House of Commons Hansard #78 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.

Topics

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food—Speaker's RulingPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on April 10, 2014, by the hon. member for Edmonton—St. Albert, regarding the admissibility of an amendment adopted by the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food for Bill C-30, an act to amend the Canada Grain Act and the Canada Transportation Act and to provide for other measures and reported to the House on April 8, 2014.

I would like to thank the hon. member for Edmonton—St. Albert for having raised this matter, as well as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for their comments.

The member for Edmonton—St. Albert claimed that an amendment adopted by the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food in relation to Bill C-30 is inadmissible, because it aims to amend a section of the Canada Transportation Act that is not contained in the bill. He argued that, in so doing, the committee had exceeded its authority and went beyond the scope of the bill that had been referred to it.

On April 28, 2014, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons countered the points made by the member for Edmonton—St. Albert. He asserted that the amendment in question was relevant and consistent with the subject matter of the bill, and respected the rules and usual practices of the House. He explained that the amendment aimed to modify the Canada Transportation Act, which is under consideration in Bill C-30. He also reminded the House that the amendment was considered without procedural objection and was adopted by a recorded vote without dissent.

In a Speaker’s ruling delivered on April 28, 1992, which can be found at page 9801 of Debates, Speaker Fraser explained the restrictions faced by committees when considering amendments to a bill. He said:

As the House knows, the Speaker does not intervene on matters upon which committees are competent to take decisions. However, in cases where a committee has exceeded its authority, particularly in relation to bills, the Speaker has been called upon to deal with such matters after a report has been presented to the House.

In relation to the Speaker’s authority with respect to amendments adopted in committee, House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, at page 775 states:

The admissibility of those amendments, and of any other amendments made by a committee, may therefore be challenged on procedural grounds when the House resumes its consideration of the bill at report stage. The admissibility of the amendments is then determined by the Speaker of the House, whether in response to a point of order or on his or her own initiative.

I have reviewed the amendments adopted by the committee, and particularly the amendment that gave rise to this point of order, which created the new clause 5.1 in the bill. It amends section 116 of the Canada Transportation Act, a section that was not originally amended by the bill, to provide an additional power to the Canada Transportation Agency.

The parliamentary secretary referred to several procedural authorities to support his arguments. Most notably, and helpfully, he quoted from House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, at page 766 on the issues of scope and relevance. However, in the same paragraph that he quoted from, a critical element went unmentioned. At pages 766 to 767, it also reads:

In the case of a bill referred to a committee after second reading, an amendment is inadmissible if it proposes to amend a statute that is not before the committee or a section of the parent Act, unless the latter is specifically amended by a clause of the bill.

This is sometimes referred to as the parent act rule.

The Chair has no difficulty agreeing with the parliamentary secretary that the amendment is relevant to the subject matter of the bill. Indeed, as a fellow Saskatchewan MP who represents a large number of grain producers, I can certainly agree on the importance of this issue. As Speaker, however, not only can I not simply act according to my personal beliefs, I must respect House of Commons precedents which, in the case before us, are only too clear. Relevance is not the only test to be applied in judging admissibility. As the amendment in question reaches back into the parent act to modify a section of the act originally untouched by the bill as passed at second reading, long-standing practice leaves the Chair no choice: the amendment and those consequential to it are inadmissible.

The procedural jurisprudence is clear. I am therefore obliged to rule that the amendment, and the two other consequential amendments adopted by the committee, are null and void and no longer form part of the bill as reported to the House. In addition, I am directing that the bill be reprinted without these amendments.

Let me close by recalling how the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has reminded the House that this bill enjoyed all-party support at second reading and that the specific measures this ruling addresses were unanimously agreed to in committee. In light of that, the Chair would be remiss if I did not, in turn, remind the House that, should there still be a clear will on the part of all parties in the House to effect these changes in the law, there are several very simple and straightforward procedural options available.

I thank honourable members for their attention.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-33, An Act to establish a framework to enable First Nations control of elementary and secondary education and to provide for related funding and to make related amendments to the Indian Act and consequential amendments to other Acts, not more than one further sitting day after the day on which this Order is adopted shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

There will now be a 30-minute question period. I will ask members to keep their questions to around one minute and the responses to a similar length so that we can accommodate as many as possible.

The hon. House leader of the official opposition.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

Burnaby—New Westminster B.C.

