SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 203 - May/31/23

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

May/31/23 4:35:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think your ruling was judicious; unfortunately, the member could not leave well enough alone and decided to take a shot on this side. That is the problem. Because of that, I actually think you should now enforce the rules of this place, which is that one does not make statements in this House when one is not appropriately dressed. There would be problems from that side if I came in wearing an “I love Alberta oil” or “I support agriculture” shirt. Therefore, I think this member should not be permitted to finish because she did not respect your ruling, which was to continue. She had to take a gratuitous shot at the opposition for trying to work with the system and uphold the rules of this place, which we should all be trying to do.

142 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:35:52 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

8 words

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

May/31/23 4:35:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was wondering whether you would have raised a question about a T-shirt, but you did not, and the opposition did not, so it was understood that this was going to happen. I am not sure whether we are dealing with our colleagues on the Conservatives' side being special snowflakes and feeling hurt and now wanting to shut down a voice. My question is about the colour red. I was actually very concerned; I thought that might be a Liberal colour. Since some of the Conservatives are wearing red too, should we rule on colour today? Is it the fact that it is a positive message of inclusion, or are we concerned that the Conservatives are feeling hurt once again?

123 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:37:23 p.m.
Watch

Again, the rule is more about slogans and props. They all fit in the same group of rules. If everyone would like to indulge me, I would be more than happy to read some of the rules, and then we will go back to the order. Chapter 13, the “Rules of Order and Decorum”, on page 611, reads: While the Standing Orders do not prescribe a dress code for Members participating in debate, Speakers have ruled that all Members desiring to be recognized to speak at any point during the proceedings of the House must be wearing contemporary business attire. Current practice requires that male Members wear jackets, shirts and ties. Clerical collars have been allowed, although ascots and turtlenecks have been ruled inappropriate for male Members participating in debate. The Chair has stated that wearing a kilt is permissible on certain occasions (for example, Robert Burns Day). Members of the House who are in the armed forces have been permitted to wear their uniforms in the House. Although there is no notation to this effect in the Journals or in the Debates, a newly elected Member introduced in the House in 2005 wore traditional Métis dress...on that occasion without objection from the Chair. In certain circumstances, usually for medical reasons, the Chair has allowed a relaxation of the dress standards permitting, for example, a Member whose arm was in a cast to wear a sweater in the House instead of a jacket. The other point I want to make is on what I said about slogans and/or props. It goes on to say: Speakers have consistently ruled that visual displays or demonstrations of any kind used by Members to illustrate their remarks or emphasize their positions are out of order. Similarly, props of any kind have always been found to be unacceptable in the Chamber. Members may hold notes in their hands, but they will be interrupted and reprimanded by the Speaker if they use papers, documents or other objects to illustrate their remarks. The point I am trying to make here is simply that we need to be judicious in what we are wearing. I am going to allow it, but I would caution the member on the retort back. That is what caused this to happen this afternoon. I will recognize the hon. member for Waterloo. Let us get reports from committees done, and let us just be judicious in the future on the wearing of T-shirts with slogans in the House. The hon. member for Waterloo has the floor.

430 words

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

May/31/23 4:39:26 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following reports from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs: the 43rd report, in relation to its study of the main estimates for the fiscal year 2023-24; the 44th report, in relation to the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, May 25, regarding the study on foreign election interference; and the 45th report, requesting a further extension of eight sitting days to consider the 2022 report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the 45th report later this day.

108 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

May/31/23 4:40:45 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-334

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-334, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Judges Act and the Director of Public Prosecutions Act (orders prohibiting publication of identifying information). She said: Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to table my private member's bill on publication bans this afternoon. This bill is an act to amend the Criminal Code, the Judges Act and the Director of Public Prosecutions Act to better support survivors of sexualized violence. Tabling this bill was made possible by the phenomenal work of My Voice, My Choice, a group of women who courageously advocated to make sure that other survivors have a choice when it comes to publication bans. Currently, there is no obligation to get consent from victim complainants when a ban has been placed on their name, and if they choose to speak out about their own experiences, they can face criminal charges. This is appalling, and I strongly believe that, as MPs, we have a responsibility to reform these systems. I know that Bill S-12 was recently introduced in the Senate, which I was very happy to see. However, there are gaps in this government bill. I look forward to working with MPs from all parties when it comes to the House to make it better. I hope that my bill can act as an example of how Bill S-12 can and must be strengthened, to ensure that all survivors are given a choice.

