House of Commons Hansard #95 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was hybrid.

Topics

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

That is not a point of order. That is a point of discussion and debate, and I would ask the member to rise to ask that question should he need to.

The government House leader needs to wrap up.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, when I am talking about feedback, let me be very clear. When members just tell me they are opposed, I get that. They are opposed to it. There is going to be an opportunity at PROC to talk about the reasons they are opposed to it, on an ongoing basis, and we will have a vigorous debate. However, I am interested in specific, concrete examples of what could be done to improve. I have heard nothing on that front, but of course I would welcome that.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, my understanding is that right now we are not actually debating the motion, but the closure on the motion. I understand that we are also on the last day of the standing orders of our current approach. I would appreciate hearing from the government House leader a reasonable explanation of why he feels closure is necessary at this time.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, there are a couple of reasons. The first is that we have to make a determination on this so that we can move forward with stability for Parliament. The motion asks for a year, and it would also give the opportunity for PROC to take a look at it and examine the relative merits of it.

Also, we have debated this ad nauseam. I see the hon. former House leader across from me for the Conservative Party and think of how many conversations we had leading into sessions, and how many conversations I had with the current House leader on this. Every time we try to open this place, we spend weeks talking about this, and what gets reported to the media is the discussion of “Will Parliament have hybrid or will it not?” Instead of talking about the critical issues of the day, we have this protracted debate on whether or not hybrid is something we should use in the middle of a pandemic.

All I am saying is to give it a year. Let us make sure that, while we have this uncertainty, we have a stable system in place, and then let us use the parliamentary committee to evaluate its utility, or lack of utility, outside of a pandemic circumstance.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Conservative

Lianne Rood Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON

Madam Speaker, what I see from the Liberals is that they want to hide from accountability and transparency behind computer screens. We hear public health officials telling us that we are moving out of the pandemic, and the rest of the world has moved back to working like normal.

We have an institution here. We have been in this place for over 150 years, and we have been able to keep Parliament going when people had other illnesses, or worse, for many years. Why do the Liberals want to continue to hide from democracy and hide behind a screen instead of being here in person in this place, where people from my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex elected me to be? We should be in this place. When we have rural Internet connectivity problems in places like my riding, where we have unstable Internet, it does not work.

We need to be in this place. It has worked for over 150 years, and we need to keep being here.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, we hold the institutions of Parliament incredibly dear. I know that every single person here has a profound regard for our democratic processes and systems and wants them to be successful. I can go back to the beginning of the pandemic, to how constructive the conversations were with all parties on the need for Parliament to adapt and provide additional provisions. Now, as we continue to be in a pandemic, and as we do not know where that pandemic will go, none of us being clairvoyant, this provides us stability.

If the member opposite thinks that some element is not as accountable as some other element, then there is going to be an opportunity to debate that. That is not an opinion that is shared universally. How a question is answered, I understand, is a concern for the member opposite, but so is members not being able to participate in debate because they are sick, and so is members not having the opportunity not to have to make a choice between representing their constituents and coming in sick, potentially getting others sick and then having that sent all around the country, or working virtually and—

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Drummond.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, judging from the questions and answers, this whole exchange is meaningless. Implementing hybrid measures to keep Parliament going during the pandemic was a good idea, but only for the duration of the pandemic. We are gradually making our way out of the pandemic. It seems likely that, as the months go by, we will leave it further and further behind.

Of all the subjects we could be debating, the one monopolizing our work today, the one that matters most to the government, is extending the hybrid Parliament for a year. That is something we could deal with when the House returns in the fall, once we see how the situation evolves.

I get the sense that some of our colleagues found it very convenient to remain in the comfort of their own homes because they live far away and can eat chips during parliamentary sessions, but that is not a good reason.

I would like to hear one actual good reason why we are currently talking about extending the hybrid Parliament for a year when we could quite feasibly do it when we come back in the fall and we know what the situation is. That would be the right thing to do.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, clearly, everyone wants the pandemic to be over. However, that is not the case. The pandemic is ongoing. That is our reality today.

We must therefore remain flexible, because it is really important that all members be able to represent their constituents. That is why we need a system as flexible as the hybrid system.

