44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 15, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/15/23 2:24:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the crimes in question were atrocious. Crimes like that defy description.
They affected people across the country. They traumatized not only the victims' family members, without question, but all Canadians.
First of all, the correctional system is independent. Keeping our correctional system free from political interference is imperative.
50 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:25:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, first of all, the idea that anybody in this House would have any sympathy for the monstrous acts that were committed is absolutely repugnant.
The second thing I will say is that it is unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition mis-characterizes what happened. He knows very well that the Correctional Service of Canada makes those decisions independently. He knows very well that we have a system where we are not supposed to interfere politically with that.
It is true, in March, that staff were informed of the possibility. It was not until that possibility was confirmed that they informed the Prime Minister at the end of May.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:26:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite cares as deeply about the gravity as those crimes and the impact on the families as I do. I know he cares as deeply about what we are going to do for Canadians on that. I also know that he knows the independence of our correctional services system. I know that he also knows that we are not supposed to interfere politically.
I would ask him to work collaboratively with us to find a way where we do not politicize Correctional Service of Canada, and we work together to make sure that the families who are impacted by crimes of this nature are taken care of.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:28:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would say that I am looking directly at the leader of the official opposition for a reason. I am looking at him for a reason because when we are dealing with something as serious and as brutal as the crimes that occurred in a community that was right next to mine, that I felt viscerally, the conversation that we have has to be measured. It has to be based on co-operation and, frankly, it needs to be based on the underlying premise that every member cares equally and deeply about this, about two things, about the victims absolutely but also about not politicizing our correctional services system.
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:29:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are, in all instances, ready to have a conversation about how we do not politicize our correctional services, about how we ensure that we take care of victims and their families. There is a review of the decision that was made by the Correctional Service. It is going to be completed in two weeks. I would suggest that we take a look at that.
I would also suggest that, when we are dealing with something as major as changing our correctional services system, it deserves discussion and it deserves the ability for it to be examined by all parliamentarians and to make sure that we do not create unintended consequences.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:33:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely true that the crime in question probably comes close to being Canada's most serious crime. It is such a serious crime. I can also say with certainty that our correctional system is independent. As I explained earlier, staff were informed of the possibility that the individual in question might be transferred. Once all the details were confirmed, the Prime Minister was informed. It was—
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:34:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, in March, staff were informed of the possibility of a transfer. There were still many details that were not certain. It was not until the end of May, once the details were confirmed, that the Prime Minister was briefed.
I would say for the member opposite, who knows that Correctional Services is independent and that decisions must not be made with political interference, is that we have to have a conversation, as a House, about how we do not interfere with Correctional Services but also ensure that a transfer of this nature does not occur. That needs to be a mature conversation that does not involve a lot of politics.
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:35:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not know the member for Peterborough—Kawartha well, but I do know that she is very sincere when she cares about these cases, and she would know that the Prime Minister would be deeply impacted as a father and as a Canadian by the horror of these crimes. Any assertion to the opposite is just frankly not constructive to the debate that we need to have.
I said that Correctional Services operates independently and that it cannot be interfered with politically. I would also say that we have to be very careful, when dealing with the victims of crime, that we do not politicize that or attempt to use it in a way other than to ask how we stop—
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:37:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the duty that each of us share as hon. members in this chamber is, on behalf of the people whom we are fortunate enough to represent, to attempt to the best of our ability to keep them safe; to make sure that when they are harmed we do everything in our power to restore them; and to make sure, yes, that we have a corrections system that is free from interference. Why do we say that? Because we have one of the best correctional services systems in the world.
If we are talking about the rightful outrage that we all have in this circumstance, we have to temper it in a mature conversation on how to balance those two priorities.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:42:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious situation. Everyone was concerned about this tragedy.
However, it is important to remember that our correctional system is independent. It is essential that the decision to transfer someone be made by the correctional service.
Now, there are a lot of emotions, and I understand that. I feel the same way, but we have to talk—
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:45:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in the current context, as I have already explained, the staff was informed that this was a possibility, without any concrete details. As I have also already explained, the choice to transfer an incarcerated person is an independent choice. When the details were finalized at the end of May, at that time, staff informed the Prime Minister of the situation.
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:48:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, as every Canadian knows, the crimes that are in question are among the most grievous this country has ever faced. There is not a person in the House who is not impacted by them. I trust that the member cares deeply about it, as do I.
However, the assertion that this is a decision of the government is false and, in fact, it is dangerous. The decision to transfer inmates is a decision of Correctional Service Canada. The independence of our Correctional Services has been a foundation of our country for a very long time.
Having a mature conversation about how we respect that and respect victims is what I think Canadians expect.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:49:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member across has made clear, not just now but for a long time, her desire for her party to be successful and for it to get on this side. They have to do that through an election.
