44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024 11:00AM
- Feb/26/24 1:36:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his many questions. I will answer a few of them, but first I want to point out that the member for Salaberry—Suroît is certainly the biggest champion in this place for the interpreters. I think any interpreter, if asked, would say that the person who works the hardest to protect the health of interpreters is the member for Salaberry—Suroît, a Bloc Québécois member.
If I tell my constituents that we are going to have dental coverage, someone will stand up and point out that we already have it. My constituents are not stupid. I will reply that, thanks to the NDP, they will have two dental insurance plans, but with the same service, and they will pay twice as much.
If I tell them that we are going to have pharmacare, someone will stand up and say that we already have it. I will reply that we may end up having to pay for Canadians to get it, without getting any more for ourselves.
If I tell them that we are going to have anti-scab legislation, someone will ask me when it is going to come into force. I will reply that it will take a year and a half to get any confirmation, but since we see the Conservatives closing in, the anti-scab legislation might never see the light of day.
This means that the folks back home might not vote for the NDP.
256 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:37:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader said that we have a minority government, but that is not true. We have a majority government since the NDP and the Liberals got hitched.
The Liberals keep trying to change the rules in the House. This is not the first time. They tried to do it in 2015, at the time of the infamous “elbowgate” incident. Now they are trying again.
I think that the government wants total control. What does the member think?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:38:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague. Her French is excellent. I tip my hat to her.
This comes back to what I was saying earlier. They created a majority government by combining two parties. Their marriage is so tight, they are not even bickering. They get along very well. It is unheard of.
The government is acting like a majority government because it has a partner that allows it to do that. I think that is a shame because Quebeckers and Canadians did not vote for that.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:39:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak to this motion.
I see the Conservatives and the Bloc getting all worked up and saying that this is a terrible motion. As adults in the House, NDP members always look at what is in a bill or motion before the House.
In the motion before us, there are two things we need to vote on. The first is that evening sittings can only be held with the approval of another recognized party. It is not something that can be done unilaterally. The motion must be supported by the Conservative Party, the Bloc Québécois or the NDP. The second is that the next day's sitting can be extended until midnight. That way, more work can be done in the House.
I would like to come back to what was said earlier. Since the beginning of this Parliament, we have seen the Conservative Party systematically block everything, with one exception. The only time we really saw the Conservatives looking out for the national interest was for the debate on conversion therapy. All parties reached an agreement and it passed. Afterwards, Erin O'Toole, the leader of the Conservative Party, was stripped of his leadership position. Apart from that, they have blocked everything.
We will therefore work harder to implement all of the things that the NDP, especially, has pushed the government to do, such as pharmacare, dental care, the federal anti-scab bill, the clean energy program, and increased consumer protections. Let us remember that, under both the Liberals and the Conservatives, major grocery chains and large corporations were able to set whatever prices they wanted, regardless of how that would impact ordinary Canadians. There is also affordable housing, the grocery rebate and more. All of these initiatives came from the NDP.
That is what the NDP wants to move forward on. We need to push the government to implement these things. There are bills that are put in place to help people. The Conservatives claim that they want to help people, but they blocked all of those bills.
This motion gives us the ability to sit during the evening so that more members can debate bills and so that it does not take days and days for these measures to be adopted.
Obviously, no one in the House could object to a measure that makes so much sense. The Conservatives seem interested in blocking legislation, but if we work evenings, they will get more chances to speak.
421 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very wary in doing this. I do not think I have ever made a point of order while interrupting a colleague's speech, whose speech is very important, but it is important to raise my concern. This is about a motion instructing the House to be able to get legislation finished, particularly Bill C-50, which has seen a lot of obstruction.
In the previous exchange between the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and the Liberal member, the Liberal member accused him of getting his children's private school funding covered by the Conservative Party, which I do not think is part of the motion, but I—
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:44:07 p.m.
- Watch
I need to know what the point of order is and what standing order it is under.
The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:44:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative member then made personal attacks against the Prime Minister. We need to focus on the motion at hand—
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:44:07 p.m.
