MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Leah Gazan

Follow by RSS

Gazan pushes two asks above all: passing her Bill C-247 to repeal section 107 of the Canada Labour Code and her Bill C-254 to criminalize residential school denialism, while pressing the government to consult First Nations before fast-tracking bills like C-39. She argues in blunt, moral terms and asserts certainty in place of sources — “As we all know”, “we know that the funding is inadequate” — and keeps her questions pointed.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
A–
88 / 100 over 56 statements
Signal 83 / 100
Relevance 82 / 100
Respect 100 / 100
Clarity 93 / 100
Loses points more than most for Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.3.1 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×3.1 Loses points less than most for A remark off to the side of the point.Less often than most members.What the tags mean A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Averaged over the 56 of 60 statements graded so far.

Statements 60

Oral Questions ·

Indigenous Affairs

“Two years ago, I put forward a bill to make it a crime to deny what happened at residential schools. Survivors and their families deserve safety and respect, and they want this made illegal. Will the government adopt my bill and make this a crime, yes or no?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it has been two years since I tabled my bill to add to the Criminal Code residential school denialism as a form of inciting hate. Residential school survivors, their families and their communities have a right to safety, security and dignity. I have spoken to ministers. Survivors want this criminalized. If the government is committed to protecting survivors, will it listen to survivors, take on my bill as a government bill and criminalize residential school denialism once and for all, yes or no?

Statements by Members ·

Residential Schools

“I want the government to support my bill to make denying residential schools a crime. We must protect survivors and the truth about what happened to them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Orange Shirt Day is a day to honour residential school survivors and children, our relatives who never made it home and the parents who were left in deafening silence every September, which was when our children were kidnapped and taken off to residential schools. It was a violent plan to get us out of the way in the name of nation building. That is why, in 2022, the House recognized residential schools as a genocide, but we cannot honour survivors without protecting truth. I again implore the Liberal government to take on my bill to criminalize residential school denialism as an incitement of hate. We must protect survivors. Reconciliation is built on their stories, truth and the suffering they endured. We owe them the protection from any and all forms of hate. On behalf of the NDP, I honour all survivors, parents, families and communities. I lift them up today, not only on Orange Shirt Day, but every day, with all our love.

Adjournment Proceedings ·

Adjournment Proceedings

“I want the House to pass this bill. The Liberals have used the law to stop strikes eight times in 18 months. They are taking away workers' rights and selling off public assets. They do not support workers.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that was a good story time. I am going to quote my good friend, President Mark Hancock, from the Canadian Union of Public Employees. He said, “[W]e will not win this trade war or make Canada stronger by stripping away the Charter rights of our own people.” He also said, “Gutting hard-won rights and protections for Canada’s workers will not help this government deliver certainty – it will do the opposite.” We know the Liberals have used section 107 forcefully to shut down the right to strike eight times in just 18 months. Every time they have shut down a strike, the Liberals in this House have made new excuses for violating workers’ constitutionally protected bargaining rights. We know that, at the CEO summit, the government was selling off Canadian public assets like airports, which is getting push-back already from Unifor, and that the government is not on the side of workers. It is smashing down rights. It is shameful.

