Debates of May 6th, 2024

Foreign Political Interference, Violence or Intimidation

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

moved:

That:

(a) the House recognize that,

(i) Canada takes global security very seriously and has several cooperative agreements with various foreign states to share security intelligence, protect democratic institutions, maintain the rule of law, and prevent violence and terrorism,

(ii) recent events, including the credible allegations of a link between agents of the Government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, at a place of worship on Canadian soil, are examples of rising forms of intimidation, threats, and interference from countries such as India, China, Russia, Iran, and others; and

(b) in the opinion of the House, to ensure that diaspora communities are protected from acts of political interference, violence, or intimidation on Canadian soil, the government should immediately review its measures that hold to account any person or agents of a foreign state undermining democratic institutions, engaging in acts of violence, or violating human or international rights, in order to bar these persons from entering Canada, and report to the House on the progress of these actions.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise knowing that what I say, and what we do as a result, will have profound impacts on Canadians across the country.

On the evening of June 18, 2023, Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a respected community leader from my riding of Surrey—Newton, was brutally murdered outside the Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara in Surrey-Delta. Following this heinous crime, on September 18, 2023, the Prime Minister rose in the House and shared with us the credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the Government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen at a place of worship on Canadian soil.

Just this past Friday, the RCMP announced the arrest of three individuals who investigators believe were tasked with the killing of Mr. Nijjar.

I commend the work of the law enforcement agencies for their collaboration in laying charges against the alleged killers. I also want to thank the family of Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar and the leadership of Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara and B.C. Gurdwaras Council for their continued advocacy. We must continue to highlight the importance of unity during these challenging times. It is crucial that we come together to condemn this heinous crime, support the grieving family and stand up for the principles of the rule of law.

The assassination of Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar has shaken communities across the country. I can recall the fear and anxiety in the days that followed, fears and anxieties that, for many of our constituents, have not yet gone away.

With that in mind, along with the help of my caucus colleagues, I got working on Motion No. 112, which I introduced on February 13. To ensure that diaspora communities in Canada are protected from the acts of political interference, violence and intimidation, our government must review its measures that hold to account any person or agents of a foreign state undermining our democratic institutions, engaging in acts of violence or violating human rights or international rights in order to bar these persons from entering Canada.

I know that many, particularly those from our diaspora communities, are being targeted and are feeling scared. I want to assure Canadians that we are a country governed by the rule of law and that our government will not tolerate foreign interference or threats against Canadians. Denying individuals from entering or remaining in Canada in order to prevent them from engaging in foreign interference is an important aspect of countering the threat.

The integrity and administration of inadmissibility provisions, both abroad and at our borders, contributes to defending against the threat of foreign interference in Canada.

While not all activities are conducted in person and many occur online or via Canadian proxies, a portion of foreign interference activity stems from the ability of foreign actors to travel to Canada. Effective screening, refusal or cancellation of immigration documents are important defences against foreign interference.

This motion would help protect our democratic institutions and would raise awareness around rising forms of intimidation, threats and interference. However, it also expresses, in no uncertain terms, the need for the government to review its measures in protecting diaspora communities. Foreign interference threats take many forms and they do not come from one state. The killing of Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar is just one of many examples of rising forms of violence, intimidation, threats and interference from countries around the world, including India, China, Russia, Iran and others.

While some foreign states advance their interests in legitimate and transparent ways, many others act with hostility that can threaten our national interests and place Canadians and their families in danger. These covert, deceptive and sometimes violent actions are damaging, and they undermine our national security.

Foreign interference poses one of the greatest threats to Canada's way of life and our sovereignty. The threat is not new, but in recent years it has increased in both volume and complexity, coming from hostile foreign states and actors, and disproportionately affecting diaspora communities.

As an advanced economy and open democracy, Canada is a target of foreign interference. Protecting our democracy is not a partisan issue. All Canadians, irrespective of political stripe, have a role to play in ensuring our democratic institutions and values remain strong. Every Canadian deserves to feel safe. Canada is a country of diversity, peace and inclusion. We cannot, and we will not, tolerate hate and violence.

We must remain committed to addressing the threat of foreign interference by modernizing Canada's policies and legislative framework in ways that align with our national values, respect Canadian rights and freedoms, and account for a wide range of perspectives and experience.

In this age of disinformation, misinformation and foreign interference, we must continue to do everything in our power to ensure that fair and transparent democratic processes are upheld. As part of the commitment to combatting this issue, I am glad to see that our government has already held public consultations to modernize the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, the Criminal Code, the Security of Information Act and the Canada Evidence Act, which enhance our ability to address foreign interference threats.

With the appointment of Justice Hogue, we established a public inquiry into foreign interference, which recently released its initial report. A final report will be released before the end of 2024.

We have established the security and intelligence threats to elections task force, which identifies foreign threats, including those that aim to interfere with Canada’s democratic processes.

