Debates of Feb. 18th, 2021

Criminal Code

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. Yesterday, the House voted on Bill C-218, an act to amend the Criminal Code, sports betting, at second reading. The government has also introduced a bill on the same issue: Bill C-13, an act to amend the Criminal Code, single event sport betting.

Page 568 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition, 2017, respecting the rule of anticipation, states:

If a decision is taken on the first bill,... [as was the case with Bill C-218] then the other [in this case, Bill C-13] may not be proceeded with.

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if you could please inform the House of the impact the second-reading vote on Bill C-218 has on Bill C-13.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I want to thank the hon. member for his question. We will be getting back to the House with an answer as soon as possible.

Adjournment Proceedings

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to raise a point of order with respect to the Adjournment Proceedings last evening.

During the Adjournment Proceedings, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, in responding to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, referred very explicitly to my absence from the House of Commons. That is an egregious break of parliamentary procedure. It breaks the rules of the House of Commons.

There are times when members of Parliament, including you, Mr. Speaker, need to be away from the House of Commons and it is a long-standing parliamentary tradition that this is respected. That is why we are indeed called “honourable”, and are able to use that title for each other with respect, and it is very important. The member broke that tradition by referring to the fact that I was not in attendance in the House last evening. I was not able to be in the House last evening. As many members of Parliament will recognize, there are often times when we are not able to be in attendance. Our responsibility, and my responsibility as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, is to ensure that a question would be answered, and it was ably answered by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health.

I would like the Speaker to consider this and to recognize that this is not a new member of Parliament. He is someone who has been here for over five years. I would expect that an apology would be forthcoming and that it would be understood that this is way the House needs to operate.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I want to thank the hon. member for his intervention and point of order. As he was speaking, I saw what was said and, yes, I want to remind the hon. members that referring to someone's presence in the House or lack of presence in the House is not permitted. We rely on individual members' honour to respect that code so that we can keep civility in this chamber and continue to do our jobs so that Canadians can be proud of what goes on in their democracy.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge the point. I believe that what I said last night was that the parliamentary secretary could not be bothered to be here to answer the question. I acknowledge that I misspoke. What I intended to say would have been that the government could not be bothered to send a person who was responsible for the file. A range of individuals are responsible for the file. I apologize for misspeaking. I should have framed my response more carefully to get at the point I intended to convey, and I hope, in the future, somebody who is not the parliamentary secretary of—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I will interrupt the hon. member there before he digs even further. I just want to remind the hon. members that the apology is accepted, but they cannot say indirectly what they cannot say directly in the House, regardless of how they say it.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I have extraordinary respect for the Speaker, and I just wanted to clarify that this whole issue is over the fact that the member for Don Valley West made all of Canada know that he was not in the chamber. I think he might have done this in a more subtle manner, so that he was not drawing attention to the fact that he was not in the chamber.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am not sure that is a point of order. That is more argument, but I am not going to go any further on that. I will just continue.

Criminal Code

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, for the Minister of Justice]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-22, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Interparliamentary Delegations

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, a report of the delegation of the Canadian Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union respecting its participation at the 206th session of the governing council, which was held virtually from November 1 to 3, 2020.

Public Accounts

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following seven reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts: the fifth report, entitled “Immigration Removals”; the sixth report, entitled “Student Financial Assistance”; the seventh report, entitled “Request for Government Response to the 65th Report from the 42nd Parliament, First Session”; the eighth report, entitled “Request for Government Response to the 66th Report from the 42nd Parliament, First Session”; the ninth report, entitled “Request for Government Response to the 67th Report from the 42nd Parliament, First Session”; the 10th report, entitled “Request for Government Response to the 69th Report from the 42nd Parliament, First Session”; and the 11th report, entitled “Request for Government Response to the 70th Report from the 42nd Parliament, First Session”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to each of these seven reports.

Protection of Freedom of Conscience Act

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-268, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (intimidation of health care professionals).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to introduce my private member's bill, entitled the “protection of freedom of conscience act”.

I have introduced this legislation to ensure in plain language those rights guaranteed to all Canadians in the Charter. This bill seeks to enshrine in law a minimum national standard of protections for the freedom of conscience of medical professionals, while respecting the jurisdiction of my provincial colleagues to expand on this bill. It would ensure that medical professionals who choose to not take part in, or refer a patient for, euthanasia or medical assistance in dying would never be forced by violence, threats, coercion or loss of employment to violate the sovereign rights we all enjoy by virtue of our citizenship in this nation.

I encourage all my colleagues in this place to ratify my bill, thereby stating unequivocally that the right to free conscience expressed in the Charter applies equally to all Canadians, regardless of their chosen profession.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Fisheries Act

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-269, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act (prohibition — deposit of raw sewage).

Mr. Speaker, this bill would make it illegal to dump untreated waste water into any body of water that contains fish habitat. This bill would remove the power of the federal minister to grant permits to municipalities to dump raw sewage into waterways, like when the former environment minister gave permission to Montreal to dump eight billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River.

When it comes to the environment, the Prime Minister acts completely phony. He talks a good game, but when the City of Montreal asked to be allowed to dump its raw sewage into one of Canada's most important waterways, he told them to go ahead. This bill would remove the power of federal ministers to grant permission to municipalities to damage vital fish habitats.

The Liberal government has a terrible record on the environment. It has not planted a single tree out of its promised two billion. Its carbon tax is neither revenue neutral—

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the member knows, and you just indicated, that when members introduce a bill they are supposed to give a brief description of it, not provide political commentary that might not necessarily be accurate.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I thank the member. I will let the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle continue, but I will remind him to be succinct and that this is not a time for debate.

Please proceed.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, this is a very succinct explanation. As members know, private members' bills are often accompanied with a rationale. In fact, usually members talk about the need for their bill. Of course, the need for this bill is to take meaningful action on the environment.

I am almost finished my remarks. I know we have always given the the government House leader great latitude when he has the floor in the House, and I promise him that I will not be but a few more moments.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Please proceed. I will not interrupt the discourse that is going on, but I will let the member continue, very succinctly.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, the Liberal government has a terrible record on the environment. It has not planted a single tree of its promised two billion, and its carbon tax is neither revenue neutral nor lowering emissions. It has damaged more lakes, rivers—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am sorry, but I am going to have to interrupt. We have a number of points of order coming in. The hon. member for Winnipeg North has the first point of order, and I am not sure of the other one.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I believe it is the former leader of the Green Party for the second point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to reinforce the ruling you just made. We all know that providing political commentary is debate, and this is not a debate. The member should be giving a brief description of the bill. He knows full well that this is the case and I would ask him to respect the rule.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am, of course, speaking to the bill. The irony here is that the parliamentary secretary—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

If the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle can hang on, we have two more points of order. The first one is from the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, and then we will move on to the second one.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise with some trepidation to support the point of order just made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North.

The former leader of the official opposition knows full well what he is doing. As a former speaker of the House, he must know this is a violation of our rules. By the way, I agree with him entirely about the terrible record of the current Liberal government. It is not as bad as that of the former Conservative government, but the introduction of a private member's bill is not a time to deliver a partisan speech.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I believe we have slipped into the same thing we were talking about.

The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the point of order raised by members who are not in our political party.

There is only one judge in this situation, Mr. Speaker, and it is you. Obviously these members do not accept what you have said. They disagree, but this is what democracy is all about. We have debates in Parliament. If the member who tabled the bill has something to say, you are the one who will judge if it is too much, not others.