Cathy McLeod

[Broadcasting Act, June 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I duly note my colleague's remarks, but when he suggests that it is only the Conservatives who are opposed and that we are not modern, I would like to point out that there were some very significant witnesses who came to the hearings and testified against this bill. The government originally put in a very important clause, proposed section 4.1, for a reason. To be quite frank, I have never heard any clear rationale as to why it was removed, from anyone, including the minister.

My question is quite simple: Will my colleague vote for the reinsertion of proposed section 4.1 into the legislation?

[Broadcasting Act, June 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I have had a lot of phone calls and emails to my office. People are very concerned about what the government is doing.

I have a two-part question. First, if clause 4.1 were put back in the legislation, it would still be a flawed bill but would it be okay? Second, at this point, would the hon. member agree that the government should probably just put it aside, take its time and bring it back, whether in the fall or after another election?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2021]

With regard to the government’s requirements for hotels to become a government-authorized hotel for the purpose of quarantining returning international air travellers: (a) what specific obligations do the hotels have with regard to security standards; (b) what specific measures has the government taken to ensure these security standards are being met; (c) how many instances have occurred where government inspectors have found that the security standards of these hotels were not being met; (d) of the instances in (c), how many times did the security failures jeopardize the safety of (i) the individuals staying in the facility, (ii) public health or the general public; (e) how many criminal acts have been reported since the hotel quarantine requirement began at each of the properties designated as a government-authorized hotel; (f) what is the breakdown of (e) by type of offence; (g) are the hotels required to verify that someone has received a negative test prior to leaving the facility, and, if so, how is this specifically being done; (h) how many individuals have left these hotels prior to or without receiving a negative test result; and (i) how does the government track whether or not individuals have left these hotels prior to receiving a negative test result?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2021]

With regard to the government’s requirements for hotels being used as quarantine facilities: (a) what specific obligations do the hotels have with regard to security standards; (b) what specific measures has the government taken to ensure these security standards are being met; (c) how many instances have occurred where government inspectors have found that the security standards of these hotels were not being met; (d) of the instances in (c), how many times did the security failures jeopardize the safety of (i) the individuals staying in the facility, (ii) public health or the general public; (e) are hotels required to verify that someone has received a negative test prior to leaving the facility, and, if so, how is this specifically being done; and (f) how many individuals have left these facilities without receiving a negative test result?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2021]

With regard to Corporations Canada and the deregistration of federally incorporated businesses since 2016, broken down by year: (a) how many businesses have deregistered their corporation; and (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by type of business?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2021]

With regard to fraud involving the Canada Emergency Response Benefit program since the program was launched: (a) what was the number of double payments made under the program; (b) what is the value of the payments in (a); (c) what is the value of double payments made in (b) that have been recouped by the government; (d) what is the number of payments made to applications that were suspected or deemed to be fraudulent; (e) what is the value of the payments in (d); and (f) what is the value recouped by the government related to payments in (e)?

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I was in committee this morning when we heard from the commissioners. It was very powerful testimony. There was a few things that the member brought up in her speech that were particularly concerning.

Certainly, when they indicated that the attention, urgency and resources needed to be made available, the comparison was made to COVID and how quickly the government responded to the COVID crisis. That is what she described there being a lack of. It was also important that she indicated successive governments share the blame and that this is a non-partisan issue.

I come to the House today to speak to a motion that I think is important for us to move forward with, and I would appreciate any further comments my colleague might have about the testimony she heard today.

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I also would like to thank my colleague for a very powerful speech.

This morning at the indigenous affairs committee, we had an hour when we listened to the commissioners and we did not ask questions. It was very powerful testimony. There were a few things that bring me some concern.

One was when Commissioner Wilson said that we have not acted with the attention, urgency and resources that are needed. Commissioner Littlechild talked about call to action 81 being stuck. They made it clear they believe this should not be a partisan issue, that there have been successive governments that have perhaps made mistakes and have done wrong.

Today, the NDP members put forward a motion. It is an important motion. It is not perfect, but it is their effort to move things forward. I would certainly like to hear my colleague indicate that she will be happy to support the motion.

[Residential Schools, June 1st, 2021]

Madam Chair, my colleague is an experienced parliamentarian. Will he commit tonight to doing everything he can to make sure that as communities, whether Tk'emlúps or the other 139 or 138 communities, are ready to move forward, the dollars flow in a way that is responsive and does not get bogged down in bureaucratic red tape? In some cases, the communities are ready to move forward.

Does he commit tonight to doing what he can to facilitate things moving forward?

[Residential Schools, June 1st, 2021]

Madam Chair, it was about three years ago that Parliament passed a motion asking for a papal apology and, much to our disappointment, that has not happened. We know that there have been other apologies that have been given.

I do join my colleague in calling for this apology. It is part of the healing. It is part of the closure, and it is another important call to action.