Elizabeth May
Saanich—Gulf Islands, British Columbia · Green Party · Canada
“It is easy to roll out solar panels, except that our provincial utilities get in the way. In any case, the cheapest source of electricity, reducing the cost for everyone, would come from focusing on renewable electricity. I do think there is some promise, although it needs a lot of work.”
“We are the only party in the House that does not receive a penny of support from the parliamentary budget, being both unrecognized and unfavoured. I am glad my colleagues from the NDP received funding to make up for what they lost when they ceased to be a recognized party. I have less money, but I am here, and I am not alone.”
“When it became clear that children were dying of Reye syndrome in New Brunswick because of forest aerial spraying by the forest industry. He stated, “I don't like to see people dying. This is one of the things I really wouldn't like to see.”
“That is not the only thing I want to concentrate on, although I will take most of the time, and I am grateful for the chance to speak to this bill now, finally, in this place. Regarding the removal of the excise tax, I have asked before about this in question period.”
“There is not even a link in the language used within the spring economic statement, the budget itself or Bill C-30, but it clearly, by inference, rests on this assumption: More pesticides are going to reduce food prices and help the economy. That is a leap. Let us say that is wrong, based on the evidence, in two ways.”
“Mr. Speaker, the hon. parliamentary secretary is a friend, so when I say a friend, it is not just rhetoric, but I am disappointed. When Bill C-30 was first tabled, I asked the hon.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,092 lines we hold for Elizabeth May, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 17 of 22.
“Mr. Speaker, probing the problem that this is an omnibus bill, most of the debate this afternoon on Bill C-12 was related to its immigration and refugee parts, but there are multiple parts on different acts. I am hoping my hon. colleague from Saskatoon West would agree with me that it would be far preferable, given the complexity of immigration and refugee issues, if the bill were to be split apart and only the committee on immigration and refugees would study the sections about immigration and refugees, not the sections on the Coast Guard, the Oceans Act, trafficking drugs, and so on. What does he think?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would love to dive into some of the refugee questions, but I know the member's knowledge of this place, and I wonder whether she would agree with me that the change from Bill C-2 to Bill C-12 still leaves us with an omnibus bill. The member has chosen to focus on the refugee portions, which I appreciate. I am very concerned about the refugee portions of Bill C-2 and now Bill C-12 . They are almost the same. They would get rid of the warrantless access to private information by Canada Post and Internet providers, but not the concerning parts. When we have an omnibus bill like this, it means that one committee studies the whole bill. Would the member agree with me that it would be better to split the bill up so the committee on immigration could study and call witnesses only on the immigration portions of the bill?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a honour to rise to raise an issue of deep concern to constituents. Petitioners are writing about the threat to our pollinators. It is a global threat that is here in Canada. The petitioners note that our government is not taking the steps that have been taken in the European Union, which is following the precautionary principle. Those governments and the European Commission have begun to implement a full ban on the use of one of the insecticides that is most toxic to pollinator. They are nicotine-based insecticides called neonicotinoids. The petitioners are hoping that the Government of Canada will follow Europe's lead and ban neonicotinoids.”
“Madam Speaker, I echo some of the questions the minister has heard from members on the opposite benches about similarities with Bill C-2 and whether Bill C-2 remains as it does on the order of precedence. My question is about RCMP training. It is really critical. I want to know if the Minister of Public Safety has read the report of the Mass Casualty Commission that was compelled after the deaths of 22 Nova Scotians. These were preventable deaths largely due to RCMP incompetence. The commission recommended that we expand training for the RCMP to a three-year required course instead of the current 26 weeks. In hiring 1,000 new RCMP officers, is the government looking at improving the training, and is it looking at the recommendations of the Mass Casualty Commission?”
“Mr. Speaker, the proof will be in the pudding on November 4. Will the budget include serious increases to our overseas development assistance? It is not going to be enough to say we are holding steady, because we have been laggards for too long. It is not enough to say we will hold steady on what we do on peacekeeping, because we have not done enough for a very long time, even though peacekeeping originated with Lester B. Pearson. Will the parliamentary secretary please take the message to caucus and to the Prime Minister that in this moment, Canada is needed in the world, as never before, to stand up for democratic values, human rights and the humanitarian assistance and contributions to making a more peaceful world that will be far more able to defend our security than arming ourselves to the teeth would be.”
