Iqra Khalid

[Online Streaming Act, February 28th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, as I join colleagues today from the national capital region, I respectfully acknowledge that the land on which I am located today is the traditional ancestral and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

The online streaming act is about updating the Canadian broadcasting system so that it better reflects our current environment. Our environment has changed drastically over the years since the last time our Broadcasting Act had any major reform back in 1991.

Although much of the discussion has centred on technological shifts over the last 30 years, today I want to focus our attention on the concerns and achievements and priorities of indigenous peoples with respect to broadcasting. Updating the act is necessary to affirm the important place that indigenous peoples have within the sector. We need to ensure space for indigenous voices, indigenous stories and indigenous sovereignty in the broadcasting system. So much has been achieved in the broadcasting and audiovisual sectors by indigenous peoples in Canada in the past 30 years.

The Aboriginal Peoples Television Network was founded in 1999 and recently launched its digital platform, APTN Lumi. ImagineNATIVE launched in 2000 and now is the world's largest indigenous media and arts festival. The Indigenous Screen Office was founded in 2017 and has quickly become an integral part of Canada's audiovisual sector. Canada's first national Inuktitut television channel, Uvagut TV, launched in January 2021, and helps to promote and revitalize Inuit cultures and languages.

Let us take a moment to recognize the accomplishments of indigenous broadcasters, of indigenous creators and storytellers. Let us build on that as a strong foundation.

There is no doubt in my mind that the online streaming act can support greater diversity, authentic representation and narrative sovereignty for indigenous peoples in Canada. Music and video are powerful media for shaping culture and changing opinions. Historical representations of first nations, Métis and Inuit people in the audiovisual sectors have reinforced racist notions toward indigenous peoples and have stifled their voices. It is now essential that the amendments to this bill advance narrative sovereignty for indigenous screen-based storytellers and support opportunities for indigenous persons working in this sector. These changes will ensure that indigenous peoples will see more of themselves reflected on screen and will support indigenous peoples in their efforts to revitalize indigenous languages and cultures.

We hear that indigenous communities desire ownership and control of cultural content. We understand the importance of self-determination for indigenous peoples in Canada in not just seeing themselves on screen but in participating in the creation of songs and stories that are shared within Canada and across the world. Modernizing this legislation is an important first step in our shared path toward a more modern, more vibrant, more inclusive broadcasting system in Canada.

This bill intends to further support indigenous peoples in the broadcasting system. Many indigenous peoples rely on oral history and community transfer of knowledge, language and traditions. Broadcasting can assist that through the preservation of indigenous perspectives. Broadcasting is an education tool that can help break down stereotypes and advance reconciliation between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. I imagine the tremendous benefits to Canadian society if indigenous voices are enhanced.

We created space for discussion. We listened with interest. The following key messages are what we heard: Indigenous storytelling, content creation and narrative sovereignty are important. Representation of indigenous peoples and the diversity of interests among first nations, Métis and Inuit is vital. The online streaming act follows on the path of ensuring that indigenous peoples can tell their stories from their perspectives and find content in the broadcasting system that reflects their lives and their experiences.

The act creates space for programming that reflects indigenous cultures and indigenous languages. It specifically states that the Canadian broadcasting system should “provide opportunities to Indigenous persons to produce programming in Indigenous languages, English or French, or in any combination of them, and to carry on broadcasting undertakings”.

It states, “programming that reflects the Indigenous cultures of Canada and programming that is in Indigenous languages should be provided”. This policy statement is now no longer qualified by the words “as resources become available”. This is as it should be.

The online streaming act will contribute to other activities designed to support indigenous peoples and culture. The government continues to work closely with the Indigenous Screen Office to empower communities and support Canada's diverse indigenous screen-based storytellers.

Indigenous artists and stakeholders have raised many concerns over the misuse and misappropriation of indigenous arts and cultural expressions. Historically, indigenous stories have been excluded from mainstream media and, if included, were mostly told from the perspective of non-indigenous people. Supporting indigenous creators through an indigenous-led funding mechanism ensures that decisions over funding allocations are made by indigenous decision-makers, helping to advance narrative sovereignty in the audiovisual sector.

