So V ote

Feb/15/22 9:59:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to respond. This is a result of poor communication and a lack of dialogue. Recognizing that this is time sensitive, there would be no obvious hold up or delay in the delivery of this. We are not talking weeks and weeks. We are talking about giving it the prudent time that it deserves, and I do not think that is asking too much. We are not delaying the bill.

74 words

All Topics

Feb/15/22 9:58:20 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I think that the rationale for us wanting some additional explanation is to respect the process of this Parliament and of this place. We are not attempting to delay this, but attempting to have thorough, respectful dialogue.

39 words

All Topics

Feb/15/22 9:56:58 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I know, for example, that we we are waiting on the three-digit hotline. It is in the works and we are just waiting and waiting. I do not know where it is, but the sooner we find out, the better. There are so many seniors, and actually those in all demographics, who are suffering right now. The mental health of Canadians is at an all-time low, and there has never been a more pressing time to act on the three-digit hotline.

86 words

All Topics

Feb/15/22 9:55:49 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, what I will suggest here is that the focus of tonight's debate is on C-12. The principle and simplicity of this bill speaks to the necessity of it and our rationale was that although we have no reason to delay, we certainly wanted a timely, thorough study on it.

53 words

All Topics

Feb/15/22 9:54:33 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it has ever been in question whether we care for seniors. That is 100% not debatable. We can all recognize that we are in a historic and quite an alarming moment in Canadian history. I can speak for all Conservatives when I say it is really important that we continue to look at and consider everything that will improve the lives of all of our Canadian seniors moving forward.

75 words

All Topics

Feb/15/22 9:52:48 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I will certainly be the first to acknowledge how helpful the minister has been. The technical briefing was wonderful. With no disrespect, there has been no reluctance for us to move forward. Seniors that have built this country deserve for all of us to move forward together.

