House of Commons Hansard #111 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was liberals.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
An Act to Amend the Criminal Code Third reading of Bill C-225. The bill aims to combat intimate partner violence by strengthening criminal justice measures regarding coercive control and homicide sentencing. It introduces targeted bail reforms to better protect victims. Members from all parties highlight the collaborative drafting process and agree that this legislation is a necessary step to address escalating threats, resulting in the bill passing its third reading. 7100 words, 1 hour.
Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned Liberal House Leader Steven MacKinnon moves to end debate on Government Business No. 9, a motion proposing that committee membership ratios be adjusted to reflect the Liberal Party’s recent attainment of a majority. Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois strongly dissent, characterizing the effort as an undemocratic attempt to stifle oversight. MacKinnon maintains the change upholds parliamentary tradition and ensures committees function efficiently. 4100 words, 30 minutes.
Consideration of Government Business No.9 Members debate a government motion to adjust the composition of standing committees following recent floor crossings. Conservatives and the Bloc argue the proposed "supermajority" undermines democratic norms and accountability by ignoring the will of the voters, while Liberals maintain that increasing their committee membership simply aligns with Westminster traditions to reflect their new majority standing in the House, stressing the importance of collaboration and unity. 6400 words, 40 minutes.
Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders Members debate Motion No. 9, which restructures parliamentary committees to grant the governing Liberal Party a majority. Conservative and Bloc MPs condemn the move as an undemocratic power grab designed to limit legislative scrutiny and oversight of government initiatives and scandals like ArriveCan. Conversely, Liberal members argue that parliamentary tradition necessitates that a majority in the House must be reflected in standing committee composition. The House ultimately votes to pass the motion. 41200 words, 6 hours.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, they said that this has never happened before. They are right. It has not happened before, but what has happened many times in this country's history is a majority government, and when there has been a majority government, there has been a majority in the House.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
An hon. member
It is not an elected majority.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, the member is heckling me: “It's not an elected majority.” Each member here was elected and is accountable to their constituents. Canadians did not elect a majority or minority government; they had 343 elections of members. Since then, there have been by-elections. What has happened is—
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that in all this criticism, they never stand up in the House of Commons, if they claim that this Parliament is illegitimate, and call for an election at this time. I am curious why this is. I am genuinely curious why, at this point, they question the legitimacy of floor crossings when in the last Parliament they were actively seeking Liberals to cross the floor to them. It was not an issue 18 months ago.
Now they are upset that we have formed a majority and that the rules of the House, the traditions of this place and of Westminster Parliament, allow us, and dictate that there should be, a majority on committees.
They can heckle. They can shout, scream and pound their fists, but this is the way it has been and the way we hope it is going to be.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Conservative
Scott Anderson Conservative Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has put a new face on what happened. In fact, the government has been trolling our benches, and some did slither over.
The House is not reflective of Canadians' wishes. About 93% of the vote goes to the party now, by custom, and about 7% goes to the individual. By law, yes, we are elected as individuals.
The Liberal Party's explanation is that it is “a big tent”, but I would say it is more like a circus tent.
I wonder if the member agrees with the views of his party's newest acquisition on vaccines and the convoy.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, I do not know that there was a question there. It is time for questions and comments, and it was more of a comment.
These members are clutching at their pearls, but there have been Conservative majorities in this country, not only provincially but federally, and they had no problem with the majority on committees being Conservative.
They can shout and scream and pound their fists, but they know I am right at the end of the day. We will see what happens at the end of this vote.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, the members opposite can say what they will, but we are dealing with a government that no longer has the slightest regard for our parliamentary traditions. It started in the previous Parliament, when the government decided to change the rules of how the House operates without unanimous consent.
Today, they are telling us that it is normal for a majority government to have a majority on committees. That is true, but I asked the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons a question, and he was unable to answer.
I would like my colleague to tell me when, in the recent history of the House, a government with a very slim majority decided to give itself a supermajority on committees. I would like him to tell me whether it is not more in keeping with the traditions of the House for a government's majority on committees to be proportional and similar to the one it has in the House of Commons.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is shocking that members speak to parliamentary tradition, but they do not look to the actual history of this place, where this always happens. Again, I point the member to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, first edition, page 819: “Where the governing party has a majority in the House, it will also have a majority on every House committee.”
