44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 12, 2023 11:00AM
Mr. Speaker, I have heard the arguments from the government, the members of the Conservative Party and the NDP. I find them all interesting.
The government says that the Conservatives have been filibustering the whole time for a while now. That is true. I can say that I have seen the Conservatives filibuster a lot and try to slow down procedures over the past few weeks.
The NDP members are telling us that the Conservatives were worse than the Liberals and they too kept using closure motions. That is also true. The Conservatives used to impose closure motions all the time. The question is, what type of Parliament and environment do we want to work in?
I wonder if, given that the Conservatives abused closure motions in the past, the government really needs to do the same. We can also talk about what is happening now and wonder whether we should short-circuit procedure and the functioning of Parliament because the Conservatives are abusing procedure to slow down the work of parliamentarians.
Those are questions I have. The government may have some good answers for me because I am not convinced that the best way to deal with this is to respond with “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” and do the very thing they criticize.
222 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we would expect Conservatives to at least use some humility when they talk about time allocation, because we know what the Conservative Party did when it was in power. How many times did it use or misuse time allocation? Now it is upset to see different parties within this chamber working together on a plan to improve the lives of Canadians.
If the Conservatives are serious about advancing the interests of Canadians, we would think that instead of filibustering for days on end they would focus on the agenda of Canadians. We would think they would work together with other MPs on making sure that the bills that come through the House of Commons are focused on what is best for Canada and Canadians.
Therefore, while I understand they are the official opposition, I would ask them to show a little humility.
144 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the democratic process will take its course in the House of Commons, but I wish the Conservatives were not filibustering. I wish the Conservatives were not putting obstacles against the interests of Canadians, against ensuring that ports are working better.
Every party in this chamber claims to represent the interests of workers, but Canadians are smart and they know what people are saying. If we listen to the words of the Conservatives, they are the ones who want to ram agreements through the negotiating table instead of allowing unions to stand up for their rights. Instead of allowing unions to have a full process of negotiating a contract with their employers, they want to force it upon workers.
120 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 2:42:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has the privilege of representing Edmonton Mill Woods, a riding in a fabulous city that is lucky to have a large Ukrainian Canadian community. I hope that the member opposite is embarrassed by and ashamed of the childish filibustering of the Conservative Party, which blocked crucial support from our country to Ukraine. That party also blocked the denial of most-favoured-nation trading status to Russia. Those members should be ashamed of themselves.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 9:57:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is always interesting to watch when someone is trying to be personal and nasty. People can make assumptions. My headset was plugged in. It just did not work for that moment.
I just wanted to say that there was a great deal of misinformation and, may I say, disinformation that went on with the hon. member's speech. If the hon. member will recall, the hon. member mentioned the clause-by-clause discussion of one of the very contentious bills on his committee. The committee did not work, and we had problems; we had to come back to the House to ask the House to set time limits for how we dealt with clause-by-clause. The reason for this was that his party filibustered every second clause. There was filibustering going on, and that was what created a dysfunctional committee, not my being hybrid, not my being there. I had everything in front of me. It was working extremely well.
Let us not be nasty and mean to people who have problems and sometimes could be ill.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, unfortunately, the member for Vancouver Centre is incorrect. We had not proceeded to clause-by-clause until the Liberals brought in a guillotine motion in the House of Commons. To say that we were filibustering clause-by-clause is 100% inaccurate, so perhaps the member could refresh her memory, because that is not what happened. They came with a guillotine motion, literally in the dead of night, to force every clause through without debate or discussion. Every debate was debated in the dead of night.
To remind members who are wondering at home, the bill in question was Bill C-11. This was the Liberal effort to regulate the Internet and to try to force user-generated content to be subject to CRTC regulations. We all know that if we want something to be done poorly, we give it to the CRTC.
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 10:27:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things that needs to be factored into the member's comments is the amount of filibustering that takes place in many standing committees.
To not take that into consideration is to not respect the fact that there is a finite amount of resources. We have to work with the resources that are there. Where they can be enhanced, they have been, as much as one would expect.
Our standing committees play an absolutely critical role. They are really the backbone of our Parliament and the work that is done. I would like to think that we would have more functional standing committees in different areas.
At times there is a need for filibustering. Often filibusters end as a result of more political partisanship than I, personally, would like to see.
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 11:25:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague must be proud to speak in French in the House. I have also decided to speak French in my committees.
My colleague mentioned a number of statistics related to the situation facing interpreters, so my questions are along those same lines. I would like to see her source indicating that some witnesses prefer to speak English because of interpretation issues. Since 2015, I have not heard anyone mention those statistics. However, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate and thank the interpreters for their exceptional work. I would like to know whether my colleague agrees with me about the measures the Conservatives are taking, such as filibustering committees, and the partisan games they play in the House during votes, such as when they vote from the lobby, with or without their device, making it look like the system is faulty. Are those situations harmful for interpreters?
I am hoping she can talk to us about that.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 11:26:14 p.m.
- Watch
Yes, Madam Speaker, it feels good to speak French. I think I was one of the first to deliver a speech entirely in French in the House.
To answer his specific question, filibustering is part of parliamentary politics. Sometimes it is misused, as the Conservatives did during the last few votes to retaliate against the government for its behaviour and arrogance.
It takes two to tango, however. A government that is defiant and irritating, one that refuses to compromise or negotiate and instead ignores the opposition is bound to face some bumps in the road. I do not agree with the Conservative Party's misuse of the voting app, but I can understand that sometimes there are no tools left to respond to an arrogant government that ignores the opposition parties.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
