SoVote

May/31/22 4:40:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I completely agree, but I would like to add something. Earlier, I spoke a lot about demographics, which are a merciless art because they let us know who turns how old and when. If a certain minority is not present in a given region, what happens then? According to the current regulations and provisions, in such cases, the university would lose its research funding. That does not make any sense. I want to reiterate, as all of my colleagues have done, that we want to be inclusive and make things easier. We believe that a better way to achieve that than what was proposed is to trust the university first and foremost, consider equal opportunity programs, give serious thought to equality, and a provide an assessment that is as fair as possible of what each person is entitled to.

141 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/31/22 4:41:18 p.m.
Watch

Order. It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Foreign Affairs; the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, The Environment; the hon. member for Vancouver East, Housing. Resuming debate, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

69 words

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

May/31/22 4:41:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my friend and colleague, the member for Waterloo. I want to address the Bloc's opposition day motion. I am somewhat surprised by the position it is taking on this issue. I thought it would have been a little more progressive to be open-minded to what I believe is a policy that has been fairly effective over the years. We should be looking at ways in which we can enhance opportunities for minority groups and women, who make up a majority of the population in Canada. This is often not reflected in many different sectors in our society. I was very proud of the Prime Minister when we took office in 2015. He made a very clear statement about women in politics, and 50% of the cabinet is made up of women. We have a healthier, more progressive government as a direct result of this. Women play very strong leadership roles within our caucus, and in particular in our cabinet. Whether we talk about the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the former minister of justice, we have done some incredible work in the past number of years. It is quite encouraging when we see women leading in many different ways. I do not think it is an issue of trying to find qualified women. The qualifications are there. We have to ensure that barriers are being taken down. I represent the riding of Winnipeg North where, and I will give some ballpark percentages, just under 40% of people are of Filipino heritage. We have about 20% indigenous. If we factor in other communities, such as my Indo-Canadian community and so forth, we get a sense of why the issue of equality and taking down systemic barriers is so critically important to me as the member of Parliament for Winnipeg North. For many years, we have talked about issues such as systemic barriers that are in place, and trying to get credentials recognized. We have Ambassador Robles here from the Phillippines, and he has been raising the issue with members of Parliament in regard to getting credentials recognized here in Canada so, for example, nurses can be practising here. There are some gender issues related to that. When we talk about the importance of diversity, we say that one of our greatest strengths in Canada is our diversity. If we look over a group, or neglect to take the actions necessary to support inclusion and ensure that people are provided the opportunities to take on many important roles in our society, we do a disservice to the whole issue of diversity. We should be taking ownership of it, promoting it and encouraging its development in all aspects in different sectors of our society. In terms of science and research and the importance of the Canada research chairs program, let there be no doubt that we have before us a government that understands the importance of research and science. We have invested literally hundreds of millions of dollars. If we look at the research chairs position, we are talking about tens of millions of dollars allocated annually and providing well over 2,000 opportunities. Our post-secondary facilities are capable of attracting the best people in the world to ensure we are getting the research and development based on science that will enable Canada to succeed into the future. I truly believe that it is so critically important that our institutions, whether they are academic or other forms of public, especially those with public dollars, or those in the private sector, be reflective of our nation. If we make that effort in our institutions, we will have a healthier nation. I remember Dr. Romy Magsino from Manitoba, a person of Filipino heritage who went on to play a very prominent role at the University of Manitoba in the department of education as its dean. Through that, Romy inspired many within the community. There is no doubt he had the expertise and the talents and so forth, but he inspired many others, including minorities who go beyond the Filipino heritage community, and I think that does a great deal. What message do we send if we are attaching significant amounts of public dollars to an area, such as the chairs of our research, and we are not encouraging and promoting that diversity? I think it is absolutely critical for our youth to see that first hand. That can be very inspiring. We see mentorship programs grow from that. I think there is so much more to do, in making and taking the sacrifices necessary in order to be able to have the diversity that reflects our overall population in Canada. I look at the University of Manitoba, and it is one of many post-secondary facilities that has greatly benefited by the federal government taking an interest in supporting research here in Canada. Through those dollars, our post-secondary institutions are better able to retain and ultimately educate some of the smartest people in the world, and the research they have done has led to incredible inventions. A number of years ago, the University of Manitoba played a critical role in the development of agriculture with canola, and I take a look at the role canola has in the world today compared to 30 years ago. The University of Manitoba and the research that is done at our universities are what enables much of the exportation and transferring of knowledge to many different industries. On that particular point, when we talk about investing, we recognize that our post-secondary institutions have a leading role, but often we will see partnerships. It is just not the public sector that invests in research and science. I look at agreements with places such as Red River College and Magellan Aerospace. We will see classrooms from a college being put into private sector institutions to advance research and technology.

