44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 10, 2022 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me thank the member for New Westminster—Burnaby for his always constructive work at committee. It is always a pleasure to work with him.
Second, I want to say that I carefully avoided in my speech even referring to what political party or what people were not allowing us to move forward. I never mentioned a word about the Conservatives once in my speech.
The end result here is that the member for New Westminster—Burnaby has, on multiple occasions, proposed motions, amendments and subamendments to have us move to the Hockey Canada study at next Monday's meeting and next Wednesday's meeting. The reason we never were able to actually get there was because Conservative members filibustered those discussions. I am sure they want to hear from Hockey Canada. I am sure that all of us want to hear from Hockey Canada. We all agree what an important study that is, but the Conservative members on the committee do not want to get to the clause-by-clause consideration on Bill C-11. Because we had said that we would hear them in parallel, the Conservative members did not want to get to a vote on that.
It is frustrating, because I know that we all want to get to the Hockey Canada study as well.
226 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, what is frustrating is the mischaracterization. The original motion on Hockey Canada actually came from the Conservative Party, just to make sure the record is straight.
As a person who has managed to sit in a couple of these meetings recently, I found the presentation by the member interesting because he spoke mostly about getting to clause-by-clause. What he did not talk about was the fact that the committee is in charge of its own destiny. Most committees will adjust their speaking and hearing schedules of witnesses as the testimony comes. This committee refuses to do so. The reality is that there are a lot more Canadians who want to speak on this bill. It is a part of the democratic process to hear from Canadians, so that during clause-by-clause consideration there will be better amendments. Perhaps that is something the government does not understand, because this is a very flawed bill.
I would like to ask the member this. In his speaking notes, he referred to content creators being able to access various funds to improve and support their quality like traditional broadcasters. Where exactly in the bill does it describe how a content creator is able to do that?
207 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the hon. member is going to let me speak to the question of witnesses.
Originally, three of the four parties at the committee thought that a certain number of hours would be sufficient to hear from witnesses. The Conservative members then proposed 20 hours, which was more than the other parties thought needed to be given to witnesses, given that many of these witnesses had already been there for Bill C-10. However, the rest of the members of the committee agreed to accede to the request from the Conservatives and provide 20 hours to hear from witnesses. At that point, the members from the other parties felt that we had heard from a sufficient number of witnesses and the Conservative members disagreed. The majority of the committee believed we had heard from a sufficient number of witnesses. As a result, instead of just coming to a vote and deciding by majority whether we had heard from a sufficient number of witnesses, there was a filibuster of each and every motion to try to move to clause-by-clause on the vote.
If the hon. member had been there at the first meeting, he would know that was actually the history of the committee.
210 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert reminded us that there was a time allocation motion on the former Bill C‑10. We supported that motion insofar as it was a bit more “step by step”. We were trying to break the impasse at committee to be able to continue deliberating, including in the House or on other aspects of the bill.
However, the motion before us today deadlocks the entire debate when the situation is much less urgent. This is not the eve of an election, unless my colleague knows something we do not.
I understand the urgency of resolving the issue, especially when we think of the money traditional media is losing. However, I would like to understand how we ended up with this sledgehammer of a motion when that was not even the case last time for Bill C‑10.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Saint-Jean, who always speaks so eloquently in the House.
I think that what it boils down to is that this decision was made after we saw what was happening in committee. I truly believe that, were it not for this motion, the committee would not be able to do the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill because it is always being blocked in everything it tries to do whenever it comes time to vote on anything.
Unfortunately, the House had to insist that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of this bill, and that is why it has come to this.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to open by sharing a quote, which states:
We need to discuss why the government does not listen at committee stage to anything anyone says. It does not accept any amendments from anyone at all, and then it complains that the opposition refuses to allow public consultation.
The quote goes on to say:
We are absolutely not opposed, but we think we should listen to experts and to people who tell the minister what the government should be doing with the bill, but nobody listens in this government.
Do members know who said that? It was the member for Vancouver Centre, the current chair of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. What she said in 2011, we agree with. The current government does not listen. The government does not accept amendments. The government does not accept the testimony and advice of digital-first creators and experts on communications and on the Internet. The government does not listen.
