Michelle Rempel

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, it is the dying days of a corrupt government that does not even have the capacity to put out a caucus revolt right now. That is the real problem that this country is facing. There is such little political will or courage in the Liberal Party, such little talent and such little focus, that everything is falling apart. It is a shame. It is a scandal. Canadians deserve better. It is time for a carbon tax election.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. His privileges have been violated. His privileges have been violated by a government that refused the will of Parliament to submit documents, and the way for his privileges to be restored are for the government to hand the documents over.

Should the constituents of Longueuil not be so happy that the Conservative Party of Canada is fighting to ensure that the will of Parliament is upheld and that the government is held to account?

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, it has been a hot minute since someone has asked me if I were chicken. My husband is here today, and I do not think he ever would say that I have shied away from a debate. In fact, I think I once told him that he was never going to win a debate with me and to not try.

I would just say this: As a former Winnipegger, I learned how to scrap on the streets of North Winnipeg, and giddy up. I am happy to take a debate at any point in time. I will say this, though: I am not sure he wants me in his constituency because I know he does not spend much time there.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, partisanship is important. It allows us to develop cohesive policy positions and then come together under a leader and team to enact political change in Canada. However, we also have to remember that while we are partisans, our first title is not “insert party here”; our first title is “member of Parliament for”. I learned that from Jody Wilson-Raybould, who I understand the government never realized was not a Liberal first. She was a first nations woman first and a member of Parliament second. She understood where her power was derived from. When we understand where our power is derived from, anything is possible in this place, including good and just laws and the respect and upholding of democracy and human rights.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, first, here are a few facts. What we are doing is defending the privileges of every member of Parliament and saying that the government must immediately release the documents, as passed by a rule of Parliament. This is part of our parliamentary procedure.

Second, the Bloc Québécois, three weeks ago, voted to keep the scandal-prone, corrupt government alive. Every time the Bloc Québécois has had an opportunity to take the government down, it has not. Why? I think it is worried about electoral fortunes. That is what I was speaking about in my speech. When we put our ego and electoral fortunes forward as opposed to thinking about doing what is right, disaster ensues.

I ask my colleagues from the Bloc to instead help us pressure the Liberal government to release these documents and then vote non-confidence in the government.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, after 20 years or so in this place, should understand that tu quoque is one of the worst logical fallacies in debate. For years, the member, who has power given to him by his constituents, has ceded it to stand here and waste countless words and hours spewing the talking points of a government that sued the Speaker of the House of Commons instead of respecting privilege.

If the member was so committed to doing better than something he thinks happened in the past, why is he here today supporting a government that is obfuscating the privilege associated with each member? He is actually saying his own privilege should be violated. All of his constituents should take note, because a member who is willing to have his privilege violated is willing to have his constituents' privilege violated. Mark my words, I know his constituents are taking note, and he should govern himself accordingly.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, our debate today is happening because the executive branch of government has defied the will of Parliament. Members in this place, some months ago, passed a motion to compel the government to release documents related to $400 million of funds that were misappropriated. It is entirely within Parliament's purview to ask for documents, particularly if they are documents produced by the government and are related public expenditures. Parliament asked for these documents so that we as members could do our primary job, the reason Canadians pay our salaries, which is to hold the government to account.

Let me remind all colleagues here that our first and primary role as a member of Parliament is to hold the executive branch of government to account. In this instance, on what we are debating today, it boggles the mind that there are members willing to work with the government to help it defy the will of Parliament and prevent parliamentarians from doing their job. It boggles the mind that there are members of the governing party who do not understand that it is not just the privileges of opposition members that have been and continue to be breached, but also the privileges of members of the governing party's caucus.

How a member arrives at the state of being willing to cede the power their constituents gave them to the centre of their party for less than nothing is easy to understand, but it is hard for someone to see in the moment. Allow me to elaborate, for all colleagues here and for colleagues who may follow us in these seats in the future, on what this means and why it is important to the debate at hand today.

Lev Grossman's masterwork, The Magicians Trilogy, an exploration of self and identity, ends with this statement: “Fillory is who I used to be, but I'm somebody different now.” This passage, profound after reading the entirety of the text, refers to the protagonist, who had structured his identity around reaching a mythical location. He reaches his goal, but the journey and what happens after change that sense of self, just as they change his sense of what power should be used for.