1001 words

All Topics

Mr. Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

May/31/22 4:51:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to what my colleague from Winnipeg North said in order to set the record straight. Quebec is the place and the society with the most accessible school system in North America. That is the first thing. Does the member for Winnipeg North understand that Quebec is a caring society? Does he not realize that, when it comes to social justice, Canada could find better things to do than to impose dysfunctional criteria on Quebec's universities? I would like to hear his thoughts on some other things. We are talking about diversity, but there is a great diversity of opinions. In April, three members expressed their misgivings about the funding criteria for research chairs in Canada. They were the member for Louis-Hébert, the member for Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation and the member for Mount Royal. Where are they today? Does my colleague from Winnipeg North agree with his party's censure of these colleagues who disagree with the research funding criteria?

173 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/31/22 4:52:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Quebec is a beautiful province with a great deal of diversity. One can talk about rural communities to Quebec City, which is a beautiful city. We had a caucus many years ago in Quebec City. I have had the opportunity to visit. There is so much rich heritage there. We have Quebec City and the rural areas. There is so much diversity. Montreal is like a world city, and it is very diverse. The province of Quebec, like the province of Manitoba, should cherish the diversity that is there and support it. One of the ways we support it is to have good government policy that enables full participation in all sectors.

114 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

May/31/22 4:53:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I always like to hear about the University of Manitoba. It is where I went to school. I would note that the member for Winnipeg North and the member for Kingston and the Islands both get a lot of time in the House. I would encourage them, at some point, to cede some time to equity-seeking groups and marginalized groups in their communities. I did want to visit the topic of people with disabilities. We know that too many of these roles are not being filled by people in equity-seeking groups, and certainly, people with disabilities have even more barriers and challenges getting access to academic grants. Does the government have any affirmative action initiatives to make sure that persons with disabilities are able to equally access grants, research and funding in this country?

138 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/31/22 4:54:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first, the member might recognize that I said in my first comment that I would be sharing my time with my colleague and friend, the member for Waterloo. In regard to enabling people to participate, whether it is gaining education or dealing with issues such as disabilities, not only have we taken budgetary actions to support that, but we have also initiated legislative actions. I would reference the member to have some dialogue with the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. I am sure she would be more than happy to share some of the initiatives her department has been taking.

105 words

All Topics

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

May/31/22 4:55:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member for Winnipeg North's comments on the importance of equity to achieve equality. We know that many times we have not necessarily had the diversity of our country reflected. I heard him speak about the University of Winnipeg. I am very proud of the University of Waterloo, as well as Wilfrid Laurier University, institutions that are leading the charge because we are embracing diversity and bringing in polices that are working for more Canadians. Inclusion is important, and I would like to hear the member's comments.

93 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/31/22 4:56:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have really been impressed with the University of Winnipeg in recent years. We have seen a very progressive move toward indigenous studies, from right at the top with the president of the university to the way in which it is opening to the entire student body. There is so much our universities can do to support the diversity of Canada.

63 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

May/31/22 4:57:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion. I move: That, notwithstanding any standing order, Special Order, or usual practice of the House, following Private Members' Business on Wednesday, June 1, 2022, a motion to concur in the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, presented on Monday, May 30, 2022, be deemed moved and seconded, and, at the conclusion of the 3 hours provided for debate or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division be deemed requested and deferred until Thursday, June 2, 2022, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions, and that during the debate, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair.

156 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

May/31/22 4:57:57 p.m.
Watch

All those opposed to the hon. parliamentary secretary moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