With the announcement of $40.1 million over three years in budget 2021, the government is fully committed to supporting the Indigenous Screen Office as well as to providing additional ongoing funding so that more indigenous stories can be told and seen.

This bill would support indigenous creators so that they can tell their own stories in their own words, and it emphasizes the need for indigenous-run broadcasting services. The bill will contribute to fulfilling existing commitments through the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The government is committed to take action through consultation and co-operation with indigenous peoples to take all measures necessary to ensure that the bill as introduced is consistent with the declaration, prepare and implement an action plan to achieve the declaration's objectives and table an annual report on the progress to align the bill and the action plan.

In addition, the government is committed to partner with first nations, Inuit and Métis people to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action and to collaborate on the implementation of an action plan to respond to the calls for justice from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

As highlighted through these measures, broadcasting can play an important role in promoting and protecting indigenous languages, arts, cultures, traditions and perspectives that ensure that advancing reconciliation between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous peoples is continued and comes to a resolution. I am hopeful that the online streaming act will move us further along the path towards reconciliation.

Broadcasting plays an important role in making sure that all Canadians see themselves represented. It is a tool used for sharing information, making each other heard and listened to, while reminding us of our many origins and shared journey. It is the ability to shape culture, change opinions and point the way toward a better, more inclusive future.

The work does not end here. We are committed to continue listening to and speaking with indigenous peoples to ensure that their voices are heard and their stories are seen on screen. We are committed to meaningful partnerships and engagement with indigenous peoples to ensure the promotion and revitalization of indigenous cultures and languages. We are committed to ensuring a more inclusive space where that vital role of culture in the process of healing and reconciliation will be realized. Culture continues to play a role in the process of healing and reconciliation with indigenous peoples.

Indigenous cultures have been insufficiently reflected in our broadcasting system, which is a problem that the proposed online streaming act is trying to rectify. Culture is paramount to healing and reconciliation. It is at the core of understanding and moving forward together. I strongly urge the members of the House to support the online streaming act.

I would like to share my own personal experience with all of this. I immigrated to Canada when I was 12 years old. Throughout my youth, I did not really get to understand and appreciate the lived reality of indigenous peoples. It was not until I grew older that I actively sought to educate myself.

The best way for us to really include these cultures, to really try to actively reconcile with indigenous peoples here in Canada, through our online streaming is for us to make sure the way we are broadcasting and what we are broadcasting is inclusive, diverse and, most importantly, helps to shape the future of what we want our Canada to see.

We talk a lot about Canadian values. If we do not feel indigenous people are included in that, then we fail.

I will stop there as I believe I am out of time.

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, the Emergencies Act that is being invoked now has a sunset clause of 30 days. Not only that, but members in the House can revoke it at any time. Those are the powers within the House. On a consensus basis and a majority basis, we can continue to debate and continue to keep ourselves apprised of the fluid situation to ensure that everything we are doing is within the limits. In fact, as the Prime Minister has said, none of this applies to the whole country. All of the measures taken will be very targeted to the issues that we are facing currently, and as those issues are resolved, we will be bringing this issue back to the House.

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, what we need to do is take swift action to ensure that we are protecting rules-based laws and the lives we live very peacefully here in Canada. Through this, we are also seeing some of the gaps that exist within our current FINTRAC laws, for example.

As we go through the process, it will be a great learning experience for all members of the House to see how we can strengthen our laws to ensure that we are protecting Canadians from fraud, protecting Canadians from crime and protecting Canadians from the national security issues that some of this has triggered.

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, in the incident that has occurred over the past number of weeks and months, we saw how much foreign interference there was in the funding of the convoy and occupation. I think we need to be very strict with how we approach this to ensure that Canadians are protected, that our borders are protected and that we are making our own decisions as citizens.

As I mentioned in my speech, these measures have a very limited time frame. An inquiry will happen and a joint committee will sit. Canadians will have their rights protected through this.

