House of Commons Hansard #136 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was jobs.
Pierre Lemieux ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture
Mr. Speaker, as I just said, our government has always defended Canada's supply management system, and we are continuing to do so with the European Union agreement.
The three pillars of our national supply management system remain intact. We will monitor the potential impact of this historic agreement on dairy producers' income. If production levels are adversely affected, we will help the producers financially.
We have a strong record of protecting the supply management system.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the hon. Minister of the Environment.
There are only about 30 days to go until the Conference of the Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change begins its meetings in Lima, Peru. Would the minister be in a position to let us know today if opposition members of Parliament will once again be included in the government's delegation, as is the case in every other country around the world and was the case under every previous prime minister?
Leona Aglukkaq ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to reaching a new global climate agreement in Paris next year. We want a fair agreement for Canada that includes all the emitters and all economies. Every country, big or small, has a role to play. That is what we will continue to push for at the meeting of the top 20.
We will continue to make progress domestically in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We have taken action in Canada to reduce coal-fired electricity greenhouse gas emissions.
I also want to thank the member for her support in our efforts to reduce greenhouse gas--
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to raise a point of order, but I understand very well, given the importance of the point of order I am making, that you are not in a position to respond right away. I hope that you will be able to respond later today or on Monday.
This concerns the guilty verdict that was just handed down against the former parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, the member for Peterborough. He was convicted this morning of violating the Canada Elections Act.
The Prime Minister's former parliamentary secretary has been found guilty on three counts: exceeding spending limits during the federal campaign in 2008, failing to report an illegal personal contribution of $21,000 to his own campaign, and knowingly submitting a falsified document.
As we know, this has been part of a pattern of behaviour we have seen from the current government, tragically, with the in-and-out scheme, the robocall scandal, and former Conservative minister Peter Penashue, who was found by Elections Canada to have broken the rules in the 2011 campaign.
The statutory provisions that render a member of Parliament ineligible to sit in the House of Commons are unambiguous, as we know. The Canada Elections Act, subsection 502(3), stipulates that a person who has been found guilty of an illegal or corrupt practice cannot be elected to or sit and vote in the House of Commons.
O'Brien and Bosc makes it clear that the decision to remove a sitting member is one for the House. I will quote from page 244:
By virtue of parliamentary privilege, only the House has the inherent right to decide matters affecting its own membership. Indeed, the House decides for itself if a Member should be permitted to sit on committees, receive a salary or even be allowed to keep his or her seat.
As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker, understanding that this is unprecedented and that you will want to perhaps take some time to reflect, I would like to ask you to clarify what next steps should be taken by the House to ensure that we are abiding by these statutory provisions.
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is quite right. The question of whether a member can continue to sit is one for this House. I think he is also right in his suggestion that we take some time to reflect, in fact I think we all do, to be able to make that decision.
My understanding, if the decision is based entirely on media reports and social media tweets, is that they have already been proven to be contradictory in a number of ways, so there is a lack of clarity. For example, it is my understanding that two of the guilty findings were stayed. I do not understand what the implication of that is. I do not understand on which charges that was, so it is very difficult for us to make a decision at this point.
I think the counsel the hon. member has offered, which is that we have to consider this at one point, is correct, but I also think we need to take some time to actually have the information and reflect on it properly before that is done.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
The Chair thanks both the opposition House leader as well as the government House leader for this point. The Chair was aware that the court ruling had been delivered earlier today relating to the member for Peterborough. As has been stated by the government House leader, at this point, the Chair has only heard second-hand media reports in terms of what happened. However, we will certainly get the primary documentation. We will consider it, as important as it is, and we will get back to this House as quickly as possible as it relates to this matter.
Costas Menegakis ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to subsection 94(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the 2014 annual report on immigration.
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
moved that the first report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food presented on Thursday, March 27, be concurred in.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to participate in the discussion on this particular concurrence motion. Yesterday I had the opportunity to share some thoughts on this.
It is always encouraging when we follow parliamentary process. We have a couple of dozen standing committees that do a lot of wonderful work. They hold government accountable. There is a lot more transparency. Are they perfect in terms of the operations of the discussions? They may not be in all ways. There is a lot of room for improvement.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
Order, please. The opposition House leader is rising on a point of order.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to hear the member for Winnipeg North, but yesterday, he did not actually reference the concurrence report he said he wanted to speak to. He is doing the same thing today. Yesterday we gave him some latitude, but I think today he has to speak to the concurrence report. If he has opinions on it, we would be very pleased to hear them. However, he cannot just wander off onto whatever he wants to talk about today.
