Debates of Oct. 8th, 2025

Canadian Heritage

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for what I am assuming was intended to be a response to the question.

The Conservatives have zero objection to cracking down hard on online child sexual exploitation, and I hope the government will support the bill of the member for Calgary Signal Hill taking aim at that. However, the Liberal government, in Bill C-36 and Bill C-63, lumped that in with its Orwellian anti-free speech censorship laws to do exactly what the parliamentary secretary is doing right now, which is to say that if we do not trust the government to weaponize the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal with a lower murky threshold for so-called hate speech, we are therefore okay with child sexual exploitation, which we are not.

Will the parliamentary secretary clear things up right now and say that section 13 of the Canadian Human Right Act, under the so-called online harms guise, will not be coming back and censoring Canadian speech online?

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, censoring Canadians is obviously a non-starter since our government is in the business of upholding their rights.

Bill C‑11 and Bill C‑18 were designed to restore a level playing field between the dominant digital platforms and Canadian producers and distributors of cultural and news content, respectively.

These legislative measures do not tell Canadians what cultural products to consume or restrict their access to a wide variety of Canadian and international media content. Right now, platforms are neither accountable nor transparent in how they manage harmful content, especially content that has a serious impact on children.

Our government strongly defends freedom of expression and freedom of press, two essential pillars of our democracy. Our government does not censor. We protect. We defend freedom of expression, advocate for and support Canadian media, and keep our children safe online.

Health

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is very simple. It is a yes-or-no question. Can the Liberals confirm if Canadian Blood Services is currently honouring its commitment that all products made from its blood donations will stay in Canada, yes or no?

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives try to spread misinformation, but the reality is very different.

First, Canadian Blood Services manages Canada's blood supply, outside Quebec, independently and at arm's length from the federal government. Héma-Québec operates the same way within Quebec. Both work with the provinces and territories; in turn, they determine how plasma is collected in their jurisdictions, including the role of paid plasma collection.

Health Canada is involved in only the regulation of the safety of blood plasma collection and products made from blood and plasma. It has no role in the day-to-day operations of Canadian Blood Services, no matter what the Conservatives insinuate.

Second, as the Conservatives are all very well aware, Canadian Blood Services has stated time and again that it does not sell the blood or plasma it collects from Canadians. For the Conservatives to imply otherwise will only spread misinformation and fear at a time when our provincial and territorial partners are working hard to increase their blood and plasma supplies.

Lastly, Canadian Blood Services has made it very clear that it is selling a waste by-product called albumin to Grifols. Canadian Blood Services has stated publicly and repeatedly that Canada already has sufficient albumin for the needs of Canadians and is therefore allowing Grifols to sell excess albumin.

What this means for Canadians is that Grifols takes albumin, sends it to a manufacturing facility outside Canada and turns it into life-saving plasma. Again, it is a waste by-product. Canadian Blood Services then buys it back at a significantly reduced rate, increasing the Canadian blood supply.

In fact, because of agreements such as this one, Grifols is opening the very first manufacturing facility in Canada for plasma products, in Saint-Laurent, Montreal. That will establish Canada's very first end-to-end domestic blood supply chain.

To state this clearly: Canadian Blood Services is not selling Canadian blood overseas. It is working to increase our blood supply. Selling off excess waste products has no impact on Canada's blood supply. Canadians can rest assured that if they have donated plasma to Canadian Blood Services or Héma-Québec, it is being used exclusively to make products for Canadians, and these products are not being sold abroad.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member did not answer my question.

Surely, Health Canada would know this. Is Canadian Blood Services currently honouring its commitment that all products made from its blood donations stay in Canada, yes or no?

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again, the reality is far different from the complicated misinformation the Conservatives would have Canadians believe. Canadian Blood Services operates at arm's length from the federal government and is working to increase the supply of blood and plasma for Canadians. We will encourage Canadian Blood Services to make sure Canada's blood supply is always there for Canadians, and there is no evidence to suggest it is not working in the best interest of Canadians. It is disappointing that Conservatives would try to discourage Canadians from donating blood to Canadian Blood Services.

Indigenous Affairs

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, in response to the throne speech, I asked if the minister would reverse the government's colonial approach or if indigenous rights would be violated. The Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations replied with promises about nation-building projects, a stronger economy and a stronger Canada.

I do not see how Canada can become stronger when the rights of indigenous peoples are being violated by the current government. Fundamental indigenous rights are being denied. Many indigenous people still do not have access to clean drinking water. Inuit children are going to school hungry. Families are sleeping in overcrowded or mouldy houses. Free, prior and informed consent is disregarded.