According to the hon. member opposite, the House would normally have finished its work yesterday. Today is therefore an extraordinary day. It is a wise thing that we are using a day that does not normally exist to finish this debate so that we can continue our work in the fall without any distractions.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, we have discussed this a lot in the House, and one of the things I have often heard is that people who are working online are not working. I have heard this from the Conservatives, yet as I work online today, I see a number of Conservatives online. I am wondering if they are calling out their own members for the same.

We have worked hard during the pandemic. Particularly for women, this is an opportunity to get more women into politics. This is also an opportunity to do our part to tackle the climate crisis by ensuring that members do not have to travel back and forth. We are in a climate emergency.

I am wondering if the hon. House leader could comment on that.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, I am glad that members have the opportunity to utilize these provisions. Obviously, we are learning from them. Today, there are many Conservatives using these provisions online. As we have a vote later on today, there will be many Conservatives who are using that application. All members have, in some form or another, used these provisions and continue to use them today.

It is clear that within all caucuses there is a variety of opinions about what does or does not work about this. That is why we should use this extraordinary day. This is a day when Parliament normally does not sit. Normally, we would be home in our constituencies. We are here longer than we usually are so that we can adjudicate this and give ourselves a year, and so that this impassioned debate on both sides can appropriately take place at PROC, in terms of whether we use these provisions outside of the pandemic circumstance.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Madam Speaker, the hon. government House leader wants to have dialogue, so here is some dialogue. This is supposed to be predicated on COVID, and what we see on this side of the House is that being used as an excuse not to be here. We see people who are here in the morning, on video in the afternoon and then here the next morning. After question period, we see those members on the front benches especially rush out in order to vote remotely. Where is the respect for this place that they cannot even vote from their seats after having been here for question period?

If the hon. government House leader wants a suggestion, how about this? If members have a concern about COVID, they should stay home and work remotely. If it does not have to do with COVID, why are they not here?

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, perhaps the member could ask that question of members of his own caucus who are participating virtually today and will be voting virtually today. He could ask that question of members in his own caucus: why they are using it and why they find it useful. Perhaps he could level those criticisms at his caucus—

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo and the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader for the Senate are going back and forth. I would ask them not to. If they want to have conversations, they can step out to have those conversations.

The hon. government House leader.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, I would reiterate that I understand that passions are very high on this on both sides. We all care about representing our constituents. We all care about this place. We all have a deep love of democracy that brings us to this place and has us make great sacrifices in the name of serving our constituents. Some believe very passionately, as the member opposite does, that they do not want to see this to continue. I certainly do not want the pandemic to continue, and we are certainly in it, but this gives us the stability over the next year to remain flexible and for members to use these provisions or not, as they wish. It also allows a parliamentary committee to look at this hereafter.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, I feel both a little sad and disrespected this morning in the House.

Today is June 23, the day before Quebec’s national holiday, and because of the Liberal government’s incompetence in managing its agenda, along with the Conservative Party’s obstruction attempts, most Quebec MPs will not be able to be in their ridings today to celebrate their national holiday.

Also, I get the impression that, for the past few weeks, I have been rising more often in the House to debate how we are going to debate rather than to truly debate measures and bills that will help Canadians.

I am truly very sad, and I feel disrespected today as a Quebec member of Parliament.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, that is rather odd because the calendar was set a year ago.

At the time, the Bloc Québécois chose to sit today. It is not an extra day and it is not at all a surprise. If it is a problem today, on June 23, why was it not a problem for the Bloc Québécois when the calendar was decided? That seems odd to me.

The Bloc Québécois is upset that the House is sitting when it is supposed to.

The House is supposed to sit, folks.

That seems odd to me. I do not understand that argument at all.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:10 a.m.

NDP

Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Madam Speaker, I have to say that this is such an ableist debate we are having. Even yesterday, some of the ableist language was just gut-wrenching. I wonder what this debate would look like if 338 of us were immunocompromised, had comorbidities or had children or family members who lived with us in our houses and were going through stem cell transplants, chemotherapy or any kind of critical life illness.

I have been in rooms with people I know whose spouse has been going through stem cell transfer. They have been forced to arrive in this place because they are staff people. We are in here in our ableist space expecting those who support us to come here and do this work. The last thing I would want to do as an MP, if I was sick or someone in my family was sick, is to come to this place and make a staff person sick who was dealing with some sort of critical life illness at home.