NDP

Peter Julian NDPHouse Leader of the Official Opposition

Mr. Speaker, I am saddened by this for Canadians and for first nations.

I am first saddened by the fact that this is now over 60 times that time allocation and closure measures have been brought into this House of Commons. There is absolutely no question that is an abuse of Parliament and an abuse of the democratic framework that Canadians adhere to.

However, what is even more important is that first nations are strongly opposed to Bill C-33. Many first nations are saying that it is not in line with what they want. Opposition to the bill is beginning to mount right across the country. It is clearly an abuse of Parliament. It is obvious that first nations are having a hard time accepting this bill. Instead of consulting them, the minister and the government want to impose this bill on them and shut down debate, ending the discussions that should be held in the House. My question is simple.

Is it not because of the growing opposition from first nations across the country and the growing concerns about the bill that the government wants to shut down debate using closure, basically ending the discussion that should be held in the House? It is shameful.

I would like the minister to explain to first nations who have expressed so many concerns about the bill why he does not want to hear debate in the House of Commons.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the NDP is becoming an accomplice of a few people determined to bring Canada's economy to its knees and to prevent first nations students on reserve, for the first time ever in the history of this country, from enjoying the same statutory right to education as other Canadians have.

The position of the NDP was made clear yesterday. Those members will oppose the bill. If they have 10 or 15 more speakers who will say the same thing, we have heard it. We understand.

As for the Liberals, they have indicated that they are ready to work constructively. The constructive work can take place at the committee hearings of the standing committee to which the bill will be referred and where first nations will have the chance, just like other stakeholders and Canadians, to indicate their point of view on the bill, which will be transformational for first nations all across Canada.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

To be very clear, Mr. Speaker, what is really under debate right now is the government's use once again of time allocation to prevent members from fully participating in a debate on legislation.

No government in the history of Canada has invoked closure as many times as the current Conservative majority government. It is a different style of government. It goes against the principles of democracy and the manner in which the House should be operating. As has been pointed out, closure has been used over 60 times by the government to try to pass legislation. That is not healthy for democracy.

I look to the government House leader, because he is the one responsible for what takes place inside the House and for making sure that things are done in an orderly fashion. My question is not for the minister about the bill. My question is for the government House leader, who is responsible for the manner in which we are forcibly proceeding inside the chamber. Why has the majority Conservative government continued to use closure, thereby limiting the right of members of Parliament, and through members of Parliament, all Canadians from coast to coast to coast, to ensure that there is due process when it comes to making and passing laws here in Canada?

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the reason is clear and obvious. Were it not for time allocation, first nations students on reserve would be deprived, as they have been for many decades, of enjoying the basic right to education.

The hon. member knows very well that if it were left to the opposition, the government would not pass any laws. All the benefits Canadians get from the legislative agenda of this government, such as over one million jobs created because of our good governance of the country, would not happen. All the good measures Canadians benefit from would not happen, because the mantra of members on the other side of the House is to oppose everything, and in this case, first nations students. It is urgent that the House adopt this to give those kids on reserve the right to education, which they plainly deserve.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

Mr. Speaker, like my—

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

Order, please. I am seeing some inquiries, perhaps, by body language, in the House. The process for this type of question and answer period is for the opposition to be given priority for their questions, and questions and comments allowed from the government side are at a more limited level.

The hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

Mr. Speaker, like my colleague who spoke earlier, I too am saddened by this motion that the government has moved.

I am saddened because this really has nothing to do with the importance of education for first nations children. That is not the issue. I think that we all agree that aboriginal children should receive the best education possible. That is not what we are talking about.

What we are talking about are the government's constitutional obligations. I would like to hear the minister's comments on that. If there is one thing that should not be compromised, it is the constitutional rights of aboriginal peoples. One of the government's obligations is to consult with first nations and accommodate the concerns that are raised during those consultations. That is not what happened. I would like to hear the minister's comments on his understanding of the honour of the crown.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, my understanding of the honour of the Crown is embodied in clause 5 of Bill C-33, which is before the House:

5. This Act does not apply to

(a) a First Nation that has the power to make laws with respect to elementary and secondary education under an Act of Parliament or an agreement relating to self-government that is given effect by an Act of Parliament, including a First Nation that is named in the schedule to the Mi’kmaq Education Act or the schedule to the First Nations Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Act; or

(b) the Sechelt Indian Band established by subsection 5(1) of the Sechelt Indian Band Self-Government Act.

