House of Commons Hansard #12 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was judges.

Topics

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for North Island—Powell River, Indigenous Affairs; the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona, COVID-19 Emergency Response; the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge, Natural Resources.

We are going to resuming debate. We are just going to double-check that the technology is working.

I will recognize the member for Calgary Midnapore. Is the member able to check her camera? I can hear her, but I cannot see her.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Madam Speaker, I have had this problem before. I apologize.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

There seems to be a technical issue. The best thing to do is allow the member to do her speech, and we can maybe work with IT to see how best to resolve this in the future.

There is a point of order from the hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, I know this is new and we do not have any established procedures for it, but I wonder if it is advisable to set a precedent of allowing members to speak without being seen. I know it is important for voting, so I feel strongly that members ought to be seen when they are speaking. I am not sure this is the best way forward. I do want the member to be able to speak, so I wonder if there might be some other way of allowing her to speak. I do not know that it is a great precedent to start allowing members to speak without being seen.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I appreciate the member's comments and point of view. Obviously, this is a process that we are all trying to navigate, and we recognize that there are some technical difficulties.

This is not about setting a precedent. We did see the member when she was first trying to connect, so we know that it is her. I know that some exceptions have been made because of this problem, and hopefully it will not happen in the future. This is beyond the member's control, and we are not talking about a vote at this moment. However, I will test the House to see if members are in agreement.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I can appreciate the member for Elmwood—Transcona's concern. I share that concern. Having said that, given the fact that we have seen the member as she was prepared to deliver her speech, I am prepared to allow her leave, if required, to present her speech. However, I suggest that the Speaker give very clear and decisive direction from this moment on after the speech has been delivered.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I will also mention that this is an issue that should be brought up with the House leaders as well, given the fact that this could happen to any party member. l know that once members have a speech prepared, they are ready to move forward, so I would highly recommend that this be brought to the House leaders.

The hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, I think all parliamentarians understand that this is an issue, but there is a concern with setting precedents. If we allow it to happen once, it could continue to happen. I know how passionate the member for Calgary Midnapore is about women's issues, but unfortunately I think we should move on to our next speaker.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Are there any further interventions?

The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from the Conservative Party. That sounds to me like a good way to proceed in the circumstances. Perhaps it is something we could get a clear ruling on from the Speaker at a later time. I appreciate that you may not be prepared to rule on the floor, but if you could come back to the House with some clear advice on how the Chair will proceed in cases like this going forward, it would be very much appreciated. I believe that was the suggestion of the member for Winnipeg North as well. That would be very welcome.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I greatly appreciate the additional information and all of the input on this very important matter, and I know that the hon. member who wishes to make her speech is probably pretty anxious about this. I will certainly take all of it under advisement and will get back to the House on this issue.

Is there unanimous consent to allow the member to deliver her speech at this point?

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Technical Difficulties of Members Participating VirtuallyPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

There being no unanimous consent, we will resume debate.

The hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Madam Speaker, it is to my surprise and privilege that I rise and speak to the bill, but I am happy to do so. This is an issue that has gripped this Parliament for several years, starting first in the 42nd Parliament and then into this Parliament, not just the first session but now the second session.

I too want to commend Ms. Ambrose for bringing the bill to the floor of the House of Commons. Thanks to her hard work and the work of colleagues, it would appear the bill is receiving broad support. It is long overdue. It is unfortunate this bill, Bill C-3, did not pass in the 42nd Parliament. It is equally unfortunate the bill was upended due to the prorogation the government triggered just a few weeks ago in order to avoid further committee investigation into the WE scandal.

Of course we now hear government members complaining about the democratic process, a process that is there to ensure members of Parliament from across this country have the opportunity to examine and speak about bills like this, even when they have broad support. For no other reason, I think the voices and debates we have today will echo and be that much louder, as opposed to passing it quickly as the government would like.

If the government members wanted to move quickly on this, they had that opportunity. Instead they tried to play politics on other issues and they are now paying the price and trying to blame everyone but themselves, when they should look in the mirror.

I want to thank as well my colleague from New Brunswick, the member for Fredericton, who I thought made a very strong bipartisan point about the importance of allowing members to speak up on issues. This chamber sometimes does move very quickly and at moments like this we are all given a chance to speak on important bills like Bill C-3.

The bill serves to do a number of things that are frankly long overdue. I hope in this go-around it will be three times lucky and the government will finally have the support to do something that should have been done years ago. I would remind the government, which is quick to point to the opposition and say we should advance the bill, that we have been doing everything we can . We have been talking about this the longest. We have been talking about it and trying to make it an issue, but at the end of the day, it is not our responsibility to shepherd legislation through the House of Commons. It is the government's responsibility. If the government is not prepared to do that or is unable to do that, we are happy to take over for it at any time and get legislation through.

This has been a pattern with the current government. It makes grandiose announcements, such as on infrastructure, and fails to deliver. This is another example of good work getting sidelined because of politics.

Why is the bill important and necessary? Let me give the House some facts and evidence. Victims are female, overwhelmingly so. They are young and too often they know their assailants. This of course makes it more difficult, not easier, to come forward when an assault has taken place. Sadly, the vast majority of sexual assaults are not reported to police. This is something we need to change as a country to ensure that when a wrong happens it is righted. Less than half of the sexual assault cases that end up in adult criminal court result in a guilty verdict.

