Debates of May 28th, 2024

Request for Office of Speaker to be Vacated—Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

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

The hon. government House Leader.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, the member is an experienced member of the House. He knows that we are trying to get back to the business that affects Canadians, that will provide benefits and put food on the table for Canadians in their daily lives. He represents a riding that would benefit, for example, from the rural rebate being increased on the price on pollution. We will vote on that later today, and we will see how the member stands up for assisting people in his constituency.

The fact is, though, that the claims being made against the Speaker of the House are fake. These claims are entirely conjured in Conservative backrooms. Why is this? It is because they wish to delay and disturb the proceedings of the House. It is that simple, and we are simply trying to get us back on track.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, I find it extremely disappointing that the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is completely disregarding the motion of privilege. The motion was introduced because there was a question of privilege. The question of privilege was analyzed by the procedural team and the Speaker, who concluded that there was a vacuum and that it was a very important question, and who allowed debate on the motion.

If the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons enjoys bashing the Conservatives for attacking the Speaker, this is a false debate. The current debate is on a motion of privilege. There is nothing more important in Parliament, in the House of Commons, than a motion of privilege, but the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is trying to pass a closure motion to limit debate on a motion of privilege.

He can do so because, with the complicity of the NDP, he proceeded with a super motion to muzzle Parliament. This is unacceptable and is key to the current debate. Does the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons not find it curious to question the nature of the privilege motion that was received, heard and analyzed by the procedural team, which found justification for the debates we are currently having? It is as though he were challenging the decision by the Speaker.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, the whip of the Bloc Québécois knows full well that everything we are doing is entirely within the rules. My colleague knows that this is the umpteenth time her caucus and the Conservative caucus have attacked the Speaker of the House of Commons. She knows we wasted a full day yesterday debating this question, which was resolved several times.

We know what happened. The Liberal Party of Canada apologized to the Speaker. She knows this. What I find surprising and disappointing is that the Bloc Québécois is getting in bed with the Conservative Party, which insists on interrupting and upending the House's work. I wonder what could be worrying the Bloc Québécois in the government's proposals and bills that would cause it to act this way.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Speaker of the House of Commons, while in his robes, did a video for a provincial Liberal partisan. While on an official junket to Washington, the Speaker relived his glory days as a partisan Liberal youth. The Speaker used Liberal talking points to attack the Leader of the Opposition in a fundraising email to Liberal partisans. Does the government House leader think these things were appropriate? Would he see the same problem if a Conservative Speaker had done it, or is there a double standard here that depends on who is in the Speaker's chair?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, the great thing about this place is that, soon, we will all stand up and say what we think is appropriate. First, in some of the instances mentioned by the member, the Speaker took responsibility and apologized for that, as a new Speaker.

In another of the instances he mentioned, the Liberal Party took full responsibility and apologized to the Speaker. A normal Parliament, a Parliament that was collegial, that respected the Chair and that respected the offices, would be satisfied with that. In contrast, this Conservative Party stands up in this place every day, devoid of a simple alternative and a simple idea, and simply obstructs. It tries to prevent the House from moving forward on the issues that will help Canadians today. That is the disappointing part.

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

Madam Speaker, yesterday we witnessed the sad spectacle of the Conservatives, along with their allies in the Bloc Québécois, trying to block the pharmacare bill.

In Quebec, a coalition of nearly 2 million Quebeckers is calling on the Conservative Party and the Bloc Québécois to pass this law because it finds it important. The Centrale des syndicats démocratiques, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec and the community organizations in Quebec say that this bill should be enacted.

Now, we know that today's debate will derail this entire important discussion. Why are the Bloc Québécois and the Conservative Party insisting on blocking—

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

I must interrupt the hon. member.

The hon. member for Manicouagan on a point of order.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's comments are off topic.

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

This is a very broad topic of discussion.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

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

Madam Speaker, my comments are definitely relevant because today's debate is derailing all the discussions on Bill C-64, which has just been tabled in the House at report stage.

