Debates of May 11th, 2022

Business of the House

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the next sitting be 12 midnight, pursuant to order made Monday, May 2.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made on Monday, May 2, the minister's request to extend the said sitting is deemed adopted.

The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, in order to create a lasting solution to the irregular migrant crossings at Roxham Road, this House call on the government to suspend the Canada-U.S. safe third country agreement; that it call for migrants to enter through regular channels across Canada and, consequently, for Roxham Road to be shut down.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I already hear members saying nay.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That the House condemn the killing of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh; call for an independent inquiry into her death in order to ensure that those responsible are held accountable for their actions; and reaffirm that targeting journalists is a war crime.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I want to say something, too. We have been using these kinds of motions without consultation with the other parties, so all I would ask is for the parties to consult with one another to make sure we know what is coming up so we can pass things amicably here in the House of Commons.

The House resumed from May 10 consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Change to Standing Order 30 Regarding the Prayer

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

It being 3:19 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the member for Drummond related to business of supply.

Shall I dispense?

[Some hon. members]

No

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

[Chair read text of motion/amendment to House]

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #83

Business of Supply

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I declare the motion lost.

The House resumed from May 10 consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.

Permanent Residency for Temporary Foreign Workers

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made Thursday, November 25, 2021, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment to Motion No. 44 under Private Members' Business.

The question is on the amendment. Shall I dispense?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

[Chair read text of amendment to House]

(The House divided on the amendment, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #84

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I declare the amendment carried.

The next question is on the main motion, as amended.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion, as amended, be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded division.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #85

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I declare the motion, as amended, carried.

Statement Concerning the Similarities Between Bill C-250 and Bill C-19—Speaker's Ruling

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I would like to make a statement concerning similarities between two bills that are currently before the House. These are Bill C-250, an act to amend the Criminal Code (prohibition—promotion of antisemitism), standing in the name of the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood, and Bill C-19, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022, and other measures.

Clause 332 of Bill C-19 contains near identical text to Bill C-250. To be more specific, the two bills seek to amend section 319 of the Criminal Code pertaining to hate propaganda, for similar purposes. Both make it an offence to wilfully promote antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust through statements communicated other than in private conversation. There is only a minor difference in the wording of one of the acceptable defences.

Bill C-19 was adopted at second reading and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance yesterday. The House is now placed in a situation where a decision was made on one of the two bills that contain very similar provisions.

There is a long-standing practice that prohibits the same question from being decided twice by the House during the same session. As stated at page 568 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition:

...two bills similar in substance will be allowed to stand on the Order Paper but only one may be moved and disposed of. If a decision is taken on the first bill (for example, to defeat the bill or advance it through a stage in the legislative process), then the other may not be proceeded with.

The Chair recognizes that these bills are not identical, as Bill C-19 is much broader in scope and contains other provisions related to the implementation of the budget.

However, in adopting Bill C-19 at second reading, the House has also agreed to the principle of that bill, and consequently, has agreed, among other things, to amend section 319 of the Criminal Code dealing with hate propaganda. As I explained a few moments ago, these are provisions substantially similar to the ones contained in Bill C-250.

Therefore, the question for the Chair is, should Bill C-250 be allowed to proceed further in the legislative process at this time? In the Chair's opinion, it should not be allowed. The House should not face a situation where the same question can be cited twice within the same session, unless the House's intention is to rescind or revoke the decision.

Government and private members' bills belong to different categories of items and are governed by different sets of rules and precedents. Standing Order 94(1) provides the Speaker with the authority to “make all arrangements necessary to ensure the orderly conduct of Private Members' Business”.

Applying this authority, I am ordering that the status of Bill C-250 remain pending and that it not be called for its second hour of debate. This leaves open the possibility that Bill C-250 could be reinstated in the next session, pursuant to Standing Order 86.1, should by any chance Bill C-19 fail to be enacted in this session.

I thank all members for their attention on this matter.

Government Response to Petitions

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 13 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.