Colin Carrie

[Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C‑78, November 28th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I have a troubling comment. The member for Hamilton East—Stoney Creek was stating quite publicly that he is not going to support this. He was threatened with unspecified consequences, threatened with punishment, because he did not want to support this. He even said caucus was not even consulted. This is highly unusual.

Was the member consulted before the government brought this piece of legislation in, and which businesses in her community did she consult with? The business owners in my community are extremely worried about it, especially about the cost of reprogramming their computers and the costs that are going to be laid down on them. Could the member just let the House know if she was consulted, and then which business owners she consulted?

[Privilege, November 27th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's speeches because she really gets down to the ideological drive of the current government. She knows that when the current Prime Minister was asked which country he admired the most, he said he admired the basic dictatorship of China. Most people on this side would have said Canada.

My concern is the drift of the government toward more censorship and more authoritarian methods to control information that is given to Canadians. In a free society, that is unacceptable.

Could my colleague please comment on this increase in censorship and how it leads to totalitarian governments?

[Privilege, November 27th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I do not like asking questions about this, but the trend of the NDP-Liberal government is toward greater obstruction and censorship. We are looking at the censorship bills Bill C-11, Bill C-18 and Bill C-63, and we cannot forget the Winnipeg lab. Do members remember when we were requesting those documents and the Prime Minister went as far as to take the Speaker to court? He actually called an election to keep Canadians from having that knowledge. I am extremely worried about the precedent we would set if we do not challenge the government on this point.

Could my colleague please talk about the importance of precedent? Enough is enough for the Canadian people with the government. Let us call an election.

[Privilege, November 26th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I was wondering if my colleague could talk about the Liberal Party members thumbing their noses at democracy. As he knows, we are the elected officials in the House, and we did have a vote. We voted that the government produce the documents.

As the member said, quite rightly, the government has a history. He talked about the Winnipeg lab. We went to an election so the Liberals would not have to share information with elected members of Parliament.

Could the member talk about how important it is to our democracy that we make sure these documents are produced? Right now, we have a government that just thumbs its nose at the elected representatives of Canadians.

[Privilege, November 26th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I was wondering if my colleague from Niagara West could elaborate a little bit more about our asking for these documents.

My constituents are really worried about censorship. It seems the government, no matter what, wants to cover things up. It puts in bills disguised as hate speech bills that are actually just to shut down debate. This has been an extremely troubling trend with the government, and its apologists, in the House. The apologists are supporting the government through this entire makeover of Canadians who believe in freedom of speech.

Could the member talk a little bit more about censorship and why it is important that we have these documents because Parliament is supreme, not the government?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 25th, 2024]

With regard to communication and meetings between the former Attorney General of Canada and the Chief Justice of Canada from January 2020 to June 2022, and the Office of the Prime Minister (PMO) and the Chief Justice of Canada during the same period: (a) how many times did the Attorney General and Chief Justice communicate with each other; (b) how many times did the PMO and Chief Justice communicate with each other; (c) what are the details of each communication in (a) and (b), including, the (i) date, (ii) subject, (iii) names of the people included in the communication, (iv) type of communication (e.g. email, phone, text, memorandum, messaging software, video conference, in person meeting, fax); (d) how many meetings occurred between (i) the Attorney General and the Chief Justice, (ii) the PMO and the Chief Justice; and (e) what are the details for each meeting in (d), including the (i) date, (ii) time, (iii) location, (iv) purpose of the meeting, (v) topics discussed in the meeting, (vi) meeting attendees, (vii) outcome of the meeting?