We have heard a lot from the opposition parties that we have had 20 hours of witnesses. The fact is that this committee did not begin studying this bill until May 24: That was 17 days ago. Today, we have Motion No. 16. In the House lately, we are all used to time allocation and closure motions, but this is not just a time allocation motion. This is not just a closure motion. This is a guillotine motion on steroids. This is a motion that not only forces this bill through committee stage and clause-by-clause, but also through the final stages in the House itself. It provides for only one day at report stage, one single day, and there is no guarantee that day has any more than an hour or an hour and a half of debate in the House.
Report stage, as it currently stands, would likely fall on next Friday, meaning that the total time the House would have to debate it, at its very maximum, would be about 150 minutes. There would be 150 minutes to discuss report stage amendments to the largest and most comprehensive updates to the Broadcasting Act in more than 30 years. The government thinks that two and a half hours in the House is sufficient to do that.
As Her Majesty's loyal opposition, we have a duty to play our role: to criticize when warranted, to make amendments and to approve when necessary. That is what we, as Her Majesty's loyal opposition, want to do. We have been clear throughout the process and the debate on this bill and its predecessor bill in the previous Parliament, Bill C-10, that we believe the Broadcasting Act needs to be updated.
The Broadcasting Act dates to 1991. It is a time when VCRs were king, when we had to borrow VHS tapes from the grocery store or the corner store and when the member for South Shore—St. Margarets claims he had hair. I will look for photographic evidence of that. I will point out, because this is relevant, the member was a senior staff member in that government of the day when this legislation first came through. If we consult Hansard from that time and review the comments and commentary by the minister at the time, Minister Masse, we will see that in that time and at that place, the legislation to update the Broadcasting Act and the lead-up to 1991, when it took effect, was done with the broad-based support and consultation not only of members of the House, but also of Canadians. It recognized the challenges that were being faced at that time by broadcasters, by Canadians and by individuals who wanted to see Canadian content creations from across our country.
We want to see the major exhibitions and creations of Quebec creators, and we want them to succeed here and around the world.
We want to see that success, and that is why we are not opposed to necessary updates to the Broadcasting Act. In fact, in our last election platform in 2021, during that unnecessary election that gave us a repeat minority Parliament, we committed to updating the Broadcasting Act, but we committed to doing so in a way that ensured digital first creators were able to succeed and that did not unfairly regulate user-generated content. Now, here we are today with Motion No. 16, which is forcing this bill through Parliament.
I wish I could say I was angry. I wish I could say I was mad. I am not angry, and I am not mad, but I am disappointed. I am disappointed the government would use such an arbitrary and draconian measure as Motion No. 16.
My friend from Edmonton West pointed this out, but it is worth reaffirming what this motion would actually do when it comes to committee resources. Motion No. 16 states “the committee shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for committee meetings”. Members in the House know the hard work interpreters do each and every day. I know sometimes I have difficulty understanding myself in one language, let alone having that translated and interpreted to a second language. The interpreters in this place and in committee do exceptional work interpreting into English and French each and every day, and they deserve our respect.
Over the past two years, the strain and workplace injuries the interpreters in this place have experienced are unacceptable. It is entirely unacceptable. The two official languages of this place, the two official languages of this country, must be respected. It is the interpreters who enable that. It is the interpreters who allow that to happen. However, each and every day we see challenges with resources. We see challenges with the Translation Bureau being able to provide us with sufficient numbers of people who can interpret at committee.
Under this motion, under Motion No. 16, only one committee shall have priority for committee resources. Only one committee shall be able to have its meetings occur no matter what, which is the Canadian heritage committee, so the government can force through its flawed pieces of legislation. No other committee can have that priority.
My friend from South Shore—St. Margarets, on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, would not have priority for committee meetings, and meetings keep being cancelled. My friend from Elgin—Middlesex—London, who chairs the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, would not have priority for House resources. Her committee meetings would be cancelled if the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage needed those resources.
My friend from Edmonton West on the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates has already noted his committees have been cancelled, when they are looking at multi-billion dollar procurement. Those meetings could again be cancelled so the government can push through its repeat legislation, Bill C-11, which was formerly Bill C-10.
