44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 4, 2023 11:00AM
- Dec/4/23 3:22:26 p.m.
- Watch
I thank the hon. member for the arguments brought forward. They will be taken under advisement.
Is the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby rising on the same question of privilege?
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:22:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rising to intervene on the question of privilege raised this morning by the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle.
We were all dismayed over the weekend after seeing the Speaker in a video tribute to the outgoing interim provincial Liberal leader at the Ontario Liberal convention. Furthermore, the video was shot from the Speaker's chamber and in the traditional speaker's robes.
As mentioned earlier today, the third edition of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, under the direction of Marc Bosc and André Gagnon, states the following on page 324: “In order to protect the impartiality of the office, the Speaker abstains from all partisan political activity”.
The rules surrounding the impartiality of the Speaker could not be clearer. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it, and there are no exceptions to abstaining from partisan activity.
This morning's apology by the Speaker partly explains why this unfortunate situation occurred. Although we understand that the video was intended for an intimate gathering for a personal friend, it was the duty of the Speaker and his office to ensure that the message was not used in a partisan context.
In his statement, the Speaker also indicated that he was recusing himself from this matter directly involving him, and that he would follow the practices established in the ruling of October 19, 2023, concerning the recusal of the Speaker. We believe that it was necessary in this case for the Speaker to recuse himself.
It is imperative to protect the impartiality of the Office of the Speaker. The citations and the quotes clearly show that the Speaker should not be taking part in any partisan activities. That he took part while wearing his robes in a video shot in this building makes the situation all the more clear.
We believe that the proper way to deal with this at this point, as the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle made clear this morning, is to refer the matter to committee. More specifically, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs can study it and recommend any appropriate remedies so that this never happens again.
367 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:25:18 p.m.
- Watch
I thank the hon. member for his input. I think that probably finishes it for that particular issue.
I know the hon. opposition House leader has a point.
28 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:25:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the hon. NDP House leader for his contribution to the question.
I want to take this opportunity to inform the House that I have gone through and looked at some of the remarks that were made today, the Speaker's statement this morning and what happened on the weekend.
Just to compare this with what would happen in a similar circumstance in another area, where a group or an entity depends on the impartiality of a certain position, we could think of what would happen if an NHL referee appeared in a locker room for one of the teams, wearing his referee's uniform and giving a pep talk or positive messages to the team that is about to go out and play on the ice. How long do we think that NHL referee would continue in the post?
It is a difficult thing to say, especially as a former speaker, but I believe that this has undermined the position of the Speaker so greatly that I must add my voice and the voice of the official opposition to those who have asked for the Speaker to resign.
We have a number of very important rulings in front of the House. There is one on the ways and means motion, which we believe should be disallowed. The Speaker decided to allow the motion to proceed and allowed the government to bring in a subsequent bill. The Speaker's decision to participate in a partisan event now calls that decision into question.
I mentioned other rulings in my earlier remarks, and I will not repeat them. However, I just wanted to inform you, Mr. Speaker, and the House of the position of the official opposition.
291 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:27:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 19 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.
While I am on my feet, I move:
That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.
54 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:28:02 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on the motion.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
51 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:28:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think you will find that it can pass on division.
Some hon. members: No.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:28:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 3:28:42 p.m.
- Watch
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:11:47 p.m.
- Watch
I declare the motion carried.
5 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:12:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the consideration of Government Business No. 31, I move:
That the debate be not further adjourned.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:13:06 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise or use the “raise hand” function so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.
The hon. member for Lakeland.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that many Conservative colleagues who represent oil and gas workers and rural or remote northern Canadians and who will be hurt by the culmination of the anti-energy agenda, represented by Bill C-50 and the just transition's top-down, central-planning Soviet aim to restructure the Canadian economy and redistribute wealth, will have many questions today. However, I just wonder, off the top, how the minister can possibly justify such a significant, fundamental, never-seen-before piece of legislation and agenda for our country and for the fundamentals of our Canadian economy, and justify ramming it through with fewer than eight hours total of debate for all members of Parliament from every region of this country, who are just trying to do our jobs on behalf of the people who sent us here.
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:13:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would say, just listening to what my hon. colleague said, that she clearly has not read what the bill says. Perhaps that is because—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:14:07 p.m.
- Watch
Members will not interrupt the hon. minister, as we want to hear the minister answer the question.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:14:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, perhaps that is because the Conservative Party has been filibustering the committee for 11 different meetings, with six weeks of filibuster, not allowing discussion and not allowing witnesses to have a conversation, which is what committees are supposed to do. It is a shameful waste of taxpayers' resources and the Conservatives should be ashamed of themselves.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:14:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have had over 133 witnesses and 120 hours of hearings on the issue of the energy transition. The Conservatives had nothing to say to any energy worker.
When we brought the Canadian Labour Congress, the Conservatives shut them down. When the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers came, the Conservatives shut them down. When the carpenters union came to speak, they shut them down. When the International Trade Union Confederation came, they shut them down. When the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs came, they shut them down. It was New Democrats who brought representatives from the coal transition. The Conservatives had no interest at all in hearing from workers.
This legislation is about workers having a seat at the table, and the Conservatives have turned to gong-show gibberish politics to stop workers from having a seat at the table. I want to ask my hon. colleague why he thinks the Conservatives have fallen down the rabbit hole of conspiracy in their attempts to stop workers from having a seat in a discussion about their future.
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:15:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is also shameful that they have looked to exclude workers across the country from a conversation that is very much about the future of their jobs and the future of their industries. It is about building a strong economy for the future, one that will create jobs and economic prosperity in every part of the country. It is shameful that the Conservatives have worked very actively to ensure that workers have no voice in this conversation.
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:16:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this has been on the floor of the House of Commons and in front of committee, but there has been a moving target on this, particularly with the Supreme Court's reading on the Impact Assessment Act, which has reopened whether there is any validity to this law whatsoever or if we are going to just end up putting the country into another couple of years of legal morass where nothing gets done. Nothing will get done for any workers in Canada. Nothing will get done for any projects in Canada. Nothing will get done for any provinces in Canada. Nothing will get done in Canada.
The government is happy with that. The government is used to that. The government has created that atmosphere across this country. That is what needs to stop in this country. The fact is we need to get things done here again. This is one more laden bill that basically says that we do not want anything to happen in Canada, but not to worry, workers, they are on their side, even though workers will not have any jobs at the end of their agenda. It is a ridiculous scenario. We need to have it examined clearly in the House of Commons, particularly with the interpretations from the Supreme Court of Canada, to see if this is legitimate legislation in the first place.
Could the minister stand up and tell us if he has anything resembling an advanced ruling on this?
248 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/4/23 4:17:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, once again, my hon. colleague has clearly not read the bill. The bill is a transparency mechanism that would establish a partnership council of labour, industry, indigenous peoples and youth to provide advice to the government on how we work together to build an economy that is going to create jobs and economic prosperity. There is nothing across jurisdictions in the bill, and I would invite my hon. colleague to read it.
I would also say, “The Sustainable Jobs Act represents an important opportunity for Canada: to shape our future and create jobs by providing the resources the world needs—including energy, food, and minerals.” That is from the president of the Business Council of Alberta.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
