Kevin Lamoureux

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the member can reflect on the amendment we have before us today in the form of a motion. It deals with an agreement that was, in principle, agreed to back in the 1960s. It dates all the way back to 1880, as has been pointed out.

There is a general feeling on all sides and from all stakeholders, including CP Rail itself to a certain degree, although this might be somewhat dated, that there is a quite difference between a motion of this nature and some of the more complicated issues of constitutional ideas that surface from all sides of the House. Does the member recognize the difference?

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, the member will recall that late last year when this suggestion first came up, shortly after the Saskatchewan legislature passed the motion, we looked at giving unanimous consent to pass a motion. At the time, I indicated that I did not think it would be appropriate, given the very nature that a constitutional change was being proposed.

I am wondering if the member could provide his thoughts as to why he feels today it is important for us, at the very least, to have some debate before the motion's passage.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I suspect that individuals who might be following the debate here today or the debate that took place in Saskatchewan might be curious about what it really means in terms of the taxation.

Had the Province of Saskatchewan actually forgone any ability to tax CP Rail, or did CP Rail actually pay taxes? In listening to my colleague, one would be of the opinion that CP has been paying taxes. That is not 100% my understanding. If she could enlighten me on that point, I would really appreciate it.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friend and colleague's approach to dealing with what is a serious issue. Whenever a provincial legislature takes an initiative, it is appropriate that the government respond, no matter what its political stripe, in whatever way it can. There is also a responsibility to gain a full understanding.

The credit that the member referenced is for the province of Saskatchewan. Are there other jurisdictions that are encountering the same situation, or is this truly unique to the province of Saskatchewan?

[Questions on the Order Paper, February 8th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.

[COVID-19 Protests, February 7th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

There have been discussions among the parties and, if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order, special order or usual practice of the House, during the debate tonight, pursuant to Standing Order 52, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair.

[Questions on the Order Paper, February 7th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed the stand at this time.

[Committees of the House, February 7th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote.

[Committees of the House, February 7th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I asked a very quick question of the chair of committee, and I am going to pose the same question. I asked what we can expect if it goes to committee in terms of the amount of time it would take to pass so that an RFP can be issued, and the chair implied that it could be quite a while. We all know that standing committees can actually do things virtually in two or three days, very substantive things. Why would we not want to give some sort of tangible indication of whether it would be a week, a month or six months? What is it?

[Committees of the House, February 7th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, maybe the member can answer a very direct question from me on the issue. When will the committee have its report finished?