House of Commons Hansard #4 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was hybrid.

Topics

The EconomyOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I want to address one of the assertions of the party opposite's members, which is that our spending during the COVID recession was inappropriate. I want to ask them to be honest with Canadians, and I want them to tell Canadians whether they really believed that COVID lockdowns were the time for austerity. Canadians know that supporting them during the COVID recession was the right thing to do, and they know better than to trust Conservatives to have their backs during a crisis.

Child CareOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON

Mr. Speaker, we know that affordable child care is not a luxury; it is a necessity. It is also essential for our robust economic recovery. Parents in Brampton are eager to get moving on improving our early learning child care systems.

Could the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development please update us on the government's work to ensure affordable and accessible early learning and child care systems are implemented across Canada?

Child CareOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Karina Gould LiberalMinister of Families

Mr. Speaker, affordable, quality and inclusive child care is good for kids, it is good for parents and it is good for our economy. Sixty percent of children in Canada are now covered by provincial agreements with the federal government that will see $10-a-day child care in the next five years. That is nine provinces and territories where parents will see their child-care fees cut in half next year. I am looking forward to adding Ontario to this list soon so that parents in Brampton and across Ontario will also benefit from this transformational federal investment.

Public SafetyOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

NDP

Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, last week, militarized police once again descended on Wet'suwet'en territory. The world watched as unarmed indigenous women were arrested at gunpoint. I have heard from dozens of indigenous leaders who are horrified by what happened.

To the minister responsible for the RCMP, do the events of November 19 reflect his view of how Canada should engage with indigenous people on their lands and, if not, what is he going to do to review RCMP conduct?

Public SafetyOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Eglinton—Lawrence Ontario

Liberal

Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, as I have said earlier this week, we expressed concern at the way in which the operation was conducted in the Wet'suwet'en territory. I have said that we are going to continue to monitor the case very closely.

Of course, as members will know in this chamber, elected representatives do not direct operations nor is it for elected representatives to adjudicate on the merits of an individual case. That is a job for the courts. However, our job will be to ensure that there is alignment between the values and the principles that underscore the responsibilities of the RCMP and those operations. We will do that job.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, COP26 has ended, not with a bang but with a disappointing whimper, and 1.5°C might still be alive, but we must all do more globally. That means that, in Canada, the plans that have already been put in place have to be believable, they have to deliver results.

Today's report from the Commissioner for Environment and Sustainable Development that Canada has 30 years of failure on climate focused on this new program, “emissions reduction fund”, which, after spending $70 million, the Auditor General is unable to find whether a single tonne of carbon was reduced.

Can the hon. minister update us on how this program can be fixed?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

North Vancouver B.C.

Liberal

Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalMinister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, we certainly welcome the report by the commissioner, and my officials are presently reviewing its recommendations. While we agree with a number of the commissioner's observations with regard to ongoing programming, one must remember that this particular program was a temporary COVID response measure and was intended to do two things: sustain jobs for workers and communities at a time of record low energy prices and ensure continued action on methane pollution at a time of economic crisis. This program has succeeded in those two elements, but we are now beyond the worst of COVID, and the oil and gas sector has certainly improved in terms of economic prospects. We have now commenced a review of the future of this program and the remaining funding.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé is rising on a point of order.

Points of OrderOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Mr. Speaker, you made several calls to order during question period and I thank you for that. However, as this Parliament begins, I would like to point out a situation that already occurred in the last Parliament, that I hope will not become a tradition: heckling during members' statements under Standing Order 31.

Members are elected by the people, and each of them has as much right as anyone else to make their statements here in an environment that is at least somewhat quiet. If people do not want to listen, I can understand that. However, those same people should not, like they did today during my statement, have discussions that are so loud I can hardly concentrate. It is a good thing I am good at it, because it was very hard to do.

Mr. Speaker, I would like you to remind the House and ask members to be more vigilant on this issue in the future.

Points of OrderOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I would like to thank the hon. member.

Since we are in a place where debates are taking place, so that everyone can hear the person speaking, I would ask the people currently holding discussions in the House to please move to the hallways or the lobby.

Points of OrderOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

NDP

Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among the parties and I hope that if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move that given that tomorrow is Make Amazon Pay day and in light of the fact that Amazon, despite record profits as a result of pandemic profiteering, does not pay its fair share of taxes; has a clear anti-labour record, including in Canada, where workers trying to unionize faced retaliation; and has abysmal environmental practices, including a carbon footprint the size of entire countries, the House call on the government to stop coddling the ultrarich by refusing to properly tax Amazon while giving it cushy government contracts. It is time to make Amazon pay.