If it were only that matter alone, I would say it was sufficient to vote down this flawed motion, but it gets worse. Not only does this motion have a negative impact on each and every other committee, but it also rushes through what ought to be a deliberative process. Subparagraph (ii) states, “amendments to the bill, including from independent members, shall be submitted to the clerk of the committee by 11:59 p.m. on June 13, 2022, and distributed to committee members in both official languages by 9:00 a.m. on June 14, 2022”.
I am sure we are all probably thinking, well, that is Monday, and today is Friday. How does the government expect this motion to take effect by Monday and have amendments due by Monday night? Not only is this a guillotine motion, but this is a guillotine motion that will be guillotined. By the end of business today, a minister of the Crown will stand in their place and state that a minister of the Crown will introduce closure. A minister of the Crown will stand in this place and state that agreement could not be reached and closure will be necessary on Monday.
On Monday, the first order of business, when orders of the day are called, will be a closure motion on a closure motion on steroids, which means that debate will not be further adjourned and that, at 8:00 p.m. on Monday evening, the bells will ring. The Speaker will call in the members, the bells will ring, and at 8:30 p.m. on Monday night, the House will pronounce its judgment on Motion No. 16.
At midnight, under the terms of this motion, amendments would be due, which would be three and a half hours after this motion passes. Amendments on the first update to the Broadcasting Act in 31 years, a complicated and complex matter, would be due in three and half hours.
The government likes to talk about work-life balance, but we, as politicians, are used to this. We are elected. We are well compensated. We are ready and able to work hard, but let us talk about the administration staff of this place. Let us talk about the clerks of our committee, who are now being told that at midnight on Monday night they have to be ready, able and available to accept amendments from each recognized party and from any independent member. This is at 11:59 p.m. on Monday night, and then they have to ensure that each of those amendments are then distributed by 9:00 a.m. the next morning to members of the committee. That is nine hours and one minute, through the dead of night, for the committee clerk and the committee staff to make that happen.
Members, the employees of the House and the employees of Parliament deserve better. They should not be forced into that situation.
It gets worse. After receiving those amendments at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 14, and this is from the motion, “the committee shall proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill no later than 11:59 a.m. on June 14, 2022”.
Committee members will receive the amendments from all parties and from independent members at 9:00 a.m., and then two hours and 59 minutes later, they will proceed to clause by clause. We will be forced, as parliamentarians and as members of the committee, to pronounce judgment on potentially dozens of amendments that we will have seen for the first time only hours before.
An hon. member: That is shameful abuse.
Mr. John Nater: Mr. Speaker, it is shameful abuse.
We as parliamentarians owe it to our constituents, our stakeholders and Canadians from coast to coast to do our due diligence, evaluate amendments, debate amendments and ensure the amendments being proposed achieve what is in the best interests of Canadian creators, Canadian viewers and Canadian consumers.
Could members do that, with dozens of amendments and dozens of clauses, in two hours and 59 minutes? It is not acceptable. It is unreasonable, and it is not possible.
I will tell us what could happen. What could happen is the same thing that happened with Bill C-10, where the Liberals tried to force through amendments that do not improve the bill but in fact worsened the bill. That is what happened with Bill C-10. The Liberals, out of the blue, moved an amendment that took away the exception for user-generated content.
As an aside, we see in this bill, and I will talk about it a little later, an exception to the exception for user-generated content, so the Liberals have clearly not quite learned their lesson when it comes to user-generated content and the importance of protecting it.
Here is another issue: We have the unique situation where there are members of the House who are not represented at committee. I am speaking about independent members, members from unaffiliated parties, such as members from the Green Party, who do not have the opportunity, or I would say the privilege, to sit on committees.
In traditional times, those members are able to come to committee, any committee reviewing pieces of legislation, and submit amendments and move those amendments during the clause by clause.
This programming motion, this guillotine motion on steroids, in subparagrah (iv) says, “suggested amendments filed by independent members pursuant to subparagraph (a)(ii) shall be deemed to have been proposed during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill”.
