44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 18, 2024 10:00AM
- Jun/18/24 11:08:09 a.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint‑Hubert on a point of order.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:08:14 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have had approximately 150,000 opposition days on the carbon tax. Today, we are studying a different bill, and yet my colleague is talking only about the carbon tax, which—
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:08:34 a.m.
- Watch
That is a point of debate. As I mentioned before, there is some latitude. The hon. member is talking about an amendment that mentions the carbon tax. I will let the member continue his speech. He has four minutes and 43 seconds.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
51 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, at the risk of being accused of repetition, I will clarify the point for my Bloc colleagues again, as I did earlier. We are, at present, debating an amendment put forward by my colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton, which is about declining to give second reading to Bill C-65, because the bill reveals the priorities of the government, priorities that are dead wrong. Conservatives would like to focus on providing economic relief to Canadians. We are ready for a carbon tax election, in which the choice will be clear, between a Conservative common-sense plan and the plan of the NDP-Liberals and the Bloc to impose additional costs on Canadians, punishing new costs that would further undermine opportunity for everyday Canadians.
Here is where we are. It is clear and unmistakable that we are at a time when Canadians are overwhelmingly disapproving of the direction of the NDP-Liberal government, when Canadians' disapproval of the government reflects their own frustration and the fact that they can see how policies of the government have made their lives materially worse, how there is more poverty in this country, more division and more crime as a result of policies that have been pursued by the NDP-Liberal government. In that context, where Canadians are upset with the government, see how the government has made their lives worse and are, therefore, looking for an alternative to the current approach, the Liberal government, rather than recognizing its failures, changing course in its policies and putting its programs to the Canadian people, is focused on pushing forward legislation to try to delay when that ultimate judgment will come down from the Canadian people. That is what we are debating. That is what Bill C-65 is about.
Bill C-65 is before this House because, rather than calling an election or putting forward bills that would actually make Canadians' lives better, Liberals are focused on delaying when that election will come. Conservatives are ready to put our plan before the Canadian people, our plan to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime, our plan to focus on the common sense of Canadians.
I want to remind the New Democrats that the plan is to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. I think we are winning converts. I think—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
406 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:11:53 a.m.
- Watch
I would remind members that they will have an opportunity to ask questions and make comments, so I would ask them to please wait until the appropriate time.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:12:01 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think we are finally getting through. I think New Democrats are finally hearing us. I think they may be reflecting. The House leader—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:12:14 a.m.
- Watch
Order. I want to remind hon. members again that they will have an opportunity to ask questions and make comments, so I would ask them to please wait.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the NDP House leader self-identifies as a worker bee. He has told us that he is a worker bee. If we doubt that he is a worker bee, all we have to do is ask him, and he will tell us that he is a worker bee. Meanwhile, New Democrats are at committee putting forward motions specifically to avoid doing parliamentary work over the summer. Imagine that. At a time when Canadians are suffering, at a time when Canadians want their politicians to get down to work and find solutions to the challenges this country is facing, Liberals are putting forward a bill to delay the election, and New Democrats are putting forward motions so they do not have to work until the election comes. This is what the NDP coalition is about: delaying the election and doing as little work as possible until it comes.
Conservatives are ready to get down to work. We are ready to replace the government. We are ready to clean up the mess that has been created over the last nine years, because our country did not have these problems nine years ago. It will be set on the right path under the principled leadership of the member for Carleton. This is what we are offering Canadians.
Conservatives are ready for an election. We oppose Bill C-65, because we do not want to delay the election. We are ready for a carbon tax election, to put our common-sense plan before Canadians for lower, fairer and simpler taxes, to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime, to bring it home.
Let us reject Bill C-65, let us have a carbon tax election and let the Canadian people decide.
295 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:13:54 a.m.
- Watch
I believe the hon. member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill is rising on a point of order.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:14:06 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to ask if I could get unanimous consent to have my vote recorded as a yea earlier. I was unable, for technical reasons, to vote.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:14:33 a.m.
