Debates of March 22nd, 2021

Statements by Members

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have been told that, during my member's statement, one of my colleagues was speaking over me. I am asking for permission to redo my statement.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I heard it.

I will take this opportunity to remind members who are here virtually, not physically, to pay attention to their microphone. When they do not have the floor, members must ensure that their microphone is on mute so as not to interrupt others as they deliver a speech or a very important message.

I would also ask all members to keep their headset on and place their microphone between their nose and lips for it to work. You may have to experiment with how it works best for you. Sometimes the way we exhale can cause a sharp noise that is hard on the interpreters' ears.

I would ask everyone to play with their microphones to determine whether the best place is between their noses and upper lips, because that avoids a lot of the pops, or to have it just below their lower lips so that the pops do not affect the ears of the interpreters, because it is rather painful on their part. That is my message for today.

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's future is at stake.

The Liberal Prime Minister was slow to roll out the vaccines and will be even slower to restart the economy. Now is not the time to reimagine the economy. The Prime Minister wants to be the centre of attention and wants to lead us into the unknown with economic experiments that will leave millions of Canadians behind. Every Canadian worker deserves to get their job back. Every Canadian worker in every sector of the economy deserves to be part of the economic recovery.

The Prime Minister has decided to choose which Canadians will have a future. That is not the right solution for the millions of workers who built Canada.

What the Conservative leader is proposing is a more secure future, a Canada with fewer slogans and more money in families' pockets. After months of hardship, Canadians want to rediscover hope for a better life. Abandoning thousands of workers in traditional sectors is not going to help us succeed.

As the leader of the official opposition stated in his excellent speech on Friday, we must rebuild Main Street. After COVID-19, only the Conservatives' economic recovery plan will provide Canadians with a stable economic future.

Hate Crime

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and I hope that when you seek it, you would find consent for the following motion. I move:

That the House express its horror at the recent mass shootings in Atlanta and its solidarity with the victims of the shootings and their families, condemn the rise of anti-Asian racism and racist attacks throughout North America and urge the government to take further action to tackle hate crimes, including by (a) hosting a federal-provincial-territorial meeting to discuss the rise in hate crimes in Canada and to coordinate our collective efforts and identify best practices to countering this trend; (b) creating and properly funding dedicated hate crime units in every community in Canada; (c) establishing national standards for identifying and recording all hate incidents and their dispensation in the justice system; and (d) working in collaboration with non-profits to facilitate the reporting of hate crimes.

[The Speaker, 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.

Hearing no dissenting voice, I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

We have another point of order.

The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.

Party Representation in the House

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a point of order regarding the COVID-19 safety protocols. I have two specific questions for you.

In a report submitted to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs dated June 30, 2020, entitled “Options for In-person Voting”, the recommended number of members who can safely attend sittings of the House is 86.

As you are well aware, we, all parliamentarians, follow public health guidelines. We keep our distance, we wear our masks when we are not speaking, and we have far fewer than 86 members in the House at any one time. We have never exceeded that number, and no one has even thought of exceeding it. Everyone is doing their part and, generally, all political parties are working together—well, almost all.

I realize that the virtual chamber is an extension of the physical chamber. You will have noticed that, for several weeks now, here in the physical chamber, only two government members have been attending the sittings of the House—sometimes three, but very often only one.

As you know, in all House committees, the principle is that the number of members selected to attend meetings reflects the proportion of seats held by each of the recognized parties in the House. This principle applies to all membership matters involving the House of Commons.

I would say this principle should apply to the maximum number of members who can safely attend, in accordance with established standards and the maximum number of people allowed in the House. The government side should not be limited to two members. There is absolutely no justification for this, especially since there have been some disappointing contradictions on the government side for weeks now.

For example, the Minister of Justice always responds to questions virtually from his office, which is here, on Parliament Hill, two buildings away. In a specific sense, he is not physically in the chamber. He is in his office, 1,023 feet away. To get to that office, the minister faces all of the usual risks. He crosses the provincial border, he encounters security officers, he encounters people in the halls and in the elevator. However, he is not here, in the House.

He even came to this building, the West Block. He made a comment to the press a few days ago, not very far from here at all, in room 125-B. You are very familiar with the physical spaces in the House. Room 125-B is the one that is located just under the floor of the House of Commons. Since he was in the building, why was he not at his desk here in the House of Commons?

Here is another reality. When we leave the West Block at night and go out the side door, we often see a fair number of the ministers' executive vehicles or limousines, a word that might, in and of itself, give us pause. We do not see just one or two from time to time but a fair number. I do not have any proof, but if a minister's executive vehicle is at the door of the West Block, then the minister in question is probably in the building.

If ministers are coming to the West Block for cabinet meetings, why can they not come here, to the physical House of Commons?

I repeat: Members are allowed to participate from another place as long as it is by virtual means. Of course, we recognize that the virtual House is an extension of the physical House. However, like you, we have noticed some disappointing inconsistencies and contradictions.

Now the Prime Minister is leaving the national capital region. Last week, he went to Montreal. Today, he is in Trois-Rivières. If he and his cabinet can make themselves available in places other than Ottawa, why can they not do the same here in the House, safely and in accordance with the rules?

We find the under-representation of the government party and cabinet in the House to be unacceptable. That should be remedied in order to ensure the integrity of our system of responsible government.

What is most troubling is that the very important doctrine that must guide our work is ministerial responsibility. Ministerial responsibility is a constitutional convention whereby ministers are responsible to Parliament for the actions of the government. It also means that they have a duty to be present in the House and to be accountable for their actions and failures.