Many of us here have travelled a similar road. It is easy for our quest to earn a seat in this place and keep it to be our identity. Then, the very few of us who are fortunate to sit here are presented with yet another identity-shaping set of dangling carrots. We want a cabinet position. What about a parliamentary secretary position? What about being vice-chair of a committee?

There is inherent oil-and-water-like tension between these two potential identities because in the former, in our first-past-the-post system, power is derived by the people who voted for us to sit in this place. In the latter, power is given by the centre of our parties. The former is the only true power in politics. It is the base of power from which the centre of our parties derives theirs, and it can only be rescinded by our constituents in an election. The latter power, that from the centre of our parties, is illusory. It is derived from a critical mass of members who vote together and form the ability to give out positions and salary increases. It is bestowed at the pleasure of one man, as there have not been many women yet, and can be rescinded at his pleasure.

The most impactful members of Parliament understand the dual nature of power in this place and how to keep that duality in balance. In our partisan system, it is good and necessary to support the centre of the party to which one was elected and lean into the ability to accomplish things like passing a budget as a team. However, if one constantly spends one's time chasing the carrots dangled by the centre of one's party when the needs of constituents are not being served, disaster for a member, their constituents and their political party inevitably ensues. This is a law of power.

How does a member of Parliament put this duality into balance and keep it there? First and foremost, we need a constant connection to our constituents. This means asking our constituents constantly what is important to them and what their opinions are. With that information, we are then able to help the centres of our parties form partisan positions that benefit our communities through policy-making and constructive criticism. The most successful centres of political parties not only relish accepting this feedback but expect it from their members. That is because our communities are constantly changing. They are not homogenous; they are not static, and we cannot develop public policy that ignores their needs and will.

To do this, a member needs a strong grounding outside of their political identity so we can have the courage when the need arises and so we can see a future for ourselves that does not involve being a member of Parliament. This grounding can also be our families, our hobbies, our spiritual practices or, in the best cases, a combination of all three. Without that type of external grounding, it is virtually impossible to discern what our constituent needs are when pressed upon by the media, by lobbyists and special interest groups, by our own egos and, yes, by the centre of our parties.

Crucially, a member needs to understand the procedural rules of this place inside and out and have a capacity and willingness to use those rules. Members who do not take the time to understand what their privileges are here as members or how the Standing Orders work are like a carpenter without tools. When all these actions work together, the duality of power is balanced, good public policy is made and successful political careers are established. However, it is also deadly easy to knock this duality out of balance. This happens when a member stops listening to their constituents, starts chasing promotions and cedes the power their constituents gave them to a centre of power that has forgotten that their power, without the support of the people, is an illusion.

Here we are today, and members of the governing party have ceded so much of their constituents' power to the centre of their party that ministers in the government feel no compunction at all about letting a $400-million spending scandal happen, because they know their partisan colleagues will not force them, or the will of Parliament, to come clean. The leader of the governing party allows his ministers to do this because he in turn knows he will not face any criticisms from his members either. Members are allowing this to happen for fear of losing their green-lit candidate status or are clinging to the hope that they are going to get a car and driver and a cabinet post.

That lack of balance is why we are here today in this place with a Parliament paralyzed by a government made unwilling to accept the rule of Parliament due to the misaligned priorities of the governing party's members of Parliament. It is a shame to see colleagues, many of whom I respect in this place, willingly cede their power given what is possible for any of us and the people we represent when we lean into it instead.

Being a Canadian member of Parliament means that literally anyone in the world will take our call. Any policy change we elect to spend our attention on is possible to enact without limit. We in this place cannot change only our communities, but also the country and the world, so what we do with that power actually matters. It must be used responsibly and with great conscience, wielded with impeccable judgment free of ego and grounded in upholding the rule of law, democracy, Canadian pluralism and freedom.

If I could go back in time and tell myself these truths when I was first elected, I would. It would have saved me a lot of time and a lot of heartache. The only time I have failed in my role here has been when I ignored those truths. Thankfully, those moments have been few and far between in the years that I have served, and when they have happened, I have been able to recognize them, admit fault and move on. However, when I have embraced those same truths, magic has happened. These same things are possible for anybody in this place.

I am proud of the cross-partisan effort with my former colleague and deputy leader of the NDP Megan Leslie, which resulted in the creation of Sable Island National Park and a national ban on plastic microbeads. I am proud of creating a program that led to the creation of countless high-tech businesses that are thriving in our country today. I am proud to have stood with delegates at our party convention many years ago to change the definition of marriage in our party's policy declaration.

