SoVote

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

May/17/22 12:17:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his support of this motion. I must say that in my 14 years of Parliament, I have never seen the Bloc side with the Conservatives more than I have this Parliament, so it is a pleasure to see it supporting a progressive cause. I cannot understand how anybody in the House concerned with facts could possibly oppose the motion. It says, “Canadians are paying almost $2 per litre of gas at the pump”, and it is more than that in B.C., actually. It also says, “oil and gas companies are making record profits”, which they are, and “Canada spends 14 times more on...support to the fossil fuel sector than it does for renewable energy”. Those are all facts, and the motion calls on the government to switch money away from subsidizing oil and gas, whatever the figure is. I understand there may be some differences about what the figure is, but there is no question that the federal government is subsidizing oil and gas, whether it is purchasing the TMX pipeline or otherwise. It also talks about reinvesting that money into renewable energy. My question for my hon. colleague is this. How can any policy-maker in 2022 deny the urgency of dealing with the climate crisis and oppose measures to transition as swiftly as possible to sustainable forms of energy and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels?

247 words

Context: House Hansard - 73 - May/17/22

Hon. Marco Mendicino (Minister of Public Safety, Lib.)

May/17/22 2:30:58 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that there are many tragedies caused by firearms. That is precisely why we want to take real action and why we are doing more. Last year, the CACP seized a record number of firearms, and this is partly due to the federal government's investments at the border. All that the Conservatives did was oppose these investments. It makes no sense.

68 words

Context: House Hansard - 73 - May/17/22

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc

May/17/22 6:44:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-14

Madam Speaker, I want to thank our colleague for New Westminster—Burnaby for his comments and his question. As colleagues know, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby is a senior member of the House. He has served the Province of British Columbia and the citizens of New Westminster—Burnaby well for a long time. I had the privilege to work with him when I was an opposition House leader, and when we sat on the Board of Internal Economy and other bodies of the House. We have worked well together. I think that our colleague for New Westminster—Burnaby identifies a fundamental challenge. When members of the Conservative Party say that they oppose, for example, this necessary measure to bring this legislation to a vote, of course they will oppose it, but at the same time they are not interested in participating constructively in debating the legislation. Our colleague for New Westminster—Burnaby identified what I think was a shambolic and appalling performance last night when, with 30-minute bells and vote after vote, the House of Commons was pronouncing on which Conservative member would make a speech. It was all designed to ensure that legislation, which the Conservatives will ultimately support, does not actually come to a vote. If we are looking for a reason to point to dysfunction in the House of Commons, we can think about this: The official opposition supports a particular piece of legislation, but is desperately trying to make sure that it actually does not come to a vote so that it might be adopted. The legislation would preserve, for example, the seat allocation in the province of Quebec and other provinces. However, at the same time, the Conservatives insist on having vote after vote to decide which Conservative will make a speech, which is designed to delay the legislation coming to a vote. It is unfortunate that it has come to this. I think that the government House leader has taken his responsibility seriously, and we hope that parliamentarians in the Senate and in the House of Commons can discuss this legislation, consider it in committee, and debate it at report stage and third reading. We think it is important as well to allow the electoral boundaries commissions, which have been set up under law and are operating right now, to have clarity in terms of what will be the number of seats for provinces, which is why it is somewhat urgent that Parliament have a chance to pronounce itself on this legislation.

425 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 73 - May/17/22

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

May/17/22 6:51:38 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-14

Madam Speaker, what is disappointing this evening is the sad spectacle put on by the Liberals and the Conservatives. The Bloc Québécois will always oppose muzzling opposition parties and taking away their powers. Yesterday, the delay tactics had consequences not just for the House, but for committees as well. A committee on medical assistance in dying was scheduled to discuss two fundamental matters yesterday: the protection of people with disabilities and the issue of mental illness as the sole underlying condition for medical assistance in dying. Witnesses were waiting. We upended all that and had to make people wait, when this committee does not meet very often as it is. At present, a minister is telling us that what the Conservatives did was appalling. The Liberals themselves, when they were in opposition, used the same tactic and will continue to use it. Neither party is all that credible. At some point, common sense must prevail, and we must act according to our cherished principles of the exercise of parliamentary democracy. What we are hearing from the minister and from the official opposition will do nothing to convince the people watching that this place is not a circus. Then, they act surprised that people are cynical about the work that we do here in the House. The Bloc Québécois feels that Bill C‑14 offers barely half of what we were asking for. That is another story, but we need to stop acting like this is the place for theatrics. I would like to see more dignified behaviour here. Instead of telling the Conservatives that what they are saying is appalling, it would be better to tell them that it is more important we keep working. There is no problem with working until midnight. However, members' ability to do so should not be taken away. We must denounce what the Conservatives did because, if we have a repeat of yesterday's nonsense, the people watching us will wonder what the heck is going on. However, this pretext is being used here to muzzle us. I would like to call for more respect for parliamentary democracy. Otherwise, democracy will rise from the streets.

371 words

All Topics