44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 1, 2023 02:00PM
- Nov/1/23 4:34:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I could tell a certain sense of understanding of the issue and, indeed, the support felt for Ukraine.
With regard to the timing of this particular concurrence motion, I cannot help but wonder what is going on here. The last time we debated this issue, the member for Cumberland—Colchester got up and said that we are taking advantage of Ukraine and that the legislation we were supposed to debate today regarding the free trade agreement with Ukraine is “woke”. Since then, we have not been able to debate this, because every time we bring it forward and put it on the calendar or on the Order Paper for debate, Conservatives move concurrence.
I genuinely believe that the member supports Ukraine, but can she tell me whether that support is felt throughout the Conservative Party, and, if not, whether that is one of the reasons why Conservatives are preventing us from moving forward with the legislation on free trade with Ukraine?
166 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 4:56:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader for sharing his time with me. He has done a very good job of setting up the context in which Conservatives are using the concurrence motion today to try to stop the debate on a very important issue. I am going to highlight what has been going on with regard to this.
I think Canadians deserve to know that there is a divide within the Conservative Party in terms of how its members feel about supporting Ukraine. I cannot believe that those words just came out of my mouth, but it is the reality. I can tell the House how I have come to this conclusion.
Throughout the spring, the minister responsible worked with Ukraine and the officials over there to set up this free trade agreement. When we got back to the House in late September, the terms of the trade agreement were put on the table. It was on October 17 that the bill was placed on the table for consideration.
We first called the bill to be debated in this House on October 23. We had one day of debate on it. The following day, we called the bill to be debated a second time. I spoke at that time. I gave what is probably one of the most non-partisan speeches I have given in this House, whether we believe it or not. I gave that speech because I assumed that the House unanimously supported Ukraine and the efforts that we could make in terms of a trade relationship with it to better the economy and the people of Ukraine.
Much to my complete and utter surprise, the first question that came after my speech was from the member for Cumberland—Colchester. He rose and said this:
One of the concerns I have is the way that Canada appears, in my mind, in spite of the incredible “woke” legislation that is woven into this free trade agreement.
The member questioned whether Canada was taking advantage of Ukraine, questioned the legislation and questioned why we were even involved in this agreement. That is just the beginning; there is more.
What has happened since then? The next day, the Conservatives rose in the House and tried to get unanimous consent on a motion on division. I would like to explain to the public what that is, because it is very important in the context of my argument. When someone puts forward a unanimous consent motion, it means that the House unanimously consents to adopt legislation, but on division. That is the key part. When we say “on division”, that means there are some in the House who are in disagreement, but they do not need to be identified. It is clear that the Conservatives have some members on their side of the aisle who are not in favour of this legislation.
That motion was put forward, but we did not let that happen. We did not let that unanimous consent motion carry, because we determined that we were not going to let them hide from their vote on this. If they are not standing with Ukraine, they should have the decency to stand in this House and tell Ukraine that.
The next time this came back to the floor was today. We brought this forward again, and what did the Conservatives do? They used a tactic to avoid this debate. They brought forward a concurrence motion, understanding full well that three hours would have to be put toward the motion and that, based on the time we have today, we will not be able to get that legislation through. Conservatives want to carry this bill on division and do not want their members to speak to it; the Canadian people have a right to know who those members are. We know one is the member for Cumberland—Colchester, but which other Conservatives are not in support of Ukraine or this trade agreement with it? Canadians deserve to know and, as long as we are in this House, we are not going to let the Conservatives try to carry this legislation on division and let this bill go through. They are going to have to stand in their place.
We might get to a point where, in the Conservative caucus meetings, the whip says she does not care how members feel, but they are all going to vote in favour of this. We might also get to the point where the Conservative whip allows some of them to abstain from voting. However, I can tell everyone that we are going to get to a point where we vote on it.
Conservatives can play these games all day long, and they can bring forward more concurrence motions such as this. However, I guarantee one thing: the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader and I will continue to call them out over this. If they do not support Ukraine, then they must stand in this House and explain why.
847 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 5:02:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, for starters, we should probably recognize what did not happen there. Normally, a Conservative would lead to ask me a question, but not a single one of them rose. I appreciate the question from my colleague from the Bloc, and I spoke at length to Bill C-57, as I indicated, the first time it came around.
This is an opportunity for Canada to work with Ukraine and look forward into the future on how we help it rebuild when it wins the war; its people will win that war. When they do, Canada will be there with them through trade relationships and opportunities to work together to rebuild their nation. They deserve it from us. They are certainly in agreement with wanting that trade legislation. The only people I know who do not seem to be in agreement with it are some Conservatives.
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 5:05:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands was absolutely correct when she said that the unfortunate reality is that some of the attention has been taken off Ukraine. That is why it is our job to keep the pressure on. One way we can do that is by continuing to push forward legislation such as this and building relationships with the people of Ukraine, so we can work together with them and not let the spotlight be taken off them and the struggles that they are going through.
We have to remember that Ukraine will win this war; in my mind, it is inevitable. Its people are fighting for their country. They have been invaded by Russia, in particular, Vladimir Putin, but there is no doubt that they will win. We need to be with them so that we can help make sure that, when the time comes, they can rebuild their country, be more prosperous, be more democratic and be more committed to world peace as a result of that.
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 5:55:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I want to bring to your attention that during my speech, I made reference to the fact that Conservatives had tried to move unanimous consent on Bill C-57. My information was incorrect. It was Bill C-350 I was thinking of when I made that comment.
56 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
