SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Minister of Health

Hon. Mark Holland

  • Member of Parliament
  • Minister of Health
  • Liberal
  • Ajax
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 64%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $134,982.00

  • Government Page
Context: House Hansard - 214 - Jun/15/23
Hon. Mark Holland
  • Jun/15/23 4:29:46 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, over the past three years, I have had several discussions with the Bloc Québécois. I asked them what changes they were proposing for a hybrid system and for voting. Unfortunately, they made it clear every time that a hybrid system was not acceptable. This is very odd, because the member opposite uses this system every day. I see this as providing an option. With the support of a majority of members, it would be possible to change the rules and, for example, cancel the hybrid system. I do wonder what would happen if we did not adopt the hybrid system, however. In the future, this way of doing things will continue to exist for one reason: It provides flexibility for important moments in a member's life. That is so important that we must continue using this system.
144 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 214 - Jun/15/23
Hon. Mark Holland
  • Jun/15/23 4:22:37 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would respond in the following way. The history is important. Let us remember that this system was created, with unanimity, in the depths of the pandemic. All parties agreed to how it would function and how it would work. Then those provisions started to live, and those provisions have lived for the last three years. In fact, the proposal that is on the table now is a continuance of an existing system that the member uses regularly, that I use regularly and that I think every member of this House has used. I see members rail against the utilization of these provisions, and then they turn on their application and vote electronically or they turn on their screen and use it. After this system was unanimously created and had existed for three years, the procedure and House affairs committee heard from witnesses and did very detailed work, exactly as the member is describing. What came out of it was that it became very clear that two parties were against this under all conditions. The parties were asked numerous times what it would take for them to support it and if there was any flexibility: The answer was “no”. They do not support it in any form and they do not support it in any function. As a result, we are at the point where continuing the debate means just listening to “no” a thousand times over. That does not make sense. At some point, we have to proceed to implement it, and that is what we are doing today.
266 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border