49 words

All Topics

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Feb/15/22 9:32:27 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak tonight to the first piece of legislation in my portfolio. This legislation would amend the calculation formula for determining benefits payable under the act by deducting the amount received under three COVID-19 benefit acts and a portion of the Employment Insurance Act from a person's income for the year, starting in 2022. While I am thrilled that the government is taking action on this and highlighting its swift willingness to have the backs of Canadians, allow me tonight to speak to the unnecessary delay. This is not a piece of legislation that, in my opinion, the government members should be patting themselves on the back for. This, sadly, is a result of an error that should have and could have been acknowledged and remedied months ago. I would like to acknowledge the work of the minister on this file. To her credit, she continues to show a willingness to act on this, albeit not as quickly as we would have liked, and more importantly, not as quickly as our seniors needed. As a result of the government's poor rollout of the CRB, scores of seniors have found themselves destitute after they were stripped of OAS and GIS payments through no fault of their own. It seemed as though there were continuous empty platitudes with no timely and clearly communicated solutions. In my opinion, the government House leader's office was using Canadian seniors to play petty procedural games at the expense of our low-income seniors. Canadians, while they are embracing their golden years, have been hit over the last few years in every conceivable metric. It was just a few months back when I stood in this very place and said that instead of providing the compassion, empathy and support that the seniors who built this great country deserve, the Liberal government has decided to penalize Canada's seniors who took CRB by lowering their old age security payments. I asked this: When will the government reverse this decision and allow our seniors to collect what they have earned? This brings me to today. Many members from all sides of the House have been representing the voices of their constituents and continuously pressuring the government to act. The government is acting, and for that I am grateful. Sadly, it seems like a bit too little, too late. It has taken eight months for the Liberals to fix the problem that they were aware of nearly two years ago. Yes, we support the principle and the content of the bill, but the attempt by the government to score political points is not acceptable. Today l was thrilled. We heard from the members for Elgin—Middlesex—London, Calgary Shepard, Kenora, Abbotsford, Calgary Midnapore, Sarnia—Lambton and Parry Sound—Muskoka, and I am confident that all members of our caucus would have proudly stood up had time allowed. All the communities these members represent echo the values of my constituents in small towns in my riding like Odessa, Coe Hill, Tamworth and the many other towns in the great riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. I would like to take a short opportunity to thank many of my fellow members for their willingness to speak up for Bill C-12. Seniors that I have spoken to, and many of us have read the emails, are happy that we are standing up for them. They need our help and I do not think they are asking for too much. The cost of everything is going up. Heating our homes is up 30%. Rent and insurance are up. Groceries are up 24%, and fuel in my riding this week is over $1.50. This is not okay and it continues to go up. Many Canadian and seniors are exhausted. They are fed up and they are tired of hearing empty platitudes like the government has their backs. They want actions, not words. On top of that, there is fear and concern, stressors of social isolation and elder abuse. Some seniors completely rely on the GIS, and this clawback was devastating. They are our neighbours, friends, uncles, aunts, parents and grandparents. They are all finding it very difficult to make ends meet. The role of a member of Parliament is to represent the views of the people in our riding. We owe it to seniors to speak to the error that was made. That should not be how a government functions. Earlier today, as in the last few weeks, we asked for legislative accountability for a simple bill. A payout timeline of May 2022 would leave impacted seniors waiting over 10 months. This situation did not happen overnight. It has been brewing for months, and it was not acted upon until the government was continuously pressed by all stripes of the House. Allow me to remind members that the government, specifically the office of the minister's predecessor, identified there was a known conflict between the CERB and the GIS program that would impact payments from the latter. If the magnitude of the impact of the GIS clawback was truly understood or fully appreciated by the federal government, distribution of the clawback repayment would have and should have already happened. The outrage, frustration and fear are real. We need to get the money into the pockets of our seniors. We have seen how quickly our government can act when necessary, so why the delay on this? Clawing back GIS payments from the poorest seniors in the wake of a pandemic was clearly out of touch. It was a flawed design all due to poor communication and lack of delivery. Today in the House of Commons, a member rose and questioned our party with regard to the urgency of the matter and why we were delaying the case. The government has created this unnecessary delay, and I do not understand why the New Democrats are continuously covering up and helping to fix the Liberals' mistakes. Approving programs and rushing things through do not always work. It seems as though we need to continuously fix and answer the failures of the government. In Hastings—Lennox and Addington, there are a host of issues and concerns, but let me remind members that every day, seniors have been seeking clarification and asking for guidance. It is a plea for help. It is in my nature to help, to be empathetic and to advocate strongly on their behalf, and that is what I continue to do here tonight. Just this morning, I received a call from a couple who live in the most southern part of my riding. The conversation was filled with a lot of concern and exhaustion. They thanked me profusely for speaking up for seniors, and I assured them that I would continue to do that. They had accepted pandemic supports and had their GIS clawed back. They had never in their lifetime missed a bill payment and have always paid on time. They are so embarrassed because they have overdue bill payments and cannot find it in themselves to own up to it and acknowledge