Debates of April 20th, 2010
House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was quebec}.
Topics
- Question Period
- Committees of the House
- Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
- Business of Supply
- Business of the House
- Business of Supply
- Auditor General of Canada
- National Victims of Crime Awareness Week
- Snowmobiling Ultimate Rider
- Millennium Summit
- G8 and G20 Summits
- Police Officers
- Reel Student Productions
- Multiple Sclerosis
- National Volunteer Week
- Vaisakhi
- Stephen Turner
- Victims of Crime
- Victoria Harbour
- National Volunteer Week
- École secondaire Pierre-Dupuy
- Juno Awards
- Firearms Registry
- Ethics
- Transportation
- Ethics
- Grant Forest Products
- Ethics
- Financial Institutions
- Afghanistan
- Health
- Firearms Registry
- Information Technology
- Public Safety
- Arts and Culture
- Fisheries
- Northern Development
- Agriculture and Agri-Food
- Justice
- Public Safety
- Status of Women
- Automotive Industry
- Taxation
- Information Technology
- Broadband Canada Program
- National Volunteer Week
- Business of Supply
- Criminal Code
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:35 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Guimond Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, as many of my colleagues have been saying all day, we are not opposed to the member's proposal.
We simply want the House of Commons to acknowledge, once and for all, that in 2006 it voted to recognize the Quebec nation. We also want it to acknowledge Quebec's right, as a minority within Canada, to have historic representation so that its weight will not be reduced and it will be adequately recognized in the House. That is all we are asking for in this motion and what we ask for every single day.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this debate. First, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Brossard—La Prairie.
I will start by reading the motion before us:
That the House denounce the fact that the government seeks to marginalize the Quebec nation by introducing a bill to decrease Quebec’s political weight in the House, and that it affirm that Quebec Members of Parliament, who represent a nation, must hold at least 25 percent of the seats in the House.
An amendment to this motion has been moved, but discussions today will focus on the motion.
I agree with the part of the motion which states that “the government seeks to marginalize”. I would say that it seeks to marginalize every region in the country. The people of New Brunswick are very proud to have an Acadian population and they believe that, through its actions, the government is seeking to marginalize not only the Acadian nation, but also the regions of Canada, including the Maritimes.
I would now like to address the rest of the motion, with which I do not agree. I am a proud federalist. I come from New Brunswick, this country's only bilingual province. I believe in this country, in Canada.
This motion benefits Quebec only and marginalizes the rest of the country. The Bloc Québécois' motion and this government's actions are marginalizing me as a politician from the Maritimes.
Let me explain. Our country was founded in 1867. The four founding provinces were Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario. If I hear catcalls and it is a joke to talk about the founding of our country, if it is a joke to talk about four founding provinces coming into a deal and having expectations—
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer
Order, please. I will let members know that there will be an opportunity for questions and comments after the member has done his speech. If members could hold themselves until that time, they can ask whatever question the like of the hon. member.
The hon. member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Thank you for coming to my rescue. I so needed that, Mr. Speaker.
When I talk about New Brunswick, when I talk about the maritime provinces, I do not need any defence. I can say to anyone that I am a very proud Maritimer, I am a very proud Canadian and I believe in the principles of our country and the ones on which they were founded.
Some of the principles the country was founded on, which came from the four founding partners, were principles of fairness and principles not to marginalize other regions of the country.
I said in French at the beginning of my remarks that I found it disconcerting that the Bloc Québécois members always bring forward motions that would marginalize the rest of Canada. That is what they believe. They do not want to be part of Canada, so they want to marginalize any aspect of Canada. There is a certain honesty in that, but I do not agree with them. I also do not agree, however, with language that comes from the other side with respect to the great federal system that we have or had.
What I think is important to—
Business of the House
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Casson Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been negotiations among the parties and I believe if you were to seek it, you would find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:
That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, on Tuesday, April 20, 2010, Statements by Ministers, pursuant to Standing Order 33, shall be taken up at 3 p.m.
Business of the House
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Business of the House
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
Business of the House
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer
The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Business of the House
Government Orders
1:40 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
1:45 p.m.
The House resumed consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
April 20th, 2010 / 1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Mr. Speaker, the government bill is really the subject of this motion. It seeks to increase House seats by 30, which would probably give an advantage to some provinces because they have grown and they would have a larger number of seats.
The principle of representation by population, that everybody's vote should count the same, either has to be a pure principle followed exactly to the letter, or it has to take into account variations that come from our foundation as a nation, our special interests within a nation and the aspect of geography, which is one of the key components of our country.