For the third time, let me be clear: We recognize that the virtual chamber is an extension of the physical chamber. However, when we see, as you do, Mr. Speaker, incongruities, contradictions and appalling situations where ministers and government members come to Parliament Hill, even to West Block, but do not attend sittings in the House, that is very disappointing. That is why the under-representation of this group in the House makes a mockery of our system of government and the very institution of Parliament.

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

Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the fact that the member was addressing the physical presence of members in the House, I would point out that despite the fact he said that the virtual version of Parliament was an extension, his arguments do not support that. As far as the hybrid setting and the rules that have been laid out, the reality is there is no difference between sitting in the House and participating virtually.

The member is suggesting we have a two-tiered system. The reality of the situation is that this is not a two-tiered system, and I can hear some of them saying that it is. Whether someone is participating virtually or in the House, it is the exact same thing.

I would suggest this is not a point of order, but it is important to understand why that side of the House has chosen to do this. It is important not just for the safety of the members of the House, but more for the safety of the people who work here. I bring that to the attention of the member. I would bring that to the attention—

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I am going to interrupt. I am having a hard time hearing the argument because there are some interruptions. It is something we have not seen in a while, so I think we are all going to have to get used to it or eliminate it right off the bat.

I will just stop now and hopefully I will hear the rest of the hon. member's argument.

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

Mr. Speaker, to conclude that point, with all due respect to the House leader of the opposition, we are not going to take lessons from him while he stands less than two metres away from House officers, without a mask on and speaking over top of them.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add to what my Conservative Party colleague was saying earlier.

I completely agree with everything he said. Over a month ago, at a meeting of the House leaders, I talked about the fact that there was just one Liberal Party MP in the House. At the peak of the pandemic, we talked about having 25 MPs in the House, and at the time, we had an agreement with the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons that the ministers who were most likely to be questioned would be physically present in the House to answer questions.

I hear my Liberal Party colleague. I agree with what he said about the virtual Parliament being an extension of Parliament. Everyone agrees. However, more and more often, parliamentary secretaries to ministers are the ones answering questions. When they are not here, the answers tend to be a little more evasive than usual, and that is saying something. If they were in the House, I think we would see better collaboration. That goes without saying. Nobody needs a dictionary to understand that.

For over a month now, the Bloc Québécois has been pointing out that the governing party has not really been present in the House. Today, as usual, there is just one Liberal Party MP, one who, unfortunately for us, never answers questions. We have to get our answers via videoconference, and, increasingly, we are getting those answers from parliamentary secretaries. We are in the middle of a pandemic here. The government should be absolutely transparent, but it does not want to answer questions. Great. Just great.

I completely agree with what my Conservative Party colleague, the esteemed House Leader of the Official Opposition, said. The Bloc Québécois completely agrees with his point of view.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I want to remind members that some have almost broken the rule on mentioning the presence or absence of a member in the House. They have come close. I want to remind members to pay attention to what they are saying.

The hon. Minister of Infrastructure and Communities on a point of order.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, we will come back with additional comments shortly.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I will take the matter under advisement and come back to the House with a response if necessary.

Foreign Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, two treaties.

The first is entitled “Protocol to amend the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas”, done at Palma de Mallorca, Spain on November 20, 2019.

The second is entitled “General Coordination Agreement between Canada and the United States on the Use of the Radio Frequency Spectrum by Terrestrial Radiocommunication Stations and Earth Stations”, done at Ottawa on January 12 and 13, 2021.

Government Response to Petitions

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 53 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

Scrutiny of Regulations

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations concerning the mandate and the quorum of the committee. If the House gives it consent, I intend to move concurrence in the first report later this day.

Public Accounts

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

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, entitled “Main Estimates 2021-22: Vote 1 Under Office of the Auditor General”.

Health

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Health, entitled “Supplementary Estimates (C), 2020-21”. The committee has considered the votes referred to it by the House and reports the same without amendment.

Natural Resources

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources in relation to the supplementary estimates (C) for the year 2020-21. Our committee has considered the estimates referred by the House and reports the same back without amendment.

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Supplementary Estimates (C), 2020-21: Vote 1c under Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Votes 1c, 5c, 10c and 15c under Department of Employment and Social Development”.

I will take this opportunity to thank the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development and the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion for appearing before the committee along with their hard-working officials and for the excellent work of the members of the committee to get to this point in a collaborative way, including some rearranging of schedules. By all accounts, it was a moment that would make Parliament proud.

Status of Women

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following three reports of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women: the third report, entitled “Supplementary Estimates (C), 2020-21”; and the fourth report, entitled “Main Estimates 2021-22”. The committee has considered the estimates referred by the House and reports the same.

The fifth report is, “Request for a Government Response to the 18th Report from the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session” on “A Force for Change: Creating a Culture of Equality for Women in the Canadian Armed Forces”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to its fifth report.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

On a personal note, I want to thank the hon. member for adjusting her mike perfectly so there is no popping and is loud enough. That engineering background has really worked out well.

Hellenic Heritage Month Act

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-276, An Act to designate the month of March as Hellenic Heritage Month.

Mr. Speaker, as a proud Canadian of Greek origin, I am honoured to rise in the House today to introduce my bill to designate the month of March as Hellenic Heritage Month. This bill celebrates the dynamic culture of Canada's Greek community and recognizes the invaluable contributions of Canadians of Greek origin to our diverse and multicultural society.

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

This week, on March 25, as we celebrate 200 years of Greek independence after 400 years under the rule of the Ottoman empire, Greek Canadians can be proud of their heritage and look forward to national recognition of their culture, language and history during the symbolic month of March.

I ask my hon. colleagues across all party lines to support this bill in naming March Hellenic heritage month.

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

Scrutiny of Regulations

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the 1st report of the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.