44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/13/23 11:58:21 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my first speech in this House involved a compliment to the hon. member for the great work that she has done in the Downtown Eastside in representing a constituency that has a lot of challenges. I do not disagree with anything that she said, but I wanted to introduce two aspects and get a reaction to them.
One is the zoning and the difficulties that people have getting cities to actually approve developments. Second is the reticence of municipal governments to increase property taxes on existing residents, which leads to the pilling on of development cost charges on new buildings that only serve to jack up the price for people who are buying those units.
Can she comment on both of those?
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 12:01:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her speech.
Fundamentally, we agree. The housing crisis has reached catastrophic levels. We need to build 1.1 million housing units over the next 10 years. That is how many units it was determined we need. However, in the last five years, the federal government managed to build only 200,000. We agree that this is a disaster.
I agree with my colleague, and I want to commend her. Her speech dovetailed with those of my colleagues. She spoke about how renoviction is bad and how certain landlords prioritize profit over tenants' well-being. She is totally right.
Why then is she supporting a government in exchange for its support on another matter, dental care? Is dental care really worth abandoning the housing crisis for?
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 1:55:09 p.m.
- Watch
I must interrupt the hon. member for a few seconds.
I would ask colleagues to please remain somewhat silent so that we can hear the speech by the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.
The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.
41 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:47:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I certainly heard the member start off his speech by saying that he would be voting in favour of—
22 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:48:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will check the seats around me. I hope that is better.
I note that the member started his speech by saying that he would be supporting the bill, but then he spent about eight of the 10 minutes talking about everything that was bad about it. The member then came back at the end and said that there are a couple of good things about it, so therefore he would be supporting it.
Does this means that the couple of good things outweigh all the bad things, and that is why the member would be voting for it?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:48:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a great question from the parliamentary secretary. He has clearly identified that, as an opposition member, I have done my job. I have identified that the legislation itself is good and that we are going to support it, and then I used the eight minutes between the front and the end of my speech to articulate some weakness in the bill that I think needs to be addressed. I thank the hon. parliamentary secretary for giving me the opportunity to clarify.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:54:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Could you remind individuals, when they are giving a speech, to not to have their phones on their desktops close to the microphone when they are speaking? I can hear vibrating in my earpiece when somebody else is speaking. I did not want to raise it when the member was speaking and interrupt the flow of his speech.
67 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 4:54:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on that point of order, I think I was the culprit. I do apologize as I did receive a few texts during my speech.
26 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:34:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering whether we are listening to another a speech or if there a question that is going to be asked.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 9:13:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech; it could have passed for a Bloc speech.
I feel like the Liberal government put one over on us during COVID‑19. We got hoodwinked because it asked for our co-operation and then forced its hybrid Parliament model on us. It is overreaching, and that disturbs me a lot. This government does whatever it wants.
This motion is super important. It should have required more than a 50% plus one vote—maybe even unanimity. This is a big deal because it is an attack on the rules of Parliament. It changes fundamental things. It changes MPs' contract with the people. This is a major issue for me, and it cannot go through like this.
The fluidity of member-to-member contact here in the House, when we see each other face to face, is a big deal. It is important for resolving conflicts and problems with our constituents and government departments.
I would just like to hear my colleague's thoughts on what I just said.
178 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:24:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague from Alberta on being able to bring the issue of guns into the issue of a hybrid Parliament. Well done on his speech.
I listened to his speech and he talked about what is being lost with a hybrid Parliament. I recognize that he feels that this is the case, but I want him to consider those things that are being gained and I want him to perhaps consider the fact that the world does move on. We do not have Blockbusters any more. There was hockey without helmets before. There was a Parliament that did not have women's washrooms before.
I wonder if he could talk about the fact that sometimes things change, that sometimes they change for the better and that we need to be able to look at how to build change going forward that will make it easier for people to participate in our democracy and make it easier for people to participate in our—
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:40:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I enjoyed the speech by my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable. I would like to ask him a question.
I think that his speech, as valid as it was, did not identify the problem properly. Let us think back on the history of innovation in the House of Commons, like when microphones were brought in in 1957, or television cameras in 1977, and then simultaneous interpretation.
Why does my colleague not see hybrid Parliament as another step towards innovation to reform our democratic institutions?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to apologize to the member. We were chuckling while he was speaking, but it was not for anything he was saying. It was just for the rich and incredible irony that we were hearing oohs out of that side of the House of Commons, because it was only a short three sitting days ago that the member spoke in the House on Bill C-41 by giving a virtual speech through Zoom. I am assuming he had good reason not to be in the chamber to do that and there was a really good reason he needed to do it by Zoom, and that is what put him in the position to not be able to be here physically.
The reality is that, from time to time, all members of this House need the ability to do that. Would the member like to address our concern over his hypocrisy for his speech about needing to be in the House as a member of Parliament when he delivered a full speech on Bill C-41 on Friday on Zoom?
183 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 11:40:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not think the member knows what the word “hypocrisy” means. I have been clear that I think the rules, as they presently exist, weaken this institution. As such, I do not think those rules should be in place.
I also believe, though, that it is legitimate for the members to use the tools as they exist. I do not think it is hypocritical at all to observe that these rules should not be in place, but insofar as they are in place, members can use them. The fact of the matter is that a speech is qualitatively different when it is delivered on the floor of the House of Commons. That is why I think all members should endeavour to be here as much as they can and that the rules should maximize the presence of members in the House.
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
