SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 234 - Oct/18/23

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Oct/18/23 2:14:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, housing costs have doubled, and people are struggling to pay their mortgages and make rent. This is something that affects small towns and big cities across Canada and Canadians both young and old. In a series of town halls and meetings I hosted last week, the number one concern I heard about was the cost of living's leading to a genuine fear about the future. After eight years, the Liberal Prime Minister is simply not worth the cost. Conservatives demand that the Liberals bring back a balanced budget, since we have painfully learned that budgets do not balance themselves. Goldy Hyder from the Business Council of Canada recently said, “With long-term interest rates at the highest they have been in years, it is irresponsible to suggest that economic growth will be higher than interest rates for years to come. Governments can no longer run permanent large deficits without fear.” It is time to balance the budget to bring home lower prices for Canadians.

177 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Oct/18/23 2:15:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as we mark Persons Day by paying tribute to the Famous Five, I would like to highlight the contribution made by Thérèse Casgrain, another great Canadian whose struggle not only gave Quebec women the right to vote in 1940, but who fought throughout her life to improve conditions for women in Quebec. Her political work, commitment and achievements are examples that inspire many of us to this day. When she became leader of the Parti social démocratique, she also became the first female leader of a political party in Canada. In 1970, she was appointed, as a person, to the Senate. The Famous Five, Thérèse Casgrain and the women of that era who fought for our rights opened doors for us. Let us make sure we keep them open.

141 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Oct/18/23 2:16:19 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, despite the harsh colonial and genocidal policies my mom was forced to endure, she had the strength to have faith and to teach me about love and forgiveness, as many indigenous people have done. I am comforted in knowing that my mom is finally at peace. If she had had access to great programs like those provided by Dechinta, I think she would have worked harder to stop intergenerational trauma from being passed on to her great-grandchildren. Organizations like Dechinta are important because they show the benefits of first nations, Métis and Inuit leadership in helping each other. Their funding is running out, and we must ensure sustainable funding for healing and cultural programs to continue without interruptions. I call on all members to be champions of organizations like Dechinta in their ridings. Together, we can break systemic racism and act on reconciliation.

147 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)

Oct/18/23 2:17:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in one of their great songs, Beau Dommage sings, “Tous mes cauchemars passent à six heures, à la télévision” or “all my nightmares appear on the six o'clock news”. Sadly, those words ring true during these terrible times we are living in. Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Gaza, war is sowing grief and desolation everywhere. No one will come out a winner. Who wins when children die? Who wins when the bodies of civilians are strewn across deserted streets, when hospitals or the sick and injured seeking care and refuge are bombed? Who wins? What god rejoices at the death of a child? What government will proudly avenge the death of a grandmother? What cause justifies these tears, this pain and this mourning? Who is proud of humanity? Who would look at our spineless approach to the climate crisis next to our fiery determination to kill each other and say, “keep up the good work”? I do not know how all of this is going to end and I have no desire to see the outcome of these dark days. I know that humanity must get its act together. I know that we must get our act together. I know one thing: We need to do better.

218 words

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

Oct/18/23 2:18:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, small business owners are the unsung heroes of the Canadian economy. These entrepreneurs make up almost 98% of all employer businesses, employing nearly two-thirds of the private labour force, and they provide meaningful paycheques to millions of Canadians. However, after eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, I doubt that small business owners feel like unsung heroes. Higher inflation, higher payroll taxes, higher carbon taxes, a labour crisis, higher rent, more red tape and increased crime rates are hurting main street businesses across Canada. Business insolvencies continue to rise at alarming rates year over year and month over month. More businesses are closing than opening. The Prime Minister is not worth the cost. This Small Business Week, I want small business owners to know that Conservatives are hearing their challenges and that we are committed to axing the carbon tax, lowering business taxes and fostering an environment where small businesses are able to grow, innovate and create powerful paycheques once again.

164 words

Ms. Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, Lib.)

Oct/18/23 2:19:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today is a special day for all of the women in this room and, indeed, across Canada. It is Persons Day. On October 18, 1929, the Privy Council of England ruled that women are indeed persons under the law. This victory was the result of a long and courageous legal battle by Canadian women known as the Famous Five. This ruling allowed women to fully participate in political life. However, not all women were included. Indigenous, Black and Asian women were not included until much later, and women from diverse backgrounds faced discriminations that limited their ability to participate. The struggle persists. Although we have made progress, women as a group, and, even more so, marginalized women, continue to be under-represented. Persons Day reminds us to continue the fight begun by the Famous Five until we achieve equal representation for all women and gender-diverse people, because there cannot be true democracy unless women's voices are clearly heard.

