Borys Wrzesnewskyj

[Petitions, April 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition signed by some 30 people from my riding of Etobicoke Centre.

The petitioners are deeply worried about the ongoing challenges faced by Somalia in nurturing civil society and are calling upon the Canadian government to appoint a special envoy to Somalia. As well, Somalia is in the grips of a major drought and my constituents are urging the Canadian government to step up to the plate in this time of need. A famine's death march does not wait.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as my predecessors have done, I would like to congratulate you on your new position.

I would like to thank the member for Kitchener--Waterloo for a most enlightening speech and for his dogged determination over the years to guarantee that all Canadians, Canadians by birth and Canadians by choice, are treated equally by legislation, and that Canadians by choice have the same charter rights and are not subjected to the political process of citizenship revocation.

In the last session of Parliament the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration tabled a report dealing with the question of citizenship revocation. How does my colleague think the current government may best deal with the flawed citizenship revocation process?

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Discussions have taken place between all parties with respect to Bill C-385, an act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda) which received first reading on May 11, 2005. I hope to find consent for the following motion, “That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, Bill C-385 be deemed to have been read a second time, referred to committee of the whole, reported without amendment, concurred in at report stage, read a third time and passed”.

This is especially appropriate as in two weeks we will be marking the 14th anniversary of the massacre that took place at Montreal's l'École Polytechnique.

[Ukraine, November 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as a light snow fell on my way to the House of Commons this morning, I felt a moment of nostalgia. On this morning one year ago, I stood in Independence Square with Viktor Yushchenko as a light snow fell on a gathering of tens of thousands of people.

The day before massive fraud was committed against the will of the Ukrainian people. Canadian observers documented hundreds of cases of fraud and intimidation reaching the highest levels. All exit polls showed Yushchenko had been chosen by the people, yet the interfering Russian government announced Yanukovych the victor.

In addressing the gathering crowd, I congratulated Yushchenko as being the duly elected president and assured that the people of Canada would stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Ukraine.

During the weeks that followed, the crowds grew to millions. Our Prime Minister provided critical support to the people of Ukraine at key points in time. In the end, the colour orange spread over the snow covered cities of Ukraine like the promising rays of sunshine.

I would like to thank the Prime Minister, every parliamentarian and the thousand Canadian observers, including former prime minister John Turner, for rising to the occasion. Not a single life was lost and the will of the people overcame the forces arrayed against them. As the slogan of people--

[Criminal Code, November 21st, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the kind comments about the government, through the Senate, having brought this bill forward.

A couple of interesting items were touched upon. Cultural destruction and genocide also deal with the tremendous hatred that the perpetrators feel toward the particular culture or peoples being destroyed. We could go on and on about this topic.

[Criminal Code, November 21st, 2005]

Madam Speaker, once in a while we get bills from the Senate, and it is encouraging. Although we may have various opinions on the role of the Senate and its effectiveness, in this case I think we can all agree that it has addressed a very important issue and it needs to be commended.

I do not know the intricacies of the law and how it would be applied when it comes to war crimes. From my understanding, Canadians who get involved, whether to culturally destroy or most likely in existing situations these days to get involved in looting and pillaging, that is the business of buying and selling the culture and history of peoples, unfortunately, have ended up in situations of conflict and wars.

Quite rightly, there should not be a situation where Canadians can feel that once they travel beyond the borders of Canada, what happens there is of no concern to Canadian law. At a point in time perhaps a majority of people held that point of view. I believe the member has brought up a great example when it comes to the abuse of children in countries overseas. The fact that it takes place somewhere other than Canada does not make the person less guilty or innocent. Abuse for profit of culture, cultural artifacts and records should be considered just as criminal should it happen in Canada or overseas.

[Criminal Code, November 21st, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for being very kind in his comments about my work. The work I have done over the last year has given me quite a perspective on some of the destruction that takes place in conflict zones around the world. The twentieth century was horrendous when it came to mass killings and cultural destruction. Some would argue it was a century of cultural genocide that often accompanied acts of human genocide.

The member mentioned Ukraine, which is part of my ancestry. It is fascinating because it ties back to the question of why, in the late 1940s to 1954, although a state party to these protocols, we did not sign on to them.

One of the signatories to these protocols was the Soviet Union. A number of vassal states in central and eastern Europe were newly enslaved. There was a great dilemma at that time. If we signed on, were we providing the Soviet Union with another method to go about the very cultural destruction that it had clearly demonstrated over the previous years and decades?