why. They are having a really difficult time. This is just one story of so many. They were definitely relieved, in their conversation with me, to hear there is a fix coming, but they cannot comprehend why they now have to wait until May. The government has dropped the ball and our vulnerable seniors are feeling it. Everybody has a story. Everybody makes choices on how they navigate through their lives. However, we can all agree that right now our country is in a bit of chaos. When Canadians are in need of more certainty, they are getting less. Many seniors have worked so hard their whole lives to save and invest. Seniors are not looking for a handout; they are seeking a hand up. Many of our Canadian seniors have stepped up and done what was needed to be done, and it is an expectation that our government will work equally hard to find solutions to the problems they are facing and act on them quickly. Growing older, becoming more seasoned and entering into a different phase of life can be beautiful. Aging gracefully and staying engaged mentally, spiritually and physically in our retirement years is a special chapter of our life to embrace. We are all going to become seniors one day. Some of us already are. Sadly, this is not the case for all people. As we become seniors, we do not all get to enjoy that beautiful retirement phase of our life. The issues and needs of seniors should be one of the utmost priorities for the government. I am here, and I will continue to be a strong advocate for the people in my riding and the seniors across our country. On top of the clawback issues, many are experiencing loss and loneliness, which of course have been highlighted by the pandemic, regret, lack of proper care, lack of hygiene, dementia, financial and physical abuse, and fear of technology, which is a big one these days. Currently, COVID-19-related benefits are not listed exemptions under the act for the purpose of benefit calculations. The proposal is to amend the definition of income in the OAS by deducting the amount received from three COVID-19 benefit acts. Do not get me wrong. I am delighted that the government wishes to move forward on this. The goal of this legislation is not to have a repeat of the 2021 GIS clawback. This is great news. My concern is, why the delay? More specifically, why would we not be allowing the House to properly and respectfully review the options that have been presented, respect the process of healthy debate and swiftly move forward in the best interests of all Canadians being impacted? I can certainly appreciate that time is sensitive and that action is required, but not at the expense of ensuring that this bill is presented in its best, most thorough possible form. A fine gentleman once told me, “The facts, ma'am, just the facts”, so allow me to provide some this evening. When ministers are called before committees, they have a document prepared for them. It briefs them on topics that may be raised. These binders are available for anyone to read. In May 2020, the then Minister of Seniors appeared before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. As is standard practice, the minister was prepared a binder by department officials. In that binder, in section 7, under the heading “Questions and answers—COVID-19 Economic Response Plan: Support for Canadians and businesses”, and under “Interaction with CERB and GIS”, the following question appears: “Will income from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit be used in the calculation of Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits?” The answer is as follows: It is considered to be taxable income and must be considered when determining entitlement to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances. This being said, this will not affect the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances for about a year. Income received...in 2020 will only affect GIS and Allowances benefit amounts beginning in July 2021, as those benefits will be based on 2020 income. This is a verbatim quote from our government, from their own briefing binders, proving that the government was aware of this for at least 21 months and chose not to act. Flags had been raised and tens of thousands of seniors have been affected. As for this next point, I had not intended to raise it, but listening carefully to the debate in the House today, I heard one of the hon. members from across the floor engage the House to reflect or, in his words, focus on the 10 years before the Liberals came to office. I took that as a welcome opportunity for me to highlight those years in the House. For the last decade, Canada's population has been in the midst of a fundamental shift. We can all recognize that. The extraordinary change to Canada's demographics can present opportunities. We do not necessarily just have to see these as obstacles. These are opportunities. In response to the member across the floor, I ask members to allow me to indulge in the achievements of the recent Conservative government when it comes to our seniors. Since 2006, the Harper government created $3 billion in additional annual targeted tax relief for seniors and pensioners. It introduced tax-free savings accounts, TFSAs, which over three million Canadian seniors have opened. It introduced pension splitting for seniors to benefit millions of seniors each year. It improved the rules for registered retirement income funds to allow seniors to preserve more of their retirement savings. It also introduced the largest increase to GIS in 25 years. As well, the GIS earning exemption was increased. Improvements were made to the CPP to allow individuals who wished to stay in the labour force to also receive CPP pensions. Shall I go on? Perhaps I will leave it at that for the purpose of tonight's discussions. Especially as a new parliamentarian, I know I cannot, and must not, understate the importance of these stages of the legislative process. What we have in front of us is admittedly a very important piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that should have come long ago. Many are desperate, and our federal government has had a significant role to play. I have mentioned before, while standing in the House, that the role of an effective opposition is not just to oppose but to critique, and our responsibility is to build solutions. We need to ensure that all low-income seniors who saw their GIS clawed back in 2021 are included in appropriate and timely, yet thorough, legislation. This portfolio need not be partisan. This is not Liberal versus Conservative issue. This is inaction that requires action. I welcome the opportunity to continue to work with the minister and all members of the House to ensure we are all working together and accomplishing the best interests for all Canadians.