“We are laggards in the world of international development assistance. We rate 15th, but that is a better record than where we rate for donating and helping peacekeeping operations.”
“That clearly means the world is going to see more millions of people at risk of tuberculosis, of malaria and of HIV/AIDS. The U.S. has cancelled its entire USAID program. Where is Canada? Can we step up and fill the gap? I mentioned that we do not have a minister for international development right now. It was Lester B. Pearson who, after he was prime minister, headed up a UN agency and said that we were going to target 0.7% of our GNI all around the world to international development assistance. That target, known as the Pearson target, has been more than met by quite a number of our European allies who have hit more than 1% of their GNI going to overseas development assistance. Where is Canada? How close are we to our 0.7% target? We are just about halfway. We are at 0.34%.”
“He is even withdrawing from the kind of multilateralism of international trade deals respecting the general agreement on tariffs and trade, the GATT from post Second World War. He has withdrawn from numerous global organizations. That not only cuts into humanitarian assistance but also reorders the world in ways that can be quite dangerous as, for instance, when the United States withdraws from UN agencies, it opens up space for the People's Republic of China to move in. The People's Republic of China already owns much of Africa. When we look at the global south, we want the influence of democratic nations that hold human rights and free speech dear, recognizing that we cannot allow women and girls around the world to go uneducated and expect to have a stable world. The United States has withdrawn from the World Health Organization.”
“Had I asked this question before the election, there would have been a minister responsible for international development who could have responded, but in this new cabinet, there is no minister responsible for international development. There is the member of Parliament for Surrey Centre , who is the Secretary of State for International Development. Certainly that is a responsibility, but he does not have the same degree of clout around the cabinet table because he is not seated there. The reality of our current situation globally is that the world is in what the Prime Minister calls a “hinge moment”. It is certainly in crisis. The old order of things that we once thought we could take for granted has certainly been upended by the actions of the U.S. president. He is erratic, unpredictable and withdrawing from multilateralism.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to pursue a question that I first asked on June 17 of this year. Looking at the reality that we have not had a budget yet, but will see soon, we have been told that we are going to see massive increases in military spending. The point of my question was to ask if we were not aware that geopolitical security does not necessarily come from arming ourselves to the teeth but to prepare to wage peace, to be prepared to hold peace in areas that have been conflict zones and, even more importantly, perhaps long term, to ensure we address the climate crisis and that we are prepared to increase our humanitarian spending in the world. The reason I raised this, and raise it again tonight, is due to the answer I received, of course. It revealed a lot about the new government's commitment to international development.”
“Mr. Speaker, I apologize to the hon. member that I am going to ask a question that was not raised in her speech, but earlier by members of her party who put things before the House that I would like to challenge a bit. The Darlington project is being touted as proof that the government is bringing economic benefit to Canada, but that project, to build an SMR, a so-called small modular reactor, if completed, will be the first one in North America. They are not operating anywhere. Well, they operate in China and Russia, but commercially, not in North America. At a $21-billion price tag, much of the consortium private sector builders are not Canadian. GE Hitachi is U.S.- and Japan-owned, and Kiewit Engineering is U.S.-owned. Do we really want to be shipping that many billions of dollars to U.S. firms on an untested technology?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today with a petition from the residents of Saanich—Gulf Islands who express concern about the electoral system. They cite a number of statistics on the level of public support across Canada in response to the distorted electoral results that have occurred due to the first-past-the-post voting system. The petitioners favour a form of national citizens' assembly to review our electoral process and give the citizens of this country a leadership role in determining the shape of electoral reform. The petitioners call on the House of Commons to take action to move toward a citizens' assembly and ensure it completes its work within 12 months.”
“Mr. Speaker, this weekend, eminent Arctic expert Professor Franklyn Griffiths wrote that Canada needs to consider the possibility that the U.S. President will without our permission send American warships through the Northwest Passage as a show of force. He asked a very pertinent question: What will Canada do? He asked whether the Prime Minister would be prepared to start by thanking the Inuit people of Nunavut for protecting Canadian sovereignty through the assertion of Inuit ownership of those lands. Will the Prime Minister respond to that brilliant suggestion?”
