SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 63

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 3, 2022 10:00AM
  • May/3/22 10:01:09 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to seven petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.
35 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:03:45 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion. I move: That a take-note debate on murdered and missing indigenous women and girls be held on Wednesday, May 4, 2022, pursuant to Standing Order 53.1, and that, notwithstanding any standing order, special order, or usual practice of the House: (a) members rising to speak during the debate may indicate to the Chair that they will be dividing their time with another member; (b) the time provided for the debate be extended beyond four hours, as needed, to include a minimum of 12 periods of 20 minutes each; and (c) no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair.
134 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:16:44 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, when I was in opposition, we often raised the issue of the experimental lakes project, which was in the whole Manitoba and Ontario area, and this is an area in which Stephen Harper actually cut, much to our dismay, given the importance of the fresh water. Why does the member believe the then prime minister cut support funding that would have dealt with the issues the member is talking about? I can remember producing petitions on the issue, and I am wondering if he can provide his thoughts on that. While he is doing that, could he explain why the Conservative Party continues to want to play games and prevent debate on Bill C-8?
117 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:31:53 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, we are supposed to be debating Bill C-8 at this time. Members will be familiar with it because it is the 2021 fall economic update that was to implement a number of measures such as rapid tests, supporting small businesses and supporting northern rural residents. We have passed the federal budget now and the Conservatives are still filibustering Bill C-8: the fall economic statement from last year. Is there something in that legislation that the member or the Conservative Party can identify that is so fundamentally wrong that they want to continue to play the games they are playing, by introducing motions for concurrence on reports in order not to debate Bill C-8?
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:37:12 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to address two quick points before I have something more solid to say on this. The first point is that it takes a great deal of courage, as a Conservative, to stand and speak about invasive species in our lakes. It was Stephen Harper, and I want members to remember the Experimental Lakes Area, who actually cut that back. I remember standing in opposition criticizing the then prime minister. We had over 50 pristine lakes. The science being administered in that area, and the research, was phenomenal. It was recognized around the world as dealing with substantial issues in order to protect freshwater lakes. The Conservatives now have the courage to move a concurrence motion on that issue, at least in part, on a government that is invested in protecting our oceans. Just the other day, I talked about the importance of our fishing industry. It was a special focus on Atlantic Canada in particular. We have many members from Atlantic Canada and B.C. who are very passionate about conservation and protecting our waters. Regarding freshwater lakes, I made reference to Lake Winnipeg. We understand the issue, and that is the reason we have put into place percentages of protected areas where we have invested tens of millions of dollars. It is definitely a lot more than the former prime minister and former administration put forward. The Conservatives then try to give the false impression that, as a government, we are not stepping up to the plate. I will leave it at that on that particular point. The second point I want to raise is one of gamesmanship. The question I put forward to opposition members was in relation to Bill C-8. Members of the House, and those following the never-ending debate on Bill C-8, have witnessed an official opposition going out of its way to prevent that legislation from passing. It has brought in a number of concurrence reports in order to prevent the debate. The one I really like is when the Conservatives move to adjourn the House. They want to quit: to stop the House and go home in order to prevent debate on Bill C-8. We saw the Conservatives' behaviour in the last couple of days in opposition to allowing for more debate. If we did not bring in the motion yesterday, we would not have had the two hours of debate we had late last night, even though the Conservatives were hollering, screaming and crying that they did not want to sit late in the evening. I think the Conservatives need to come to the realization that there are members in the House, whether Liberals or New Democrats, who have seen the value in allowing for a legislative agenda and allowing not only debate to occur but the ultimate passage of legislation. The Conservative Party is determined to continue to play the game. That is why I find myself in a position, as I have in the past, to try to get the Conservative Party to refocus on the issue of serving Canadians through passing some of the Liberal government's legislative agenda. Bill C-8 needs to be debated and it needs to be passed. Bill C-8 was brought in many months ago. It is a reflection of the fall economic statement of last year—
563 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:42:29 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, as I was saying, if we look at the fall economic statement of last year, as we are approaching summer of 2022, we have—
27 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:43:35 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, just in case the member was not listening to all of it, I said there were only two points. The first point I emphasized was the issue of the IISD Experimental Lakes Area. The member was a parliamentary secretary under Stephen Harper, so I can understand why he might have selective hearing on that aspect of it. That definitely falls within the jurisdiction of the legislation. I am also pointing out how the motion we have before us is meant to continue playing the ongoing game of avoiding the passage of Bill C-8, which is causing me to have to move the motion I am about to move. This way people will understand why I am feeling obligated to move the motion. There is no disrespect for the issue being raised today. Unlike the Conservative Party, the government genuinely believes in taking action to deal with invasive species. We have shown that in budgetary measures, and I would even suggest in legislative measures, with some of the protection legislation we have brought in for our environment. Having said that, I am feeling obligated to move the following motion because it is time to finish the debate so we can have a vote on Bill C-8. Remember that we have already passed budget 2022-23. All we are saying is that it is time we support our teachers, farmers and business people, along with the many people who are dependent on Bill C-8. Let us pass the legislation. Let us allow it to come for debate. I move, seconded by the member for Halifax West: That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.
280 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 10:46:31 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, unless the will of the House is to pass it on division, I would ask for a recorded vote.
21 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 1:37:17 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-8 
Madam Speaker, the member made reference to the property tax issue and health care transfers. It is important that we recognize that members of the Bloc Québécois very much would like the breakup of Canada. At the end of the day, Bloc members would ultimately argue that Canada should be nothing more than an ATM from which cash would just flow to provinces. The Bloc members do not recognize that within Canada is a great federation with provinces and territories and with incredible leadership from indigenous communities. It is a nation that makes for the best country in the world to live in. This means that the national government does have some leadership roles to play, whether in housing or health care, according to the Canada Health Act. I wonder if the member feels that, maybe for the rest of Canada, Bill C-8 is a good thing.
152 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 5:12:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, I disagree with the overall assessment the member tries to portray regarding the image of the government. Virtually from day one, we have seen a government that is very supportive of workers in Canada. I can talk about things such as labour disputes, contracts that were signed shortly after we had taken government and changes in labour laws that were very well received. We have had changes in our EI program. We have provided literally hundreds of millions of dollars to training programs. We have seen legislative and budgetary measures in the past, including today, that are advancing workers, including in the area of the just transition. I think the member is looking for a way to try to justify voting no on the legislation, from listening to the content of her speech. I am wondering if she would reflect on what I have just said. How can she advocate that the government has not been listening to and working for workers?
164 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 5:27:45 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's comment with regard to supporting the principle of the bill and it going to committee. We look forward to having an ongoing discussion on the aerospace industry, which is an industry we are all concerned about. We know how prominent the province of Quebec is in that industry worldwide, but the province of Manitoba also has a very healthy aerospace industry. I do not think it will be affected as much by what is being proposed, but yes: Let us have that dialogue in committee and see what we can come up with. I would ask the member to provide his thoughts on the difference, let us say, between a $350,000 luxury boat and a $350,000 light aircraft or private aircraft. Does he distinguish a difference in terms of the value of taxation potential or whatever it might be?
148 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border