Debates of June 7th, 2021

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[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, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 632, 634, 635, 637, 639 and 640 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.632

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

With regard to the government using Bolloré Logistics for flight services between Canada and China between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020: (a) how many flights did the government contract the company for; (b) what are the details of each flight, including the (i) date, (ii) origin, (iii) destination, (iv) products transported by flight or purpose of flight; and (c) what is the total value of all the contracts related to these flights?

(Return tabled)

Question No.634

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

With regard to the government's contracts for personal protective equipment (PPE), signed by Public Services and Procurement Canada since January 1, 2020: (a) how many contracts did the government sign for the procurement of domestic production of PPE, broken down by month; (b) how many contracts received a national security exemption; (c) what was the total number or amount of (i) hand sanitizer, (ii) disinfectant, (iii) disinfectant wipes, (iv) non-medical masks, (v) non-medical gloves, (vi) nitrile gloves, (vii) surgical masks, (viii) face shields, (ix) eye goggles or protective glasses, (x) thermometers, (xi) respirators, (xii) reusable gowns, (xiii) disposable gowns, (xiv) shoe or boot covers, purchased by the government, broken down by month; and (d) for each sub-part in (c), how much of each product was manufactured in (i) Canada, (ii) China?

(Return tabled)

Question No.635

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

With regard to An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, broken down by year since 2011: (a) how many reports has the RCMP received under section 3 of the act from a service provider or entity in Canada; (b) how many reports has the RCMP received under section 3 of the act from a service provider or entity outside of Canada; (c) how many investigations related to the offences in section 10 of the act have either been initiated or are ongoing, broken down by specific offence committed; (d) how many of the investigations were initiated by the RCMP; (e) what were the results of the investigations in (d); (f) in how many cases were charges laid under section 10 of the act; and (g) of the charges laid in (f), how many resulted in convictions?

(Return tabled)

Question No.637

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

With regard to documents prepared by the government departments or agencies about cyber trafficking, cyber-sex trafficking, organ trafficking, human trafficking, slavery, modern slavery, forced labour, sex trafficking or prostitution, since November 4, 2015: for any such document, what is the (i) date, (ii) title or subject matter, (iii) type of document (routine correspondence, directive, options to consider, etc.), (iv) department’s internal tracking number, (v) sender and recipient, if applicable, (vi) summary of contents?

(Return tabled)

Question No.639

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

With regard to legal fees paid and budgeted by the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs: (a) what is the itemized breakdown of all legal fees budgeted and spent during the last five years; and (b) what is the itemized breakdown of all legal fees budgeted for the upcoming year?

(Return tabled)

Question No.640

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

With regard to the Memorial to the Victims of Communism and the additional $4 million announced in the 2021 budget to the project: (a) what was the original total budget for the project, broken down by line item; (b) what is the current budget for the project, broken down by line item; (c) what specific delays caused the monument not to be completed in 2018, as the government stated was the schedule as recently as 2017; (d) what is the current projected completion date; (e) what are the details of all contracts and expenditures over $10,000 related to the project including (i) the date, (ii) the vendor, (iii) the description of goods or services, including quantity, (iv) the original contract value or amount, (v) the amended contract value or amount, if applicable, (vi) whether the contract was sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bidding process; and (f) has any vendor, including those involved with the construction of the project, received a financial penalty from the government as a result of the project being more than three years behind schedule and, if so, what are the details of the penalty?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Request for Emergency Debate

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to draw the attention of the House to an emergency situation, one that has sadly not gotten the notice or attention it deserves.

This Parliament must be engaged with foreign policy crises, and that must include emerging challenges in Africa. The Democratic Republic of Congo, or DRC, is the largest nation in sub-Saharan Africa. Currently, it is facing an insurgency while also suffering from the aftermath of a volcanic eruption and increased violence from local militias.

On May 31, the militant fighters of the ADF killed 57 civilians, including seven children, in displacement camps in eastern DRC. According to the UNHCR, the ADF has caused the displacement of over 5,800 people in the province of Ituri. As a response to this, the politicians of the DRC have voted to extend martial law for 15 days in the provinces of North Kivu and Ituri.

This recent attack by the ADF comes as the country is still struggling to deal with the volcanic eruption of Mount Nyiragongo, which is the largest natural disaster Congo has seen in nearly two decades. It left 31 people dead and over 20,000 homeless. The eruption caused an exodus from the Congolese city of Goma. The DRC also faces instability and violence from smaller local rebel groups fighting for territorial control.

Issues of judicial fairness have also come under the spotlight, as a court recently handed death sentences to 29 people accused of violence on May 15 after a clash between two rival groups. The sentence was handed out after a one-day session in courts.

As aid agencies and the government are grappling to manage the different threats to eastern Congo, we are also awaiting a verdict on the accusations of sexual abuse and exploitation by aid workers in Congo during the ebola epidemic. Over 40 women have pointed a finger specifically at WHO employees, which points to the urgent need for accountability from international organizations for abuses in which they may be involved in Congo.

