House of Commons Hansard #309 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-69.

Topics

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

[Chair read text of motion to House]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

All those opposed will please say nay.

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Bill C-69—Time Allocation MotionImpact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #736

Impact Assessment ActGovernment Orders

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I declare the motion carried.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:25 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism

moved:

That in relation to Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the report stage and second reading stage and five hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and

that at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at report stage and second reading stage and at expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the third 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 then under consideration shall b3 put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so the Chair will have some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in the question period.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:30 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-59 is the government's answer to our Bill C-51 on national security, which we introduced in response to attacks that took place in Canada. The Liberal government said our bill was no good, so it introduced Bill C-59.

Recently, Abu Huzaifa al-Kanadi, who is known to have committed brutal crimes as an ISIS executioner, admitted to the CBC and the New York Times that he travelled for terrorist purposes. During a podcast interview, he proudly recounted what he did over there. It was from that podcast that CSIS and the RCMP learned what he did.

Can the minister tell us how Bill C-59 will improve situations like that now that these agencies have less power than before?

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:30 p.m.

Regina—Wascana Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. gentleman's question, but I beg to differ with his interpretation. The fact is that the changes we are in the process of making with Bill C-59 would bring much greater clarity to the law. It would make the constitutional authorities much more clear and distinct so that our police and security agencies would have a much better sense of the scope and impact of their powers.

In consultations with those authorities, and I obviously had the opportunity to discuss these issues with them quite frequently, they said the one thing that bedevils their work is uncertainty, a lack of clarity, and doubt about what they have the authority to do and not do. In Bill C-59, clarification is brought to a great many matters with respect to CSIS and other agencies, which would make them more effective in conducting the important work they do to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard rights and freedoms.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Once again, I would ask hon. members to limit their interventions to one minute. That applies to the minister replying too.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Mr. Speaker, this is the Liberal approach to Canadians' rights and freedoms in action. We saw the minister, the Prime Minister, and others on the front bench in the previous Parliament vote for the Conservatives' Bill C-51 and then say, “We don't like this bill. We're going to do better. We promise to do better. Just vote for us in the next election.”

Here we are, at 8:35 on a Wednesday evening, debating in the House of Commons a time allocation motion, because the Liberals sent the bill to committee before second reading. They said that this part of the process would allow them to accept amendments that were outside the scope of the bill, and they were going to listen to them.

I had 120 amendments. Four were adopted after adopting Liberal wording. Of 25 Conservative amendments, zero were adopted. Of the half-dozen Green amendments, none were adopted.

Could the minister explain to me why time allocation is the way to approach what they claim is the biggest change to national security legislation in the last 30 years?

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the hon. gentleman that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and Security did very good work on this legislation. It heard from at least three dozen witnesses. It received some 95 briefs, and it amended the legislation no fewer than 40 times. The result of those 40 amendments was to take what the experts had previously referred to as a very good piece of legislation and strengthen it in a number of ways. I am very happy to accept those 40 amendments.

I also remind the House that this legislation is based upon the most extensive public consultation about national security ever in the history of Canada.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, for his intervention and for his hard work on this file. I also want to say a proper thanks to the minister for bringing the bill forward, because it is time we updated our security arrangements with the different agencies. It is important that we bring about the ability to defend ourselves from cyber-attacks and enhance our cybersecurity so that we can go on the offensive, as well, to eliminate those threats. I think the minister would find, on the Conservative side, that we support that.

However, there were over 250 amendments brought forward at committee, and here again, we are having debate limited, and again we cannot raise the issues and concerns we have. We ask the government to kindly allow democracy to work and allow each and every one of us to raise the issues that are important on Bill C-59.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I read in the media the other day comments from that hon. member indicating words to the effect that by and large, Conservatives support this legislation. I appreciate his support for Bill C-59.

Again, I point out that this legislation is the product of extensive consultations. Fifty-nine thousand people responded online with respect to the proposals we have now before the House of Commons. Eighteen thousand submissions were received by email. Town hall meetings were held across the country in places like Halifax, Markham, Winnipeg, Vancouver, and Yellowknife. The standing committee held numerous meetings in preparation for the legislation. Social media was engaged, with Twitter and online conversations. There were 17 engagement meetings held by various members of Parliament across the country and 14 in-person sessions with experts from civil society.

All the results of that have been published so that all Canadians can see what everyone was saying to everyone about the content of this legislation.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:35 p.m.

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, from the 41st Parliament, we have reams of quotes from Liberals regarding the use of time allocation by the then Conservative government. The quotes we have from the member for Winnipeg North would fill several pages.

What we have seen over the last couple of weeks is the government's use of time allocation and using the bare minimum, allocating five hours for debate on this legislation, on Bill C-69, which was done just before this, on Bill C-75, and on Bill C-76. The list goes on.

I have a simple question for the Minister of Public Safety. Given his party's record when it was the third party in the 41st Parliament, does he not feel the slightest bit of shame and contrition over the complete reversal of his position, now that he occupies that side of the House?

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:40 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is the function of Parliament and the committees of Parliament to deliberate, debate, discuss, take legislative proposals, seek amendments, and go through that valid exercise in democracy, but it is also the function of this place and the committees of this place to ultimately, having heard all the evidence and all the information, to take a decision and actually vote on the decisions that reflect the best interests of Canadians. That certainly is happening in spades with respect to Bill C-59.

There has been extensive consultation, the largest in Canadian history. There has been a fulsome process in Parliament, and now, as we come to the conclusion of the deliberation stage, we are getting closer to the point when it will be time to vote and take a decision.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

June 6th, 2018 / 8:40 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, as I was unable to rise earlier tonight on time allocation on Bill C-69, I will say, parenthetically, that I find that time allocation even more offensive than this one, because we were time allocated in committee as well. I had clause-by-clause amendments on Bill C-69, and I had clause-by-clause amendments on Bill C-59. At least, to the credit of the Bill C-59 time management, we were allowed to debate all the amendments on Bill C-59, on public security, but we were stopped from debating two full bills' worth of amendments on omnibus Bill C-69.

Why is it required at this point, on a bill that has much that is good in it, to stop this place from being able to have a full debate? It is anti-democratic.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:40 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate the hon. member's interventions and her comments with respect to Bill C-59.

There has been a huge amount of input already, including ample public consultation for a full year before we even introduced the legislation in the first place.

Now, at this stage of the legislation, there will be another five hours of discussion in the House, and following that, another five hours of discussion in the House, which should be ample time for all serious proposals and propositions and comments to come forward, based upon what has already been the most extensive--

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:40 p.m.

Conservative

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:40 p.m.

Whitby Ontario

Liberal

Celina Caesar-Chavannes LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his responses so far. He elaborated on the comprehensiveness of the consultations, with about 70,000 inputs on this piece of legislation.

I am wondering if he could speak to the testimonials from key stakeholders and experts on this piece of legislation, because my constituents in Whitby would like to know what the experts say about Bill C-59.

Bill C-59—Time Allocation MotionNational Security Act, 2017Government Orders

8:40 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, as with all complicated pieces of legislation, and as is the natural disposition of experts in whatever field, there are various opinions. However, some of the most prominent commentators from, for example, the University of Ottawa, Carleton University, and the University of Toronto, and former heads of various security agencies across the country, who usually, perhaps, are in the category of being critical of legislation of this type, have described this as the most significant overhaul of public safety and national security legislation in Canadian history, certainly since the CSIS Act was originally introduced in 1984. They described the changes we have made as progressive and aimed at a very important balance. Number one, keep Canadians--