SoVote

May/16/22 3:13:50 p.m.
Watch

Order, please. There are standing orders and rules of the House. Members should not pass between the Chair and the speaker, and of course the mace as well. Let us all try to follow that practice. The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

44 words

Mr. Denis Trudel

May/16/22 3:14:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion: That this House reiterate that Quebec is the sole master of its language policy and that it call on the federal government to not impede or restrict—

62 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:14:40 p.m.
Watch

I am already hearing some nays, so there were no discussions. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

19 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

May/16/22 3:14:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations with other parties, and I believe if you seek it, you will find consent for the following motion: That the House: express its horror at the hate-fueled mass shooting by a white supremacist in Buffalo, New York; extend its deepest condolences to the families, friends and communities who lost loved ones; and reaffirm the need to confront racism, white supremacy and hate in all their forms.

73 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:15:26 p.m.
Watch

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. Hearing no dissenting voice, it is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

41 words

All Topics

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

May/16/22 3:16:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I also rise on a point of order. It is about unanimous consent. In the debate earlier today, the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent said several times that I opposed something that I had not opposed. I want to put on the record that when there is consultation between the parties, there needs to be consultation. I not only did not get advance notice, but I did not hear what the member for Mégantic—L'Érable said. I have expressed it to the member for Mégantic—L'Érable and he understands— An hon. member: Debate. Ms. Elizabeth May: I am sorry, but this is not debate. This is a point of order, because I have been denied unanimous consent on every non-controversial and sometimes deeply personal matter, such as being able to rise to pay tribute to my friend of 40 years—

155 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:16:51 p.m.
Watch

I want to make one comment on this before I recognize a few other people. Unanimous consent motions are being abused in the House of Commons. Those motions used to be before question period, and a number of years ago the House adopted the forum to use Statements by Members. I urge each and every member of the House of Commons to use Statements by Members to get their points across rather than using unanimous consent motions as they are being used today. I cannot stop it and it will continue to happen, I am sure, but I do hope we use them for the opportunity they actually are, which is to get the unanimous consent of the House.

119 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:18:19 p.m.
Watch

Following discussions among representatives of all the parties in the House, I understand that there is unanimous consent to observe a moment of silence in memory of the victims of the shooting in Buffalo, New York. I invite hon. members to rise. [A moment of silence observed]

47 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:20:09 p.m.
Watch

It being 3:19 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion by the member for Wellington—Halton Hills relating to the business of supply. The question is on the motion. Shall I dispense? Some hon. members: No. [Chair read text of motion to House]

65 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:23:52 p.m.
Watch

I declare the motion carried.

5 words

All Topics

Mr. Blaine Calkins (Red Deer—Lacombe, CPC)

May/16/22 3:36:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it at this time, I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move: That the membership of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be amended as follows: Mr. Kelly McCauley for Edmonton West for Mr. Steinley for Regina—Lewvan. The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. Hearing none, it is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

93 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:36:48 p.m.
Watch

I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 5, 2022, by the member for Simcoe—Grey concerning alleged ministerial interference in the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. When presenting his question of privilege, the member explained that he had received an email chain meant for members of the Liberal Party in connection with the preparation of instructions for the draft of the committee's report. While recognizing that this is normal party practice, he said that he was concerned to learn that the staff of the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship was actively involved in drafting these directives. The member alleged that such interference in the work of the committee meant that ministerial staff were trying to steer the direction and manipulate the analyst's work. In his opinion, he believed that this is contempt of Parliament. For his part, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader remarked that it is normal for the political staff of a parliamentary secretary who is a member of the committee to provide advice on a report in order to ensure an approach consistent with governmental policies. He argued that they are merely suggestions and not an attempt to constrain the members or dictate the work of the committee's analyst. The parliamentary secretary suggested that it is premature to raise this question of privilege since the committee has not presented a report to that effect. The crux of the problem raised by the member for Simcoe—Grey is that the minister's political staff participating in the discussions about the committee's report supposedly somehow deprives the House and, by extension, the committee of its right to govern its own proceedings, as mentioned by the member for Salaberry—Suroît. The Chair takes every allegation of interference in the proceedings of the House and its committees seriously, and it analyzes each case based on the facts presented to it. In this case, the situation described by the member does not seem highly unusual when a committee reviews a study, begins to plan the drafting of the report and discusses possible instructions. The members of a committee can consult stakeholders, interest groups and even their political colleagues before formulating their recommendations. It is not immediately obvious to the Chair how such discussions could constitute a breach of members' privileges, especially since there is no indication of confidential information's being shared or of threats or intimidation. A committee that deems it appropriate to submit certain problematic aspects to the Chair's attention can follow the normal process by presenting a report to the House. It is therefore impossible for me conclude that there has been a breach of the rights of the House or that a contempt has been committed. I therefore consider the matter closed. I thank the member for the intervention.