The multiplication of serious challenges requires greater attention and engagement from the world. As the DRC is encountering multiple deep-rooted issues, we need to recognize these issues and stand with this country to aid and support the people who are in dire need.

If this were happening closer to home, it would lead the news. We should still be talking about it. It still matters. Human lives are involved. The destabilization in the DRC affects lives and livelihoods. It also sends ripple effects throughout Africa, and it has consequences for the well-being and security of many communities around the world.

I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to give the House an opportunity to consider this question in greater detail in the context of an emergency debate. In my view, it is an emergency that requires it.

Speaker's Ruling

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I thank the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for his intervention. However, I am not satisfied that his request meets the requirements of the Standing Orders at this time.

While I have the opportunity, I want to remind all members that when submitting a request for an emergency debate, they should include some details so that the table and I can be prepared when the submission is made. It makes it easier to make the decision and gives us a better idea of what is coming.

Conduct of the Member for Pontiac—Speaker's Ruling

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 28, 2021 by the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London concerning the conduct of the member for Pontiac.

During her intervention, she reported that the member for Pontiac had admitted on social media to committing a breach of conduct in front of the camera during the virtual proceedings of the House in committee of the whole last May 26. Citing the relevant authorities, she argued that this was an unprecedented breach and an offence to the dignity of the House. She added that the behaviour of members participating in the proceedings by video conference must be treated the same as that of members who are physically present in the chamber, whether or not they are on camera.

In response, the member for Kingston and the Islands agreed that it was a deplorable and unacceptable incident, while also pointing out that the member for Pontiac had accepted full responsibility and that he had stepped aside from his parliamentary secretary responsibilities and from his committee responsibilities in order to obtain the appropriate assistance. For that reason, he was again apologizing on his behalf. He concluded by saying that the incident was not a question of privilege because there was a long tradition in the House of accepting members’ apologies.

The Chair has on many occasions reminded members that virtual sessions are an extension of the proceedings of the House and that their conduct must respect our rules and practices, even if they are participating remotely. I want to reiterate, yet again, the importance of everyone adjusting to the temporary measures put in place in response to the pandemic and exercising continued vigilance to prevent such incidents from recurring. As soon as a member connects to a virtual sitting and opens their camera, they are considered to be, for all intents and purposes, in the House.

There is no dispute about the facts in question, and they constitute a serious breach of the rules of decorum and an affront against the dignity of the House. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states, at page 60, “Any conduct which offends the authority or dignity of the House...is referred to as a contempt of the House.”

I obviously take note of the apology from the member for Pontiac. He recognized that his behaviour was completely inappropriate and confirms his commitment to obtain the necessary assistance. Nevertheless, the Chair is required to determine whether the alleged facts are a breach of the rules governing contempt and thus merit priority consideration.

That is the case here. I would add that the new reality of members participating virtually, as well as its attendant rules, is unquestionably exceptional in the history of this House, but it is not without challenges. As such, more attention should be paid to this general and fundamental issue, perhaps even more so than to the more limited question on which I am required to rule today.

For those reasons, the Chair rules that there is a prima facie question of privilege. I thus invite the member to move the appropriate motion.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That the prima facie contempt, concerning the misconduct of the Member for Pontiac committed in the presence of the House, be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

I will be sharing my time with the member for Banff—Airdrie.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly commend your ruling. It is important that this matter be examined. Obviously, when we have a case of someone literally exposing themselves to the House on two different occasions, that is a pretty serious matter and one that does deserve to be reviewed by the procedure and House affairs committee.

I would also note that what we have seen is maybe a bit of a pattern of a general degradation of decorum and debate in the chamber by the fact that we have had the hybrid type of proceedings. No one denies that this has been necessary because we have been dealing with a pandemic. Certainly, we have seen everything from issues with connections, sound quality, right through to instances like we have seen in the case of the member for Pontiac on a couple of occasions.

A lot of that stems from the fact that people are a bit more relaxed and comfortable because they are at home or in their offices. Sometimes members forget that they are still in proceedings of the House of Commons. It is something that is very difficult, if not impossible, to do when we are here in the chamber. We understand the gravity and the respect that we must provide this institution when we are part of the proceedings here in the chamber, whether we are speaking, or observing debate or preparing for our opportunity to speak. I think that relaxation does lead to things like this.

I look forward very soon to the day when we are able to see the end of hybrid proceedings, as we see vaccination rates go up in the country, etc., and have the opportunity for all members to be back in the House of Commons, where we belong and where we all want to be. Hopefully, that will help to prevent instances like this as well as bring back elevated debate and decorum in this place.

Again, I look forward to that opportunity very soon for all of us to be back in the chamber in person, so hopefully we can move on without these kinds of instances in the future.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.