We have a concurrence report before us. We would like to ask that the member actually stick to it and speak to the report.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, you will find that there is a great deal of latitude in addressing topics.
I was talking about the process of receiving the different reports. It is completely relevant to talk about how reports come to this House. If I want to pre-empt my discussion, nothing prevents me from doing that. The member just needed to be a bit more patient and listen as I continued to provide comment.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
The opposition House leader raised a point of relevance, which is always in force, and the hon. member for Winnipeg North also makes a good point, which is that there is some latitude given.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to remind all members of the House that when they rise to speak, they ought to be speaking to whatever matter is before the House. In that context, I give the floor back to the hon. member for Winnipeg North to continue his discussion regarding the motion that is currently before the House.
Agriculture and Agri-FoodCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
October 31st, 2014 / 12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, we have an agriculture committee that meets and deals with a report. It is important that Canadians are aware of just how much work goes into all reports, including this particular report. Committees meet twice a week. They go through a litany of different things. The same principle applied for this report. The last time this committee met could have been months ago, depending on the committee.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. We have important legislation before the House that all members want to comment on. I am always interested in hearing the member for Winnipeg North, but one thing he has just said is incorrect, of course. The agriculture committee is meeting.
However, he is not speaking to the report. If he does not have anything to say on the report, he should just allow us to move on to the important business before this House.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
Before I go back to the member for Winnipeg North, I just remind all hon. members, as I think all are aware, of the issue of relevance. I understand that I have ruled, and other Chair occupants have ruled, that there is some latitude and have asked members to respect that process and speak to what is before the House. At the same time, I would also encourage all other hon. members to give their colleagues some latitude as well and to recognize the fact that it may take them a few moments to get to the specifics of what is actually being discussed. I am quite confident that the member will do that.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, if you were to look at my comments from the beginning, maybe I had the opportunity for one or two minutes to reflect on the report and the processing. It has not been more than that, because I have been interrupted on two occasions within just a few minutes.
Agri-Food is an important area of discussion. It was discussed at length by a committee, as committees play a very important role. Part of the point I want to emphasize is that even though we have had the report brought forward today to be concurred in, that does not necessarily end the discussion. The discussion needs to continue. The discussion can continue at committee. However, unfortunately, because of a lack of work ethic from the New Democratic caucus, what we find is that the New Democrats are not allowing—
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
Order, please. The opposition House leader is again rising on a point of order.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I think we have been really patient. I do not think the member has the slightest clue of which report is before the House. We have offered him three opportunities to speak to the relevance of the report that has been moved. He continues to refuse and seems to be throwing out gratuitous insults. He is not respecting the rule of relevance in any way. Therefore, I would ask him to allow the important other items before the House to move forward.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
The hon. member for Winnipeg North on the same point of order.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, just because the NDP House leader does not like my comments it does not give him the right to stand up on a point of order. Actually, he has the right to stand up on a point of order any time he wants but it does not necessarily give him the right to abuse that right to rise on a point of order, when in fact my comments are relevant. All we have to do is take a look at the budget bill that we are debating and the issue of time allocation and so forth. It is totally relevant.
Just because you do not like what it is that I am saying does not make it irrelevant.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin
Order, please. On top of everything else, I would also remind members to address their comments to the Chair rather than directly to their colleagues.
I think the point has been well made that there is a rule of relevance. I think a second point has been made that members are given latitude to speak in context before they get to the matter before the chamber. Having said that, there remains a requirement that the member gets to the matter that is before the House.
Therefore, the hon. member for Winnipeg North has the floor. There is a specific committee report that is before the House and the Chair would encourage that member and indeed all members to make their comments relevant to the report that is before the House.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your comments. I can assure the members that when we talk about the agriculture report what we are really talking about is an industry that is important to all Canadians.
The NDP House leader sits, stares and concentrates in the hope that I will say something about process so he can jump to his feet on a point of order. I must say that I appreciate how attentive the NDP House leader is.
Having said that, if I could send a very strong message to the member, that message would be that we need to recognize that agriculture is very important in Canada. It affects all of us.