I know that our government is working tirelessly to protect national security and public safety. We have provided $48.9 million to the RCMP to protect Canadians from harassment and intimidation by foreign actors. This funding will also help the RCMP increase its investigative capacity and co-operate more proactively with communities that are most at-risk of being targeted.

The Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, CSIS, is key to protecting Canadians from foreign interference threats through its intelligence operations in Canada and around the world. Through budget 2024, our government is investing $656 million over eight years into CSIS to enhance its intelligence capabilities, which is critical in our fight against foreign interference.

In order to build resilience, CSIS continues to work closely with diaspora communities to raise awareness of foreign interference threats. Some, including certain members of the House, may claim that this motion divides Canadians or that it pits diaspora communities against one another. That is completely false.

I brought this motion forward to protect all Canadians, so that we have the mechanisms in place to defend our democratic institutions, maintain the rule of law and prevent violence and terrorism.

I am proud to share that this motion has been jointly seconded by members from all recognized political parties. It is a product of my interactions with constituents and others across this nation, many of whom came to this country in search of a life free from political intimidation and interference. To those who came before us, and to many around the world still, Canada promises a life where a person can live with dignity and where a person's fundamental freedoms can never be taken from them.

However, I am afraid that the potential implications of Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s murder confirm the worst fears of many Canadians. While people can come to Canada in search of a better life, while they can raise their children safe from the dangers faced by their parents and grandparents, it might not be enough. Perhaps the threats and intimidations of the past will follow them here.

Let us remain calm and steadfast in our commitment to democratic principles and our adherence to the rule of law. This is who we are, and what we do as Canadians. Our constituents trust us to do our best to protect them from any and all types of foreign interference, and so we must stand united against foreign powers that seek to undermine our fundamental freedoms and our sovereignty.

All Canadians have the right to feel safe and secure in their communities, and our government remains committed to taking the necessary steps to combat threats of foreign interference. Simply put, we cannot and will not allow these hostile activities to go on. We must continue our efforts while strengthening measures to hold to account any person or agent of a foreign state who undermines our democratic institutions, engages in acts of violence, intimidates diaspora communities in Canada or violates human or international rights.

Once more, I thank all the members from all the recognized political parties who have come together and encouraged me to stand in the House to defend Canadian values. For these reasons, I urge all members to support this motion.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for moving this motion and I commend him on his speech. It is good. We will be voting in favour of the motion. As he said, all of the parties support it. However, I would like to ask him whether the motion is sufficient.

Part (b) of the motion suggests that maybe it is not. Unfortunately, there is no getting around the fact that the Liberal government has been dragging its feet on this from the beginning. It took a lot of pressure from the opposition for the government to finally launch a commission of inquiry into interference. We are starting to see results from that, but the work is not yet finished. What does the member have to say about that? What more could be done?

I would like him to talk about the foreign agent registry, which the government has talked a lot about but has not yet produced any results.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member from the Bloc Québécois for supporting this motion.

As I mentioned, some steps that our government has taken include the appointment of Justice Hogue to lead a public inquiry, with a final report due by the end of the year; investing in our national security agencies to help them detect and stop malicious activities, including nearly $50 million for the RCMP to combat foreign interference; and establishing a national counter foreign interference coordinator to coordinate efforts to combat foreign interference. These are some of the things, but I can tell members that there is more to come from the government to make sure that our sovereignty and integrity are protected and to protect Canadians.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the member for Surrey—Newton for bringing forward this important motion. As he mentioned, it has the support of all the recognized parties in the House. It has been seconded by members of Parliament from each of the parties. This is an important initiative.

No one, no Canadian should have to fear being involved in their community in their own country. The tragic and horrendous murder of Mr. Niijar indicates to all of us the importance of taking foreign interference seriously.

Justice Hogue has put forward her interim report. She indicates the importance of putting measures in place immediately. One, of course, is the foreign agent registry; another is having protocols.

What is the member's reaction to putting these elements in place immediately?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of working with the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby for many, many years. In fact, when I first landed in B.C., it was in New Westminster. To answer his question, yes, I am also actively advocating that the foreign registry should come into effect immediately.

I would also like to thank the hon. member from the NDP for seconding this, as well as the NDP for supporting the motion.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, something that needs to be emphasized is that, when we talk about interference, there is not one single country; there are a number of countries. We have a responsibility to protect our citizenry.

Could my colleague amplify the fact that we all need to take responsibility for ensuring that we are talking about more than one country?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have run into many different members from different communities, such as people from the Iranian community and people of Chinese origin, who have come to me and said they have been victims of foreign interference. In fact, members of Parliament from different diasporas have been victims of intimidation and acts of political interference.

This motion says that we should focus on every nation that tries to interfere with our sovereignty, not only India, China, Iran or Russia but also many other nations.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we are here today because of the real and serious issue of foreign interference happening here in Canada. After nine years of the Liberal-NDP Prime Minister, the Canadian dream of being able to live in this country with freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom of thought is broken. Diaspora communities across this country are feeling less safe than ever because of fear of extortion, intimidation and, in fact, assassination.