If we were to have representation by population purely, then some vast regions of our country would be impossible to represent because the number of people required to make, let me say 108,000 electors, would be so vast that it would be half of northern Canada. We have already de facto decided that we will make exceptions to the representation by population principle.
Therefore, when I hear members, including the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, talk about it being a pure principle and how could anybody be against it, I want to remind them that we have already made exceptions to it. We have to take into account that there are special circumstances to special regions, special populations, special language groups and special historical facts.
I was attempting to outline that people as eminent as Donald Savoie in my region have talked about the diminution of the influence of Maritime Canada within the federation. I am sorry that defending where I come from upsets people. As a Maritimer, I hearken back to the days when the Maritime provinces were the economic engine of this great federation, and that day will surely come again. If Danny Williams has his way, it could come tomorrow or the next day.
If this federation is a give and take relationship, then we all have to be respectful. I am being very respectful when I say for my members from British Columbia, Ontario and Alberta that it is a wonderful thing that their communities have grown and contributed to the economic engine that is Canada. It is a wonderful thing to support representation by population. It is also a wonderful thing to respect the old partners of Confederation, special language groups and the geographical fact that we are a dispersely populated country.
If we have already made exceptions to the rule of representation by population, the government saying that an exact principle has to be followed in every case does not hold water.
Let us look at our neighbour to the south. Would we say, as a characterization, that Americans are overly generous when it comes to the democratic representation principle, that they would say on the larger stage that they do not care about democratic equality? They have fought wars on these issues. Yet in the United States of America, Rhode Island has two senators just like the great state of California. The House of Representatives is a pure representation by population body, but the senate, which some would argue is the more powerful body, is not representation by population.
Perhaps we have to go back to the drawing board and decide what we want in this bicameral state we call Canada. We know the Senate is either something that the government really wants to get rid of totally, or it is something that it wants to reform into an elected representation by population body, so we would have two of us, as if one is not enough, or we decide we will have one rep by pop body and one Senate representing regions, ethnicities and languages, a historical fact upon which our great country was founded.
That is the real debate we should be having in the House. We should not be debating some government drive-by bill written in a Tim Hortons somewhere with a camera on saying that the government is doing democratic reform now. The government is doing it because in 19 Conservative ridings out of 30, the Conservatives would be gaining an advantage.
The bill that this motion is the subject of is nothing but political opportunism. For that reason, we want real democratic reform from that side, not just another press conference.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:50 p.m.
Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam
B.C.
Conservative
James Moore Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for wasting 10 minutes making the most obvious and unoriginal observations about representation by population I have ever heard. He talks about being respectful. Of course there is a debate to be had about democratic reform. However, over 13 years, the Liberals did not offer any solutions to representation by population or about any kind of democratic renewal reform of this Confederation.
My hon. colleague fails to recognize that while my province of British Columbia has six Senate seats, his home province of New Brunswick has 10 seats. Of course Labrador, with a population of about 30,000 people, has its own seat in the House of Commons. Of course that will be a fact. Of course the territories, which have smaller population bases, will have their own seats.
The question is how we get better balance. Pure representation by population per riding happens on a province-by-province basis as administered by Elections Canada, but the goal of our bill and of our government is to get us closer to where we have parity and representation in the House of Commons. We cannot have absolute pure. That is obvious. The hon. colleague does not have to waste 10 minutes of the House's time saying something that a grade 6 social studies student knows. We know that.
The question is this. When will the Liberal Party stand up against the Bloc Québécois and ensure that people in my home province of British Columbia, the fastest-growing province, can come closer to having a fair share and a fair set of voices in the House of Commons to represent their needs, just like other folks do?
What we do not need in the House is the member standing up and saying that we should be respectful. He started off his comments saying that the reason why they wanted to have more seats for British Columbia was so they could have less of a voice from people like Acadians and official-language minority Canadians. Shame on him for using those kinds of tactics.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Mr. Speaker, they are not my words. Donald Savoie has characterized the concerns of many Maritimers. If he does not respect Donald Savoie, then he does not deserve to get into grade 7. Mr. Savoie said:
As a Maritimer, I’m deeply offended and if we keep going down this road, I’m worried about the future of my country.
I know Donald Savoie well enough to know that he could be taken out of context. Maybe he is not against the principle of the bill. Maybe he is saying that we have to look at democratic reform and ensure that all the regions are respectfully represented in this nation. That includes the Senate and this place. No one wants to deny British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario the reward for the fact they are growing.
Business of Supply
Government Orders
1:50 p.m.
Conservative