House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2019, with 55% of the vote.
Foreign Affairs October 3rd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, China executes more people every year than the rest of the world combined. Due process does not exist. White collar criminals are routinely put to death, and the Chinese premier says China will not consider ending the death penalty. Therefore, why are the Liberals talking, discussing, negotiating with China on an extradition treaty?
Foreign Affairs October 3rd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, as the Liberals press ahead with their misguided negotiation of an extradition treaty with China, and just as a correction for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines negotiation as “discussion”.
We have heard concerning remarks from the Prime Minister's spokesman that Canada is not going to criticize the Chinese justice system. Really? Is that why the foreign minister has been so reluctant to speak out on human rights abuses in China?
Rosh Hashanah October 3rd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to rise today to offer New Year's greetings to Jewish friends in Thornhill, across Canada, and around the world.
Thornhill boasts the largest Jewish population of any riding in the country, and over the years I have had the privilege and honour of working closely with the community in the special celebrations and observances of the Jewish faith.
Every new year cycle begins with a focus on renewal, forgiveness, and reconciliation. It is a time to reflect on the past year, to learn from mistakes, and to commit to work toward a better new year.
I look forward to the celebratory sounding of the shofar and the symbolic foods, the apples dipped in honey in hopes of a sweet new year.
I wish all good health, happiness, peace, and prosperity.
L'Shanah Tovah! Happy Rosh Hashanah.
Business of Supply September 29th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, as the member sits beside the chair of our foreign affairs committee, I quite agree with the remarks that the committee is applying itself very diligently and productively to the issues we have been assigned to investigate.
As I mentioned in my remarks about the Arms Trade Treaty, we have serious reservations about the possible encroachment, with the breadth of the treaty as it is written today, with regard to those Canadians who are legitimate hunters and trappers, quite law-abiding users of weapons that can be used improperly. However, on record in Canada, this is a major recreational sporting sector of our economy. Billions of dollars every year are invested and generated by this economy.
As I said in my remarks, little or no consultation, to my knowledge, has been undertaken by the government to speak to lawful gun owners in Canada about their concerns about what participation in and commitment to the ATT would mean to them.
Business of Supply September 29th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I must say, it has been a pleasure in recent months to have worked with the member on the foreign affairs committee on a number of important issues.
The government has not been persuaded yet to strike a committee. However, there are a great many very important issues, to be fair, that the committee has been asked to address, and it will.
To answer my colleague's question directly, there is concern. There is concern among the Canadian public about a broad range of situations in the world today where arms have found their way into the hands of those who would abuse not only human rights but their own domestic populations.
I think conditions may seem to have changed in the years between the signing of some of our current contracts and the behaviour of the purchasing countries, bodies, and organizations in the years since. Therefore, I think that, yes, it is a valid topic that Parliament should investigate, but again, I would suggest that the resources of the House are too valuable and too thinly stretched to be focused on yet another standing committee. It would be best done by a subcommittee of either the foreign affairs committee or a joint subcommittee of foreign affairs and perhaps defence.
Business of Supply September 29th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, let me say off the top that I will be sharing my time with the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
Let me make clear at the outset that there are a number of statements in the preamble of this motion with which we, in the official opposition and as the previous government, fully agree. Conservatives agree with the NDP that Canadians expect a high standard from their government when it comes to protecting human rights abroad.
Conservatives have always supported efforts to establish and to maintain international standards for arms transfers, aimed at preventing illicit transfers of weapons and matériel that would be used to fuel conflict, to enable terrorism, or for the use of organized crime.
Under our previous Conservative government, Canada had some of the strongest export controls in the world, including laws and regulations such as the Export and Import Permits Act and the Automatic Firearms Country Control List.
In addition, when we were in government, the then department of foreign affairs rigorously assessed all exports of military goods and technologies on a case-by-case basis.
Now to address another point in the preamble to the motion by the NDP member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, we in the official opposition also recognize that Canadian arms exports have increased over the past decade. That is not, in itself, bad news. Arms exports were only approved by our Conservative government if and when contracts were consistent with Canada's foreign and defence policies. I will come back to those considerations in a moment.
Members today must remember, and Canadians must remember, that many thousands of Canadian jobs depend on exports—legitimate and closely regulated sales of the products of our Canadian defence and defence-related industries.
The much-discussed sale of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia has created, and will sustain, more than 3,000 jobs in southwestern Ontario, which is a region of Canada that is the heartland of our manufacturing sector, as my colleagues in the House know. This single contract will also create thousands of indirect jobs across Canada through a 500-firm supply chain stretching literally from coast to coast to coast.
We in the official opposition were proud to deliver these economic benefits for southwestern Ontario when we were in government, benefits that extended to all of Canada. This single, job-creating contract is only one of many in Canada's steadily expanding defence industries—our aerospace, shipbuilding, and high-tech sectors, to name just a few.