482 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/16/22 3:39:51 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 response to 14 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

35 words

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

May/16/22 3:40:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of committees of the House, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 and 114. I intend to move concurrence in the seventh report with the agreement of the House later this day. I also have the honour to present, in both official languages, the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs in relation to its study on the main estimates for the fiscal year 2022-23.

95 words

All Topics

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

May/16/22 3:41:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented to the House earlier this day, be concurred in.

33 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

May/16/22 3:41:25 p.m.
Watch

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. Hearing no dissenting voice, it is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

41 words

All Topics

Mr. Michael Barrett (Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC)

May/16/22 3:41:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I move that the third report of the Standing Committee on Health, presented on Friday, April 29, 2022, be concurred in. It is a pleasure to rise today to speak to this important report, tabled by the health committee. I would like to note that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton. This report reaffirms the support of the full participation of the country of Taiwan in the WHA, the World Health Assembly, and the WHO, the World Health Organization. Taiwan has been shut out of these international institutions over the objections of one group, and that is the Chinese Communist Party. We should go back and take a look at the implications of this and the important role that Taiwan could have played in a major, recent global health event. In the early days of the COVID pandemic, we had a great opportunity. I want to take us back to December 31, 2019. One of the big global players that we saw on the stage during the COVID pandemic was the Communist Party of China. On December 31, 2019, it was not talking about COVID, but Taiwan signalled to the WHO major concerns about the COVID-19 virus being transmitted from person to person. That was the opposite of what the Communist Party of China was saying, but Taiwan was saying what we now know to be true. Taiwan was on the leading edge of this in 2019. It is interesting. We talk about “COVID-19”, because it is from 2019, but most of the world was not recognizing it until well into 2020. Taiwan was on the leading edge, but instead of heeding the warning offered by Taiwan, the WHO took the advice of communist China. In the early days of COVID, the world could have been informed by Taiwan's transparent epidemic command centre, but instead we were met with misinformation, cover-ups and suppression of the work of independent journalists. Now, more than ever, the need for rational states in the regions influenced by aggressive, authoritarian regimes has been made clear. The pressure and influence the CCP has exerted and continues to exert on these international institutions is nothing short of extraordinary, and the CCP has made it clear that if Taiwan wishes to be part of the WHO or the WHA, it must submit and accept the one China policy. That language is important. It is evident that, because of the pressure put on these institutions, China will be the one calling the shots. It should be noted that Taiwan participated in the WHO as an observer from 2009 to 2016, but since 2017 Taiwan has been excluded from the WHA due to opposition from China, particularly due to the policies of the current president. Since then, the WHO has denied Taiwan even observer status. Taiwan, a democracy, is being denied participation in the WHO and the WHA by the CCP. That is absolutely unacceptable. Taiwan deserves a seat at the table and should be allowed to participate on the world stage. That is evidenced by the point that I referenced earlier: its epidemic command centre. Taiwan was able to provide pandemic information on the leading edge in 2019, while we were being met with misinformation and cover-ups from the very country that would see Taiwan denied admission to the WHO and the WHA. From a health perspective alone, it is outrageous that Taiwan is not given the opportunity to participate. Canada and Taiwan's friendship has been ongoing during the past 150 years. They have enriched and benefited each other through their continued involvement and through their continued interactions. Canada must be there for its allies. Canada must stand up for its democratic allies. Many of our allies have been strong in their public support for Taiwan's participation in these important global institutions. The G7 issued a statement that said, “We underscore the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and encourage the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues.” It went on to affirm its support of Taiwan's inclusion, saying, “The international community should be able to benefit from the experience of all partners”. The United States has passed legislation supporting Taiwan's inclusion in the WHO and the WHA, underscoring the importance of the debate occurring today and a vote affirming it in this place. The United States House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill, S.812, to ask Washington to help Taiwan gain observer status in the WHA. The bill cleared the U.S. Senate in August of the past year, and President Biden passed the bill into law on May 13. Who else are we talking about? Denmark, Latvia, Slovakia and the European Parliament have all passed resolutions supporting Taiwan's participation in the WHA. Despite this, Canada has not offered support as an individual nation. It looks like it is our turn. There is more we can do and there is more that we should be doing. Concurring in this report is not all that can be done, but it certainly is a good step in showing support for Taiwan on the world stage. What has happened in Ukraine with the Russian invasion really underscores the possibility, frankly, that it could happen in Taiwan. It could be China that invades a sovereign democracy. Russia and China signalled their intention to have a close and historic partnership that everyone in the world should pay attention to. I have mentioned this before in the House. They talked about a comprehensive strategic partnership. Mr. Putin described it as “a relationship that probably cannot be compared with anything in the world”. Autocratic states want to upset the international and rightful order of things, and weakness on the world stage is exploited and allows these types of things to happen. Allies must support each other. Having Taiwan's full participation in these international bodies is important not only to the world, but also to Canada. It would be an asset in our responses to future health events. I invite all colleagues to join me and support Taiwan's inclusion in the WHA and the WHO, and in concurring in this report. An awful lot of work is transacted in this place, and we have an awful lot of opportunities to do the right thing. We have famously heard from the government in the past that Canada would be back on the world stage. It is time for people around the world to take notice, for Canada not to be last and for Canada to stand up for an ally, stand up for a democracy and stand up for Taiwan. That is the opportunity we have today.

