Kevin Lamoureux

[National Security Act, 2017, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I was here when Stephen Harper brought in Bill C-51. We voted for it, even though we recognized back then that it needed significant changes, and part of this legislation deals with some of those changes. We brought in legislation earlier dealing with what was a major flaw in Bill C-51, which was not having the parliamentary oversight committee. This government rectified that problem. We made a commitment to Canadians.

The difference between us and the Conservatives is that we look at individual rights and charter rights and privacy as being as important as security and safety, and in fact we can do both at the same time. This legislation is a good example.

When my friend was talking about the no-fly list, it was as if the Conservatives know how to get it right, when in fact Bill C-51 set up the environment that put many children onto the no-fly list. It was Stephen Harper who complicated it and made it more difficult, such that more children were put on the no-fly list.

In the future, are some of my colleague's proposed changes going to rectify the problems that Stephen Harper put in, which in good part this legislation and previous legislation have already addressed?

[National Security Act, 2017, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Given that the government has six times the number of members as the Conservative Party has, if anyone is slumbering, I would suggest it might be the Conservatives.

[National Security Act, 2017, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I was here when the minister made his statements in regard to the necessity of this legislation and explained exceptionally well why we are at the stage we are at.

My question is related to the bigger picture. The member made reference to Bill C-51. There were a series of changes that were required. We are seeing part of that in the legislation; it is only a component of it. The legislation also addressed one of the biggest things lacking in Bill C-51, and that was the parliamentary oversight committee, which put us on par with other Five Eyes nations. I think this is good, substantive legislation that is in Canadians' best interests, from a security and privacy perspective. Both issues are being addressed.

Would the member not agree that it is time we actually saw this legislation passed?

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Petitions, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I am presenting a petition today from constituents who have supported the need to have super visas, which are visas used by individuals to come to Canada and stay for an extended period of time, up to two years. They call for assurance that if they get a super visa, they will be allowed to stay for the entirety of the two years.

[Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent at this time to call it 12 midnight.

[Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would love to compare and contrast that point of order to one I raised the other day with respect to relevancy.

I can assure you and the member that my debate is absolutely relevant to having a bill of rights with respect to the environment.

I see you are anxious to stand, Madam Speaker. I suspect my time has already expired.

[Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise and talk about important issues. A number of days ago we had a fairly healthy and robust discussion with respect to our environment and how important it is to this government.

As members know, we brought forward a motion recognizing the state of emergency with respect to our environment. We all have a very important role to play. Yesterday was World Environment Day, which is recognized internationally. One of the things I have found over the years when dealing with environmental issues is that the people who have really taken that active interest spread across all the different social and economic strata in our society. There are young people, people who are not so young and people of different ethnicity or economic status in life, all of whom really care about the environment.

Over the years, I have seen the words sustainable development, and things of that nature, which we can never talk enough about because there are so many things we can do within budgets and legislation to encourage that sustainable development. We have a government that has demonstrated that over the last few years with a number of policy positions that have really had a profoundly positive impact and will continue to have an impact on the environment here in Canada.

The most obvious that comes to mind is the price on pollution. For the very first time, we have national assurances that there will be a price on pollution from coast to coast to coast. Prior to this government, the price on pollution was very much patchwork. Some provinces had it and other provinces did not. Through strong national leadership we will ensure that it is from coast to coast to coast.

Even within this most recent budget, we have an announcement to try to encourage Canadians to look at electric cars—

[Criminal Records Act, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House you would find unanimous consent to call it 5:30 p.m., so that we could begin Private Members' Business.

[Criminal Records Act, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, this has been an interesting process, at the very least. We have seen a dramatic change in social policy, and it is a positive step forward. Providing pardons with this piece of legislation is going to assist a lot of individuals in being able to take further steps in employment and other aspects of life. Parties may disagree with regard to expungement versus pardons, but there is no doubt that it is a step forward, just like the legalization of cannabis itself. Would the member not agree?