- Watch
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:14:37 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, before I get to my question, the member mentioned an employee who received his master's today. An employee of mine in my Hill office received two master's degrees. I do not like to be outdone by a Conservative, so I will note that. As well as having a dual master's in political science, he has been accepted into the Ph.D. program. Again, I want to congratulate my employee, Liam O'Brien.
When the member talks about moving to the election, has he spoken to the 32-plus members on his side who would not qualify for a pension when they do not get re-elected?
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:14:37 a.m.
- Watch
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Avalon.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:15:12 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first, I want to associate myself with the member's comments and also share congratulations to his employee who is getting his second master's. Maybe once he gets his third master's, he will see the light and become a Conservative. I wish him the best with that intellectual journey.
In terms of the views of members, the Conservative Party has been clear and united that we are ready for an election. We want an election, and we want a carbon tax election where Canadians can choose. We do not want to delay the election. As members will see when this measure comes to a vote, that is the united position of every single Conservative in the House.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:15:50 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, voting in federal elections is allowed every day at the office of the returning officer. Currently, without the law, there are four days of early voting prior to voting day, people can vote by mail and they can vote on campuses. Simply put, there are plenty of opportunities to vote.
Officially, the government is citing the need to accommodate the festival of lights, Diwali, a holiday celebrated by Indian communities, to justify postponing election day. The Liberal government has chosen to integrate the religious calendar into the electoral calendar. It has chosen to subordinate the rule of law to religious considerations. With that in mind, I would like the member to tell me what he thinks of this official reason.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:16:45 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is fair to say that I would have a bit of a different view of many aspects of the religious accommodation conversation than my colleagues do. I think that a free society, a rule of law society, should make efforts to ensure the protection of religious freedom, of the deeply held convictions of people. Religious freedom is a foundational aspect of human rights. It is in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights very clearly.
That said, the member is right that there are many different ways and times people can vote. If we have a situation in which the main election day as well as advance poll days and early voting days also intersect with religious holidays for the same community, then I think there is a much greater problem. In this case, this is just cover for the government. I do not think it is really about accommodation. It is fundamentally about the Liberals' desire to delay the election as much as possible and benefit themselves in the process.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:18:04 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, among the member's many useless slogans that were put forward once again today, one of them was around the Conservatives being “clear and united”. I find that particularly interesting, because the member said he is not in support of this bill, yet last night the member for Calgary Confederation said very clearly that he would be in support of this bill as long as there is an amendment to move the election date back.
I have made it clear that I will be putting forward an amendment to see the election date put back, because I agree that we cannot be looking at legislation that will benefit members at a time when people are struggling to make ends meet.
How can the member continue to sabotage legislation that truly supports Canadians?
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the worker bees in the NDP want to tell us about amendments that they might propose, will propose or intend to propose in the future.
Let me tell the House about an amendment Conservatives have already proposed that is at present before the House. This is the amendment I spoke to, from the member for St. Albert—Edmonton, which would, on the basis of the attempt to delay the election, decline to give reading to Bill C-65. Our position is to support the amendment that is on the table, not hope that the worker bees in the NDP will, after taking sufficient time off over the summer, eventually get around to coming up with their own amendment in the future.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:19:41 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, to follow up on that point, it seems like we have two options here. One is to get rid of the bill altogether because there is one provision in it that is inappropriate. The other is to continue with the bill that has many important elements in it, for example, making it easier for folks to vote at advance polls, and then at committee, as is often the case here, to address the problematic provision.
Greens, of course, would strongly support what the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith has put forward.
Why not at least support the bill, given that there are other important measures in it, and address the problematic provision at the place where that is best done, at committee?
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/18/24 11:20:33 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, here is the legislative process in a nutshell. At second reading, we look at the principle of a bill and determine whether the principle of the bill is one that we want to support or not. The principle of what the government is trying to do is that it is looking for cover to delay the election; I think it is quite evident. The principle is that Liberals, the member for Kingston and the Islands and others, are reluctant to face the judgment of the electorate. That is what they are trying to do with the bill. We are not going to fall for this Liberal trick.
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
