Debates of Nov. 24th, 2017

Commissioner of Official Languages

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. It relates to the comments made by the MP for Skeena—Bulkley Valley today, who reminded this House that the government is about to appoint an official languages commissioner. I would refer you to the point I raised on May 31 in this House, which was talked about again on June 6. I have yet to receive a decision from the Chair on that question of privilege with respect to contempt on the part of the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

In those references, we provided prima facie evidence of contempt, where the evidence of Madame Meilleur, who was considered for a time as a person for the official languages post, conflicted directly with the remarks of the Minister of Canadian Heritage in this place on May 31. On June 6, there was additional information for the Speaker to consider.

I would also say that there is news from November 17 that suggests that a senior advisor in the minister's office, who had also worked at Queen's Park in the Ontario legislature, with respect to Madame Meilleur and senior PMO officials, directly contradicts what the Minister of Canadian Heritage told this House with respect to the appointment of an official languages commissioner.

There is no timeline on when the Speaker needs to respond to a question of privilege or a point of order. However, in light of the fact this was raised in May, and we are likely days away from a new person being named as the official languages commissioner, it is an additional question of privilege for me as a member that my previous question of privilege be addressed before this new person is appointed. The minister's actions with respect to the appointment process, both originally and now, are suspect and in contempt of my privileges as a member. I would like that determination from the original May 31 question of privilege to be addressed before the government proceeds with its next appointment.

Therefore, I am asking you for that decision with respect to my May 31 point to be accelerated, so that the matter can be addressed in due course.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I greatly appreciate the follow-up information the member has provided. At this point, I am not quite sure if it is actually a matter of privilege. However, I will certainly take the information back, and the Speaker will certainly come back before the House, if needed.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to add to the member's point. I will certainly be checking the blues. If it is true that there was a question of privilege raised on May 31 that has not been responded to, I would agree completely that we, as a House, need to receive the reply from you prior to the appointment. At this critical point and in these critical weeks, we need to have that reply. I will be checking the blues, and I will reserve the possibility to come back and comment further, either later today or Monday.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Madam Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I would ask that if you are going to consider any new information with respect to this matter that we be notified as well, and that we be able to respond in this place.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I appreciate the government House leader's intervention. The new information that has been provided is exactly what has been stated here. However, if there is anything additional, we will be sure to do that.

Again, I will take all of the comments under advisement, and the Speaker will get back to the House as soon as possible, if required.

Palliative Care

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have a large petition containing 32,000 signatures to present to the House today. I wonder if it might be a record in this place for signatures. The Catholic Women's League spearheaded this petition.

The petitioners recognize that health care is changing and hospice and palliative care need to be an integral part of our system. These women have done extraordinary work in getting 32,000 signatures. I am pleased to present this petition today. They have raised a valid and important point that needs some consideration by the government.

Labour

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am tabling today a petition signed by LaSalle Community Comprehensive High School students.

They are calling on Parliament to promote awareness of child labour in schools and enact legislation requiring Canada's large corporations to report on their efforts to monitor, combat, and prevent child labour.

This is a call to action which I and many Canadians support.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the member that when tabling petitions members are not to show support. The member basically tables the view of the petitioners.

Taxation

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, today I bring forward a petition on behalf of thousands of hard-working Canadians who are concerned about the Liberal government's proposed changes to the tax plan and the use of private corporations proposal.

The petitioners call upon the government to completely abandon these proposed changes and to publicly commit to not raising taxes on dedicated small business owners who contribute economic value and growth to Canadians everywhere.

Small business owners work hard for their money and they should expect the government's support.

Abandoned Vessels

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise again in the House to present petitions signed by coastal people who are urging the House to adopt my Bill C-352, which would solve the problem of abandoned vessels. These signatories are from Port Saunders and Corner Brook, Newfoundland, and on the west coast, Nanaimo and Ladysmith.

The petitioners urge that the bill and its remedies for fixing vessel registration dealing with the backlog of abandoned vessels, and with recycling and green jobs all be advanced. All of these are pieces that would fill holes in the government's Bill C-64.

Religious Freedom

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Madam Speaker, a pastor in my riding asked me to table a paper petition signed by many Canadians who are calling on the government to protect all religious leaders and the freedom to worship without interference. I think that is the government's intention, but just to be sure, I am pleased to present this petition today.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I would like to remind members that they are simply to present their petitions without offering their opinions on them.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-45, An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts, be read the third time and passed, and of the amendment.

