IN THE HOUSE ~ Question ~ growing criticism on Bill C-51

This was posted more than 12 months ago. The information may be outdated.

    M. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NPD): Monsieur le Président, de graves violations des droits de la personne peuvent être faites au nom de la sécurité nationale. Cela prend un véritable mécanisme de surveillance des agences de sécurité.

     En fin de semaine, le ministre de la Défense nationale a rejeté cette mesure. Le pire est que c'est le même ministre qui prétend que le projet de loi C-51 ne donne pas plus de pouvoir aux agences de sécurité.

    Pourquoi les Canadiens feraient-ils confiance à ce gouvernement qui tente de soustraire son projet de loi et les agences de sécurité du regard des parlementaires? Qu'a-t-il à cacher?

    L'hon. Steven Blaney (ministre de la Sécurité publique et de la Protection civile, PCC): Monsieur le Président, on l'a revu encore en fin de semaine: la menace extrémiste djihadiste est réelle et cible des endroits, ici, au pays. C'est la raison pour laquelle j'invite tous les députés à supporter le projet de loi C-51.

    Pour nous, la sécurité et la liberté vont main dans la main et vont de pair. En effet, nous avons un projet de loi qui va faire en sorte qu'il y aura encore plus de supervision judiciaire et qu'on aura besoin de l'autorisation du procureur général. Envoyons le projet de loi en comité et livrons la marchandise pour les Canadiens.

    Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. Speaker, from the day that the Prime Minister announced Bill C-51 in a campaign-style event, this has been about politics and not about protecting Canadians.

    Bill C-51 is a 62-page omnibus bill that amends no fewer than 13 acts, and despite ministers not being clear and sometimes even contradicting each other on the bill, the Conservatives still want to force it through after only a few hours of debate.

    If the government is so confident about the bill, why is it ramming it through to avoid debate? Why is it trying to keep it away from public scrutiny?

    Hon. Steven Blaney (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we have seen again this weekend how the jihadi extremists' threat is real. That is why we need to move on and put measures in place to keep Canadians safe.

    Under the leadership of our Prime Minister who, in one of the largest communities in our country, was proud to present a bill that is fixing the issue we face here in this country when in this very place we were attacked.

    I invite the member to support the bill, to send it to committee, and I will be more than happy to answer all the questions that he has on the bill so we can see what Canadians think.

    Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP): Mr. Speaker, we all agree public safety is important, but it must never be used as an excuse for dividing Canadians.

    There is growing criticism that Bill C-51 goes too far. First nations in particular are sounding the alarm about how the bill would impact them. Grand Chief Terrance Nelson spoke out, saying:

Treaty rights, land rights, natural resource development, any protest like that, they could be considered eco terrorists.

    Does the government not understand that the bill is not just about terrorism? Is it really blind to the fact it can also target legitimate dissent and take away fundamental rights of Canadians?

    Hon. Steven Blaney (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the member should spend less time fearmongering and more time reading the bill.

     On the third page of the bill, protests are not even included. What is included is tools to make sure that those who are there to protect us will be able to protect us, like sharing information or preventing high-risk travellers from being in an airplane.

    When will the member read the bill and have a more balanced question?