David Anderson

[Religious Freedom, September 23rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, nearly 75% of the world's population is affected by religious persecution. It is the defining issue of our time and deserves a coordinated international response.

Recently, I had the honour of attending the second international conference of the International Panel of Parliamentarians for Freedom of Religion or Belief, or IPPFoRB, which is an information network of members of Parliament advancing freedom of religion or belief.

Last week, we hosted nearly 100 parliamentarians from 60 countries. We met in Berlin to address specific countries of concern to foster regional connections, and to resource and equip ourselves to pursue long-term solutions and be effective in our home countries.

Despite having the world's worst acronym, IPPFoRB continues to work to protect and promote the embattled right to believe. As a founding member of IPPFoRB, I invite all members of the House to join this important network.

The right to believe is what shapes our common humanity. If we are not vigilant, we risk losing it.

[The Economy, September 22nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. All that was achieved without the participation of the agriculture minister.

Here are the results of the Prime Minister bringing his friends here. Alberta energy investment is lost. Agricultural jobs are disappearing. Industries are being hammered. The government's carbon tax scheme is being blamed, and the Liberals have already said that Canadians will be punished with ever-increasing carbon taxes. This is how they destroy an economy: one Liberal policy at a time.

When will the Liberals remove their bull's eye from the western Canadian economy?

[The Environment, September 19th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are threatening the provinces and Canadians with new climate taxes. The Liberals have been clear: they do not get things their way, they are just going to slap on more taxes, including fuel taxes. Higher fuel taxes punish rural Canadians and agriculture more than anyone else.

This is the start of Canadians paying more for everything. Why are the Liberals so viciously targeting rural people and agriculture with their new climate taxation fixation?

[The Environment, September 19th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are declaring all out war on the provinces that do not want to go along with their carbon tax scheme. They are not even willing to do their own work. Yesterday we saw paid PMO officials attacking Brad Wall, the most popular premier in Canada.

Is this the best the Liberals can do on climate change, using unelected staff to attack a premier for defending his province's interests?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 14th, 2016]

With regard to any government body obligated to respond to requests under the Access to Information Act, from November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016: (a) how many Access to Information requests have been received; and (b) of those requests in (a), how many (i) were completed within 40 days, (ii) were extended for 40 days, (iii) were extended for 60 days, (iv) were extended for 90 days, (v) were extended for more than 90 days, (vi) missed the deadline to provide the requested information?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 14th, 2016]

With regard to government travel, from November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016: how many visits to First Nation reserves have each of the following cabinet members made, broken down by reserve, (i) the Prime Minister, (ii) the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, (iii) the Minister of Justice, (iv) the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, (v) the Minister of Finance, (vi) the Minister of Canadian Heritage, (vii) the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, (viii) the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs, (ix) the Minister of Natural Resources, (x) the Minister of Health?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 14th, 2016]

With regard to ministerial offices outside of the National Capital Region: (a) what is the rationale for operating these offices; (b) what criteria are used to determine the location of the offices; (c) what branches or programs are operated out of the offices; (d) where is each office, broken down by region and province; (e) what is the address and location of each office; (f) what is the number of exempt staff in each office; and (g) what is the number of full-time and temporary departmental staff in each office?

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 10th, 2016]

With regard to the details of any consultations undertaken or advice received by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, his office, or his Department, for the period of November 4, 2015, to April 22, 2016, regarding a royal regime for farmer saved seed under the Plant Breeders Rights Act: for each consultation, (i) what was the date, (ii) which people were present, (iii) were there any recorded positions on this issue taken at this meeting?

[Business of Supply, June 9th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely agree with my colleague. I think it is a very important point that we make because what we are seeing is this notion of moral relativism, and moral equivalence seems to be permeating the government's position so that it cannot take a stand on anything. We understand what has happened here. Entire communities have been destroyed, men and boys have been slaughtered, and women have been taken, raped, and sold, specifically because they are part of a group of people from a particular area. That qualifies as the definition of “genocide”, even to the Minister of Foreign Affairs who earlier said it is an intention to kill a group, because it is this group. Certainly, that fits with this definition.

The government opposite needs to make a moral decision to support this and do the right thing.

[Business of Supply, June 9th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, this is the second time I have heard the New Democrats say that they thoroughly agree with the motion but then put a qualification on it, which is that the government needs to act in some other fashion. Therefore, I would encourage them to support it. Part of supporting that can be in their messaging to encourage the government to do something more as well. If they want to turn to the United Nations as a later solution to some of the issues with respect to this, it is fine for them to do that. However, the reality is that they say that they agree with this. We are talking about crimes against humanity. We are talking about rape and sexual violence. We are talking about targeting gays and lesbians. We are calling upon the House to strongly condemn these atrocities. I do not think it should be a question for anyone in the House that the government should be able to do that.

The reality is that our allies, the United Kingdom, the EU, the U.S. State Department, and the House of Representatives in the United States, have all called this genocide. It is not out of the realm of reason and good decision-making for the House to make that same clear statement.