“I want the government to stop Bill C-39 and pass my bill instead. Bill C-39 gives the labour minister more power to shut down strikes, which violates workers' constitutional rights to strike and bargain. The government is siding with big corporations instead of protecting workers.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year on International Workers’ Day, I asked the Liberal government why it continued refusing to support my bill, NDP Bill C-247, to repeal section 107 and stop violations against workers’ right to strike. This bill is supported by workers and unions across Canada. In response, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Jobs deflected her government’s failures and advised that consultations were ongoing concerning changes to the Labour Code. Today, the cat is out of the bag. We learned that the Liberal government has done these consultations and is putting forward an omnibus bill, Bill C-39, trying to turn back the clock on workers’ fundamental rights by expanding the minister’s ability to shut down a strike and violate workers’ rights whenever the Liberals and their CEO buddies deem it inconvenient, as we saw with port workers, flight attendants and rail workers. Of course, they did consult with the CEOs who will benefit. It is not only a historic insult to workers, but also an immense threat to workers’ constitutional rights. We know that right now there are countless families, communities and individuals being devastated by Trump’s tariffs. Nobody is arguing with that. Nobody is arguing that we are not in a cost of living crisis. Instead of addressing this, the government is siding with CEOs, and instead of giving workers the relief they need to lift up their rights as workers, the Liberals have caved into the wish lists of corporations across this country by pushing forward Bill C-39 and violating their constitutional obligations to uphold the rights of workers, the rights of indigenous peoples and important environmental laws, even after a summer of disastrous wildfires during which we saw communities and homes literally burn to the ground. This past summer, the Liberal government saw what was going on, and once again it has doubled down in favour of its corporate buddies. I want to be clear that workers do not want to strike. Who wants to go on strike to get a reduction in pay, be out of work and be more financially worse off than they are when they are working and being ripped off by the Liberals’ corporate friends? Workers have rights, and these rights are protected in international law. The right of workers to walk off the job in solidarity is the only collective means to push back against powerful corporations and CEOs as the Liberal government lines its pockets. This so-called Canada strong plan is being built off the backs of people, workers, indigenous people, our environment and a livable planet. The NDP is very firm in its belief that we must protect the rights of workers. We must protect workers’ rights, and that includes the right to strike and free and collective bargaining.

Government Orders ·

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act

In response to a question from Elizabeth May

“The government talks about respecting treaties, but its actions do not match its words. It needs to stop breaking its promises to Indigenous people. Honouring treaties protects the environment, builds the country, and keeps projects out of court.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 18 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, as somebody who has rights holder adhesion to Treaty No. 4, I can say that the only thing the government is committed to is saying the right words. Its actions speak differently. It is time for the Liberals to stop using our brown bodies as indigenous people and stop slapping us in the face when they turn their backs on their treaty obligations time and time again. Upholding treaties means protecting our environment, building the country and keeping projects out of the courts.

In response to a question from Kelly McCauley

“The government cares more about big corporations than people, the environment, and Indigenous rights. It keeps breaking United Nations rules on Indigenous rights. If the government creates this commissioner, it must actually listen to them.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 44 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the government has clearly demonstrated that the only partners it cares about are big corporations, which comes on the backs of people, the environment, indigenous rights and community health and safety. If we want to talk about accountability, the government has shown that it is not accountable. It has continued to violate the minimum standards outlined in the articles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples time and time again over the last year and a half. I am calling the government’s bluff. If it is going to put a commissioner in place, it better listen to that commissioner.

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The government must get Indigenous consent before announcing projects on their lands. It is failing to respect treaties and Indigenous rights.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this is about free, prior and informed consent, and the government needs to stop announcing projects of national interest that involve indigenous people after the fact. In fact, Anishinabek Nation Grand Council Chief Linda Debassige called out the government for its “continued failure to respect our Nation’s inherent rights and the treaties.” She said, “the lands and resources being targeted for development and investment are within the treaty territories of the Anishinabek First Nations around the Great Lakes region.” She went on to say, “First Nations will continue to demand justice, respect, and the fulfillment of the Crown’s constitutional and treaty obligations to the original relationship.” That was her response to the latest and greatest debacle: the slap in the face to the treaty at the CEO summit in Toronto.