We have to remember that this was the Stalinist regime. Stalin was a party to signing these protocols at that time. It was mentioned that its recent history was 1954. While I was not born at that time, I have some knowledge of that history. It was this same regime that committed genocide through the Holodomor, the famine in Ukraine in the early thirties. It was the same regime that burned down hundreds of churches in Kiev and throughout Ukraine. It destroyed thousands and thousands of churches and libraries. It was the same regime that burned down the archival library in Kiev, which held manuscripts and archives going back to the tenth century.

There was no question why we were unable to sign on with partners such as the Soviet Union at that time. It was signing on because it saw a particular advantage. It could use cultural institutions as the premises for military intelligence operations. The same regime performed a similar trick with the Helsinki accords. After signing the Helsinki accords, it immediately sent numerous people into the gulags.

It provides a little historical context as to why Canada did not sign on at that point in time. However, today is the right time. We have seen the destruction that takes place during times of war, especially today in Iraq. It is a terrible situation in that country. Unfortunately, one of the things that is not discussed is once this conflict is over, a lot of that cultural history, the repository of thousands of years of history of a people and of all civilization, will have been destroyed.

[Criminal Code, November 21st, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in favour of Bill S-37 which would provide the basis for Canada to go forward and join the two protocols to the Hague convention. Canada is already a state party to the convention. By joining the protocols Canada would strengthen its long held commitment to international cooperation in the protection of the world's heritage.

By joining the protocols and by ensuring that we can prosecute violations of the convention and protocols in Canadian law, we will send a message that Canada will not be a haven for those who destroy, damage, and loot cultural property abroad during armed conflict. The bill has now had the benefit of consideration by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and I am pleased to say that during its discussions the committee acknowledged the importance and even the urgency of Canada joining the Hague protocols. The committee supported the intent of the bill.

A number of important issues were raised by the committee about the bill and about the implication of Canada's membership in the convention and its protocols. What have we learned? First, that the Hague convention and its two protocols reflect obligations toward cultural property that are already well enshrined in international law and in other treaties such as the additional first protocol to the 1949 Geneva convention. This means that Bill S-37 and Canada's proposed ascension to the protocols will not add new operational burdens or legal risk for our armed forces. Second, we have learned that the international community is increasingly ready to identify acts against cultural property during conflicts, as war crimes, and to punish those who commit such acts.

The more countries that adhere to agreements such as the Hague convention and its protocols, the more effective such efforts will be. We have also, thanks to the committee, learned more about the ramifications of the proposed amendments. For example, the new offences will not apply retroactively. We have learned that with Bill S-37 everything Canada will need to implement the Hague protocols will be in place in Canadian law. The amendments proposed by Bill S-37 would ensure that there are no gaps in our ability to implement our treaty obligations once we join these two important agreements.

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage voted unanimously to adopt Bill S-37 without amendment. This is an important step for Canada. It is a good bill. Let us give it our support.

[Criminal Code, November 21st, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for giving such a great historical perspective and then bringing it to the present day.

My question is in terms of the death and destruction taking place in Iraq and the largely unreported tremendous cultural destruction that is taking place. When the Buddhas were being destroyed in Afghanistan, there was a tremendous amount of press regarding that one particular horrendous act. Yet, there have been a series of acts of destruction in Iraq that have largely gone unreported. What correlation does the member see between the lack of reporting with regard to Iraq and the fact that the United States and the U.K. are involved in the war in Iraq?

[Ukraine, November 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, November marks one of the greatest tragedies in human history, when 7 to 10 million members of farm families which had just brought in record harvests, were deliberately starved to death in the breadbasket of Europe by the Soviet regime in 1932-33.

The Stalinist regime perpetrated the Great Famine/Holodomor by making food illegal in Ukraine's countryside. Red Brigades, under the direction of Lazar Kaganovich, seized grain, prevented the starving population from leaving the countryside and then sent the food to the west for export. This was done to eliminate resistance to the forced collectivization of agriculture and to destroy Ukraine's national identity.

On the eve of the 70th anniversary of Holodomor, the UN declared a week of commemoration in memory of the victims of the Great Famine in Ukraine.

I join all members of the House in calling upon the Government of Canada to recognize the Holodomor of 1932-33 in Ukraine and to condemn this genocidal act of inhuman brutality by Stalin and his henchmen.