That said, end-user contracts are an important element of defence systems export sales. In the case of the armoured vehicles sold to Saudi Arabia, I would remind colleagues, the sale itself was conditional. The purchaser committed, in effect, that the vehicles would not be used against the Saudi domestic population. No evidence of any such misuse was discovered or reported during our Conservative years in government.
However, we in the official opposition fully expect the Liberal government to continue today to ensure the conditions of that contract are respected. As we have said many times in recent months, if the government finds the terms of that contract have been violated, then appropriate action must be taken by the Liberals, by the government. The Liberals simply cannot look the other way on highly conditional defence product export contracts.
I would like to return to my earlier points about any arms export contracts being consistent with Canada's foreign affairs and national defence policies.
Despite the concerns that have been raised about the armoured vehicle sale to Saudi Arabia, we need to remember that Saudi Arabia is an ally in probably the most violently contested region of the world today. Saudi Arabia is an important member of the allied coalition in the war against ISIL, the so-called Islamic state. Iran's support of terrorism is a continuing and growing threat to the stability of that region, specifically in Yemen, in Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the region.
In Syria, the Iranian regime has provided increasing military assistance to the Assad regime. We just learned today that another 3,000 Iranian fighters have been dispatched to prop up Assad forces in the long and tragic battle for the city of Aleppo.
It remains to be seen today whether Iran will comply with the P5+1 nuclear agreement, even as the regime continues to ignore UN resolutions against the development of ballistic missiles. Iran continues to belligerently proclaim its goal—its aim of destroying the state of Israel. Domestically, of course, Iran is among the world's worst violators of human rights.
That said, at the same time, the recent execution of the Shia cleric Nimr al-Nimr in Saudi Arabia has outrageously and unnecessarily further inflamed Sunni-Shia tensions right across the region. While we share Saudi concerns about Iran's efforts to export its violently destructive ideology across the region, we believe that alienating moderate Shias in these chaotic times is profoundly counterproductive.
We strongly encourage the Government of Canada to take every opportunity to make our views on human rights and religious freedom known to Saudi authorities and the international community at the same time. Canada must continue to work aggressively with our allies in the region to create a stable and, one day, prosperous Middle East, governed by freedom, tolerance, and pluralism, where human rights are fully respected, particularly the rights of the now persecuted minorities.
My hon. colleague raised the matter of the Arms Trade Treaty. I would like to make a couple of points there, although it is not directly reflected in the motion by the NDP today.
We in the official opposition believe that any arms trade treaty should recognize and acknowledge the legitimacy of lawful ownership of firearms by responsible citizens for their personal and recreational use, including sport shooting, hunting, and even collecting. We are disappointed that the Liberals have moved forward with an ATT that does not specifically respect the legitimate trade or use of hunting or sporting firearms.
We are also concerned that little to no consultation with lawful gun owners was undertaken by the Liberals before they unilaterally decided to accede to this treaty. These are concerns from law-abiding Canadians about just how the treaty could affect responsible firearms owners. Conservatives will continue to give voice to these legitimate concerns.
That brings me to the central objective of the NDP motion, an outcome the party has sought on a number of occasions in the past. The NDP wants to address legitimate concerns about Canada's arms exports with a review that would look at past and current sales, the arms export permits regime, end-use conditions and enforcement, and broader international trends, which are all valid topics for review. However, in this motion it is asking to create an entirely new standing committee of the House to manage such a review.
The official opposition will not support this motion. The reason is quite simple. The foreign affairs committee already has the power and authority to study these issues or to create a subcommittee for such a study. In our view, establishing an entirely new committee devoted solely to arms sales would create an unnecessary burden on and consumption of limited House of Commons resources. Therefore, the official opposition will oppose the motion put by the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.
Foreign Affairs September 28th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, on another matter, an international investigation into the downing of Malaysian passenger jet MH17 confirms that the missile that hit the plane was brought into Ukraine from Russia and fired from Russian-backed rebel territory. Evidence reveals that the launcher then returned to Russia.
Given that two Canadians were among the 298 who died in the attack, will the minister now clearly condemn Russia for its unrepentant military aggression that has taken thousands of lives and displaced almost one million people in eastern Ukraine?
Foreign Affairs September 28th, 2016
Well, Mr. Speaker, that is not good enough. Canadians are still trying to understand the very obvious contradiction between the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister over the extradition treaty with China.
The Prime Minister says discussions have begun, his website says that talks have begun, and the Chinese premier says so as well. The only person who did not know seems to have been the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Is he simply out of the loop, is he splitting grammatical hairs, or is he quite properly challenging the Prime Minister on an unwise initiative?
National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act September 27th, 2016
Madam Speaker, it seemed that my colleague was just getting to some rather important flaws that he saw in the legislation and I wonder if he could expand upon those.
National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act September 27th, 2016
Madam Speaker, we in the official opposition still disagree with respect to Bill C-51. We are reassured that the government, since the election and some of the promises it made in that campaign, has come to see the virtues in Bill C-51.
However, that aside for the moment, to your very logical points with regard to the legislation before us, we agree it is legislation which is fundamentally flawed. I noticed you were just getting to pointing out—