“I want the House to pass this bill. It creates an independent commissioner to make sure the government keeps its promises in modern treaties with Indigenous peoples. The Liberal government often ignores treaty rights when it makes deals and writes laws. We need this oversight so the government actually respects these treaties.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is so nice to rise today as we begin another session. I want to start by saying that the NDP absolutely supports Bill C-10. It is something that indigenous and modern treaty partners have long been asking for, an independent oversight and accountability mechanism over the federal government on modern treaty implementation. This is also an obligation that is outlined in UNDRIP, which includes commitments to improve modern treaty implementation. This has been Canadian law, or affirmed in Canadian law, since the passing of Bill C-15 which received royal assent on June 21, 2021. However, as we know, it is one thing to change laws; it is another thing to change colonial behaviours. With the Liberal government, I have not seen this kind of violation of, watering down of or pushing against indigenous rights since the Harper era. It is not surprising that our Prime Minister was taking photo ops with former prime minister Harper at his CEO summit that was held in Toronto just last week. This bill would establish many important things. It would establish an independent commissioner for modern treaty implementation and support the office to review and audit federal institutions on the implementation of modern treaties and related agreements, with reports that would have to be tabled in Parliament. It requires draft findings to be shared and many other accountability measures. We know, and in fact on occasion the whole House has acknowledged, the importance in actually achieving reconciliation of respecting our treaties, which are affirmed by aboriginal rights and title that form part of our Constitution. The government has indicated that it is committed to achieving reconciliation with first nations, Inuit and Métis people. Those are noble promises, but unfortunately, as we see a Liberal member and the Deputy Speaker of the House speaking during my time, interrupting my time, in action, this has been demonstrated to be completely unimportant to the current Liberal government. We know that modern treaties are a part of our constitutional framework. We know that modern treaties were intended to establish a mutually agreed upon and enduring framework for reconciliation and ongoing relationships between the Government of Canada and indigenous peoples. Strong treaty relationships work when respected, when people work nation to nation. As the former prime minister Right Hon. Justin Trudeau has said, there is no more important relationship than that with indigenous peoples. When we respect treaty relationships, and when treaty partners actually respect each other, we can flourish, not only as independent nations but also as a country that we now call Canada. This was affirmed and is part of the articles in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which states: Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements. It also states in the United Nations declaration that its purposes are to provide a framework for the Government of Canada’s implementation of the declaration to affirm that the declaration is a universal international human rights instrument with application in Canadian law, something that we affirmed through the passing of Bill C-15. We know the minimum human rights standard, the bottom floor that formed part of the declaration. What is stated in the declaration are “the minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world”, and they must be implemented in Canada. As I indicated, actions speak louder than words, and unfortunately the Liberal government has demonstrated, not through its words but through its actions, that it is not dedicated to reconciliation. In fact, in the year and a half since the election of the so-called new Liberal government, our Prime Minister has made many gaffes in terms of respecting and upholding treaty rights in this country. In November 2025, the federal-Alberta memorandum of understanding on energy development, which endorsed the construction of a new bitumen pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast, failed to include impacted indigenous nations, such as Treaty No. 6, Treaty No. 7, Treaty No. 8 and other nations, in decisions affecting their lands, territories and resources. The Confederacy of Treaty No. 6 First Nations stated, “We are disappointed the Confederacy...was not included at the decision making table prior to or during the signing of the MOU, despite the importance both governments have placed on First Nations inclusion.” This is an example that actions speak louder than words. It went on to say: We require a seat at any table where decisions are made that impact our People. Treaty No. 6 Nations are the only Rights Holders on this Land—there would be no Alberta without Treaty. It is unacceptable that we need to request this. There can be nothing for us, without us. Actions speak louder than words. It is a slap in the face by the Liberal government to treaty partners. It is a clear demonstration of its total disregard of treaties, which was also demonstrated in June 2026, when the government was forced by a class-action settlement to introduce clean water legislation. However, according to the Anishinabek Nation Grand Council Chief Linda Debassige, “Bill C-37 was introduced without broad or meaningful input by first nations. Our letters of advocacy have been met with deafening silence”. This is another slap in the face to treaty partners. Chiefs at the Assembly of First Nations unanimously opposed the Prime Minister’s plan for projects of national interest, with AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak denouncing the government’s plan, stating, “The federal government can try and set up all the timelines that they want for project approvals, but they can’t put a deadline on First Nations rights.” I want to be clear. The NDP absolutely supports putting in place an independent treaty commissioner to oversee the actions of the government, but as we have seen through the actions of the government, it does not respect treaties, does not respect the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, does not respect the rule of law and does not respect our Constitution and section 35 rights. When this commissioner is put in place, will the government finally listen, follow a path of true reconciliation and respect our treaties?

