44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 15, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/15/23 4:18:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, context is really important. At the start of the pandemic, when we were in a very difficult situation and it was impossible to work in person, we had to use technology to be able to continue our work in Parliament. At that time, we unanimously passed a motion to operate in a hybrid format.
When health conditions improved, we were able to return to the House to continue our work in person. Over the past three years, we have seen just how effective the system has been. Ministers have continued to be in the House when members on the other side stand up during question period, and this will continue to be the case. The concept of accountability is included in the change proposed today.
However, this motion provides some flexibility. Every party, whether it is the Conservative Party or the Bloc Québécois, uses the hybrid format. Every day, the members use technology to vote. Just a few moments ago, we saw the Bloc using this technology. I find it strange that the Bloc is against this proposal when it makes use of all the options available in the hybrid format, such as electronic voting.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the debate that we have been having in the House on this issue. The one issue that I keep hearing from the Bloc members is that we need to have consensus. However, I reflect on the fact that on Monday of this week, there was not a single vote in which fewer than 50% of the Bloc members used their voting app. As a matter of fact, when we voted on Bill C-41, 80% of the Bloc members used their voting app. When we voted on their own motion about climate change, 50% of the Bloc members used it.
Would the House leader not agree that consensus is pretty well established, given the participation in using the application?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:25:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am surprised and shocked that the debate on something as fundamental as the way this House operates is now going to be cut off. If we are going to have a hybrid Parliament, we need to come to an agreement on how it is going to operate.
I recall many years ago that Chuck Cadman, a member of Parliament for Surrey, in my area, came here to vote even though he was undergoing cancer treatment. That is how important it was for him. Nowadays we see people voting on the app just because it is more convenient for them. Often when there is a vote right after question period, a whole lot of Liberal members of Parliament dash out of here because they are going to vote on the app.
This is worthy of a full debate, but debate is being cut off right now. I do not think that is appropriate.
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:28:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I hear my colleague. I feel he could at least have the intellectual honesty to correctly quote what the Bloc Québécois said. We are facing a rejection of custom and tradition, and he is acting like it means nothing.
He is taking an exceptional pandemic situation, in which we all participated and co-operated, and setting an absolutely shameful precedent. He is talking about the voting app. He should have consulted us instead of unilaterally doing what he is doing today. I would like him to have this done to him when he is on this side of the House after the next election just to see how he likes it.
If he had consulted with us and read our dissenting report, he would know that we were willing to make concessions on the voting app. There is nothing wrong with that. People may have obligations in their constituency on Fridays or Mondays. Rather than setting up a pairing system, we can vote remotely. It is something worthwhile.
Why does his motion not comply with the report's sixth recommendation? Why the double standard? He is asking the opposition parties for quorums that he will not need to reach on the government side. It is despicable. Doing it with a closure motion is even more despicable.
223 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:29:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, over the past three years, I have had several discussions with the Bloc Québécois. I asked them what changes they were proposing for a hybrid system and for voting. Unfortunately, they made it clear every time that a hybrid system was not acceptable.
This is very odd, because the member opposite uses this system every day. I see this as providing an option. With the support of a majority of members, it would be possible to change the rules and, for example, cancel the hybrid system.
I do wonder what would happen if we did not adopt the hybrid system, however. In the future, this way of doing things will continue to exist for one reason: It provides flexibility for important moments in a member's life. That is so important that we must continue using this system.
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:31:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it was January 31 that PROC completed its report. Immediately after that, we were able to engage in discussions with the House leader from his party. Then we got the response from his party about, I believe, three or four weeks ago, when they let us know what their final position was and what their proposed changes were. It took a little while for them to get them. I do not criticize them. I know there are a lot of things happening in his party, but we certainly appreciated receiving those.
What I heard from the Bloc Québécois was, “Well, maybe, maybe not; maybe we want to change some things; maybe we don't.” There was never any specificity. I still do not know what the position of the Bloc is. I heard, “Maybe we're for the voting application.” That would be great, as they use it. In one recent case, 80% of the Bloc members used it. Some Bloc members have told me that they love the voting app and the ability to speak at a distance, use the screen and participate virtually, while other members do not agree with that, so I do not know what their position is.
That is over the past three years, by the way, which we have come back to again and again.
The Conservatives have been very consistent, I have to say: They are against it in any and all circumstances. They say they want to debate it more, but the only thing they say when they debate it is that they are against it. I do not know how many speeches we have to listen to, year after year after year, as they say “No, we're against it. We don't support it.”
We have heard them, but these provisions, which have been in place now for three years, allow the House to continue to do its work and the government to continue to be accountable. These provisions provide a little bit of flexibility, and, by the way, Conservatives and Bloc members use them every single day.
360 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 6:41:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have to point out the hypocrisy here. Let us really stop and think about this.
The Conservative Party says no to the hybrid and the voting application. However, in the last vote we had, 65 Conservative members of Parliament, the member's colleagues in his party, voted using the hybrid application; 43 of them voted in person. Can members imagine? A person is voting against the voting application in the hybrid format, and they are on their phone, saying, “I do not want to be able to vote with my phone.” It sounds pretty stupid to me.
Does the hon. member believe that he really has the full support from his entire caucus, in terms of the statement he has just made?
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 6:42:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the voting app is actually driving people out of this place.
If there are two votes to take place in this chamber, they take at least 20 to 24 minutes. If one is using the voting app, one can literally take about 30 seconds of those 24 minutes to vote. If one sits in the chamber, one actually cannot do certain things while the voting takes place, across those two votes. One cannot, for example, be on a phone call with somebody else. One cannot be doing something other than what one is permitted to do in the House.
The voting app, perversely, is actually driving members out of the chamber. This is why these sorts of measures need to be ended and sunsetted, as has been done in other western democracies.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 6:58:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think I was pretty clear in what I said, which was that there is no other western democracy. I was referring specifically to national legislatures. There are provincial legislatures in Canada, but not one of them is using a hybrid model or a voting app. They have all returned to some sense of normalcy, and that is specifically where we need to go. We cannot continue down this path, because, as I said earlier, we are going to continue to see a further decline in democracy.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 7:25:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech, and he did identify the nature of proximity and the ability to establish rapport and trust between members when they are in close proximity to each other.
There is nothing in the Standing Orders that gives any requirement of this. Under the changes that are proposed, any member could be virtual as much as they want, and the increasing use of the voting app shows the extent to which the expediency of it drives people out of this place.
Why make the permanent change now? Why not give us the opportunity to get it right following an election and following further all-party consensus, rather than a permanent change now?
119 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 8:00:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not think I can provide an argument against it because I am not actually against hybrid. I am not against the voting app, nor indeed is the motion proposed by our House leader, which would allow the voting app to continue for the rest of this Parliament and one year into the new Parliament. I am really against the removal of the consensus requirement for changes to the Standing Orders.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 11:47:59 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, really and truly, we just cannot make this stuff up. We have to see it to believe it. The member is right on.
Canadians need to know just what the Conservatives are actually up to. The idea that out of 106 people in the Conservative Party, when it came time to vote to get rid of the voting app, 77 of them actually used the voting app that they want to get rid of.
It may be that or saying that they support Bill C-9 and want it to pass, but then they move an amendment. Traditionally, when the Conservatives have done that, what they are really saying is they want to talk and talk, as the leader of the Conservative Party said last week about the budget. He said he was going to speak until the Prime Minister changed the budget implementation bill. We did not change it, and four hours later, it passed. It is a game.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
