SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Apr/30/24 10:28:09 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I like the hon. member, but of course, she lived through the dismal decade, as all Canadians did, with the Harper government, where the fiscal management was basically thrown out the window: $116 billion in liquidity supports for the banking sector to prop up their profits; $30 billion a year, according to the PBO, given to overseas tax havens because of the notorious Harper tax-saving treaties that have basically eliminated the fiscal capacity of the federal government, which is $300 billion over a decade. The Conservatives have no lessons to give anybody in terms of fiscal management. They were terrible. However, I want to ask my colleague a very simple question about pharmacare. There are 17,000 people in her riding who have diabetes and who are paying up to $1,000 a month for medication. As members know, the risk of stroke, heart attack or death is four times greater for people with diabetes than for other Canadians, yet Conservatives are blocking, at every single step, the pharmacare supports that would mean a difference of up to $1,000 a month in supports for 17,000 people in her riding. My question is simple this: Why are the Conservatives blocking this life-saving medication that would make such a difference in the lives of her constituents?

220 words

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Apr/30/24 11:29:29 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member is, of course, challenged by the fact that he is carrying the party's record from the dismal Harper decade, where we saw record deficits every single year, including $116 billion given to the banks and $30 billion every year that were given to overseas tax havens through the infamous Harper tax haven treaties. The reality is that Conservatives cannot give fiscal lessons to anybody. Their record is absolutely deplorable. The issue of pharmacare and the supports that would go to people with diabetes in his region, 17,000 in his riding, is that Canadians who suffer from diabetes are paying up to $1,000 a month for diabetes medication. They are struggling to make ends meet. If they cannot pay for the medication, they have a four times greater risk of a heart attack or stroke. Conservatives are blocking this important life-saving medication, which the NDP has pushed the government to put into place. My simple question to my colleague, who I respect a lot, is this: Why are Conservatives blocking this important life-saving medication, which could make such a difference in the lives of 17,000 of his constituents?

197 words

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Apr/30/24 12:03:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Harper Conservative government members were terrible fiscal managers. They gave away $30 billion a year to overseas tax havens, massive subsidies to oil and gas CEOs and bank bailouts. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has continued many of the bad financial management practices we saw under the Harper government. The massive corporate subsidies that are going out started under the Conservatives and seem to be continuing under the Liberals. Why will the Liberals not rein them in?

79 words

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian

Apr/30/24 12:33:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as the Speaker has already ruled, false titles, such as that which the member is trying to put forward, are not appropriate for the House of Commons. There is no coalition and he certainly understands—

38 words

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian

Apr/30/24 12:35:01 p.m.
Watch

The member should withdraw and apologize.

6 words

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian

Apr/30/24 12:35:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You have directed a member of Parliament to approach the Chair. I would hope that he would do that.

28 words

Approach

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Apr/30/24 6:46:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I gave notice to the table regarding this point of order following what we witnessed this afternoon and the Speaker's decisions, which were good decisions. I want to start by saying that the rules have to apply to all in the House of Commons, and what we saw today was the Speaker enforcing the rules of the House of Commons. We have the Standing Orders, and we chose, together as members of Parliament, a Speaker. The Speaker's job is to ensure that the Standing Orders are respected. I will read what a former Speaker, who is now the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and the Conservative House leader, said. He spoke to this issue, which I am going to raise, on September 24, 2014. I was in the House, so I remember this. He said, “Another of our time-honoured traditions is that of respect for the office of Speaker.” He then quoted from O'Brien and Bosc: Reflections on the character or actions of the Speaker—an allegation of bias, for example—could be taken by the House as breeches of privilege and punished accordingly. The former Speaker then continued: I wish to conclude with an appeal to members on all sides. Needless to say, the kind of unsavoury language or expression that we heard yesterday does little to assist the Chair in managing question period proceedings, and I urge all members to be judicious in the expressions they choose to use. This is the former Speaker of the House of Commons, who is currently the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and the current Conservative House leader, stating that reflections on the character or actions of the Speaker, for example, an allegation of bias, could be taken by the House as breeches of privilege and punished accordingly. I want to submit for your attention, Madam Speaker, two posts that have come out on social media. One is from the member for Carleton, which says, “Today the Liberal speaker censored me”, before going on to provide deliberately misleading information in his Twitter post. This is very clearly challenging that ruling from 2014 of the former Speaker and current member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, the current Conservative House leader. The second tweet is from the member for Lethbridge, who also has shown a wanton disregard of the rules of the House of Commons. She stated: “How did partisan hack, [the Speaker] respond?!” These are unacceptable terms and warrant a full apology from those members. I will read, for the record, what we have in our House of Commons Procedure and Practice, which is the procedural bible of the House of Commons. These are the rules that Canadians expect us to live by. When they elect us in ridings across the country, they expect members of Parliament to abide by the rules to ensure that there is decorum in the House and that we are doing the job that Canadians have sent us here to do. The House of Commons Procedure and Practice says, concerning the impartiality of the Chair: The actions of the Speaker may not be criticized in debate or by any means except by way of a substantive motion.... Reflections on the character or actions of the Speaker (an allegation of bias, for example) could be taken by the House as breaches of privilege and punished accordingly. There are a number of examples where that rule has been breeched. For example, in 1981, when there was clearly a question of privilege being raised, the leader of the opposition at that time withdrew his remarks, and that settled the matter. In 1993, there was a similar attack on the dignity of the House, an attack on the Speaker. Again, the member rose in the House and withdrew the remarks. It is very clear that the rules of the House, which are put in place to ensure that our democracy functions properly so that we can have orderly discussions and debates, were violated. It is very clear that these two social media posts do not abide by those rules. In my opinion, both members should have to apologize and withdraw their remarks before returning to the House.

711 words