It says “deemed to have been proposed”. The member for Kitchener Centre and the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands will not even have the opportunity to appear before committee and move their amendments to this piece of legislation, which is the largest update to the Broadcasting Act in over three decades.
This is like a bad novel. It keeps getting worse and worse. Obviously, it is a bad novel written in a foreign country because Canadians only produce great novels, but this is a bad novel because it keeps getting worse as we go. Subparagraph (v) states:
if the committee has not completed its clause-by-clause consideration of the bill by 9:00 p.m. on June 14, 2022, all remaining amendments submitted to the committee shall be deemed moved, and the Chair shall put the question, forthwith and successively without further debate, on all remaining clauses and amendments submitted to the committee, as well as each and every question necessary to dispose of the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill
That means no debate. Not just limited debate, but not a word of debate on a clause-by-clause or amendments at clause-by-clause. Our job, as parliamentarians and as elected officials, is to debate legislation. It is to debate legislation on behalf of our constituents and on behalf of Canadians.
Under this motion, Motion No. 16, each and every question necessary will be put without debate. It means that we cannot even suggest minor amendments to proposals. We cannot suggest to the Chair that perhaps an amendment may be out of order based on various reasons, including the parent act rule. That would not be possible because this proposal does not provide for it.
This proposal states that there shall be no debate, no debate on the largest update to the Broadcasting Act since 1991. No debate on a piece of legislation that could affect each and every Canadian who listens to music online, watches videos online or creates content that is posted online. There will be no debate on clause-by-clause or amendments after 9:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 14, 2022.
Mr. Rick Perkins: What are they afraid of?
Mr. John Nater: Mr. Speaker, my friend from South Shore—St. Margarets asks what they are afraid of. The problem is that they are afraid of Canadians. They are afraid of the viewpoints and considerations of Canadians. They are afraid of hearing more testimony from stakeholders.
In the last couple of days alone, we have had requests from dozens of stakeholders, organizations, individuals and businesses that would be directly affected by this bill. We have yet to hear from APTN, the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network, an amazing organization. We have not heard from them at committee on this matter.
I find subparagraph (a)(vi) of this motion intriguing. I find it intriguing because when committee reports and legislation are reported back to the House, who are they normally reported by? I see my friend from Elgin—Middlesex—London, who is a committee chair. When the the Standing Committee on the Status of Women reports back to the House, it is the chair of the committee who does so. The chair of a standing committee reports bills, legislation and reports to the House. Sometimes the vice-chair will have a supplementary or dissenting report, and in rare cases, a vice-chair will report a bill back if the chair of the committee is unavailable. That is the typical traditional process: The chair or the vice-chair of a committee reports a bill back. However, Motion No. 16 expresses non-confidence in the chair of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. It states:
a member of the committee may report the bill to the House by depositing it with the Clerk of the House, who shall notify the House leaders of the recognized parties and independent members
The motion by the government shows non-confidence in the chair of the committee's ability to report the bill to the House.
Not only does the government not have confidence in the chair of its own committee, its own member, but it is not even following the traditional process for submitting reports to the House. Following question period today we will have Routine Proceedings. The rubric of Routine Proceedings includes the tabling of reports from committees. That is the process for tabling a report. Motion No. 16 does not do that. It just says that any member can take the report and give it to the Clerk rather than following the usual practice of the House. I look forward to hearing the justification from Liberal members of the committee as to why they have lost confidence in the member for Vancouver Centre to fulfill her duties as chair of the committee.
That is not the end of the motion. Motion No. 16 would be bad enough if it forced this bill through committee stage and clause-by-clause. However, there is more.
Mr. Philip Lawrence: There can't be more.
Mr. John Nater: Mr. Speaker, the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South says there cannot be more, but there is more, unfortunately.
The government has tools available to it in the House to force through legislation. On motions it can use what is called closure, and on pieces of legislation it can use time allocation. That is the traditional process. If Bill C-11 were to be reported back to the House and the government felt that it was not proceeding as fast as it would like, it could move time allocation. However, it did not. At least with time allocation there is an opportunity to put questions to the minister for a period of 30 minutes. It is not a lot and it is not sufficient, but at least there is a process. Motion No. 16 pre-emptively time allocates this piece of legislation before clause-by-clause happens, before the process even begins.
