SoVote

Peter Julian

Member of Parliament
NDP

New Westminster—Burnaby
British Columbia
Voting Attendance: 63%
Expenses Last Quarter: $194,227.44

Government Page

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

May/8/24 10:23:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member agree with me that this needs to be referred promptly, this evening, to procedure and House affairs to come up with recommendations?

28 words

Context: House Hansard - 294 - Mar/22/24

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Mar/22/24 2:27:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, all parties clearly agree that we need answers. We have lived through too many scandals. There was the ETS scandal under the Conservatives. Now we have the ArriveCAN scandal under the Liberals. It is important that we get all the answers in order to put an end to all these scandals. The procedure being proposed has not been used in over 110 years. The last time was before we had simultaneous interpretation, before television, and even before microphones were installed in the House. It is important that we establish a solid foundation for this procedure. That way, the House will be able to follow it in the future, too. We all agree on the importance of calling this person, Mr. Firth, to the bar. I believe we are all united in our desire to get answers. Does the member agree with me that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs could actually sit over the next two weeks to put in place recommendations on how to follow this unusual procedure?

173 words

Context: House Hansard - 262 - Dec/5/23

Mr. Peter Julian

Dec/5/23 4:51:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I always appreciate the questions from my colleague from Winnipeg North. The reality is that the procedure and House affairs committee will make those decisions. However, I do feel it is important that there be a timely resolution on this for obvious reasons. This is a priority, and it has to be a priority given that it is a House supporter for procedure and House affairs. At the same time, it is important that those remedies be provided in a timely way. I think all of us would allow the procedure and House affairs committee members to decide how to balance out the timeliness with getting witnesses as well as to help provide the supports for developing the remedies. That is a balance they will have to achieve, and I wish them the best of luck in doing that.

141 words

Context: House Hansard - 262 - Dec/5/23

Mr. Peter Julian

Dec/5/23 4:43:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is the former official opposition House leader, so he understands the rules and the importance and gravity of this situation. I believe the hon. member was asking a rhetorical question. He understands, as I do, that this would have to take precedence for the procedure and House affairs committee, if it were to become a House order, which it would at the adoption of this motion. It would then become the top priority for the procedure and House affairs committee. I have confidence that the procedure and House affairs committee will treat it with the timeliness that is required and ensure that this is the top priority of that committee moving forward. The rules of the House, as we well know, indicate that as well. The committee simply cannot continue doing other work. This would be an order of the House, so the procedure and House affairs committee would have to put it top of mind.

161 words

Context: House Hansard - 202 - May/30/23

Mr. Peter Julian

May/30/23 1:19:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, again, I will say it for the third time: I do not want to repeat myself too much, but please read the motion. It is very clear. This would be binding when they instruct the committee. The motion states: (b) instruct the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to provide a report to the House as soon as possible with a recommendation on who could lead such a commission of inquiry and what its terms of reference should include. As you know, Mr. Speaker, with your learned experience as Deputy Speaker of the House, that would be binding on the committee. The committee cannot say it is not going to do that. The committee members cannot say they are not going to follow this instruction. This would be a binding obligation on the procedure and House affairs committee, and so it would be bound by that and obliged to do that. There is the question of whether the Right Hon. David Johnston would be obliged to resign if Parliament asked him to. Is there a binding obligation on him? I think there is a moral obligation. I have followed his career; I have seen him work with both Conservative and Liberal governments. I believe he is a man of integrity, and if the House of Commons makes the decision in the coming hours to ask him to step down, I believe he will. In that sense, I believe there is a binding moral obligation that would follow the vote on this motion in the House.

258 words

SoVote

Member of Parliament

Peter Julian