SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 122

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 1, 2022 10:00AM
  • Nov/1/22 10:05:29 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to present a petition, like so many others who have stood before the House, asking the government to establish a resolution to stop the Chinese communist regime from systematically murdering Falun Gong practitioners for their organs, to amend Canadian legislation to combat forced organ harvesting and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in China.
67 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 10:16:51 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition raised a very acute and real reality that many Canadians are facing right now. They are facing extreme hardships as a result of global inflation and as a result of what is going on throughout the world right now. I will put to him the question that he has been asked several times in the House by the Prime Minister: Why did the Conservatives choose not to vote in favour of Bill C-31? That is the bill to give important relief to Canadians, in particular Canadians who needed it the most, Canadians he referenced in his speech. Would the member be willing to share with the House now why Conservatives voted against that very important measure?
124 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 10:56:11 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, one thing I find most fascinating about the Conservative motion today is that it about ArriveCAN. The minister responsible for this is here and the Conservatives let their first question go by. They were entitled to the first question and they let it go to the Bloc. They did not even bother asking the minister a question. Meanwhile, the member for Abbotsford was chirping away in the back row over there, heckling him the entire time. I will go back to the opening comments of the minister today. He mentioned specifically the Conservatives' willingness to support programs that supported Canadians during the pandemic, but they did not only do that. The Conservatives actually fought to spend more. Let us look at the Canada emergency wage subsidy. Originally what was introduced by the government versus what ended up being passed by the House was considerably more because the Conservatives wanted to spend more money. Would the minister not agree that it is slightly hypocritical for the Conservatives to suddenly be so critical of the spending for which they voted in favour?
182 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 11:08:10 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I love when we talk about the sponsorship scandal. I was in high school at the time, so forgive me if I do not remember the details of that. On the topic of the last question asked, about trusting the Liberals, I wonder if the member from the Bloc could tell us how Quebeckers feel about trusting Conservatives. They must trust Conservatives more than they trust Liberals. Is that correct?
72 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 11:52:14 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand that the NDP will be voting in favour of this motion. The first clause in the preamble says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”. Could the member comment on what cost of government he thinks is driving up the cost of living?
53 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 1:19:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am looking for a little clarification and perhaps the member could help. The very first clause in the motion says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living.” When I asked the New Democrats about this, they said that this referred to oil subsidies. However, what I heard the Leader of the Opposition and the finance critic say this morning was that more and more government employees were being hired and that was what they were being critical of. I want to ensure that the NDP knows what it is voting for here. With respect to the first clause in the motion, could the member confirm whether we are talking about oil subsidies or are we talking about the hiring more and more federal employees?
133 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 1:36:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to speak to this opposition day motion introduced by the Conservatives. From the outset, I do not have an issue with the fact that the Conservatives are seeking accountability by asking the Auditor General to conduct some work. The premise of my concern is with respect to the preamble and the rhetoric that preludes the call on the Auditor General. That is what I will be focusing my time on. For starters, I am concerned with the tone being suggested about such an important piece of infrastructure, which is this particular program for the security of Canada. We have members, like the member for Louis-Hébert who said moments ago that somebody could have made this for $200,000 in their basement. I believe those were his words. Do we really want somebody working individually from their basement to create an app that holds such sensitive data as passport numbers and health information of not just Canadians but individuals around the world? Is that the standard by which we establish and set the quality of service that people visiting Canada and Canadians have come to rely on? I highly doubt it. There is also the fact that the contract for ArriveCAN was not just about the creation over the weekend of an app. It was about multiple variations of it, changing the app, updating the app and maintaining the data. Let us think of the incredible amount of maintenance that was involved in this particular app on its own. It is quite disingenuous when members get up in the House, namely Conservatives, like the member for Louis-Hébert did moments ago, and very haphazardly say that somebody could have created this app in their basement over the weekend. It is extremely disingenuous. They are heckling now, suggesting that they said they could do it. I am sure that a lot of people could say they could do it, but are these individuals who are qualified to handle such sensitive data? Are these individuals who could properly put the required measures in place to make sure that data is secure and kept secure? That is the question. Are these individuals who have the ability to maintain that piece of a program for months and years to come so that it could properly be updated and protected against various threats? Of course not. It is extremely disingenuous to suggest that. At the end of the day, the members opposite know that. What I find most interesting about this is that now we have the Conservatives saying that we did not need ArriveCAN and it was completely unnecessary. Let me read something from November 26, 2021. Conservatives do not want to hear this. They are already humming and hawing over it. This is from the leader of the Conservative Party at the time. They have since given him the boot and gotten somebody else. He said, “Vaccines are the most effective tool to slowing the spread of known COVID-19 variants”. Do the Conservative members still support that? I would love to hear their input on that. That is a slight digression. It goes on to say, “preventing serious illness, and ensuring that our economies from coast to coast to coast can stay open. As soon as COVID-19 began to spread, Canada’s Conservatives called on the...government to take action to secure the border and prevent the spread of the virus in Canada.” This is the Conservatives. This was their former leader making that statement. How about this from CTV News on April 22, 2021, again quoting the federal Conservatives and their then leader. With the words “Secure the Border” plastered behind him, the former Conservative leader “urged Canada to temporarily suspend all flights from COVID-19 hot spots.” This is a quote: “Canadians are being told not to go to work, not to send their children to school, but hundreds of international flights continue to land in Canada each week,” he said Thursday...