We are glad there have finally been arrests that will bring some justice for Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s family and the community. Those responsible should face the full consequences of their crimes; no foreign agent should be able to kill a Canadian, let alone on Canadian soil. We call on the Indian government to co-operate with authorities as they investigate this murder, because the truth must come out.

Canada’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies must relentlessly pursue any other person or entity that was involved in this murder so they can be held accountable and brought to justice. We wish the government was able to foil this plot and stop this murder from happening in the first place, as was the case in the United States. In the U.S., authorities laid allegations; within one week, arrests were made of those who were going to commit that crime.

The Liberal member who brought this motion forward mentioned Iran in the motion, even though his government refuses to list the IRGC Quds Force as a terrorist organization. The Prime Minister allows 700 agents from Iran’s terrorist regime to operate freely in Canada and terrorize Canadians. Now the regime operatives are recruiting Canadians to terrorize our allies. This terrorist organization shot down flight PS752. The families and communities of those on that flight are still living a nightmare without justice for their loved ones.

It was voted on in the House to ban the IRGC in June 2018. Members should make no mistake: A common-sense Conservative government, under the leadership of the member for Carleton, will list IRGC as a terrorist organization and ban it so it can no longer use our country as its safe haven to recruit, fundraise and hide from any accountability.

The Communist regime in Beijing is another threat that the government ignores. It is the same Prime Minister and his entire cabinet who showed their cowardice by abstaining on a vote to recognize that there is a genocide being committed by the Communist regime against the Uyghur Muslims. The foreign interference inquiry commissioner confirmed that agents from Beijing interfered in the 2019 and 2021 Canadian elections. The election of our former colleague Kenny Chiu was impacted by foreign interference, as we found out from the recent findings by the commissioner. My colleagues have had real threats to their safety and their families' safety because of foreign interference and the lack of any courage to stand up to it by the Liberal-NDP government.

That same regime also intimidates and threatens Canadians who exercise their right to freedom of speech and to vote. Instead of standing up for Canadians, the government was dragged, kicking and screaming, to call a public inquiry into foreign interference in the first place. Police stations run by the Communist regime in Beijing are intimidating others here who are pro-democracy. This only demonstrates that the Liberal-NDP government must take further action to protect our country, including by immediately implementing a foreign influence registry. This is something that, for a long time, the Conservatives have been calling for. We believe paid agents of foreign governments should have to be registered. If a Canadian food bank must register to lobby a Liberal minister, paid foreign agents should have to register as well.

Even the Prime Minister's senior bureaucrats recommended he set up a registry, but nothing has been done. Conservatives brought an opposition day motion in May 2023 calling on the government to create one. All the opposition parties here voted in favour of it as well. Canadians are still waiting to have a registry implemented. This House adopted that motion a year ago. For the sake of Canada’s democracy, the Liberal government cannot continue to dismiss the impact this interference has had on our elections. This was further confirmed by the recent findings by the commissioner.

Conservatives will continue to fight any foreign interference from any country and put an end to any attempts by foreign governments to target Canadians and our elections. This issue is one of the most important we speak about in this House, because fundamentally it is about protecting our country and protecting our people from foreign governments that seek to target them.

The duty of government to protect Canada and Canadians is one of its most important responsibilities, and yet, sadly, as we have seen over the past nine years, the government has failed to do this. We have seen unprecedented foreign interference for years in our democracy and in our communities, and yet the Liberal government has refused to take the action necessary to bring it to an end and send a message to foreign countries that Canada will not tolerate it anymore.

Many immigrants who came to this country, like my family, came here for a safe future. Many immigrants came here because they left countries where they did not have freedom of speech, freedom of religion or freedom of thought and were not allowed to vote the way they wanted to vote. However, when they came to this country, it was like the Canadian dream they came here for, to live freely and to be able to express themselves through their religion, their thoughts and their words, was not there. They do not feel like they are in a country where they are able to do that. It is almost like they left a country and then came to one where they ask themselves what they left their old country for when they cannot freely express themselves here either. That is after nine years of the Liberal-NDP government failing to protect Canadians and failing to protect our democracy.

Make no mistake, a common-sense Conservative government, under the leadership of the next prime minister, the member for Carleton, will do just that. We will restore the Canadian dream. We will act to secure our democracy, protect our people and end foreign interference anywhere within our borders. We will restore the hope that if people come to this country, they will be able to express themselves freely through their religion, their thoughts, their speech and their expressions. We will bring the once lauded Canadian dream back to this country once again.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will keep the public interest in mind while making my remarks rather than uttering sentences in the future tense about some potential future government.

