SoVote

Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.)

May/6/22 12:48:45 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, I am very perplexed as to what is happening today because this is a bill that has gone through a number of days of debate in the House as one single unit. As of today, we will have had our sixth meeting of witnesses. We have set clause-by-clause for about a week and a half from now. We have agreed, by consensus of all the parties, to have eight meetings to discuss the bill, and at this point the Conservative Party is coming forward and saying we need to split the bill. I think it is outrageous. They in fact should be ruled out of order. I want to ask my friend this: Is it appropriate at this juncture to bring forward a motion to split the bill? So many witnesses have come forward and shared their experiences of systemic racism within the criminal justice system: their hurt, their anger and their lived experiences. Is it appropriate at this point in this debate to come forward and ask for—

174 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 66 - May/6/22

Mrs. Sherry Romanado (Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, Lib.)

May/6/22 1:00:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague spoke a lot about the important work being done at the justice committee. We have already had many witnesses come forward to provide testimony, crucial information and feedback on Bill C-5. Would the member care to elaborate on how splitting this bill would impact the committee's good work?

55 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 66 - May/6/22

Mr. Gary Anandasangaree

May/6/22 1:01:09 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, we have completed five meetings with around six witnesses at each meeting, so we have heard from about 30 witnesses. Another meeting started a couple of minutes ago and there are two more scheduled meetings. In total, by the end of the study, we will have heard from roughly 45 witnesses who are experts in their fields, representatives of organizations that support those in the criminal justice system or people with lived experiences who have gone through the criminal justice system. In the following week, we have will clause-by-clause. By splitting the bill, we will be in danger of having to go back and do the study again, which would involve bringing back the same witnesses, who would then have to repeat their heart-wrenching testimony about their lived experiences. I do not think it is fair. We have a bill that is balanced and needs to be debated in its entirety. If opposition members do not like the bill, they are welcome to vote against it. In fact, I am not expecting the support of the Conservative Party on this bill.

186 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 66 - May/6/22

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

May/6/22 1:22:49 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-5

Madam Speaker, I thank the member from Whitby for his speech. Just before him, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice made an interesting comment about the possible splitting of the bill. He said that if the bill were to be split in two, witnesses would probably have to be recalled to testify on the separate parts of the bill. What this comment implies is that the testimony cannot apply in the same way to the two parts of the bill that some want to split. Are the Liberals not admitting that these two parts are different enough that we would want to vote on them separately?

108 words

All Topics