John Oliver

[National Defence Act, September 21st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to strengthening victims' rights within the military justice system. The Code of Service Discipline recognizes the harmful impact of service offences on victims.

Bill C-77 makes two significant changes to the Conservative bill with respect to sentencing. One of those is that it adds gender identity and gender expression as special consideration in sentencing. Could my hon. colleague from Dartmouth—Cole Harbour reflect on that change in sentencing provisions?

[Canada Summer Jobs Initiative, September 21st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to celebrate the Canada summer jobs program in my riding of Oakville.

Employing youth in our community truly benefits all involved. Over 370 students contributed this summer in meaningful and positive ways to our small businesses, and non-profits and public sector organizations. In turn, students gained relevant work experience and earned money for post-secondary education.

Over the course of the summer I was able to see first-hand the amazing contributions students were making to our community. I went paddling on Sixteen Mile Creek in an outrigger canoe with student leader Aidan and the kids at Wai Nui Canoe Camp. I practised my French with leaders Kaitlyn, Madison, Sean, Jade and Florence and the young campers at Camp Tournesol. I even learned the Swan Lake pose with Keira and Blythe and the young ballerinas at Balletomane.

All this was made possible by our government's increased funding for the Canada summer jobs program. I am thrilled that so many organizations in my riding participated in the program and so many students benefited.

[Telecommunications, June 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the Internet is not a luxury but a necessity in today's world. We need net neutrality to ensure the free flow of information. This is vital to our freedom of expression, our digital economy, and our democracy.

In my Motion No. 168, I call on the government to have net neutrality as a guiding principle in the telecommunications and broadcasting acts review and to enshrine it in legislation.

Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please provide an update on his progress to date?

[Marijuana, June 4th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, cannabis consumption rates by our youth are among the highest in the developed world. Education aimed at teenagers about the dangers of cannabis use is essential. As a hockey dad, I have taken my son William to many Oakville Blades hockey games. I know how influential professional hockey players can be as role models, so I am excited about our government's recent partnership to educate teenagers about the risk of cannabis.

Can the Minister of Health please update the House on her public awareness campaign?

[Net Neutrality, May 22nd, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to speak again to my Motion No. 168. This motion is aimed at strengthening and protecting an open Internet in Canada by ensuring that net neutrality is a guiding principle in the Government of Canada's upcoming review of the Telecommunications and Broadcasting Acts.

I do want to thank the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, the parliamentary secretary, and the government for their interest in and support for this motion, and once again thank Mr. Andrew Quinn for his work in identifying and doing research on this topic.

We must enshrine in legislation the principles of neutrality in the provision and carriage of all telecommunications services. As we have heard throughout this debate from members on both sides of this place, net neutrality is an issue that is important to Canadians and that it is imperative for the Government of Canada to affirm our commitment to preserving a fair and open Internet for Canadians.

I do want to thank the members who have risen to speak to the motion.

At its core, net neutrality means that all content and applications should be treated equally and that the choices made by users should be free from interference from Internet service providers.

Canada has emerged as a world leader in supporting policies protecting that neutrality. However, policies alone will not guarantee net neutrality. Requiring that net neutrality be a guiding principle in the review and update of these acts signals a clear commitment to placing consumers and content providers first. That is a very important signal to send to the industry.

As our neighbours to the south try to save their own net neutrality regulations, I believe it is time for Canadians to address this issue directly and act to protect our own. This motion would require the government, industry, and Canadians to have a robust conversation about enshrining net neutrality as an essential component in the review of the Telecommunications and Broadcasting Acts.

Two-tiered Internet, or a situation in which an Internet service provider actively discriminates against certain content or services by throttling the speed of delivery to enhance their own private business interests, gets to the heart of what could happen without strong net neutrality regulations in place.

As clearly expressed by Dr. Michael Geist, professor of law at the University of Ottawa, and the Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law, the average Internet user is not all that concerned about the policies that govern how their Internet is delivered. They just want to ensure that they can uniformly access all of the applications and services they have chosen at the speed they have paid for, and are not restricted in their access to services or content.

I agree with Dr. Geist. While in the past many Canadians probably were not aware of the term “net neutrality” and the majority probably were not interested in the governing policies for ISPs in the Internet, I do not believe that is the case today. Canadians are now very aware of what they do and do not want regarding Internet access. Canadians want to continue to use the services they choose without interference.