162 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:20:59 p.m.
Watch

As promised before the constituency week, the Chair would like to make a statement on order and decorum in the House. In a very simple way—

27 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Oct/18/23 2:21:26 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of this government, the inflation rate in Quebec is the highest—

17 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:21:48 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member will have an opportunity to start Oral Questions once I make this statement to the House. Question period will follow immediately after the statement. An hon. member: It is question period. The Speaker: I will ask the hon. member to please take his seat for a moment while I consult with the table. Colleagues, the Speaker has the choice as to when to start question period. There will be a full question period that will follow after this declaration from the Speaker. It is important for us to make this declaration. The hon. opposition House leader is rising on a point of order.

106 words

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Oct/18/23 2:23:26 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to remind the Chair of Standing Order 30(5) under “Time for Statements by Members, Oral Questions and orders of the day”. It states, “Not later than 2:15 p.m...as the case may be, Oral Questions shall be taken up.” It does not say, “may be taken up”; it says, “shall be taken up”. It is well past 2:15 p.m.

78 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:24:21 p.m.
Watch

Following a consultation with the table officers, it is important to realize that we have deviated from the custom of commencing exactly at 2:15 p.m. due to Statements by Members. The Chair will make this statement. I do not intend to make this a habit. However, the Standing Orders allow me the option of starting Oral Questions after my statement. The hon. opposition House leader.

67 words

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Oct/18/23 2:25:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, you ought to know that when rules are not followed or when there is a derogation from a rule, and when that is pointed out to the Speaker, the Speaker then enforces the rules. The Standing Orders are the property of the House. It is up to the House to decide when we are not going to follow a rule or when we are going to change a rule. This is a standing order that the House has adopted. You are a servant of the House; you should follow the standing order.

94 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:26:10 p.m.
Watch

I would like to thank the hon. member for pointing out the Standing Orders. He is indeed correct; there are written Standing Orders. However, there is a long tradition in the House that the Speaker has the ability to— An hon. member: Preside over Statements by Members. The Speaker: Can I ask the hon. member to please allow me to finish, as I have the floor at this time? I will be happy to recognize the hon. member for a point of order. It is really important that we understand that the Speaker does have this ability to make a statement. We will have full Oral Questions at the end of this statement from the Speaker. It is an important message, which I think members would appreciate hearing because it gives an indication as to how the Speaker is going to be proceeding in the months and years to follow. Order. The hon. Leader of the Opposition is rising on a point of order.

165 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre

Oct/18/23 2:27:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, every day in the House, the opposition has occasion to respond to the actions of the government and hold the government accountable for its actions on behalf of Canadians. That happens at 2:15 p.m. every single Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. That is not a “may”. That is not a “possible”. That is a “shall”. There is nothing in the clause that creates question period in the Standing Orders that allows the Speaker to arbitrarily change the time in order to give a speech. I will note that the Speaker has a plethora of occasions to stand on his feet to make any point he wants or any declaration he likes. He does not need to do it in the middle of the sacred period during which we hold the government to account. If I may, this is the first time in all of my years here that I have seen a Speaker interrupt question period to make a speech. I have never seen it. Furthermore, the fact that you have risen to your feet in order to impose, apparently, a series of guidelines that are not approved by the Board of Internal Economy or voted on by the House of Commons, and that you are doing it in violation of one of the rules that are already in place, suggests a very serious and unusual departure from the normal way in which Parliament exists. The government is here to serve Parliament, not the other way around. We ask that you allow us to proceed with question period and that you make your statement afterward.