37 words

All Topics

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

May/31/22 4:58:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am happy today to participate in the debate on the Bloc Québécois motion in relation to the Canada research chairs program and to have the opportunity to discuss the government's commitment to achieving a more equitable, diverse and inclusive Canadian research enterprise. The Government of Canada is proud to support science and research from coast to coast to coast. Canada's highly skilled and talented researchers are world-renowned for their leading scientific breakthroughs, discovering bold, innovative approaches and contributing to solving our world's toughest problems. Returning our country to evidence-based decision-making is one of the main reasons I chose to run as a Liberal candidate in the riding of Waterloo. The government invests over $4 billion annually in academic research through the federal research granting agencies and the Canada Foundation for Innovation. Through these investments, we are committed to cultivating a rich and diverse research ecosystem that welcomes researchers from across the globe who choose a Canadian institution to call home. Research demonstrates that diversity within the research ecosystem helps drive research excellence and strengthens its quality, social relevance and impact. If we want Canada to achieve its greatest potential in research, we need the rich diversity of Canada and all its intersectionalities to be reflected in our research institutions. It is critical that no researchers, especially those from under-represented groups such as women, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and racialized communities, face systemic barriers in accessing support for their work. Moreover, to retain this excellent talent in Canada, individuals need to be supported, valued and included. Our country needs to benefit, to gain from this talent, these skills. Our country loses when we leave these populations on the sidelines. We know that such systemic barriers persist within academia, and within Canada's research ecosystem more broadly. There is well-documented evidence of the challenges these groups face, including unconscious or implicit biases in hiring, tenure, advancement, promotion, and peer review; wage gaps; precarious work; and institutional practices and policies that perpetuate disadvantages and contribute to a climate that is not inclusive. For Canada to tap into its full potential for research excellence, these barriers must be eliminated so that all researchers can participate fully. That is why the Government of Canada has made concerted efforts to support systemic change and build capacity within Canada's post-secondary research enterprise to foster equity, diversity and inclusion. Canada's granting agencies are implementing an ambitious tri-agency equity, diversity, and inclusion action plan to ensure fair access to research support and promote equitable participation in the research system. We recognize that systemic change is hard work and institutions need support in their efforts to drive transformational change in the research environment if they are to succeed. Through “Dimensions: Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Canada”, a pilot initiative that is among the world-leading programs promoting equity, diversity and inclusion in higher education, we are encouraging institutions to take part in a transformation to increase equity, diversity and inclusion and help drive deeper cultural change within the research ecosystem. As well, the pilot equity, diversity and inclusion institutional capacity-building grants have provided over $10 million to support post-secondary institutions in identifying and eliminating barriers faced by under-represented groups. These grants are supporting institutions as they adapt and implement organizational and systemic change, informed by evidence and meaningful engagement with impacted groups. The tri-agency research support fund also provides support to institutions for projects related to equity, diversity and faculty renewal through the program's incremental project grants stream. In 2021-22, the program supported 29 such projects, totalling over $6 million. Earlier this year, the government provided $19.2 million through the race, gender and diversity initiative to support 46 community-based and community-led research partnerships pertaining to the causes and persistence of systemic racism and discrimination, grounded in the lived experience of disadvantaged groups. The Canada research chairs program is a flagship funding program that supports some of the world's brightest scholars and scientists. This program is a catalyst for amplifying new voices, insights and groundbreaking discoveries that respond to society's economic, social and health needs, and that help us make better sense of the world we live in. Given the program's mandate to support research excellence, it is imperative that all excellent researchers have access to these prestigious positions. Since the program was first launched in 2000, it has had a history of continued under-representation of women, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and racialized communities, demonstrating that the barriers for individuals from these groups are systemic and persistent. To suggest that these individuals are not qualified is ridiculous and, frankly, disheartening. The government has taken a variety of measures to address these barriers within the program and encourage institutions to do better. Some of these measures stem from a legally binding settlement agreement reached in 2006, and its addendum in 2019, pertaining to human rights complaints about equity within the program. The program uses institutional equity targets, considered a best practice by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, as a tool to address systemic barriers to participation. It also requires most institutions to develop robust action plans that will enable meaningful progress towards addressing the disadvantages experienced by under-represented and underserved groups. These measures help ensure that the program meets its objective of attracting and retaining a diverse cadre of world-class researchers at Canadian post-secondary institutions to reinforce excellence in research. The emphasis on equity, diversity and inclusion within the Canada research chairs program is delivering results. In the most recent group of new and renewed chairs, announced in January 2022, 53% were women, almost 30% were racialized individuals, close to 3% were indigenous and almost 6% were persons with disabilities. These outstanding scholars are poised to make critical contributions in diverse research areas, such as photonic devices, health economics, substance use, artificial intelligence, ocean sustainability, northern wildlife biology and hydrological modelling and analysis, among many others. Today, women make up 41% of all appointed chairs, up from less than 25% in 2009, when the first equity targets were set. In the same period, the representation of racialized communities in the program has almost doubled, to 23%, that of persons with disabilities has increased more than fivefold, to almost 6%, and that of indigenous peoples has increased more than eightfold, to just over 3%. This strong progress is the result of collaborative efforts on the part of the participating institutions and the government. I would like to acknowledge the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University for their leadership and efforts in advancing a more equitable, diverse and inclusive research community and ecosystem. These actions are helping to ensure that all of our best and brightest researchers have fair access to the support they need in their pursuit of scientific discovery that will lead Canada to a more equitable, more prosperous and consciously more inclusive Canada. This is part of the importance of ensuring that the decision-making table is more reflective and representative of Canada's diversity, because that will ensure better outcomes for even more Canadians. I think we can all agree that we can do better. The COVID-19 pandemic once again highlighted, exposed and brought to the forefront the inequities that exist within our society. One way to ensure that we are responding to these is by making sure that the decision-making table, Canada's researchers included, is better representative of our diversity. I am thankful for the time, and I look forward to comments and questions.

