Sadia Groguhé

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her question.

Obviously, this has happened before, and it is clear that the only reason for extending sitting hours until midnight is to cut debate short and end the parliamentary session before the scheduled date of June 21.

The government is not telling us that; it is trying to hide that part. However, as I said, Canadians are not stupid and neither is the official opposition.

That is why we keep saying that this government is not living up to its responsibilities. It is being hypocritical, shutting down democracy and dismissing the House's role.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I will share my speaking time with my colleague, the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

I have been given time to speak to this motion. Once again this week, the government is moving to extend our evening sitting hours significantly. It wants Parliament to sit until midnight.

We have to take a close look at this motion because similar motions in the past have often resulted in a shorter parliamentary calendar.

Since the beginning of this discussion, the Conservatives have continually surprised us with messages utterly at odds with what we are used to hearing.

Just like that, the government wants to extend the time we spend in the House. It claims this approach will enable members to debate bills on the order paper in detail and work hard for Canadians.

How ironic. After constantly curtailing debate ever since the last election, the government now says it wants to extend sitting hours to provide opportunities for debate.

Also ironic is the fact that the government has so much to say about democracy despite its unrelenting and unprecedented contempt for our parliamentary bodies.

Such principles were conspicuous by their absence when the government prorogued Parliament for purely partisan reasons, a move that was bad for Canadians.

Let us not forget that the Prime Minister had absolutely no compunction about letting dozens of bills die on the order paper when he wanted to save his government's hide. How can he say that he wants to let bills move through the normal legislative process when his political agenda has been given top priority in the current legislative cycle?

When a government constantly uses adjournment motions as a tactic to limit participation in and duration of debates, that is not democracy. It is exactly the opposite of what has been moved today.

May 8 was the 33rd time the government brought a vote on a time allocation motion that effectively limits the number of MPs who can speak to a given bill.

It sure looks like the Conservatives have been hell-bent on beating their own record for shutting down debate ever since the beginning of this Parliament.

How can the government say that it wants to promote free debate when it holds the record for cutting debate short? Are we supposed to believe that the government really wants to have it both ways?

Nor is it very democratic when the Prime Minister's Office muzzles its own members in their statements in the House.

Personally, neither I nor my colleagues in the official opposition have to get our speeches approved or adjusted to go with the soup of the day. We speak freely, without constraint from our party, but the government members cannot say the same.

How can the Conservatives stand here today and say that they defend democracy when they put gag orders on their own party's statements and speeches in the House?

Working for Canadians does not mean introducing three mammoth bills like Bills C-38, C-45 and C-60, and then watering down debate, limiting discussion and preventing parliamentarians from learning about what is happening in parliamentary committee, as is the case with a typical bill.

How can the Conservatives claim that they want to let the parliamentary process follow its course when they are the first to short-circuit it by forcing the vote on hundreds of measures without allowing representatives to do their work properly?

Never in the history of this country has a government shown such contempt for our institutions. That is why it is becoming difficult today to understand and believe the lines the Conservatives are trying to feed us.

You cannot on the one hand advocate for extending our sitting time to encourage debate, and on the other hand interfere constantly, as the Conservatives have done with complete impunity.

Therefore, we must question the motives behind the government's desire to extend the sitting hours.

If we look at what has happened in the past, we see that, in general, extending the sitting hours allows the party in power to make the parliamentary calendar shorter. Right now, the Conservatives clearly do not have enough credibility for us to believe their intentions and trust them.

We have to wonder whether the government simply wants to be forgotten as quickly as possible over the summer and to have people forget about all the problems that its wilful blindness caused with the temporary foreign worker program.

Yesterday, the government House leader said that he wanted to accelerate his government's economic measures. If he really cares about the economy, how could he let senators make such extravagant expenditures on the backs of taxpayers? The fact is that the government would rather shirk its responsibilities than face any challenges, answer the official opposition's questions and allow a real debate on issues that are of concern to Canadians. That is the real problem.

If the government wants to fully debate the bills on the order paper, then it should allow the House to sit until June 21, as set out on the calendar. The NDP is prepared to debate. The NDP is prepared to sit until June 21, as scheduled.