275 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:29:34 p.m.
Watch

As promised before the constituency week, the Chair would like to make a statement on order and decorum in the House. In a very simple way, order and decorum are signs of respect for each other and for the institution, respect which is necessary for productive debate in a deliberative assembly. It is, in fact, fundamental to Parliament’s ability to fulfill its constitutional role. I decided to stand for Speaker because, in the eight years that I have been a member, and prior to that as a keen follower of parliamentary proceedings, I have noticed a deterioration in the collective decorum in this place. It is important to note that this deterioration was not inevitable. It is not a natural outgrowth of the advent of social media. We can choose to conduct ourselves differently. I suspected other members felt the same way and, during the many discussions that I held recently with members from all sides of the House, I have confirmed this feeling. Decorum and disorder was the one issue that was most often mentioned to me in the one-on-one exchanges that I had, and not just in passing. Perhaps most importantly of all, members felt that bad behaviour dishonours not only ourselves, as elected members of Parliament, but also Canadian democracy. On October 3, 2023, when I was invited to take the Chair for the first time, I said: We need to make sure that we treat each other with respect and that we show Canadians an example, because there can be no dialogue unless there is a mutual understanding of respect. There can be no ability to pursue arguments, to make points be heard, unless we all agree to extend to each other that sense of respect and decorum. I meant it then and I mean it now. Members should not be surprised by my statement today. Not long ago, on May 8, my predecessor rightly said in a ruling on decorum, which can be found at page 14090 of Debates: The rules and practices governing order and decorum are intended in part to ensure that proceedings are conducted in a civil, courteous and respectful manner. In particular, members are expected to address each other through the Chair and to avoid making any offensive or disruptive remarks. For example, stating directly, or indirectly, that a colleague is a liar, or has lied, is unacceptable.

401 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:29:34 p.m.
Watch

I would like to thank the hon. member for Carleton for his intervention. I would like to inform the House, though, that this is not the first time that the Speaker has interrupted the proceedings to make a statement from the Chair between the point of S.O. 31s and Oral Questions. So that everybody can understand this very clearly, my immediate predecessor, for example, has done this on at least two occasions, and it has also been done by Speakers in the past. I am going to continue with this statement. I think it is important for all members to understand this. I would like to reassure the member for Carleton and all members that there are going to be no new Standing Orders that would require the approval of members. I would invite members to listen to this statement in order to be able to improve order and decorum in this House.

154 words

Mr. Chris Warkentin

Oct/18/23 2:33:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would usually ask if this was a filibuster, but for the purposes of planning, I wonder if the Speaker might indicate to the House how long he expects to continue.

40 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:34:06 p.m.
Watch

First, that is not a point of order. I will let members know that it will continue for the time that it will take. It should not be too long.

