House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 35% of the vote.
Criminal Code May 3rd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I am very confused by the Conservatives who keep raising the use of the notwithstanding clause. Could the member perhaps flesh out how he would see this going forward?
If we are going to at least discuss this, I would like to hear some idea about how the member thinks we could start this process of using a notwithstanding clause to override the Supreme Court decision.
Criminal Code May 3rd, 2016
Madam Speaker, I listen with great interest to the debate on this very important issue.
However, there seems to be some confusion as to what we have been asked to do by the Supreme Court. This is not an optional measure that we are taking. The government has no option to put this bill in. It has been ordered by the court, and that is how our constitution works.
I am hearing a rather extraordinary request from the member, which is for the government to invoke the notwithstanding clause. I am not sure that would actually work in this instance. I am wondering if the member would care to elaborate on that.
Petitions May 3rd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present an electronic petition calling on the federal government to establish an independent judicial inquiry into Canada's treatment of Afghan detainees since 2001. It was initiated by Craig Scott, former MP for Toronto—Danforth and professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, and is signed by over 700 Canadians. The petitioners want an investigation into the facts, the conduct, and decisions of Canadian officials, as well as a public report assessing whether Canada complied with international human rights law. In tabling this petition today, the government will now be required to provide a written response within 45 days. I know many Canadians are expecting that the government will take these concerns seriously.
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns April 21st, 2016
With regard to the National Energy Board’s review of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project and the interim measures for pipeline reviews announced by the government on January 27, 2016: (a) how many Canadians applied to participate in the National Energy Board’s review of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project, broken down by (i) individuals, groups, and authorized representatives, (ii) province and territory, (iii) whether they wished to participate as a commenter or as an intervenor, (iv) whether they were “directly affected” by the proposed project or had relevant information or expertise; (b) of those Canadians identified in (a), how many were accepted by the National Energy Board to participate as intervenors, broken down by (i) individuals, groups, and authorized representatives, (ii) province and territory, (iii) whether they wished to participate as a commenter or as an intervenor, (iv) whether they were “directly affected” by the proposed project or had relevant information or expertise; (c) of those Canadians identified in (a), how many were accepted by the National Energy Board to participate as commenters, broken down by (i) individuals, groups, and authorized representatives, (ii) province or territory, (iii) whether they wished to participate as a commenter or as an intervenor, (iv) whether they were “directly affected” by the proposed project or had relevant information or expertise; (d) of those Canadians identified in (a), how many were rejected by the National Energy Board from participating either as a commenter or as an intervenor, broken down by (i) individuals, groups, and authorized representatives, (ii) province and territory, (iii) whether they wished to participate as a commenter or as an intervenor, (iv) whether they were “directly affected” by the proposed project or had relevant information or expertise; (e) of those Canadians identified in (d) who were rejected from participating by National Energy Board, will their applications be reconsidered as part of interim review measures for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project announced by the government on January 27, 2016; (f) of those Canadians identified in (d) who were rejected from participating by National Energy Board, will they have an opportunity to apply to participate in the interim review measures for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project announced by the government on January 27, 2016; (g) of those Canadians identified in (d) who were rejected from participating by National Energy Board, will their views and expertise be solicited by the “Ministerial Representative” appointed by the government to “engage communities, including Indigenous communities potentially affected by the project, to seek their views and report back to the Minister of Natural Resources”; (h) of those Canadians identified in (b) who were accepted to participate by National Energy Board as intervenors, will the government provide funding for these individuals or organizations to present evidence and cross-examine as part of the interim review measures; (i) do the interim review measures alter, in any way, the current legislated time limit of May 20, 2016, for the National Energy Board to issue its report on the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project to the Governor in Council; and (j) as a result of the interim review measures, can any amendments be made to the National Energy Board’s final report after it has been issued to the Governor in Council?
Business of Supply April 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the speech and reply, and I thought the hon. member on this side had an excellent question. I am just wondering, if everything is transparent, why she will not disclose the list.
The Budget April 14th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot about pipelines in the House, and of course that topic is definitely related to this matter today. I have seen an article in the National Post saying that the Prime Minister has told his senior lieutenants to draw up plans to make Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain expansion a reality.
A lot of times I hear in this House that the government believes in a new process, but it seems that now it is overriding the process and approving this pipeline before the application has even been filed.
Can the parliamentary secretary tell me if a decision has already been made? Will they build Kinder Morgan, or will he stand with me in this House today and oppose this pipeline?
Starred Questions April 11th, 2016
With regard to the reported unemployment rate of 7.2%, provided by Statistics Canada in January 2016: what is the government’s target for reducing the unemployment rate in Canada?
Petitions April 11th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present an online petition calling on the federal government to ban the sale and use of electric shock collars on household pets. It was signed by over 5,400 Canadians and initiated by two constituents from my riding, Gwendy and Alfie Williams, who have worked tirelessly to protect animal welfare for the better part of the decade.
Members will notice that there is only one sheet of paper because this is the very first e-petition to be tabled in the House. I would like to thank all of the staff at the Clerk's office who have done an outstanding job in setting up Parliament's e-petition website.
The new system has been a resounding success to date, with over 50 official e-petitions, receiving nearly 150,000 signatures from the public. As more and more Canadians engage with this new form of participatory democracy, I urge the government to take their concerns seriously.
Citizenship Act March 10th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, language should never be an unfair barrier to participation in political life. The 1965 Voting Rights Act in the U.S. was all about that. Language tests were put in before one could be registered to vote there. The Supreme Court struck that down. I think that is the case here.
I do not understand. If people consider themselves to be Canadian but the government does not provide enough resources to allow them to become fully fluent in either language, then I do not see why that should be any kind of barrier to full citizenship. As my hon. colleague said, an individual can contribute even if that individual's language skills are not as good as those of others.
Citizenship Act March 10th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, terrorists should go to jail. That is it.
We are a very well-resourced country. We have excellent public servants who look after our penal system. When somebody commits a terrorist act and through the courts they are found to be guilty, they should go to jail. That should be that.
In a way, I think that removing citizenship is a side debate. It is something to distract us. I think that catching terrorists, ensuring we have intelligence to do that, ensuring we have fair process, due process under law to put people in jail and keep them there, keeps them from doing harm to other countries. We have a global responsibility to do that in Canada.