“The NDP supports appointing an independent treaty commissioner. But the government keeps ignoring and violating treaty rights. I want to know if the government will actually listen to this commissioner and stop breaking treaty promises.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to let the member across the way know that the NDP absolutely supports appointing an independent treaty commissioner, but I am having trouble because the government, time and time again, has demonstrated that it actually does not respect treaties. There is the MOU signed with Alberta without treaty partners; treaties 6, 7 and 8; and Bill C-5, which in fact violated modern treaty rights holders including the Grand Council of the Crees, a bill that was supported by the member who is from that territory. If we were to have an independent treaty commissioner, would the government actually listen to the commissioner and stop violating treaty rights?

Oral Questions ·

Indigenous Affairs

“The government's new water bill does not say clean drinking water is a human right. Children in Grassy Narrows First Nation are still suffering from mercury poisoning. The Prime Minister should apologize, clean up the mercury, and make sure everyone has clean water.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberals tabled water legislation that would fail to recognize clean drinking water as a human right. Today I stood with Grassy Narrows First Nation, where children continue to suffer mercury poisoning caused by decades of government and corporate neglect. This is a national disgrace. When challenged to deliver justice, the Prime Minister’s response to a woman living with mercury poisoning was, “I can outlast her.” Will the Prime Minister apologize, clean up the mercury and guarantee clean water for all?

Statements by Members ·

Clean Water

“I oppose the government's new water bill. It does not treat clean water as a human right for First Nations. It only protects water on reserves, even though pollution comes from outside those borders.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, this has been one of the most disappointing years of my nearly seven years in Parliament, watching the Carney government bulldoze constitutional rights and human rights. The final blow came this week when the Liberals tabled new water legislation after years of failing to end long-term boil advisories. This bill does not recognize safe, clean water as a human right for first nations. Worse, it limits protections to reserve boundaries while ignoring aboriginal title and the reality that pollution from resource extraction flows beyond reserve lines, contaminating the waters our nations depend on. As the session ends, I will return home to Winnipeg Centre, which I have lovingly nicknamed “the centre of the universe”. It is a community built on care and solidarity, where we understand the importance of always placing community at the centre. I will rest, restore my spirit and return in the fall ready to keep fighting for a better future for everyone.

Oral Questions ·

Indigenous Affairs

“The new water bill only covers reserve lands. Indigenous rights apply to all traditional lands, not just reserves. Will the minister confirm that these rights apply across all traditional territories?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the minister tabled Bill C‑37 yesterday, yet its definition of “First Nation lands” is limited to reserve lands under section 91(24) of the BNA Act. While the bill repeatedly references UNDRIP’s application, it appears restricted to reserves. Indigenous peoples have rights that extend beyond reserve boundaries into their traditional territories. Can the minister confirm that UNDRIP, including article 25, applies throughout indigenous peoples’ traditional territories and not just on reserve, yes or no?

Oral Questions ·

Indigenous Affairs

“I want the government to stop making excuses and pass the bill that removes sexism and racism from the Indian Act before the summer break. First Nations have already said there is no need to wait or consult on this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it has been one year since the Liberals fast-tracked Bill C-5, gutting environmental protections and indigenous rights, but now with Bill S-2, which would eliminate sexism and racism from the Indian Act, they suddenly hide behind the need to consult. First Nations everywhere have told the government that there is no need to consult on ending sexism and racism, so will the minister end the spin cycle, stop the excuses and pass Bill S-2 before the summer adjournment?

Government Orders ·

Government Orders

In response to a question from Jenny Kwan

“The government is failing to protect people from deepfakes and the harms of AI. Women's groups asked the minister for help, but he has not met with anyone harmed by this technology. Instead, the government supports big tech companies.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I was talking about deepfakes. In spite of the fact that the minister responsible for AI has been asked by several womens organizations and by people impacted by deepfakes, the government has voted to support media giants such as Elon Musk in programs such as Grok. I would like to note that this is a problem under the purview of the minister of AI, who has failed completely to address the widespread concerns and fears of folks across Canada about the social media consequences of AI. In March of this year, I requested information on the Order Paper question concerning meetings the minister has taken with stakeholders impacted by AI, and I learned that he has taken absolutely zero meetings. Instead, the Liberals have been more concerned with—

