44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 17, 2024 11:00AM
- Jun/17/24 10:54:40 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on Motion No. 146. A vote on this motion also applies to Motion No. 147.
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.
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:55:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since so many Canadians are engaged in following the budget and the upcoming vote, I would ask for a recorded vote on that amendment, please.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:55:12 p.m.
- Watch
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:55:21 p.m.
- Watch
The next question is on Motion No. 148. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 149 to 153.
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.
66 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:55:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, after nine years, we believe we need some more common sense, and common sense would say that we need a recorded vote on that amendment.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:55:54 p.m.
- Watch
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:56:00 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on Motion No. 154. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 155 to 161.
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.
65 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:56:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to assure you I am not doing this to try to beat the word count in the House of Commons of the member for Winnipeg North today, but I will request a recorded vote on that amendment as well.
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:56:29 p.m.
- Watch
The recorded division on the motion stands deferred.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:56:41 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded divisions stand further deferred until Tuesday, June 18, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:57:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North gave his speech and his comments on the government's proposed legislation, Bill C-65. One thing he forgot to mention was probably the most well-known part of the bill he has just spoken about for several minutes, which is the Liberals' attempt to change the election date; we have affectionately called this the NDP-Liberal pension protection act.
It was the Liberal-NDP agreement to change the election by a week for some reason that just happened to give class of 2019 members of Parliament their pensions if they were defeated in the next election. Thankfully, after relentless pressure from Conservatives, the NDP heard from many Canadians who thought that was an absolutely dreadful and shameful approach.
I want to get the member on the record. Does he now agree that this was nothing but partisan politics in an attempt to try to save some of their pensions for their own gain? Will he now agree that it was a terrible idea and nothing but a fake premise to try to change the date of the election to benefit their pensions?
190 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:58:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand the Conservative-Reform party members are a little weak in math. There are actually more than double the number of opposition members who would benefit from this than Liberal members. I can assure the member across the way that it had absolutely nothing to do with the legislation.
It is unfortunate that he did not hear the comments from the minister directly. I would ask the member to reflect on the fact that it is a minority government, which means the will of the committee will ultimately prevail. As the minister himself indicated, we will support the committee.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:58:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things I am really concerned about is foreign interference. We heard about it in the news. The leader of the Conservative Party refuses to get the security clearance he needs to participate. I think this is happening at a time when there are many things people are questioning around the safety of our elections.
How does the member across the way feel about the Conservative leader's fear, as it seems to be fear, to get security clearance?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 10:59:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think that is a fair question. Why does the leader of the Conservative Party not want to get the security clearance to have the full, unredacted briefing? It is a legitimate question. I suspect that the leader of the Conservative Party would rather play political games than do justice to the issue at hand.
I find that unfortunate. As one of my colleagues asked, what is the leader hiding? We know there are references, for example, to the Conservative leadership. I suspect that might be the leadership he ran in. Is there something that he is scared of? What is the reason? The leader has not provided any explanation other than he does not want to know.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:00:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the legislation amending the Canada Elections Act is an important piece of legislation. In fact, it is critical because it seeks to improve access to electoral participation, while also ensuring the continued integrity of our system. It has to go to committee to be studied further because it is essential to our democratic process.
Can the member elaborate on that? Can he give us his reasoning and his opinion on that?
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:01:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are many aspects of the legislation that would ultimately be modernized. It deals, for example, with issues like cryptocurrency. Across the way, we have the king of cryptocurrency, the member for Carleton, who apparently knows the benefits of cryptocurrency. However, we need to ensure that we do not have foreign actors investing in cryptocurrency and donating to candidates or political entities during or outside of elections. I think that is a positive aspect of the legislation. It deals with misinformation and it enhances the opportunity for people to vote. It makes a whole lot of sense to get behind this legislation.
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:02:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think a lot of Canadians watching out are not sure what this bill actually refers to. I will quote an article quickly. It states, “Canada soon to be governed by the pension coalition in Ottawa.” It says this new law, Bill C-65, proposes to move the election date, meaning 80 MPs would get vested in their pension. Let us just call the government we have in Ottawa what it would be after this new law, Bill C-65, passes: the pension coalition.
My question is to the NDP and Liberal members. Are they still the pension coalition; yes or no?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:02:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a little weird. There is no NDP-Liberal pension coalition. There is an NDP-Liberal understanding that this is important legislation. Even though the Conservative Party opposes the legislation, there is a great deal of value in strengthening our election laws by seeing the legislation go to committee. If there is a coalition, I would even suggest that the Bloc also recognizes the value of the legislation.
I would remind my friend opposite we are in a minority government. When dealing with this issue, the minister has indicated he will abide by what the committee proposes with respect to that, or listen to any other ideas that would give strength to the legislation. It is beyond me as to why the Conservative-Reform party is not supporting this legislation going to committee.
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:04:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we lived under the Harper regime and, of course, the Conservative attempts to ensure that people could not vote, using all kinds of subterfuge and disinformation, trying to attack indigenous peoples, youth and poor people in our communities across the country. The Harper regime was absolutely terrible in trying to reduce the number of Canadians voting. We saw all of the techniques that they used to try to do that. Now, the Republicans in the United States are doing the same thing. They are disenfranchising racialized people. The attempt by the Conservatives and by the Republicans is to have fewer people voting, so they can better control the rest of the population.
I want to ask my colleague, is that why the Conservatives are opposing this legislation, which broadens the vote and makes it easier for Canadians to exercise the fundamental democratic freedom of voting for the government that they choose? Is that why Conservatives are so incredibly opposed to broadening the franchise and letting every Canadian vote?
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/17/24 11:05:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is a great deal of merit to the argument that the member has just put forward.
I would add to it by reflecting on the voter identification card, which members would remember. The Conservative Harper government, when the current Conservative leader was a part of that government, advocated that that particular voting card should not be used as proof of identification that would enable a person to vote. We even had one Conservative who grossly exaggerated abuse of the card and literally made up a story about how cards were being thrown to the side and then gathered and how people were going to vote, or something of that nature. That member had to formally apologize for being intentionally misleading.
There is a valid argument that the Conservative-Reform party today does not want to see an enhanced electoral system that sees more people vote. That could be a major aspect of the problem.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
