44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024 11:00AM
- 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
- Feb/26/24 1:51:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. If members want to show that they are in the House and choose not to vote, they simply do not rise in their seat. There is a video record of them not rising in their seat either for or against, thus showing an abstention visually.
55 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:52:05 p.m.
- Watch
I will look at this, but I think I was pretty clear as to what is on the official record and what is not. If we are debating something that would be new to the chamber, if we want to pursue that, then we would ask PROC to look at it. Maybe we can think about that.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
65 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:52:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would remind the member for Sarnia—Lambton that two-thirds of Conservatives voted virtually with the app to vote against a virtual Parliament. It is unbelievable that two-thirds of Conservatives said they do not like the virtual Parliament, but voted virtually to end it. I think it is really important to raise that point. Sometimes we really have to wonder why they think they can pull the wool over the eyes of their constituents by acting that way.
If Conservatives want to raise a point of order, they are welcome to do that.
The second part of this motion deals with the fact that we voted all night one night. We saw how that affected the staff. We saw how that affected the interpreters, who work so hard and who had to work all night.
As the member for La Prairie said earlier, the member for Salaberry—Suroît is a strong advocate for the interpreters' health and safety in the workplace. If the Bloc Québécois truly believes in that, then they should vote in favour of this motion, because requiring House employees and interpreters to work all night jeopardizes their health and safety. That is the reality.
There are two aspects of the motion that should be supported. Apart from the Conservative Party, there should be a consensus among the parties in the House to vote in favour of this motion, which gives us more hours to work and more hours to debate, which is good, while also protecting employees, interpreters and everyone who is subject to the decisions made by the Conservatives, who are clearly showing a complete lack of respect for the employees of the House.
The two aspects of the motion that we are talking about have to do with working harder and working evenings, but that is not something the government can impose. There has to be the support of another recognized party in the House to have the evening sessions. What evening sessions mean is more members of Parliament being able to speak out with respect to legislation. This is something that should be a no-brainer. This is something that should pass by consensus: that we believe that we need more time to debate pieces of legislation. Then the idea of having evening sessions makes a great deal of sense.
Second, there is the issue of all-night voting sessions. We have had a discussion, which I know the Speaker will be bringing back to the House, about the member for Carleton's triggering votes, six of them in person and 124 of them virtual. I know we cannot question whether a member has been in the House, but the reality is that there is a caveat that says somebody can stand up—
472 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:56:49 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Louis‑Saint‑Laurent on a point of order.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:56:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with all his experience, the hon. member should know that he cannot make the same mistake twice. He cannot make a distinction between votes cast here in the House and those cast electronically. A vote is a vote. When will he understand that?
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