1277 words

All Topics

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

May/31/22 5:07:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Waterloo for her speech. I also thank her for making an effort to actually discuss. She did not simply try to look for the underlying intent of the Bloc Québécois's opposition day, as if opposition days were named as such because other parties simply needed to oppose them rather than try to participate in what my colleague called the ethics of discussion earlier. That being said, I imagine my colleague heard my colleague from Mirabel's speech this morning, as she is taking part in the debate this afternoon. He explained how difficult it is to go out and find good people, even if you want to look around the globe, given the many pitfalls you have to overcome, such as the ability to pay these individuals. Is my colleague aware that Quebec has equal access employment programs? Despite my young age, those equal access employment programs have been in place throughout my teaching career. Does she understand that Quebec has a recruitment problem that is not necessarily related to the criteria she wants to apply all across Canada?

191 words

All Topics

Hon. Bardish Chagger

May/31/22 5:09:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would first like to thank my colleague for his comments. I think that the topic we are discussing today is a very important one. Even though it is hard to find more diversity and candidates, we need to keep trying. Saying that we are not going to do it because it is hard is not an excuse that I can understand. I know that we can do better and that we can create more inclusive spaces. I would like us to continue working together to find qualified candidates, because I know that they are out there.

99 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

May/31/22 5:10:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this motion seems to be based on a faulty understanding of who gets appointed. There is an assumption that when affirmative action policies are in place, it means that a less qualified candidate is put forward. In fact, what it actually means is that we get a larger pool of qualified candidates and that we are removing barriers for those people who have traditionally been marginalized. I would love to hear the member's comments on that.

79 words

Hon. Bardish Chagger

May/31/22 5:10:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have been watching the member for Victoria engage in this debate throughout the day. I really appreciate the approach she is taking of recognizing that we need to do better, as well as the fact that this is actually much more of a conversation about how quickly, for example, if we see a woman such as myself or herself be appointed, we see the headlines become that it is not merit-based. We are qualified individuals. We are educated. To suggest that when we have more diversity and intersectionalities represented, candidates are all of a sudden less qualified I personally think is, first of all, ridiculous and also disheartening, hence why I mentioned it in my comments. I know we have very qualified people who have been overlooked for far too long. We are creating systems that work for more Canadians, for more talent, and that is why dismantling the systemic issues is instrumental. I would like to assure the member that I will keep fighting to ensure that we do better.

175 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

May/31/22 5:11:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Waterloo for her powerful speech. In particular, she mentioned the progress that Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Waterloo in our community are making. I wonder if she would be open to elaborating more on the impact it has had as they have made progress with respect to equity, diversity and inclusion.

60 words

All Topics

Hon. Bardish Chagger

May/31/22 5:12:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member for Kitchener Centre and I come from the same region, and it has been impressive to see that we have post-secondary institutions that are recognizing that the best natural renewable resource we have in our community is our people; it is the talent. That is why it is important that we continue to invest in them. Both the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University have continued to push themselves. To an earlier comment in regard to having a challenging time finding qualified talent, what the universities in Waterloo demonstrate is that the talent does exist and we can find it if we work hard enough to try to secure it.

