House of Commons Hansard #65 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-6.

Topics

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, I do not understand the Prime Minister's stubborn refusal to hold a referendum.

Yesterday, his own minister did not close the door on a referendum. The day before yesterday, the hon. member for Mount Royal said, “I am not against the idea. A referendum is a tool we could use.” Last month, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons initially rejected the idea, but then seemed more open to having a referendum.

The government wants to be open and transparent and to instill trust in Canadians. Then why does the government not tell Canadians that following consultation, it will give them the final say through a referendum?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:20 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party said online that it supported the idea of all parties working together without a Liberal Party majority. Now the Conservatives are against that. There is an opportunity here, and I hope that the Conservative Party will work with us, to discuss the issues in committee and improve our voting system.

Rail TransportationOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport just asked his department if it is possible to take the DOT-111 cars out of service more quickly. Is that a coincidence? The Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities is in Lac-Mégantic today. It is hard to take that action seriously since it reeks of improvisation.

The minister has been in office for seven months, but he waited until today to decide to start thinking about taking action. Meanwhile, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada sounded the alarm a long time ago.

Will the minister stop with the public relations strategies and finally tell us when the DOT-111 cars will be phased out?

Rail TransportationOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

Honoré-Mercier Québec

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities

Mr. Speaker, the government knows how important it is to make sure that our rail transportation system is safe. With that in mind, we are investing $143 million to improve rail safety and the transportation of dangerous goods.

This year, we will provide $10.9 million to update over 400 level crossings across the country. These positive developments are in keeping with the minister's mandate to improve rail safety.

Rail TransportationOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, during his trip to Lac-Mégantic, the minister gave a geography lesson on valleys in Canada but refused to address residents' concerns. One resident summed up the minister's remarks, saying, “He seemed to be trying to placate the public, and I think he missed the mark.”

The people of Lac-Mégantic have simple requests.

Will the minister finally listen to them and commit to repairing the existing railways and funding a bypass?

Rail TransportationOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

Honoré-Mercier Québec

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the government knows how important it is to make sure that our rail transportation system is safe.

The minister did go to Lac-Mégantic. He listened to residents, who lived through this horrible tragedy, and he will continue to listen to them. Our hearts go out to these residents, and we are keeping them in our thoughts.

I want to point out again that the committee is there today to listen and look at possible measures, and we will listen. One thing is clear: safety is our top priority.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I smile because only Conservatives could call a proposal we made in public four months ago in a debate that we had on the floor of the House of Commons “a backroom deal”.

After eight months of political impasse and a discredited process from the government, New Democrats were proud to put forward a motion to engage all parties in Parliament to create a process that is fair for the millions of Canadians we represent.

Now that the logjam has been cleared, what is the government going to do to ensure that all MPs have the resources and tools available so that all Canadians can participate in this historic process?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Before going on to the parliamentary secretary, my ears are getting older and all this chatter back and forth really makes it difficult for me to hear. I would ask everyone to respect the process and let the one person who has the floor speak.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite, not just for the motion but for the collaborative spirit with which he has been operating on this file. It is my hope that will pervade this entire process.

If we are going to change our electoral system, if we are going to ensure that Canadians have a better way to express their democratic will, then it is going to take everyone in this House working together. In terms of how we move forward from this point, I am glad that the motion has a clear date for when that committee is going to be set. It will be a maximum of 10 days after it is approved. The committee does need to be resourced so it can travel across the country. We need to support every MP to have town halls in all 338 ridings.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, after decades of fighting for a more equal voting process, civil society groups are keen to mobilize Canadians for change. We have created together a historic opportunity to engage millions of Canadians who have been turned off and tuned out of our politics.

We are looking for specific tools that MPs can use and that the government will create with us to reach out to young people, aboriginal Canadians, and people living in poverty to finally open the door to all Canadians.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:25 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, certainly we want to work with not only the member opposite but with all members of the House to ensure that all Canadians are included in this process, particularly those who traditionally have been disenfranchised.

That of course will mean travel and going directly to talk with these groups. It will mean using innovative digital means to ensure that Canadians can engage, particularly when they are remote or where that connection physically is otherwise difficult for them.

I think the spirit that Parliament shows is incredibly important. In this, I turn to all members of the House and specifically to the Conservative Party to say that there is an opportunity to take the issues they have, the concerns they have, to focus them through the committee process. We have opened that door. Work with us and let us improve our democracy.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Before I go to the next question, I want to thank the hon. members. That was really much easier for me to hear.

The hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Mr. Speaker, I think they all fell silent in anticipation of my question.

The Prime Minister favours a ranked ballot and always has. What a surprise, his government has turned around and hired an activist for ranked ballots to advocate on behalf of ranked ballots. This is all before any committee process.

