Kevin Lamoureux

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 19th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said the other day, in terms of responding to a question in question period:

The fact of the matter is that western farmers voted for marketing freedom, and that is what they are going to get.

What I have found is that the current government, more than any other government that I am aware of, just feels that it has this mandate that it can do whatever it is that it wants. If we take a look at prairie grain wheat farmers and the fact that they had a legitimate plebiscite in which in excess of 60% of those grain farmers said, “We want to keep the Wheat Board”, the current government, headed by the current Prime Minister has made it very clear that it does not care what the farmers want, and that is reiterated by the motion that was brought forward just a few minutes ago to limit the amount of debate on the Wheat Board.

My question for my colleague is, what type of leadership does he think this speaks of? How does he feel our farmers in rural Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta are going to respond when they see the type of action that the government has superimposed on them? Does he believe the government really cares about prairie grain wheat farmers?

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 19th, 2011]

Yes, Madam Speaker, now it is a point of order.

I was up on my feet shortly after the vote was called. You had asked for questions and I had twice indicated that, yes, I was standing on a question.

What I want to suggest, Madam Speaker, is that you review what has taken place. On both occasions I made it very clear I was standing up for a question. On both occasions, Madam Speaker, you had canvassed to ask if there were questions on the bill, and I said yes.

It was the government, in defying what is truly correct in terms of democratic principles by bringing forward its motion, that caused a bit of excitement. It did not—

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 19th, 2011]

It is a question, Madam Speaker, and I do not blame you for the confusion, because the government is very antsy, given the interesting reaction it had.

It is interesting to note that today we have a bill—

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 19th, 2011]

They are a little sensitive, and I can understand and appreciate why they are so sensitive on this issue.

After there is a debate, members are provided the opportunity to ask questions. I would suggest that the government would want to be a little patient so I can—

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 19th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, in terms of process, it is interesting.

My question for my colleague is of a very serious nature. We have a government, and the Prime Minister—

[Democracy in Ukraine, October 18th, 2011]

Madam Chair, I appreciate the comment in regard to the election observers. The number of Canadians who participated in Ukraine in 2004 was impressive to see.

In my short period of time in the Canada-Ukraine Parliamentary Friendship Group, I have noted that there was a relationship between the past ambassador and the group. I do believe there is some merit in terms of asking, but the past ambassador is now back in Ukraine. One of his last responsibilities was to retrace via train the immigration of individuals who came from Ukraine. I met him in the Winnipeg train station. I believe there is merit in at least asking for the ambassador so we can express ourselves in a very direct way.

One of the suggestions we made earlier was having an all-party group of MPs travel to Ukraine, hopefully to meet with Ms. Tymoshenko or others. We hope the government will pick up on that particular recommendation.

[Democracy in Ukraine, October 18th, 2011]

Madam Chair, again, I have two quick points.

That is one of the reasons I made the suggestion that the Canadian Ukrainian Congress would be a wonderful group to have come and meet with the friendship group, which we already have established and which is quite ably chaired by the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette. There is all-party representation on it. I believe it could be done in a fairly apolitical fashion by doing it that way.

With regard to the reference to orange, I could talk about the yellow revolution that occurred in the Philippines in reaction to President Marcos. I do not want to get into the colours. It is not about colours. Ms. Tymoshenko is an awesome lady and she is quickly becoming a world icon. I think what we need to do is, in an apolitical fashion as much as possible, try to make sure there is justice to this issue and that democracy is protected in Ukraine, as much as we can.

I am prepared to work in an apolitical fashion with someone of Ukrainian heritage back in Winnipeg North or with the Prime Minister, because this is an issue that I think transcends party lines. At least that is my take on it at this point.

[Democracy in Ukraine, October 18th, 2011]

Madam Chair, I think that is an excellent idea. I have two quick points. The Orange Revolution is something that is really unique in world history, and we acknowledge that. The leading role Ms. Tymoshenko played was just overwhelmingly phenomenal. That is all the more reason why Canada does have a role to play.

I suggest that there is the political will here today, whether it is the Liberal Party of Canada, the New Democrats or the Conservatives in government. Maybe the way we attempt to take it to the next level is to ask the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, who is the chair of the parliamentary friendship group between Canada and Ukraine, to convene a meeting and we will get members from all political parties together. I am a member of that particular committee and I would welcome the opportunity to have the ambassador come before the committee. Maybe we can come up with some ideas through that particular committee. I can assure the member that he would have my full co-operation in an apolitical fashion.

[Democracy in Ukraine, October 18th, 2011]

Madam Chair, I am disappointed over recent events in relation to the prosecution of former Ukrainian prime minister and opposition leader, Yulia Tymoshenko. Recently, a judiciary in Ukraine found that Ms. Tymoshenko had overstepped her authority as former prime minister in a 2009 gas deal with Russia. The government of the current prime minister, Viktor Yanukovych, has alleged that the agreement forces Ukraine to pay exorbitant prices well above market value for Russian gas. As a result, Ms. Tymoshenko has now been sentenced to seven years in prison and has been barred from holding governmental posts for an additional three years after the completion of her prison sentence.