No one can be against virtue. This is hardly a new idea. In fact, the greatest philosopher ever, Socrates, once said that “no one knowingly does evil”. Let us bear that in mind. This morning we are studying Motion No. 112, which deals with interference and violence. The motion is divided into three parts, which I will summarize to ensure that our arguments are placed in the proper context.

The first section moves that the House of Commons recognize that “Canada takes global security very seriously.” As we know, Canada is part of the Five Eyes. Canada is maybe the fifth and a half country, but it is nevertheless a member of the Five Eyes and, as such, it receives and provides information on the national security of member states. In recent years, questions can certainly be asked about the effectiveness of this, because it seems that when it comes to interference, we have not reacted in a very timely way. Nevertheless, there is a desire to see Canada take global security seriously.

The motion also discusses the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in a place of worship on Canadian soil. This is an example of threats and interference by a country. India, Iran, Russia, China and many others are recognized for their practice of interfering in some way or another in the affairs of numerous states.

The motion goes on to say that “the government should immediately review its measures that hold to account any person or agents of a foreign state undermining democratic institutions, engaging in acts of violence, or violating human or international rights, in order to bar these persons from entering Canada, and report to the House”. No one is against virtue.

Reading Motion No. 112 made me smile a bit, I have to say. The motion—and it is a good motion—calls on the government to play the role it should have been playing. There should be no need for Motion No. 112 because these measures should already be in place. In concrete terms, Motion No. 112 talks about reviewing the measures Canada takes to hold to account foreign agents seeking to undermine democracy. No one can be against that.

When it comes to ignoring measures, the government is number one. We have only to think of the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, the incidents involving Chinese interference, the incidents during the election that Justice Hogue commented on last week and the harassment of certain members of the diaspora. It seems to me that we should have started demanding accountability a long time ago. When we talk about accountability, we have to differentiate between matters of influence and matters of interference. Influence is leading someone to come on side of their own accord. Interference is meddling in someone’s affairs.

We know that, since 2015-16, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service warned the government on a few occasions that there were risks or information that had to be taken into account. We know that in November 2020, the House of Commons adopted a motion to create a foreign agent registry, but that has still not happened. Actually, last November, I proposed introducing a bill to create such a registry, which would have some teeth and a very broad scope, but so far we have not seen anything. It has not yet happened.

The interference issue, however, has been known for a long time. We could say that the government had a slightly naive view of China and was a bit complacent toward that country. Indeed, in all these years they have not done much, other than denying the bill or attempting to dodge the issue. This struck me in the case of the Winnipeg laboratory. Six hundred pages of the report were redacted, and now the equivalent of about 14 remain. That is certainly cause for concern.

The same goes for the federal election. They said that nothing happened, but they realized that something perhaps did happen in the case of the member for Don Valley North and the former Conservative member for Steveston—Richmond East.

In fact, it is interesting, because, although this report says there was interference, it also says there was no impact on the outcome of the election and that the same party would have come to power. However, it might not have been the same member sitting in the same place. It is important to realize that.

These types of missed opportunities include the 2023 Rosenberg report. There was an investigation into interference and the Trudeau Foundation. It is funny that just 23 out of the 23,000 words in the report referred to interference or to China. Here again, this looks like a missed opportunity or an attempt to dodge the issue.

In the case of the Trudeau Foundation, cheques were written in Mandarin, donations were reimbursed and the board of directors was a bungling mess; in short, this was a crisis. The Trudeau Foundation is not the government, let us be clear about that. However, there is a connection, and there is a need to rebuild trust. In a democracy, trust is key. Trust is the act of delegating one's future to someone else. That requires a relationship of trust. Otherwise it does not work.

Morris Rosenberg filed his report. I was rather dissatisfied with it. After that, we figured there would be an independent special rapporteur appointed. We recognized Mr. Johnston’s capabilities. However, we challenged his independence. We did not approve. He said that there was nothing there and that there were documents that could not be made public because they were classified as secret or top secret. Pressure was applied to help us get to the bottom of things. In short, Mr. Johnston resigned.

Then there was the Hogue commission, which promised transparency and did a thorough job. It recently tabled a report confirming foreign interference, with nuances, of course.

It was only once it had lost the people’s trust that the government agreed to take action. That is not reassuring. It does not build public trust in the government, since Canadians do not know whether our elections are working, if the nomination system is working, or if—getting back to my initial point—everything was done to protect national security.

Personally, I like Motion No. 112. However, I cannot say that the government was quick to take action. Rather, it tried to make us believe that the Prime Minister was doing something. Not doing anything is not exactly taking action.

With a foreign policy that, in my opinion, is vague at best, and perhaps even naive, we cannot manage these incidents piecemeal. We need a coherent vision to be able to provide a coherent response. For now, we appear to respond only when we are forced to do so, on a case-by-case basis. I believe we need to think about the rogue states around us, because there is an increasing number of them, and see what we can do.

