SoVote

Ms. Joanne Thompson (St. John's East, Lib.)

Feb/8/23 3:11:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this week, the Conservative leader launched radio attack ads across Atlantic Canada against carbon pollution pricing. That is preying on people's fears by spreading mistruths. The Conservatives know it, and they owe Atlantic Canadians an apology. Can the Prime Minister update the House on what the government has been doing to support Atlantic Canadians?

57 words

All Topics

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

Feb/8/23 3:11:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to thank the member for St. John's East for her hard work and her leadership on this file. What the Conservative Party still does not realize is that one cannot have a plan for the economy if one does not have a plan for the environment. On this side, we are focused on creating good jobs, helping families with the cost of living and fighting climate change. We are doing so through our climate action incentive rebates, which are putting more money back in families' pockets. We are also helping households with retrofits and switching from oil furnaces to heat pumps, which are saving energy and money while protecting the planet.

117 words

All Topics

Mr. Matthew Green (Hamilton Centre, NDP)

Feb/8/23 3:12:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, workers across Canada and Quebec continue to be left out in the cold on picket lines, while their bosses replace them with non-contract scab workers. New Democrats fought to end these union-busting tactics. The member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie has already introduced anti-scab legislation. The minister just has to pass it. There is no need to delay things any longer. Why is this minister delaying the rights for workers to have the ability to collectively bargain? Why?

84 words

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

Feb/8/23 3:12:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we mandated the Minister of Labour to create a fairer collective bargaining process in federally regulated workplaces by putting forward legislation to further limit the use of replacement workers. We launched consultations, which have now wrapped up, and the results of those consultations will determine the legislation that will be tabled by the end of this year. We support and we have faith in the collective bargaining process, because the best deals are always the ones that are made at the negotiating table.

85 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Feb/8/23 3:13:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it has been almost a year since the governing party promised to bring in a homebuyers' bill of rights, to end blind bidding in home sales and to tackle large corporate investors in the housing market. All of those actions would help make housing more affordable, but the federal government has not implemented any of them yet. What are they waiting for? We need urgent action on the housing crisis. When will the Prime Minister finally deliver on these promises?

82 words

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

Feb/8/23 3:13:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to levelling the playing field for young and middle-class Canadians looking to buy a home. That is why budget 2022 announced that we would work with provinces and territories to develop and implement a homebuyers' bill of rights and a national plan to end blind bidding. The homebuyers' bill of rights would tackle unfair practices in the real estate market, and it could include measures to ensure the right to an inspection and transparency in sales history. We will not rest until we ensure that the dream of home ownership is protected.

99 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:17:03 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for La Prairie on a point of order.

11 words

Prairie

Mr. Alain Therrien

Feb/8/23 3:17:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in response to a question from the Bloc member from La Pointe-de-l'Île, the Prime Minister said about Bloc members that “they do not give a damn about francophone minorities across the country.” I have to say that was unparliamentary language and, as everyone would agree, absolutely false. I therefore demand an apology from the Prime Minister.

64 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:18:02 p.m.
Watch

I noticed that MPs in the House today were a little agitated and worked up. I would remind all members to choose their words carefully. Members must use parliamentary language, in other words, language that will not cause offence. I urge members to be careful about what they say.

49 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:19:41 p.m.
Watch

It being 3:18 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the member for Carleton relating to the business of supply. Call in the members.

46 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:32:01 p.m.
Watch

I declare the motion defeated.

5 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:33:18 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion to concur in Bill C-226 at report stage under Private Members' Business.

38 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:43:57 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-226

I declare the motion carried.

5 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:44:44 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-293 under Private Members' Business.

37 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:58:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-293

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Health.

16 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 3:59:05 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-282 under Private Members' Business.

37 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 4:11:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-282

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade.

17 words

All Topics

Hon. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC)

