SoVote

May/2/22 5:28:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, once again, my colleague is unable of rising above partisanship. That being said, my criticism of the government is that it introduced in a closure motion a file that it has mismanaged and has been very lax in addressing. Had it not been for the separate vote we were able to obtain concerning medical assistance in dying, we would have been forced to vote against it, when all we want is for that file to move forward. I will stop there because the member in question is always very partisan. He thinks that, by pointing a finger at the official opposition and saying that it would have done worse than his government, his government’s current actions are justified. However, it is the Liberals who are in power now.

132 words

Context: House Hansard - 62 - May/2/22

Mr. Luc Thériault

May/2/22 5:34:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is another example of just how low my colleague will go. It is more partisan thinking. I thought my speech was very clear. I said it was despicable to include medical assistance in dying in the closure motion when we have been asking the government to give the committee more time, to recall the committee and reconstitute it as soon as possible for weeks, months even. I did so the day after the election. They dragged their feet and now, with the clock ticking, they have decided to include it in a closure motion. It is clear now that they did not understand what I said. They did not understand the speech. Some things are just not done. If they had left that out, if they had decided to talk about it, and if the Conservatives had said “no”, we could've had this same debate on one issue. Maybe the cat would be out of the bag, which is not currently the case. Some people can vote against this motion for reasons other than the ones I am talking about.

186 words

Context: House Hansard - 62 - May/2/22

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

May/2/22 6:27:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will try to elevate the debate in the House and move away from irony and accusations. I agree with some of the criticisms that my Liberal colleague has levelled against the Conservatives, but I would like to steer him towards other topics. I would like to hear his thoughts on the three points I am about to raise. Is this motion not designed to make up for his government's lax management of the agenda? The government prorogued the House, called an election and took months to recall the House. Medical assistance in dying is a fundamental issue. To include the MAID committee in a motion like this is unacceptable. The government claims it wants to save time. That was just brought up. I will explain to my colleague what the possibility of a closure motion means. I will predict what will happen. When my prediction comes true, I would like my colleague to acknowledge it. At the end of the session, the government will put an end to all this, probably before June 23, by putting a bunch of legislation in a closure motion without any debate. That is not what I call democracy. Everyone wants to work for the time we spend in the House from evening until midnight. That is why we are all here. Moreover, I think that we are not moving quickly most of the time, and we are taking up committee resources. Just today, a committee meeting was cancelled.

249 words