Since it would be hard to be against virtue, the Bloc Québécois will support motion Motion No. 112, despite the fact that it is a timid measure at best.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as I explained earlier, the NDP will support Motion No. 112, which seeks to prevent political interference, violence and intimidation on Canadian soil. I would like to thank the member for Surrey—Newton for moving this motion in the House.

This is a very concerning issue for us. The Hogue commission, and particularly its first report, confirms it. Although Justice Hogue said that foreign interference had not impacted past elections, foreign actors could play a role in future elections. Consequently, we believe that the government should act immediately and establish a foreign agent registry.

Protocols should also be put in place to facilitate the sharing of information. Clearly, information was not passed on during the 2019 and 2021 elections. Although this did not change the outcome of the election, it did in some way erode the trust Canadians might place in the electoral process. For this reason, protocols must be implemented. Procedures should be put in place to ensure that information flows and the government and authorities make decisions and take action, rather than simply observe what is going on.

We will be supporting Motion No. 112. The horrific murder of Mr. Nijjar, a Canadian citizen, that took place in Canada just a few kilometres from my home, is something that I think has been a wake-up call for Canadians right across this country. There is an ability for foreign governments to intervene in our country in a way that can be profoundly destructive to democracy, and in the case of Mr. Nijjar, it cost him his life. Our condolences go out to his family, friends and everyone who was associated with him. This was a horrible and tragic killing that can never be repeated. We commend the intelligence agencies and our police for having arrested the hit squad that was sent to kill him, and justice will be done. It is encouraging to know that justice will be served one day, and our thoughts are with his family.

First and foremost, the NDP spoke up about foreign interference. It was in February that our leader, the member for Burnaby South, first raised the issue of having a public inquiry into foreign interference. Members will recall that at the procedure and House affairs committee the NDP brought forward a motion that eventually was debated and passed in Parliament with the support of four of the five political parties in the House.

We then moved forward with an opposition day motion expressing non-confidence in the government's original intent around dealing with foreign interference and the appointment of a very distinguished special rapporteur, David Johnston as the appointment process simply did not have the confidence of the House. Members will recall that it was the NDP members who put forward that motion expressing non-confidence. I said at the time, as did the member for Burnaby South and a number of other NDP MPs, that if the House expressed non-confidence, we were confident that Mr. Johnston, out of his respect for Parliament and for democracy, would choose to step down. Indeed, Parliament adopted it, with four parties out of five voting in favour, and we expressed that non-confidence in the special rapporteur process, not in the individual. A week later, Mr. Johnston chose to respect that vote and resign.

That opened the door for what we believed, since February, needed to happen, which was putting in place a public inquiry. Working very diligently over the summer, the House leaders were able to come up with the recommendation around an appropriate justice, Justice Hogue, who then began her work last fall and has issued the preliminary report that will lead to a final report by the end of this year.

All these things came because the NDP felt very strongly that all types of foreign interference needed to be treated seriously. I think it is fair to say that the government has finally come around to that fact. All the recommendations that will be made by Justice Hogue by the end of this year need to be implemented. We have also been very vocal about implementing some measures immediately, such as putting in place a foreign agents registry. It is absolutely essential, and it needs to happen right away. We are going to continue to push the government to do this.

In terms of the protocols within the information that comes to light with the government, it is very important that protocols be established. How to communicate that information to electoral authorities, potentially to candidates in an upcoming election and certainly to law enforcement in the horrific case of the murder of Mr. Nijjar, the information that comes forward, the intelligence, needs to be vetted and acted upon. The communication around that information needs to be handled effectively and carefully, of course.

The reality is, I think, from the preliminary report of Justice Hogue, that it is not clear that this was the case and that the government seemed to be working with a very informal and not effective set of protocols. That needs to change. Motion No. 112 does speak to that, the importance of reviewing all the measures and taking new measures. I think it is fair to say that members from all corners of the House support that.

I will raise concerns. I stood up to ask a question when one asked for questions on the official opposition response to this private member's bill, because it seems that there are some kinds of foreign interference that the official opposition condemns but others that it is less ready to condemn. I find that very disturbing. All forms of foreign interference should be condemned.

We, of course, spoke out. The member for Vancouver East spoke very eloquently in the inquiry about interference from China. We have spoken very determinedly. Our foreign affairs critic from Edmonton Strathcona has spoken about interference from Iran. It is also equally important to condemn foreign interference coming from India and from Russia. Indeed, the public inquiry is looking into all of this.

I note Balpreet Singh's comments around the official opposition and the member for Carleton, saying this last October: “I'm very disappointed to see His Majesty's loyal opposition leader”, the member for Carleton, “siding with a hostile foreign government against Canadian intelligence, Five Eyes intelligence and frankly the memory of a dead Canadian citizen.”

We have also seen the unwillingness, just in this recent speech, to condemn what was a horrific murder and the ongoing interference that is coming from India as well.

