The hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul has the floor.
House of Commons Hansard #384 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was point.
House of Commons Hansard #384 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was point.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
The hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul has the floor.
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Speaker, I will try to be very brief.
I did want to put a few points on the record for your consideration of the privilege question, particularly from a public safety standpoint. As you know, I am the official shadow minister for public safety, and the RCMP falls under my portfolio. I am accountable to hold the government accountable.
My concerns are regarding the protective policing program. I just want to put a few words on the record from the government's own documents: “The RCMP Protective Policing Program (PPP) is facing significant challenges meeting increased demand for their services, putting unsustainable pressure on the PPP program.” It also says, “Security and protection are of increasing concern due to a significant increase in the number of threats against public figures”.
I did feel responsible to ensure that the public safety aspect of this is put on the record, because we do not know who the individuals are. We do know who the NDP members are who were supporting them, but we do not know who the other members are. We walked to our offices and had individuals blocking our way. We do not know who they are, but their purpose was to block us from going into our offices. If we allow it to transpire that there could be sit-ins in our offices, I do believe it would raise considerable safety concerns.
In particular, given the concerns raised by the government's own document, there is a reason we have the protective policing program in the first place. I cannot use props, but MPs are able to carry panic buttons for a reason—
Access to Parliamentary PrecinctPrivilegeGovernment Orders
December 6th, 2024 / 1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Mr. Speaker, this is not speaking directly to the question of privilege or prima facie. This is involving other programs. This would be perfectly reasonable to bring up, if and when you rule on this, in speeches. It is not appropriate at this time when you are hearing the question of privilege. Conservatives do not seem to understand the rules. You can imagine if—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
I will say to the hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul that, I understand the information coming, but I just want to make sure that we are very concise and make it quick.
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am not speaking quickly enough to the standard of the NDP member, but I will speak to this. I would say that I do believe the Speaker should consult with the the director of the PPP program for those considerations because I do have grave concerns in this regard. It increases the threat, the access that individuals have and the idea that they can come to a sit-in right in our offices, or right outside our offices, and block us from going to work.
If we allow this to happen with no consequences, I ask that you consider consulting the RCMP on the threat analysis of whether this is allowed to be permitted. Please ensure that is part of your consideration.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Speaker, I wish to very briefly add some additional information in respect to the question of privilege raised by my colleague, the member for Thornhill. Specifically, the member for Thornhill cited that three NDP MPs were actively involved in this illegal anti-Israel protest, and I would add that there was a fourth member of the NDP who was involved—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Mr. Speaker, again, this is debate. I say this with due respect.
I do understand that Conservatives do not read the Standing Orders. They have not read the procedural bible. They love to cause mayhem, but this is not directly—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
I have two people on my list now. I want to make sure that the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton finishes things up, quickly.
The hon. member has the floor.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is highly pertinent, insofar as that there were NDP MPs who were actively involved in facilitating this illegal anti-Israel protest, and contrary to the—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
I am tending to agree.
The hon. member for Joliette.
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, what a day it has been in the House. I have never seen anything like it.
I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to see the clock as 3:00 p.m.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
Having reached the expiry of the time provided for today's debate, the House will resume consideration of the privilege motion at 11 a.m. on Monday, December 9.
Pursuant to Standing Order 94, I wish to inform hon. members that Private Members' Business will be suspended that day.
It being three o'clock, the House stands adjourned until next Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 2 p.m.)