Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, March 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, just a few minutes ago, the minister said he was looking forward to hearing from witnesses at committee on Bill S-7. Well, I have some doubts about his comments that I would like to share, if I may.

First of all, just this week, some newspapers referred to a Conservative Party internal document that revealed that the Conservatives had already decided on the content of the report before the latest committee review even began. This proves how little the Conservatives care about the evidence given by witnesses.

Furthermore, during debate on Bill S-7, we had not even finished the second hour of debate when the minister said that the title was just fine as it is and it would not be changed.

When the minister says he is looking forward to hearing from witnesses, frankly, I do not a believe a word of it, because we know very well that the Conservatives' minds are already made up and they have no respect for the parliamentary process or for the opinions of the experts who appear in committee.

This time allocation motion is just further proof of that.

[Questions on the Order Paper, March 12th, 2015]

With regard to the Citizenship and Immigration Canada's pilot project for LGBT refugees: (a) to date, how many refugees have been sponsored through the project; (b) how many of the sponsored refugees are present in Canada; (c) how much of the funding budgeted for the pilot project by the government has been spent; (d) how many sponsors participated in the pilot project; and (e) have any evaluations been conducted on the pilot project?

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the processing time for sponsorship applications of spouses living in Canada is now 25 months. That is 25 months during which thousands of young Canadian families must live with insecurity and uncertainty as they wait for an answer.

The minister told us that the wait times would go down, but the opposite is happening. The times continue to increase.

What is the problem? Is it a lack of resources? Are they indifferent to the suffering of these families? Is the minister prepared to admit that there is a problem? Will the minister finally reduce these processing times?

[Committees of the House, February 25th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the report is accompanied by a supplementary report from the official opposition, the NDP. The report on protecting women in our immigration system is interesting, but it completely ignores some important details that practically all of the witnesses agreed on. For example, the concept of conditional permanent residence should be eliminated, because it makes women more vulnerable. Our report also calls on the government to make it easier for newcomer women to connect with organizations on the ground that provide front line services, including, for example, assistance in situations of spousal violence and information concerning their rights.

[Citizenship and Immigration, February 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives surprised many when they sent out a fundraising email saying that they oppose the wearing of a hijab at a citizenship ceremony.

It is bad enough that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is waging a war against Muslim women who cover their faces, but it is beyond belief that he is mixing up the terms hijab, niqab and burka for the sole purpose of confusing people and instilling fear.

He could have simply said that he had used the wrong term, but no, he chose to say that the hijab is not allowed, even though the hijab is allowed at citizenship ceremonies. He would rather create more division and fear for political gain.

The Conservatives are doing the same with Bill C-51. They are taking advantage of current circumstances to mislead the public by claiming that Bill C-51 does not give law enforcement agencies more powers.

Canadians deserve better. Canadians deserve leaders who tell the truth and do not exploit divisions for political gain.

[Foreign Affairs, February 19th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are trying to save money at the expense of the security of our diplomatic corps abroad.

If we send diplomatic staff to high-risk areas, the least we can do is keep them safe and provide proper protection.

Could we finally have a minister with a long-term vision who will put an end to his predecessor's administrative shenanigans and invest in proper protection for our diplomatic corps?

[Canada-China Relations, February 18th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the minister clearly has no intention of showing any leadership here. We have been pressing the minister for months and he has yet to do anything tangible.

The Americans managed to negotiate with China to get visas that allow unrestricted movement, including for business people. Canada is still lagging on this.

Will the government show some leadership? Will it support my colleague's motion and work with the Chinese government to obtain a 10-year multiple-entry visa for Canadians?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, February 17th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk to my colleague about the content of the bill.

He knows that a number of witnesses spoke to the bill. For example, Ms. Yao-Yao Go of the Metro Toronto Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic said:

The bill seeks to deport people who are engaged in polygamy, and that would include the very women that the government claims it's trying to protect.

Ms. Mattoo of the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario said:

We stand for victims and survivors of gender-based violence, whose voices have told us, time and time again, that they would not come forward if it meant criminal sanctions or deportation of their families.

The bill could hurt and further ostracize women and victims of forced or polygamous marriages. What does my colleague have to say about such statements? Does he not worry that by supporting Bill S-7, he is promoting the victimization of women?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, February 17th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am not the only one to say so. A number of people on the ground are saying that we need to be careful because this title will hurt us and prevent us from achieving the objective of the bill.

Earlier, my colleague mentioned Bountiful. Could the parliamentary secretary tell me what culture is in Bountiful?

This is not what we are debating, and it does no good to point fingers at certain cultures that are already ostracized as a result of debates being held at different levels in this country. I can name a number of people who say that the very title of Bill S-7 and the various legislative amendments it would bring about are based on racist stereotypes and contribute to xenophobia against certain radicalized communities.

This title encourages xenophobia and racism, and it further ostracizes communities. These are major problems that we need to look at. What good does that do for this bill?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, February 17th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. I would also like to thank him for making those important points.

Many also believe that this bill will not only harm victims but it will also fail to provide the additional necessary tools. I can mention others. The minister spoke earlier about honour killings. The government is saying that Bill S-7 will ensure that the provocation defence will not apply to honour killings. Meanwhile, a number of rulings have shown that cultural grounds cannot be used to justify an honour killing. On the contrary, the court interpreted such arguments as a reason for the crime, rather than mitigating grounds. The court saw these arguments as proof that the unacceptable crime was planned. If we look at the decisions rendered in the past, we see that the courts are able to deal with such grievances under the Criminal Code.