Canada: House Speaker bans Conservative leader
who accused foreign minister of ‘pandering to Hamas’
Canadian Parliamentary House Speaker Greg Fergus, whose job is to be neutral, is accused of being so partisan that the official opposition Conservative Party of Canada is not only calling for his removal, but has released a petition to “Fire The Partisan Liberal Speaker.”
The petition reads:
Whereas the Speaker of the House of Commons must act in a non-partisan nature to ensure fairness and neutrality,
Whereas the current House Speaker, Greg Fergus, has shown complete disregard for the neutrality his role requires by clearly acting in a way that benefits the Trudeau Liberals and disparages Conservatives,
Whereas the Liberal Speaker filmed a partisan video in his office wearing his Speakers’ robe to address the Ontario Liberal Caucus, he censored Pierre Poilievre for calling Trudeau’s deadly drug policies “wacko,” and hosted an event advertised on the Liberal Party website that directly criticized the Conservative Party Leader.
Whereas the Liberal Speaker has continually shown favour and a double standard of treatment to Liberal MPs in the House of Commons, including choosing to censor Pierre Poilievre and common sense Conservatives while allowing Justin Trudeau to speak freely,
Therefore, we call on all members of the House of Commons to uphold the principle of Speaker neutrality, and express non-confidence in this partisan Liberal Speaker.
Last year, Liberal MP Greg Fergus became new Speaker of the House of Commons after his predecessor Anthony Rota resigned in scandal for inviting a Nazi to Parliament — Yaroslav Hunka. Hunka is a former Ukrainian soldier who fought in the Nazi division Waffen-SS Galicia Division, or the SS 14th Waffen Division. He was honored in Canada’s House of Commons during Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Parliament. The National Post reported at that time that the newly installed House Speaker Fergus “now has the difficult task to restore some order in a hyper partisan House.”
Given the latest news regarding Fergus, he’s failing. The latest incident stems from Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre accusing Foreign Minister Melanie Joly of “pandering to Hamas,” and Fergus banning Poilievre from Parliament for the day. Yet Poilievre’s accusation is not without merit. There has been a pattern with Joly. Firstly, recall her Twitter post:
Now Joly is demanding an apology from Poilievre, despite her long record that aligns with Poilievre’s accusation:
- In March, a Member of the Israeli Knesset, Dan Illouz, sent a letter to Joly, saying that a Canadian arms embargo on Israel (that Joly voted for) “sends a dangerous signal to the world that Canada is willing to sideline a democratic ally in favor of appeasing radical elements.”
- Also in March, Joly responded to accusations about Israeli sexual violence that “we believe Palestinian women.”
- In April, Joly told Israel to “take the win” and “not respond with direct attack on Iran” when Iran bombarded Israel with missile fire.
- In May, Joly stated: “We are horrified” by Israel’s “strikes in Rafah,” and pledged 5000 more visas for Gazans. Yet she turned a blind eye to Hamas’ use of human shields and Israel’s need to protect its country from jihadist obliteration.
- Joly also announced in May that Canada was imposing new sanctions on Jewish “perpetrators of extremist settler violence” in Judea and Samaria, under a Special Economic Measures Act.
Greg Fergus is proving to be another Liberal partisan crony.
Speaker silences Poilievre for a day after he accused
foreign minister of pandering to Hamas
by John Paul Tasker, CBC News, October 8, 2024:
Speaker Greg Fergus ruled Tuesday that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre won’t be allowed to speak in the House of Commons for the rest of the day after he refused to withdraw his claim that Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly is pandering to Hamas.
In question period Monday, Poilievre asked Joly to condemn what he called “genocidal chants from hateful mobs” during recent protests over the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza. Police have opened investigations into alleged hate speech following some rallies and charges have been laid in some cases….
Poilievre continued:
“I gave the foreign affairs minister two opportunities to condemn the increasingly common and terrifying antisemitic chants we hear in the streets, such as ‘Israel will soon be gone’ and ‘There is only one solution! Intifada, revolution!’ ” he said.
“Twice she refused to condemn those remarks. She continues to pander to Hamas supporters and the Liberal Party as part of her leadership campaign rather than doing her job.”
In this current climate, certain grossly repulsive speech has been allowed in Trudeau’s Canada, particularly against Jews, even though Canada cracks down on speech that it deems to be “hate,” to an extent that earned it a label of “Stalinesque” from Trudeau’s own appointed Senator Senator David Richards. Other examples of active antisemitism that went unpunished in Canada:
- Canada: ‘Campus flood’ in Montreal to celebrate Hamas’ October 7 ‘Al-Aqsa flood’ massacre
- Canada: Diversity Minister was warned about consultant’s anti-Semitic tweets before news broke.
Yet anything deemed “offensive” by Canada’s self-appointed Liberal arbiters of what constitutes “offensive” speech is punished, even in violation of constitutional freedoms.
It was only a matter of time before Conservative politicians in Canada were attacked. America has already experienced the relentless weaponizing of its political system against Donald Trump.
Cancel culture first unleashed its fury upon truth-tellers in the culture war who were regarded as the easier targets, but it has metastasized to include those in the political establishment.
The battle to restore freedom to society from the top down, as well as the rule of law and constitutional rights, has yet to be won. No one is safe as free societies remain under threat from ruthless and rabid woke leaders who are aligned with the red-green axis.
=============================================================================
Why has Parliament's work been paralyzed for more than a week?
Standoff over documents related to failed clean tech fund
has brought normal business to a halt
The House of Commons has been at a standstill for more than a week as a dispute over releasing documents related to the government's failed green technology fund continues to gum up the works.