244 words

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval

May/31/23 4:42:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would just like some clarification about your decision earlier on wearing a T-shirt. I know that you cited the Standing Orders, but I would like it to be clear. This is how I interpret your decision. If a member decides to come to the House wearing a T-shirt with a slogan, speaks on a topic and the Chair or another member intervenes to raise the matter, the Chair will tell the member that they can finish their comments, but must dress in the future in accordance with the Standing Orders. Tomorrow morning, if I arrive in the House in a T-shirt that reads “Vive le Québec libre”, I would be able to finish my comments, but my dress must be in accordance with the Standing Orders for my next intervention. I would just like to clarify that that is how things will work in the future. In the Bloc Québécois, we have always wanted the Standing Orders to be enforced and for things to be clear. We have always wanted the government to respect the Canadian Constitution, even though we do not like it.

205 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:43:20 p.m.
Watch

I think I made that clear. I allowed the rules to be bent this one time in the interest of getting through Routine Proceedings, but let us just say it will not happen again. I believe that if we want to talk about what we are wearing in the chamber, I would invite the caucuses to maybe put a motion on the floor so that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs can look at it. It is not something we can be deciding on the floor. In the future, I would suggest that we do not wear T-shirts with slogans on them in the House.

108 words

Hon. Bardish Chagger

May/31/23 4:44:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the 45th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs—

24 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:44:24 p.m.
Watch

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

13 words

Mr. Alain Therrien

May/31/23 4:44:26 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the last time, you allowed the member to complete her speech even though she was in breach of the Standing Orders of the House. That was clearly explained in the remarks you read. Now, she is rising wearing the same T-shirt and you have just told my colleague that you would not allow that in the future. This is the future. Now, she is rising wearing the same T-shirt. I am sorry, but at some point, there are limits. Could you enforce the standing order that you read and that is extremely clear? She is obviously in breach of the Standing Orders. It was fine earlier, but this is not earlier, this is now.

118 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:45:03 p.m.
Watch

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader is rising on a point of order.

16 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/31/23 4:45:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, again, because I know there are certain members who are listening this time around, I will just repeat what I had indicated earlier. We saw the Speaker make a ruling, inadvertently, by allowing a member to stand for the introduction of a vote on a bill not wearing a tie and then, in your ruling, you used discretion in this situation. My understanding was that it was just so that we can get through the rubric. It is a one-time issue where we saw something earlier in a vote, and it is not something that is going to be accepted going forward because you are giving a detailed explanation. That was my understanding, so I would suggest that we just continue to get through the rubric. Members on all sides of the House have taken note of what you have said, and I am sure that the respective whips will make sure that it is reinforced in caucuses.

161 words

Mr. Ali Ehsassi (Willowdale, Lib.)

May/31/23 4:46:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is truly a great honour for me to present a petition today on behalf of the Canadian Hazara advocacy group. This is a group with members from across the country, from coast to coast, and they are particularly concerned about the persecution that the Taliban is subjecting members of the Hazara community in Afghanistan to. It is well recorded that there are many atrocities going on. Members of the Hazara community in Canada have come together and put their shoulders to the wheel to make sure that we are fully aware of this and that we do everything we can possibly do. It is important to point out that other Parliaments and municipalities have taken note of this and recognize full well that we should stand up and stand with all members of the Hazara community. In this particular case, the petitioners are rightly asking us to support an investigation by the Human Rights Council of the UN into the serial atrocities that are going on against the Hazaras. In addition, they request that we substantially increase visas for Hazaras seeking asylum in Canada through special immigration programs. It is a great honour to present this petition, and I would remind all members how incredibly important it is that we continue to pay attention and continue to stand up for members of the Hazara community.

228 words

Mr. Dan Mazier (Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, CPC)

May/31/23 4:48:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise for the fifth time on behalf of the people of Swan River, Manitoba, to present a petition on the rising rate of crime. The people of Swan River are demanding that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies, which have fuelled the surge in crime throughout the rural community. The crime severity index in the rural town of 4,000 has increased by over 50% from just five years ago. What was once a safe community has now turned into a place where people fear for their lives; this is because the government's catch-and-release policies have allowed violent repeat offenders to be out on bail instead of in jail. The people of Swan River demand that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies, which directly threaten their livelihoods and community. I fully support the good people of Swan River.

150 words

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

May/31/23 4:49:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1387 to 1391, 1394 and 1398.