I want to quote paragraph (b) of the motion. It states:
not more than one sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the bill at report stage, and that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders that day, 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
That means one day for Bill C-11 at report stage.
Canadians listening at home may not quite grasp the severity of this provision. In the House, there are certain days of the week when government orders are debated for a lengthy period of time, for multiple hours. Sometimes when the government moves time allocation, it will say five hours. This is still, in my opinion, not enough time for an important piece of legislation, but five hours is more than what is foreseen for this piece of legislation.
If Bill C-11 is called before the House at report stage on a Wednesday afternoon or on a Friday, there will be not more than two and a half hours of debate in the House on each and every report stage amendment that may be brought forward. There is no discussion to extend hours. There is no discussion of additional time for Canadians to hear from their elected representatives.
I know that in my caucus, my Conservative colleagues want to discuss this bill. Many of them have eagerly volunteered to sit in on deliberations at the Canadian heritage committee because they have an interest in this piece of legislation. However, they have not had a chance to speak to it in the House of Commons. Why? It is because at second reading the government moved time allocation and they did not have a chance to speak.
My friend from Cumberland—Colchester is here today listening intently because he wanted to speak and did not have the chance. It is the same for my friend from Beauce. He has not had a chance to speak to this piece of legislation, and neither has my friend from Calgary Signal Hill. Each of them has been denied the opportunity to speak to this bill, and now they will be pre-emptively denied the opportunity to speak to the bill because of the limited time available for it.
That is not all. The final paragraph of this motion time allocates the bill at third reading. Paragraph (c) of Motion No. 16 states:
on the day the bill is considered at the third reading stage, the ordinary hour of daily adjournment shall be midnight, and that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders that day, 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.
That means one day of debate for the third and final reading of this piece of legislation.
I will remind members of the House that this bill only got to committee and began the committee process on May 24. Now, less than four weeks later, the government wishes to see this bill arrive at third reading and pass without meaningful debate in this place and without meaningful debate during clause-by-clause in committee.
Earlier this week, the Minister of Canadian Heritage appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. I was in the chair for that meeting, and as members know, the chair does not actively participate in the debate. However, I listened intently to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in his opening comments. He made the comment that when the committee was finished its process, there would be more debate in the House of Commons at report stage, at third reading and then in the Senate. Then, just three days later, on notice on the Order Paper was this guillotine motion, which does not fulfill the minister's commitment to allowing more debate on this bill.
The Minister of Canadian Heritage and I get along very well, so I take him at his word that he was committed to more debate. Unfortunately, the government House leader's failure to manage the legislative agenda of this place means that our colleagues, members of the House, will not have the opportunity to fulfill their duty as parliamentarians, to fulfill their duty to the people they represent.
It is interesting that with the current government, what was old is new again, because in the previous Parliament there was a similar motion. It was Motion No. 10, and it also dealt with a bill, Bill C-10, the predecessor to this bill. It forced Bill C-10 through committee, forced it through the House of Commons and forced it into the Senate.
Had the government actually been committed to passing that piece of legislation, it could have, but something else intervened: the political interests of the Prime Minister. We saw the political ambitions and self-interest of the Prime Minister in his attempt to try to win a majority government during a pandemic, when he and every Liberal member on that side had committed to not calling an election during a pandemic.
They saw an opportunity to try to get their majority, and they did not. However, what happened is that every piece of legislation that was before the House or the Senate died on the Order Paper, including the previous Bill C-10. To hear Liberal members and ministers talk about having to expedite legislation through the House and through committee because it has to get through is simply horse feathers. It is horse feathers because they had an opportunity to do so but killed their own legislation by forcing an unnecessary election, which included the dissolution of Parliament.
However, the Liberals do not learn their lesson. These undemocratic processes keep coming back time and time again, and we have seen this with different pieces of legislation. I know I have heard Liberal MPs talk about the other matters we need to get to. Our Conservative Party put forward a proposal at the heritage committee to prioritize a review of Hockey Canada. We put forward a motion to prioritize the review of the disgusting situation we have learned about from four years ago. That should be our priority at committee. That is what we as parliamentarians should be looking at.
