James Bezan
Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, Manitoba · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals themselves are warning that public investment in ag research and development has fallen by 15%. Private sector R and D outsourced to universities is down 77%. The number of firms conducting research in Canada has dropped by 30%.”
“Mr. Speaker, let us separate the fiction and actually have some reality here. Most of our troops are not seeing a bump in their paycheque because the Liberals continue to claw it back at every opportunity. Rents are up by more than 5% for military housing. Housing support is down in more than 10 of the major housing posting locations.”
“Mr. Speaker, everything the Liberals say about our military is just an illusion. They promised our troops raises, but they never materialized. Retention benefits for reserves are missing in action.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister has driven Canada into a full-scale recession. Our economy has been shrinking for three of the last four quarters. We are the only G20 country in an economic downturn. While the government tries to downplay it, families know something is wrong. They feel it every day at the checkout counter.”
“Mr. Speaker, I just want to poke holes in the justice minister's argument over the length of debate on Bill C-16 . We only debated this for two days at second reading, and then we let it go on division so we could get it to the justice committee for study.”
“Madam Speaker, although we are legislators, it is our responsibility as members of Parliament to carry out our fiduciary duties and responsibilities to the taxpayers of Canada and to properly vet all of the legislation and spending of the government. This bill opens up a huge abyss of extra spending.”
The complete record
Every one of 360 lines we hold for James Bezan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 8.
“I want to ask the member whether he believes the Liberals are going to turn away from Bill C-2 and the flawed policies they still have in it. Should we be making some suggestions about them? Does he think, through Bill C-12 , the Liberals are going to empower CBSA officers to police the entire border, not just ports of entry?”
“Madam Speaker, I want to follow up on some of the comments made. Bill C-12 has taken up the parts of Bill C-2 that we agree with and moved them over, but Bill C-2 is still sitting on the Order Paper. That bill, as my colleague mentioned, would give the power to Canada Post employees to do search and seizure, which is in complete violation of our charter rights. We know that through Bill C-2, the Liberals want to take cash and make it illegal to make deposits of over $10,000. Last time I looked at the back of any currency in Canada, $20 bills, $10 bills and five-dollar bills say “Canada”. We are talking about legal tender, guaranteed by the government and the Bank of Canada, yet they want to make cash illegal.”
“Will the Liberals formally announce or put in place the legislative powers to make sure the Canadian Coast Guard is part of the Department of National Defence and under the control of the Minister of National Defence, not make some ambiguous statement within the clause itself? Will they also ensure that, since the Coast Guard is going to be asked to take on the role of security, its members will be given the tools to defend themselves when they are doing interdictions, along with the ability to encounter ships at sea when they are doing border security? That is very important since, right now, they are unarmed. When doing surveillance, all they can be are eyes and ears. Even the Canadian Rangers are allowed to carry guns, whereas the Canadian Coast Guard cannot.”
“Madam Speaker, I have gone through Bill C-12 . I appreciate the fact that the minister took the Conservatives' advice, listened to Canadians and took out the sections of Bill C-2 that were egregious and violated the charter rights and civil liberties of Canadians right across this country. The government is talking about moving the Coast Guard to the Department of National Defence. However, part 4 does not name the Department of National Defence or the Minister of National Defence. It is rather open-ended on the Coast Guard still being under the control of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Minister of Fisheries since its creation under the Oceans Act.”
“Lastly, I would like to point out that this bill would give direction to the Minister of National Defence because of the cover-up by the Liberals with Harjit Sajjan, which the member for Waterloo helped cover up when she was House leader. She always defended Harjit Sajjan for refusing to investigate Jonathan Vance.”