“Mr. Speaker, today is Bike Day on the Hill. [ English ] In a non-partisan spirit, I will give a shout-out to the former MP in this place who always led bike day, John Weston, who used to represent West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country. I want to pay tribute to the wonderful volunteers in Saanich—Gulf Islands who have worked so hard to make sure we have paths for safe cycling. To Island Pathways on Salt Spring Island, to MAP, Moving Around Pender, and to all who share the vision of a Salish Sea trail to bring bicyclists all around the beautiful southern Gulf Islands, I give a huge shout-out of thanks, particularly to my dear friend Bob MacKie, who has led so many cycling campaigns, to Robin Jenkinson and certainly to the many more I cannot mention in the time I have left.”
“It will not solve all of the problems, and we will have to hold it accountable too, but right now, if this dies or if it takes too long to pass, I do not know why first nations, Métis or Inuit people would believe a single word out of our mouths ever again, any of us, from any party.”
“Mr. Speaker, again, this is a very fair question. No one in the opposition parties is going to say it is a good idea because it belongs to one party or another. If the Conservatives had formed government, I would say the same thing: It could just be something they say they are going to do. With the Liberals there is also a track record. I do not want to make this partisan. All I know is this: I am humbled by the extraordinary patience of the peoples and the chiefs. The Land Claims Agreements Coalition has worked for more than 20 years now to get to this point where, through consultation and co-operation, it came up with this proposal.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would, again, ask colleagues to consider what we have before us as an opportunity in this country to reimagine ourselves. Canada is the best country in the world, there is no question, but could we not, as the Order of Canada's slogan says, desire a better country? This does not mean somewhere else; this means here. Becoming a better country means facing a legacy of abuse and recognizing that this will cost some money, but it is a pittance. It is crumbs off the table compared to what we owe indigenous people across Turtle Island for taking their land, stealing their culture and banning them from speaking their own languages. Land back is an essential part. These modern treaties are progress, but if they stall, they are not progress; they are just another broken promise.”
“Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that it is not for me to imagine the attributes. I asked the leaders of the Land Claims Agreements Coalition whether they had been thinking about what attributes the commissioner would have, what kind of person it would be. Yes, they are confident they will be consulted. Yes, they are confident this person will have the kind of wisdom and the attributes that come from an indigenous world view to bring forward, to hold to account any government, the current government or the next government, through audit, pressure, transparency and the first word, of course, of the late Murray Sinclair in his work as commissioner, “truth” and reconciliation. This commissioner could get to the truth and report it back. That is an essential step in reconciliation.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for a very fair question. What I put my belief in is what the people who asked for this think, those who have co-created this proposal, this creation of a commissioner with audit and reporting powers and the ability to push and report to Parliament. It might not be what I would come up with, but who cares? I am a settler member of Parliament, and I work for first nations in my own community. The modern treaty nations and the coalition worked on these issues day and night, and they have been patient. This is what they want.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Mirabel, a member of the Bloc Québécois, is right. There are other problems in his riding, like environmental justice or environmental and toxic threats. I know them well. Bill C‑10 is not the answer to every problem facing indigenous peoples, but it is certainly a vital step in that direction and I would ask all of my colleagues to vote for it.”
“Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, we have some bad habits here. No particular party is to blame. There are five parties here. We are at our best when we work together. What we all need to do right now is ignore campaign sign colours. We just need to consider what is best for everyone. [ English ] Members should forget their party colours and do what is right.”
“This must be a commissioner who has the trust and faith of the indigenous people of this country and of the modern land claims agreements, the modern treaties. The peoples who entered into these modern treaties are saying, “If you're not serious about reconciliation, you might as well tell us now, because we've been patient.” What we were asked to do directly by the people in these land claims modern treaties is to pass Bill C-10 and to pass it quickly, as it does not need amendments. I beg my colleagues on all sides of the House to take this small step for reconciliation. I ask them to pass the bill quickly and to not make it a political football. I ask them to be proud of themselves when they look in the mirror, so they can say they did their part to make up for the horrors of abuse. This is what we do: We pass Bill C-10 .”
“It was tabled for first reading on September 25, almost a full year after it started as Bill C-77, and it is now back word for word as Bill C-10 . There are the first nations and the leadership from the Land Claims Agreements Coalition, as well as all the different partners, such as the Déline Government and the First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun. I mentioned some of the first nations, such as the Kluane First Nation, the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation, the Toquaht Nation and the Teslin Tlingit Council. To all these people, if they have been watching Parliament today, all I can do is tell them how very sorry I am, because the last thing they expected to see was settler culture people saying that this is just a waste of time and that this will be a Liberal appointee.”