I see that I have one minute before question period, and as I assume I will have time to resume my comments after question period, I will leave with a few interim closing comments.
Canadians expect us to do better. Canadians expect us to review legislation. They expect opposition MPs to improve flawed legislation, and that is what we as Conservative members of Parliament will do. Regardless of the outcome of this motion, we will do what we can to protect Canadians, to support our creators and to ensure that Canadian creators are able to succeed at home and around the globe.
I look forward to resuming after question period.
4323 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:00:15 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to commemorate William Davis Miners' Memorial Day, which is observed every year on June 11 in mining communities across Nova Scotia.
In the spring of 1925, coal miners in Cape Breton went on strike to protest poor working conditions and wages. In response to that strike, the community's access to food, water and electricity was cut off by the company of the day. On June 11, hundreds of brave coal miners took action to restore those essential needs to the community. Unfortunately, 37-year-old William Davis was shot and killed, making the ultimate sacrifice so that those in the community could have a better life.
On Davis Day, mining communities take time to remember William Davis and those who have been lost to mining accidents in mines such as Westray, Springhill, Inverness, No. 26 Colliery in Glace Bay, people like my grandfather, Billy Kelloway, who was killed in No. 20 Colliery in Glace Bay.
In my riding of Cape Breton—Canso and across Nova Scotia, this day serves as a reminder of the determination, the sacrifice, the bravery, the leadership and the resiliency of miners and their families everywhere.
200 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:01:20 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was very proud to agree to be the honorary chair for the Canadian Cancer Society Relay for Life in Lotbinière, which will take place on June 11, 2022, in Saint-Apollinaire.
At Relay for Life events, which first began in 1999, participants of all ages gather and take turns walking around a track or path to symbolize the perseverance of those affected by cancer and to send them a message of hope.
The money collected goes toward supporting innovative research projects on all types of cancer, providing the largest support network to help people better manage life with cancer, shaping public health policies, and providing trusted cancer information for all Canadians.
I invite all members to come walk with me at the Lotbinière Relay for Life and to support this noble cause that is very dear to my heart.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:02:19 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend a wonderful group in my riding, the Beechville Walkettes, for their commitment to supporting the health and wellness of seniors and of all residents in the community.
This group was started by Beechville resident Paula Blackmore to lead regular neighbourhood walks and encourage folks to get some exercise, socialize across generations, tell jokes and check up on their neighbours. In this way, they are countering social isolation and supporting their older friends and neighbours to age in place with a greater sense of security and support.
Our government recognizes the value of helping seniors age well at home, and that is why I was so happy on Wednesday when I heard the Minister of Seniors launch the age well at home initiative to support the community organizations that provide the services seniors need in order to enjoy their golden years at home.
I encourage all organizations to consider applying for this program, and I want to thank everyone who is working to ensure that our seniors feel safe, valued and supported in our communities.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:03:47 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this parliamentary session is coming to a close, and I want to take this opportunity to highlight all the progress made for my constituents in Alfred-Pellan.
In addition to business here in the House, including 165 interventions, 136 votes and eight bills passed, I am pleased with the concrete results we have achieved in Alfred-Pellan, in the form of dozens of thousands of dollars for seniors through the new horizons program, 332 jobs for young people and for 87 businesses and organizations, more than $1.2 million for Canada summer jobs, and more than $11.3 million to build affordable housing, not to mention the neighbourhood parties, community cleanups, walks in support of medical research, support for essential and health care workers, support for our SMEs, and support for our local farmers and producers. There is a long list, but as we are running out of time, I look forward to spending the summer with my constituents in Alfred-Pellan.
Mr. Speaker, I want to wish you and all of my colleagues in the House a good summer.
184 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:04:51 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, across Canada, many are losing loved ones to toxic drug overdoses. Last month, I met with service providers from across my riding, and we discussed a health-based approach to substance abuse and Bill C-216 from the member for Courtenay—Alberni, which was sadly voted down by many Liberals and the Conservatives.