The Conservatives are trying to force the government to release all documents related to the now-defunct Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC), a federally funded arm's-length body that was launched in 2021 to hand out taxpayer money to promising clean tech firms.
The Conservatives want the RCMP to investigate alleged wrongdoing at the SDTC and say police need these documents to do so.
The Liberals, meanwhile, say the government has released some of the documents already and the question of whether to disclose more should be studied further by a Commons committee.
They also say it would be unconstitutional for the government to produce documents for MPs to hand over to police without going through the appropriate legal channels.
In the meantime, as MPs squabble over what should or should not be released, Parliament is getting almost nothing done.
How did the SDTC get into trouble?
The SDTC's past chair, Annette Verschuren, has acknowledged she participated in approving more than $200,000 in grants to her own company.
But the problems at SDTC went much deeper. Back in June, Auditor General Karen Hogan reported that the organization had violated its conflict of interest policies 90 times, awarded $59 million to 10 projects that were not eligible and frequently overstated the environmental benefits of the projects it funded.
In other words, it was a slush fund for Liberals and their supporters, the likes of which you might see in Malaysia.
She found "significant lapses" in the $1-billion fund's governance.
The SDTC was so poorly managed and beset by scandal that Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne shut it down earlier this year and rejigged the government's strategy for funding technology to help fight climate change.
How did we get to this impasse in the Commons?
In June, the Conservatives introduced a motion demanding that the government turn over all SDTC documents to the Commons law clerk within 30 days. The clerk, in turn, would turn over those files to the RCMP for a possible criminal investigation into this troubled fund.
MPs passed the motion before rising for the summer break.
Not all of the government's documents were handed over to the clerk by the specified deadline.
That led Conservative MP Andrew Scheer, the party's House leader, to claim in September that parliamentary privilege had been violated because the government was not complying with a clear directive approved by MPs.
Speaker Greg Fergus agreed the documents should be produced, even if it would set an unusual precedent because MPs are requesting documents in order to hand them over to a third party — in this case, the police.
"The House has the undoubted right to order the production of any and all documents from any entity or individual it deems necessary to carry out its duties," Fergus said.
"The House has clearly ordered the production of certain documents, and that order has clearly not been fully complied with."
Fergus said he "cannot come to any other conclusion but to find that a prima facie question of privilege has been established."
Why does this matter?
Since Fergus issued that ruling, MPs have been debating a motion that would send the matter to the Commons procedure committee for further study.
Privilege motions like this one take precedence over virtually all other parliamentary business, such as government orders and private member's business, although question period has gone ahead as usual.
Since the debate began, the government hasn't been able to bring forward new legislation or pass bills already before MPs.
The government has rescheduled a vote on changes to the capital gains tax three times, and each time it has been overtaken by debate about the documents.
Similarly, long-awaited bills on clean drinking water for First Nations and citizenship rights for Canadians born abroad have not moved forward.
In an interview with CBC News last week, Scheer said the Conservatives will hold up the Commons until the government agrees to hand over all of its unredacted SDTC-related documents to the Commons clerk so he can then provide them to the police.
"We believe the RCMP should have all the documents, all the information for possible criminal charges," he said. "We expect the government to do that."
When asked how long this could drag on, Scheer said it's up to the government.
"It's really a question of how long the Liberals want to keep the House of Commons ground to a halt rather than simply hand over the documents," he said.
He said the Conservatives want "literally everything handed over," and if that doesn't happen it tells him "the government is trying to hide something."
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said Monday it's really the Liberals who are holding everything up. "The government must hand over evidence to the police," he said.
What's the government saying?
The Liberal government, meanwhile, maintains this Conservative effort is a stunt and Conservative MPs should just agree to pass the privilege motion and send the matter to the procedure committee.
When asked why the government doesn't give the Conservatives what they want to bring this dispute to a close, government House leader Karina Gould said producing documents to be passed on to the police would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
"The Conservative Party of Canada has put forward a motion that would blur the lines of independence between the legislative and judicial branches," Gould said last week.
"This is something that every single Canadian should be alarmed about. They're trying to get around judicial oversight and trample on the Charter. It's not something that should happen in a democracy. Canadians need to be aware."
What a croc!
For evidence to hold up in court, police have to follow the proper protocols.
When it comes to documents, police normally have to get a production order from a judge that compels a person or organization to disclose records to law enforcement.
That's why Hogan herself has said she doesn't want the information she gathered as AG to be given to the police outside the normal channels. She said so in a letter to MPs this summer.
As Liberal and Conservative MPs slugged it out in the Commons, RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme said last week there are already "ongoing investigations" of SDTC and the RCMP "did receive the documents" that could be used for a probe.
It's not clear which documents the RCMP has; a spokesperson for the force said the RCMP could not comment further.
What's next?
The Liberals could produce what the Conservatives want, or the Tories could agree to let the whole matter go to committee.
The Liberals also could try to force an end to the debate through a parliamentary process called closure — something that would require either Bloc or NDP support.
New Democrats have said they want to study the issue further at committee. They've accused the Conservatives of filibustering the process and needlessly dragging out the debate.
"We patiently await the day when Conservatives stop enjoying the sounds of their own voices," said NDP MP Alistair MacGregor.
"When will Conservatives allow us to execute a vote on this so we can get the business going and get this investigation underway?"
When? When the Liberals come clean and stop hiding the real goods.
==============================================================================
Conservatives passed a motion on Monday to have Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault appear before the public accounts committee. MPs want Guilbeault to appear to explain why a company he owns shares in, and worked as an adviser to for 10 years, received $200 million in subsidies from Sustainable Development and Technology Canada (SDTC).
No comments:
Post a Comment