Clause 4 states:

4. For greater certainty, nothing in this Act is to be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from the protection provided for existing Aboriginal or treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada by the recognition and affirmation of those rights in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

That is what it means to respect the honour of the Crown.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue and for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, listening to the discussion and the answers from the minister, it is pretty clear. This discussion is absolutely not about closure. It is really not about the Constitution. The discussion is about the NDP deciding not to support this bill for first nations children. The discussion is about the NDP deciding to put the rights of first nations children on the back burner. We can wait another two or three or four decades, and they will never get an education and never participate in society.

This is about putting the rights of first nations children first, not second or third or fourth.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is indeed right. As a matter of fact, I am a bit astonished. Since 1971, when the Indian Brotherhood issued its policy paper on Indian control of education, first nations students, chiefs, councils, and members of those communities throughout the country have been calling for control of their education system.

Now our government is putting on the table incremental, committed funding of close to $2 billion to implement, for the first time, a school system that would bring about results and better outcomes on reserve, and this is opposed by the NDP. Well, it means that it simply wants to play politics on the backs of first nations students. We do not accept that on this side of the House.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am speaking to time allocation, because the act that is before us is supported by some very prominent, important first nations organizations and is opposed by other chiefs and councils. It is obviously an issue of great importance.

No one on this side of the House is paying less attention to first nations education than the minister, but the question of the complexity of the issue and getting it just right is paramount.

I have not heard a single reason advanced for why, once again, in anti-democratic contempt of this place, we have the 60th-plus use of time allocation on a government piece of legislation. Could the minister offer one single cogent reason why this place should rush through a bill of such importance and complexity?

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, very simply, the characterization by the hon. member of the procedure and the process omits saying that the best way to fully look at the different points of view on this bill is at the committee level. Once second reading is completed, there will be ample opportunity at the standing committee for members, witnesses, and people interested to weigh the points of view of those who favour and those who oppose it. We will let the hon. members at the standing committee do their job and report back to the House, where the debate will continue.

This is not about shutting down the debate. It is about ensuring that we can make a decision in the best time possible for first nation students to benefit from this legislation.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Malcolm Allen NDP Welland, ON

Mr. Speaker, I think you heard a lack of noise from this side when the House leader from the government moved the closure motion, because it is so usual for us to hear that.

The minister suggested that somehow we oppose everything. Let me remind the minister that today Bill C-30 will come before us and that it was this opposition, this New Democratic Party, this critic of agriculture, who said to the minister opposite, “We will help you, sir. We will help you get the legislation through. We will help you at committee. We will help you bring it back, because it is an emergency.” We intend to continue to do that.

Unfortunately, as you heard earlier in the Speaker's ruling, the government brought forward amendments. What happened in its rush to do all of that? The government was ruled out of order. When we rush, we make mistakes. That is a human frailty. It is not necessarily a Conservative frailty, albeit the government is the one that brings closure all the time. Clearly, its frailty is probably more obvious than anyone else's when it comes to making mistakes.

This single piece of legislation is immensely important. I do not sit on that committee, so my opportunities to speak to this legislation are limited to this place. By doing what the government has done 60-odd times, it limits the opportunity for those of us who do not have the opportunity to go to committee. Some would ask why we do not just substitute in. That would be an opportunity. However, I can imagine that the government would come up with some sort of ruling that there could only be so many substitutes, because if we all tried to substitute in to listen to committee hearings, the government would say that it would take too long as well.

There are times we need to take the time to study. In this case, the minister should reconsider. I do not know why he wants to rush this through. Education is important for every child. We agree with him that first nation children deserve to have the same education and the same opportunities as everyone else, but let us get it right in the first place. Let us not make mistakes.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I listened intently to the position of the official opposition on this bill. It opposed the principle of the bill. The opposition is very clear. I have been in this House long enough to say that I have never seen the opposition party change its mind on a bill after it has stated its opposition, and we know that it opposes this.

What is important is that Canadians, first nation members, stakeholders, and people who care can see the bill at committee, where the members will listen to witnesses and first nation representatives, and as the previous questioner said, weigh the views to ensure that at the end, we get a bill that enshrines in law the right of first nation students to have quality education and to finally get the outcomes they deserve.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, I do have to oppose this over-60th time allocation motion.