Feedback was clear: Rural and remote communities have very specific challenges. There is a lack of access to basic health care services, compounded by a lack of access to supports for families and for people struggling with substance abuse. There is a lack of affordable housing and often no supportive housing, putting stabilized people at risk of returning to the streets, where it is impossible for them to stay clean. There is a lack of support for families struggling to support their loved ones who suffer from addiction, and the stigma silences and stops addicts and their loved ones from getting access to the help they need.
I want to thank the many organizations that came to speak with me on that day, and I am so grateful for their dedication to saving the lives of Canadians.
193 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:05:55 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the inauguration of the BAPS Swaminarayan Research Institute on the premises of BAPS Hindu Mandir in Toronto last weekend. The June 4 inauguration marks the centenary celebrations of His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, creator of this famous Hindu mandir.
Under the spiritual leadership of His Holiness Mahant Swami Maharaj and guided by his message of vasudheva kutumbakam, meaning “the entire world is my family”, this research institute is dedicated to advancing quality research, learning and expression of the Hindu heritage, its philosophies and denominations and its affiliated languages, cultures, and rich collection of literature.
As the institute pursues excellence in research, I am hopeful that we will see a flourishing of the values of peace, love and harmony that are central to Hindu practice and tradition. We are proud of the achievements of the Hindu community here in Canada and of the success that has enabled them to grow their work through the creation of this institute as it begins its work.
177 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:07:10 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today marks the end of the 10 days of terror endured by the Sikh community from June 1 to June10, 1984. I still remember as a young child seeing the pain and grief of my parents as they learned of the Indian government's invasion of the holy site of the Darbar Sahib, known as the Golden Temple.
As thousands of people gathered to pray, the military hit with heavy artillery, machine guns and tanks. Many innocent lives were lost. The Sikh Reference Library was burned down and the Darbar Sahib complex was destroyed.
The events that occurred in June of 1984 led to further unrest in government-sanctioned mosques, which resulted in thousands of men and women and children being tortured, raped and murdered based on their identity, leaving a scar on the hearts of Sikhs everywhere.
Today, I remember the victims and families who suffered this trauma and I stand with the Sikh community in seeking justice, truth and reconciliation.
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:08:13 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the members of the London Home Builders' Association. I recently attended their president's industry gala dinner and heard perspectives on what is needed to address housing affordability and supply.
The evening also honoured leaders who have made significant contributions to the local and national industry. I am speaking of Peder Madsen of CCR Building and Remodelling, the incoming president; Sue Wastell of Wastell Homes, president for 2021; Dave Stimac of Ironstone Building Company, president for 2020; Toby Stolee of Sifton Properties, president for 2019; and Jared Zaifman, named CEO in 2021. I certainly also want to honour the contributions of Lois Langdon, who retired as CEO after 25 years of service.
A home is more than just a structure: It is a place where Canadians raise their families and forge unforgettable memories. That is because of home builders. Let us get more quality and affordable homes built quickly and let us see all levels of government and professional associations like the London Home Builders' Association work together to that end. I look forward to working with them.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:09:20 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in Kelowna—Lake Country, June is a busy month filled with recreational activities, heritage, arts, culture and celebrations. It is Italian Heritage Month, Indigenous History Month, Pride Month, and Filipino Heritage Month. The Lake Country Creekside Theatre and the many organizations in Kelowna's cultural district have shows, exhibits and performances for everyone to enjoy. The Kelowna Wine Country half marathon includes a scenic run with a beverage and music festival. There are also many sports and recreation activities, including cheering for our very own Kelowna Falcons.
We then lead into Canada Day and the celebrations that are finally back this year. The Rotary Club of Lake Country starts the day off at Swalwell Park with a pancake breakfast. Folkfest at Prospera Place includes the giant cake cutting, and I will have a tent set up to hand out Canada flag items and kids' colouring sheets.
I wish locals and visitors to our beautiful area well, whether volunteering, watching or participating in activities or celebrations, and I hope to see everyone at one of our many community events this summer.
183 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:10:30 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I recently met with Nicki Lyons-MacFarlane, chair of the Imprint Youth Association in Fredericton. They shared with me how the pandemic has put a strain on gender-affirming care, and wait-lists to access trans health care services are growing.
