Anthony Housefather

Minister of Finance Mr. Speaker, I have some good news for my colleague. Last week, I was with thein my riding, where Kraft Heinz announced a $250-million investment to increase the number of Canadian products being made here at home in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. That is because Kraft Heinz has confidence that the new government knows what it is doing with the economy. I think we should look at [more]

Mr. Speaker, of course the answer is no. It is clear that people could read any sacred text, pray to it, or do anything else, and no one would be charged for reading a sacred text. The issue here is the promotion of hatred, that is, deliberately wanting someone to be slandered. The idea that this would happen simply because a person goes to church and reads the Bible there makes no sense. It is [more]

Mr. Speaker, I have been asking for this bill for two years. This is a bill I feel passionately about, and it is a bill that is desperately needed. In the last month, three synagogues in Toronto were shot at. Jewish institutions were shot at in Belgium and Holland. A synagogue in Detroit was attacked with a car by a guy who was armed. He rammed into the gate. Over and over in this world, we have [more]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing I want to say is that this bill, when we talk about anti-Semitism, is something that has been asked for by all of the main Jewish organizations in Canada, including CIJA, B’nai Brith and the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center. I can go on and on about the Jewish organizations that support the bill and have asked for the bill. They want to see actual action, not just [more]

Mr. Speaker, I extend the same appreciation to my colleague, whom I often work with and very much enjoy working with. The member asked about two things. First, I have called for the repeal of the religious-based defence since early 2024, when CIJA called for it, and I agreed with them, following what happened with Charkaoui in Montreal. I have supported removing that for two years. It has never [more]

I would just like to understand, Mr. Chair. Ms. Hepfner C‑16 's private member's bill was referred to the committee. I'd like to know whether Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe is proposing that we consider Ms. Hepfner's bill once we're finished with Billor whether he's proposing doing his study and setting Ms. Hepfner's bill aside. I wasn't quite sure.

Jean Chrétien was the prime minister for 10 years during the time that the notwithstanding clause was part of the Charter of Rights. He never used the notwithstanding clause. Is that correct?

In my recollection, there were cases during Jean Chrétien's time as prime minister that Chrétien himself said he had reservations about. Two examples are Marshall, on fishing rights, and the same-sex marriage case. Is that correct?

C-16 There are alternatives to using the notwithstanding clause—to get around a case like Senneville, for example, rewriting the law to address the concerns expressed by the majority in a court decision, whether we agree with it or not, as you have done in the case of Bill. Is that correct?

Yet he still managed not to use it. Using the notwithstanding clause is essentially saying that we have a protected right under the charter and we're going to.... Say we're using it because we're not going to limit a right in a way that is reasonable in a free and democratic society. By using the notwithstanding clause, we're essentially acknowledging that. Is that correct?

I agree. Thank you so much.