Does my colleague think that there is a connection between the Conservative Party's and the Bloc Québécois's determination to block this bill and the fact that these two parties always want to debate the topic that we are debating today?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, of course there is a connection.

Why? It is because what frightens the Bloc Québécois are bills passed by this Parliament that will help Quebeckers, measures taken by the overnment of Canada that will help the people in our ridings.

The Bloc knows that thousands of people walk up to me at hockey and soccer games and tell me they are so happy they qualify for the dental care plan. People with diabetes ask me what the pharmacare plan will do for them.

What frightens the Bloc Québécois is the fact that these programs are delivered directly to citizens by the Government of Canada. The fact that we are helping Canadians proves that the Bloc's separatist rhetoric is hollow. It keeps Canada going, and Quebeckers like it. That is what they are afraid of. They would rather debate the speakership.

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

Madam Speaker, I am sure the longest-serving NDP House leader in history, Stanley Knowles, is rolling over in his grave at what the House leader for the NDP just said: He thinks that one of the most fundamental principles of a parliamentary democracy, the neutrality of the Speaker, is not worthy of a privilege debate, when the Deputy Speaker has actually ruled that the Speaker pursued partisan activities, breaching his neutrality. The government House leader, who has a responsibility to enforce and uphold the rules of the House, has called that ruling of the Deputy Speaker “fake”. It is reprehensible that the government House leader would question the ruling of the Deputy Speaker on this issue.

As my colleague from Manitoba said, the government House leader has a responsibility, first and foremost, to understand that the rules say a privilege motion debate is more important than any other piece of legislation in the House. I know the NDP does not understand it. I expected more from the government House leader, yet, twice this week, he has imposed closure on issues. On every single bill, every single issue, the government imposes closure. They are cutting off democracy and debate at every turn, and he has no respect for the rules of the House.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, this is what it has come to, of all things. I cannot believe my ears: We have a Conservative, under the current Leader of the Opposition, quoting Stanley Knowles, who had a reverence for this place, who achieved the status of having a permanent place in the House. To compare the actions of the Conservative Party with the actions of a person who inspires us all with his reverence for our democratic institutions is something that, quite frankly, is shocking.

It is right out of the MAGA playbook, where up is down, north is south and black is white. The Conservatives have become masters in turning words around, in making base populist appeals. What they really do is stand up every day and stop earnest, honest attempts to make life better for people from becoming reality. We see it in the United States, and we see it here. They obstruct, delay, insult and, yes, disrespect our democratic institutions.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, the idea that a Speaker who is represented by individuals in their community cannot be partisan is absolutely ludicrous. I come from the riding of the longest-serving Speaker of the House of Commons, Peter Milliken. I personally attended fundraisers that Peter Milliken put on as a Liberal in our riding while he was Speaker. There is an established practice for it.

If one does not want to listen to what the longest-serving Speaker of the House of Commons did, let us just talk about his successor, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who is the House leader for the Conservatives right now. While he was Speaker, he not only attended a fundraiser in his riding but also went to the neighbouring riding of Regina—Wascana and attended a fundraiser. There is documented evidence of it. I have tried to table it in the House of Commons before. There are pictures of him at that fundraiser but, of course, Conservatives would never let me do that.

It raises this question: Why are the Conservatives and the Bloc hell-bent on taking down this particular Speaker? I cannot wrap my head around it. Why are they after the current Speaker of the House of Commons?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, we can only wonder why the Conservative Party will not relent in its attempts to derail the work of the House and to attack the Chair and the democratic institution that we are all so privileged to serve in. I can only explain it with the word “hypocrisy”. It is the same hypocrisy that has a member vote against a housing program and then go and announce the results in her riding. Conservative members do this all the time. They put this stuff on repeat. They come here to obstruct, delay, insult and offend, but they do not offer one single idea.

I urge those who are watching us today to watch and listen closely. Is there a single alternative offered by the Conservatives that helps them in their day-to-day life? That is what we are trying to propose. That is what we are trying to move to, so we can get to work on things such as pharmacare, dental care, expanding the rural rebate on the price of pollution; these are things that put money in the pockets of Canadians. Those are the things that we are going to be talking about later today if these Conservatives would just get out of the way.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to make two points.