The message is very clear. The fix is in, as it has always been for the Liberals' preferred system, but Canadians are sending the message back. The Liberals can choose the system, but they must let the voters vote on it in a referendum. Will the government allow a referendum so that Canadians can decide whether the new proposal is better or worse?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member opposite say not very long ago, maybe a couple of weeks ago, that there was no way the Liberals would change their position. They are intransigent, they are forcing through a committee we do not agree with. There is a better proposal that we support from the NDP, why can they not work with that proposal?

Of course, we did that. We talked to the member and said let us try to find unanimity and now the members do not support that. I do not know their position on this and I am confused by their refusal to work with us. I would encourage that we put wording into the amendment that we move forward on the main motion that allows them to have the type of discussion they want at committee. Participate and let us get this process moving forward.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to equal flexibility from the government on the issue of referendum. One good reason for that is that 73% of Canadians are in favour of holding a referendum on the Liberal government's proposal to change the way we vote.

Canadians should have the final say. Canadians want the final say, but the government seems to have predetermined that it wants a particular proposal, ranked ballots. It has already hired a specialist to communicate in favour of ranked ballots.

Why does the Prime Minister not abandon that path and let Canadians decide in a referendum the appropriate method for allowing us to have elections in the future?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite himself has said that first past the post is not the best system. The member himself and critic in the Conservative Party has said that we can do better. What I would suggest is let us get to the work of making a better system, of creating a system that works better for Canadians. Then, if he feels that the process of working together and having consensus is not good enough, then let us talk about the ways that we can engage Canadians further.

However, to give up on the process before it began, to not even have a dialogue on how to improve our democracy, I do not accept that. Let us get to work. Let us be positive.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, regardless of the backroom deal that has been conjured up between the NDP and the Liberals, the facts are still straight on this. The Liberals are not bound by the decisions being made by the committee. The cabinet will go ahead and decide on the system that it prefers and at the end of the day, the Liberals still have a majority of members on the committee.

Canadians understand that their interests are not served by the committee's formation and they would like to have a voice on this matter. Will the members opposite agree to hold a referendum?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, the committee has not even met yet, so to say that the committee is not working effectively, I think is a little premature. The reality is we do not have a majority on that committee, the opposition parties do. For anything to happen at the committee, it is going to require the consent and work of the House.

Where I did see closed-room deals, where I did see Canadians excluded, was unfortunately on the unfair elections act, or the in-and-out scandal, or on the prorogation of Parliament.

We saw a decade of Canadians being locked out of our democratic process. We do not want to continue that. We turned over a new leaf that includes working with other parties, including the Conservative Party.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, the minister likes to talk about using social media. Perhaps she is unaware that only 20% of Canadians have access to Twitter. Meanwhile, 68% of all eligible voters showed up in the last election, and, historically on referenda, even more individuals have come out to vote. Therefore, a referendum will allow millions more Canadians to participate in this process than the minister's flawed initiative. Will the minister opposite give Canadians a say? Will the minister hold a referendum, yes or no?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, maybe it is because only 20% of Canadians are on Twitter that the Conservatives thought they could post that they would support the NDP proposal and then not. Maybe that is why they thought they could get away with it.

The reality is, the minister has talked about a myriad of ways for Canadians to engage, and of course those include digital means. We live in a digital age where many Canadians are in remote locations, have disabilities, or have other challenges that do not allow them to engage directly. The news is that Twitter is one medium but there are many media. We want to engage Canadians in every single one of them. That is the type of consultation they deserve. That is the kind of consultation they will get.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC

Mr. Speaker, the election reform proposed by the Minister of Democratic Institutions is nothing but an attempt to manipulate the public.

Why does the Liberal government not trust the 26 million registered voters in Canada to vote freely on this issue in a referendum?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, during the last election campaign, we promised to change our democratic system and ensure that everyone has a chance to share their thoughts and ideas about the type of government that people want.

We will absolutely keep this promise. We must work together to change and improve our electoral system.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC

Mr. Speaker, we all know that a referendum would express the will of Canada's 26 million registered voters.

Why does this government believe that a committee made up of only 12 politicians should decide what changes to make to our voting system?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, there is a committee, and it gives us an opportunity to speak, not only with members, but also with all Canadians about how to improve the system. During this process, there will be an opportunity to think about how to improve the system. I hope that the Conservative Party will work with us to do that.

MarijuanaOral Questions

11:35 a.m.

NDP

Sheri Benson NDP Saskatoon West, SK

Mr. Speaker, after the Liberal leader promised he would be the pro-pot Prime Minister, Canadians are becoming increasingly concerned about the Liberals' rightward shift. They appointed a former police chief to handle the issue, who then encouraged police to crack down on marijuana, while continuing to hand out criminal records. Now they have appointed Anne McClellan, who has called pot “more dangerous than cigarettes”, and who was even against medicinal marijuana. How can the Liberals justify sounding more “law and order” on pot than even the Conservatives who just voted for decriminalization?