Peter Kent

[Chief Rabbi of Israel, May 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to welcome the Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi David Lau, to Canada.

The youngest chief rabbi in Israel's history, Rabbi Lau is a religious and civil leader in Israel and a well-respected religious authority to Jews around the world. He is known for his modernity and openness and for his willingness to engage in open discussion on the important topics surrounding Jewish life in Israel and across the diaspora.

This is Rabbi Lau's first official visit to Canada. We are excited that he will have the chance to meet with some of the vibrant Jewish communities that have flourished in our country. This important visit is a symbol of the close friendship between Canada and Israel, which has been built on our shared commitment to the fundamental values of freedom, democracy, and human rights.

On behalf of the official opposition, we welcome Rabbi Lau to Canada, and we wish him the very best as he embarks on this official visit.

[Business of Supply, May 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for providing some wise and reasoned counsel in debate, as he always does. We certainly appreciate his support for the main thrust of our Conservative motion, which is to respond to a government that says climate change must be countered at all cost but is refusing to answer the essential question of what that cost is.

Indeed, in our previous Conservative government, when we regulated limitations on emissions by the major producers of GHG emissions themselves, whether in the coal-fired industry or in tailpipe emissions, from which Canadians are still benefiting from today and will for the foreseeable future, until the mid-2020s, we provided cost-benefit analysis.

I appreciate the member's suggestion that it is only logical that if we are going to look at the costs of the government's proposed program, which it resists revealing for the moment, eventually we would want to see the benefits as well. However, the problem with the government, as we know, in recognizing its mistakes and broken promises and conceding the error of its ways, is that it has to proceed with one correction of its course at a time. The principal correction that Canadians want to know—

[Vietnamese Canadians, April 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, today, Canada's Vietnamese community, with all Canadians, marks the fourth annual Journey to Freedom Day. Enacted under our former Conservative government, it is a national day of commemoration of the exodus of Vietnamese refugees from their war-torn country after the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975. As one who witnessed the first boats leaving on the Saigon River from a marine helicopter flying out of the U.S. embassy that night, it is an honour to recognize the refugees, known as the “boat people”, who fled their homes and communist rule to make the perilous journey to freedom. Many thousands perished at sea, but for over 60,000 people, Canada proved to be a safe haven.

In marking this year's Journey to Freedom Day, I am proud to recognize the many contributions of Vietnamese Canadians and their descendants, who came to Canada in search of freedom and a better life.

[Foreign Affairs, April 18th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first example of the government looking the other way when Liberal MPs seek electoral support and funding from groups associated with extremism and terror. Government funding of Palestine House was cut by our previous Conservative government six years ago for just these reasons.

Again, will the Prime Minister distance himself from this outrageous tribute made in his name?

[Foreign Affairs, April 18th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills excused her words at an event featuring a notorious apologist for the war crimes of Syrian President Assad, an event hosted by Palestine House, long associated with anti-Israel extremism and terror, by saying that she was only meeting with a diverse array of individuals.

Diversity does not excuse pandering to extremist organizations in the Prime Minister's name. Again, will the Prime Minister renounce this unacceptable solicitation of votes?

[Foreign Affairs, April 17th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills may be willing to stand with an extremist supporter she addresses as “brother Amin”. She may be willing to praise a man who denies President Assad is a murderer and a butcher in return for support in the next federal election.

Will the Prime Minister disassociate himself from this misguided tribute to extremism made by the member in the Prime Minister's name?

[Foreign Affairs, April 17th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, what we have here is a blatant, inexcusable endorsement of a notorious apologist for the brutal terror sponsoring, human rights abusing President of Syria, words of praise not offered by a merely misguided member of Parliament pandering for votes with an organization with a history of support for extremism and terror, but on a behalf of the Prime Minister of Canada.

Will the Prime Minister distance himself from this outrageous tribute in his name?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, April 16th, 2018]

With regard to government expenditures in relation to the Prime Minister’s attendance at the Young Changemakers Conclave and, specifically, the event at Indira Ghandi Stadium in New Delhi on February 24, 2018: (a) how much did the government pay to sponsor the event; (b) does the government consider the map of “India” displayed at the event to be an accurate representation of India’s borders; and (c) if the answer to (b) is negative, what actions has the government taken in order to address the validity of the representation displayed on the map?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 29th, 2018]

With regard to the Trudeau Report: (a) what does the government consider to be the report’s “recommendations”; and (b) what specific action has the government taken to implement each recommendation in (a)?

[Ethics, March 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has abandoned even a half-hearted acknowledgement of members and ministers' ethical obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act and Code.

Again, there was a question asked and not answered yesterday. Will the Prime Minister and will the Liberal government, disgraced by a spectrum of ethical lapses and violations, do the right thing and clean up the mess themselves or are they leaving it, once again, to the Ethics Commissioner?