“Mr. Speaker, I first want to point out that the member erred in his speech. Conservatives supported the Deschamps report, and that was 10 years ago. It took 10 years since the Deschamps report, and the Jonathan Vance scandal, for the Liberals to finally bring this forward. He also erred in saying that the sexual misconduct support and resource centre was opening up a section to help victims navigate the legal system in civilian courts because of Bill C-11 . No, it was already doing that before Bill C-11 was brought forward. That again is something that was brought forward in the Deschamps report, as well as the Arbour report.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned, just a couple of minutes ago in his speech, that Bill C-11 would provide officers to victims. An hon. member: That is debate. James Bezan: Mr. Speaker, this is not debate; this is fact. It is not in Bill C-11 . Bill C-11 does not provide that support. The Canadian Armed Forces is doing that through the Department of National Defence through the sexual misconduct support and resource centre—”
“Could the member address whether or not the bill would deal with the issue of information sharing, when we transfer these cases to the civilian courts, between local police agencies and the courts with the Canadian Armed Forces so that the code of service discipline and the ethos that is supposed to permeate throughout the entire military will be properly enforced at the military level while individuals are seeking justice in the civilian system?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend and colleague, the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, for his excellent speech, for his service to Canada as a member of the Royal Canadian Navy and for being there to hear the stories and support those members who have been victims of military sexual trauma. He got quite emotional in that, when we hear these stories and hear how the chain of command did not want to prosecute certain individuals because it might mess up those individuals' chances for career advancement, we can see why the bill is necessary. It is sad that it has been 10 years since we first learned about this, and the Liberals are bringing this forward only now.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Bloc for her work with veterans. When she is at the national defence committee, she always has a lot to contribute to the discussion. I would like to ask the member whether she has some of the concerns Conservatives have, which are that the civilian criminal justice system has been undermined by the Liberals, and because of Bill C-75 and Bill C-5 , when someone is charged with sexual assault, sexual exploitation or sexual human trafficking, they can serve their sentence under house arrest. Would the requirements for lax sentencing given out by the civil courts, whether provincial or federal, undermine the ability to get justice for victims of military sexual trauma as we move cases from the military court to civilian courts?”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his great speech today laying out all the problems and laying out why we do not trust the Liberal government and why Canadians do not trust it either to deliver for our Canadian Armed Forces. The member used to sit on the defence committee, and we sat there and watched the Liberals try not to let the committee study why Harjit Sajjan, Jonathan Vance, Justin Trudeau, Katie Telford and Zita Astravas covered up Jonathan Vance's sexual misconduct against another serving member of the Canadian Armed Forces. I would ask the member to speak to why the Liberals would cover this up rather than deal with it, waiting 10 years to finally come forward with a bill.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her intervention. She had over two minutes left. She needs to talk to her staff or to the minister 's staff, whoever wrote her speech for her. They could have filled it in a bit more. I wonder if the member wants to comment on the concerns we have on our side with the soft-on-crime policies the Liberals have brought forward, which are permeating our civilian courts. They are putting everybody out on bail with the lowest conditions possible. We also see that perpetrators of sexual assault, sexual interference and sexual exploitation get to serve their time under house arrest. Those who commit those crimes within the military would have access to the civilian largesse that is coming from the government. I would ask the member if she agrees that civilian penalties should be applied to military members.”
“Mr. Speaker, it has been a problem. We know that those who brought complaints against Admiral Art McDonald were reprimanded by their superior officers. We know they were coerced. They were scared to come forward and it took, in some cases, years before they did. We created a safe space at committee, allowing them to speak and share their stories where there was no opportunity for retribution by their superior officers. This is one of the reasons we are supporting parts of Bill C-11 . It is to make sure we can take parts of this out of the chain of command and allow victims to stand on their own two feet without fear of repercussion.”
“Mr. Speaker, the first place to start is accepting all 10 recommendations from Madame Deschamps' report, which was completely ignored by the government. I think we would be a lot further ahead today in supporting victims and stomping out misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces had this been acted upon 10 years ago. The Liberals refused to do it. They still do not even mention the report in their speeches. All they talk about are Fish and Arbour. We need to make sure that we continue to address all the concerns that were raised. There are about 50 recommendations in the Arbour report. I think there are over 110 in the Fish report. We need to see which ones are doable and that we can act upon quickly. This is just the first step, but there is much more that needs to be done.”
“Mr. Speaker, I said during my speech that victims deserve justice, and that military sexual trauma is one thing we have to eliminate. The support is needed. We support the sexual misconduct support and resource centre and the great work it is doing in providing counselling. As well, it is going to be providing some legal advice to those victims. Victims' rights have to be paramount. That is why we supported Bill C-77 . It was to make sure we codified victims' rights in the Criminal Code and moved them into the National Defence Act as part of military justice. We will continue to fight for victims because that is what this is all about. That is why I raised this flag. Can we trust the government, which has ignored victims' rights for too long by letting repeat offenders back onto our streets?”
“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-75 reduced the conditions on the principle of restraint, allowing those who commit sexual offences to be released on bail very easily. It allows them to be repeat offenders. That will now permeate the Canadian Armed Forces, as well, because of the soft-on-crime approach taken by the Liberals. With Bill C-5 , they got rid of a lot of the mandatory minimums so that repeat sexual offenders can now serve their sentences at home. That includes sexual assault, sexual exploitation and sexual interference. What is the purpose if those who are committing these crimes are allowed to continue to serve in the Canadian Forces at their leisure?”
“Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, Jon Vance was appointed in the end days of the Conservative government. I would also say that the Bloc helped the Liberals shut down the study, in 2021, into sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces. It was particularly Minister Sajjan's mismanagement and refusal to deal with the sexual misconduct of Jon Vance. I do not think the Bloc can take much high ground on this. I would remind everyone that we started the Madame Deschamps report looking into addressing sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. The government had a chance to act upon it but did not.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North is always up here defending the government, including its own failures, especially in dealing with sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces. The member was up here defending Minister Sajjan back when he was still the minister. I do not believe the member. The Conservative government signed on to reach that NATO promise in 2015. We had 10 years to get there. I should remind everyone, before the Liberals started their creative accounting by adding things like veteran pensions and the Coast Guard to the calculation of what military spending is to meet the 2% matrix, that actual spending within the Department of National Defence was just over 1% last year. The Liberals have cut over $2.7 billion from operations over the last three years, and they also allowed over $12 billion to lapse.”
“We cannot trust the Liberals. They have failed our Canadian Armed Forces. They have failed our brave women and men. Our warships continue to rust out. Our jets are worn out. The army has been hollowed out and our troops no longer feel like they are respected and honoured by the government. (1145) When we really dig in and look at Liberal policies, it is a book of empty promises, like the 2017 defence policy and the defence policy update, which are all irrelevant. The government has allowed money to lapse. Because of this lack of respect for our forces, we have a recruitment problem. We are short over 13,000 troops today. Over 10,000 are undertrained and undeployable. Our forces are short 6,700 houses. Conservatives will rectify all the mismanagement and wrongs of the Liberal government and serve our Canadian Armed Forces.”
“Our Royal Canadian Air Force and our Canadian Armed Forces right up to the chief of the defence staff today have all said that this is the jet they need and that we should buy more of them. Of course, the Liberals continue to play political football and kick the can and delay that procurement, which is only undermining the ability of the Royal Canadian Air Force to protect us here at home and work alongside our allies. We know about things like cash for access and the wealthy Chinese billionaires that Justin Trudeau was involved with. We know they tried to cover up the expensive holiday that the former prime minister took on his private island. The ethics commissioners found multiple breaches. We know about the witch hunt that went after former vice-admiral Mark Norman back in 2018, which was politically motivated.”
“We did find out, through that study, that the Privy Council Office, the Prime Minister's Office, former prime minister Justin Trudeau and Katie Telford were all aware of this over the entire three-year investigation. To make things even worse, at the end of the day, even though Harjit Sajjan, the minister of defence at the time, knew about the sexual misconduct and the gravity of the problem that was happening within the Canadian Armed Forces, the government still gave Jon Vance a raise as the chief of the defence staff. That, I think, was just adding insult to injury. We know that when it comes to political interference, the Liberals cannot be trusted. We can look at the ongoing F-35 debacle and how they continue to politicize the procurement.”
“At the end of the day, when it came to charging him and prosecuting within the civilian court, the government accepted the lesser charge of obstruction of justice. It never prosecuted on sexual misconduct and sexual assault. That, again, does not live up to victims' rights in any way, shape or form. The victims of Jon Vance still feel that they were never properly served or got the justice they deserved. This went on. The defence committee was suspended for months on end. The chair of the committee, Karen McCrimmon, refused to hear testimony and motions. She kept suspending meetings. We were in the same meeting for three months and could not do our work as the defence committee, and we could not do our work as parliamentarians. I firmly believe that our privileges as parliamentarians were violated through that process.”
“Gary Walbourne, who was the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces ombudsman at the time, tried to provide that evidence and was pushed away. He was completely in the right because the only person who could deal with it in the chain of command was the Minister of National Defence. We know this went back and forth. We did an in-depth study of this in the Standing Committee on National Defence. I was vice-chair at the time, as I am vice-chair right now. That was covered up by the Prime Minister's Office through Justin Trudeau, Katie Telford and Zita Astravas. They continued to cover up that sexual misconduct and protect the minister and Jon Vance, which is beyond me.”
