House Hansard - 98

44th Parl. 1st Sess.

September 20, 2022 10:00AM

Sep/20/22 1:20:23 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-22

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate since this morning, and I think that many members agree on the principle of this bill. However, the bill basically says nothing about the terms and conditions, criteria, process or accountability in particular. According to my colleague, what mechanism will enable parliamentarians to measure the effectiveness of the regulations that will be enacted to ensure they uphold the fine principle we are discussing this morning?

74 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 98 - Sep/20/22

Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.)

Sep/20/22 3:00:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I plan to be clear, as I was just moments ago, and repeat that our artists should all be treated the same, whether they speak English or French. That is a principle that should be respected by everyone.

40 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 98 - Sep/20/22

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Sep/20/22 3:38:17 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-22

Madam Speaker, I think that we all agree that this is a statement of good intentions and sound principles. This is not the first time such a bill has been introduced. There is no problem there. I also agree that, sometimes, it is important to support the principle and then give the bill some substance or correct certain grey areas during study in committee. The Bloc Québécois agrees, and that is why we will vote in favour of the principle. However, we need to at least flesh this bill out a little since there is nothing in it about the terms and conditions. For example, I am wondering about one very simple thing. Will the benefits be paid to people directly or will the money be sent to Quebec, which will then take care of paying these benefits?

142 words

All Topics

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 98 - Sep/20/22

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Sep/20/22 5:29:22 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-22

Madam Speaker, allow me to acknowledge my hon. colleague. I am glad we are meeting again in Ottawa instead of Edmonton. Let us consider the nature of this bill. As a man of rigour, does he not feel that, in being asked to vote in favour of this bill, we are being asked to vote for a principle? Voting for a principle when it comes to people with functional limitations and disabilities is something everyone can obviously agree on, but what is the actual substance of this bill? I find it lacks rigour. Who is it really for? Is it a temporary, band-aid solution, or are we going to see long-term solutions? Can the government revamp its relationship with Quebeckers and Canadians with disabilities? It has a responsibility to provide these people with a better quality of life. I think this bill lacks long-term vision, but I do not think that was the government's intention. Can the member help me understand?

165 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 98 - Sep/20/22

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

Sep/20/22 5:44:20 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-22

Madam Speaker, I asked the previous Conservative speaker about the possibility of recognizing the fact that there seems to be universal support. All political entities inside the House are supporting Bill C-22. When we talk about the principle of the legislation, it seems that everyone will be voting in favour of it. In a legislative agenda, things get fairly busy, whether it is the GST, the dental plan or opposition days. Here we have a wonderful opportunity to try to pass the legislation, given that everyone is in favour of the principle of it. Why would we not allow it to go to committee, where it could be thoroughly discussed in detail to look at possible amendments, and then maybe have a greater debate at third reading? Would she support and would the Bloc support its quick passage?

139 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

SoVote

House Hansard - 98