Sadly, for many trans and diverse-gender Canadians, the pandemic has made it difficult to safely access gender-affirming clothing and items as well, especially in rural communities and for those living in unsupportive households.
Trans health care is a health equity issue. Trans and gender-diverse Canadians need to know that our health care system will serve their needs, advance equality and see them for who they are.
As anti-trans sentiments and legislation have proliferated around the world in recent months, it is important for Canada to remain an ally to the trans community to ensure they feel safe, heard and empowered.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:11:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Cold Lake Air Show is a not-to-be-missed event of the summer. It brings together the best of civilian aviation, a spectacular show of the Royal Canadian Air Force and of course our warm northeastern Alberta hospitality.
Over the weekend, people will have the chance to watch the Canadian Forces Snowbirds dance across the sky and the Canadian Armed Forces SkyHawks parachute team perform daring parachute performances. In addition, there will be the CF-18 Demonstration Team, the U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor Demonstration Team and so much more. If someone would rather see aircraft up close and personal, they need not worry, because there will be static displays of some of the coolest planes and helicopters.
This family-friendly, fun-filled weekend is so much more than just aerial shows and flyovers. There will be bouncy castles, live music, a classic car show, beer gardens and food trucks, just to name a few of the other entertainment options.
I would like to officially welcome each and every one of the members to come and join us on July 16 and 17 for the 2022 Cold Lake Air Show.
196 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:12:46 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am going to read an e-mail from one of my constituents.
It says,
Hello, Dr. Ellis... I am writing to you about being a senior and being cold and hungry...and do not know where to turn.
I have gotten myself into a problem using credit to pay for groceries....because there is not enough money, after paying bills with old age and the supplement, to feed myself. Yesterday it was declined in the grocery store and I am hungry. My mortgage is low, but my power bill is high as is the cable/phone, which one has to have, especially in the case of emergency.
I also have a line of credit and another credit card and put payments on every month, but that leaves me in overdraft, after paying bills on the first.... I am not understanding how seniors can live these days with the cost of everything and it is not only me, that is hungry and cold.
I could try to find work, but then my income supplement would cease, sooooo, how would that equate...hmmm...I still have a mortgage... but am living in a trailer, which I could sell...but where would I go????? It is insane after working my whole life, to be in a position of not being able to feed myself or keep warm...I have no answer....Thank you for listening....Catherine.
Sadly, the current Liberal government refuses to address the cost-of-living crisis facing all Canadians.
252 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:14:01 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Cassandra Gillen on being one of the young recipients of this year's Terry Fox Humanitarian Award.
Cassandra's passion for social action began at the tender age of five when her adolescent cousin fell ill. Cassandra asked for money instead of gifts for her birthday so she could donate to the Montreal Children's Hospital.
Today, Cassandra's volunteerism is extensive. She is a Special Olympics coach, co-leader of two Girl Guides units, a member of the organization's National Youth Council and Provincial Quebec Council and a member of the City of Pointe-Claire Youth Advisory Board.
Cassandra's humanitarian spirit extends beyond our borders. She has raised money to help build a school in India, physically helped build a school in Ecuador, raised money to pay for a clean water system in India and provided meals to schoolchildren in Haiti.
I am proud to represent in this House a recipient of this prestigious honour that carries the name of one of our greatest national heroes.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/22 11:15:10 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, June is National Indigenous History Month, and Canadians must have the courage to put truth before reconciliation as we confront our past.
Canada was just three years old when it waged its first war in the west at the Red River Métis settlement, a peaceful trading and farming village. Then again, in 1885, the government would launch a second war farther in the west at Batoche, resulting in the largest mass execution of indigenous leaders in Canada's history, including those of Louis Riel and Wandering Spirit.
During this time, and as a means to clear the plains, the government would install its most insidious policy: that of the residential schools. A policy from this place, it intended to “kill the Indian in the child”, as stated by then prime minister Sir John A. Macdonald.
These attacks on our children never stopped. From the sixties scoop to today's child and family services and the lack of clean water and housing, let us not repeat the past.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