“He started up, after the Liberals formed government, Operation Honour, which turned into a complete fiasco and did nothing to support victims, did nothing to stop sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces and did not live up to the code of service discipline and the ethics that those who serve should be living up to. As I said, we know that Minister Sajjan, at that time in 2018, refused the evidence of the sexual misconduct charge against Jon Vance. We know there are memos that went back and forth between the minister's office and the Prime Minister's Office on how they could cover this up to protect Jonathan Vance and, later, also protect Minister Sajjan for not acting upon evidence that was given to somebody who reported directly to him.”
“Those conditions are now going to be transferred from the military justice system, or the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, to the civilian system, which the Liberals have almost completely destroyed. As I mentioned earlier, we cannot trust the Liberals when it comes to dealing with sexual assault in the Canadian Armed Forces; our members know that. Again, it has been 10 years since Madam Justice Deschamps brought forward her recommendations in her report, and they did nothing, which could have stymied this whole problem. (1140) Take Jon Vance, who was CDS at the time.”
“This is where we get bail, not jail and repeat violent offenders going back on the street. Now, potentially, those who are committing sexual assaults within the Canadian Armed Forces will have access to that same lax and soft-on-crime approach the Liberals have implemented. Bill C-5 is another reason we should not trust the Liberals when it comes to reforming the military justice system. The bill reformed the criminal justice system by repealing mandatory jail time and allowing very serious violent offenders to serve their sentences at home. This includes getting house arrest, not jail time, if they commit sexual assault, sexual interference or sexual exploitation.”
“We should not forget the current Prime Minister recently appointed Doug Guzman as CEO to the defence investment agency. It turns out Doug Guzman is a former banking buddy of the Prime Minister's from Goldman Sachs. I do not know if we need to have these close personal friends and partisan Liberal bagmen actually getting these types of appointments. I would hate to see this being the case when we look at appointments within the national defence apparatus, when we look at those who are going to be in charge of our military justice system. That would not be fair. The Liberals also cannot be trusted when it comes to criminal justice. They have been soft on crime right from the beginning. Bill C-75 brought in the whole principle of restraint, which puts the least onerous conditions on those who are seeking bail.”
“It turned out he was an anti-Semite, but they were supposed to be working on diversity. The Liberals appointed Martine Richard as the Ethics Commissioner. She had to drop out because she was related to one of the cabinet ministers, who currently sits today. It was a complete conflict of interest. They appointed Birju Dattani as the human rights commissioner; he turned out to be anti-Semitic. Of course, it was another terrible appointment by the Liberals. Justin Trudeau completely ignored the Ethics Commissioner's warning about appointing Annette Verschuren as the head of the green slush fund. This resulted in a huge scandal of over $2.1 billion that she and her cohorts were able to take from that Liberal slush fund and stuff into their own pockets.”
“Those things are going to give these guys their independence, so they report straight to the minister and to the government. There are questions about chain of command and how that is going to work. However, these are things we can look at in committee. The same is true for the director of defence counsel services. Consistency is important here. Qualifications are important in these appointments. We want to make sure the partisanship that happens within the Prime Minister's Office does not percolate into the Canadian Armed Forces through those who serve the forces. The minister talked about trust. As I suggested in my question for him, Liberals cannot be trusted, especially when it comes to talking about bad political appointments. If we look at 2022, the Liberals appointed Laith Marouf to do a project.”
“There is an inconsistency here on how people are being appointed, now being done through order in council in the Prime Minister's Office, and we know there is going to be the ongoing issue of the length of terms: Some are for four years; some are going to be eligible for reappointment whereas some are not. Some are for seven years, and some are for 10 years. It just gets a little confusing in terms of how this is all going to work. (1135) When we talk about the provost marshal general, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services, we just want to make sure there is a criterion as to what we want to see for qualifications for service in positions that normally would have reported to the vice-chief of the defence staff and/or the judge advocate general.”
“Because he was chief of the defence staff and everybody reported to him, nobody was prepared to take on that investigation and prosecute, including the then minister of national defence, who actually had authority over the chief of the defence staff. Harjit Sajjan refused to accept evidence and walked away. We know there are questions about how this would all work. The provost marshal, who has traditionally been a colonel, would be made a general, so we are seeing a creep of the number of flag officers again. Conservatives question the term limits.”
“We definitely want to make sure that all are given a fair trial and that we support those who were erroneously charged in the first place. What are we doing about the issue of capacity, as was previously asked by my colleague, within the military police and national investigative service when they have to do investigations outside Canada? How do they coordinate with provincial, municipal and RCMP police agencies when we are talking about things that happened on base and will require investigations done by local authorities? Bill C-11 seeks to increase the independence within the military, one of the recommendations coming from Madam Arbour and Justice Fish, so we would avoid a situation like what happened with Jon Vance.”