“We were rather stuck for a while. I am not going to discuss who was to blame for that, but Bill C-77 died on the Order Paper on January 6. We are talking about what the peoples and the nations are asking us to do. If we are serious about reconciliation, then we must live up to the promise of 20 years of consultation in which the Government of Canada, under at least a few different prime ministers, said it would get this thing done and it would bring in, as a legislative priority, a commissioner of modern treaty implementation. It was a tool that was codeveloped over decades. It was brought forward for first reading almost a year ago now. Bill C-77 died on the Order Paper when the House was prorogued by former prime minister Justin Trudeau, along with 25 other bills that died that day, and it has come back to us now.”
“These first nations, Métis and Inuit people, over a 20-year period, decided that what would work would be to have an independent auditing function embodied in the commissioner for modern treaty implementation. This is something first nations, Métis and Inuit people decided, and they have been working to try to get the government to act upon it. They felt they were finally making progress on October 10, 2024, when Bill C-77 , an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation, was tabled in this place. I am not going to go back, because one thing that has been consistent through the day-to-day across the aisle is one party pointing at the other and saying it is the other's fault that nothing has happened so far. I am not going to go there, but I do remember why Bill C-77 did not get past first reading.”
“The other co-chair is the president of the Nisga'a Lisims Government, Eva Clayton. They work together. They came to Ottawa this week, and I met with many of the people who were in the leadership of the modern treaties agreements, the Land Claims Agreements Coalition. What they came together to tell us about was how long they have worked to achieve what Bill C-10 proposes. How long have they worked for that? They worked, first, to get their land claims agreements put together, to have modern treaties established and to have them accepted by the Crown. Then, over a 20-year period, they consulted about how we were going to enact this and make it happen.”
“Just to give a sense of what it means to have a modern treaties coalition, that work is not done by just some kind of stakeholder group; they are people who have come together, chiefs from nations that are as vastly different as if the people of my riding of Saanich—Gulf Islands sat down with folks from downtown Toronto to decide what our priorities would be for grocery shopping for a potluck. We're different people from different places. It is a tribute to these first nations and peoples that they came together and formed this modern Land Claims Agreements Coalition. (1555) The coalition is co-chaired by an extraordinarily gifted group of dedicated people. One current co-chair, Jeremy Tunraluk, is the president of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., which has a huge land base.”
“They were groups as different as the Carcross/Tagish First Nation; the Council of Yukon First Nations; the Gwich’in Tribal Council, way up on the border with Alaska, where the Gwich'in need and rely on the porcupine and caribou for their sustenance, just as the Tsawwassen First Nation's modern treaty relies on the salmon and a different ecosystem altogether, with a completely different language group; and significantly, of course, the Nunavut Tunngavik, which represents an enormous chunk of Canadian territory.”
“It recognized that it was different from the treaties that took place back in the 1700s, 1800s and into the early part of this century. They recognized that modern land claim treaties were different, and they came together despite the fact that we are talking about vastly different language groups and experiences on the land and relationships with the land.”
“[ Translation ] The project of reconciliation is truly a whole-of-society project, with indigenous peoples and members of settler cultures, like the vast majority of members here. [ English ] It just about breaks my heart to have heard most of the debate in this place today as Bill C-10 comes forward. People who have been watching, any of the viewing audience, I just want to tell them that there is a story here that they are not hearing. It is likely some later-day insomniac watching CPAC. Yes, it has taken a long time to negotiate the modern treaties. Yes, we now have 26 modern treaties, and that represents an enormous effort of the comprehensive nature of the modern treaties. In 2003, just to give a sense of history, that is obviously 22 years ago, a group called the Land Claims Agreements Coalition came together.”