“It is long past time for the [Prime Minister] to take action.” This, again, is exactly what the former Conservative leader was saying. Now, they are suddenly saying that, when they said take action, they did not mean develop a way to prevent these people and to monitor these people coming to and going from the country. Do not forget, it was not that much later that the Conservatives suddenly started asking why the borders were not open. The member for New Brunswick Southwest said earlier that he wanted his borders open and asked why his borders were not open? What was their plan? Was it to just open the borders without any kind of safety measure? The Conservatives literally called on the government to bring in these safety measures. The government suspended those flights, brought in the safety measures and then gradually let people back into the country and that was not even good enough for them. Here is another one from CTV on November 26, 2021. The member for Durham, the leader at the time, called on the Canadian government to issue travel advisories banning non-essential travel to and from countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe. The article says, “The party also wants to see mandatory screening at all international airports from affected countries, regardless of vaccination status and mandatory quarantine for all travellers from those countries.” The member for Durham, the leader at the time, was literally calling on the government, in his words, for mandatory screening. How did they want to screen people? What was wrong with the piece of technology that was developed in order to screen them? This is the hypocrisy that we are seeing from the other side. Earlier on, the Conservatives were saying to close the borders and set up tough measures to control people coming in. We brought in this app and then they suddenly changed their tune and asked, “Why are the borders not open and why do we have this silly app that we do not need?” That is the rhetoric that comes from the other side of the House. I feel the most sorry for the New Democrats in this opposition day motion. They have been completely duped by the Conservatives. The first whereas clause in this motion says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”. This is important because we heard in the opening comments by the Leader of the Opposition and the critic for finance that they were relating that specific clause to the increase in employees who work for the Government of Canada. That is what they said. I asked the member for Courtenay—Alberni why he would support something like that. He said that they are talking about oil subsidies. I then asked the member for Calgary Midnapore whether she can confirm what that was exactly. She said it had to do with the rise in the number of employees who are working for the Government of Canada. By supporting this motion, the NDP members are effectively agreeing with the Conservatives that the cost of government is driving up the cost of living and, by their own words, the Conservatives are referring to the number of employees who have been hired by the Government of Canada. That is not something that I would see the NDP in this House supporting. The member for Edmonton Griesbach keeps standing up and talking about protecting public service jobs. He keeps getting up and asking that question. The very first whereas clause in this motion goes directly against that. They are critiquing and challenging those jobs, but the New Democrats have no problem voting in favour of it, even though it has that whereas clause in it.
1320 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 1:45:26 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, do not worry about being in disbelief. Welcome to my world for the last seven years. The member asks about the app and the way the app was being applied. The Conservatives were calling on the government to do something about this. I read direct quotes by the member for Durham when he was the leader of the opposition, and there are quotes from the member for Carleton. They were demanding that the federal government close the borders until we could set up a secure way to let people in. That is exactly what we did. We set up a secure way and, yes, doing secure operations in a G7 country costs money. However, they will dumb it down by saying not to worry about it and that they could have done it in their basement for 200 grand. It is up to you, Madam Speaker, who you want to take seriously on that.
156 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 1:47:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry that I disappointed the Bloc by not bringing up health care transfers because that is the only thing its members ever really want to talk about in here. I will say that my concern for the NDP was laid out very clearly. I am concerned that the NDP would vote in favour of a motion that has a whereas clause basically saying that we have too many public servants working for the government. That is my concern. I did not say they had to haphazardly follow the government like a lapdog, as the member suggested. I laid out exactly what my concern was. The member is trying to suggest I am doing something other than that, and that is simply not the case.
128 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 1:48:48 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am being lectured on not protecting public service jobs while the member is about to vote in favour of a motion that criticizes the government for having too many public sector employees. Maybe he should go back to read the motion again.
45 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 3:29:40 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I heard the member talk about the requirements for being vaccinated, and I was thinking back to when I was speaking earlier and was quoting the former leader of the opposition, the member for Durham, when, back in November 2021, he said that the best way to protect our economy, the best way to protect our country, was to get vaccinated and he was calling on everybody to get vaccinated. I am wondering if the member agrees with that. Was the best way to protect our economy and our country to encourage people to get vaccinated?
98 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 4:12:42 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I sincerely apologize to the member if she thought I was heckling her, but I was actually talking to my colleague. Obviously I was talking too loudly, and I will try to keep it down, but I certainly was not directing anything at her.
51 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/1/22 4:15:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have been trying to clarify something with respect to this motion, because I have been getting different and conflicting answers from Conservatives and the NDP today. The very first clause in this motion, the first “whereas” clause, says “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”. What we heard the Leader of the Opposition say today is that he was referring to the fact there are more public servants now, more public sector jobs, than there were before the pandemic. He was essentially criticizing those public sector jobs. The NDP seems to claim it has to do with subsidizing oil, which is what the member for Courtenay—Alberni said. I am wondering if this member can clarify for me item (i) of this motion, where it says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”. Is that indeed talking about the fact that there are more public sector jobs now than there were prior to the pandemic?
173 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border