“It has provided for the way that this has been dealt with historically, but there is concern about whether the civilian courts would have the capacity to take on extra cases in those jurisdictions, from the standpoint of both the court level and the police level. What are they going to do with historic cases? We already know of historic cases that have been transferred into the civilian court system that have not resulted in convictions. Instead, we have seen high-level flag officers and general officers who were found innocent or had their proceedings stayed; we have seen cases that the Crown rejected because of the way the evidence was collected by the military police and the national investigative service of the Canadian Armed Forces. We question whether that provides the justice that the victims were looking for.”
“It would amend the National Defence Act to transfer jurisdiction of most offences of a sexual nature from the military justice system to civilian authorities, including the courts, municipal police, provincial police and the RCMP. This would depend on the jurisdiction in which the offence takes place, with the exception of a sexual offence that takes place outside Canada when troops are deployed. In that case, those who are deployed would have access to the current regulations under the military justice system and the National Defence Act, and military police and the JAG, the judge advocate general's office, would still undertake those investigations with the national investigative service. We know that section 273 of the National Defence Act provides for that.”
“We know that when things go into the PMO and into cabinet, things become quite political and partisan. Conservatives will continue to support those in the armed forces, and we are going to make sure that we are carefully studying Bill C-11 to ensure that concerns from all stakeholders, including those in the military justice system, those in the defence industry and, especially, those who have served in the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as victims' rights groups, and that their voices are heard when we study this at committee. As I said earlier, Bill C-11 is the former Bill C-66 , with minor tweaks in language, translations and interpretation of certain clauses: 6, 67 and 68.”
“For 10 long years, the Liberals sat on their hands and did nothing to actually change the National Defence Act and the military justice system under it. (1130) When we look at Bill C-11 , we are concerned that it would potentially open the door for more political interference. There would be an opportunity for partisan-style appointments, such as the Liberals' giving more power to the minister of national defence to issue guidelines with respect to prosecutions. That would not happen in the normal system in Canada because it would be considered political interference. The Liberals would also be changing the appointment process in that the director of military prosecutions, the director of defence counsel services and the provost marshal are all now going to be appointed by the Governor in Council rather than the minister.”
“At that time, we had initiated the Madam Justice Deschamps report, and Justice Deschamps had made 10 recommendations. Then of course there was an election, and that report sat on the corner of the desk of both former chief of the defence staff Jon Vance and former minister of defence Harjit Sajjan and collected dust. They did nothing during that time. There was then the Jon Vance scandal and all of that, and I will talk about that a bit later. We know that through the process, the Liberals finally took action. There was the Arbour report and now the Fish report, which brought about some of the things that would happen with Bill C-11 . However, it has taken 10 years to get to where we are today.”
“We hope this is going to culminate in the move from the military justice system to the civilian system, if the capacity is there and it would actually result in prosecutions and true justice for the victims of sexual trauma in the military. It has been years: The Liberal government has been in power for 10 years. There have actually been three reports done. The first report came out in 2015, and it is interesting to note that the only time the current Minister of National Defence and I have had an interchange in the House on military sexual misconduct was when he was a member of the third party and the Liberals were sitting way down in that far corner. I was the parliamentary secretary for defence, and he asked a question about what steps we were taking.”
“This is why we have to invest in the people, in their kit and in the training they need to undertake to deal with the hybrid warfare, the asymmetrical warfare, we are experiencing around the world. First and foremost, Conservatives have always said and believed that those who serve, who proudly put on the uniform, are the best of the best Canada has to offer. They deserve to have a respectful workplace that is free of discrimination, racism, sexual misconduct, and abuse of authority and position. All members deserve to be respected. We also believe that the victims, those who are dealing with military sexual trauma, deserve justice.”
“There is the ongoing escalation we are experiencing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait as the People's Liberation Army Navy of China continues to escalate in that region, using air power, as well as resources and its coast guard to exercise its power in the region but ignoring international rules such as UNCLOS, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Those hostile powers want our resources, whether in the Arctic or our maritime domain, and they want to be within striking distance of our continent. We have to do more to protect ourselves here and invest in our military. This means supporting those who serve us. As Conservatives, we take our national security very seriously and want to make sure we always put that first and foremost.”
