SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 66

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 6, 2022 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 66 - May/6/22
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:32:18 p.m.
  • Watch
There are 13 here, and we have a number of members online. Online does count on this list. We do have quorum. The hon. member for Winnipeg North.
28 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:32:29 p.m.
  • Watch
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.
15 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Peter Julian
  • May/6/22 12:32:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I did not want to interrupt my friend from Winnipeg North, but you should be aware that there are literally dozens of members of Parliament participating online. I do not understand the repeated calls for quorum when members of the Conservative Party should be aware that dozens of members are participating actively through Zoom in this hybrid Parliament.
60 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:33:02 p.m.
  • Watch
That is what I referred to. The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.
19 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Michael Barrett
  • May/6/22 12:33:06 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, it is not a lack of understanding. Members in the chamber are able to see the other members who are physically in the chamber. Not to discount the number of members who are online, but that number is in fact seven, not “dozens” as my hon. colleague said. There is no way for members in the House to verify that. That is why I respectfully requested that the Chair verify quorum.
75 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
  • May/6/22 12:33:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, at the end of— An hon. member: Point of order.
19 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:33:41 p.m.
  • Watch
We are already on a point of order with the hon. member for Winnipeg North. I will go back to whoever was yelling that.
24 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
  • May/6/22 12:33:49 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for members, before they stand up to try to be funny and call quorum, to ask a member in their caucus. For example, there are 33 members online right now. Members should be courteous, as opposed to interrupting a speech knowing full well there is quorum. The Conservative and Bloc members who have now done this should be a little more courteous to me, who happen to be speaking, and to members who might be having a meal.
85 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:34:29 p.m.
  • Watch
Order. We had another point of order or a continuation of the same point of order. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
24 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Peter Julian
  • May/6/22 12:34:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to make the same point. The member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes just misinformed the House. There are three dozen members participating online, including myself. I do not understand why he would try to lead the House in error—
50 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:34:53 p.m.
  • Watch
I am going to stop things right now. We are doing a count. We will find out exactly how many people we have participating. When we go back, the member for Winnipeg North will have two minutes and 10 seconds left in his time. Let us take a couple of seconds to get the count done correctly. And the count having been taken:
63 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:35:25 p.m.
  • Watch
There are 25 members here in the chamber at this moment. There are nine with their cameras on. Members can be online, but if they do not have their cameras on, they are not counted in the quorum. The camera needs to be on. The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.
57 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Michael Barrett
  • May/6/22 12:35:43 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, the member who just spoke, the hon. gentleman from New Westminster—Burnaby, did say that I misinformed the House, and I would respectfully ask, in light of the verification offered by the table officers and by the Chair, that an apology be offered for having alleged that I misled the House.
54 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:36:08 p.m.
  • Watch
Would the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby like to make a comment? I will afford him a minute.
20 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Peter Julian
  • May/6/22 12:36:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, the numbers stand. There are three dozen people online. I understand your interpretation of having the cameras on or off, but I can see a number of Conservative members who have turned their cameras off. I just wish we would stop the game playing and get on with the debate.
52 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/6/22 12:36:35 p.m.
  • Watch
I am done with that for now, so let us put that one to bed. Having the cameras on is the rule there. The hon. member for Winnipeg North has two minutes and 10 seconds left.
36 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
  • May/6/22 12:36:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, having gone through that, I should be given a bonus five minutes, I would suggest. At the end of the day, the Conservatives like to play their games, and we saw that just now. They do whatever they can to play a game, cause distractions and lose the focus on what I believe and the government believes is important to Canadians, such as the budget and the budget implementation bill. We do not get very many bills that are more important than the budget implementation bill, something that invests billions and billions of dollars into supporting Canadians in all sorts of different ways. That is what we were supposed to be debating today. On a Friday afternoon, the Conservative Party, Canada's official opposition party, wants to play games. As much as the Conservatives want to focus on their games and their character assassinations, I can say that all members of the Liberal caucus will continue to have their focus on Canadians and the people of Canada first. That is the reason why we are very excited about Bill C-19, no matter what sorts of games might be played by the Conservative opposition. We understand how this budget is going to have a profoundly positive impact on building a stronger, healthier Canada. We will continue to support the middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it, and push aside the games. That is the assurance that I would give members. I do not support this motion. Bill C-5 should stay as one bill, as was the intent.
264 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. John Brassard (House leader of the official opposition, CPC)
  • May/6/22 12:39:08 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Prime Minister would be proud of this member for his intervention today. The Prime Minister refers to spreading disinformation quite a bit. Let us go back to what actually happened here. The member for St. Albert—Edmonton, who is a member of the justice committee, proposed the motion during Routine Proceedings to split Bill C-5 at committee to allow the committee to effectively do its work. I then stood up and said that we want to put the question, which means we want to put it to a vote. That vote would have happened on Monday. There would have been no need for debate. There would have been no need for the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader to stand up and do this filibuster, and I suspect there are going to be others as well. They could have easily gone to Bill C-19 to debate it. I am guessing that maybe either the whip of the Liberal Party or the House leader has called the House leader of the NDP to prepare him to speak to this just to filibuster this. Let us be very clear about what happened. We put the question. We could have voted on this on Monday and we could have gone to Bill C-19. This is not a question, but more of a comment. I am curious as to why the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has decided to filibuster his own piece of legislation to delay time so that we cannot get to Bill C-19. It just does not make any sense.
273 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
  • May/6/22 12:40:51 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I am sure members recall Bill C-8, the fall economic statement. We just passed that piece of legislation, even though it was introduced in 2021. The reason why we just passed it is the Conservative games. The Conservatives did not want to pass the legislation. That legislation was there to support small businesses and to support people directly in response to the pandemic, in a very real and tangible way. That is what Bill C-8 was all about. What we are seeing now is that the Conservatives want to continue to play that game, but on the budget implementation bill. This whole week, the Conservative Party has been attempting to stop debate on legislation. This is not the first time during motions that the Conservatives have stood up to try to prevent a debate from occurring. We can just look at what has happened this week. There are many examples of it. As the member tries to suggest that he is being generous, he might fool some within his Conservative caucus or some members, but he is not going to fool me or, I suspect, other government members.
192 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)
  • May/6/22 12:42:25 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Madam Speaker, to follow on the question from the member for Barrie—Innisfil, I wonder if we should not have just quickly put the question. I hear the parliamentary secretary speaking not to the motion, but to Bill C‑19, so he is preventing us from debating Bill C‑19. Does that not show that we should have simply gone directly to putting the question on the motion before the House?
74 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border