30 words

The Speaker

Oct/18/23 2:34:41 p.m.
Watch

The House is a place where freedom of speech is primordial and where views are strongly held and vigorously defended. While the Chair must allow the widest range of individual expression possible, members are expected to be mindful of their words and behaviours within the realm of what would be considered parliamentary. I wish to echo the words of Speaker Milliken, which can be found at page 3719 of the October 5, 2006, Debates: But the exercise of that freedom of speech ought to be based on the underlying principle of respect to the House and to other members. Conduct should not cause a disruption to proceedings. It would be an understatement to say that we have been plagued in recent weeks by what any observer would have to admit is an unusually noisy chamber, particularly during question period. Some of the disorder is being triggered by questionable language or provocative statements. But much of it also appears to be generated by interruptions, interjections or other demonstrations...actions that seem to be designed to drown out or plainly disrupt those asking questions or those answering them. But when the noise reaches levels where no one, not even the Speaker, can hear what is being said, the House as a whole loses some credibility. So I appeal to all hon. members for cooperation. I will continue to try to give members wide latitude in expressing their points of view, but I ask for all members' assistance in ensuring that we can all hear the member who has been recognized and who has the floor. Going forward, I will be fair and will ensure that all members, regardless of which side of the House they sit on, can freely speak their minds, vigorously hold the government to account, challenge each other’s ideas and thoroughly consider public business. However, as your Speaker, I will equally be looking for ways of improving the overall decorum in the House and I will be dogged in that pursuit. I commit to doing this as your servant, to enforce the rules that you yourselves have given the House on your behalf. I will do so with humility and with an outreached hand. Within our purview, all the Chair occupants will work collectively to ensure that the rules of order and decorum are respected, applied consistently and applied to the same standards. As another of my predecessors, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, stated on December 12, 2012, at pages 13215 and 13216 of Debates: My task as Speaker is to ensure that the intensity of feeling expressed around some issues is contained within the bounds of civility without infringing on the freedom of speech that members enjoy. The Chair tries to ensure that our rules are adhered to in a way that encourages mutual respect. However, all members will recognize that ultimately the Speaker must depend on their collective self-discipline to maintain order and to foster decorum. My authority to enforce the rules depends on the co-operation of the House. Our electors expect all members to make greater efforts to curb disorder and unruly behaviour. So I urge all members to reflect on how best to return the House to the convivial, co-operative atmosphere I know all of us would prefer. Because of the collegial character of the House and the broad privileges enjoyed by its members, no one—not even the Speaker—can act unilaterally to improve the level of decorum in the chamber. Despite my own strong individual determination to maintaining the dignity and decorum of the House, ultimately those efforts will come to naught without members themselves taking responsibility for their behaviour and conduct, and showing their own personal efforts in comporting their business in an appropriate and civil manner. I will therefore need your help in order to succeed. From what I have observed over the years as a member, the following issues have deteriorated and need to be addressed. First, excessive, disruptive and loud heckling must be toned down. Occasional heckling has always been a part of our proceedings, and a lighthearted or clever comment will often enhance debate rather than detracting from it. However, far too often, heckling is boorish and rude, designed to intimidate, insult or drown out others. Members have a right to be heard and to hear the proceedings going on around them. The frequent and time-consuming disorder that heckling creates must stop. Excessive interruptions must be curtailed. Second, while I am committed to protecting the individual privilege of freedom of speech necessary for our debates, too frequently our ideas and thoughts are expressed in provocative terms leading to tense exchanges that harm the necessary collegiality for our work. We have, in the past, had members likening their colleagues to Mussolini or calling each other racists or shouting obscenities. Latitude in expressing one's point of view will be given, but questionable language and unnecessarily provocative statements will no longer be tolerated. Finally, the growing tendency to make pointed criticisms in a way that is unnecessarily personal and designed to denigrate, bully, elicit an emotional reaction or attack the integrity of the person introduces a toxicity into our proceedings that hampers our ability to get things done. This includes coming up with fake titles for members in order to mock them or making comments that question their courage, honesty or commitment to their country. I would also include comments designed to draw attention to the absence of members as a means of embarrassing them, even though this is against our rules. As many of my predecessors have underscored, members must go to multiple places to fulfill their duties. I will point out that there are examples of these sorts of comments on all sides of the House. Insofar as personal attacks can be limited, I will use whatever tools I have at my disposal to do this. The above-mentioned issues tend to be displayed most prominently during statements by members and the daily question period. This is unfortunate, because it is when our proceedings receive the most attention from those watching, or from the public in the galleries, and from which clips are most widely circulated on social media. These are the issues I will focus most of my efforts on resolving. While the House is the master of its own proceedings and the Speaker its servant, the Chair has the authority to enforce rules of debate to maintain order and decorum so that the House can conduct its business in an orderly fashion. The Standing Orders of the House state explicitly that the Speaker shall preserve order and decorum and decide questions of order. This duty, which extends to the other chair occupants, carries with it a wide-ranging authority covering matters as diverse as the behaviour and attire of members, the conduct of proceedings, the rules of debate and disruptions on the floor of the Chamber and in its galleries. As such, any challenge to the authority of the Chair by refusing to respect a call to come to order, to withdraw language ruled to be unparliamentary, to cease irrelevance and repetition in debate or to stop interrupting a member who has the floor can be addressed through recourse to a number of options. For instance, the Chair may recognize another member or refuse to recognize a member until the offending remarks are retracted and the member apologizes immediately in person, or at a later time in writing, to the Speaker. As a last resort, the Chair may name a member, which is the most severe disciplinary power at the Speaker's disposal. In the days and weeks ahead, as I proceed as outlined above, I will continue my discussions with individual members, as well as with House officers in the different parties, to see how we can join forces in our collective objective of improving the decorum in our proceedings. I thank all members for their attention and invite them to reflect on the statement I have made today. I also wish to indicate that members are always free to come and see me if they wish to discuss the matter further.

1367 words

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

Oct/18/23 2:44:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after eight long years in power, this Prime Minister is not worth the cost, especially not in Quebec, where the inflation rate is at 4.8%. That is a lot higher than elsewhere in Canada. After eight years of inflationary deficits, the solution that the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals are now proposing is to drastically increase costs with a tax on gas and diesel, which drives up the cost of all products that are transported. Will the government finally reverse its inflationary policies so that Quebeckers can buy gas and groceries and put a roof over their heads?

105 words