Debates of May 10th, 2021

Bill C-19—Time Allocation Motion

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague must be joking when he says it is time to send the bill to committee.

This act demands consensus. This is about the Canada Elections Act and the right to vote, as my colleague astutely pointed out earlier. There has to be consensus. Over four months of debate, only one Bloc Québécois member has spoken to this bill.

The Liberals introduced Bill C-19 on December 10, 2020, while the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs was already looking into the issue. Instead of waiting for the committee to finish its work, the Liberals decided to introduce a bill, utterly disregarding democratic institutions, such as the committee. Now they are forcing closure with help from the NDP, their usual accomplice for this kind of tactic. They say there has been enough debate and this bill must go to committee. I am not making this up.

The Liberals have trouble managing a legislative calendar. They are a bunch of amateurs. Here is my question. Are they not ashamed to invoke closure on a bill that requires consensus?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from La Prairie.

No, we are not at all ashamed to give Parliament the opportunity to pass a bill that will temporarily amend the Canada Elections Act for the next election only in response to an official request submitted to the House by the Chief Electoral Officer.

My hon. colleague from La Prairie spends his time expressing his lack of confidence in the government by voting against it. It is therefore clear that he wants an election because, otherwise, why would he spend his time doing that?

We think it is a good idea to give Elections Canada a lot more flexibility to protect residents of Quebec's long-term care facilities, for example. The proposed amendments to the Canada Elections Act were introduced in Parliament a few months ago. I would invite my colleague to recognize that, last Friday, when Bill C-19 was debated in the House of Commons, the four Conservative members who spoke about it once again insisted on delaying the vote to send this bill to committee.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to start by recognizing what a frustrating situation we find ourselves in as a Parliament. The election in Newfoundland and Labrador showed very clearly that even if an election during the pandemic did not precipitate a public health crisis on its own, it could have really damaging effects for democracy and for the outcomes of an election.

The government has proposed some temporary changes to the Elections Act. It has not called the bill very often, which has been a point of frustration for New Democrats, but when it has, the official opposition has often found ways to delay and stall.

We have an important bill that really needs to be passed, given that the Prime Minister repeatedly refuses to put everybody at ease and say that he will not unilaterally call an election during the pandemic. Our view is that the responsible response to that is to try to get rules in place exactly because we do not trust the Prime Minister to do the right thing.

Perhaps the government today could allay those concerns and let us know when the Prime Minister intends to commit that he will not call an election during the pandemic. When is that announcement coming?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, the member for Elmwood—Transcona, for his constructive conversation with respect to this legislation. We have taken note, obviously, of his comments in the House during the debate at second reading.

The New Democratic Party has constructively and thoughtfully suggested, for example, some improvements around ensuring that campus voting can take place and potentially using Canada Post locations in small rural communities like those in my riding. The Canada Post office may offer an additional place where people, for example, could apply to receive a special ballot.

Those are precisely the kinds of discussions that we are hoping the procedure and House affairs committee can have around Bill C-19.

We would welcome working with all colleagues around amendments that would improve the legislation. However, we think the time has come for Parliament to take its responsibilities, study the bill in committee and offer Elections Canada the tools necessary should there be an election during the pandemic, and to do so safely and prudently in the interest of protecting everybody who works in elections.

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

Madam Speaker, I have heard some comments today from members of the official opposition and the Bloc that seem to suggest that they are not too familiar with the bill or the parliamentary process.

First, the leader in the House for the official opposition said that this would change the way Canadians would vote in the next election, which is not true. It would only change if an election happened during a pandemic; there are sunset clauses on this. Could the minister confirm that these are only temporary measures during the pandemic?

Second, the Bloc suggests that this is a done deal after today, but there is still a lot of parliamentary work to go on from this point. Indeed, the bill would go to committee for rounds of discussion there and then it would come back to the House for another debate.

Could the minister comment on those two points?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague friend, the member for Kingston and the Islands, is absolutely right. He is an experienced parliamentarian and understands the parliamentary process.

A vote today would simply allow the procedure and House affairs committee to study the legislation and to look at it clause-by-clause. We would hope that the committee would want to hear from important witnesses, such as the Chief Electoral Officer. At the root of this conversation is a report sent to the House of Commons in October of last year from the Chief Electoral Officer, asking Parliament to make, as my hon. colleague noted, temporary changes to the Elections Act that would apply only to the next general election and would sunset once the pandemic circumstance was over.

We think it is time for Parliament to have a look at this legislation in committee and ensure that the people who work delivering safe and fair elections for all Canadians, and there are hundreds of thousands of these people, can do so safely.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Madam Speaker, the minister is probably one of the smoothest speakers I have ever heard in Parliament. Let us be honest. We have been speaking about the bill for about four and a half hours. On Friday, yes, there were Conservative speakers, because at 12:06 p.m., we found out that no Liberals would be speaking.

I recognize all these things. However, we talk about a sunset clause, but it is mentioned only the preamble of the bill. Therefore, a lot of work needs to be done.