“I say that today because it is critical that we not just recognize the need for reconciliation on the one statutory day per year that this Parliament created a couple of years ago, which we observed on September 30. It was once known as Orange Shirt Day because of Phyllis Webstad's story, which breaks our heart, of the wonderful orange shirt that her grandmother bought for her being taken away; she never saw it again. On that day, I know my colleagues on all sides of this House went to events in their own ridings. Many of them were here in Ottawa for the event that took place on Parliament Hill, which was very moving. If we have said it once, we have said it a million times: Reconciliation is not just one day a year; it is how we conduct ourselves, what we do and how we show that we understand the project of reconciliation.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour for me to rise this afternoon to speak to Bill C‑10 . [ English ] It is also an honour to stop, especially given the content of the legislation, to recognize that we are all on the unceded territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin nation. To them, we say meegwetch . We recognize in this country, and it is quite a stunning thing when one starts diving into it, how many nations and language groups there are, how many peoples whose lands we live on without noticing or thinking about the thousands of years they stewarded Turtle Island, took care of and, in many cases, welcomed and protected European settlers and allowed them to survive.”
“Mr. Speaker, I do not think my friend from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes and I have had an across-the-aisle exchange yet. I congratulate him on his re-election. I would ask the member to please reconsider. There are a lot of reasons that those nations in this country, the indigenous nations that form the 26 modern treaties that have been signed and negotiated, have waited too long. The bill before us was originally Bill C-77 , which was introduced almost a year ago. It was allowed to die on the Order Paper. There is no point in going back over which parties are to blame for that, but now we must come together and get the bill passed. Can the member agree?”
“The petitioners call for a financial safety net for all Canadians, looking particularly at the threat to our working life posed by artificial intelligence. They call on the government to implement a guaranteed livable income for all Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for sharing his time. I am honoured to rise today to present a petition. Many parliamentarians here will know that Coalition Canada Basic Income is meeting with many of us today. It is my honour to present on behalf of my constituents a petition that points out the need for a guaranteed livable monthly income so that no Canadian falls below the poverty line. The petitioners point out that the current patchwork of federal and provincial income assistance programs is transaction-heavy, has a lot of paperwork and bureaucratic costs, and could be replaced by a simple, straightforward guaranteed livable income.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to present a petition on something of concern to many of my constituents, which is the rather stale issue, still not solved, of equal pay for work of equal value, and gender parity as required under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Women in Canada are still not paid equal pay for work of equal value. Women receive 21¢ less than men for every dollar earned for substantially the same work. Therefore the petitioners call on the House to enact legislation and meaningful policies to promote pay equality and pay equity to get equal treatment for the women of Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, like my colleague from Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound , I want to thank the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles for serving our country. I just have one question. Does the Conservative Party currently support passing Bill C-11 ?”
“Madam Speaker, I am desperately trying to find out what happened to the position of minister for disabilities. It was Carla Qualtrough, who no longer serves in this place. She was, herself, a woman with disabilities and quite inspiring. It was then Kamal Khera, who did not win her seat in Brampton. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment explain how he is here tonight to defend the government's position on people with disabilities? We know, those of us who served in the last Parliament, how we worked together to get the Canada disability benefit legislation passed. We know the cheques started going out in July. My point is those cheques are utterly inadequate to meet the needs of Canadians with disabilities.”
“We should make sure there are no clawbacks and no reductions. I am still proud of the work that we did, and I want to again mention Mike Morrice. More than half of the amendments accepted to the bill were his amendments, including the one to ensure that this benefit be indexed to inflation. However, if they index $200 to inflation, they are not going very far. I will wrap up here and hope for a better answer tonight and a real sign of commitment.”
“Yes, as the minister said, it is important to work with provinces and territories to ensure that money will not be clawed back, but there needs to be much more done by the federal government. For example, we need to increase the benefit amount. That is pretty basic. We need to broaden eligibility so people can automatically get their Canada disability benefit if they are already receiving other disability-related benefits. It should be individual income, not household income, that determines when the Canada disability benefit is sent. It is not the income of the people they live with; it is for them. We need to raise the income threshold and the working income exemption. We need to do these things to ensure that the Canada disability benefit lifts people with disabilities out of poverty.”
“That was not going to lift people up out of poverty. Therefore, my question that day was this: Now that the Prime Minister was raising the urgency of having nation-building projects, could the government, please, not make lifting all Canadians with disabilities out of poverty a nation-building project? The answer I received was not from a minister responsible for disabilities, and the minister who responded, actually the Minister of Jobs , misnamed the program that I was talking about. It is the Canada disability benefit, not credit. However, the response was not adequate. That is why we sometimes send in slips and say we would like to discuss this in the Adjournment Proceedings.”
