Debates of Dec. 11th, 2023

Justice and Human Rights

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I think the point is made.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I want to clarify your point here. We are in a hybrid Parliament, so people are in this chamber regardless of whether they are here or voting virtually.

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

The hon. member definitely has a point. People can vote virtually or in person.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. Who votes and who does not vote is a matter of Hansard. It is a matter of record. The hon. member did not mention certain members who were or were not here, but mentioning that half of a particular caucus was not there for a vote is a matter of Hansard, and I think that could be mentioned in debate.

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

It is true that the records of our voting are public. Members can mention that people did not vote, but not that they were not in the chamber.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, to the last point of order, the member is right in the sense that if we are in hybrid, it means that members can either be inside the chamber or they can be on screen. However, after midnight, maybe Conservatives were in bed. I would suggest that, at the end of the day, let us push that to the side and talk in terms of why we are debating this particular motion today.

The Conservative Party would like to give the impression—

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would point out that it is the Liberal government, which the member is a part of, that has allowed members to vote from bed. They are good with that. We have opposed that all the way. It is the Liberals who moved that into Parliament—

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

Let us start with the debate. We are not redoing that point.

I will allow the hon. parliamentary secretary to complete his speech.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I was moving on from the Conservatives being in bed. At the end of the day, it is up to the Conservatives, and I get the sense that they have a guilt thing going on. However, just because a significant percentage preferred sleep as opposed to voting, they are the ones who have to justify it, not me. If they are feeling a little guilty about that, that is fine.

Where I have a problem is when Conservatives try to lump all those votes and say that they had a right to vote against each one of them, because—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It appears that we are about 12 minutes into this speech, and we have not heard one word from the member that is relevant. This report that we are debating is about the criminal—

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

He was about to start when he was interrupted. I am going to give him another chance.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member across the way has not been listening very carefully at all. I have made reference, right from the very beginning, in regard to the report.

I have both motions, the motion that ultimately went to the wrong committee, in terms of the concurrence report, and the one that we are actually supposed to be debating. It is not that difficult. It is about Afghanistan and the Taliban. When we talk about Afghanistan and the Taliban—

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

The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester is rising on a point of order.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I find it fascinating, Madam Speaker. The member on this side of the House clearly outlined the government business that is allowed, the rules in this chamber and how he can present a concurrence motion, but the member continues to say that something else should be debated at this time. That is exactly—

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

We are talking about the two reports.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, we all know very clearly that concurrence in a report is an acceptable measure in the House.

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

Yes, it is. The hon. member—

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Otherwise, Madam Speaker, you would, of course, have ruled that it was unacceptable to present it at that time.

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

Absolutely, it is admissible. It is part of the rules. The hon. parliamentary secretary was referring to the two reports that caused confusion with the Chair, not with the House.

The hon. parliamentary secretary is rising on the same point of order.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, interruption is the game the Conservative Party is playing. I find it highly inappropriate, because it disrupts the train of thought.

At the time the member stood up to say that I was not being relevant, I had both motions in my hand and was going to read the one that we are debating. That is definitely relevant, even for the simplest mind to understand, I would suggest.

I would like to be able to continue with my speech and not be constantly interrupted by—

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

We are not going to debate that any longer.

The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, we are talking about a report that the Conservative Party felt was such an important issue that it had to be debated today. This comes right from committee. The motion reads, “That the committee report to the House that it firmly denounces the Taliban and rejects any recognition or legitimization of their control over Afghan territory.” I will stop there for a moment.

I do not know about the Conservatives, but no one on the Liberal benches, and I suspect no one in the NDP, the Bloc or even the Green Party, would dispute what I just read. Duh. Does the Conservative Party really believe this is what Canadians want us to be talking about today when, earlier, we were talking about affordability and purpose-built rentals, somewhere in the neighbourhood of 80,000 homes being built? That is one aspect of competition. That is what we are supposed to be talking about. That is what is on the minds of Canadians.

What is on the minds of Conservatives in this chamber? I will continue to say what is on their minds.

The motion goes on to say, “In particular, the committee denounces the Taliban system of gender discrimination”. Who in this chamber does not support that? Are we all not discouraged by what the Taliban has done with regard to gender discrimination? It is very real. Women are losing their lives to the Taliban. Do we really think that, at this point in time, as we get closer to winding up the session, there is any indifference on that particular issue? I would ask anyone in the chamber who disagrees with that to put up their hand. I suspect no one will. However, the Conservatives feel it is so important that we need to talk about this.

I suspect that if we were to do a Hansard search, which I have not done, we would find that I have talked about this issue in the past. I would be prepared to bet a Big Mac on that.

I want to continue the debate that we had just before question period. That is what I want to talk about, because that is what was on the legislative agenda. That is the agenda the majority of MPs came to this chamber to talk about today. Prior to question period, the Conservatives were getting a little exercise and stood on points of order so that they would not allow me to say what I wanted to say. It is a form of censorship, I would suggest, and everyone knows how sensitive I can be at times. I was emphasizing a pattern that I saw in the leader of the Conservative Party's office. That is why we have this motion before us today.

We will remember the big threat made last week by the leader of the Conservative Party, whom I did not see very much during the votes. He made the statement—

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

The hon. parliamentary secretary knows he may not have seen the person, but they could have been participating virtually, as is allowed by this House. I would refrain from making such references.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

My apologies, Madam Speaker. They are a little sensitive on the other side for some reason today. I suspect some of—

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

There is a point of order from the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.