SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

Mar/18/24 12:29:56 p.m.
Watch

I know the hon. member realized her mistake of not going through the Chair when she was asking her question. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona.

26 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

The Deputy Speaker

Mar/18/24 12:34:24 p.m.
Watch

I think “impugn” is what we are looking for, so I appreciate the discussion. I will proceed. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona had the floor.

28 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Mar/18/24 12:39:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, at a time when the number of people facing catastrophic hunger in the Gaza Strip is now 1.1 million, and at a time when the International Court of Justice has already ruled for the State of Israel to take six immediate steps to avoid acts of genocide, today's motion from the NDP is a critical one to compel the government to align its actions with its so-called calls for a ceasefire. It is why Greens have long supported the calls in today's motion. I applaud the member for Edmonton Strathcona for her courage in bringing it to the floor of the House. I wonder if she could further comment on how important it is that we move in this critical moment to have Canada take steps to align its calls with that which the ICJ and others around the world have already called for.

150 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Mar/18/24 1:02:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank all my colleagues and friends in the House. I thank my colleague from Edmonton Strathcona, as well as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, my colleague and friend. I am rather distressed. How can the government members vote against this motion? Canadians want to see us, as elected people, reflect the conscience of this country, the heartbreak across this country and the cries to stand up and to not be on the wrong side of history as innocent civilians continue to be slaughtered. I could tweak the words of the motion before us; we all could. However, I do not see how we can fail to be united, as Canadians would like to see and as Greens will be, in supporting the motion. I beg the minister to consider how important a signal it would be to the world that we vote together in support of peace, of humanitarian values, of the release and the freedom of the hostages and of all the individual elements of this excellent motion.

172 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

The Deputy Speaker

Mar/18/24 7:14:15 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty to inform the hon. member that an amendment to an opposition motion may be moved only with the consent of the sponsor of the motion. Therefore, I will ask the member for Edmonton Strathcona if she consents to the amendment being moved.

46 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Mar/18/24 8:17:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I think it is important that we recognize that it was on March 1 that the House made an order indicating that we would be having the vote today at 7:15 p.m., an hour ago. Every member understood before the recess that the vote would be taking place this evening. The other issue I have is this: Take a look at the purpose of opposition days and at the process we have witnessed today. There is no new element being introduced to the motion, and I will expand on that right away. What is important is to recognize the process that has gotten us to this point. The NDP introduced a motion. There was a great deal of debate on it. There were all sorts of crossover discussions taking place, and at the end of the day, the government House leader moved an amendment. That amendment, which is completely within scope, was accepted by the member for Edmonton Strathcona. The Speaker reread the amendment and then ruled that it was, in fact, in order, as has been done previously on many different opposition days. I take exception when members opposite try to give the false impression that it is out of scope. Let me give a very specific example. When they stood on the point of order to try to filibuster a vote, they made reference to the fact that the Gaza issue is a very important aspect of the amendment. Let us go to what the motion actually says about Gaza and ask how they could imply that the amendment would in any way be out of scope. I would refer people to part (viii): “the forcible transfer and violent attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank have significantly increased in recent months”. How could they say that an amendment dealing with the West Bank is, in fact, out of scope, when it is actually in the motion that has been presented? We can go further, to part (g): “ban extremist settlers”. Again, how could we not identify that this is also a part of Gaza? I go to part (h): “advocate for an end to the decades-long occupation of Palestinian territories and work toward a two-state solution”. I would argue against the very premise. After the Speaker agreed everything was in order, and the vote was just about to occur, a member stood up and brought up an issue, saying that the amendment is not within scope. In fact it is, and Gaza is actually mentioned, if members had listened to the Minister of Foreign Affairs when she made her presentation to the House, and to where other members even make reference to both Gaza and the West Bank. I would suggest not only that it is within the scope but also that we have an order from March 1 saying that the vote should occur today at 7:15 p.m. I would suggest that we get on with it and vote.

510 words