SoVote

Feb/7/22 10:01:22 p.m.
Watch

Order. I will let the member ask a question, but members cannot refer to someone being here or not being here. The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester.

28 words

Absence or presence of members

Mr. Stephen Ellis

Feb/7/22 10:01:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry for saying that the member was not here. I really apologize for saying that he was not here. That is unfortunate—

27 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/7/22 10:01:44 p.m.
Watch

Whether someone is here or not is irrelevant. The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester.

15 words

Absence or presence of members

Mr. Stephen Ellis

Feb/7/22 10:01:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry for saying those things that I said previously, over and over again. I apologize for that. The unfortunate thing is that, when we have these debates, perhaps everybody should pay very close attention to what is happening and that would make the debate much better. Will you get your Prime Minister out there to talk to these people?

63 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/7/22 10:02:12 p.m.
Watch

To the member for Cumberland—Colchester, when asking a question, ask it through the Chair and not directly to a member. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

26 words

Remarks addressed to the Chair

Mr. Arif Virani

Feb/7/22 10:02:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have three quick responses. The first is that no one accused the member opposite or his colleagues of driving the trucks outside. Ths second point is that attempting to resurrect his interim leader in terms of what she may have said today does not eviscerate what she said last Monday, which is that they should take political advantage of the situation, not discourage people to leave and make the Prime Minister wear this as his problem. That is a matter of record that has been reported by multiple media outlets. Thirdly, I actually find it quite puzzling that the member opposite, given his vocation as a medical doctor, is not appreciating the simple fact that if people his ilk are afraid to wear scrubs in public and are being told by law enforcement not to wear scrubs in public because they might be targeted, we have a problem generally and we have a problem for those in his profession, whom I hope he would stand up for.

170 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/7/22 10:03:13 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester is rising on a point of order.

14 words

Mr. Stephen Ellis

Feb/7/22 10:03:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is quite possible that I do not know the rules, but I am quite sure that “ilk” is really not a favourable term that I should be called in this great House of Commons.

39 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/7/22 10:03:37 p.m.
Watch

We are descending into debate a bit. The hon. member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

21 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Feb/7/22 10:03:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, earlier my colleague mentioned statements by the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. Those statements rubbed me the wrong way too. The member challenged us to go talk to the protesters and learn about their experience. Does he think we spent the last two years as MPs not talking to our constituents, not talking to people at local businesses that were struggling or had to close their doors? Does he think we have never talked to people who disagree with public health measures? Over the past two years, we have seen it all. We talk to our constituents, and they tell us all those things. There is nothing wrong with expressing discontent. What we disagree with is how that is being done right now. Does my colleague agree? Does he think it is not just up to the police or the City of Ottawa to manage the situation? Does he think the federal government needs to shoulder some of the responsibility?

164 words

Mr. Arif Virani

Feb/7/22 10:04:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that all three levels of government in this country, municipal, provincial and federal, have their responsibilities. The actions we took and the policies we implemented were always based on science and on what experts and doctors told us. That is what informs everything. We will continue to follow their advice in this situation.

61 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Feb/7/22 10:05:14 p.m.
Watch

Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji. I want to thank the member for acknowledging that the NDP have a great leader in our member for Burnaby South. Unfortunately, I cannot share the same sense of acknowledgement for the Liberal leadership. The Liberal government has shown a history of either inaction or responding to issues too slowly, some of which include its promises to address indigenous housing and to flow funds for housing so there is less overcrowding, and of course the extremist activities on the Hill. Can the member commit to ensuring the implementation of the four-point solution put forward by the member for Burnaby South when he asked for this emergency debate to calm the situation on the Hill and ensure there is a strategy for Canadians to move toward a sense of normalcy. We must ensure the Prime Minister meets with the municipal leaders, that he addresses the interference of funds from foreign states and ensures that provinces and territories have the—

162 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/7/22 10:06:39 p.m.
Watch

The hon. parliamentary secretary with a very short answer.

9 words

Mr. Arif Virani

Feb/7/22 10:06:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would simply say to the member opposite that yesterday we had an announcement from the Prime Minister that a table is being struck with respect to leadership from all three levels of government. That is exactly the type of co-operation we need, because we are seeing a situation that is very concerning for the city of Ottawa, all Ontarians and all Canadians.