1134 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/16/22 3:51:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am not surprised that the Conservative Party would use the tactic that has been used on many occasions in order to prevent debating substantive legislation. It is a little disappointing, but not surprising. I am somewhat suspicious that the Conservative Party would be looking to the World Health Organization on anything to do with COVID, given that many within the caucus believe there is absolutely no need to have any mandates anymore. In the province of Quebec, masks are still mandatory. I wonder if my colleague could reflect on some of the performances of his colleagues within the Conservative ranks who are not necessarily listening to health experts and science.

113 words

All Topics

Mr. Michael Barrett

May/16/22 3:52:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a very disappointing response from the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader for the Government of Canada. We are using an important tool in this place, and that is to concur in a report from a committee that calls for the participation of Taiwan in the WHO and the WHA. With respect to the advice that we get from global health bodies, that advice can be improved by the participation of responsible, democratic countries like Taiwan. The government has an opportunity today to put aside the partisan politics that the government House leader's parliamentary secretary is offering and instead engage in this debate, which will be very brief on a day that we sit until midnight. Then we can vote in favour of this motion to support Taiwan's participation in the WHO and the WHA. It will result in better health outcomes for everyone around the world and all Canadians.

157 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

May/16/22 3:53:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, could the hon. member share further on the importance of ensuring that we consider responsible actors, especially Taiwan given the unique challenges it faces within the region? Why is it so important to ensure that the House has the opportunity to debate this issue and that we have this show of support and solidarity in Canada's Parliament for Taiwan's inclusion in the WHO and the WHA?

70 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 72