Most of all, why did the minister put forward legislation before he got the excellent report that came out of the Standing Committee on Procedures and House Affairs? Why did he go forward with this legislation before taking any of the information that we had provided to him?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I suppose I should thank my hon. colleague from Elgin—Middlesex—London for what was surely intended as a compliment.

I share her view that the procedure and House affairs committee did excellent work in studying the report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada. We obviously followed the work of the committee very closely. I would note that the legislation largely follows the recommendations made by the Chief Electoral Officer. We just disagreed and thought we should have more potential voting days than simply those on the weekend before what had traditionally been a polling day on Monday.

We introduced this legislation before Christmas because we thought it was important for Parliament to have a chance to consider it over the Christmas break. I talked to a number of colleagues in the House of Commons during that period. When it came back, we called it for debate.

My hon. colleague said that last Friday at 12:06 p.m. she found out there would be no Liberals speaking. That was precisely because we wanted the debate to conclude so Parliament could vote and the committee could begin studying the bill. The Conservatives obviously used that as a chance to filibuster it.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to reassure our colleagues opposite. The Bloc Québécois carefully examined the bill and we are starting to become very familiar with parliamentary procedure, so there is no need to worry. We have experience. However, that is not the issue here. What we are talking about here is respect for the work of parliamentarians.

There has been very little debate on this very important issue, and many things are still up in the air, including the number of days. As the previous speaker mentioned, the government wants to ram through this legislation without any respect for the work of committees.

My question is critically important. Why will the government not give us the time to hold a proper debate? Is it because the government members are worried that the window of time in which they think they can win a majority is closing too quickly and they want to ram this through so they can be ready just in case?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé for his comment and, especially, for his belief that if there were an election right away, the government would win a majority of seats in the House of Commons. I never doubted it myself, but I am really pleased to hear my colleague share this belief.

However, as he knows very well, we are not trying to call an election. It is not the Liberal Party that has a lack of confidence in the government. On the other hand, the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives cannot deny they have never had confidence in the government. I acknowledge my colleague, but he should know very well from the parliamentary experience he cited that a vote of non-confidence in the government increases the likelihood of an election.

We believe it would be appropriate for the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to study the bill in detail to amend and improve it. We want to work with our parliamentary colleagues, especially in committee. That is why we are pleased to hold a vote today to send the bill to committee.

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

Madam Speaker, I am very disappointed to find that we are having time allocation on a bill as essential as this one. Clearly, all parties in this place have said publicly that they do not want a federal election in a pandemic, but we want the best possible legislation in case that happens by accident. Pushing this through with such limited time for debate does not meet the standards that I expect of the government. As the hon. member and the hon. minister said, back in the day we saw practically daily use of time allocation by the Harper administration. We are seeing it far too often under this administration.

I ask the hon. President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada to please reconsider and give us adequate time for debate.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I salute my friend, the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, for her work in Canada's Parliament.

I do not think we disagree in the sense that amendments to the Canada Elections Act properly require parliamentary scrutiny, as they would with any piece of legislation. However, these are modest amendments that would apply only, as my friend from Kingston and the Islands noted, to the next general election.

We are in a minority Parliament, so the idea that the government, on its own, is in a position to ram legislation through is simply not the case. When the legislation gets to the procedure and House affairs committee, and we hope it gets there soon, members from all parties will have an opportunity to debate and discuss it, and amend it as they see fit. Then, we look forward to another discussion at third reading and report stage in the House of Commons.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend the speech given by my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona. He raised some important points. We need Bill C-19, there is no doubt about it. We are in the midst of a pandemic, and there is always the possibility of an election.

Last Friday, the NDP offered all parties a way to discuss Bill C-19 every night this week. Unfortunately, the other opposition parties rejected our proposal. Once again, as the only helpful party in the House of Commons, the NDP is proposing a solution to break this impasse and put the debate where it belongs, which is in committee.

Meanwhile, the government has not been responsible. The Prime Minister and the Liberals seem like they are on a pre-election tour, bragging about having an election before the third wave came to Canada.

My question is simple. Can the Liberals say clearly here today that they will not call an early election?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I salute and thank my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby, the NDP House leader. I had the privilege of working with him in previous Parliaments, and I appreciate his constructive contributions to these debates very much.

I agree with him that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs is where all our colleagues from every party would be able to discuss Bill C-19 and improve it. I presume they could hear from witnesses as important as the Chief Electoral Officer.

As far as an early election is concerned, I can assure my hon. colleague that the government is focusing on providing Canadians with the essential help they need during a pandemic.

There is an important budget implementation bill before Parliament. We understand the importance of these measures for Canadians, and we will remain focused on this issue. I can assure my colleague of that.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Madam Speaker, this bill has only been up for debate three times and has only been debated for about three hours and 45 minutes. The minister saying the government is looking forward to getting it to committee does not leave the opposition with a lot of hope, because quite a few bills have gone to committee and come back worse. I think about Bill C-10 and the MAID bill. There are a few bills like this, and we do not have confidence that after they go to committee, they will be better bills. That is why we are in favour of having more debate on the floor for this piece of legislation, so that we can get our comments on the record and ensure that it moves forward.