In response to a question from Andréanne Larouche

“The inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women asked the government to give everyone a guaranteed basic income. The Liberals promised to act on these calls, but they have only responded to three of them. If the government wants to stop violence against women, it should keep that promise and spend money on services that keep people safe.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, call for justice 4.5 calls for the immediate implementation of a guaranteed livable basic income as one of the key calls for justice to deal with the ongoing genocide against indigenous women and girls. I want to remind the Liberals that they agreed to implement the calls for justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, but where are they? They are nowhere, and they have responded to only three. Why do they not work on that if they are worried about dealing with the crisis of femicide in the country, and invest in services and support that actually keep women and gender-diverse people safe?

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“This bill only deals with violence after it happens instead of stopping it first. The government needs to fund programs that keep women and gender-diverse people safe before they are hurt.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the legislation would not deal with the root cause. It would deal with the violence after it occurs. In my riding, there is a crisis of gender-based violence against women and gender-diverse folks. In the midst of it, there has been a massive cutback in funding to keep people safe before the murder or violence occurs. The government, if it is serious about community safety and about dealing with the crisis of gender-based violence, will listen to the experts and will stop divesting from programs and funding to keep us safe.

“I want to change this bill. It punishes people after violence happens, but it does not stop the violence before it starts. The government needs to spend money on prevention programs, basic income, and stopping online fake sexual images.”
Official Hansard

moved: Motion No. 1 That Bill C‑16, in Clause 28, be amended by deleting lines 9 and 10 on page 18. Motion No. 2 That Bill C‑16 be amended by deleting Clause 63. Motion No. 3 That Bill C‑16 be amended by deleting Clause 87. She said: I am happy to rise today on Bill C-16, as this is a very far-reaching bill. My colleague and I have studied this bill very carefully and sought to amend it significantly while it was reviewed by the justice and human rights committee. The amendments were submitted by women’s legal organizations, including NAWL and LEAF, and Senator Kim Pate. I thank them for their participation in trying to strengthen the bill. As noted in the title, the government claims that the bill is about protecting women and children, but this is very difficult because, I have to say, although the bill is a response to violence, it fails to actually address what women’s organizations and gender-diverse organizations have been wanting: more money and more support in trying to prevent violence before it occurs. It was those very amendments that were submitted to try to improve the bill, based on the advice of organizations representing women and gender-diverse people, nearly all of which the Liberals and the Conservatives together voted down. It is unfortunate. It is also important to note, and make people aware of, the failing record of the Liberal government when it comes to upholding the safety and well-being of women, children and gender-diverse people. Instead of prioritizing this crisis facing women and children across the country, the government has been fast-tracking legislation that undermines our safety. In fact, just yesterday, the CCPA published a report on behalf of the National Family and Survivors Circle demonstrating that the Liberals’ failure to adequately fund programs surrounding the crisis of missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people, and their failure to advance any progress toward implementing the 231 calls for justice, is actually placing indigenous women, girls and diverse gendered folks in more difficult and violent situations. This is very personal to me because the very riding of Winnipeg Centre has been noted as “ground zero” for the ongoing genocide of indigenous women, girls and diverse gendered folks. This is the very government that right now is stalling Bill S‑2 at committee, stalling on taking sexism out of the Indian Act, sexism that has been perpetrated against indigenous women, something that was noted by the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal at the UN as one of the resulting impacts of what it called the “ongoing genocide [of] Indigenous Peoples” in Canada. We know that since the pandemic, rates of gender-based violence have actually increased, not decreased, and the government has allowed, in the middle of an ongoing crisis of violence, prevention programs to expire by doing things like cutting funding to the Department of Women and Gender Equality. Meanwhile, this year’s child poverty report by Campaign 2000 states that child poverty has increased for the third consecutive year and has more than doubled since 2020, reaching 10.7%, or 802,000 children. At this rate, the report says, it will take almost 400 years to eliminate child poverty in Canada. It is one the reasons that since being elected, I have tried to fight for a guaranteed livable basic income to be implemented. We know that income guarantees in this country are not livable, and we know that women’s organizations across the country have indicated that a guaranteed livable basic income is one of the most foundational programs that the government could put in place to assist with the elevating crisis of violence against indigenous women and girls, all women, in this country. Instead of finding programs or investing in prevention programs, the Liberals have joined the Conservatives in advancing carceral approaches to public safety that fail to address the roots of the crisis of violence against women and children in this country. Investing in prevention before the crime happens, before the femicide happens, is something that would create meaningful change so that we would never have to hear about the unfortunate circumstance of violence that occurs because of a lack of investment in violence prevention programs. It is really sad that the government only wants to deal with the crisis after the fact, after the murder or the violence has taken place. We need to invest in prevention, and that is something that has been echoed strongly by women’s organizations and gender-diverse organizations across the country. Investing at the latter end without dealing with prevention means we will not see, unfortunately, a significant decrease in violence. The NDP has always taken seriously the safety and well-being of women, gender-diverse people and children. We welcome a formal acknowledgement of femicide in the Canadian Criminal Code. We are advancing solutions to get at the root of the problem we face rather than simply dealing with it after it is too late. Take, for example, what I worked on with families and advocates with the implementation of the red dress alert system, something the government fails to fund, to ensure that should somebody go missing, they must be found. Where is the funding? Where is the support for that initiative? One of the critical problems that women’s organizations brought up, which is under the purview of the Minister of AI, is the problem of deepfakes being used and benefiting media giants like Elon Musk through AI platforms like Grok. These sexualized deepfakes are appalling and violate the safety, well-being and fundamental rights of those impacted. That is why the NDP listened to researchers and legal experts from women’s organizations who strongly suggested that the language surrounding deepfakes in Bill C-16 be strengthened, since there are currently loopholes that let big tech companies off the hook and allow platforms like Grok that promote sexualized deepfakes to continue doing so. How did the Liberal government members vote on this amendment? They sided with big tech companies, failing to introduce regulations that would actually prevent sexualized deepfakes. I would like to note that in March, I requested information in an Order Paper question concerning meetings the Minister of AI has taken with stakeholders impacted by AI. Can members guess how many meetings he has taken? He has taken zero meetings with women and gender-diverse people. We welcome the inclusion of femicide into—

