Following a speech by Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba (Liberal)
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Winnipeg South Centre. I rise to speak to Bill C‑9, the combatting hate act, at a time when Canadians are looking to us for clear, serious and determined action to better protect them from hate and intimidation. I will begin by clearly describing the context we are currently in. Across Canada, Black, Jewish, Muslim, LGBTQ, indigenous and other communities are feeling extremely vulnerable. The rise of hate is far from theoretical. It is a palpable, painful and disturbing reality that we are seeing in schools, on the street and even in places of worship. I cannot give this speech without mentioning the events that recently took place in Montreal. We live in a country of rights and freedoms. What we are experiencing right now illustrates the whole reason for this bill. It may be a combination of circumstances or an unfortunate coincidence, but this happened here, in Canada. We have to discuss it and address the problem immediately. It is not okay for people in positions of authority—regardless of their discretionary power—to incite any kind of targeted intent toward a particular community. In Canada, diversity is our strength. In Canada, our differences unite us. As an elected official, I cannot believe that a member of Parliament would say something with such serious implications. I am referring to the member for York—Durham. He said things that are hard to imagine, things that are beyond the pale. People may assert their parliamentary privilege, but they cannot say whatever they want just because they have that privilege. Growing up, I was always taught that not every truth should be uttered. Yesterday, an elected official said something unacceptable. He outright dismissed the pain and stress that the mere thought of a noose can cause my community. He argued that we are importing an American problem into Canada. That is shocking. In Canada, particularly in Nova Scotia, where the first Black communities were established, this symbol evokes a past marred by racism and intimidation toward Black people. In the North American context, the noose remains one of the most powerful and universally recognized symbols of racial hatred directed at Black communities. Today, that member will have an opportunity to retract his remarks, now that he has had a chance to sleep on it. Hopefully he woke up this morning, drank his water and his coffee, and came to realize the implications of what he said. Hopefully he recognizes the importance of exercising his parliamentary privilege responsibly and of not simply saying whatever comes to mind while fulfilling the duties of this fine office. We must respect the House of Commons. It is the House of Canadians from all backgrounds, from east to west. The noose has long been recognized as a symbol of virulent hatred directed at Black communities. It is deeply rooted in the history of anti‑Black racism. The violence associated with the noose is not merely a historical phenomenon; it is a symbol that forms part of the hatred and violence to which Black Canadians are regularly subjected and which are rooted in a white supremacist ideology. This ideology is associated with the noose. Now is the moment we have been waiting for. Canadians across the country have made it clear that they want to be able to live openly, safely and freely as themselves, regardless of their background, faith, ethnicity, gender, identity or community. We all share the same goal: to protect Canadians from all forms of violence, particularly those that target the most fundamental aspects of being human. Canadians asked us to take action and keep them safe, and that is exactly what this bill does. Bill C-9 has been carefully examined by both chambers. It is now time for Canadians to get the protection they deserve from the government and the elected officials they have chosen. For the first time, the Criminal Code will include a definition of hatred, which will describe the conduct that falls under the new stand-alone hate crime offence. This is an extremely important change that must not be overlooked. This new offence and the new definition of hatred will address the particularly reprehensible nature of this crime, which undermines the very foundations of the Canadian values of equality and respect for our citizens. By passing this bill swiftly, we will not just be strengthening the Criminal Code; we will also be sending a clear message to Canadians that their safety matters, their dignity matters, and their right to fully and freely belong in this country will be defended. I urge all members of the House to support this bill and ensure that Canada continues to be a country where no one, and I mean no one, is made to feel unsafe simply because they are Canadian and have chosen to live in accordance with their identity while respecting their culture and heritage.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning, Respect and Clarity. Reasoning rests on one conclusion, too few to hold the grade down.
Average 97 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 32%The question 33%Reasoning 36%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 12 wordsthe member across the way makes reference to the Charter of Rights, The question · 19 wordsbut it is not clear that for the charter to be invoked, a person has to be charged first?Claims · 20 wordsThe removal of the good-faith clause means that people who are citing religious texts in good faith could be charged, 1Reasoning · 26 wordsand then they would have to go through financial expense and public shame before they could defend their rights and before the charter would be imposed.The question · 14 wordsIs that not the process, and is that not the way it would work?Reasoning · 10 wordsPeople would be guilty before proven innocent in this case.