Others have also been targeted. Recently, charges have been brought forth against former interior minister, Yuri Lutsenko.

I think it is clear, from these recent charges against the opposition in Ukraine, that the government is engaging in political silencing, especially in light of upcoming elections both next year and in 2015. As a result of her sentence, Ms. Tymoshenko will not be permitted to run in either election.

I take issue with these political trials that ultimately put at risk the ability of Ukraine to have free democratic elections. We must ask how Ukraine can uphold the rights and visions of its people when dissenting voices are threatened and effectively removed by the hands of the courts and through what appears here to be the influence of the government. Governments cannot prosecute the decisions of former governments simply because they do not agree with them, and governments must respect and safeguard the right of individuals to express their positions.

Dissension is not criminal. Rather, it is an integral part of the maintenance of a strong, dynamic and democratic society. Amnesty International has repeatedly called for the release of Ms. Tymoshenko and various international experts have questioned the legitimacy of the trial.

I urge the government to take measures so that the rights of Ukrainians are upheld and so that individuals and authority figures have the ability to speak freely of their positions without fear of prosecution. Ukraine needs to facilitate a fair and transparent appeal process for Ms. Tymoshenko and to ensure that the judiciary maintains its independence.

It is a privilege for me to stand here today and speak to this very important take note debate. I find that Canada has a wonderful history in terms of friendship with Ukraine and the connections we have been able to develop over the years speak volumes. As has been pointed out, back in 1991, Ottawa was quick to recognize an independent Ukraine. On May 27, 2008, all four parties here in the House of Commons voted on a bill recognizing the Holodomor as an act of genocide.

Even though I was not in this particular House, I was in the Manitoba legislature. In the last number of years, the Manitoba legislature has had resolutions and bills dealing with the recognition of the Holodomor as an act of genocide. We recognize the valuable contributions our Ukrainian community has made to who we are as a Canadian society. In fact, one of the first issues I raised inside the House of Commons was an issue that I know is very important to our Ukraine community, and that was in regard to the Holodomor and the Canadian Human Rights Museum, and why it is that I believe, suspect and hope that others in the House see the value of having that permanent display.

I say that because we do have a role to play. We have a history where we have shown that Canada can have an impact. We have that rich heritage here. I could talk about Winnipeg North as a community that was, in good part, built by Ukrainian immigrants. They have not lost their caring or compassion for their homeland, which is something I personally encourage. We need to take advantage of the rich heritages that are brought from other countries. Ukraine is one of them and the Ukrainian community has made immense contributions to our country.

People can turn to organizations such as the Ukrainian Canadian Congress that have immense amounts of credibility to get a sense of what is actually happening. Organizations like that can help us in ensuring we are making good decisions on where to go from here.

I and the Liberal caucus have benefited immensely from the past performance of Borys Wrzesnewskyj, the former member of Parliament for Etobicoke Centre, and he also was a friend. Even though I have not known him long, he was a colleague of mine, and he ensures that the Liberal caucus is being kept informed on this very important issue.

That is one of the reasons I made the suggestion a little earlier that there is something else we should consider doing. I was pleased that the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette mentioned the possibility of three or five members going to Ukraine to look at what we might be able to do in an all-party fashion, including the Canada-Ukraine Parliamentary Friendship Group, of which I am a member. I look to the member and suggest this is something that could make a difference. Maybe it is possible to visit Mrs. Tymoshenko herself or other individuals in Ukraine, as a group of parliamentarians.

It is really encouraging when party politics are put aside in order to address an important issue. This is an important issue that is worthy of the debate taking place this evening, and I hope and trust that members will want to take it to the next level. It is encouraging when we hear that letters have been written, whether they are from the Prime Minister or others, or when individual actions are taken within our many communities, even by individuals not of Ukrainian heritage who know what is right and wrong, see what is happening in Ukraine and feel it is just not right. It shows just how vulnerable democracy is and how important it is for us as parliamentarians to play a role in protecting democracies where we can, especially where we can have that influence.

I would suggest the time is right for us to be debating this issue today. I hope a strong message will go to Ukraine about the debate we are having. I look forward to a response from the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, chair of the Canada-Ukraine Parliamentary Friendship Group, with the hope that we will be able to move forward on the issue. Perhaps we could meet and have a discussion as to what is next. We could possibly invite the Ukrainian Canadian Congress to participate in our next meeting so we can continue the dialogue in an apolitical fashion and hopefully have a stronger impact in Ukraine. I trust, hope and pray we are able to make a difference in the beautiful country of Ukraine.

[Democracy in Ukraine, October 18th, 2011]

Madam Chair, I want to pick up on the member's point about getting directly involved. I had made the suggestion to a previous speaker that one of the things we could consider looking at is the possibility of having an all party group of members of Parliament go and deliver a message based on consensus.

I would be interested in hearing the member's response to that particular idea.