This has been really disappointing. As the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra, I have a number of people in my riding who would die if they caught COVID-19. They deal with this ableist language all the time. I am just so over it. Maybe the member—

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

June 23rd, 2022 / 11:15 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. government House leader has the floor.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, the member opposite makes an excellent point. There are many members of Parliament who have different statuses of health. I spent over three years as a former whip, and there are a couple of things one learns. The first is how hard it is to be a human being. There are so many stories we do not hear about what others are going through, and I have tremendous sympathy for all members of Parliament and the sacrifices they make. Second, there has to be an opportunity for those who are ill in a pandemic, or have other illnesses or are immunocompromised, to have the circumstances to continue to represent their constituents. The hon. member is absolutely correct.

I will make a last point on this question. I see a child in the chamber, which I love. Not long ago, when I was elected in 2004, that would have been considered abhorrent. Having a child in the chamber would have been considered disrespectful to this place. Members would have talked in the lobby about how disgusting and disrespectful it was to have a child in the House. I heard that. People were saying they would never allow that, and that somebody talking about it is disrespectful to the place and destroys it.

Our institutions evolve as our compassion and understanding for one another evolve, and that is what this is about.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Laila Goodridge Conservative Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB

Madam Speaker, while I appreciate some of the comments made and the flexibility of sometimes being able to bring my infant into this chamber due to the long hours we work and some of the struggles we have as parliamentarians, the fact that this is being rammed through in the last couple of days of the parliamentary session without any real opportunity for debate is abhorrent. It is not okay.

If the members opposite truly want to fix things, let us actually have some conversation. Let us not just band-aid this across. Let us have some serious conversations in September so we can fix the problem rather than just create more band-aids, because that is all this solution does.

Every other parliamentary system in Canada has already gone back to meeting in person. There are so many wins that can be had by having these conversations all over. I really think that what we are doing right now is hurting democracy, because we have not had adequate debate. While there are some very good arguments, we have not been able to have the time to actually study this and make sure we are doing the best thing for Canadians.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, first of all, I am very glad to see the member opposite be able to bring her child into the chamber. I am very glad we have provisions that recognize the responsibilities of being a parent are extraordinarily difficult and are the most important functions we ever will take on in our lives. There has to be primacy to that, and I respect that she sees that and that all members in the House, whether they have a child or do not, feel that way.

We, of course, have been debating this for two years. Every time a session of Parliament began, we had an opportunity in the media, in the House and in the Board of Internal Economy. We had extensive debates. Exactly what I am saying is let us take a year, while we are still in a pandemic, to hold these provisions and then have a separate debate about what is going to happen.

I want to point out one thing that is confusing to me. In the last vote on orders of the day, 66 Conservative members voted remotely and 44 voted in person.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, I learned something today.

According to tradition, Quebec’s national holiday is celebrated on June 23 and 24. It is true that Parliament usually does not sit on June 23 except in the case of an emergency, which has only ever happened a few times. June 23 is set aside for emergencies.

This motion could easily have been moved sooner, since the government had all the time it needed. The Bloc Québécois has always been ready to collaborate, especially in the case of Bill C-14, for which it set aside two days to allow Parliament to adjourn on Wednesday and Quebec members in the Bloc Québécois and other parties to celebrate with their constituents.

Our request was legitimate. The government vehemently rejected the fact that Quebecers have a national holiday to celebrate this evening and tomorrow. We asked either not to sit on Thursday or to sit with a Friday schedule so that we could leave the House earlier to celebrate Quebec’s national holiday with our people back home. The government refused. Would the same thing have happened if we had to work on June 30?

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax, ON

Madam Speaker, a year ago we had the opportunity to review the calendar, and that included June 23. There was no objection made whatsoever about June 23 being included. At that point in time, the calendar was approved, with unanimity, to have us sit all of those days. There is nothing that promised we were going to leave early. I never said to my constituents that this was the calendar, but maybe we would not fulfill the calendar. Most of us can have hopes the calendar will not go to the end, but if there was a serious problem, why—

Motion That Debate Be Not Further AdjournedOrder Respecting the Business of the House and its CommitteesGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. The hon. member for La Prairie asked a question, but he seems to be in the process of debating with someone else. I am sure that he would like to hear the answer.

I would ask the hon. government House leader to finish his answer before I give the floor to someone else to ask a brief question before the expiry of the time provided.