Cannabis Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Markham—Unionville had four minutes left before I interrupted him for question period. The hon. member for Markham--Unionville.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Madam Speaker, countless medical professionals have testified that the brain continues to develop until the age of 25. According to the Canadian Medical Association, increased use of marijuana before the age of 25 increases one's risk of developing mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, and anxiety by up to 30% compared to those who have not used marijuana under the age of 25.

The government cannot go through with this. Is this what we want for our children? I have said it before and will say it again. This is most certainly not what I want for my children. This is not what I want for my constituents and this is not what I want for Canadians.

For these reasons, the Canadian Medical Association and various other medical professionals recommended increasing the age a person can consume marijuana to 21 at the very least. As it stands, the government will fail our children if it goes through with this legislation. The government claims that this legislation will control the drug, but in reality it will allow its use to become out of control.

The vast majority of witnesses at the health committee spoke strongly against home grown marijuana in their testimony, including most medical groups and the police forces that appeared. Allowing home grown marijuana will most certainly not help us to regulate the industry. Further, police have said at the health committee that because they cannot see inside homes, they will be unable to enforce a plant per household quota. Even more concerning is that a large network of legal home grows could easily become an organized crime network, and this could happen next door to anyone.

Canadian families expect safe and healthy communities in which to raise their children. We are parliamentarians. We are representatives of our constituents and we need to ensure that all voices are heard. People are concerned about this drug. We as elected officials can and should provide guidance on this drug to reflect the views of all Canadians. When it comes to health and safety, Canadians deserve the best. This legislation is not what is best for Canadians.

There are only 218 days to go until the arbitrary date of July 1, 2018. Let me be clear: let us not rush through this legislation. We need to do what is right for Canadians. The provinces, the municipalities, and police forces are not ready to implement this legislation. I cannot support Bill C-45.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, when the Conservatives stand up, they consistently talk about there being a problem if the bill passes, but they fail to recognize that the problem is there today. We have a serious problem with cannabis consumption by our youth. Their usage is recognized as among the highest in the world.

In my constituency and all constituencies there are criminal elements that go into our schools to sell marijuana to our children, to 12-, 14-, and 15-year olds. We finally have a government that has taken a proactive approach to deal with the issue. We have a government that made a commitment in the last election to do exactly what it is doing today. It is a part of the election platform. We are stepping forward and trying to resolve some very complicated issues.

Would the member across the way not recognize that the status quo just does not work? The numbers and what is happening to our young people in our schools today—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I do have to allow for other questions.

The hon. member for Markham—Unionville.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Madam Speaker, there is a huge problem, but we are going to make it worse. This is the main concern of police officers and the Canadian Medical Association. Everyone spoke against it. For example, if marijuana plants are allowed to grow in homes and on every street corner, marijuana will be available. People could go to Shopper's Drug Mart and it would be available. This is making the overall situation worse. Yes, there is a problem, but the Liberals are making it worse down the road.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, earlier this week, I had representatives of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities sit down and have a chat with me. One of their major concerns is the pace of the legalization of marijuana and how communities themselves have a lot of work to do to prepare. I wonder if the member could share with the House whether he shares those concerns and how the government needs to support communities in this process.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Madam Speaker, indeed, there is a problem. There are many problems. I was speaking to our local police chief. He was wondering when we are going to train our police officers. It costs $10,000 to train one police officer. Where is the money going to come from? What happens when kids go to school stoned, having eaten the wrong brownies from the kitchen? All those questions and concerns are not being addressed. The whole process has not been well thought through by the Liberals.

There is no rush. I would ask them to please take their time. The arbitrary date of July 1, 2018, is simply unacceptable to us, and it is unacceptable to Canadians.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, we have heard a lot of reasons why not to legalize marijuana. What is the rush? When I was door knocking back in 2015, we hit about 25,000 doors. I can count on two hands the number of times I talked to people who said they were going to vote Liberal because they would legalize marijuana.

We have heard that doctors are against it. Police are against it. Firefighters are against it. Insurance people, etc., are against it. Does he have any idea why the Liberals would do this, when no one wanted it? What is the rush?

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Madam Speaker, we did a round table in my riding, and 98% disagreed with the government. Ninety-eight per cent said that we are going to make the situation worse.

The one thing that crossed my mind is that the Liberal government is so broke that it is looking for a couple of bucks, another half-billion or billion dollars.

The Liberals are forgetting that there is a cost attached to this issue. More money will be needed for health care, policing, schooling, and everywhere else. There is a cost involved. Most of the provinces and municipalities are doing all the work. Meanwhile, the Liberal government is looking for more cash, because it is broke.