There is the issue around Russian interference, which played such a preponderant role in overthrowing the 2016 election, which led to the election of Donald Trump, and throughout the Brexit election, of which the people of the United Kingdom are still contending with the fallout from that foreign interference. To suggest that Russia, because of its massive social media reach into each and every Canadian home, is simply not something we should condemn is something I find quite disturbing.

Unlike the official opposition, we condemn all forms of foreign interference. We are very concerned about the rise in foreign interference. It is for that reason, and to commemorate the horrific murder of Mr. Nijjar, that we will be voting in favour of this motion.

We will continue the fight in the House of Commons to ensure that the government takes action on all forms of foreign interference and takes action now.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this very important motion, Motion No. 112. I would like to thank the member for Surrey—Newton for bringing this motion before us and, of course, for his dedicated service.

Democracy has always been at risk and has been tested throughout history. Living here, in one of the world's greatest democracies, it is easy to forget how fragile it is. These are real threats posed by foreign governments who seek to intimidate diaspora communities in Canada. We need to combat these threats with new tools and resources to protect our democracy, our institutions and our way of life.

Our government has taken some strong measures, like creating a National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians so that MPs could be briefed with gathered intelligence and sensitive information they can work with to make recommendations to government. Additionally, the security and intelligence threats to elections task force was installed to maintain the integrity of our electoral process.

In budget 2024, we are committing $655.7 million over the next eight years, and $114.7 million in ongoing funding, to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to enhance its intelligence capabilities, in addition to increased funding for the RCMP. These efforts demonstrate the commitment of the government to push back against the threats of foreign interference.

While these are necessary steps, we recognize that they are not sufficient, and we need to modernize our approach and fight to protect ourselves. As Justice Hogue's recent report made clear, more work needs to be done to protect Canada's democracy and institutions from foreign interference. The murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in front of the Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara in Surrey is proof of how far some foreign actors will go to achieve their objectives, to harm opposing ideologies or to attempt to destabilize our strong and free nation.

Canadian police and intelligence authorities need the necessary tools to track, and they must be equipped with the tools to expose threats from foreign state actors or from individuals from within Canada. I was encouraged to hear, during the recent RCMP press conference, that co-operation between the RCMP and its counterparts in the Five Eyes allied nations, particularly the United States, helped make these arrests possible. This is why Motion No. 112 specifically references the sharing of information and security intelligence to protect democratic institutions, to maintain the rule of law and to prevent violence and terrorism.

However, we must do more to protect vulnerable diaspora communities and the integrity of our democracy. Gone are the days when the Conservative government thought it was a good idea to invite Chinese police officers to come here, to strike fear in the Chinese diaspora community and to repatriate people back to China.

Motion No. 112 calls on the government to review its measures that hold to account any person or agents of a foreign state undermining democratic institutions, engaging in acts of violence or violating human or international rights in order to bar bad actors from entering Canada.

At the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, we completed a study on foreign interference last year. We heard valuable testimony on steps Canada could take to address foreign interference, including a foreign agent registry. The registry has been mentioned a couple of times. The registry is another tool that could have the ability to protect our intellectual property, academic institutions, research and development, industry and innovation, but the registry lacks the strength to target clandestine actors.

I reached out to CSIS officers for support and protection advice, and they recognized that a registry has its limits. Dan Stanton, the former executive manager at CSIS, told the committee that it still does not solve the issue of a proxy acting out illicit activities. When asked if a registry would blunt the attempts of the PRC to influence Canada's elections, he said that it would not.

Stanton did recommend that the government should focus on the Security of Information Act. That is why I was encouraged to see our government take another strong step forward, this past November, to launch the consultations to amend the Security of Information Act and the CSIS Act to modernize our response to the ever-evolving threats.

The findings from the public safety consultations on amendments to the CSIS Act proved to be productive and thoughtful. The report found strong support for proposed amendments to section 16 of the act. Section 16 would close the gap created by technological evolution and regain the ability for CSIS to collect, from within Canada, foreign intelligence about foreign states and foreign individuals in Canada. The amendments proposed in the consultation for the Security of Information Act provided investigators and prosecutors with new categories of offences in response to the reality of modern, clandestine activity, in order to pursue hostile foreign actors from Iran, Russia, China, India or any hostile state.

Notably, the Department of Justice received strong support for increasing the penalty for the preparatory acts offence in section 22 and expanding its scope of application to other Security of Information Act offences, as well as to the new foreign interference offences being proposed under the act. Rightly, the report was conscious of the risks these changes could pose to the charter and provided warnings to the government that safeguards are necessary to ensure that these powers are used only against foreign actors. I look forward to seeing revisions to the CSIS Act and the Security of Information Act in the House very soon.