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Fredericton.

I have listened quite intently to the debate that has been ongoing on the question of the emergency measures act. While I am sometimes disappointed in the partisan and petty level of debate coming from the opposition benches, I think there are some things we can agree on as a House.

We can agree that all Canadians are protected by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that it is our job as MPs in this House to protect those rights, including the right to expression, to peaceful assembly and to the safety and security of the person. We can agree that the majority of Canadians are frustrated and tired of this COVID-19 pandemic, which has claimed the lives of over 34,000 Canadians.

We can agree that our Prime Minister did not create COVID-19 or this global pandemic. He and his government created measures to combat it, with the objective of protecting Canadians' health and safety. We can agree that a convoy of protesters drove for days, uninhibited, to Ottawa to protest various provincial and some federal regulations. For at least three weeks, they blocked major streets and were allowed to set up tents, speak their minds and express their feelings.

We can agree that the organizers of this convoy-turned occupation officially called for the fall of this democratically elected government and its replacement by people of their own choosing. We can agree that crowd-sourcing efforts raised millions of dollars for this occupation, and that over 50% of that funding came from foreign lands. We can agree that the Ambassador Bridge was blocked by these protesters for many days, causing hundreds of millions of dollars lost in trade per day, and that those losses still continue.

We can agree that lethal weapons were seized in Coutts, Alberta from protesters and over a dozen people were charged with conspiracy to commit murder. We can agree that children were used as shields in Ottawa and on the Ambassador Bridge. We also agree that Canada is a federation, with separation of powers outlined in our Constitution, and that those powers include policing powers, where provinces take leadership, including in Ontario, Alberta, Quebec, Manitoba, British Columbia and so forth.

I have received thousands of emails from across Canada, and not just from my own riding, from people who are confused and scared. Some were repeating misinformation about what is happening in our country. My job as a member of Parliament is to listen to all voices in my riding and balance the diverse ideas into a consensus that I then represent in this esteemed House. I will continue to try to clear up some of that misinformation that has been disseminated irresponsibly by some in this very place.

This convoy does not represent all truckers, and it has been condemned by all major trucking organizations across Canada. I have heard from truckers living in Mississauga—Erin Mills, and they have expressed to me their disgust with the actions we are seeing from certain participants in the convoy. They pleaded with me not to judge them for the protesters' actions, because they do not represent them or their industry.

I do not believe that every person supporting these convoys has behaved in this way. For many, this was a way to express their frustration with the pandemic. The fact is that these incidents keep happening. They keep encroaching on the rights of Canadians, and it needs to stop. When it comes to this issue, the majority of Canadians do not care about a person's politics and they do not care about what colour a person's party is. This behaviour just cannot be defended and our citizens have demanded action.

When these convoys arrived in the GTA, the greater Toronto area, we saw that appropriate police action could minimize the harm and damage to local residents. We need to understand why Ottawa had so much trouble. I appreciate that the hard-working women and men of our police services and our federal government have been responding since day one with all the support we could provide under normal circumstances. To be honest, I am disappointed that the provincial and local leadership could not handle policing these demonstrations to ensure that Ottawa citizens were treated with respect and that our supply chains were secure.

After two weeks of what we saw here, the Premier of Ontario declared a state of emergency and called for greater tools from our federal government to take action, which could be administered only through the Emergencies Act. Instead of leaving Ontario out in the cold, our government is invoking this legislation, after careful consideration and after exhausting all other measures, to provide these greater tools to local authorities to address the situation.

We are taking action to keep Canadians safe, to protect people's jobs and to restore confidence in our institutions. If we look outside, we will see that the emergency orders we are debating right now are already helping local law enforcement restore safety and a sense of normality to the streets of Ottawa.

After weeks on end of working day and night, they now have the tools they need to enforce the law, thanks to the federal government. Citizens should be able to walk freely without the fear of being harassed. They have the right to safety and security. Small businesses in the downtown core should be able to open their doors to the public again without fearing for their safety and that of their staff. These organizers have had weeks to address the hate symbols and disturbing statements, weeks to root out the participants who are putting the citizens of Ottawa in danger, weeks to leave and go home. They refused at every turn, and that is what brought us to today.

