House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2019, with 34% of the vote.
Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement Implementation Act March 10th, 2020
Mr. Speaker, on the last point, I emphasize that there was not a loss in the trade of those projects. There is a level at which an additional fee is added, but Canada is nowhere near that level yet, so there is not a loss there.
I thank the member for her speech. It was great. On a slightly different topic, however, I wonder if she supports the increased benefits in CUSMA for labour, the environment and women's rights.
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, I rise on a very short point of order, but an important one.
The member made a comment on heckling, which is a comment on a point of order. I would like to ask, it is a very important thing these days, if the Speaker could get back at a later time, not to shorten this, to their position on that suggested change to a point of order.
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, the member mentioned that he thought the media was not present, but I do not think it is going to be lost on the media, with the many weeks they spent hearing Conservatives and NDP members saying that a change like this around the Standing Orders should not be made without all-party consensus.
I have already given some quotes from both those parties, but I will just give one more short one. On March 23, 2017, near 6 p.m., the member for Calgary Shepard from the Conservatives said, “I think they need more time, but we shouldn't change them without unanimous agreement.”
I know this was before the member's time in Parliament, but hopefully some members who are here will stick to their principles and vote against this motion.
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, I always enjoy the member's speeches.
I do not think it will be lost on the media that sat in on the many weeks of discussion on the changing of the Standing Orders, where the Conservatives and NDP passionately voted and spoke against doing it without the consensus of all parties. Now, in a few hours, they want to go totally against that.
I have already given a couple of quotes from the NDP. On the morning of March 21, 2017, the member for Hamilton Centre said that anything you might call a comprehensive or systemic review of the Standing Orders, that report, as other reports have told us, was always done with all-party support.
I am very interested to see on Monday which NDP members vote against their principles and vote for this motion.
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's always thoughtful speech. He is welcome to criticize the government, though hopefully he will do it the proper way.
I mentioned earlier how the NDP, in a debate in 2017, passionately opposed getting around the Standing Orders like this. I gave a quote.
In another quote the former member for Hamilton Centre referred to the report of the special committee on modernization, of which Bob Kilger was the chair, and said:
The Committee's order of reference—like that of the predecessor—required that...any report be adopted by unanimous agreement of all the members.
Further on he said:
...parliamentary reform is best achieved where there is consensus and all-party agreement.
The NDP passionately spoke for many weeks of debate against the changes to the Standing Orders like this without any unanimous support.
Does the member agree that some of his members might vote for this motion and go against the principles they so strongly stated during that debate, which I do not think the member was here for?
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, in the last Parliament there was a debate at committee on getting around the Standing Orders, but the Bloc was not involved in it.
I would like to provide a couple of quotes.
On March 21, a Conservative member said, with respect to an amendment that was put forward, that it, “would require that all parties agree to any changes...made to the Standing Orders. That's what's been done in the past....That's what's been done in a proper functioning way of going about this.” The person who said that was the member for Perth—Wellington.
In the same debate, an NDP member stated, “the only way to proceed on major changes to Standing Orders is through all-party agreement.”
Those cases were passionately made by those two parties during that debate, which went several months out, if I remember correctly. I wonder what the member thinks about those two parties changing their view on that.
Business of Supply February 28th, 2020
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's passionate speech. On March 21, he was very passionate about making such a change to the Standing Orders. He said:
The learned amendment that's been put forward would require that all parties agree to any changes...made to the Standing Orders. That's what's been done in the past....That's what's been done in a proper functioning...of...[doing] this.
Obviously, this is changing how a Standing Order works, so it would be hypocritical if he voted for this motion.
Criminal Code February 27th, 2020
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her very heartfelt speech. It is one of the best ones I have heard, because she provided us with her personal opinion.
She mentioned that what is important to her is that people do not have to end their life earlier than they need to because they are not competent. The other major positive item is people who do not have access to MAID at all right now and that the bill would make it available to them.
The member mentioned at the beginning of her speech that she had some suggestions from health care professionals. I wonder if she could outline some of those to us.
Criminal Code February 27th, 2020
Mr. Speaker, I enjoy working the member on the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region. He gave a very positive speech.
I wanted to reply to a couple of items. Why now, before that major review of the act in June? We had no choice; the Supreme Court ordered it. Concerning the 10-day period, medical practitioners suggested that a person may be incapable in those 10 days, so it was not necessary. That was a bit problematic, as was getting two signatures.
On palliative care, I agree 100% with the member. That is one of the reasons why in the last budget, for the first time in history, we added $6 billion to help the provinces with palliative care. I hope it is working toward exactly what the member would like.
Could the member let me know, as I think about this bill, what his constituents said to him about the MAID legislation?
Business of Supply February 25th, 2020
Madam Speaker, I have two quick questions.
First, the Liberal tax cut, which we have talked about a lot today, proposes increasing the exemption ceiling and it would reduce taxes for 20 million Canadians. The Conservatives, of course, have said they are against it, and the New Democrats would reduce some of that. Is the member in favour of that tax cut for 20 million Canadians?
Second, the health committee has decided to study dental care, which I am definitely in favour of. I wonder what positive contribution the member thinks the Bloc will make to that discussion in the health committee.