Debates of Dec. 6th, 2024

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 3092 and 3096 to 3098 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.

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

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.3092—

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

With regard to the government’s announcement in Prince Edward Island that it would provide up to $1.5 million for a short-term project in partnership with Island Telecom and Xplornet to connect 1,046 homes in 56 communities: (a) what are the details of all projects approved through this funding, including, for each, the (i) recipient, (ii) location, (iii) project description, (iv) amount of funding, (v) original projected completion date, (vi) actual completion date or current projected completion date, (vii) reason for the delay, if applicable, (viii) status of the project; (b) what is the total amount of funding provided to projects to date under the funding; (c) how many households have been connected to high-speed internet to date specifically as a result of this project; (d) how many households have received upgraded broadband service to date specifically as a result of this project; (e) what were the penalties for funding recipients that did not meet (i) the performance metrics, (ii) the timeline, (iii) all other requirements, outlined in the funding agreement; (f) what is the current funding breakdown between federal and provincial governments to date in relation to these projects; (g) what are the details of all funding transfers to Island Telecom to date as part of this partnership, including, for each, the (i) amount, (ii) transfer date, (iii) description of the goods and services; and (h) what are the details of all funding transfers to Xplornet to date as part of this partnership, including, for each, the (i) amount, (ii) transfer date, (iii) description of the goods and services?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3096—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

With regard to government funding provided to Thornhill Medical, since November 4, 2015, and broken down by department or agency: what are the details of all such funding, including, for each instance, the (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) type of funding (grant, loan, contract for goods, etc.), (iv) purpose of the funding, (v) program under which the funding came?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3097—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

With regard to government funding provided to Conavi Medical, since November 4, 2015, and broken down by department or agency: what are the details of all such funding, including, for each instance, the (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) type of funding (grant, loan, contract for goods, etc.), (iv) purpose of the funding, (v) program under which the funding came?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3098—

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

With regard to deportation or removal orders for individuals: (a) how many people are currently subject to a deportation or removal order, in total, and broken down by province or territory and by type of removal status or classification (monitoring, wanted, stay, working inventory); and (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by country to which the individual is being deported?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

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

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

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Access to Parliamentary Precinct

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I want to add first-hand testimony. I too was trying to access my office that morning. I was prevented access to the building by the Parliamentary Protective Service. I was intending to go to my office to meet with stakeholders. I did make my way around to the back, through the basement, and as previous interventions have outlined, a number of stakeholders were in the basement. Unfortunately, instead of talking about AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis with stakeholders that morning, we spoke about how our building was being taken over.

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

Now we will hear the two sentences remaining of the hon. member for Battlefords—Lloydminster.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I will close with this. Security of all staff, members of Parliament and those who are visiting this institution to see how our democracy works and to visit the heart of the nation must be taken seriously.

I ask the Speaker to look through the lens of those who were intimidated, traumatized and scared for their safety, and that he also review the procedures that were used and put in place by PPS that day, address the flaws and gaps, and ensure occupations like this will never happen again on Parliament Hill and in the precinct.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. A few minutes back, the member for Surrey—Newton introduced a motion seeking unanimous consent, and I said no. I believe on the way out of this chamber, the member threatened that I would be effed up. Another member also aggressively accosted me in the lobby. I feel that as a member of Parliament, I should be able to express my opinion and my views freely in the House and I should not be threatened by any words or actions of my fellow members.

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

I thank the hon. member for bringing that forward. We will talk to the hon. member about the proper way to look into that particular issue.

Also, we have the hon. member for Spadina—Fort York on a point of order.

[Kevin Vuong, Independent, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on the question of privilege raised by the member for Thornhill. Just like her and the member for Battlefords—Lloydminster, as well as the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington, my office is in the Confederation Building. I am rising in support of the case put forward by the member that privilege was indeed breached. Moreover, I would encourage the Speaker to consider the alarming report of three NDP MPs as witting abettors and accomplices to what was a clear breach of privilege and contempt of Parliament and our sacred traditions.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Mr. Speaker. I rise on the question of privilege raised by the member for Thornhill. The office that Canadians have elected me to occupy is also in the Confederation building. On Tuesday, with the illegal protest that happened, which was assisted by three members of the NDP, the Confederation building was targeted because its ease of access outside the fences of West Block and Centre Block made it an easy target. Therefore, the NDP was complicit. I was unable to do my duties as a member of Parliament. I had a meeting scheduled that day with the ambassador from Israel in my office to discuss issues going on in the Middle East, and the ambassador cancelled the meeting because his security team felt threatened by this.

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

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, again, I go back to jurisprudence. I know Conservatives never even consult the Standing Orders; they just walk in. If they actually reviewed the procedural bible, on page 9374 of the Debates, they would see a ruling from June 13, 2012. The Speaker said to this point, “in the case of a question of privilege, the floor is not the members'.... The Speaker has the right to terminate [the] discussion if the Speaker feels that relevant points [to the question of privilege] that have not been previously raised have not been brought forward.” These are, more properly, debates for after your decision, and I would ask you to uphold the jurisprudence, the traditions of the House, and bring an end to this repetition by Conservatives.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Cost of Living Relief for Canadians

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

We will be able to get back to the privilege motion after I do this.

It being 1:45 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(16), it is my duty to put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

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

Mr. Speaker, on the NDP's plan for relief for so many Canadians, we would ask for a recorded vote.