We have demonstrated our commitment and dedication to Parliament on numerous occasions. One of our members once even sat for 22 consecutive hours. When the government wanted to lock out Canada Post employees, we were there to debate and to stand up for Canadians.

Every day, we are here to stand up for the interests of Canadians. We routinely propose amendments in order move forward on bills that have sometimes been introduced over a year and a half ago, but these amendments are rejected by a government that wants to promote a political agenda rather than work for Canadians.

First and foremost, we oppose the government's motivations for wanting to impose extended sitting hours. Canadians will not be fooled. They understand the political game that the Conservatives are constantly playing. Canadians know that they cannot trust the Conservatives.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, instead of trying to enact laws for our neighbourhoods, perhaps it would be better if the Conservatives started making laws and having the Senate comply with them. I think that is the priority.

The government is being cynical once again. It does not know what democracy means. It is showing unprecedented contempt for our parliamentary bodies and for Canadians. Fortunately, Canadians are not fools. They understand the political game the Conservatives are constantly playing.

When will the government act respectfully and ethically toward democracy and Canadians?

[Citizenship and Immigration, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, on May 10 at 4:15 p.m., the Minister of Immigration tried to pass on some bad news in his Friday statement in the hope that no one would notice. Although he lifted the hold that he himself had placed on immigration applications, he changed the rules, and now people will have to pay more than ever for parents or grandparents to be reunited with their families in Canada. Additionally, only a small number of applicants will be accepted next year.

Why is the minister putting up barriers to family reunification?

[Citizenship and Immigration, May 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to take the Conservatives seriously when the immigration minister refuses to meet with a number of groups representing Canadians of Syrian descent.

His colleague at foreign affairs said that we should be doing more. What a good opportunity to meet with these groups that have been waiting for a sign from the minister for months. They want to know what the plan is—and I mean a concrete plan—to accelerate the family reunification process for Syrian refugees whose family members have made Canada their home. Some 70,000 people are dead and 4 million people have been displaced.

What is the minister going to do?

[Situation in Syria, May 7th, 2013]

We should welcome them here.

[Situation in Syria, May 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question.

Indeed, there have been precedents in the past. As just one example, consider the war in Lebanon, during which we welcomed huge numbers of refugees and other people in the context of family reunification.

So, the precedent has been set. It exists and we can use it again today to reunite Syrian families with other family members who have already settled here.

We do not really understand. We have not heard any significant or relevant explanations to help us understand why this government is dragging its feet on family reunification.

[Situation in Syria, May 7th, 2013]

Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleague for his question.

I think that the government is taking steps and boasting about everything it is doing to address the situation. That being said, we need to do even more. That is key. I think that above and beyond the figures that have been mentioned and the political measures that we hope to implement, there is really is, as I mentioned earlier, an urgent need for humanitarian aid that will require much more than what is currently being done.

Yes, it will involve saving lives and protecting women and children from the violence they are experiencing. We must also think about family reunification. We have been calling on the government to take such measures for weeks now. We specifically asked the immigration minister to talk to the Minister of Foreign Affairs about helping families to be reunited as quickly as possible. There are Syrian Canadians who just want one thing: to be able to be reunited with their families and welcome them to Canada.

They are prepared to use all their money and savings to welcome them as warmly as possible. What are we waiting for? This is urgent and we must take action.

[Situation in Syria, May 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

A political solution must be applied. I would like to point out to my colleague that we are looking at an emergency. Women and children are facing indescribable violence, and refugees are dealing with living conditions in the camps that are also indescribable.

I would like to refer to a media kit from March 2013, issued by Doctors without Borders, that mentions the emergency in Syria: “Syria Two Years On: The Failure of International Aid”.

I do think a political solution is needed, but humanitarian action is as well, and it must be stepped up.

[Situation in Syria, May 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, tonight we are all here to focus on the seriousness of the situation in Syria.

Human lives are at stake here. Women and children are suffering in Syria, and Syrian-Canadian families are suffering here in Canada as they wait to see their family members. For months, the NDP has been putting pressure on the government to fulfill Canada's humanitarian responsibilities in response to the conflict in this country. That means taking action. For months, we have been urging the government to take action to save lives, welcome refugees and reunite families.

