House of Commons Hansard #54 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debate.
The House resumed from January 29 consideration of the motion that Bill C-18, An Act to implement the Agreement on Trade Continuity between Canada and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Canada-United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Liberal
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
It being 3:10 p.m., pursuant to order made on Monday, January 25, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the second reading stage of Bill C-18.
Call in the members.
Canada-United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Liberal
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade.
(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)
Bloc
Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that several members shut off their cameras temporarily. Would it be possible to make sure that does not happen again? The whips agreed on that, and I feel cameras should be on for the duration of the vote.
Liberal
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
I thank the hon. member for La Prairie for his observation and I would remind all hon. members that during a vote, their microphone is to be turned on only when they are voting, but their camera is to stay on for the duration of the vote.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 104 and Standing Order 114, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of committees of the House. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the 10th report later this day.
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-263, An Act to amend the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (equalization).
Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling an act to amend the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (equalization). For short, it is called the equalization and transfers fairness act.
This act would do the following: publish publicly all calculations on equalization; publish all consultation documents with the provinces; remove the per capita cap of $170 being proposed in the fall economic statement to there being no cap, which is about $3 billion to the Government of Alberta; bind the government to negotiate in good faith in referendums conducted by a provincial government under provincial legislation; and finally, rename the badly called Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, when it is truly the equalization and transfers act.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion will please say nay.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
I declare the motion carried.
(Motion agreed to)
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any Standing Order, special order or usual practice of the House, the time provided for the debate pursuant to Standing Order 51 shall end no later than 6:30 p.m. today.
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion will please say nay.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
I declare the motion carried.
(Motion agreed to)
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition on behalf of Canadian citizens deeply concerned about the vicious and ongoing genocide of the Uighur peoples by the Communist Chinese government. They express their condemnation of the Communist government's use of forced abortions and sterilizations, forced labour, family separations and forced indoctrination and detention in what has been described as concentration camps.
These citizens are calling on the Government of Canada to formally recognize that Uighurs in China have been and are still subject to genocide and to use Magnitsky act sanctions against those who are guilty of these crimes against humanity. I hope the government will faithfully deal with these citizens' concerns.
Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Mr. Speaker, I too would like to present a petition on behalf of signatories to recognize the atrocities put on the Uighur people by the Chinese Communist Party. They call on the House of Commons to formally recognize that the Uighurs have been and are being subjected to genocide and to use the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, better known as the Magnitsky act, and sanction those responsible for such actions.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to join my colleagues in presenting a petition highlighting the horrific human rights abuses targeting Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in China. The petitioners note reports of forced sterilization, forced abortion, systemic sexual violence and mass detention in concentration camps. They note that these crimes clearly violate the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
The petitioners call on the Government of Canada and the House of Commons to recognize that Uighur Muslims are victims of an ongoing genocide. They also call on the Government of Canada, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs in particular, to hold those involved in this genocide accountable by using Magnitsky sanctions to target those involved in these gross crimes.
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Mr. Speaker, you may notice that there are citizens from across this country expressing the same concern through petitions, and that concern is regarding the situation with the Uighurs in China. The petitioners are calling on the government to deem it a genocide and to look at implementing Magnitsky sanctions on those responsible for this heinous crime.
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
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
The Chair has a request for an emergency debate from the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith.
Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to request an emergency debate on the current situation regarding the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically to the new threat posed by mutations, known as variants. The spread of the novel coronavirus variants is cause for grave concern, if not alarm. We believe it constitutes an emergency in which Parliament should engage.
The variants have been primarily identified as being from the U.K., which is known as B.1.1.7; from South Africa, known as B.1.351; and from Brazil and Japan, known as P.1. The evidence as to whether these variants are more deadly than the original COVID-19 appears to be divided. However, medical reports from around the world consistently point to the variants as being significantly more transmissible.
With COVID-19 spreading more rapidly due to the variants, there is risk of exponential growth in cases of COVID-19, which may overwhelm our health care systems. There is also the risk that increased spread will lead to more mutations, which may be more deadly or vaccine-resistant.
