SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 308

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 3, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Chandra Arya
  • May/3/24 10:32:57 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I fully disagree that racism went up during the last nine years in our government. What has happened is that there has been recognition of systemic racism. This has resulted in a higher number of complaints, which have been made public. Those have gone up. That is the reason we see an increase in the statistics.
58 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Chandra Arya
  • May/3/24 10:34:25 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, our government has indeed made adequate funding provisions for the public complaints and review commission. We have committed about $112 million. This substantial financial commitment underscores our dedication to building a robust mechanism that would serve Canadians long into the future.
43 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)
  • May/3/24 10:36:23 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciated the comments of my colleague regarding the empowerment of citizens to forward their complaints through this process. I would like to know his thoughts on how this complaints process would help the RCMP and the CBSA to better manage their affairs.
46 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Chandra Arya
  • May/3/24 10:36:47 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important thing. The more complaints that are handled in a transparent way, the more the agencies, the officers and the executives there would feel accountable, and that is how this would work out.
39 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)
  • May/3/24 10:51:20 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I really liked my colleague's speech. I would like to talk about the request made by several organizations, including the Customs and Immigration Union, both the francophone and anglophone chapters of Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Council for Refugees, and more. All of these well-respected organizations have asked for a standard time frame for processing complaints, especially complaints about systemic problems such as systemic racism. The government rejected these amendments and, what is more, it refused to allocate resources so that the commission could operate properly and meet its objectives. Would my colleague agree that this is a mistake that the government made twice with this bill, which has many positive aspects but could have been better?
126 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval
  • May/3/24 10:52:22 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have not read the specific amendments that my colleague is referring to. However, a problem that sometimes comes up when we talk about systemic racism is a prior assumption that there is a situation involving racism or systemic racism. If the goal of the amendments was to automatically assume that everyone is racist, then, of course, there may be a problem. For example, one good thing about the bill is that the commission must report to the government and the public on what kind of complaints it normally has to deal with. Even the RCMP and the CBSA will have to report on how they handle the recommendations that they get and on the nature of the complaints that they normally receive. That means there will already be a way to get an overall picture of what is happening and to look at whether further action needs to be taken in some areas where problems seem to arise more often than in others, such as problems related to racism.
172 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Peter Julian
  • May/3/24 12:38:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, they have wasted $70,000, so far, on this meaningless debate and delay tactic. I think Canadians would say to get on with the public complaints and review commission. Why did they not accept the UC that I moved prior to question period, which would actually allow us to move to third reading debate on this bill?
59 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 308 - May/3/24
Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)
  • May/3/24 12:55:53 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on why his party voted against the NDP's amendment, which called for a standard service time for complaints related to things like systemic racism. Without a standard service time, things can drag on and people do not get answers. The National Council of Canadian Muslims, Amnesty International and many other civil society groups requested a standard service time. Why did the Liberals reject that amendment?
77 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border