The member for Welland made a very good point about the fact that, yes, this may go to committee, but there are a lot of members in this place who are extremely interested in this issue. As a result of the time allocation, we do not have the opportunity, and the public in Canada does not have the opportunity, to hear the views from a wide range of people from across the country.

My colleague, our critic, spoke extensively on this issue yesterday. She outlined a number of concerns that should be talked about in this place, not just at committee. There are time allocation motions here. We see the way the committees operate in this place, too, ramrodding a bill through without the committee hearing all the proper witnesses.

Again, this is an affront to the democratic process by the Conservative government in terms of ramming legislation through. We know it has had five extensive defeats at the Supreme Court in the last month. That is what happens when the proper legislative inspection is not done in the House of Commons. Mistakes happen, and things get turned down by the Supreme Court. Then, to a certain extent, it has been a waste of time.

I encourage the minister to back off on the closure of this debate and to let proper debate on this legislative matter happen in this country.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, we keep hearing the same old story. What more can we say except that we must assess the process that led to the preparation of the bill and its introduction?

For decades, first nations across the country have been asking for control over their own education system on reserve.

I cannot say it enough: it is very important and urgent that we provide the chiefs and band councils in the country with a legal framework that will enable them to provide first nations' children with an education system that produces results. That is what is driving the government's efforts.

We have been working in concert with the first nations since 1971. For the first time, a government wants to take action on the Assembly of First Nations agreement.

I am simply asking the hon. member that we hurry up and send this to committee so that we can pass this bill that will benefit the first nations.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Mr. Speaker, I am kind of shocked and saddened to see exactly what is going on here today.

Here is a very important piece of legislation for aboriginal students. It is a generation that we can capture and embrace. We are hearing that the NDP members will not even let it go to committee and that they are going to vote against it at second reading. They say they want to debate it, yet they will not even let it go to committee. It is shocking and saddening.

We would spend some $1.9 billion on aboriginal students with this piece of legislation. Can the minister tell us just how important it is that we not miss the members of this generation, that we embrace them, help them up, and give them a hand up, so they can participate in this blooming and growing economy we have here in Canada?

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I totally agree with the hon. member.

As a matter of fact, it is important to note that the fastest growing segment of the Canadian population is among the aboriginal community.

In many provinces throughout Canada, we have a cohort of young first nations kids who are going to enter the labour market in the next decade at a speed and a number that is incredible. These kids today too often graduate or get out of the school system, attempt to enter university or trade school, and they are lacking a degree that is comparable to what the non-aboriginal kids are getting.

This serious investment, incremental funding of $1.9 billion, over the $1.55 billion that we are currently investing, would provide first nations kids on reserve throughout the country with an education system that would be comparable to what their non-aboriginal neighbours are getting.

This is the promise of the bill. This is the promise of Canada. Aboriginal people are fully members of our country and deserve the same rights as non-aboriginals.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, members have an opportunity at this moment in the proceedings to talk about why the government has introduced its 60th-plus time allocation motion on a bill that the minister himself said was so important in terms of its implications.

We have some ideas on this side that are perhaps contrary to those of the minister and members opposite. I am from Nova Scotia, where the first nations and Mi'kmaq have had control of their education system for the past 20 years and are doing just fine, thanks, without the support of the patrimony of the minister and his office. They do not need a superintendent provided by the minister, who reports to the minister on matters of education.

I would like to have the opportunity to debate the issue, to explain the experience, as I understand it, from the perspective of the Mi'kmaq in Nova Scotia and of Nova Scotians about this issue and why I am concerned. I find it offensive. The members opposite suggest that I should not have the right to stand and express my views, views that may be contrary to theirs. I would like him to explain why it is that I, who has been elected by the people of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, do not have the right, on an important piece of legislation like this, to explain what I and my constituents feel is important on this issue.

Bill C-33—Time Allocation MotionFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Valcourt Conservative Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, if he wants to talk about what is offensive, what is offensive is the hon. member leading people to believe that the bill would prevent first nations across Canada from becoming a self-governing institution over education, as is happening in Nova Scotia. He talks about Nova Scotia, and we all know about the success of the Nova Scotia system. If he cared to read this bill, he would know that it does not apply to Nova Scotia. He would also find out, if he read the bill, that this is probably the best promise for first nations to be able to get to the self-government level with their own education system.

Obviously, as you can hear, Mr. Speaker, he is not interested in the answer—