Foreign interference ranges from direct hostile action, such as the murder of Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar, to the spread of online misinformation and disinformation. The ethics committee is currently studying the effects of misinformation and disinformation on the work of parliamentarians. We heard fascinating testimony last week from Ben Nimmo, a threat investigator at OpenAI, who spoke about the range and success of various foreign interference plots. He spoke about some efforts that had tremendous impact, such as the Russian “hack and leak” operations in 2016 that targeted the United States. However, there are other initiatives, like the Russian operation Secondary Infektion between 2014 and 2019 that posted hundreds of pieces of content across hundreds of platforms, where very little of it was seen by real people, that did not have the intended impact.

Again, foreign threats have been real for a long time. Russian state actors may have pioneered mass information activities, but other states are now emerging as leaders in these campaigns. We learned this recently from Justice Hogue's interim report and her findings. Although attempts to interfere in recent elections were not successful, we need to be increasingly vigilant about the intentions of hostile nations and make sure our security intelligence agreements with foreign states work to protect Canadians.

As Abraham Lincoln once said, “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present.” We must adapt our thinking and our actions to new realities, which is why I call on all members of the House to support Motion No. 112.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote, please.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 8, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion that, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, (a) the amendment to the motion at second reading for Bill C-64, an act respecting pharmacare, in the name of the MP for Cumberland—Colchester, be deemed withdrawn, and (b) Bill C-64, an act respecting pharmacare, be deemed read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Health.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I heard someone indicate that they do not give the motion unanimous consent, so there is not unanimous consent.

On a point of order, the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, just to clarify, the Conservatives said no to the unanimous consent motion?

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I cannot clarify that at all. There was not unanimous consent given by the House.

On a point of order, the hon. member for Perth—Wellington.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, to clarify, the NDP is trying to bring time allocation to a bill using a point of order.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

That sounds very close to debate, but I thank the hon. member for the point.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

moved that Bill C-69, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, what a pleasure it is to rise to start the debate on Bill C-69.

Governments have an opportunity every year to set down in legislation initiatives that could have a wonderful impact. I look at Bill C-69 as a budget implementation bill that would really make a difference in the lives of Canadians. I would like to think that all members of the House would get behind the legislation and the budget for the many positive initiatives the budget would put in place for the benefit of all Canadians, no matter what region of the country they are in.

I personally think there is a theme to be taken from the budget, which I hear many of my colleagues talk about, whether it is the Prime Minister or members of caucus, and that is a sense of fairness. We need to think about generation X and the millennials, and how the government can ensure there is a higher sense of fairness. We saw a good example of that in 2015-16 when we brought in our first budget. Taxation policy is important. Through the legislation and the budget, we will see there is a higher sense of fairness as we are look to the wealthiest in the country to pay a fairer share.

This is not the first time. In fact in 2015-16, we put a special increase on the tax on Canada's wealthiest 1%. Today it is even a smaller percentage. We recognize there is a need for us to provide the good-quality programming the government has had over the last number of years, much of it being enhanced in the budget and legislation. Some of the programs we are seeing for the first time, and others are a continuation. What it really means at the end of day is that we have a government that very much cares about the well-being of Canadians and wants to support them in a fair fashion.

If we look at overall government policies over the last eight-plus years, we will see that, in comparison to other countries in the world, Canada is doing relatively well. I will highlight a few of them. However, before I do that, I want to talk about the last few times the Prime Minister came to Manitoba. In my opinion, they highlight three areas Canadians understand and the fact that they very much appreciate the government's making them a high priority.

Last year, the Prime Minister visited Stanley Knowles School in Manitoba, which is pretty close to the heart of Winnipeg North, to highlight child care. He visited a child care facility at Stanley Knowles School, and the reception was exceptionally positive as people understood what the Government of Canada was doing. For the first time, we have a national child care program that ensures $10-a-day day care. It has had a profoundly positive impact in the province of Manitoba and, indeed, in all of Canada.

The Province of Quebec instituted it many years ago. We took the idea and turned it into a national program. As a direct result, not only are we making child care more affordable for Canadians but we are also enabling more women than ever, on a percentage basis, to get engaged in the workforce. It is no real surprise, as we anticipated that would happen. There are many benefits, as we have seen, of the $10-a-day child care program, the first ever by the national government. Every province and territory has now signed on, recognizing the true value.

For the second visit from the Prime Minister, I was able to participate in a press conference. The single greatest issue I have seen over the last 30-plus years as a parliamentarian, in my constituency and, I would argue, across Canada, is the issue of health care. We love our health care system. We are passionate about it. In fact, when I talk to many people and ask them what makes them feel good about being a Canadian, our health care system is often what comes up as the thing that helps us identify as and feel good about being Canadian.

As members know, working with all the different provinces, the federal government came up with a generational commitment of $198 billion, not million, over 10 years. That would enable long-term financial planning in an area that Canadians are genuinely concerned about. At that particular press conference, we had not only the Prime Minister but also the national Minister of Health, the Premier of Manitoba, the provincial minister of health and the most important people, the health care workers there to witness the announcement for the Province of Manitoba.

