SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Feb/15/24 11:05:58 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think my colleague shares my concern that we are now 30-some days away from an arbitrary deadline that was imposed. We passed a national palliative care motion that I brought in 2016, and nothing was done. In 2019, we brought forward the national suicide prevention strategy that was based on the work in Nunavut. Everybody signed off, and nothing was done. Now we are being told that we should be making it easier for people who are suffering with mental illness, people who are on the streets, people using opioids, people who are hopeless, and that we should be fast-tracking that rather than putting in place the protections needed to protect people. What are my hon. colleague's thoughts are on that?

127 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

Feb/15/24 11:34:57 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I simply want to remind my colleague that, yesterday, I voted in favour of the amendment for advance requests because there is a political and social consensus in Quebec society. I think that the message for the federal government is to find a compromise and a solution so as not to prevent Quebec from moving forward. However, we must also not block the bill, because there is no medical or scientific consensus on the issue of mental health as the sole underlying condition. I think that it is important to meet the March 17 deadline and to ensure that we can reflect together on this issue because there is no medical or scientific consensus.

117 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie

Feb/15/24 11:35:39 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I recognize that the member voted with the Bloc Québécois for advance requests, but I deplore the fact that he was the only one from his party to do so. This demonstrates the rift that exists between Quebec and the rest of Canada on this issue. It is deplorable. I deplore the fact that the member could not convince his entire caucus to vote with us. I recognize the importance of taking the time to talk about such important issues. However, we have been at this for three years, and the government has not done anything. Extending the deadline by three years is a hypocritical way of ensuring that we never talk about it again, because that takes us past the next election. It is irresponsible.

132 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Feb/15/24 12:49:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to follow up on something my colleague pointed out that people in Canada really need to understand. Because the federal government failed to challenge the Truchon decision, the legislation came back to the House. Parliament went through it, and it was to be approved in the Senate, yet unaccountable, unelected people in the Senate who did no due diligence decided arbitrarily that they would expand MAID to include people who were desperate, isolated and alone with mental illness. They threw it back to the House without any work being done, and the Liberals accepted it. Now we are scrambling, 30 days away from the deadline. I would ask my hon. colleague what it says about the fundamental failings of democracy that unelected, unaccountable people in the Senate, who cannot even be fired, could make such a profound change in legislation that would affect so many lives without any oversight, due to a failure of the government to say they are way over the line, this is not their purview and this is the work that Parliament does.

181 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Feb/15/24 1:41:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we are about 32 days away from a legal deadline that was arbitrarily thrown at us by the unelected, unaccountable Senate, forcing us to allow people who are depressed, people who are isolated and alone, to die through medical assistance in dying. Now my colleagues are saying to give them a couple of years and they will make it all work. What I found profoundly disturbing was that my colleague said they would support this. They figure that if they have another year or two, if they can meet just a few more people and just tick all the boxes at consultation, then people who are depressed and alone should be allowed to die. I find that an appalling position of the government. The government put us in this position through its cavalier approach to MAID, and its refusal to look at the issues and hear that this is really not a road we want to go down, that this is a line in the sand with respect to the human community. If the member thinks that in three years she will have consulted enough people, but, at the end of the day, she will support people dying because they have no support, then the government has very poor vision and it needs to explain that to the Canadian people.

222 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Marc Dalton

Feb/15/24 4:47:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is a real concern, especially because we have a deadline in March to get it passed here and then through the Senate.

25 words

Context: House Hansard - 283 - Feb/15/24

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Feb/15/24 4:48:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, given the March deadline and the potential for trouble in getting this expeditiously through the Senate, is the member glad that we are wrapping up debate in the House of Commons so quickly, so that we have time to try to get it done before the deadline?

49 words