I am proud, after months of blood, sweat and tears, to have forced the current government to recognize the Yazidi genocide and to have forced it to create a program that saw around 1,500 of the world's most vulnerable people take refuge inside our borders. I am proud to have, among much consternation, authored the Buffalo Declaration. It was a spicy piece of business that in many ways spurred a year-long debate over how to champion western Canada's rights and standing in Canada.

I am proud to have brought, written and passed a motion in this place to condemn the anti-Semitic boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. I am proud to have fought for changes to elect more women to this place, see them elected and make it easier for them to work here. I am proud to have uncovered and prosecuted multiple government spending scandals.

I am proud to have enforced, against an overwhelming amount of political pressure, the federal government into closing the loophole in the safe third country agreement, under which it allowed tens of thousands of people who had reached the safety of upstate New York to illegally enter our country. I am proud to have fought and won, through endless political and national pressure, against the government's senseless and useless quarantine hotel system, which brought needless mental and financial anguish to countless Canadians during the pandemic.

I was the first Conservative critic to call for major changes to Canada's telecommunications oligopoly, and faced an incredible amount of push-back from the oligopoly for doing so. I was the first parliamentarian to call for a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency and tabled a bill to do the same. I was the first legislator in any jurisdiction around the world to raise the issue of large language models in any legislature. I also founded the multipartisan Parliamentary Caucus on Emerging Technology, and passed, after a year of work, a resolution, supported by over 100 countries, on the impact of AI and human rights at the Inter-Parliamentary Union in Geneva last week. I would like to give a shout-out to my colleague Neema Lugangira from Tanzania for her work on the same.

At the Inter-Parliamentary Union, I have now thrice chaired the general assembly drafting committee and emerged with consensus-adopted resolutions condemning Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, with Russians sitting at the table. Just last week, I passed a resolution calling for reform to multilateral institutions to ensure their long-term viability and to be able to solve global crises and promote peace.

I have proudly stood with Canada's allied nations against much public pressure to do the opposite in their fight to protect themselves from terrorism and destruction. I have also, in changing times for the media, managed to build a communication platform that allows me to reach no less than a million people every day. I no longer have to rely on the stilted lens of partisan columnists or political talk show hosts to communicate an idea to the public. I can do that on my own.

Accomplishing these things has meant ruffling feathers, sometimes within the public, within opposing parties and even within my own caucus. Conflict is not something that we should strive for here. We should strive for peace, but speaking truth to power is not conflict. Rather, it is the essence of our existence as parliamentarians.

I raise my accomplishments in this place not to boast, but to inspire. Even if colleagues here might not agree with the change I have enacted, the reality is that I have now sat in every position in the House on both sides of the aisle. I have sat as a cabinet minister on the front bench and at the very back corner of this place, with my back touching the curtains. It was when I was in that last seating position that I had dinner with a woman who I very much respect, the Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould, who reminded me that I was sitting in a seat that she had once occupied. She reminded me of what she was able to accomplish from that position and where her power came from, and she expected no less from me. This hard lesson was a gift, a dose of humility, that I pray everyone in this place gets to experience at some point in their career and come through with grace.

I am deeply blessed to have had the counsel of Jody and other principled leaders like her. Their actions are reminders to me that no matter where a parliamentarian sits in the House, our power remains the same. I know that my ability to effect change remains limited only by my smarts, my courage, my grace, my knowledge of the rule and my willingness to pay a cost for doing right when right is needed to be done. However, that is the rub of this place, is it not? It is the cost of doing what is right.

In moments where we, as leaders, can feel in our deepest gut that change is needed, an admission of wrongdoing is needed, we are asked to do something that in our hearts we know we should not be doing, or if we toy with relinquishing jealousies and grudges in favour of peace, but feel like we should not be doing that, we often think about what would be lost if we were to carry through with our actions. Will it cost us our pride? How about a shot at a cabinet spot? Will it mean sitting at the back of the House? Will it mean we do not get to run again? In those moments, I challenge my colleagues to instead think about what they would gain if they were to do the right thing with the ability to effect positive change for our communities, a change in perspective, results and respect, and so we are here today.

I understand why the government is asking members of its caucus to support it in defying the will of Parliament. The release of these documents will no doubt expose wrongdoing on the part of the government, but how are we, as parliamentarians of any political stripe, to force the government to admit wrongdoing and enact change if we cannot exercise our fundamental rights and privileges as parliamentarians?

