SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 194

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 10, 2023 02:00PM
  • May/10/23 5:28:16 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I love that question. I have loved all the questions. I would say, to that end, one thing that is really important is that this is not a competition. This is not one vulnerable group against another vulnerable group, or one advocacy organization against another advocacy organization. The need is profound here, across disability, and we will absolutely get more traction as we work together. The advice I would have for stakeholders, self advocates and all of those different roles is to find the common group. We may have areas where we are working on our own track, and that is great, but the more we can find common ground, the more we will accelerate the action we are looking for.
123 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/10/23 6:31:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the member across the way is trying to connect some very important issues. Talking about the opioid crisis, I am sure the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Health could have expanded on the degree to which we, as a government, need to continue to work on that particular situation. A good part of that is recognizing that Canada, as a country, cannot do it alone. We need to work with provinces and municipalities, as well as first responders and others. There are many different stakeholders who are out there trying to deal with the opioid situation. That is an issue in itself. The other issue the member is trying to raise and make a connection to is McKinsey. That is kind of tacked on. McKinsey has a contract, but the member is trying to build the case that there is a wonderful, special relationship between an individual at McKinsey and the Prime Minister. Tying the three issues together is not very responsible, because there is no direct connection among them. The opioid crisis is there; it is real and tangible. The government is doing what it can and working with a multitude of different stakeholders. In regard to the contracts, if we listen to the Conservative Party on this particular issue, we would think that if they were in power, they would change the process of procurements and contracts that are being let out through the public service. The Conservatives are doing that process a disservice. The Liberal government, through transparency and accountability, has ensured that these contracts are done through the public service as much as possible. This should not be a surprise, because these types of contracts are done at all different levels of government here in Canada. Internationally, around the world, governments always look for those independent contracts. The issue is how those contracts are awarded. I have no problem comparing Canada's procedures with those of any other country. Often, we get other countries looking to Canada for the way our public service lets contracts out for tender. We can all take comfort in and have confidence in our public service in getting out those important contracts. Now, on the connection between McKinsey and the Prime Minister, this is one of those fishing trips by the Conservative Party. No matter what, they put on their tin hats and start asking questions like these: Where is it all connected? How could it be connected to the Prime Minister? They do this so they can dump all over the Prime Minister. That is the logic behind it. The member is taking a couple of serious issues and trying to somehow make it look as though something corrupt has occurred; in fact, nothing corrupt has occurred. The Conservatives are trying to give that impression, and then they are trying to somehow link it to the Prime Minister. I can assure the member that there is nothing there. In turning these little pebbles, he is not going to find—
503 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border