SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 285

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 285 - Feb/26/24
Hon. Steven MacKinnon
  • Feb/26/24 12:45:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I salute my friend and the members from the Bloc Québécois for their constructive contribution. They are here to oppose. Sometimes they support our proposals, sometimes they reject them. However, they do not do what I criticize my friends in the official opposition of, namely using dilatory tactics that only create chaos and prevent my friend and all parliamentarians from expressing their point of view, taking a position and taking action in favour of Canadians or against something. Bills are introduced in the House so that we can debate them and vote on them. Then, we have to take positions and defend them. The fact is that this motion is being moved for this member and for all members in the House, so that this seat of democracy can work better.
137 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 285 - Feb/26/24
Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)
  • Feb/26/24 12:46:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that we are having this debate and this discussion today. I believe that every member of Parliament is elected to represent their constituents. I am really honoured and privileged to represent the good people of the riding of Waterloo. What I have noticed, whether in the House or within committees, is that each party has priorities. Each has areas of focus. Whether it is the Bloc, the NDP, the Greens or the independents, there are areas of interest in which each party is trying to work with the government to ask how they can deliver for their constituents. I echo the comments of the government House leader, that there is one party that believes that the role of the official opposition is to always oppose rather than actually constructively work with. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Bardish Chagger: Mr. Speaker, they find it funny, and that is fine. We notice that when there are certain people speaking in the House, the volume in the House is a lot louder than when other people are speaking. I think that when it comes to this motion, what is important for us to actually focus on is how we deliver for Canadians. The leader of the official opposition lives in government-funded housing. Every member of Parliament is paid by the public purse. How do we ensure that we are delivering for Canadians? Government does have a role to play. I would like to hear the government House leader's comments on how this motion might actually be able to make us more productive if members of Parliament chose to come here actually to work constructively together rather than blindly oppose.
285 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 285 - Feb/26/24
Mr. Peter Julian
  • Feb/26/24 1:13:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the voting record speaks for itself. I want to come back to my colleague and the idea that we would force employees and all members to be in the House over a 30-hour period with all the health impacts that we know to be true. Does the member actually oppose the idea that we could have a health break so that when we go through those marathon votes, employees are respected and all members are respected, and that we could do the business of the House in a way that does not have a negative health impact? In the end, why is the member opposing a motion that makes good sense, that makes us work harder and that is also smart?
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border