SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Kevin Lamoureux

  • Member of Parliament
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
  • Liberal
  • Winnipeg North
  • Manitoba
  • Voting Attendance: 64%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $110,821.77

  • Government Page
  • Jun/11/24 7:23:47 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, just to start, it is interesting how the member continued with the character assassination of an outstanding Canadian. When he is talking about the special rapporteur, he is really talking about is the former governor general. When the member labelled him as a Liberal appointing all these other Liberals, what people should realize is that the Right Hon. David Johnston was actually appointed as Governor General by former prime minister Stephen Harper. The last time I checked, Stephen Harper was not a Liberal; he was a Conservative and a man who was held in fairly high esteem. It is unfortunate that the Conservatives with their ramped-up rhetoric felt it was necessary to throw him under the bus in the fashion they did. Personally, I thought it was somewhat disgraceful. Having said that, when we think about what we are talking about this evening, nothing could be further from the truth in terms of the manner in which the government has actually dealt with foreign interference. In fact the Government of Canada not only consulted but worked openly with all recognized parties of the House to collaboratively develop the terms of reference for the commission. All parties agreed to the terms of reference as well as to the appointment of the commissioner herself. One of the key aspects of the terms of reference is that the commission essentially has unlimited access to classified information related to its mandate. The terms of reference are very clear: The commission is to have access to certain cabinet documents that are relevant to its work. The government agreed to this approach, although it is exceedingly rare for something of that nature to occur. Cabinet confidence is a bedrock principle of the Westminster system of government. The notion that such a principle can be thrown out in a sweeping approach to government records undercuts the very same democracy we are actually trying to protect. All of the cabinet documents that were committed to in terms of the reference have already been provided to the commission. I would contrast the manner in which we as a government have approached the issue to the manner in which the leader of the Conservative-Reform party has approached it to date. The leader of the Conservative-Reform party has not even acknowledged, or desired in any way to actually get, the security clearance necessary in order to get the information that will answer the types of questions the member is looking to answer. He does not want to get it. He intentionally chooses to be ignorant of the facts. Contrast that to the leader of the New Democratic Party. In fact, the leader of the Green Party had a very interesting public press conference earlier today after getting the debriefing and was very clear with Canadians as to what she thought. At least she took the interest and the time not only to get the clearance but also then to look at the unredacted report. We know what her comments are. However, that does not solve the appetite of the Conservatives to go on a vengeful character assassination hunt, in terms of what it is and who it is they can go after. I am surprised and disappointed in the leader of the Conservative Party, but I should not be because even when he was the minister responsible for Elections Canada, in that important role he did absolutely nothing on foreign interference. He knew then that it was an issue but chose, intentionally, to do nothing.
589 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/25/22 1:11:27 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the issue being brought forward, it is very rare for me to be giving compliments to the Conservative Party, but the question has captured the essence. We may disagree in many ways on many policies, but we understand that what we should be debating is in fact issues that are somewhat relevant, at the very least, to what Canadians want us to be talking about. I guess I would take the proposal a little differently if the Bloc were to approach it in a different way. Is it suggesting we have an elected president in the future? Is it talking about us appointing a president? There is absolutely nothing more with this particular motion than just being mischievous.
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/16/22 12:59:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-9 
Mr. Speaker, the member made reference at the beginning of her comments to appointments and the fact that she did not feel we were appointing judges fast enough and it was causing murderers to go free. I am wondering if she could cite any individuals who committed murder and actually went free because of not having a judge in place.
60 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border