I am not here to second-guess the judiciary today with respect to sentencing, but I think it is important for voices to be heard and for victims to have their day in court and be given every opportunity to express themselves and to be treated fairly and in a judicious manner. There are far too many cases, and we have heard about some of them today, repeatedly so, where that is just not happening. If we as parliamentarians can change that and set a better tone so that our judges are treating young people, young women in particular, with the respect they deserve, I think we should view it as a good day and something we should strive for.

I do want this bill to pass, as my colleagues do, and I think that is on both sides of the Commons.

The opposition is not here to do the government's work for it. We are prepared to replace the government and do a better job. We would do it with fewer scandals, with less WE, and with less rule breaking, law breaking and ethical violations. At the end of the day, it is up to the government to get the bill through. We are not going to make it difficult, but we are going to respect the rules of this place. While the government would prefer to govern alone, there are 338 members in this chamber and they should all have the opportunity to speak out on these issues as they see fit.

We hear a lot about the other place. We are breaking tradition here in referring to it as the Senate. In the other place, Conservatives do not hold a majority of seats. Not only that, as one of my hon. colleagues pointed out today, the bill failed in the 42nd Parliament because, again, the government mishandled the legislative business.

Maybe the government should prioritize what is actually important, which is bills such as this, and getting them through as opposed to focusing on handouts for their friends, and the WE scandal, and some of the other scandals we have seen over the years that resulted in Parliament being shut down and the work stopping. On this side of the House, we want to see bills like this pass. We want to see the committees going.

Even if my hon. friend on the government bench had his way and passed this bill today, to what end would it be? The committees are not sitting, because the government and this Prime Minister closed down Parliament weeks ago to protect him from the investigations of numerous committees into the government's malfeasance when it came to dealing with friends and cronies and the handouts to family members of the Liberal Prime Minister and the former finance minister.

Let us do the work, but set priorities and make sure they are the priorities that Canadians care about, not what is important to Liberals and their friends. The case for this bill has been made time and again. I echo the support of this bill, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak here today, suddenly and with little notice. I look forward to taking some questions on it.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, the government has very clearly demonstrated just how important the issue is. Even though we were in the midst of a throne speech debate, we brought it in on Friday. We brought it back yesterday, and here we are debating it for quite a few hours today.

The member says that all members should have the opportunity to debate the bill because that is part of the process, and debate should be encouraged where it can be encouraged. We have literally hundreds of private member's bills and motions that eventually come for debate. There is always a limit of two hours of debate before a bill goes to committee.

Should the same principle of allowing all members to speak on private member's bills apply, so that the member opposite and others would have the same opportunity to voice their passion on so many of those critical issues? Some of them are very important to our society. There are very strong, socially progressive moves in many of those private member's bills, but they are limited to two hours of debate.

Does he believe all members should be afforded the opportunity to have those debates too?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Madam Speaker, that was a nice try. This is a government bill, and government bills have in the past—

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I remind hon. members they are not to have conversations back and forth. The question has been asked. The member needs to answer the question, as opposed to the heckling that is going back and forth.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Madam Speaker, I recognize the parliamentary secretary would like me to agree to that in order to drag out the time for private member's bills. Governments tend not to support private member's legislation because it tends to upend their agenda. Therefore, no. We can recognize the difference with a piece of government legislation.

We are not extending debate. We are not asking for anything unusual here. We just keep hearing this drumbeat from the government side saying, “end it, end it, end it, let's get on with it,” but you have had five years. You have had three years since this bill was introduced. Let us hope that the third time you get it done.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I would remind the member to address his questions and comments through the Chair.

The hon. member for Shefford.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I also thank him for agreeing at the last minute to say the final words in the debate on Bill C-3.

I think we have covered this issue. We are nearing the end of the debate. Everyone agrees that it is important for judges to receive training in order to fight the stereotypes associated with sexual assault.

I think there are two major grey areas that have not yet been addressed. I would like to tie this in with what the member for Saint-Jean said and what my colleague from Repentigny brought up last year. A woman's body belongs to her and her alone. This is a stereotype that we are trying to eliminate in cases of assault. A woman has the right to do what she wants with her body. That does not mean that she is asking to be assaulted. To take that even further, a woman's body belongs her and her alone. She even has the right to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term. I would like to hear his opinion on that.

I would also like to hear what he has to say about the massive budget cuts that the Conservatives made to Status of Women Canada in 2015. The Conservatives have repeatedly said that it is important to broaden the debate and give training not only to judges but also to others, such as those in the education system. Thanks to the cuts and the current crisis, there is a risk that the government—

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. I am sorry to interrupt the member, but we are running out of time.

The hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Madam Speaker, the member did not quite finish asking her question. Since I was not here following the 2015 election, I cannot really comment.

What I can say is that the bill ensures that women who have been raped or abused by men have the opportunity to be heard in court and that they are treated with respect by the judge. We support the bill that is before us today.

I hope that this will be the last word on the subject. As I already said, it is the government's responsibility to move the bill forward in the House.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Is the House ready for the question?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.