2389 words

All Topics

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Feb/11/22 2:19:47 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, the situation is urgent, and I certainly agree with a lot of the statements that were made during the hon. member's comments. There was a lack of planning by the government, when it full well knew that this was anticipated to come, so it was a delay that could have been avoided. Might the member agree that the need for a timely yet thorough debate is essential, and be supportive of my amendment not to fast-track it?

81 words

All Topics

Feb/11/22 1:28:44 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, with all due respect, six years ago I still had a BlackBerry. I was not part of the Harper government and I will not speak to that today. The focus of the debate is seniors. The official opposition, the Conservative Party of Canada, is suggesting constructive, thorough and timely action. We are not disagreeing with the government. This should have been acknowledged months ago and I am happy to be part of the solution.

76 words

All Topics

Feb/11/22 1:26:28 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, let us not be mistaken. We are all delighted that the government is finally moving on this, and we want to work together collaboratively to make this happen. With regard to listening to real Canadian stories of hardship and loss, Canadian seniors have been struggling. Low-income seniors are worthy of some healthy debate by the people they elected to be here. There is a tremendous amount of study, but this is not something that we would belabour. We need to act on it quickly. It does not need to be long and drawn-out.

97 words

All Topics

Feb/11/22 1:24:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, it seems that it does not matter where we go. At age 55, we are seniors at Shopper's Drug Mart, and at age 65, we are seniors somewhere else. At age 70, we are seniors somewhere else. What we need to address here is that we respect the intention of the bill in principle. We want to make sure that it is heard and equally debated and listened to. The thorough passage of this, and thorough understanding and debate, are critical to moving forward.

87 words

All Topics

Feb/11/22 1:23:16 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, we can certainly acknowledge that we want to move as quickly and collaboratively as we can. We want to be able to help Canadian seniors as quickly as we can. With regard to the advance payment, it should have already happened, so the sooner the better. It has been too little, too late.

55 words

All Topics

Feb/11/22 1:21:35 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Madam Speaker, I can certainly acknowledge that I agree this is a bill of urgent nature and yes, with regard to the minister, she suggested that there is simplicity in its nature. She also suggested that every day we wait to pass this, we are impacting seniors. However, I must acknowledge that we have been waiting. Canadian seniors have been waiting, and I do not think that, with respect to due process, if we respect the democracy of this place and the voices of all here, we can still proceed in a timely manner.

94 words

All Topics

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Feb/11/22 1:14:54 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Therefore I move that the motion be amended as follows: (a) in paragraph (a), by replacing the words “immediately after the adoption of this order” with the words “at the next sitting of the House”; (b) by deleting paragraph (b); (c) in paragraph (c), by replacing the words “the debate” with the words “Government Orders on the day the bill is considered”; (d) in paragraph (d), by deleting all the words after the words “if the bill is” and substituting the following: “read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, consideration in committee shall take place the following day, provided that the Minister of Seniors be ordered to appear as a witness before the committee during its consideration of the bill, and that if the committee has not completed the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill by 11:00 p.m. that day, all remaining amendments submitted to the committee shall be deemed moved, the Chair shall put, forthwith and successively without further debate, every question necessary to dispose of the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, and the committee be instructed to report the bill to the House, by depositing it with the Clerk of the House, no later than three hours before the next sitting of the House”; (e) in paragraph (e), by deleting all the words and substituting the following: “no notice of motions in amendment shall be allowed at report stage”; (f) in paragraph (f), by deleting all the words and substituting the following: “the report stage and third reading stage of the bill may be considered during the same sitting and be ordered for consideration at the next sitting following the presentation of the report”; and (g) in paragraph (g), by deleting all the words and substituting the following: “when the order is read for the consideration of the bill at report stage, the motion to concur in the bill at report stage be deemed carried on division and the House then proceed immediately to consideration of the bill at the third reading stage, provided that, at the conclusion of the time provided for Government Orders that day or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, the bill be deemed read a third time and passed on division”.