Feb/8/23 4:12:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am rising today on a question of privilege concerning the interpretation services provided to this morning's meeting of the official opposition caucus. To be clear, these were issues with the technical arrangements provided by the House of Commons administration, not the quality of the work provided by our great and hard-working interpreters. Caucus meetings play a very special role in the work of members of Parliament here in Ottawa. It is where we gather to discuss the issues of the day that are dominating the national conversation as well as the business that needs to be addressed here in the House. These meetings are also where we learn about local and regional priorities in this vast and diverse country of ours. Mr. Speaker, as a former chair of the national Liberal caucus yourself, I know I do not need to remind you of that. Our national caucuses engage in conversations about national issues in a truly national way, not least because they are conducted in our two official languages, English and French. Indeed, subsection 4(2) of the Official Languages Act requires that: Facilities shall be made available for the simultaneous interpretation of the debates and other proceedings of Parliament from one official language into the other. Today, those facilities were not available to the Conservative caucus here on Parliament Hill. Technical concerns at caucus meetings have, in the past, given rise to prima facie cases of privilege. On October 17, 1973, at page 6942 of the Debates, Speaker Lamoureux found a prima facie case of privilege concerning the discovery of a bugging device in the NDP caucus room. More recently, on March 25, 2004, at page 1711 of the Debates, Speaker Milliken found a prima facie case of privilege when the confidential proceedings of the Liberal Party's Ontario regional caucus had been inadvertently disclosed through the House's audiovisual system, which was installed in the meeting room. The Chair observed the pivotal nature of proceedings to MPs' work, stating the following: “The concept of caucus confidentiality is central to the operations of the House and to the work of all hon. members.” Subsequently, in its 22nd report, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs stated at paragraph 14: To the extent that caucus confidentiality is breached by Members by disclosing what was said or went on to non-members of caucus, this is a matter to be dealt with by each party caucus. Any unauthorized recording of caucus meetings, however, is a matter for the House itself. Not only does this arguably impede Members in carrying out their parliamentary functions, but it also could constitute a contempt of the House of Commons. Although both cases involved eavesdropping on confidential caucus meetings, I would respectfully submit that the rulings stand for two important propositions. First, caucus meetings form an essential component of an MP's parliamentary functions. When they are interfered with or impeded, this raises considerations of parliamentary privilege. Second, troubles arising from the technical facilities at caucus meetings become, in the words of the procedure and House affairs committee, a matter for the House itself. On pages 111 and 112, House of Commons Procedure and Practice recalls for us: A Member may also be obstructed or interfered with in the performance of his or her parliamentary functions by non-physical means. In ruling on such matters, the Speaker examines the effect the incident or event had on the Member’s ability to fulfill his or her parliamentary responsibilities. If, in the Speaker’s view, the Member was not obstructed in the performance of his or her parliamentary duties...then a [case] of privilege cannot be found. It is impossible to codify all incidents which might be interpreted as matters of obstruction, interference, molestation or intimidation and, as such, constitute prima facie cases of privilege The inability of the Conservative caucus to conduct its affairs in both official languages has seriously undermined our ability to do our work, discuss issues at hand and prepare ourselves for another week of resistance in the face of a government that, after eight years, has so cruelly abandoned Canadians. Should you agree with me that there is indeed a prima facie case of privilege here, I will be prepared to move the appropriate motion.

723 words

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)

Feb/8/23 4:16:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I too wish to speak to this question of privilege, because I believe that my privileges as a parliamentarian were also breached during this morning's caucus meeting. My francophone colleagues in the Conservative caucus and I unfortunately did not have access to interpretation during the meeting. The current situation on the Hill is no secret. Last October, Linda Ballantyne, president of the International Association of Conference Interpreters for the region of Canada, said the following to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs: Canada did conduct a survey dating back to December 2021, I think it was. Measuring the amount of time spoken in Parliament by different parliamentarians of different languages, indeed we found that English has predominated and French has been snuffed out. That is the reality in Parliament, because most of our colleagues use English as their primary language to communicate, share their opinions and make speeches. Unfortunately, when a group of colleagues get together, the discussions tend to occur mainly in English. Unfortunately, that is what happened this morning in our caucus meeting. I want to commend the interpreters who were there for their offer. They came out of their booth and offered to provide interpretation services at the back of the room for those who wanted them. Unfortunately, that is not ideal. That is not the way to conduct a meeting, hold debates and have normal discussions. We cannot have a caucus meeting and make some of the members go to the back of the room so they can have access to interpretation services. I therefore wholeheartedly support the question of privilege raised by the House leader for the official opposition. I want to raise the same question of privilege because I think that my privilege of being able to communicate with my colleagues was also breached by these technical difficulties. We need to have a plan B. Meetings must take place at the scheduled time and proceed normally with the possibility of access to interpretation services and interpreters and, especially, to the equipment that makes those services possible. Mr. Speaker, I hope you will find that the question of privilege raised by my colleague is fair and you will side with him.

372 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/23 4:19:19 p.m.
Watch

As members know, it is very important to me that every member in the House or on the Hill be able to participate in a debate or listen to a debate in the official language of their choice, because that is their right. It is very important. I would like to thank the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable. I would like to thank the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for bringing that up. I will take it under advisement, dig in deeper and come back with an answer after the shortest delay. I want to thank all of you.

106 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 156