44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 11, 2023 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, I think the most appropriate place to start off is the line of questioning that I just asked the member opposite. Prior to question period getting under way, we were having a healthy discussion at the third reading stage of Bill C-56. I know I was not the only one prepared to come to the House to debate Bill C-56.
What I would like to talk about for the next number of minutes is the purpose of moving concurrence reports such as this particular report. It is not necessarily to have the focus of the House of the Commons on debating the issue the member has attempted to bring forward. As we saw in a number of questions, issues aside from Afghanistan were raised. Rather, it is about a rationale and reasoning that I believe, as many others believe, we see from this particular member: He stands in his place time and time again in order to prevent debates of the government agenda. One only needs to look at the timing of when the member brings forward concurrence debates. They are all on the government's legislative dates when we are going to be debating substantive legislation.
This morning, as members would know, we brought forward Bill C-56. Prior to question period getting under way, I was the one speaking to it. Bill C-56 is very important to Canadians in a very real and tangible way. It is about an issue that Canadians are very much concerned about from coast to coast to coast. To amplify that, all one needs to do is take a look at the last remarks, because as we were getting to question period, I had to stop speaking on the legislation because we were entering into members' statements, followed then by question period.
It is interesting that a big focus of question period was in fact the issues I was talking about in the lead-up to members' statements. Also, if we go through members' statements, we will find that these were the issues being amplified. Members of the House, outside of the Conservative caucus, came to the House believing that we would be debating Bill C-56. That is not to say that what is happening in Afghanistan today and what has taken place since 2001 are not important issues. We recognize many of the horrors that have taken place in Afghanistan. We understand the important role that Canada has to play in it.
However, we also need to recognize at this point in time the types of tactics and efforts from the official opposition, the Conservative Party, a minority inside this chamber, today to prevent debates and legislation from passing. A very good example of this is in a question raised by the New Democrats. We talk about Canada and its role in Afghanistan, and the member talked about the alliance that seems to be out there, indirectly referring to Russia, Afghanistan and like-minded countries. Then he posed a question about the Conservative Party with respect to Ukraine. I think it was a legitimate question to be asking the Conservative Party. Again, we saw the tactics it used last Thursday and Friday. The response was laughable. The question was why the Conservative Party not once, not twice, but I believe three times in total voted specifically to deny Ukraine funds. One of those funds was with respect to the—
574 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/11/23 4:40:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we are here debating an important motion about human rights in Afghanistan following the Taliban takeover. A couple of members have said we should not be debating this. We do not need to be debating this for the full three hours. Those members have proceeded to give lengthy speeches on the subject. Of course, those members know the process is if they think it should maybe collapse on an item, then the most effective way they bring about that result is by not speaking to it. I am referring in particular to my friend across the way from Winnipeg North.
My friend from the Bloc, of course, found ways of connecting all kinds of other issues into the discussion, as sometimes happens in this place, but I do want to ask him a question about Afghanistan. I would like to hear his views on what we in Canada can do to concretely promote democratic development in Afghanistan. I think some people look at the situation and they feel a certain kind of fatalism. I believe there are still things we can do and we need to do to stand with the people of Afghanistan, that we cannot give up on the cause of freedom and democracy.
What does he think that Canada can concretely do to support the people of Afghanistan in their desire to realize democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law?
237 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/11/23 8:52:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I appreciate the work of the member for Peace River—Westlock. He is a member of the indigenous and northern affairs committee, and I enjoy working with him and his additions to the debate that he is bringing to us today.
Housing is something that we have heard is an ongoing issue with indigenous communities, first nations, in particular, and Inuit as well. We know that housing is often cramped and in need of repair, and that a lot of that was exacerbated during the pandemic where people were forced to live in conditions that were greatly unacceptable. ISC, unfortunately, has yet to improve on those actual outcomes. So, most of the discussion that we are bringing on this side is about actually getting results.
The bar is not how much money we spend; yes, it is an important piece, but if we are spending a lot of money and getting no results, something is wrong. So, we need to actually have that conversation about how we get better outcomes in this picture.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/11/23 10:13:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I appreciate the comments from the member opposite and the passion he brings to this place. Unfortunately, it seems that he may have misunderstood the comments that I made. I take no issue with the funding itself. I recognize that funding is very necessary for the department, but, unfortunately, we have seen an increase in funding and not a similar increase in the outcomes, the tangible results of that funding. That is where the issue lies. The government has to ensure that these dollars get to the communities that need them, get to the leadership, to ensure that the supports are being funded.
It is not a discussion about more or less. It is a discussion about ensuring that the dollars are getting spent correctly and that the dollars that are getting spent are going to support first nations and indigenous peoples right across the country.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