The Prime Minister has said this over and over again and I will say it once more. These measures are temporary. To be clear, the Emergencies Act does not involve the military and will not be used to limit people's freedom of expression or freedom of speech.

In fact, the Emergencies Act requires that any steps taken be reasonable and proportionate to the situation. There is a strict time limit of 30 days, unless the House votes to extend, and the House of Commons has the power to revoke these measures at any time. It will not prevent people from peacefully protesting. It will certainly not infringe on individual rights, which will always be protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

There must also be a joint review by Parliament, including the Senate, to ensure that all requirements under the act were followed and justified. Residents in Erin Mills have told me that they would expect such a review to also scrutinize the response of provincial and municipal governments and why they needed to kick this issue up to the federal government.

We must maintain the appropriate balance between Canadians' rights and their freedoms, including the right to peacefully protest. At the same time, we must protect the safety and well-being of Canadians and of our nation's supply chains. I assure my constituents that I will be the first to defend them against government erosion of their rights. I sincerely do not believe that these powers are abusive, and I sincerely do believe they will help to restore peace and order and the rule of law in our Canada.

I recognize that we are all tired of the pandemic and we are all tired of the public health measures that have separated us from our loved ones for over two years. We want life to go back to a semblance of normalcy, and that is what we are all working towards every single day.

Our government has already been loosening certain restrictions at the federal level that pertain to travel, and will continue to do so at a pace that ensures that Canadians' health and safety are protected.

If we are to live with COVID-19, then we need to make COVID-19 livable for everyone, especially vulnerable residents for whom this virus is a death sentence.

I am encouraging all of us to take a step back and start connecting with our residents on the ground rather than with spectators on social media, to take the time to clear up the misconceptions and misinformation that are beginning to fester in our grassroots. It is time we really talked about the real issues, and I am looking forward to spending time this coming week connecting with Erin Mills and celebrating Black History Month the way we should.

I look forward to hearing from constituents about our ongoing budget, which is our plan forward out of the pandemic and out of this economic downturn.

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I would love for all members in the House to back up their statements with facts. That would be wonderful.

I will ask a brief question for the parliamentary secretary. Why is it so important for us to protect the rule of law? What value does bringing the totality of lived experiences have for Parliament? Why is that so important for us here in Canada?

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, the member had a very passionate speech.

Throughout the past couple of days, I have heard members from the opposition benches say that they do not feel threatened walking through the convoy. They do not feel that their security and safety are at risk. However, we have seen young women being attacked. We have had police reports filed by young women who have had hot coffee thrown at them.

The member prior said that there was not a lot of violence—

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that my colleague has outlined the implications of this measure. We have seen throughout this debate and over the past number of years how misinformation feeds into confusion and a lack of understanding. I have talked with a number of my constituents about what this convoy is about, and there seems to be a lot of misinformation. Therefore, I would ask the member this. What responsibility do members in this House have to make sure that Canadians know exactly what is going on, and what level of duty do they have to speak the truth?

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the member asked if anyone on the other side had talked to any of the protesters. I did speak to one of my constituents when she came back from Ottawa, and we had a very good conversation.

Is it okay, based on his speech, that a couple of hundred people can take over a city that inhabits tens and thousands of people and terrorize them, inconvenience their lives and harass their movement? Does he think those hundreds of people speak for all those tens of thousands?

[Emergencies Act, February 20th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I have noticed not only this morning but over the past couple of years a very targeted, divisive approach to get to this government, and not on any merit.

I will ask the member why he is blurring jurisdiction lines. I know we have heard from Bloc Québécois members about the importance of jurisdiction and from other members about the importance of ensuring that the rule of law and our Constitution are maintained. Our Constitution accounts for those jurisdictional lines. As part of their main argument, we have heard members talk about how our federal government has failed because of lack of action by regional or provincial governments. Can the member please clarify his position there?