411 words

All Topics

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Feb/11/22 12:55:56 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, I was hoping to rise today to speak positively of the first piece of legislation in my portfolio. I wanted to share with the House how helpful the new Minister of Seniors has been. I wanted to be able to point to the past week as an example of this legislation putting aside partisan differences to deliver results for Canadian seniors. Instead, what we have is the government House leaders's office using Canadian seniors to play petty procedural games. The situation is urgent today. It was urgent a month ago. It was urgent a year ago. Many Canadian seniors are feeling neglected and desperate. After we raised the hopes of low-income seniors, they are exhausted, fed up and tired of hearing the government has their backs. A payout timeline for May 2022 would leave impacted seniors waiting over 10 months. This situation did not happen overnight. It has been a long time coming, and it was not acted upon until the government was continuously pressed on this by my colleagues of all stripes in the House. Our Prime Minister identified that it was an unintended conflict between the CERB and the GIS programs. If the magnitude of the impact of the GIS clawback were truly understood or fully appreciated by the federal government, distribution of the clawback repayment would have and should have already happened. The outrage I have heard from constituents and stakeholders in Hastings—Lennox and Addington and seniors across our great country is alarming. We need to get the money into the pockets of our seniors immediately. Let me tell a story. A fine gentleman of 71 years old from my riding is working hard with extra shifts to cover increased rent. He is too proud to acknowledge to his own family how much he is struggling. He opened up to me. He shared stories with me from the good old days, stories of his late wife and the family reunions and trips they used to go on. Today, sadly, he lives very modestly. He volunteers at the food bank two days a week, in part because he loves the social aspect of it, but more importantly because those are two days he can have a warm meal. Another gentleman, whom I have known most of my life, is now evicted and is living in his car. These are just a few examples of hundreds of real stories of human lives being affected. Our vulnerable seniors are feeling sad and forgotten. Everyone has a story. Everyone makes choices on how they navigate through life. However, we can all agree this country is in chaos. Many of our Canadian seniors have stepped up and done what they needed to do, and now it is time for our Prime Minister and the Government of Canada to do the same. Growing older, becoming more seasoned and entering into a different phase of our life can be beautiful. Aging gracefully and staying engaged mentally, spiritually and physically in our retirement years is a special chapter of life to embrace. Sadly, this is not the case for all. Many of our vulnerable seniors are done. They are tired of living. Heating their homes is more expensive. In fact, yesterday I spoke with a constituent who has ice on her window ledge in the room where she sleeps, and she bundles up with extra blankets. On top of this, many are experiencing loss and loneliness, which have been highlighted by this pandemic, regret, lack of proper care, lack of hygiene, dementia, financial and physical abuse, and fear of technology. The list goes on. Now seniors are being put on the sidelines until May so that between now and May, they need to live each day in the hope that they can persevere until the next. Currently, COVID-19-related benefits are not listed exemptions under the act for the purpose of benefit calculations. The proposal is to amend the definition of income in the OAS by deducting the amount received from three COVID-19 benefit acts. Do not get me wrong. I am delighted that the government wishes to move forward on this. The goal of the legislation is not to have a repeat of the 2021 GIS clawback. This is great news. My concern is, why the delay? More specifically, why would we not be allowing the House to properly and respectfully review the options that have been presented, respect the process of healthy debate and swiftly move forward in the best interests of all seniors being impacted? I can appreciate that time is sensitive and action is required, but not at the expense of ensuring that this bill is presented in its best, most thorough possible form. Yesterday, in response to the Thursday question posed by my very capable colleague from Barrie—Innisfil, the government House leader indicated that the reason for ramming through Bill C-12 was to move as “expeditiously as possible”. I nearly fell out of my seat when I heard the member say that, and this is why. When ministers are called before committees, they have a document prepared for them. It briefs them on topics that may be raised, including answers to potential questions. These binders are available online for anyone to read. In May 2020, the then Minister of Seniors appeared before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. As is standard practice, the minister was prepared a binder by departmental officials. In that binder in section 7, under the heading “Questions and answers—COVID-19 Economic Response Plan: Support for Canadians and businesses” and under “Interaction with CERB and GIS”, the following question appears: “Will income from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit be used in the calculation of Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits?” The answer is as follows: It is considered to be taxable income and must be considered when determining entitlement to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances. This being said, this will not affect the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances for about a year. Income received from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit in 2020 will only affect GIS and Allowances benefit amounts beginning in July 2021, as those benefits will be based on 2020 income. That is a direct, verbatim quote from the government's own briefing binders, proving the government was aware of this issue for at least 21 months and chose not to act. We keep hearing that this legislation is urgently needed. On this side of the House, we have been constantly asking the government about this, since I have been here and for months before that. Flags were raised to the government and it did not do anything. In fact, not only did it do nothing to address the issue, but it actively chose to dither. Its own briefing binders point out that this was going to be an issue a year down the road. The government, knowing full well what its decision would mean, did nothing. After tens of thousands of seniors began reaching out to their members of Parliament, including, I would suspect, every single member on the other side as well, the decision was to do nothing. To be clear, I do not necessarily pin all of this on the minister. I can certainly appreciate that it takes time to settle into a new role and get accustomed to the file, especially one that stretches laterally across so many different policy areas, as the seniors