44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 21, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's passion for the subject. On this side, we understand our responsibility, which is to protect all Canadians. That is exactly why we need to move forward with debate on this bill—to better protect Canadians across Canada, including Quebeckers. As a matter of fact, it was the Bloc that encouraged the government to take more action. We must take action. Debate on this bill is our opportunity to better protect all Canadians. That is our priority.
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we need to talk about the question from the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert. Obviously, Quebeckers are watching and listening to the NDP's questions, because we are seeing growing support in Quebec polls. As my colleagues know, if we had proportional representation—
47 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/22 11:14:15 a.m.
- Watch
Order.
The member for Battle River—Crowfoot on a point of order.
13 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is my understanding that, when time allocation is moved, it is an opportunity not for the NDP to defend its actions and the decisions it has made in this place, but rather an opportunity for the government to defend the shutting down of debate on a particular—
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/22 11:14:43 a.m.
- Watch
This is more a point of debate.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, Bloc and Conservative members are so sensitive. It is incredible.
12 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/22 11:14:57 a.m.
- Watch
The member for Provencher on a point of order.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I know it is at the discretion of the Chair, but it seems to me there are a lot of members who would like their opinions expressed here during this debate, and you keep deferring to the same member of the NDP. I think it is time to spread out the questions.
54 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/22 11:15:12 a.m.
- Watch
It depends upon who within the party gets up, so I would just indicate again that it is at the will of the Chair to recognize members.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. You do an excellent job. I know that it is not easy when there are parties that are blocking everything and that do not want to co-operate. You do an excellent job, and I thank you on behalf of all Canadians.
In my opinion, there is an unhealthy dynamic here. Some members are blocking everything. They do not want things to move forward. They do not want anything to be studied in committee. They do not want to hear from witnesses. They do not want any subamendments to be proposed and they do not want the bills to be improved.
I have a simple question for my colleague. Why are these parties refusing to improve the bills?
124 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, honestly, I do not have an answer to his question because what the government cares about is working with all members on one of the highest priorities for the country, and that is protecting all Canadians. Even in Quebec, we are working on this bill with the mayor of Montreal, the mayor of Quebec City and my provincial government counterpart in a spirit of co-operation.
We want to continue the debate in committee. That is why we need to move forward in a spirit of co-operation.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I completely agree with the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert that invoking closure over and over again sets a dangerous precedent.
I am someone who has been in the House long enough to remember when time allocation was rare. When Stephen Harper started bringing it in over and over again, I counted. I put to the ministers then that between 1920 and 2000, we had seen these kinds of debates 40 times, and in the previous 18 months we had seen them 40 times.
I would urge my hon. friends in the Liberal Party and in the NDP to consider what we are doing here. When we make time allocation routine, it means that the next government in the next session will weaponize it further, and the rights of individual MPs to debate bills properly will be further eroded. I ask them to please not do this thing.
151 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her comments and her notes of caution. Of course, we are using this particular procedural motion to advance debate. I would hope that she would know that there is always going to be an open mind on studying this bill and that there will always be an open mind on improving this bill. Of course, I remain open to her suggestions and to the suggestions of all parliamentarians, and indeed of all Canadians, on how we can better protect Canadians.
My hon. colleague spoke about the weaponization of procedural motions. I am concerned about the weaponization of lethal firearms in our communities. Of course, this past weekend was a very harsh reminder that, tragically, innocent lives are being lost. Instead of getting any kind of collaboration from the Conservatives, we have seen delay tactics. That has to stop. Debate will continue at committee.
152 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I disagree with the member from the Green Party. As I have said before, no one likes time allocation, but it is a tool that is necessary when we cannot negotiate and have co-operation.
We must remember that the mandate was not just given to this government in terms of co-operating. The mandate to co-operate was given to all political entities in the chamber. All it takes is any one opposition party to prevent any piece of legislation from passing, which will force the government to bring in time allocation or to concede the legislation and never see it pass.
My question to my colleague is this. Would he not agree that, at the end of the day, this is important? This is what Canadians want to see, which is the type of legislation that would have an impact on our lives. That is why we have to push it—
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/22 11:19:51 a.m.
- Watch
I will allow the hon. minister to answer. There are other members who would like to ask questions.
The hon. minister.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in short, I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. colleague and the observation he makes that Bill C-21 is vitally important to Canadians, because it seeks to address the increase of gun violence, which has been statistically studied by StatsCan and other individuals over the past decade or so.
We have seen gun crime go up. We have seen handgun crime, specifically, go up. We have seen intimate-partner violence and gender-based violence go up in connection with the presence of guns. Rather than being able to advance the bill in this chamber, we have seen Conservatives partake in filibustering, which is why we have brought forward this time allocation motion. It does not stop debate. Of course, this bill will continue to be studied by the committee so we can better protect Canadians from the scourge of gun violence.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the government defending its use of something that Liberals previously said was an absolute affront to democracy: time allocation. It is incumbent upon us to talk about the fact that the bill has been debated for three hours and 20-odd minutes. This is not a bill that has been “filibustered”; this is a bill that has barely received scrutiny. There are valid questions that have been raised.
I believe that it is really important to point out right now, especially for the record, that the concerns that are being heard in my riding of Fort McMurray—Cold Lake and many ridings across the prairies are very different from the concerns that are being heard elsewhere. I think that this government would be very well suited not to move time allocation on this and instead hear directly from these witnesses. I would urge the minister to come to the prairies. He can come to my riding and talk to people who have serious concerns about the bill and what it would mean for their day-to-day living. Will he come to my riding to talk to the gun owners?
197 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would be happy to accept my hon. colleague's invitation, and I thank her for it. Also, I am pleased to alert her to the fact that I have previously visited the ridings of some of her colleagues in opposition, including Lethbridge, Alberta, where I had the chance to interact with law-abiding gun owners, for whom we have a tremendous amount of respect.
I would point out that we are not stopping the debate on this bill. All of the urging that my colleague has impressed upon me and the government to hear from witnesses and to continue with debate is an effort that will continue at committee. We have to move on with the bill, because this is an urgent issue, and we look forward to making sure that we can study this bill and ultimately pass it to better protect Canadians.
147 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, what needs to be acknowledged this morning is that this government refuses to accept its status as a minority government, and has never accepted it, since 2019. Its minority status means that it has to work with the opposition parties. It refused to do so from the beginning, so the government called an election in the middle of a pandemic to try to win a majority. When that did not work, the government found a third party to be its puppet, and now it can do whatever it wants. Then it complains that the opposition is trying to obstruct proceedings in order to buy time. Of course, the government should not expect collaboration when it refuses to respect its collaborators.
We were told yesterday that we would be sitting until midnight tonight. No one knows who was consulted. The government House leader is not communicating with the House leaders of the other parties. If that is not contempt, I do not know what is. I urge the government to open its eyes and, more importantly, its ears and work with the opposition parties so we can stop debating about not debating. This is ridiculous.
196 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my colleague's role and the opposition's role. That is exactly why we came up with concrete and practical solutions for Canadians during the pandemic and obtained a consensus in the House. This was done very publicly and I am very proud of the result.
At the same time, with respect to gun violence, I am working with my Quebec counterparts, as I have mentioned several times. We must act. We will continue to debate this bill in committee with all members, including the Bloc members.
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