- Watch
That falls into debate.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:44:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate hearing from my colleague from Timmins—James Bay. He was elected a few hours before me. We are like twins as we were both elected the same year. The member won first and I won a few hours later. I always appreciate hearing from him with his experience in the House, and I thank him for that.
There are two aspects to the motion. First of all, we are going to work harder and work evenings. I get fed up when I hear the objections from the Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois on the other aspect, on the House sitting for a series of recorded divisions.
We saw how the Conservatives voted to block and cut funding from a whole range of items having to do with food security, like ensuring that we have a good food system and that inspections get done. The Conservatives wanted to cut back on these things, on affordable housing, and on the whole air transportation safety system.
We saw the Conservatives vote against each of these items, one after another. It took 30 hours. The Leader of the Opposition was there for one hour of those 30 hours. We had 30 hours of votes, and the leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Carleton, was only present for one of the 30 hours. He made—
233 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:46:06 p.m.
- Watch
I will do my best.
It is possible to go on the Internet and see how everyone voted in the House. However, it is not possible to check whether a member stayed in the House for an hour, 30 hours or not at all. This gives us an idea of whether or not someone is in the House. The hon. member can make comments on the number of votes he did or did not cast, but he cannot say who was in the House or not.
The member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:46:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for you.
You are saying that the fact that he voted only six times in person and 124 times virtually shows—
31 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:46:49 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member knows for sure that it does not show online whether one voted virtually or voted in the chamber. That is another issue: we need to find the line on whether we are underlining who is here and who is not here, so it does not show.
The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:47:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on the quality of his French. I hear him using typically Quebec expressions such as “j'ai mon voyage”. It proves that the member has spent time in Quebec.
On the substance of the issue, he is totally wrong. We do not have the right to make a distinction between a vote in the House and a virtual vote. A vote is a vote, period.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:47:36 p.m.
- Watch
I said exactly the same thing.
The hon. member for Hamilton Centre.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:47:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have an observation: When folks are tuned into ParlVU, it is very clear who is voting here and who shows up as a little picture. However, I am seeking advice and direction. It is already public and broadcasting; does that then not make it fair play for us to reference things that are already made available to the public in that space?
We certainly look to you and to the Table for wisdom, but given the hybrid nature of the way in which we engage with the voting, I should state for the record that it is very clear that indeed people can see who rises from their seat and who is presented as a little profile picture on the television.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:48:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, on that same point of order, and it is a point I have also raised on a couple of occasions, if the app is a representation of the chamber, and if a vote is a vote, as the member has just stated, then it is interesting that on the virtual app we have the choice of voting for or against, yes or no, or abstaining. However, in the House a person would not have the option of abstaining, because they would either rise to vote for or they would rise to vote against, but they would not get to abstain. Therefore I think it might be important to look at how we do make sure that the app actually reflects how the chamber operates, and then maybe there would be more of a—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Bardish Chagger: Mr. Speaker, I do not know why I am being chirped at. I am just trying to raise a part of the same point of order.
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:49:34 p.m.
- Watch
I appreciate the input.
The app was designed so as to show a yea or a nay, but the abstention issue was built in for the lobby so they can understand who has voted or not. Of course here in the chamber if a member wants to abstain from something, they just do not show up or do not rise when the time comes.
The official record does not distinguish between whether a member voted in the chamber or via the app. If members are saying that we should actually underline that, then I would suggest they bring it back to PROC, which can make that determination when the time comes.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:50:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order.
It was the current government that put into place the virtual application and voted with the NDP to keep it. Is it trying to create two classes of citizens, those who voted electronically and those who voted in person? I do not think that is appropriate; both are valid and we should not be calling out the difference.
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:50:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order to add to the conversation on procedure, I think there are some instances where MPs do in fact want to be shown on the record as abstaining. Some people may not have the information to make one decision or the other.
I have seen anecdotal information that on the government side a few of its mavericks every now and again, 0.5% of the time, rather than taking the parliamentary walk or having the flu, will go ahead and click “abstain” officially. Therefore I wonder whether abstention is not an official position within the Standing Orders, the rules of the House.
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:51:29 p.m.
- Watch
Abstentions might show on the screens and on the video, but they are not shown in the official record of the House of Commons.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
