SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 166

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 8, 2023 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Mr. John Nater (Perth—Wellington, CPC)
  • Mar/8/23 2:24:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are concerned about foreign interference into Canadian elections. However, instead of accepting the proposal from all opposition MPs for a public inquiry, the Liberals are offering a secret process at a secret committee, with secret hearings, secret evidence and secret conclusions all controlled by the Prime Minister. He is focused on protecting himself and not our democratic institutions. Yesterday, at the procedure and House affairs committee, the Liberals filibustered for hours and then did not even show up to the committee meeting. All this was to prevent the Liberal chief of staff from testifying under oath. Canadians deserve to know what the Prime Minister knew, when he knew about it and why he chose to keep it from the public. Canadians deserve answers, a public inquiry, or better yet, a new Prime Minister.
136 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 166 - Mar/8/23
Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)
  • Mar/8/23 5:07:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise in this place to draw the attention of, in this case specifically, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada to the following: that the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bissonnette struck down section 745.51 of the Criminal Code, which allowed parole ineligibility periods to be applied consecutively for mass murderers. As a result, a killer and some of Canada's most heinous mass murderers will have their parole ineligibility period reduced as they are now eligible to apply for parole after only 25 years. R. v. Bissonnette, along with other examples, is an unjust decision putting the interests of some of Canada's worst criminals ahead of the rights of their victims. Recurring parole hearings can retraumatize the families and victims of mass murderers, and the Government of Canada has tools at its disposal to respond to instances like this, including invoking the notwithstanding clause. Therefore, these petitioners from Alberta and across Canada urge the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada to invoke the notwithstanding clause to override this unjust court decision.
189 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border