.

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

Madam Speaker, indeed, it is late, but it is never too late to talk about issues as serious as this. What I have wanted to know since the start of this whole thing is how seriously is the Liberal government in power taking this issue. If we look at the measures this government has taken from the start, they coincided with the release of new information in the media every time.

The Liberals have known things for years, but, as long it does not end up in the papers, they do nothing. To me, that is not taking things seriously. It may even be an attempt to cover things up.

My question is simple. Does my colleague not believe that an independent public inquiry would shed light on all of this and that this issue will finally be taken seriously?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, the question is whether the government should take this issue seriously. Very much so, it should take this seriously. It concerns me, as a member of Parliament, that as this debate continues, we see members on the government side smirking and chuckling about the debate that is happening here. It is shameful that Canadians and parliamentarians have to find out the truth through media stories and not be informed by the government.

Information was provided to the government about members who have had their families threatened, and yet the government withheld that information for almost two years, until it came out publicly and, finally, the government was caught once again trying to hide its corruption.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I note the seriousness of the subject we are tackling here this evening. Having this happen to one of our colleagues, a member of this House, has sent shockwaves throughout the country and among fellow parliamentarians.

The fact is that there was a delay in the response, and I believe others around the world are looking at Canada's response to this and saying they do not know how seriously the government is taking it. They are asking why it took so long to make things right and deal with things properly.

I wonder if my hon. colleague has some comments related to the response and how long it took once we knew these things and they came to light?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question about why it took so long for the government to respond.

We can only speculate about that. If I was to speculate, I would say the government was hoping that it could be hidden and covered up and that nobody would expose it. It took two years for it to come out in the media, and it was finally exposed. That is why we are only just hearing about it and debating it now.

That is speculation, but I believe that the hope on the other side that it would never come to light is why it has taken this long for any action to be taken.

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

Madam Speaker, one point I want to add as more of a comment is that with critical G7 meetings coming up in Japan, I think it is very important for free democracies to work together on a coordinated response to transnational repression. That includes us learning from our allies by implementing measures such as the foreign influence registry. It also includes having a coordinated approach among allies on combatting forced labour in our supply chains. However, especially on this issue of protecting free democracies from foreign infiltration, I think we have a lot to learn from like-minded partners. It is very important that this is a priority on the agenda in those upcoming meetings.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, certainly we can learn from other countries, but hopefully we are not learning from dictatorships. Hopefully we can learn from democracies around the world, from other countries that are putting a spotlight and close eye on the wrongdoings of dictatorships like that of the Communist Party of China. Let us keep Canada free and keep Canadians feeling safe and secure in their own country.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. There being no further members rising for debate, pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the motion in relation to the breach of privilege in the name of the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills now before the House.

The question is on the motion.

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

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded vote.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 10, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

We have a point of order from the hon. Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Madam Speaker, I move:

That the House do now adjourn.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

Good night, everybody.

(The House adjourned at 11:51 p.m.)