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, we are going to be commemorating the Battle of Stoney Creek, a tremendous victory by British regulars, indigenous warriors and Canadian militia over a hostile American government. Of course, just down the QEW, past St. Catharines, we have Queenston Heights, where Major General Isaac Brock fell defending Canada against another hostile American government.
The member for St. Catharines is acutely aware of the history of the Battle of Stoney Creek in the Niagara area. Can he comment on how important it is to have Canadian unity and stability?
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I say this with all due respect for the historical events the member is referring to, but we are debating a time allocation motion.
I think it is written in the Standing Orders that we must not ask questions that are off topic. That is in the Standing Orders, and this is not a point of debate. Mr. Speaker, I invite you to make a ruling on this.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater
I thank the hon. member. Yes, according to procedure, interventions must be relevant.
I am assuming the member has some relevance he is attaching to the motion at hand. I will give the member about five seconds to wrap up. He is nearly out of time.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question to the member for St. Catharines is, how important is it to have Canadian unity and stability to move forward in these uncertain times?
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is fundamentally important, as the Prime Minister pointed out.
With respect to Isaac Brock, with indigenous support, defending Canada, what was then British North America, against a hostile American threat, we are facing difficult times with our American neighbours.
We got voted in, as I said in my speech, on a plan to build Canada strong. Canadians have spoken. They have spoken in the last three by-elections, overwhelmingly, and have confidence in the Prime Minister, confidence in this government and confidence with us moving forward, especially on issues with respect to trade with the United States. This is fundamentally important and something we need to keep going on.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for St. Catharines says that it has been fundamental to parliamentary democracy. I wonder if he would agree with me that the process of parliamentary democracy in this place is continually, regardless of who is in power, to reduce the rights and powers of smaller parties in favour of their own rights and powers.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, as I have read from the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, I will point to that again. Governments that have a majority have the majority on committees. This is what the motion is seeking to do.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Government Motion No. 9 and the importance of parliamentary committees.
As members of Parliament, we have been individually elected by our constituents to represent their interests in the House of Commons. Not only do we individually represent the interests of our constituents, but together we represent the fabric of who Canadians are. We are a privileged minority of Canadians elected to this House, representing Canadians from every beautiful region of this vast and breathtaking country.
We are standing here today to represent our constituents' interests and as a representation of the will of our constituents. Every moment of our work as parliamentarians is ultimately aimed at good governance for the benefit of all Canadians. Much of this work is done in committees, which is the subject of Government Motion 9.
Before I speak to the motion itself, it is important to highlight the role of committees in the Westminster system. One of the fundamental functions of members of Parliament is the development of legislation, and the crux of this work is done in committee. Committees are the venues that allow for and facilitate the detailed examination of not only legislation but also other policies and issues of interest to Canadians.
Committees allow us to have focused and detailed discussions on what would be possible in the chamber, where debate is focused on the principle and scope of each bill. Committees are the place where we can review legislation, hear from witnesses and conduct clause-by-clause consideration of bills. It is through this process of legislative scrutiny that we can voice our views, ask experts questions, raise our concerns and debate proposals with each other.
Our ultimate, and I suggest shared, objective is to improve legislation when it is needed. It is this scrutiny and detailed examination in committees that not only strengthens accountability but also allows members to work together to find solutions to issues facing Canadians. That process and engagement builds trust with Canadians. It encourages open and transparent government.
Participation in committees gives members the opportunity to scrutinize decisions and expenditures and monitor progress. Robust and constructive debate in committees is the means through which we arrive at solutions.
Committees produce extensive and comprehensive reports, thereby adding to greater transparency for Canadians by ensuring public access to information about the government's work. These studies help inform government policy and future legislative proposals. Committees are also incubators of non-partisan collaboration. They allow members from across parties to come together to address complex problems in a collaborative manner and foster consensus on difficult issues.
Committees allow us to build camaraderie among members so we can bring forward our diverse perspectives as members from across the country, consider evidence-based insights and come together to advance the interests of Canadians. The discussions and insights that committees generate enrich our parliamentary process and our ability to work together.
Further, the common thread to the work of all committees is that of hearing directly from Canadians, stakeholders and experts on a range of issues that are important to who we, together in the House of Commons, represent.