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

“An international tribunal found that Canada's policies against Indigenous peoples amount to genocide, including taking their lands and resources without consent. I want to know if the government will start respecting Indigenous rights and following its constitutional duties.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal concluded that Canada’s ongoing policies amount to genocide, pointing specifically to the government’s seized value of indigenous lands, territories and resources. The tribunal noted that part of the issue is related to the failure of the government to obtain the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. Will the government begin to uphold its constitutional obligations and uphold section 35(3) rights? Will it take this finding very seriously and respect the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples, or is it going to continue building a pipeline to the court?

Oral Questions ·

Indigenous Affairs

“Alberta's premier wants to change the Constitution to weaken Indigenous rights for a pipeline. The Prime Minister has stayed quiet. I want him to tell us if he agrees with her or if he will speak out against her plan.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, recently suggested that the Constitution be amended because she finds section 35 rights problematic for her pipeline dream. What is more troublesome, though, is that the Liberal Prime Minister has remained silent. However, that is not surprising, considering Amnesty International has confirmed that he has backslid on indigenous rights. Indigenous peoples want to know, does the Prime Minister agree with Premier Smith, or will he take the honourable stand and condemn this dangerous proposition?

Oral Questions ·

Climate Change

“Climate change is causing worse fires, floods, and toxic smoke. A member left the Liberal caucus because the government is failing to protect us. Will the government fix its weak environmental rules, or will it do nothing?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie’s decision to leave the Liberal caucus was a principled response to the Liberal government’s failure to protect us from catastrophic climate change. We see wildfire seasons, floods and whole towns and communities burning to the ground while people wait for another summer when they are going to be choking on toxic smoke. Will the government reverse its backsliding on environmental protections or will it continue to sit by and watch the world burn to the ground?