What took place in Manitoba is taking place across the country because, for the first time in over a generation, we have a Prime Minister who is committed to ensuring that we have a world-class health care system that deals with the issues we are hearing about at the doors from people. There are concerns about family doctors; concerns about health care workers; concerns about how we are going to be able to get things, such as credentials, recognized; concerns about how we can ensure that health care workers are being valued; and concerns about how we can bring additional health care workers and support staff into the system so that we are able to meet the expectations Canadians have.

We are looking at ways in which we can expand into mental health like we have never done in the past. This is a government that cares about health care and is looking at the Canada Health Act and the benefits it provides every Canadian in every region.

I made reference to child care and gave credit to the province of Quebec. For health care, a great deal of credit goes to the province of Saskatchewan, where it originated. More recently, we had the Prime Minister come to Winnipeg, and this time we were involved in a press conference that included not only the national Minister of Housing but also the premier of the province, provincial ministers and the mayor of Winnipeg. At that particular press conference, we dealt with the issue of housing.

We are very much aware of the needs for housing. I have stood in this chamber on numerous occasions to talk about the importance of the issue of housing. It is somewhat hypocritical of the official opposition to stand in its place and criticize the federal government for not doing enough on housing. I compare what the Conservatives did when they were in government, and in particular the current leader of the Conservative Party, who I think built six non-profit housing units in total. He spent hundreds of millions and was able to get six built, but I did not necessarily want to get to that. It is a bit off track.

The point is that we had a wonderful press conference with different stakeholders out in Transcona, where we had great participation from a wonderful housing complex, and we had the opportunity to talk about some of the things the federal government is doing. Working with the different levels of government, we are going to have an optimum impact on dealing with an issue that is so critically important to all Canadians.

What is providing a great deal of comfort is the fact that it is something we have been talking about for months now, even longer. I would not be surprised if we went back a couple of years, when members might have heard me talking about the issue of housing and how the best way to deal with housing issues in Canada is to have all three levels of government, and other stakeholders, engaged. That is the only way. It is not one level of government that cures all. It is going to take all levels of government working together, as well as the non-profit organizations.

I often talk about Habitat for Humanity. Habitat is a wonderful organization. It has likely done more in building affordable housing than any other non-profit organization, at least that I am personally aware of. In the province of Manitoba, we are talking about hundreds of homes over the years. I believe we are somewhere in the neighbourhood of 600 homes built, all of which are affordable. These homes were provided to individuals who never would have had the opportunity to have housing.

We had the stakeholders, the premier, the mayor and the Prime Minister in Winnipeg talking about things such as accelerating funding, providing supports to the City of Winnipeg so it can speed up its process, working with the province to ensure there is going to be more non-profit housing units built and that the province would be at the table, both in a financial fashion and with other forms of resources. This is to complement other budgetary measures, which dealt with, for example, the GST removal on purpose-built rentals for the country. These are initiatives for which Ottawa is not only taking upon itself and demonstrating leadership on but also working with the different levels of government. We are talking somewhere in the neighbourhood, through this budget, of just over four million new homes as a target in the coming years. That cannot be done by the federal government alone, and we have demonstrated our willingness to work with the different stakeholders, including our partners.

There is also our commitment to indigenous housing and working within indigenous communities. In Winnipeg, indigenous communities stepped up and worked with the Hudson's Bay Company to develop housing in downtown Winnipeg. There is also what is taking place in rural communities across the country.

The budget shows how important it is that we not only have a higher sense of fairness but also that we move forward with a healthy, stronger economy, which is in the best interest of all.

One of the things I took away from the budget, which the Deputy Prime Minister made reference to, is something I want to highlight because, to me, it really does matter. It puts things into perspective. No matter how much the Conservatives want to spread misinformation, the reality is that, in comparison to other countries around the world, Canada is doing exceptionally well.

I will give an example from the Deputy Prime Minister's speech and the stats on foreign direct investment. People and companies around the world looking at where to invest their hundreds of millions and billions of dollars will often look at Canada. Not only will they look at Canada, but they will also invest here. With direct foreign investment, on a per capita basis, Canada is number one out of the G7 countries. That is number one in direct foreign investment.

Throughout the world, per capita, Canada is number three. I would suggest that people, businesses and corporations around the world that are taking a look at where to invest are looking at Canada, and that is not an accident.

Let me elaborate on that. No government in Canada's history has signed off on more trade agreements than this government, under this Prime Minister, has. No government in the history of Canada has signed off on more trade agreements than this government has. Canada is a trading nation. We need trade. All of us benefit from it. That is one of the reasons why, I would argue, people around the world are not only looking at Canada but also investing in Canada. They are doing that because they see the stability that is here, along with a myriad of other positive attributes.

Members can take a look at the investments. The Conservatives have been critical. They do not like the fact that we are helping Volkswagen, for example—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There appears to be so little interest in this budget on the Liberal side of the House that we do not have quorum.