file does. While I am so happy to see movement on this file, I must reiterate that government inaction is the reason we are even considering the motion before us. This should have been addressed months ago. Hopefully, moving forward, the government will realize that there are real costs to inaction, which are being borne by our most vulnerable seniors during the deadliest pandemic in a century. It did not have to be this way. Canadian seniors did not need to be placed by the government in a position to choose between food, medication and shelter, but this is where we find ourselves, and I pray that it will never happen again. The government's motion would ram through Bill C-12 with minimal debate, zero committee study, no ministerial accountability and a total denial of an opportunity for amendments to be proposed to improve and strengthen those very important measures. While this may be fairly obvious to my colleagues in the House, we must be absolutely positive that any deviation from standard practices is considered greatly and not done without heavy thought. What I am particularly concerned about here is the divergence from long-standing, well-established practices. In their defence, I will turn to the wisdom of those who came before us, those who have examined and established the rules of today. On September 24, 1968, the House of Commons ordered a special committee of this place to be struck. Its objective was to “report upon the advisability of making changes in the orders concerning the business of supply, the business of ways and means, the stages of the legislative process, and the operation of the standing committees of this House”. Over 26 meetings, the Special Committee on Procedure of the House produced its report. The fourth report recommended changes to the legislative process and is the genesis for so much of what we have today, including what our predecessors envisioned as the role of each stage of the debate process. The authors had this to say: 10. In considering the reform of the legislative process your Committee has taken into account the need to eliminate obsolete procedures; the desirability of providing more meaningful opportunities for Members, and particularly back benchers, to participate in the consideration and shaping of a bill; the desirability of identifying the crucial stages in a bill's passage which, in your Committee's opinion, should occur later rather than earlier in the legislative process; and the necessity of ensuring that the legislative programme of a session, following reasonable consideration by Parliament, should always be completed in this age of heavy governmental responsibilities. 11. In the hope of achieving these aims the Committee's recommendations, which are contained in its Fourth Report, are based on the following principles: (d) The motion for the Second Reading would read: “That this bill be now read a second time and referred to a committee”. This motion, if passed, would imply that the House had given preliminary consideration to the bill and that, without any commitment as to the final passage of the bill, had authorized its reference to a committee for detailed scrutiny. Your Committee believes that the significance of the Second Reading stage has been exaggerated in the past, and that the decisive stage should occur later in a bill's passage after it has emerged from a committee. The purpose of the Second Reading stage is to define the scope of a bill, and to extend its significance any further is, in our opinion, to distort the meaning of the legislative process. I do not believe the authors could have been any more clear. It is extremely evident that they placed a great importance on the committee stage, and subsequently on third reading over second. The report continues: The motion for Third Reading would read: “That this bill be now read a third time and passed.” This wording would indicate clearly and unambiguously that the final and most crucial decision relating to the passage of a bill would be taken at the Third Reading. At present the Third Reading is seldom debated and has become almost a formal stage. Your Committee does not envisage that a debate should necessarily take place at the Third Reading, but it attaches great importance to the preservation of the opportunity for debate at this stage. We wish to emphasize that the Third Reading should always be the decisive stage and that in the case of a highly controversial bill it could be a most crucial debating stage. The report of the Special Committee on Procedure also had quite a bit to say regarding the importance of committee, another key stage of the legislative process that this motion would do away with. It further states: It will be apparent from the recommendations already made in relation to supply and the legislative process that your Committee envisages a significant extension of the functions of the Standing Committees and in consequence a substantial strengthening of their importance and influence. They would become the forums in which the details of expenditure and legislation would be closely considered. They would investigate the operations and continuing programmes of government departments and would develop areas of subject specialisation. We would expect debate in the Standing Committees to be well-informed and pertinent; their members to become influential in the areas of their specialised experience; and their reports to the House to assume a critical significance related more closely to the national interest as a whole than to simple political differences. We also anticipate that the business of the House would be greatly expedited and handled more efficiently through exploiting the potential of the committee system of the House to the full. The importance of these stages of the legislative process cannot, and must not, be understated. What we have in front of us is admittedly a very important piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that should have come long ago. Many Canadian seniors are waiting. Many are desperate, and our federal government has a significant role to play. I have mentioned before while standing in the House that the role of an effective opposition is not just to oppose and critique. Our responsibility is to build solutions. We need to ensure that all low-income seniors who saw their GIS clawed back in 2021 are included in appropriate and timely, yet thorough, legislation. This portfolio need not be partisan. I welcome the opportunity to continue to work with the minister to ensure that we are working together in the best interests of all Canadian seniors. This brings forward the very obvious question of how we balance the importance of legislative scrutiny with the need to get this legislation passed in a timely manner. I think I have the solution.

2410 words

All Topics

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Feb/11/22 12:50:04 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-12

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, this government motion will push through Bill C-12 with minimal debate, zero committee study and no opportunity to improve it or strengthen it. Can the member perhaps acknowledge that this is deviating from standard practice that is entrenched in this place?

48 words

All Topics