How quickly Bill C-5 was passed showed the true colours of the Liberals. They do not respect indigenous peoples. They prevented the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. The Liberals only hold meetings with indigenous nations to win votes. When Bill C-5 was pushed through Parliament, thousands of indigenous people had been and remained evacuated from forest fires. While indigenous people coped with losing their livelihoods, the Liberals violated their rights to give free, prior and informed consent to Bill C-5.

The Liberals' goal of building Canada strong oppresses indigenous nations. Building Canada strong keeps indigenous people in poverty. It keeps indigenous people without infrastructure like housing, infrastructure to provide safe drinking water and infrastructure to generate economies based on indigenous strength.

In 2021, Canada adopted UNDRIP, which committed Canada to taking the necessary measures to ensure Canadian laws are consistent with UNDRIP. On free, prior and informed consent, it states that UNDRIP will provide all peoples with the right to “freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”.

The Liberals see FPIC as a barrier to economic goals. Their investments in natural resource development manipulate indigenous communities into economic development disguised as economic reconciliation. There is no reconciliation in taking land and resources from indigenous people without consent.

The Prime Minister had meetings with indigenous people after Bill C-5 was passed. This is not respect for indigenous people, especially when they specifically called for delaying the passing of Bill C-5.

The Liberals' indigenous advisory council is another Liberal ploy to deceive Canadians into thinking indigenous voices are being heard. A council of indigenous advisers is not a suitable replacement for consultation with indigenous rights holders. In what way will the advisory council's role respect rights holders?

[Claude Guay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the chance to further answer her question.

Today, I speak in strong support of the government's unwavering commitment to consulting with indigenous people and fostering genuine opportunities for indigenous equity in major projects. Canada stands at a pivotal moment in its journey to reconciliation, one that calls for true partnership and meaningful action. This commitment is not just a promise; it is embedded in our legislation and operational practices, ensuring indigenous rights are upheld and indigenous knowledge is actively incorporated into assessments for all projects of national interest.

A critical feature of the newly created Major Projects Office is its indigenous advisory council. This council brings together 11 exceptional representatives from first nations, Inuit, Métis and modern treaty and self-governing communities from across the country. The council's expert advice shapes policy and improves operational practices, guaranteeing that indigenous perspectives and interests are truly embedded in major project decision-making. This is not just an advisory role in name only; its contributions will have tangible impacts on project design, execution and outcome, reflecting our dedication to nation-to-nation, government-to-government and Inuit-Crown relationships grounded in respect and recognition of rights, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

We know that reconciliation and economic transformation go hand in hand with the inclusion of indigenous peoples. That is why our government has doubled and expanded the indigenous loan guarantee program. Initially launched as a $5-billion initiative, this program now dedicates $10 billion to supporting indigenous peoples' participation in capital, not only in energy and natural resource projects, but also in infrastructure, transportation and trade projects. This program addresses persistent barriers to financing and encourages indigenous communities to participate in major projects, thereby opening new avenues to prosperity.

However, our work does not stop there. The Major Projects Office has made significant financial commitments totalling $40 million over two years to strengthen indigenous peoples' ability to participate in major projects. From the earliest stages of project development, these targeted investments help participants hone technical skills, deploy clean technologies and support indigenous communities in their energy transition and sustainable resource development.

Advancing reconciliation is not only the right thing to do, it is also essential to Canada's long-term economic growth and environmental stewardship. Our success depends on building strong, respectful relationships with indigenous peoples, who are the original stewards of this land. We are therefore taking bold and historic steps to ensure that indigenous peoples have access to capital and are truly part of the prosperity that these projects generate.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, it is clear that the Liberals have no concern for indigenous peoples and their rights. Their so-called consultations were nothing more than a publicity stunt to limit backlash. The Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Assembly of First Nations and Métis nations expressed their concerns regarding Bill C-5. However, it was still rushed through to become law.

At the same time, the Liberal government is projecting cuts to Indigenous Services Canada. Making cuts to Indigenous Services Canada programs and services would mean losing investments in indigenous peoples' well-being and support. How will the Liberal government support indigenous peoples' well-being?

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will appreciate a few examples of indigenous-owned and partly owned projects that our government helped fund. Let us start in Saskatchewan with the Bekevar Wind energy project. This is one of Canada's largest wind farms. The Cowessess First Nation is a majority owner, and it is backed by $50 million in federal support.

There is also the Oneida Energy Storage project. A leading example of large-scale battery storage, this facility is a partnership that includes the Six Nations of the Grand River Development Corporation, Northland Power, NRStor and Aecon Group. It stands out as one of the largest indigenous-partner energy storage facilities in North America. It received $15 million from the federal government.

There are many more examples I can speak to, but let me be clear that we are committed to reconciliation, to duty to consult and to supporting indigenous equity and leadership—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:53 p.m.)