44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 21, 2022 10:00AM
- Oct/21/22 10:27:28 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I am not sure if he is looking for his headset, but I know that he speaks excellent French.
He spoke about section 102 and what the review panel can do if it dismisses a complaint against a judge. The panel can take several actions, which include ordering the judge to attend counselling or to apologize publicly. To come back to the member's proverb about sheep and wolves, it seems to me that, in this case, unfortunately, no one is thinking very much about the sheep. When a complaint is filed, it is because someone has been the victim of something.
When the panel dismisses the complaint but actions such as therapy, counselling or a public apology are imposed on the judge, should the victim who filed the complaint be more included in the process? Should the inclusion of the victim in the complaint process be one of the things discussed by the committee following second reading of the bill?
171 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/21/22 10:58:48 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
Aside from the very specific subject matter of Bill C-9, he talked about a few things that can sometimes contribute to a loss of public trust in our institutions, particularly legal and judicial institutions.
Given that Bill C-9 deals with what happens further downstream, that is, after judges are appointed, I wonder if my colleague could comment on what happens upstream, in other words, how judges are appointed.
Would this not have been a good opportunity to review the judicial appointment system, so we will never again have to talk about the notorious “Liberalist”?
107 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/21/22 11:25:51 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Radio-Canada is reporting that the federal government is hunting down journalistic sources in order to punish a whistle-blower. It wants to know who disclosed that the federal government was appointing a unilingual English speaker as CEO of the Canadian Museum of History. What the government should have done was take a hard look in the mirror and ask why it continues to make unilingual English appointments. No, instead it searched the emails and phone records of 82 employees to find out who had spoken out.
Why is it that the government's problem is not the appointment of a unilingual person, but the fact that everyone knows about it?
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/21/22 1:22:34 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Timmins—James Bay for his speech.
I would like to hear what he has to say about the fact that, in the bill before us, the voices of victims are not really heard when the review panel decides to dismiss a complaint. The review panel may propose actions, such as therapy or an apology letter, and can impose certain sanctions on the judge. However, we never hear about the participation of victims. Could they be consulted more? I would like to know whether that is an improvement that could be considered when the bill is studied at second reading stage.
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the Fédération professionnelle des journalistes du Québec spoke out against the government's source hunting. It fears that Ottawa is discouraging whistle-blowers when it should in fact be protecting them. It is concerned, and rightly so, because Canada has the weakest whistle-blower legislation in the world. According to the International Bar Association, Canada ranks 50th out of 50.
That is why the Bloc Québécois has introduced Bill C‑290 to better protect public servants who blow the whistle.
Will the government support our bill instead of basically going on a witch hunt trying to track down sources within its own ranks?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