“My friend, the former member for Kitchener Centre, Mike Morrice, had worked incredibly hard with other advocates for people with disabilities from all sides of the House. We worked to try to get a commitment and the legislation through to ensure that we would have a Canada disability benefit. We knew that it was about to start being mailed out at that point, in July. There was sadness at the tragedy of it all because we had been promised by ministers in the previous government that when we got the bill through it would lift Canadians with disabilities up out of poverty. However, hearing Tina, living with disabilities, crying on the phone because she could not figure out how to feed her children, I knew that the cheques that were going to start going out in the month of July would max out at $200 a month.”
“Madam Speaker, welcome to Adjournment Proceedings, where I will be taking up a question I asked on June 4 of this year. As members will recall, Parliament had only recently resumed. I had intended to ask a different question, but someone had called my office and caught my wonderful chief of staff on the phone. As the caller was explaining that she was living with disabilities and could not figure out how she was going to feed her children, she started to cry on the phone. When the minister responded to me, she made the assumption that this was a constituent of mine, but I do not know where Tina lives. She called our office and changed my question that day because I just had to know. We had been working so hard in this place and in the previous Parliament.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am following up with the hon. minister. The story has made a lot of waves in media. It does not seem at all clear that there is evidence that the band Kneecap was deemed ineligible by the department. Since the minister cannot discuss any individual case, can she please confirm whether any authorized entity within the Canadian government refused entry to the Irish band Kneecap or whether it was just one rogue MP?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to present a petition that relates to a private member's bill that I was honoured to sponsor through this place, which has received royal assent. Bill S-203 bans the keeping of whales, dolphins and cetaceans of all kinds in captivity. I know I should not update a petition that is being presented, but we know the Minister of Fisheries has done the right thing. The petitioners asked for the Minister of Fisheries to deny any export permits, which would have put the belugas and dolphins of Marineland at risk by exporting them to the People's Republic of China. The petitioners call on the Government of Canada, working with the Province of Ontario, to find ways to improve the welfare of these mammals, which must not be kept in captivity but must not be exported to places of greater cruelty.”
“Madam Speaker, as I look at this legislation, I have to agree with the Conservative MP who earlier asked the hon. member if we did not agree that the Criminal Code already covers the offences that are described in this bill relating to symbols. As we are looking at the question of limiting free speech or accidental inferences that there is a hate crime being committed, I would ask the hon. member if those on the Liberal benches could put forward a clear explanation of what additional protections this bill offers that were not already covered by existing hate crime laws.”
“Madam Speaker, I know my hon. colleague was not yet a member of this place or living in Ottawa during the convoy, but I do not think he fully recognizes how awful it was for local businesses and local residents to not be able to sleep and to have horns blowing all the time. We sat in this chamber not knowing if the trucks outside were loaded with explosives. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Elizabeth May: Madam Speaker, no one knew what was in those vehicles. I was told by the RCMP that I needed an escort to get in and out of the building because my face was too well known and that I would not be safe trying to get into the building. The buses were not running. The taxis were not running. It was not safe to walk through a crowd. Does the hon. member really think that was an acceptable situation for Parliament?”
“Madam Speaker, I would say this to my hon. colleague: We are trying to combat hate, and this is prompted by a question that was asked earlier, but why do we not go after rage farming and the algorithms, bring back the digital services tax and really deal with the threat that promotes hatred?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have the paper version of this petition, but there is an e-petition to this effect, for clarity, that is open for signature until January. It currently has 2,725 names, and the paper petition has 40 names. The petitioners are concerned constituents and Canadians who are asking for the House of Commons assembled to call on the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to bring home Zain Haq, who is the deported husband of a Canadian citizen and is currently in Pakistan, to be reunited with his wife, Sophia Papp, who is living in Vancouver. The petitioners point out the numerous ways that this couple are an intrinsic part of their community in Vancouver and are calling on the minister to do the right thing.”
“Madam Speaker, it is an honour to present this petition. I know that, because of the petition rules, I cannot speak to how much this petition means to me, so I will stay neutral. Many petitioners from my community are calling for the Minister of Immigration to revisit decisions that deny a Canadian couple the ability to live together. The wife, Sophia Papp, is Canadian. Her spouse, Zain Haq, has been deported to Pakistan. The petitioners call on the government to revisit this matter, reverse the deportation and reunite this couple so they can live together with their family in Vancouver.”