SoVote

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

Apr/8/24 3:48:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, to the members for Northumberland—Peterborough South and for Skeena—Bulkley Valley, we really are at one of those rare moments I love in this place, when we are in violent agreement. We should be seeing witnesses respect Parliament and answer questions clearly. This may veer from where the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South is coming, but it is pretty clear to me that something very wrong has happened within the functionality of the civil service that this could happen at all. I do not see any long figures of partisan engagement. What I see is base incompetence and a chance to make a quick buck, which should never, ever be allowed in the culture of our civil service. Bring it on, and let us get Mr. Firth in here.

135 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/8/24 4:54:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member really trying to explain the context of a situation, whether it is the committee, the roles that committee members play or, ultimately, witnesses. I think that took a great deal of bravery to be able to say so, and I appreciate that. I understand the Bloc's position is also to see the witness brought to the bar, which is great. Often what happens in a committee, especially when we bring in witnesses, is that things sometimes get a little bit too politically partisan. As a result, it can be a disservice to the committee and, ultimately, witnesses. Could she can provide some further thoughts on the potential of partisanship and the impact that has on the whole process going forward?

127 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mrs. Julie Vignola

Apr/8/24 4:55:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my opinion is just the same as it was when I was elected in 2019, despite the five years that have gone by and everything I have seen since then. In committee, our work should never, ever, ever be partisan. The committee is there to conduct studies for the common good, for the good of the public and for the good of public finances, as far as the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates is concerned. The common good has no colour. It is not light blue, dark blue, red, orange or green. It has no colour. That must not change and must not be forgotten. Yes, it can fun to publish a few words in newspapers or on social media to generate some likes. However, are we in kindergarten, or the House of Commons?

138 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Apr/8/24 5:19:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is rather ironic to see certain elected members, who spoke a few minutes ago about dealing with issues in a non-partisan manner in order to get to the bottom of things, now replying to people from other political parties that this also happened in their government. We need to move beyond that, and I will give the member the opportunity to do so by asking her a fundamental question, which I asked my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou earlier. We are going to bring these people in, and that is good. We will get to the bottom of this and find out the truth about this scandal, which I think is quite serious. However, as I noted earlier, it will probably not be the last. I do not want any more scandals. This is sadly reminiscent of WE Charity and other previous incidents. My question to the member is this. Once we get to the bottom of this scandal, what does she think needs to be done to ensure that it never happens again? When friends give each other contracts and millions of dollars are thrown around, it is ordinary people's money that is being squandered. It makes no sense, and we have a duty to do something to ensure that this never happens again.

220 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Apr/8/24 5:32:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, just so that we are clear on this, the government actually supports, which I have been indicating throughout the day, the individual in question coming to the bar. From the very beginning of the ArriveCan app, there have been concerns with the government, and the government has taken tangible actions. We have been very supportive of the Auditor General and the recommendations that came forward, and we continue to look at ways in which we can improve the system. The challenge I give to the Conservatives, which is why at times I get fairly animated, regards their positioning, which seems to be more partisan and politically motivated, as opposed to looking to improve the system. I am wondering if the member opposite can give an indication as to how he envisions going forward when Mr. Firth comes to the bar because it is a very serious issue.

149 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Apr/8/24 6:32:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I think this is such an important issue, especially where I live in Port Alberni and the Alberni Valley, and on Vancouver Island. It is an issue where we actually need all sides to work together. This should not be a partisan issue. This should be all of us hammering Washington. Over the last four decades plus, we have seen both Liberal and Conservative approaches in terms of their failed resolution to the softwood lumber dispute. The Liberal approach can be described as winning in court, but still losing as the U.S. has continued to levy tariffs against Canadian softwood lumber. The Conservative approach can be best described and characterized as appeasement through agreements, where Canada would not only impose an export tax on softwood lumber, but in return, the U.S. would remove its duties. What new approach is the government going to bring? The sense of urgency is real. We have the first new mill in 15 years on Vancouver Island in my community, and it is struggling right now. The tariffs are crippling, and the sense of urgency is real.

186 words

Context: House Hansard - 295 - Apr/8/24

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Apr/8/24 8:21:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, the member is talking about solutions again. That is what we need more of tonight. It is good to see my colleague from Kootenay—Columbia bringing forward that approach as well. Let us talk about how we could move forward. What we have had for most of the night is partisan bickering about the 42 years of failed negotiations with the United States. Tonight we have this take-note debate. What would be the outcome that my colleague would like to see tonight in terms of how we use the fibre in our communities and how we add value the most? There is this false dichotomy that we cannot protect the environment and have jobs at the same time. We have to do both, and we can do both. Does my colleague see potential opportunity in tonight's debate, if the government were actually listening?

148 words