66 words

Mr. Scot Davidson (York—Simcoe, CPC)

Feb/7/22 10:07:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Brandon—Souris. I am glad we are having this debate this evening. It is a very important issue, and it is necessary to address the growing sentiment that exists right here across this great country. Canadians are frustrated. They are sick and tired. Constant shutdowns, lockdowns, restrictions and mandates are having a terrible toll on our country's population. This toll is now going far beyond that of COVID-19 itself. After two years, we know that COVID-19 is not going away. That is why we have to use all the tools at our disposal for Canadians to live healthy normal lives and for businesses to reopen. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has failed in its handling of the pandemic, and now it is failing to provide Canadians with a credible plan to get life back to normal. Even as countries around the world drop their restrictions and mandates, even as they put forward plans to help their citizens learn to live with COVID, the federal Liberal government persists with policies and practices here in Canada that no longer make sense. Over 90% of the population has been vaccinated already, and we know that vaccines have limited utility in preventing the transmission of the omicron variant. Instead of putting forth a credible plan, the Liberals continue to sow division and resentment among Canadians. They ignore the widening gap between those on guaranteed government salaries like themselves and those who are only able to work if the government lets them. There is a widening gap between those who live in rural Canada and everyone else, a gap between low-income workers and those at the very top, between home owners and renters, and between the haves and the have-nots. It is no wonder Canadians are angry and frustrated. It is no wonder that after two years that frustration has led to one of the most significant protests Parliament Hill has ever seen. The “freedom convoy” of trucks and other vehicles are assembled outside from coast to coast. They are here at Parliament, as is their right, protesting the policies of the federal government. They are doing this outside the federal building and protesting provincial policies outside legislative buildings across the country. I would note that this is the appropriate place to do that. They are not outside private homes, or cottages of MPs or premiers' homes. The Prime Minister may not want to speak to those protesters, but I have. I have spoken to many of them. I have read their signs and listened to what they are saying and one thing is abundantly clear. It is not just the protesters outside in the provincial capitals across the country who have these so-called unacceptable views. These views are not held by some fringe minority. I have heard these opinions from my own constituents. Canadians from all walks of life have real concerns about how the Liberals have handled this pandemic. They want to know what the government is doing to put COVID-19 behind us. Instead of addressing these concerns, the Prime Minister, his government and some in the mainstream media have labelled them as racist, misogynist and extremist just to avoid scrutiny for the Liberal government's numerous failures. Unlike the Prime Minister, I believe the most important job I have as an elected representative is to listen to the residents of my community, just as it is his job to listen to the citizens of this great country. Over the past few weeks, I have heard from the owner of a local gym in Bradford, 9Round. She was in tears. She has been shut down so many times she cannot even count. She now owes thousands of dollars in rent with no relief available to her and no confidence that anything will be changing any time soon. I have heard from an elderly man in Keswick who was eligible for no COVID-19 support and has been forced to eat Kraft Dinner five days a week for supper because he cannot afford to buy proper groceries as inflation continues to rise. He told me he never thought his retirement would look like this. I have heard from a couple in Jacksons Point who returned from a cruise near Egypt, only to be locked up in a quarantine hotel for days on end with no clothes and no access to life-saving medication. I have heard from families in Mount Albert who have experienced the pain of losing a loved one to COVID-19, and from seniors in Sutton who have been isolated in long-term care homes and other facilities for the past two years without the ability to see their families or the outside world. I have heard from an expectant single mother in Holland Landing who provided for her family through her job in a federally regulated industry but was fired because she made the decision to wait to get vaccinated after she had her child. I have heard from parents in Bond Head whose son has not been to school in 18 months. Every single one of these people have real stories and valid concerns about where our country is after two years of COVID-19. Many Canadians are hurting right now. Many have lost their jobs, friends or family members, and they have lost faith in their government and institutions. They deserve to be heard. My constituents in York—Simcoe, and Canadians across the country, have diligently followed public health advice, made sacrifices and done what is necessary to keep their families and communities safe throughout this pandemic. They have done their part, now it is time for the Liberal government to do its part. It is time for a re-examination of the government's COVID-19 response in a more sustainable path that gets life back to normal and gives Canadians hope for the future. What does that path look like? It is clear that more must be done to ensure that those most vulnerable are protected as best we can from the coronavirus, but that can be done without devastating, ineffective lockdowns and mandates that cripple the economy and impact the lives and livelihoods of Canadians. I spent most of my life working as a restauranteur, and I know the challenges and triumphs that exist in the industry. It can be hard to make ends meet and keep the doors open in the best of times, but when the government shuts them down and prevents patrons from coming in, it is no wonder many have closed their doors for good. Instead, we need to be looking at alternative policy approaches that will keep Canadians safe while strengthening our economy and respecting individuals freedoms. In the summer of 2020, my colleagues and I in the Ontario Conservative caucus were criticized by state media, the Liberals and the NDP for examining an innovative rapid test that Health Canada had not approved after months of delays, despite it being available in the U.S. and across Europe. We were looking for solutions and to hold the government to account so that it could be the best it could be, but instead of addressing the long delays at Health Canada, and instead of looking at best practices of other countries, government members opted to criticize, ridicule and ignore. That is why it is no surprise that those same rapid tests, and many like them, are still hard to come by for most Canadians today, two years later. However, it is not just rapid tests. We need better medical approaches that focus on treating those who are suffering from COVID and not just fruitlessly trying to stop its transmission. Right now, we have some of the worst health care capacity in the G7, and our system will remain strained because of delayed surgeries and other procedures. Where is the plan for that? Where is the funding for the provinces? No matter what is done to specifically address COVID-19 going forward, one fact remains: Most of us hate to see the country in the state it is in today. It is hurt, and it has divided us. That is why it is important that we restore a sense of unity in Canada and a shared commitment to one another. It is time to put aside the divisive rhetoric and policies and politics that drive wedges between neighbours, family members and friends. There needs to be a recognition that we are all in this together as we look towards a future. This is what our country needs, and it requires the right kind of leadership to make this happen. Canadians are telling us that they want this Parliament, and they want it to work together while representing every part of this country and the people who live here. They are telling us that they want to see a government that is committed to collaboration, accommodation and a willingness to listen. I hope the Prime Minister is listening.