Points of OrderOral Questions

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

Points of OrderOral Questions

3:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Business of the HouseOral Questions

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to get back to the truth with the habit we have in the House of Commons of the Thursday question between both House leaders.

Allow me to officially congratulate you on your election, Mr. Speaker. We have demonstrated in the last four days that Parliament is working well.

What does the government have in store for us in terms of parliamentary work in the coming days? That is my question to the hon. government House leader.

Business of the HouseOral Questions

3:20 p.m.

Ajax Ontario

Liberal

Mark Holland LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. I love questions, but I especially love the Thursday question.

I can say that tomorrow we begin debate at second reading of Bill C‑2, an act to provide further support in response to COVID‑19, which was introduced yesterday by the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.

On Monday of next week, we will resume debate on the COVID-19 economic measures legislation. On Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, we will have a debate on the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne.

The House resumed consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Kings—Hants has three minutes remaining.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, we talked about the opportunities of the 2019 class in the previous Parliament. One opportunity I did not have then was to give a speech that ran out of time just before we went to members' statements, so I will try to pick up where I left off.

I was explaining that as the chair of rural caucus for the governing party, I have had the opportunity to speak to my colleagues. I mentioned the Minister of National Revenue and that I had spoken to the her about the challenges she has in being able to get to Ottawa because there is not the same availability of flights. I am tying that back to the provisions of the motion under consideration right now, which allows us to look at certain votes and make sure they happen at certain times of the week. It is responsible, it is equitable to members from far-flung parts of this country who are not within driving distance and it is a reasonable piece.

I also want to mention to my colleagues who have been expressing some level of concern over the motion that this is time limited. As I have said, we are in the middle of a pandemic. I look around and I see people with masks on. We know that COVID still exists, but the motion is not going to continue indefinitely. It has a date of June 23, I believe. I do not have the text right in front of me, but it is June 2022. It is a reasonable motion to make sure that we can continue debate.

Some of my colleagues may not have been in the chamber before question period, but I mentioned that I intend to be here. However, I want to make sure that all of my colleagues and I have the ability to practise our parliamentary privilege in the event that one of us or someone close to us contracts COVID. The fact that the member for Beauce has COVID-19 right now is a prime example of that. I want to make sure that his privilege is protected in the House, and I fail to understand completely why there is such opposition in the House to the motion that has been put forward.

I will leave it at that. I would welcome any questions from my colleagues if they have them.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, I really do respect what the member is bringing to the table and understand the importance. I know that many of my colleagues have brought forward the option of pairing, making sure that if someone's vote is not able to be counted, we can pair or do something of that sort. There have been many options.

I have sat through a hybrid Parliament. I have sat through PROC, where we saw so many issues with interpretation. We understand that there have been medical conditions.

I wonder why the member is not asking why we should not test when we come in. Why are there not options other than just having a hybrid Parliament?

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, we know that testing is part of the COVID response, but testing alone is not always going to pick up instances where COVID-19 exists.

The member mentioned the hybrid Parliament. Again, I would dare say that the majority of the members, if not all the members, prefer to be here, but we are still in the midst of COVID-19. We have to make provisions for members if they do contract COVID-19 so that they can participate.

The member mentioned pairing. I would not want to take away anyone's ability in the House to come here physically, if they choose to do so, because I contracted COVID-19, and then get them to ask a member from the official opposition or from one of the other parties not to physically show up. I would rather have the ability to tune in from Nova Scotia. I say this regrettably because I would rather be here, but I still want the opportunity to bring the voice of my constituents to this place.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, as we saw in the Speech from the Throne, we have a government that talks the talk but does not walk the walk. We have a government that talks about science, but that does not act on it.

Can someone explain to me why the City of Montreal, the Quebec National Assembly, the City of Toronto and the City of Winnipeg can offer their citizens functioning legislatures and municipalities while here, in Ottawa, we are told it would be impossible?

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his question.

The examples he gave were local ones. The City of Montreal, the Government of Quebec and other local jurisdictions. This is the Parliament of Canada, and members come from all across the country, from coast to coast to coast. I think it is in the best interests of members to have the option to participate virtually when necessary.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Ruff Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Madam Speaker, as this is the first time I am speaking in the House, I want to thank my constituents for putting me back here for the second time.

