Following a speech by Garnett Genuis (Conservative)
“Mr. Speaker, I recognize that the member is a new member in the House. He is not as new as he once was. I do welcome him back. On a serious point to that member, I heard from some of his constituents about a private member’s bill that I put forward in the House. It is Bill C-290, on the theft of religious items, because I know there have been some thefts of mezuzahs. There has been real concern in the Winnipeg Jewish community about that, so I have been meaning to call him about it. I would recommend he have a look at Bill C-290. I hope that the bill, which seeks to address the issue of theft of religious items, is something that could be an area of cross-party co-operation. That definitely is not related to Bill C-10. What I am underlining in this speech is simply that, in the midst of challenging times for our country, in a context where it is important for us to come together and agree on the fundamentals of defending the Canadian national interest, the robust debate that happens in Parliament, the requests for information and the process of holding government ministers accountable are important processes of helping us collectively make better decisions. To love this country is also about loving and working through its existing institutions and recognizing the value of the heritage we have in the establishment of these institutions. As it relates to Bill C-10, it is about saying that the core of accountability is not external to Parliament; it is right here in Parliament. It is the obligation of ministers to uphold our obligations under modern treaties and other treaties. It is to come before the House to defend their actions, to respond to questions from opposition members about them, to do so here within the House and to do so before its committees. We need to have a strong Parliament, a strong Parliament for a strong Canada and a united Canada in the face of various challenges. I was thinking about these challenges just today, looking at the news and comments from the American administration about buying potash from Belarus. This was really striking to me because Belarus is systematically involved in the theft of children from Ukraine. It has been well established by human rights groups that Russia and Belarus are involved in stealing children from Ukraine. This is actually an issue that the first lady of the United States has been quite active in and vocal on, trying to get children who have been stolen from Ukrainian families returned to their families. How in the world did we get to this point where the American administration is talking about buying potash from Belarus instead of trying to restore the relationship with Canada? This is a baffling point to be at. It underlines the need for us to bring the case directly to the American people, to say that we need to have partnerships among like-minded democracies. This ridiculous economic attack on our country makes no sense from a strategic perspective for the United States. Why would we want to buy potash from a regime that is intentionally and systematically stealing children? These are the challenges we face. These are the kinds of challenges that need to be addressed in our Parliament through debate, through discussion, through collaboration and also through disagreements, but to defend the interests of Canada.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 100 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 79%Reasoning 4%The question 17%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 22 wordsthe member gave the government credit for actually bringing forward this legislation, well, not really credit, but he attributed it to them.Reasoning · 6 wordsI would not go that far.Claims · 85 wordsThis legislation is a result of pressure from modern-day treaty nations that have called for this, because of the government’s failure to implement treaties and dragging its feet.That is what this is about, and it includes the Maa-nulth first nations in my riding.1I also think about nations in my riding that have signed agreements with the government that are not modern-day treaties, like Tla-o-qui-aht.2The government is dragging its feet on promises it has made.We hear the government constantly talking about nation-building.The question · 26 wordsDoes my colleague agree that nation-building is signing modern-day treaties, signing agreements with indigenous peoples, and that fast-tracking that should be a priority for the government?Claims · 11 wordsThat is good for the economy.That is good for nation-building.
