SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 337

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 17, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24
Mr. Patrick Weiler
  • Sep/17/24 4:38:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not have a good answer as to why it took an Ontario Superior Court decision. However, I do know that it is high time these things were done. The act is discriminatory, and the bill we are debating today will help improve the situation. We need to do more. I hope that next time something needs to change, we will not wait to go to court and for judges to tell us to take action. We have to do the right thing, and we can do it here, as parliamentarians.
94 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24
Mr. Brendan Hanley
  • Sep/17/24 4:49:35 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, of course, the judgment of a court can be considered at any level. In this case, a solid, thorough decision made by the Ontario court was accepted and agreed to by the government. That gives reasonable grounds to proceed with what is really correcting an injustice that dates back to the previous Conservative government.
56 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24
Mr. Brendan Hanley
  • Sep/17/24 4:53:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the question. I think it is really very precise in that, if we are to achieve correcting this injustice, then we can stand on firm ground to accept the Ontario court's decision and proceed accordingly.
41 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24
Mr. Sébastien Lemire
  • Sep/17/24 5:11:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think that partisanship will always have its place in debates on certain issues. However, on other issues, dignity must come first in the House. In that regard, the government is indeed going to support this motion. I invite members to show respect to these people who are in a delicate situation by fast-tracking this bill, which has an expiry date, I should point out, and respecting the court's ruling.
74 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24
Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)
  • Sep/17/24 5:40:52 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-71 
Madam Speaker, the previous member who spoke, the member for London West, made a point, so I want to make a point to the parliamentary secretary. I want to just congratulate him on the multi-meeting filibuster he conducted on the draft report on Afghanistan. He was able to make it last from May well into September, and it ended only yesterday. He did quite the job on it. It is unusual to have a draft report debated in public. I invite members of the public to go watch that particular filibuster. The member mentioned the court ruling, so I want to draw his attention to paragraph 265 of the judge's ruling. In it, she said that of the errors in processing in the sample size she looked at, 50% were the fault of the department. The department was unable to provide accurate information. In one case, the department sent the proof of citizenship document with the wrong date on it. In another case, it sent the wrong document. It had the wrong person's name, and it was not even the name of another family member. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Tom Kmiec: Madam Speaker, I hear the member for Waterloo heckling me, as she did yesterday. I had asked the minister a question earlier in the debate, and I am going to ask the parliamentary secretary: How many persons who are abroad currently would be eligible for the provisions in Bill C-71?
247 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border