As a nation, Canada has struggled with establishing a coordinated response to the pandemic. Green MPs are concerned that there have been moves to ease restrictions precisely at a time when federal health officials have recommended that we maintain or even increase measures in response to these new variants. Canada should be able to identify the jurisdictions that have had the greatest success and use those examples to inform winning coordinated strategies across the country. We believe there is an urgent need to debate whether now is the time to shift gears from bending a curve to going to zero cases, or as close to zero as possible.
We are entering more dangerous territory. Should the government increase warnings about the changing nature and risks due to the variants? Should the federal government increase the coordination of efforts among the provinces? An emergency debate would assist in identifying those options.
The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
I thank the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith for his intervention. However, I am not satisfied that his request meets the requirements of the standing order at this time.
The House resumed consideration of the motion.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, before the break, I was talking about heckling and the importance of the interaction that it can facilitate, at least when done well. I know my friend for Saanich—Gulf Islands is going to weigh in on that, and I look forward to what she is going to say.
Absent the changes I have proposed, I suggest that we insert a mechanism of written heckling, whereby members could post a written message, while a person is speaking, in response to things they are saying. These written heckles would appear on screen under the video of the person speaking, allowing the public and other members to see them and allowing the Speaker to respond to or ignore them as he or she chooses.
The point of heckling is to give the opportunity for substantive interjection. Perhaps members who do not like the excessive noise will appreciate the proposal for a mechanism of written heckling, at least for the time being. If it works well, we might consider continuing it when virtual Parliament ends, allowing members to heckle from their phones instead of with their voices. This will allow more voices to be heard and will still facilitate that kind of ongoing interaction.
The fact that only one instead of many voices can be heard is a key way in which virtual Parliament is not real Parliament, and I look forward to getting back to the real thing. Living with my young family in western Canada, there are many ways that virtual Parliament carries personal advantages, but the public interest is not served by the prolonging of this virtual Parliament any more than is absolutely necessary.
Finally, I believe we should dramatically increase the slots available for Private Members' Business and create a mechanism whereby substantial pieces of private members' legislation can be prioritized over motions. A member who simply wants to propose a committee study can propose a motion anytime at a committee rather than in the House. Our primary job is not to be goodwill ambassadors for government programs or to run Service Canada outlooks in our ridings. Our job as legislators and members of Parliament is to legislate in Parliament.
Anyone else can attend a pie-making contests in my riding, but only I can be here to do the hard work of passing laws. However, absurdly, only a minuscule proportion of members, even in a four-year Parliament, will ever have the time or the opportunity to take a legislative proposal through to conclusion. Many good ideas, which in some cases enjoy unanimous support, have not moved forward because of time constraints.
Therefore, I would like to see us increase the length of the sitting day by one hour and double the number of slots for Private Members' Business. Our institutions would improve if we had a greater opportunity for all members of Parliament to do their most fundamental job, which is to legislate and put forward ideas for legislative changes and reforms that other members should consider.
These are ideas that I think all members would appreciate and consider. We can try to move forward in a consensus way that would improve the rules and reflects the consensus of all parties.
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 want to pick up on the member's comments with respect to question period.
Manitoba once had a system where the questions and answers were long. I was relieved when we adopted what Ottawa had and limited them to less than a minute. It made a huge difference in the number of questions being asked.
When I was in opposition, I would often say that the government never answered my question. When I am on the government side, I say that maybe we should be reflecting on questions. However, when it comes time for PROC to deal with this issue, I believe that people need to stop thinking in terms of an opposition and a government perspective. There is a reason certain questions are asked. There is a reason certain answers are provided. We need to look at ways to depoliticize this, take the party out of it and ask one question: What is better for our democracy inside the chamber, and how can the rules affect that?
I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on the importance of depoliticizing, taking the parties—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
I am sorry, but we do have to allow for other questions and comments. The hon. member has already asked his question, so I am sure that we know what he is asking.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.