To date, the Syrian civil war has caused the death of more than 70,000 people. In total, no fewer than 4 million people have been displaced within or outside the country, which is 20% of the population. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said this week that there are more than 1.3 million Syrian refugees in the surrounding countries. For a country like Jordan, with 6.5 million people, taking in 450,000 refugees is a massive challenge. Organizations and authorities on site are unable to keep up with demand for infrastructure, medical care and basic necessities.

A month ago, an HCR spokesperson, Adrian Edwards, warned that we are at a breaking point. With the alleged use of chemical weapons, the increased number of refugees and emerging epidemics, it seems that we are about to go beyond the breaking point if we have not already.

The Syrian conflict has been going on for two years now. Two years of combat, two years of internal fighting, two years of repression. The Canadian government has to face the facts: a political solution is not going to appear overnight and we must do whatever we can until then, whether that means supporting our allies, Syria's neighbouring countries, organizations on the ground or refugees fleeing the country in terror and insecurity.

The Canadian government cannot just keep giving speeches that are devoid of meaningful proposals. There needs to be a real plan. Otherwise, it is leaving the door open to massacres and merciless combats where no one wins and the people of Syria risk losing everything. Conversely, over the past few months, the NDP has taken action and come up with solutions to improve the lives of these refugees. We began by moving a motion in order to condemn the acts committed in Syria and get the Canadian government to do something to limit the impact of these abuses.

Then, on a number of occasions, my colleague from Ottawa Centre and I met with representatives from the Syrian community in Canada, something the Minister of Immigration has refused to do. They told us how upset they are about the current situation. They talked to us about the government's inaction both politically and in terms of humanitarian aid. They illustrated how important it is to take action in order to save lives. We need to take action right now, not six months or a year from now. Two ways we can act are by implementing procedures to expedite family reunification and by welcoming refugees.

This emergency debate is the time to think about the importance of adopting a real plan to limit the adverse effects on individuals, a people and an entire region. A more significant intervention by the international community seems unlikely at this time, given the opposition from permanent members of the Security Council that have veto power. Nonetheless, we can do something. We must do something.

The NDP believes that Canada must introduce meaningful measures to limit the effects of the Syrian crisis and live up to Canada's humanitarian responsibilities. We believe it is possible to take action and that we must do everything in our power to support the Syrian people, who are the primary victims of this bloody conflict. Canada must be there to support international organizations on the ground by providing equipment and supplies to improve the lives of refugees who have been in camps for months on end.

That shortcoming is obvious and inevitably has consequences on the health of refugees, and the safety and capacity of the camps.

In March, Doctors Without Borders drew attention to the fact that Syria's health care system was breaking down, hospital infrastructure was crumbling because of bombing, and thousands of women and children were at risk. It also highlighted the dangers of disease outbreaks, the increased numbers of infections and diseases as well as a significant increase in the number of miscarriages and premature births.

In addition, hundreds of thousands of people are crowding into small areas where resources are inadequate. Yes, the Minister of Foreign Affairs announced $48 million, but real action is still lacking.

The Canadian government must also focus on decreasing processing times for family sponsorship applications so that we can reunite Syrian families that are anxious about their loved ones. Their anxiety is made worse because sponsorship applications are being transferred and there are processing delays of 16 months in Ankara. That also increases the danger for Syrian applicants who have been waiting for months. In exceptional situations, exceptional measures need to be considered and taken. That is what must happen here, in the case of Syria's civil war.

Lastly, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism needs to introduce procedures to make it easier to welcome Syrian refugees. Millions of people have been displaced, and Canada has not stepped in to support them. The Canadian government has a moral duty to save lives and enable these people to leave the insecurity in which they live. We cannot shrink from Canada's responsibility to meet our humanitarian obligations.

To conclude, the situation is, of course, serious and the consequences are even more so. What is being done is not enough given the human tragedy taking place in Syria. There is also a complex political situation that will not make a political solution easy, as the minister suggested. Therefore, this political solution will be a long time coming. In the meantime, we must continue to act as effectively as possible and provide even more tools.

We need to keep on hoping to change things, keep on hoping that the situation of the refugees will be addressed and that we can improve their lives, keep on hoping that Canada will live up to its humanitarian responsibilities, keep on hoping that members of Parliament care about the fate of a population that has great need of our unwavering support.