The minister says the government does not want a pandemic election, so what is the big desire to rush this bill through now and call for a concurrence motion?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, if my colleague from Regina—Lewvan is worried about people rushing an election, he should ask himself the same question, as he and the Conservatives constantly stand in the House of Commons and vote no confidence in the government over and over again.

I remember the estimates votes some weeks ago. In one evening, the Conservatives voted no confidence in the government eight times. If anybody is rushing to an election, it would certainly appear the Conservatives are willing to play chicken, all the time hoping somebody else swerves. We do not think that is a very responsible way to proceed.

My colleague is worried about the bill coming back from committee in worse shape, but I certainly do not share his view. It is a rather pessimistic view of democracy. In a minority Parliament, the government needs to achieve consensus at committees for legislation to come out. We look forward to working with all members, including members of the Conservative Party, to make sure the legislation is not worse but better.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, there are times in parliamentary life when we are offended.

Personally, I take offence at this closure motion to limit important debates for democracy. It is the ultimate exercise in democracy for our constituents.

Today we are being asked to shorten essential debates in the House to just three and a half hours.

You cite the need to go the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, but it had already started to discuss the matter with the Chief Electoral Officer. You decided to rush things and introduce a bill that did not take into account—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Need I remind the member that I personally made no decision?

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, that is true and I apologize. I am supposed to address the Chair. You remind me quite often, and yet I still have difficulty with that.

Why not give the House the time it needs? Why use time allocation yet again?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I am reassured that you were not the one who decided to expedite the bill before Christmas. I am pleased that our colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville clearly explained that.

I have had the privilege of sitting in the House of Commons for 20 years, and I can state that the members of the Bloc Québécois are experts at taking offence. We are not surprised that our colleague is taking offence this morning at closure. The members of the opposition and the Bloc Québécois are always opposed to government bills and never want to move them forward.

However, this bill was introduced in December, following the tabling of a report by the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada on the measures required to protect Canadians who vote in a possible election held during a pandemic. We must realize that the average age of the people who work for Elections Canada during a general election is 65-plus. We believe it would be helpful to provide temporary tools to the Chief Electoral Officer to keep those people safe.

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

Madam Speaker, it is a total surprise and unbelievable that after four hours of debate the government would be rushing this legislation, which is about our tried and true democratic process. We have heard others say that the Liberals tabled the legislation before waiting for their own recommendations from the PROC committee, and now, after four hours, they are shutting down debate so they can get the bill to committee, the same committee that has been filibustered by the Liberals for 40 hours or more to hide the fact that the Prime Minister prorogued Parliament to cover up his involvement in the WE Charity scandal. It is unbelievable that they are doing this.

I wonder if the minister could explain why they are in such a rush when Canadians have been clear that they do not want an election in a pandemic.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, I would hardly call this a rush. The Chief Electoral Officer presented a report to Parliament on October 5. The government thought it would be important for parliamentarians to consider the legislation over the Christmas recess. That is why we introduced Bill C-19. We have called it for debate, and once again, as is always the case, the Conservatives show no desire to allow the debate to conclude, allow a vote to happen and allow the committee to begin its work on studying the bill.

Our colleague from Sarnia—Lambton seems to think that there is a rush to an election. Once again, it is her party that continually votes no confidence in the House of Commons. I think the Conservatives are the ones rushing to an election.

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

Madam Speaker, I cannot believe that the member for Regina—Lewvan actually said in the House that he does not want the bill to go to committee because he is afraid of the result. Unfortunately for him, the democratic process is not decided based on the preferences the opposition has before a bill goes to committee or when it comes back. Democracy does not work like that.

More importantly, it does not seem to matter how long this bill has been on the table. The member for Elgin—Middlesex—London apparently has not even read the bill, even though it has been on the table since December. The sunset clause is not just in the preamble. It is also mentioned in the coming-into-force clause.

Can the minister confirm that the sunset clause is in the bill?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Speaker, my friend from Kingston and the Islands is absolutely right. In fact, it is in clause 11 of the legislation.

I too was surprised at the pessimism of our Conservative colleague from Regina—Lewvan, who imagines that committees make legislation worse. We have more faith in the work of committees of the House. That is why we are very anxious to work with the committee to ensure that the legislation reflects the will of Parliament before it comes back for a third reading debate.

We think it is time for the House of Commons to take up its responsibilities and look at what temporary measures can be put in place, should an election happen during the pandemic, to ensure the safety of all Canadians who participate.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is extremely disappointing that a government could mismanage the parliamentary calendar so poorly. Of course, everybody has their role in this and I certainly do not put it past the hon. opposition to acknowledge the role it is also playing.

The New Democrats believe that, while all this gamesmanship is difficult at best, ultimately the Prime Minister is the only one responsible or able to call an election at any time. That role and responsibility sits with him.

I do not understand. I would like the hon. minister to explain, because despite the many questions he has not explained yet, why the Prime Minister and his government refuse to take that responsibility and say outright that they will not call an election during a pandemic.