44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 30, 2022 02:00PM
- Mar/30/22 3:10:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Richmond Hill for his important question and his advocacy with respect to chronic homelessness.
We understand as a government that the pandemic has made worse existing housing challenges for Canada's most vulnerable people. That is why we introduced an investment of $2.5 billion through the rapid housing initiative to create over 10,000 new permanent affordable homes and provided $567 million to Reaching Home, so that frontline organization like the the member mentioned can fight homelessness and end chronic homelessness on the ground. On this side of the House, we are committed to ending chronic homelessness once and for all.
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:11:10 p.m.
- Watch
Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji.
The extent of indigenous language loss is evidence of the deep impacts of colonialism. It is an essential and basic part of reconciliation to preserve first nations, Inuit and Métis languages. The Indigenous Languages Act was passed three years ago by the Liberal government, yet little to no action has been taken.
Words mean nothing without action. What will the minister do to ensure that indigenous languages are supported and protected for now and for future generations?
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:11:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to advancing reconciliation for the protection and promotion of indigenous languages. I personally really appreciated the member opposite's testimony and involvement at committee this past week.
We are currently studying with Elections Canada how to move forward on ensuring that indigenous languages are available, and that people who speak indigenous languages have access to that, when they go to vote at election time. I look forward to the conclusion of this study and its recommendations, and I very much appreciate the work that the member is doing in this regard.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:12:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's so-called emissions reduction plan sold Canadians a fairy tale. If only we give the oil and gas industry tens of billions more in subsidies for an unproven technology, the carbon intensity of their oil will magically disappear.
We need a climate plan that lines up with what climate scientists tell us is required to hold onto the possibility of a maximum 1.5°C rise in global temperatures. Why is the Prime Minister gambling with big oil on a safe climate future for our kids, instead of making transformational investments in proven solutions?
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:13:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the emissions reduction plan announced yesterday is an achievable road map for Canada to reach our ambitious climate targets. That is 40% to 45% below 2015 levels. It is getting great reviews from environmental groups to banks, to those in the resource sector.
Let me read a couple for the hon. member. The Pembina Institute says, “The Government of Canada's 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan...is a significant step forward in meeting the climate moment that Canada and the world face today.” Environmental Defence says that “the Government of Canada's emissions reduction plan provides the most comprehensive national climate action—
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:13:58 p.m.
- Watch
That is all the time we have for question period today. Thank you so much for your interest.
We have a point of order from the hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:14:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to correct the record on an answer I gave earlier when I said we would eliminate student debt. I would like to correct the record to say that we will eliminate interest on student debt.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:14:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We had many discussions in QP today, particularly around the Bank of Canada confirming that the carbon tax is inflationary. I have the letter from the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklem, and would like to table it with unanimous consent. I have it in both official languages, so I think if you seek it, you shall find unanimous consent to hear about the inflationary nature of the tax. I thank the member of Parliament for Northumberland—Peterborough South for asking the question and getting the response.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:14:58 p.m.
- Watch
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion to table the document will please say nay.
Some hon. members: Nay.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:15:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to eight petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.
While I am on my feet, I move:
That the House do now proceed to the orders of the day.
55 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:15:56 p.m.
- Watch
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to please rise and indicate it to the Chair.
The hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition.
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:16:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 3:16:32 p.m.
- Watch
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:01:21 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
moved:
That, in relation to Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the bill; and
That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:01:21 p.m.
- Watch
I declare the motion carried.
5 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:04:01 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 67(1), there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so that the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.
Questions and comments, the hon. House leader for the official opposition.
60 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:04:04 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, obviously, it is a profound disappointment that the government is now moving time allocation on what is effectively a very substantive justice bill repealing, for example, mandatory minimums. Effectively, what it is doing is giving criminals a get-out-of -jail-free card at a cost to victims.
I want to point out, too, that we have dealt with this issue since December of 2021 with only four days of debate on this substantive bill. I also want to point out that I am sure the left hand will be holding the left hand on this one. In the agreement between the NDP and the Liberals, it says that both parties agree that parliamentary debate is essential and they will identify the priority of bills to expedite them through the House of Commons, including expediting sitting hours to allow for additional speakers, so I do not quite understand why they are not allowing for additional speakers on this bill, especially as it is something so substantive.
My question to the Minister of Justice is this. There has been an increase in gun crimes and domestic violence in this country since this bill was introduced. Why is the NDP-Liberal government proposing time allocation? Why is it putting the rights of criminals ahead of the rights of victims?
219 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:05:27 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill. I agree with the hon. member that this is a substantive criminal justice reform bill that would effectively reverse a series of policies that frankly did not work, and that are being abandoned everywhere around the world, particularly in the United States, which served as an inspiration for the previous Conservative government to bring in these kinds of minimum mandatory penalties.
I was in Washington last week and met with a number of bipartisan groups and think tanks working on criminal law reform. The basic message from all of them was that incarceration does not work. We need to shorten incarceration periods and minimum mandatory penalties, and the kind of flexibility that conditional sentence orders offer is precisely the kind of reform that they are suggesting, and that we are suggesting. Even states such as Louisiana have abandoned minimum mandatory penalties, because they simply do not work.
The idea that this is in some way soft on crime or does not protect victims is completely false, for a number of reasons that I would be able to elaborate upon.
186 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:06:41 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, it is rather odd to hear the minister say that this is an important bill and that he is imposing closure. If it is an important bill, we must discuss it and express our opinions.
Five Bloc members have spoken about this bill. This is happening against a backdrop of increasing incidents involving firearms in Quebec. The minister knows this. He is from Verdun. He should know that this is a serious problem in Quebec, that we must come up with some useful and intelligent solutions, and that we must have some room for debate.
The Bloc Québécois proposed splitting the bill because it dealt with diversion measures as well as minimum sentences. These are two different matters. We would have liked to have had more debate, because we must have an intelligent discussion. We need a bill that will fix the problems we have on the ground once and for all. The minister is well aware of this.
My question is simple. Why have they decided to move closure when people, especially in Quebec, expect us to do our due diligence?
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/30/22 4:07:50 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. colleague for the question. I am pleased to admit that I, too, have a hard time with the French term for “diversion measures”. We can stumble over it together.
Fighting gangs and gun trafficking is not the objective of this bill. We will be introducing another bill, as we did in the previous Parliament, to tackle the problem raised by my hon. colleague.
In this case, we are talking about minimum sentences for offences that do not pose a threat to public safety and should be considered differently to ensure they are more effective for communities, making them safer, and for the justice system.
112 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
