44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 10, 2022 10:00AM
- Jun/10/22 11:19:52 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today's headline says it all: “Massive majority of Liberal caucus wants the Prime Minister to drop federal COVID mandates.”
The report says that the Liberal member for Yukon, a doctor and former medical officer of health, has given multiple presentations at Liberal caucus meetings on why the mandates need to be dropped. The member is a real doctor, not a spin doctor, but has the Prime Minister listened to him? No.
Finally, the incoherence of a policy that is punishing and limiting the rights of Canadians is being realized by Liberal MPs.
The Prime Minister will not listen to Canadians, but will he listen to his caucus?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:21:00 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming clearer by the day that these mandates and restrictions have nothing to do with science or evidence-based decision-making. They are all about control.
They are about the Prime Minister controlling Canadians travelling to see their families, controlling businesses recovering from COVID and controlling Liberal MPs by forcing them to be bit actors in his COVID theatre. People can watch them, when the cameras come on them, and how quickly they put on their masks. There is no coherent reason for these mandates to continue, other than control.
Will the Prime Minister admit that he has lost the plot and that this is all about controlling Canadians?
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:25:08 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, since the Liberals like importing American policies so much, in the 1990s the United States experimented with a tax on boats very similar to the one in this year's Liberal budget, but Congress ended up removing it just two years later because it was killing jobs and destroying the industry. It was so bad that the government ended up losing more money from the industry collapse than it generated from revenue. It was a net loss for the Treasury.
Will the Liberals admit that there is absolutely no point in having this tax that will cost jobs and kill a sector of our economy that Canadian families enjoy, or is that their plan?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved:
That it be an instruction to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage that, during its consideration of Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, the committee be granted the power to travel throughout Canada to hear testimony from interested parties and that the necessary staff do accompany the committee, provided that the travel does not exceed 10 sitting days.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke for seconding what I believe to be a very important motion.
As members are aware, Motion No. 16 was presented today. It is basically a draconian way of dealing with issues and matters of the House by the government. It is a way of stifling debate. It is a way of silencing the voices of millions of Canadians who sent their elected representatives here to Ottawa.
Bill C-11 has been universally panned, for lack of a better word, by content creators and others who are concerned about censorship on the Internet and concerned about content creation. We heard this morning the member for Perth—Wellington give a very good description of some of the concerns with this bill.
Effectively, what Motion No. 16 has done is basically taken the work out of the hands of the committee on this extremely important bill. The government is ramming it through, with the help of its NDP partners, in order to get it passed through Parliament without addressing many of the concerns that are being brought up by those who, as I said earlier, are expressing significant concerns about issues related to censorship.
I have been hearing from my constituents on this. Over the last two or three days, Canadians have become increasingly engaged on this issue. They are finding out what is going on.
Similar to a previous iteration of this bill, Bill C-10, Canadians are concerned. In fact, I would suggest they are more concerned about what is going with Bill C-11 and the impact it is going to have on their ability to see what is on the Internet and produce what is on the Internet. There are concerns, as we heard, as to the power the bill gives the government and the censorship role it gives to the government. It contributes, in my opinion, even more to what we see as a decline in democracy here in Canada, whereby millions of voices, including the Speaker's voice, is silenced as a result of draconian measures.
What this motion would do is allow the committee to travel across the country to hear from those who it has not heard from before. This motion is important because the Conservative opposition has said we are not going to agree to committee travel. The motion highlights the importance of hearing from those in Canada who are extremely concerned about this bill and the censorship it can create. It would allow the committee to do its work, function properly and hear the voices that are being silenced in this place. “Parliament” comes from parler, or “to speak”, yet we are being silenced on this bill.
There is another interesting part to this. I have been watching closely the deliberations at the heritage committee and have been speaking to our shadow minister of heritage about the level of dysfunction that has been created as a result of the chair of the committee not coming to Ottawa and being on Zoom. It speaks to the overall dysfunction of this place. Hybrid Parliament is having such a tremendous impact on the ability of the committees to do their work, and there are health implications for the people who work here, namely the interpreters.
In my opinion, it is time for hybrid Parliament to end. We need to get back to normal. That forms the basis of every argument we have been making in this place.
I am moving this motion in the hopes that we can allow the committee to have its deliberations and speak to Canadians who are concerned about government censorship and the impact this bill will have. We need the support of Parliament to allow the committee to do its job.
715 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, of course I can. There are committees of this Parliament that want to travel all around the world. They have moved motions to travel to places such as Brussels and other parts of the world that do not have the same restrictions as those the Liberal government is imposing on its own citizens. The hypocrisy is palpable.
We are still allowed to travel domestically in Canada, and we think the committee can do it safely. The Liberal Party is imposing restrictions on Canadians for travel abroad, especially on those who are unvaccinated, and is putting parliamentarians at risk in other countries. We do not believe there is a risk, especially to travel here in Canada.
As I mentioned at the onset, this is work that needs to be done. The voices being silenced are from those who are critical of this bill. We need the committee to travel to listen to those voices.
Maybe the Liberals should end the mandates. Then maybe we could get on with normal life here in Canada, stop restricting Canadians from seeing their families and stop businesses from being affected by the resurgence of issues. Businesses want to succeed, not for the Liberals to get in the way.
205 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, maybe the member is hoping for a cabinet seat so he can have the Liberal talking points, which he has clearly used since the supply and coalition agreement was enacted. The member has sold his soul to the Liberals, so I do not take anything he has to say, frankly, with any sense of credibility at all because—
61 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 12:23:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the truth hurts.
5 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we have been seeing that all along, and it is a great point the hon. member brings up. We have seen the dysfunction of virtual Parliament. I mentioned that as I was speaking about the motion. We have seen the impacts that it has had on the translation bureau, for example. If the chair will not come to Ottawa, then, yes, maybe we need to take the committee out to Vancouver or other places to eliminate and stop the dysfunction.
I think this speaks to the broader picture. The broader picture here is that the Liberals are misusing hybrid Parliament. We saw it today in question period. How many parliamentary secretaries, who should be here in the seat of power, in the seat of Parliament, are—
129 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 12:26:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I believe I stand in a live television studio, and those who were watching us today know who was here and who was not. Certainly, I am not going to point out who was here and who was not, but people who were here can certainly see that for themselves.
52 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I respectfully suggest that it would be enough to hear from both sides of the argument, those who are in favour of the bill and those who are opposed. Perhaps, as a result of those interactions, we could allow consequential amendments that would fix the bill. We have heard that there are some serious problems with this bill, not the least of which is proposed section 4.2.
There are four substantive things we are concerned about. I am also concerned about the amendments we are hearing about from those who are looking at this bill and saying it needs to be fixed. It is not just those who understand these sorts of things, these censorship issues, but content creators too, so we need some substantive time to consider not just the bill itself, but amendments to the bill as well.
By the way, Mr. Speaker, you are doing a great job up there.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we are seeing a strong level of dysfunction going on among all committees because of the hybrid and virtual aspect of this Parliament and the decision to continue it. We are seeing that committees are being cancelled. We are seeing situations like the one the hon. member talked about. This has to stop. It is having a sincere and profound impact on our democracy, and it is contributing to a decline in it.
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
