Matthew Dubé

[Cannabis Act, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

As members of the House are aware, one of our concerns, one that we have been talking about for some time, has to do with the decriminalization of marijuana and the amnesty that will be granted subsequently. The Prime Minister himself has illustrated how his family's privileged connections allowed a member of his family to escape criminal charges that could have resulted from his recreational use of marijuana.

Can my colleague tell us why the government suddenly changed its tune? During the election campaign, the Prime Minister specifically said that amnesty and the possibility of wiping out the criminal records people could be saddled with for something that would be legal moving forward would be a cornerstone of the process to legalize marijuana. Now the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is saying the opposite.

Can my colleague explain why the government changed its mind?

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I can anticipate already what the parliamentary secretary will say. Once again we have a reprinted speech on another bill so that they can argue about how they are pushing their legislative agenda. The member is specifically referencing Bill C-25.

We were looking at who the next speakers would be, and some, including me, I dare say, actually have things to say about Motion No. 14, which is before the House.

I understand the leeway you give, Mr. Speaker. I have tried to benefit from that leeway myself, as we all have, but unfortunately, I think, we have talked so much in the last few months about the way this place works, that at the very least, if we are to invoke closure, it would be nice if we could actually deal with the motion in the limited time that we have.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As a member of the third party, and it is not something I like to brag about, we have fewer speaking spots. We can look at the fact that a closure motion was presented on Motion No. 14. There are no more New Democrats speaking tonight, so if the member is going to skip ahead to the business that is going to take place later with Bill C-45, perhaps he could sit down and allow others to speak, those who wish to talk about the important work we do here, which is part of Motion No. 14, the extended sitting hours, and other pieces of procedural rules.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's enthusiasm on this subject. However, if I am not mistaken, he is talking about Bill C-45, which is on the agenda for later this evening. Right now, we are talking about Motion No. 14.

[Presence in Gallery, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I simply wanted to inform you that once the committee has tabled its report, we will be raising a question of privilege on this issue and the fact that, in light of the information provided, it would seem we were misled in committee by the new commissioner. I wanted to give you advance notice.

[Presence in Gallery, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, given the partisan and troubling nature of the appointment of the new Commissioner of Official Languages, the main tool parliamentarians have is obviously committee testimony, particularly by the main person involved. I should point out that there is a contradiction between the answer given to the member for Outremont’s question about membership in the Liberal Party and what was stated in a written document provided to committee members.

I would like the committee to report, in light of the work by the member for Drummond—

[Privacy, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, there is not much use for LinkedIn when one can just get on the Liberal donor list, because that clearly seems to be the way in.

A letter from the Privacy Commissioner outlines his concerns about the powers granted to the Americans under Bill C-23. Despite the minister’s assurances, Canadians who will be intimidated or subjected to invasive searches by American border guards will not be able to pursue civil action. This grants American officers immunity on Canadian soil.

With Trump flirting with the idea of searching cellphones at the border, when will the Liberals finally reconsider this legislation and once and for all stand up for Canadians' rights?

[Petitions, May 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased, but also quite sad, to table a petition signed by hundreds of my constituents, not to mention the similar electronic petition, which is still open by the way, concerning Sophie Thewys, a resident of Mont-Saint-Hilaire who tragically lost her spouse on Christmas eve. He was sponsoring her application for permanent residency.

The people who have signed the petition are asking the Minister of Immigration to review the extraordinary circumstances of her file, given that the application had been approved. With the death of her spouse, Nicolas Faubert, her application was dropped. This is an obvious lack of compassion, and the people in Sophie's community have shown great support for her.

With this petition, we hope that the government will take note of the situation and finally allow this family to grieve and to continue to live in Canada.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, May 29th, 2017]

With regard to the high-risk immigration-related detention by Canada Border Services Agency in provincial jails: (a) how many high-risk immigration-related detainees are currently detained in each province; (b) of the total number of detainees in (a), (i) what is the gender ratio, (ii) how many are under 21 years old, (iii) how many are over 65 years old; (c) how many high-risk immigration-related detentions have been prolonged, since October 2015, in the past (i) six months, (ii) one year, (iii) one year and six months; (d) what has the government done with respect to outsourcing of housing for high-risk immigration detainees to provincial jails, since 2000, and related to (i) annual cost, (ii) cost by provinces; and (e) what is the percentage premium, on top of the per-capita costs associated with housing those detainees, paid to each province?

[Public Safety, May 15th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, a statistical record does not really help someone who is being dehumanized at the border because of the colour of their skin or their religious beliefs.

The minister keeps repeating that the number of people being turned away at the American border is going down. However, this morning's edition of La Presse is reporting on a family that was turned away at the border and was told by the U.S. consulate in Montreal that profiling has been taking place at certain border crossings.

The minister said that he was given assurances when he met with Secretary Kelly a few weeks ago right here in Ottawa. What good are those assurances?

Will the minister finally stand up and address this issue Canadians are having at the border?