First, I would like to remind the member that we are talking about a question of privilege. I do not think that raising a question of privilege can be considered obstructing Parliament. On the contrary, that is our right as members. We need to settle this issue. That is the first point I wanted to make.

Second, the party in power keeps saying that we are unable to pass bills, yet it is the party in power that is responsible for setting the legislative agenda. It is the party in power that decided to call an election after two years. If bills are being delayed, it is not because we do not want to work. It is because we have a Speaker who is not doing his job properly and who obviously lacks judgment. In addition, he is partisan.

It is also because the Liberals decided to slow down the process by calling an election and mismanaging government business.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is true that questions of privilege take priority in Parliament. That is why we have been debating this matter all day. However, for the umpteenth time, the Bloc Québécois is joining the opposition leader and his troops in attacking the Speaker of the House and the work that needs to be done here.

The summer adjournment is only a few weeks away. The member knows full well that we are going to address issues that are likely to please her constituents, issues like the dental care plan, initiatives like the pharmacare plan and the amounts to be transferred to the Quebec government to expand child care centres in her riding.

The member knows full well that she is obstructing Parliament, and we want to stop that obstruction so that we can finally offer her constituents and all Canadians measures that will help them in their everyday lives.

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

Madam Speaker, Canadians should be very concerned about the vicious attacks on the independent Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature by Conservatives and about the vicious attacks that we are seeing here by Conservatives.

A former Speaker of the House, the current member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, said this: “Reflections on the character or actions of the Speaker—an allegation of bias...could be taken by the House as breaches of privilege and punished accordingly.” He urged, as the Conservative Speaker at that time, who was the Speaker representing all of us in the House of Commons, that members be judicious in the expressions they choose to use.

We have seen an unparalleled attack on the Speaker by Conservative MPs in their comments in social media. It is unbelievable. It is something that would surely make Stanley Knowles roll over in his grave, knowing that Conservatives are treating, with such disrespect, our parliamentary institutions, as they treat with disrespect our independent institutions like the Bank of Canada, the Auditor General, the PBO and so on.

My question to my colleague is simple: Why do Conservatives have so much disrespect for the institutions that govern us and our democracy?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, that is a very good question, and we are seeing it all over the world. Democracies are under assault by right-wing parties. Right-wing parties seek to create chaos and to create disorder. They hope that those who are watching at home just say that it is not for them, that their votes do not matter and that they have no say in all of that.

The fact that is people do have a say. They do not have to listen to the Conservative nonsense, where what is okay for them back in the day is no longer okay. Respect for institutions must be rigidly enforced when the Conservatives are in the chair and they are in power, but respect for institutions must not be enforced at any other time. This is the playbook we are seeing across the world. It is the playbook we are seeing in the United States, and it is a shame that Conservatives are engaging in it here.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, the comments just made by the government House leader, the member for Gatineau, are contemptuous at best.

What we are debating here right now is closure on a decision made by the Deputy Speaker that the Speaker has a prima facie case of violating the privilege of the House. Just to remind the government House leader, “The rights accorded to the House and its Members to allow them to perform their parliamentary functions unimpeded are referred to as privileges or immunities.”

On page 323 of the procedure and House affairs book, it says, “When in the Chair, the Speaker embodies the power and authority of the office, strengthened by rule and precedent. He...must at all times show, and be seen to show, the impartiality required to sustain the trust and goodwill of the House.”

The Speaker has lost the goodwill and trust of the House, and that is why the Deputy Speaker found him in contempt of Parliament and found it to be a prima facie case at that.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, there have been a lot of questions of privilege raised by a lot of the opposition. That has happened over the course of history. There is a way to resolve that, which is what we are proposing to move to right now. That is what we will be doing. We will do so serenely, democratically and within the rules and procedures of the House. The member should reflect on how this is going, with respect to our democratic institutions, in that right wing—

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

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.

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.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote, please.

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

Call in the members.