Members of the government should want the will of Parliament to be upheld in this case as well. Ministers should not be allowed to act without compunction in these matters. We have a fiduciary responsibility to our constituents to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not wasted, that they are not used to enrich people because of their proximity to the government as opposed to their place in an impartial and unbiased procurement system set under parliamentary supply rules.

Bureaucrats within ministries will also act without compunction if they feel as though Parliament's will can be ignored. We have all seen this at committees, where members of departments will sit there and just look at us as though we are ghosts, as though we do not matter. I reject that notion. I represent 120,000 Canadians. I stand here in the full apex of the power they have bestowed upon me, and I will not cede it. I will not let these people not be held to account. I will not let people get rich off the backs of my constituents. I will hold the government to account. It matters not what the topic is.

Colleagues have asked if we would be doing this if it was with respect to an oil and gas company. Absolutely, we would be. Would I be doing this if it was my political party? I absolutely would because there are things that matter more than the centre of our parties, which are the rules that uphold this place. That is why the government must immediately accept the will of Parliament to release these documents and allow itself to be held to account. It is also why the members of the caucus of the governing party should be pushing their visionless, listless, embattled and spent leader to do the right thing by refusing to participate in the government's blockade of Parliament's will.

I am deeply grateful to be surrounded by people who not only expect me to do the right thing but also stand beside me, come hell or high water, while I do so. To Sean Schnell, Kerry and Paul Frank, Dustin and the crew, Denise, Petronella, Cole, Murdoch, Eric and Sonya, my sister, and my husband and children, I say that not a day goes by when I am not grateful for their expectation of excellence and morality, as well as their support. Their support, along with the support of countless others in Calgary Nose Hill and across the country, makes me believe that, no matter how broken our country is now, better is possible in the future. Our country is worth fighting for. I will not write it off. Our problems can be fixed. I am proud to fight for change alongside my colleagues in the Conservative Party. Our team has gone through a lot in the last several years, but standing here today, after going through that visceral time of turbulence in which we decided where we were going to set our priorities, we are now in a caucus that is filled with peace and is clearly united and focused on enacting practical, common-sense change to fix our country. That fills me with pride and hope.

I guess the moral of the story is this: If members set foot in this place hoping to be comfortable or hoping to be liked, they will fail in their responsibilities to their constituents; they will fail to use the power that constituents have bestowed upon members to do what is right on their behalf. If members seek to appease people rather than to fight for what is right, if they seek to enrich themselves or save their ego instead of rising up for others and if they seek to destroy and undermine the democratic institutions that undermine the miracle that is Canada's pluralistic democracy, they will fail. They can also be sure that millions of others who believe in the beauty that is our country and understand that it only rests upon the rules of this place being followed, including me, will fight to ensure that they fail.

Therefore, the Liberals should govern themselves accordingly, do what is right, respect the will of Parliament and release these documents today.

[Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, is that a responsible approach to immigration?

The former immigration minister bragged about increasing international student permits from about 400,000 to 500,000 knowing that shady universities were abusing these students and that they were living under bridges in Toronto. That is the record of the government. The government, with the responsible approach the member talked about, also dropped security clearance certificates from its own background checks for temporary residents.

There is nothing responsible about the government. Will the Liberals allow for a carbon tax election so that Conservatives can fix Canada's broken immigration system?

[Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that it was the Liberals who fought tooth and nail for an extension of the Rainbow Railroad refugee program that was started under the former Harper Conservative government, and all the while, they allowed countless people in upstate New York to illegally cross the border. That is the record of the government's broken immigration system.

If the minister wants to talk about queer youth or any Canadian, the reality is that the government's inflationary crisis is what is putting people out on the streets.

The Liberals have broken Canada's immigration system. Will they allow for a carbon tax election to allow Conservatives to fix their mess?

[Ethics, October 23rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the member's attention to a name that is going to be seared upon his heart over the next year. The name is Rachel Punzalan. She is a strong, feisty Filipino woman who is committed to bringing truth and speaking truth to power.

I have sat in this place with the member for years, and I will just tell him this: Every moment that he continues to carry the water of the Prime Minister, with his lies, his deceit and his scandal, is a moment that Rachel is knocking on a door in his riding, or going to a Filipino event, and saying time is up for this stuff.

Is the member willing to sacrifice all of his principles and the principles of the people of his riding to continue to support these lies? If he is, I know for a fact that Rachel will continue to speak truth to power and take his seat.