“Mr. Speaker, as the shadow minister for national defence, I am always honoured to stand in this place to talk about the great work of the brave women and men who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces and how we can do more to support them, which is what Bill C-11 is trying to do. The first responsibility of the federal government is to protect Canada, protect our citizens, as well as to protect those who serve us. There has been a rapid escalation of threats, and what we are facing in Canada is continuing to evolve. There is Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. There is the ongoing conflict we are seeing with Hamas first attacking Israel and now Israel's clearing operation to neutralize the terrorists in the Gaza Strip.”
“The prime minister of the day, Justin Trudeau, was complicit in the cover-up for those three years. Finally, they also sat on the Justice Deschamps report that was commissioned under our previous government, and they never acted on any of those recommendations at that time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for bringing the bill forward. It was Bill C-66 in the last Parliament, and we never got it completed at second reading. The minister talked about trust, and I want to ask him why Canadians and the people in the Canadian Armed Forces should trust him and trust the Liberals. We have to remember that one of his predecessors, Harjit Sajjan, was complicit in a cover-up of sexual misconduct of one of the very highest-ranking officers in Canada, the former chief of the defence staff, Jon Vance. When the minister at the time was presented with evidence of sexual misconduct by Jon Vance, former minister Sajjan refused to accept it. Why should Canadians trust the minister , when his predecessor covered up that sexual misconduct for three long years and refused to accept evidence?”
“Mr. Speaker, senior Iranian government officials were banned from entering Canada in 2022 for gross human rights violations and state-sponsored terrorism. In June, border services still had 66 open cases into Iranian officials right here in Canada. We know the Minister of Public Safety has lost 600 foreign nationals with criminal records, and over 400 of those evading the government are convicted of serious criminality right here in Canada. The minister has one job: keep Canadians safe. When will the Prime Minister fire the incompetent public safety minister?”
“Conservatives will always support our women and men in uniform, and we will continue to press for them to get all the kit they need to carry out the important missions we ask of them. I thank all our army heroes for their amazing service and send a shout-out to all those who are joining us on Parliament Hill today.”
“Mr. Speaker, today is army day on the Hill, when we celebrate and honour the brave women and men in our Canadian Army. Their dedication and sacrifice for Canada is unquestionable. I want to recognize the over 2,000 members currently serving in the Canadian-led multinational brigade group in Latvia, as well as our troops training Ukrainian soldiers under Operation Unifier and those contributing to the NATO deterrence mission in Europe against Russian aggression under Operation Reassurance. This summer, we saw our soldiers deploy to assist wildfire efforts in Manitoba and across Canada as part of Operation Lentus. Our troops cannot do all of this without the support of our military families, which are the backbone of our members as they endure long deployments away from home.”
“With the passing of the legislation, I would look forward to working with all colleagues to prevent Canada from being a safe haven for gross human rights violators and corrupt foreign officials. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)”
“Finally, Bill C-219 would amend the Broadcasting Act to revoke licences for broadcasting companies and media companies from around the world that are from regimes that either the House or the Senate has recognized as committing genocide, or that have been already sanctioned by the government through the economic sanctions regime that we have, to ensure that they are not using our broadcast airwaves. We would also change the name of SEMA to the “Sergei Magnitsky global sanctions act”. This would make sure that when we are sanctioning in Parliament or by the government, we are consistent with our allies and that whenever we stand up for human rights, it is synonymous with Sergei Magnitsky.”
“We would immediately ban immediate family members of those who are put on the sanctions list from travel in Canada. We would make sure that the government must table in Parliament, every time it adds somebody to the sanctions list, who they are and what foreign nationals and entities they are. We would ask the RCMP and FINTRAC to report back to the minister on how they are going to enforce and regulate the sanctions regime and administrate that. We would allow parliamentary committees to actually make recommendations to the minister on who should be added to the sanctions list; the minister would have to report in 30 days on whether they will add them.”
“One is to require the Minister of Foreign Affairs to report to the House on an annual basis what steps the government is taking to fight and advance human rights internationally and to include the names and the status of political prisoners and prisoners of conscience across the world. We would also amend, as the Speaker mentioned, the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, the Sergei Magnitsky Law, which I introduced in the chamber and which was passed in the House and the chamber with Senator Raynell Andreychuk at the time, back in 2018. As well, Bill C-219 would change SEMA to define transnational repression and sanction foreign nationals who do it right here in Canada against Canadian citizens and permanent residents.”