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 25th, 2024]

With regard to Health Canada’s (HC) and the Public Health Agency of Canada’s (PHAC) decision to withdraw the market authorization of and to destroy the COVID-19 XBB.1.5 vaccines and future assessment of upcoming mRNA vaccines: (a) are there material differences between the XBB.1.5 COVID-19 vaccines and the new 2024-2025 formulation beyond the mRNA coding for a different spike protein strain; (b) if (a) is affirmative, what are the differences; (c) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, how will Canadians processing claims against the vaccine manufacturers be able to prove their allegations when physical evidence is required and has been destroyed; (d) what is the estimated number of COVID-19 vaccine vials that will be destroyed, broken down by manufacturer (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, others); (e) what is the estimated dollar cost to Canadians to destroy these vaccine products, per vaccine and in total; (f) what is the regulatory process for COVID-19 vaccines which resulted in a “contractual obligation for Health Canada to withdraw all XBB products from the market until a lot could be released and distributed in Canada” (Global news); (g) what is the contractual obligation in (f) and with whom; (h) will provinces be able to order any interim supply of the COVID-19 XBB vaccines and, if not, why not; (i) with respect to the statement made by Pfizer/BioNTech on October 20, 2023, found on page 56 of Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) 2024-000097-2024-08-22, that Pfizer “would be open to discuss the outcome from the plasmid backbone modification evaluation with Health Canada”, does HC expect the removal of the SV40 sequences from the updated Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines for 2024-25; (j) is HC considering the assessment of future mRNA-based vaccines to continue under the Centre for Vaccines, Clinical Trials and Biostatistics or to be transferred to another Centre or Department within Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate or elsewhere, and, if so, what would be the criteria or rationale?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 22nd, 2024]

With regard to the government’s response to Order Paper Question Q-2741 relating to Statistics Canada (StatCan) and released data of provisional deaths and excess mortality during the time frames of June 13-27, 2022, July 4-18, 2022, and July 25-August 29, 2022: (a) what are the timeframe-matched denominators (i.e., the total number of individuals by vaccination status by dose and by age group) for each of the following vaccination status categories (i) COVID-19 cases following vaccination, (ii) COVID-19 cases in the unvaccinated, (iii) deaths following vaccination according to doses 1, 2 and 3, (iv) deaths in the unvaccinated; (b) what steps were taken to investigate the underlying reasons for this unusual finding of excess deaths in young persons; (c) why is there a discrepancy between the data that was released on the StatCan website for “other ill-defined and unspecified causes of mortality” in 2022 and the value provided in the government response to Order Paper Question Q-1115 for the same year and same category; and (d) what are the details of the memo drafted by the PCO in May 2021 which instructed recipients to skew statistics to minimize the impact of vaccine-related deaths or injuries, including (i) which agencies or entities and which specific officials received this memo, (ii) how did the agencies or entities carry out the PCO’s instructions vis-a-vis statistical skewing, (iii) who at each agency or entity signed off on the report of the data?

[Privilege, November 6th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Cumberland—Colchester's speech was excellent. A friend of mine moved out to his area, and he said that we could still actually get homes in the member's area for anywhere from $200,000 to $400,000, which means that just this one scandal, the $400-million scandal, accounts for 1,000 to 2,000 homes that could be built in the member's riding.

We talk about the corruption that is consistently supported by the NDP. Its members talk about all the programs and things like that, but we are looking at billions of dollars of misappropriated and misspent money. As a physician, I think about the beds in hospitals that could have been built permanently for this amount of money.

Could the member comment on his own community and how much good could have been done with the funds if they had not been so misappropriated and given to Liberal friends?

[Committees of the House, November 5th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, the report that the member brings to the attention of the House is so important.

The member talks about how the Liberal Party has been all pain and no gain. The member for Whitby actually is on the record saying that the Liberals know that their net zero policies are going to cause pain intentionally. What kind of government intentionally causes pain for its population?

We do know that the Liberal leader admires the basic dictatorship of China. The Liberals talk about radicalism, but it seems to be moving further and further towards wokeness. I am wondering whether the member could talk about Canada's competitiveness, because right now we know that we have to compete with the world. What difference are carbon taxes and crazy radical policies going to make for Canadian manufacturers?