44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 13, 2023 10:00AM
moved for leave to introduce Bill C‑341, An Act to Amend the Inquiries Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this is bigger than those in the spotlight at the moment. Current events are a good example of how frequently democratic institutions have come under attack during this Parliament and since the Liberal regime came to power.
One of the most important elements of democracy is, of course, accountability. When accountability is lacking, there are statutory tools that task people with setting up commissions of inquiry. This latest situation is an extreme example, of course, and it could benefit from this act, but beyond that, institutions must be strengthened.
Accordingly, the purpose of this bill is to ensure that, from now on, when a commission of inquiry is set up under the Inquiries Act, Parliament will determine who the commissioners of such an inquiry will be. I think getting this process under way now is essential, not only so it can help with the current conversation about a commission of inquiry into Chinese interference, but also so it can benefit democracy in the long term.
185 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 7:33:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saint-Jean for her heartfelt speech. I think we agree on a number of points.
Yes, we need to be open to making some changes. However, as she so rightly said, it is important to take the time to do it right. The pandemic is over, and I think that the existing rules should be reviewed.
She talked about several subjects in her speech, including accountability. Ministers need to be present in the House so that we can ask them questions. I came here in 2019, and I worked here in person until March 2020. Then, I started working remotely. I have not really had much of a chance to get to know how things work around here.
Over the past few months, I have noticed that it is much more convenient and important to be here in person. As my colleague from Saint-Jean rightly pointed out that, when we go get a coffee outside the chamber, we can take the time to talk with our colleagues opposite and share our opinions. I think that is important.
We are talking about accountability and discussions among parliamentarians. The work that we do in our ridings is important. For me, the work that I do in my riding is very important. I go back to my riding every weekend to meet with my constituents. However, the work that we do here with the other parliamentarians is also very important. The opportunity to talk to those we are asking questions of is important.
I would like my colleague to elaborate on that.
268 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:05:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it has been over year, but I congratulate her on the birth of her child.
There are ways we can deal with this. Certainly we can make adjustments for those who are sick and those who have babies, etc. We can certainly work around that, but we should look toward consulting members about how we can address that. We should look at all sides, and not just at what we are seeing from the government, which is a blanket hybrid for all.
If it was simply on the honour system and everyone showed up in committee when they were in town but we had the hybrid for other reasons as a backup, as the colleague from Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke explained with his situation, I would be fine with that, but we do not see that.
In the committee I chair, I see often one member of the government there and I see the faces on the screen of the others sitting in their offices on Wellington or in Confed, or I see ministers Zooming in, or officials. If the system is set up to ensure we can have accountability and those who could be here are here, I would be supportive of that, but this system as it is, without consultation from all the parties and without a real sincere attempt to try to address very valid issues about accountability or caring for families, has not been seen, so I cannot support what the government has proposed.
251 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:06:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to the speech by the member for Edmonton West this evening, and I feel as though I have an entire speech of questions I would like to pose, so I am going to try to narrow it down.
The first thing that comes to mind is accountability. I really think that, when we are holding fellow members of Parliament accountable in the House, we have to do some self-reflection with respect to our own parties.
Just the other day, I watched as Conservative members decided they wanted to circumvent a vote. They went on the other side of the wall here to cast their votes through the hybrid voting system. They did not have the appropriate headsets on, which put the interpreters at risk. Therefore, I think we need to look at ourselves.
Currently, the representation of women in Parliament is only at 30%. We can do better to ensure we have representation in this party. To say that everybody has equal access to being members of Parliament and serving here is completely out of touch and unrealistic. Quite frankly, those remarks show an element of privilege.
My question for the member is this: Why does he not believe in the tools necessary to have equitable representation within the chamber?
217 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:10:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Edmonton West for his well-argued presentation in the House just now. We have also experienced the same problem at the national defence committee, where we have had meetings cancelled because of a lack of resources.
I want to ask the member for Edmonton West if he would really get down to it, especially as he talked about how this virtual Parliament is impacting the health of our interpreters and how the government is not here with a full cabinet to defend its record. Is that happening because the government wants to avoid accountability; has a lack of respect for members of Parliament; lacks compassion for those who work in the House of Commons, such as the interpreters; or is it all of the above?
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:55:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington for his question. We have many mutual friends in the area. I know the hon. member is a long-time farmer in the agriculture sector. I have a great deal of respect for everyone in the agriculture industry across this beautiful country and for what they do for us.
The permanent changes to the Standing Orders have provided a balance to ensure that members' asking questions, accountability and transparency and being there for our constituents are maintained. We always need to ensure that our democracy is robust. Our democracy is there for Canadians to participate in. The permanent changes to the Standing Orders in Government Business No. 26 reflect modern-day society but also reflect maintaining accountability and transparency that every Canadian from coast to coast to coast demands.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:02:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will answer all three questions even though they were asked by only one person.
First, in my mind, a pilot project must be evaluated for results that can be applied permanently. We had three years of practice. We met with experts. We have a result and that is the report. What I heard from my colleague is that they will not be using all the work we did. It has been shelved.
He said that there were discussions. Unless my dear leader slept all through these last few days, there was no communication about what would be tabled, in this case Motion No. 26. I would like someone to show me the proof and I will apologize for my comments. Otherwise, I did not see the leaders consulting and discussing the report or having any constructive consultations.
Finally, with regard to the voting application, I will slowly repeat my remarks. Sometimes I definitely speak too quickly for the interpreters.
We agree on the application. We used it a great deal. When I talk about in-person accountability, I am referring to confidence votes, which do not happen every week, and supply votes. We intend to use the application for everything else.
Are we going to have to say it 50 times? It seems clear enough to me.
222 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 10:21:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are a lot of things to take in. What we have just heard was a very dramatic exposé about the horrors that hybrid could offer in the House.
For anyone at home who might be wondering, as a mom of young children, I can assure them that if I am ever participating in hybrid at home, I am not relaxing. It is very hectic, and we all have to juggle a lot of things. It is certainly not something that I like to do very often. I am a chair of a committee, so I am here in person absolutely as much as possible.
I would like to ask the member about accountability. Let us focus on that.
Are there existing mechanisms to ensure that this could function without coming to these extreme examples of the traditions of the House possibly falling apart?
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