16 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/31/23 4:49:30 p.m.
Watch

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

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

May/31/23 4:49:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 1386, 1392, 1393 and 1395 to 1397 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

29 words

May/31/23 4:49:30 p.m.
Watch

Question No. 1387—

Questioner: Blake Desjarlais

With regard to notifications for environmental emergencies in the province of Alberta, broken down by calendar year since 2020: (a) what is the number of environmental occurrences that took place as defined in the Canada-Alberta Environmental Occurrences Notification Agreement; (b) what is the total number of occurrences that were officially reported; and (c) what are the details of all environmental occurrences in (a), including the (i) location, (ii) deleterious substances involved, (iii) date of the first notification?

Question No. 1388—

Questioner: Christine Normandin

With regard to BGRS, which is handling the Canadian Armed Forces’ (CAF) relocation program: (a) on what date was the contract awarded to BGRS; (b) what firm was responsible for the relocation program prior to BGRS; (c) was the contract awarded to BGRS as a result of the expiry of the previous contract with that firm; (d) if the answer in (c) is negative, why was there a change in the firm responsible for the program; (e) was the contract awarded by mutual agreement or through a competitive bidding process; (f) how many compensation awards to CAF members in connection with their relocation have been subsequently claimed retroactively or cancelled (i) since the start of the contract with BGRS, (ii) for the duration of the contract with the firm that preceded BGRS, broken down by year; (g) how many complaints have been received regarding file management (i) since the start of the contract with BGRS, (ii) by the firm that preceded BGRS, broken down by year; and (h) what is the ratio of the number of complaints per number of files handled (i) since the contract was awarded to BGRS, (ii) by the firm that preceded BGRS, broken down by year?

Question No. 1389—

Questioner: Michael D.

With regard to planned defence spending by the government: what will Canada's level of defence spending be as a percentage of gross domestic product, broken down by year for each of the next five fiscal years?

Question No. 1390—

Questioner: Michelle Rempel

With regard to sexual assault, physical assault or harassment complaints filed by those abiding by the government’s hotel quarantine measures since March 1, 2020: (a) how many sexual assaults, physical assaults or harassment complaints have been filed, broken down by type of complaint; (b) how many of the complaints in (a) resulted in criminal charges; (c) how many sexual assaults, physical assaults or harassment complaints have been filed against quarantine screening and enforcement officers during regular visits, broken down by type of complaint; (d) how many of the complaints in (c) resulted in criminal charges; (e) has the government made any payments related to legal or settlement fees related to harassment or assaults related to government quarantine measures, and, if so, how many payments have been made and how much has been paid out; (f) how many complaints have been filed related to quarantine officers inappropriately demanding cash payments from those under restrictions; (g) for any complaints filed in (f), was any disciplinary action taken against the quarantine officers, and, if so, how many officers were disciplined, broken down by type of disciplinary measure; and (h) did the government conduct a gender-based analysis of its quarantine measures and programs before implementation, and, if so, what were the findings and details of the analysis, including whether (i) vulnerability due to confinement and authority of the officer was assessed, (ii) evaluations of any private security firms hired were conducted with respect to safety, (iii) other measures were considered, in order to ensure the safety of those under government restrictions?

Question No. 1391—

Questioner: Michael Kram

With regard to the budget 2022 announcement of $539.3 million for the National Action Plan to End Gender-Based Violence, broken down by province and territory, and by organization: what is the amount of funds (i) committed, (ii) allocated but not distributed?

Question No. 1394—

Questioner: Niki Ashton

With regard to the government's commitment to close the infrastructure gap on First Nations by 2030: (a) what metrics is the government using to measure the progress on meeting this commitment; (b) has the government made any assessments on whether it is on track to reach this commitment; and (c) what year does Indigenous Services Canada expect the infrastructure gap will be closed, and what is the current level of progress based on the metrics in (a)?

Question No. 1398—

Questioner: Garnett Genuis

With regard to gender parity amongst ministerial exempt staff, as of April 13, 2023: (a) how many chiefs of staff for ministers are identified as (i) male, (ii) female, (iii) neither; (b) how many directors of policy for ministers are identified as (i) male, (ii) female, (iii) neither; (c) how many directors of communications for ministers are identified as (i) male, (ii) female, (iii) neither, and (d) how many political exempt staff in general are identified as (i) male, (ii) female, (iii) neither?

2781 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/31/23 4:49:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time.

16 words