While we are leaders when it comes to net neutrality policies, we cannot rest on our laurels. Now is the time to enshrine this concept in legislation. Further, we cannot solve the current telecommunications competition or privacy concerns without a solid foundation of net neutrality.

I will say it again: Canadians expect to choose the applications and services they want to use, and they expect to be able to access them without interference from their Internet service provider.

Let us not forget that when we defend net neutrality, we defend much more than Canadians' ability to access online services. We are defending our democracy. We are preserving principles as fundamental as freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Preserving an open Internet and the free flow of information is vital to diversity, education, entrepreneurship, innovation, and the continued economic and social prosperity of Canadians.

Members must express their firm support for the continued preservation of an open Internet, free from unjust discrimination and interference. This is the critical issue of our generation.

Now is the time to stand up to protect the rights of Canadians. Now is the time to protect one of the pillars of our democracy. I hope every member will join me in voting in support of net neutrality in Motion No. 168.

[Petitions, May 10th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today signed by Canadians requesting that Parliament support Bill C-316, an act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act regarding organ donors.

Today there are 4,500 Canadians awaiting a life-saving organ or tissue transplant. The majority of Canadians support organ and tissue donation. However, only 25% are registered as donors. Bill C-316 would make it easier for Canadians to indicate their desire to donate their organs and tissues through their annual tax returns. This information would then be shared with the provincial and territorial governments so that the names of those Canadians who want to help save lives could be added to existing donor registries.

[National Day of Mourning, April 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Canada's National Day of Mourning, a day when we remember and honour workers who have been killed, injured, or become ill due to workplace-related hazards and accidents. We also remember the families who have lost loved ones.

Unfortunately, not all workplaces are safe. On average across Canada, three workers per day are killed on the job or die due to workplace hazards. Many more are injured or develop illnesses. The National Day of Mourning focuses our attention on these personal tragedies and reminds us that there is more work to be done in this area.

I was pleased to join the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793, and the Oakville and District Labour Council in my riding of Oakville this past weekend. Every year, these organizations bring the community together for events. Families, labour, management, and the public join as one to remember and commit to change. I thank them both for helping us to remember this year and every year.

[Business of Supply, April 24th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his remarks, although I do not necessarily agree with them.

I want to make this debate more personal. My wife and her family are refugees from Poland. In 1980-1981, they fled Poland and ended up unexpectedly and unplanned in Austria. The Austrian people took them in. They provided shelter, health care, and food, and they provided my wife with education. They did this for six months, until the family was relocated to Canada.

Interestingly, my wife's younger sister married a very fine young man from Vietnam who, when he was a young man, fled Vietnam with his family and ended up here in Canada. When I sit down with my wife's family for dinner, I am the only non-refugee at the table.

When will it be Canada's turn, like Austria, to accept unexpected refugees? Under what circumstances would he ever think that Canada would accept unplanned and unexpected refugees and provide generous accommodation, as happened with my wife's family's experience in Austria?

[Housing, April 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Oakville, access to temporary housing, shelters for abused women, and adult supportive housing are critical issues. Last November, the government announced Canada's first-ever national housing strategy, a 10-year $40-billion plan to give more Canadians a place to call home. Last week, we saw the first multilateral agreement on housing in a quarter of a century signed with the provinces and territories.

Could the minister responsible for the national housing strategy explain how the housing partnership framework will help realize the government's bold vision for Canadians?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 19th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I was very happy to hear the member for North Island—Powell River speak about national pharmacare and the reference to it in budget 2018 and I was happy to hear support for it. I am a member of the committee, and we are very proud of the report released yesterday. I certainly believe no Canadian should be denied access to necessary prescription medicines because they cannot afford them. That is fundamental.

The committee made 18 recommendations. Two of them dealt directly with the model of how national pharmacare should be designed and 16 of them dealt with implementation challenges. What we heard from expert witnesses is that implementation of a national pharmacare program, given the nature of our Confederation of provinces and territories and federal government, is incredibly complex. I was delighted to see in the budget the creation of a national council that will study implementation of national pharmacare. Dr. Hoskins has one year and will be back next spring with a very comprehensive analysis of how best to implement national pharmacare.

Does the member not support taking more time to make sure we get this right and not lose it because we have rushed implementation?