I have a couple of really quick yes-or-no questions for the member opposite that I am confident he will actually answer, unlike maybe his colleague from Winnipeg North. First, would he say that it would be preferable for the rhetoric in the House to be toned down, yes or no? Second, would he agree that it is a lot easier to build relationships in person than it is through a hybrid Parliament?

Finally, I have a comment. The member should talk to the member for Winnipeg North. He spoke yesterday during this debate about extending the motion past the June timeline.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member opposite for his re-election to this place. I was taking notes, and yes, of course it is preferable to be here. As a new member, I felt like I was not able to fully participate because of the COVID pandemic. It was isolating at times to be at home.

To his point about building relationships, I agree. In fact, I built many good relationships with the members opposite, particularly at the agriculture committee and the public accounts committee, in the last session.

I will continue to be here in person, but I want to make sure that members have the ability to continue their privileges in the event that they are exposed to COVID-19 or their partner or a family member has to isolate. They should still have their privileges. We can continue to have respectful decorum and relationships, but we can also protect members' privileges when necessary.

Order Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

November 25th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in the 44th Parliament to once again represent the great people of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook. That is in Nova Scotia, of course. I want to thank them for electing me for a third time and giving me the privilege of continuing to represent them, speak on their behalf and advocate for them and all of the communities in my riding.

I also want to thank the volunteers in my riding who came out to support the democratic process and do the work that is so important in delivering the message of Canadians during an election. What we were committed to is how to deliver that. That is really important.

Finally, I want to thank my family, because we all know that when one of us is running, the whole family is in it together. It is a challenge, but it is an enjoyable experience and I would do it again, maybe.

I am very pleased to speak to the motion we are debating today, to bring back a hybrid Parliament, and in particular to speak on social topics such as our working and private lives.

More and more studies are showing that a flexible work environment has a lot of advantages. For example, it can reduce stress and increase satisfaction at work, on top of increasing productivity, which is a very important consideration.

Canadians continue to develop this work-life balance. I think COVID-19 has shown that people can be very productive and successful in this type of system.

A recent survey of Canada conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development reported that decision-makers should look at implementing policies that would help Canada achieve a resilient and healthy post-pandemic society.

That is also why we promised during the election campaign to amend the Canada Labour Code with certain very important principles in mind. We want to strengthen the code's provisions to better support women who must be temporarily assigned to other duties during their pregnancy, include mental health in workplace health and safety standards, require employers to take preventive measures against stress and the risk of workplace injury, provide all federally regulated workers with 10 days of paid sick leave and work with federally regulated employers and groups representing workers to develop a policy on the right to disconnect, which would let workers disconnect without having to worry about their job security.

Since March 2020, the pandemic has forced us to change how we work and, to a certain extent, to reinvent work. An unprecedented number of Canadian employers have had to adapt and be more flexible over the past 20 months. Accordingly, telework and virtual schooling have led to huge changes with many positive effects. Virtual schooling has existed for quite some time and the pandemic has done much to advance this essential virtual programming.

Despite the many benefits of teleworking, the closure of schools and school day care centres caused additional stress for many parents. That is why our government strongly believes in the right to disconnect. We are doing everything we can to manage the pandemic and accept that a return to normal will require a healthy work-life balance.

The House of Commons Administration also demonstrated tremendous creativity and adaptability. It did an outstanding job delivering a hybrid parliament in such a short time. For 150 years, we had no other way to vote than to be physically present in the House. Suddenly, thanks to the exceptional work of the House of Commons Administration, we managed to do it, and we will be able to use this system for years to come. That is what it means to learn and to make the most of a difficult situation.

The motion we are debating today is very similar to the one we discussed in the last Parliament. Yes, the vaccination rate has increased, the Pfizer vaccine has been approved for children aged 5 to 11 and the third dose is available. However, the situation is still precarious, and the number of cases is increasing because of the season, as we are going into winter. We are already seeing those numbers go up across Canada, and that is why we need to find ways to make this work.

It is extremely important that we be able to work. Whether it is from this building or elsewhere, we must be able to work. Whether we vote here in the House or elsewhere, we must be able to vote and represent our constituents. If we find ourselves at home an extra day to participate in an important activity in our community, that is even better for our constituents. That is our job; we have done it before and we will continue to do it in the future.