With every committee study undertaken, through witnesses and briefs, we get to hear the diverse aspects and views on a particular subject, from business leaders to academics, scientists and Canadians from across this great country who are directly impacted by or have a strong interest in any one of the numerous subjects that the parliamentary committees study. This engagement of experts, stakeholders and citizens acts as a bridge between Parliament and the broader Canadian public.
Committee work can also bring international perspectives on how we can best achieve our policy goals. Hearing about experiences from like-minded countries can help facilitate an exchange of ideas and ways to incorporate good ideas from abroad that can be implemented here in Canada. By bringing in the international perspective, we get to hear about emerging issues and opportunities to learn from the experience of other countries. Through this process, we learn about what worked well, what did not and how to avoid challenges that other countries have experienced.
Every time I chair or participate in a committee meeting, I am struck by the extent to which witnesses want to share their expertise and lived experiences to inform the studies we undertake. The fact that we hear from witnesses with varied and sometimes opposing perspectives helps us stay in touch with the diversity of Canadian perspectives.
What Canadians think and their views on issues not only matter; they are important to informing us as members of Parliament. All of what we learn through parliamentary committees is taken into account as decisions are made. I encourage all Canadians to get involved in the work of our parliamentary committees. It is democracy in action.
Now I will turn to Government Motion No. 9. It is important to take a moment to note that the standing committees and special joint committees in this Parliament have mandates that are focused on the issues that are important to Canadians and to Canada. The reason they are called standing committees is that they should reflect the standings of the recognized parties in the House of Commons. In a Westminster parliamentary system such as ours, the composition of parliamentary committees is historically determined by reflecting the representation of political parties. This balances the need for representation with effective governance. The composition of committees should always reflect the standings in the House, and Government Motion No. 9 simply seeks to uphold and institute the principle that underpins our parliamentary system.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, today is indeed a very special day because just recently we had the three by-elections and today we have the largest women's caucus in the history of Parliament. I believe just over 70 women have been elected and that is worthy of recognizing.
We saw earlier today the government and opposition working together as we had an opposition private member's bill pass through the House. It amplifies what the Prime Minister said a year ago. He wants to see Parliament work in a collaborative way. I am wondering if the member could provide her thoughts on how we continue to move forward in a collaborative way, working for the betterment of Canadians first and foremost.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, being chair of the environment committee in recent weeks, I have enjoyed how we have worked together across parties to move the work forward in our environment and sustainable development committee. In my past life, working at the City of Halifax, it was all about working across different perspectives to get the work done and to have shared objectives to move things forward. I am really pleased that we have had cross-party support for various private members' bills on both sides of the House. I hope that we can continue to collaborate for the betterment of our country.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the adjustment of numbers of members on committees. I would like to ask her to explain fully, not just to the members on this side of the House but to Canadians, why the government chose to move to a 60% makeup on committees instead of the 51% that it has in the House. Is this to shut down the opposition completely at committee, or is there some other diabolical scheme behind all of this?
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, I am sure there are no diabolical schemes happening on this side of the House.
I know that there was a decision to make regarding whether Conservatives are removed from each committee or Liberals are added. My understanding was that the more well-received path forward was to add Liberals rather than to take away Conservatives so that we could still have robust conversations in committee.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, during her speech, my colleague said that the parties' representation on committees must reflect their representation in the House. The Liberals hold 51% of the seats in the House, but they want 58% of the seats in committees. Can my colleague explain to me how she can say in her speech that she wants committees to operate like the House, when in reality, the Liberals are giving themselves much more power with this new majority that they engineered by enticing floor crossers?
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that parties with status sit on committee and that it is the history of Canadian government and Westminster government that when there is a majority government, there is a majority on every single committee.
Consideration of Government Business No.9Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing OrdersGovernment Orders
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am quite concerned. The NDP has a strict rule. We actually tried to pass a bill to not allow floor crossings but to leave that up to the electorate. The current Liberal government has passed several bills that are in violation of our Constitution and charter rights: Bill C-9, Bill C-5 and Bill C-12. Now, we are going to have a situation where the majority Liberals pass bills that are completely unconstitutional. I am wondering how the hon. member feels about that.