Laurel Collins

[Criminal Code, October 27th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, we support this bill. We know that the ban on conversion therapy is important and it says to members of the SOGI community, especially to transgender and non-binary youth, that they are not in need of fixing. I want to thank the member for her speech, but also ask her about this bill being long overdue. It alone is not enough to repair the damage that has been done by conversion therapy.

Will the Liberals commit to investing in, and funding capacity building within, the SOGI community so that challenges as a result of conversion therapy can be addressed within the community?

[Business of Supply, October 22nd, 2020]

Madam Speaker, the member spoke eloquently about the challenges of rapid testing and the tragedy in long-term care, and about the need to look at these issues and the need for goodwill. Transparency is needed. It is a critical component of our pandemic response.

I am curious to hear the member's thoughts on the Liberals' suggestion that somehow transparency will hamper the government's response.

[The Environment, October 21st, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is hiding behind the opposition and refusing to be open with Canadians about his agenda. While people are struggling with the second wave, they also know that we are facing another impending global emergency: the climate crisis. Just two weeks ago, in his throne speech, the Prime Minister made promises to take long overdue climate action, but now the Prime Minister seems determined to go to an election. He is playing politics with our climate and our future.

Were those promises on climate change real commitments, or just empty pre-election announcements?

[Business of Supply, October 20th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, people in my riding have been contacting my office to say they are struggling with the transition from CERB to EI, or to the other benefits. Some of them have been without income because the government prorogued Parliament, shutting it down when Canadians needed the government the most. Some were not able to reach the CRA this weekend because of scheduled maintenance. The Liberals do not seem to have planned ahead to take care of these people, and I can only imagine how worried my constituents are to hear the Liberals threatening an election only a year after the last election and in the middle of a pandemic.

What does the member think? How can the Liberals stand behind this kind of lack of accountability, secretiveness and what is looking more and more like corruption from a government that is working for wealthy and well-connected friends when Canadians just want them to be working for Canadians?

[Business of Supply, October 20th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his speech. I have to agree that sunlight is needed right now to shine light on the Liberals' unethical behaviour, and on the fact that they are trying to avoid oversight and accountability by filibustering, proroguing Parliament and, now, threatening an election.

The NDP proposed a special committee that would get documents, but it did not have a few of the things that the Conservative motion has. Some of these things make it look like the Conservatives are more interested in scoring political points than in getting to the truth.

I am curious why the member thinks it is important to ask for information from private citizens, who may have done nothing wrong, and why he thinks the committee needs to be chaired by an opposition member.

[Business of Supply, October 20th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit surreal to watch the Prime Minister threaten an election if there is a committee struck to look into government corruption, all the while maintaining he has nothing to hide. The NDP is committed to ensuring that we have oversight and accountability. The Liberals seem to think filibustering and delaying is somehow going to be able to hide what they are trying to hide from Canadians.

I am curious if the member across the way thinks that threatening to go to an election makes it look like they have nothing to hide.

[Lobster Fishery Dispute in Nova Scotia, October 19th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, over two decades ago, the Mi'kmaq people fought in court, and the courts ruled that they have the constitutionally upheld right to fish for a moderate livelihood. However, this is not only about their right to fish for lobster. It is about their basic human right to be free from violence. It is about justice in the face of violence and systemic racism.

The Liberal government, for all its words, has not fulfilled its obligations to uphold the treaty rights of the Mi'kmaq people. Its inaction has led to this situation, but the government has also failed to address the lack of action from the RCMP and DFO, the lack of action and the lack of justice.

When does the member think the Liberal government will stop paying lip service and actually take action to stand up for the rights of the Mi'kmaq people?

[Housing, October 8th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, people in my community are struggling with the economic impacts of COVID-19 but also with the housing crisis and growing economic inequality. At the same time, the people at the very top in Canada have gotten richer and richer. The Liberals and Conservatives have set up systems that allow their corporate friends to get sweet deals while avoiding paying their fair share.

People in my riding need housing. We used to have a federal government in the 1970s and 1980s that invested in housing. If we made corporations like Amazon and Facebook pay their fair share, if we taxed wealth over $20 million and the excess profits of corporations that are profiting off of this pandemic, if we cracked down on offshore tax havens, we would have billions and billions of dollars to invest in things like building affordable, sustainable housing.

The B.C. government has invested historic amounts in housing. Our federal government needs to step up, at least match the provincial funding, take care of Canadians who are just trying to keep a roof over their heads and start making the wealthiest pay their fair share.

[Judges Act, October 7th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her speech, for her words and for her frustration and rage at the situation that women are facing. I share that.

I have been a member of Parliament for just a year, which means I have only had maybe a 10th of the barrage of sexism. I think back to February when this bill was put forward, and one of the Conservative members rose in the House after I spoke about the importance of listening to sex workers and of acknowledging that sex work is work. That member asked me if I had ever considered sex work. Underneath that was an undermining of sex workers' value and a restigmatizing of the sex workers out there.

I am curious if the member would want to comment on the need for legislation that actually protects sex workers and destigmatizes the work that they do.

[Judges Act, October 7th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, it is encouraging to me that we have unanimous support for this bill, and I would love to see this pass as quickly as possible, but I am disappointed that we have had to go back to the beginning. The Liberal government's decision to prorogue Parliament had many impacts, and one of them was restarting and slowing down the progress on important bills from the last session, such as this one.

When I spoke on this bill last February I mentioned that, like it is for many Canadians, this is a deeply personal issue for me. I am one of the one in three women who have experienced sexual assault in their lifetime. That statistic is staggering, but for most women it is not surprising. Yesterday, Tanya Tagaq, the incredible artist and Inuk throat singer, said, “Every woman I know has to carry the memory of at least one unreported sexual assault”.

I am curious if the member has an answer for women like me who have to carry that story. Why did his government prorogue Parliament? Why did they slow down the progress of bills like this? How can he stand in defence of a government that prorogued Parliament for what seems like no good reason?