1518 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Feb/7/22 10:16:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, members will forgive me if they thought I was sitting in Queen's Park, as the hon. colleague for York—Simcoe opposite highlighted school closures, the gym that was facing troubles and, of course, businesses. I presume he will not be voting for Doug Ford in the upcoming election in Ontario, because that is the government that is imposing those elements. However, I will agree with the member opposite that we do need to transition beyond COVID. Dr. Theresa Tam is talking about that right now, as are other chief medical health officers. Going back to the protest, in February 2020, the member highlighted the Wet'suwet'en protest and the economic cost that those blockades represented. He said that in committee, and it is on the blues for the record. My questions to him today are these: Is the member not concerned about the economic cost of the blockades that we are seeing in Ottawa, and indeed in other places, and why has he not spoken up for these protesters to go back home?

178 words

Mr. Scot Davidson

Feb/7/22 10:17:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, he is pointing out the provincial lockdowns. I am trying to show the government that the people who are outside right now are hurting. This is what has all led to this. This is the frustration that people have. People are crying in their businesses right now. They are literally crying. The gym owner I talked about, who the member alluded to, owes $40,000. She showed me that her payment is $831, but she has $600 in her account and she is shut. She cannot make money, and she is sitting there crying in front of me. This is the frustration out there on the streets right now, and I wish my hon. colleague would go out to talk to some of these people and listen to them.

131 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Feb/7/22 10:18:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I appreciated his tone, and I thought he did a nice job evaluating the situation that many of his constituents are going through. However, I do not get the impression that we are finding a solution to the current crisis. This evening, I am hearing politicians throwing the ball back and forth in the House because we all have different visions. I am talking about us, but I am also talking about our constituents. Everyone has a different vision of what measures should be in place and how we should deal with the situation. In the short term, I think the fact that politicians are using the crisis to their advantage will not send the trucks away tomorrow morning. I would like my colleague's opinion on this. Does he think that seeing politicians capitalize on this crisis may have added fuel to the fire?

154 words

Mr. Scot Davidson

Feb/7/22 10:19:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, no one should be making political games of this. Again, and I spoke to it in my speech, we are in a minority Parliament. Canadians have sent us here to work together and come up with a solution for this. Today, our leader put forth a suggestion to the Prime Minister that we should go out and meet with these people. Canadians do not want to see these convoys anymore. These are the conversations about new government policy and mandates we all have to have together. The government will keep alluding to 92% of Canadians being vaccinated and 90% of truckers being vaccinated. People will ask the question, and it is okay to ask that question now. Why are people being put in a corner? If it is 90%, why are there mandates? The Liberals keep alluding to the United States. I do not take my marching orders from the U.S.

154 words

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Feb/7/22 10:21:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member says he does not take his marching orders from the United States. With the convoy, what we are understanding is that there is a lot of money coming from the United States. Does he agree that should be stopped? In fact, this is going to be brought up at committee as an issue from the NDP. Would he agree that funding from the United States should not be going to the convoy and that it should be stopped?

82 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 25