116 words

All Topics

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

May/31/22 5:12:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak on this opposition day today. I would like to start by saying that I will be sharing my time with my esteemed colleague from Shefford. I believe that this is the first time in two and a half years that I have said this at the beginning of my speech. The debate that we are having today is an important one. I will start by saying that I have enjoyed the last few speeches. I have been listening to the debate for most of the day, and I only missed a few bits here and there. Many have said that they were disappointed with the topic and with the Bloc Québécois, but these are the words of people who have few arguments. I myself was disappointed to hear people say that they were disappointed. Let us talk frankly about this fundamental topic. I will start by sending a message to all women, to all visible minorities, to all first nations people, to all people with disabilities, and to any other group that may be under-represented. I would tell them that they are qualified and that they can do whatever they want in life and apply anywhere. The Bloc Québécois's message today does not run counter to that. The message of the Bloc Québécois is that these groups are overwhelmingly under-represented in a large proportion of our institutions and that we must ensure that they have a proper place. Therefore, we are in favour of affirmative action. It is important for me to specify that because I do not want to later be accused of wanting to protect the power of 50-year-old white men. That is not what we are doing, and we are very much in favour of affirmative action. The problem arises when we start to prohibit individuals from applying for a specific job. Regardless of differing opinions, I think that is very serious and a line that should not be crossed. That is the issue we are discussing today. When you start saying that certain people cannot apply if they do not have specific physical or cultural characteristics, regardless of skills, that is a major problem. I am not saying that minorities are not competent; that is not my intention at all. What I am saying is that you cannot prohibit people from applying, and that is fundamental. When problems arise in this world, we see a kind of pendulum effect. We can go back in time to observe this phenomenon. I would like to share an example that has a lot in common with the subject at hand: child-rearing philosophies. The 1980s and 1990s were an era of child-kings and parents who did not dare place any restrictions on their children. Nowadays, we understand that was not necessarily a good thing. Previously, parents were too harsh, and then the pendulum swung the other way and they wanted to be their child's best friend. Eventually people realized that going too far in the other direction was bad, so things settled somewhere in the middle. Lots and lots of books were written about the importance of saying no, setting limits and so on. I wanted to share that to explain the idea of the pendulum. We now find ourselves in the same situation with respect to the representation of minorities and other groups in jobs, including research chairs. These groups are currently under-represented, and we need to address that. I think we should bring the pendulum back to the centre without going too far in the opposite direction by excluding other people. I hope people will understand what I am saying and that their questions will not be accusatory. How do we increase the representation of groups? Some of my colleagues referred to the equal access program in Quebec. I also experienced this when I was a teacher for a school board. I think that the Commission scolaire de l'industrie in Joliette was one of the first places where such a program was established in Quebec. In the 1990s, following a complaint from an individual, it was determined that women were clearly under‑represented in management positions. We set up a program that said that, if candidates had equal or similar skills, then we would favour female candidates. Equal skills can be difficult to establish, so it had to be suitable and equivalent skills. The program worked very well. Of course, this was not something that happened in one or two years; it took a number of years for the program to work. However, if we look at the situation today, women are much better represented in management positions. We cannot, as a central state, wave a magic wand and say that tomorrow morning everyone will be fairly represented. The current ratios stem from a long and heavy history. At the same time, we also cannot tell people who were hired a long time ago that they no longer meet the criteria, so they are going to be fired and replaced by someone from a diverse background. I am being sarcastic, but I think my point is clear. That is what bothers me. As I have pointed out in several questions earlier today, and I think it has been raised other times as well, what continues to surprise me is that I have not heard from anyone from the political parties that oppose our Bloc motion who has bothered to answer that question. If anyone is willing to chat with me during question period, I invite them to say whether they are comfortable telling people that they are not in the right category so they do not have access to that, even though we claim to be the country where everything is possible. We have a fundamental problem and this is important. Perhaps there are government members who also want to call us out. My colleague from Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques raised an important and interesting question about three government members who expressed doubts about the fact that applicants from certain ethnic groups were being rejected. Coincidentally, we have not heard from those three members today. It is all a bit surreal. If anyone has an answer for me, I would really like to hear it. The other part of my speech has to do with the one-size-fits-all nature of the measures. The previous speaker used the phrase “coast to coast to coast”. The government considers everyone to be equal and the same everywhere, but it is unrealistic to require this to be done at the same speed everywhere, and it is not representative of the targeted communities. Several times today, people gave the example of Rimouski, where 2% of the people are members of visible minorities. It will be very difficult to have 20% of the staff come from those minorities when they represent only 2% of the population. That is a challenge, but that does not mean that we must not try, that we must not put measures in place or that we must not require this university to make every effort to seek candidates from outside the region and the country to fill these positions. The problem is that the government is telling that university that if it fails, then it will not get any money. That is where we run up against the great and powerful, all-knowing federal government. If the government institutes one-size-fits-all measures across the country, does that mean that since Quebec represents 23% of Canada, then 23% of the research chair holders across Canada need to be francophone? I am being sarcastic again. That is not what we are asking for. People will think that is ridiculous, but we are being asked to do the reverse. I want to reiterate that we believe diversity is important and that we need these voices in our research institutions, in particular. Measures must be put in place, but problems cannot always be solved with a wave of a magic wand. It can sometimes take time to restore balance, but you cannot correct an injustice by committing a new one.

1388 words

All Topics

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

May/31/22 5:22:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened to the speech by the member for Berthier—Maskinongé, and although we do agree on a lot of things, that is not the case today. Does my colleague understand that he and I, as white men, do not face certain systemic barriers? If so, does he agree that more needs to be done to remove these systemic barriers?

64 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 78