I will say, on this issue, that the decision made was independent. If we want to have a conversation about Correctional Services's decision, that is exactly what we are doing. There is a review taking place, which concludes in two weeks. We have asked it to review this decision, and I think understanding that these decisions are done independently is important. It has been an important foundation of corrections in this country.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:51:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think we should choose what we talk about. If we want to talk about the circumstances that are involved in these horrific crimes and how we can responsibly deal with a corrections system that is one of the best and most envied in the world—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
54 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 2:51:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, when we talk about these issues, I would suggest that they require enormous sensitivity. I am concerned that the Conservatives are peppering every question with partisan commentary and trying to extract political advantage from this situation.
I have attempted, as I have talked about this, to talk about our responsibility. We have one of the greatest correctional services systems in the world. It is admired all over the world, and one of its principle tenets is to not interfere with it politically.
We all rightly feel outrage about this transfer. We have great emotion about the crimes that occurred, but we need to deal with that emotion responsibly and make—
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to respond on behalf of the government.
This afternoon we will continue debate on Government Business No. 26, concerning amendments to the Standing Orders. When debate concludes later this evening, we will consider Bill C-35, respecting early learning and child care, followed by Senate amendments to Bill C-9, concerning the Judges Act.
Tomorrow we will consider Bill C-42, respecting the Canada Business Corporations Act, at report stage and third reading, and Bill S-8, respecting sanctions.
The priorities for next week shall include Bill S-8, on sanctions; Senate amendments to Bill C-18, respecting online news; Bill C-40, concerning the miscarriage of justice review commission act, also known as David and Joyce Milgaard's Law; and Bill C-33, which strengthens the port system and railway safety.
Thursday shall be an allotted day.
Finally, I request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the next sitting be 12 midnight, pursuant to order made Tuesday, November 15, 2022.
169 words
All Topics
- C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada
- C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act
- C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews)
- C-42, An Act to amend the Canada Business Corporations Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts
- C-33, An Act to amend the Customs Act, the Railway Safety Act, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, the Marine Transportation Security Act, the Canada Transportation Act and the Canada Mar
- Adjournment
- Tuesday
- Evening
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:12:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in relation to the consideration of Government Business No. 26, I move:
That debate be not further adjourned.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:15:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the member recognizes well why we have to use time allocation. He can see that the Conservative Party has done everything from faking technical problems to raising point of order after point of order to try to disrupt the House from doing its business. In fact, last Friday, an entire day of Parliament was lost as a result of procedural tricks by the Conservatives, and the leader of the official opposition himself has said that they will do everything to block the ability of the House to do its job. Of course, one party that represents one-third of the seats does not have the opportunity or right to stand in the way of every other party from doing its business. That is most certainly not democratic.
The other thing I would point out is that it is the Conservatives' right to make the same point again and again, which is that they are against the utilization of hybrid Parliament, which they have said they would never support under any conditions. They can keep making that same speech again and again, but it is not a restriction of democracy to hear that speech 10, 20, 30 or 40 times. At some point, when they say the same thing, the message is heard. They are against it.
I am sorry, but the House is moving forward with this because it is the right thing to do.
239 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:18:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, context is really important. At the start of the pandemic, when we were in a very difficult situation and it was impossible to work in person, we had to use technology to be able to continue our work in Parliament. At that time, we unanimously passed a motion to operate in a hybrid format.
When health conditions improved, we were able to return to the House to continue our work in person. Over the past three years, we have seen just how effective the system has been. Ministers have continued to be in the House when members on the other side stand up during question period, and this will continue to be the case. The concept of accountability is included in the change proposed today.
However, this motion provides some flexibility. Every party, whether it is the Conservative Party or the Bloc Québécois, uses the hybrid format. Every day, the members use technology to vote. Just a few moments ago, we saw the Bloc using this technology. I find it strange that the Bloc is against this proposal when it makes use of all the options available in the hybrid format, such as electronic voting.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:20:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as the member knows, this matter was put before the procedure and House affairs committee. That committee did take an enormous amount of time to study the issue, and the member's party was part of those agreeing with the recommendations that were before this House. After that came forward, we worked with all parties, asking their opinions about the work PROC did. Of course, it takes a bit of time to hear from all parties, and now, after that consultation, we have a continuance of what we have done for the last three years.
If we were to take longer than this session and had not adequately used that time in PROC and then the time immediately after PROC to have those discussions, the consequence would be that we would have missed this window and we would have had to reintroduce these provisions in the fall and have the same debate that we have had again and again.
I want to thank the member opposite for their work at PROC and I want to thank the member for the work that they did after PROC to find a position that works. We have listened very carefully to how members are utilizing these provisions, and of course we are often hearing in hallways from every party about how much they love them. We see how they use them, evidently, and the rhetoric does not quite match what they are doing.
242 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
