Mark Holland

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, there is a very quick way to get that answer, and it is to support this motion to create the committee. If the Conservatives are interested in those answers, I am a little confused as to why they are blocking them.

I appreciate that the member across is concerned for my well-being. That is kind of him. As I age, sometimes I forget the details of movies and different things that I used to remember. However, I will tell members what I do not forget: trying to come to work through an occupation. What I do not forget is talking with the residents of Ottawa, who were completely besieged day and night, their lives utterly turned upside down. What I do not forget is the conversations I had with businesses that had their livelihoods horrifically upended as a result of these protests. What I do not forget is members opposite appearing in the illegal protests taking photographs, giving coffee and tweeting their support. I do not forget those things. They are burned indelibly into my memory because they were so disappointing.

What we need to remember now is that before the act was put into place, this was the reality outside of these doors. That occupation was occurring. It was not until the Emergencies Act was put into place that we began to see action to see it lifted and to see us move forward. If the Conservatives are interested in the type of oversight they are talking about, there is a simple solution: Stop obfuscating and vote for this.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I think the question from my hon. colleague is about taking a look at exactly how these measures were used. Let us remember that before the act was invoked, we were in a situation where border crossings were closed, the city of Ottawa was besieged and there did not seem to be an end in sight. The Emergencies Act was put into place, as it was contemplated in 1988, to deal with emergency situations, and we now see a flow of goods and services and a return to normalcy here in the city of Ottawa.

The important work that needs to be done is not about dealing with the debate on who chairs the committee, particularly when we have so much agreement on how that process should take place. Instead, it is about looking to make sure the powers that were used were used judiciously, appropriately and in a limited fashion in terms of both geography and time. I would think that all members would want to get on with that process as quickly as possible, so I am frustrated that, because of the Conservatives' desire to have chairmanship, we continue to have to wait and grind this out. This should have started on Monday. We should not be here today continuing to deal with this.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, here is the thing that I find concerning. We had, for three weeks, the city of Ottawa besieged by an occupation. I had an opportunity to talk with business owners and residents who had their lives ripped apart by what had occurred, yet the question we are being asked again and again is this: “Why can't I get the chair of the committee?” The concern from the Conservatives seems to be an obsession with whether they get the chair and have a member who gets to say they are the chair, when the city of Ottawa went through an absolute nightmare.

I cannot imagine, if I were a resident or an owner of a business in the red zone, hearing the Conservatives spending all their time myopically asking about whether they can get a chair, instead of telling us to look at what happened here and to make sure that it never happens again, given these poor people in Ottawa, the blockades, the businesses that were impacted and the billions of dollars that were lost. How can we make sure that we do not have members of Parliament supporting those kinds of activities and make sure that we do not have these issues in the future?

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the way is absolutely right. It is important to create the committee as soon as possible. It is discouraging that the Conservative Party continues to block its creation when the committee is receiving a lot of support from the other parties, not just here in the House of Commons, but also in the Senate.

The second point I want to raise is the process in the Senate, the other place. The Senate also needs to start its work, but it is waiting for us to adopt our motion to create the committee. The longer the House of Commons waits, the longer the Senate also has to wait.

It is time to start our work because this is so important. There is a very reasonable proposal on the table, and now it is time to create the committee.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with the member on the importance of not only parliamentary oversight, but, of course, an independent inquiry, which will be conducted. As part of the provisions of the act, it must report back within 365 days.

I have heard the reasonable proposition of the member opposite, and I will certainly take that under due consideration and have conversations with the other parties about the possibility of it. I understand her interest and the interest of all members in ensuring that this process is conducted fully, fairly and independently.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, there will be a parliamentary committee, and it will be responsible for reviewing the use of the Emergencies Act.

I am certain that the process will be fair. The proposal is so fair and reasonable that we reduced the number of members from the governing party. There are three members from the Liberal Party, three from the Conservative Party, one from the Bloc Québécois, one from the NDP, and one from each group in the Senate.

That is more reasonable that the normal makeup of committees, on which there are more government members. The only question remaining has to do with the role of chair. I do not understand why this position is causing such a big problem, especially when the solution is obvious, namely that the committee should be co-chaired by one member from a party that supported the declaration of a public order emergency and one from a party that was against it.

This is not about pitting the government against the official opposition. I think my colleague across the way and former counterpart is a very reasonable person. I have a lot of respect for him, and I am sure he understands what I am saying.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the impasse seems to be on that very point. My hon. colleague is correct that the impasse is on the Conservatives' insistence on chairing a process when they had taken such a clear side. One of their members called it “Canada Day times a thousand”.

They are yelling across the aisle because I understand they do not want to wait for their questions. Neither do we, and that is why we are not chairing. Perhaps the hon. member will understand that we have given up the chair and that they have taken a strident position of being in favour of the illegal activities and cheerleading those activities and that therefore they would be inappropriate to be the chair. That is why we have moved this reasonable proposal.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to tell my hon. colleague from the Bloc Québécois how great she is. I often had the opportunity to work with her when I was the whip for my party, and it was clear to me that she is very reasonable.

I was hoping that the same could be said for the Conservative Party, but unfortunately not. For over a week, I tried to come to an agreement with that party, but it stuck to its guns.

The Conservative Party was hoping to get two of the co-chair positions for this committee, one from the Senate and one from the House of Commons. It was proposing that it have one MP on the committee and that the government have only one seat. That was unreasonable, so it is an awkward situation.

Unfortunately, a solution had to be found with all the other parties to foster the most neutral situation possible. That is why it has been proposed that one of the co-chairs come from a party that supported the emergency measures and that the other come from a party that did not. That is reasonable.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I have some of the same reflections. It is confusing to hear the official opposition demand on the one hand that the process get started and on the other hand obfuscate and delay the process from starting.

I would hope the hon. members across have not just adopted a position that they want and are not listening to anybody else. They got to do that when they had a majority with Stephen Harper, but they do not get to do that now. They need to listen to other parties. We have a proposal that is supported not only by two other parties in this House but also by the independent Senate group, the progressive Senate group and, we hope, by the Canada Senate group as well.

We have worked on a proposal whereby we all compromise and we all got together so that we could move forward with this oversight. The Conservatives are saying they want oversight, and yet they are delaying the said oversight. It makes one wonder why they do not want to have this oversight move forward.

[Parliamentary Review Committee pursuant to the Emergencies Act, March 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am here for 30 minutes, so they have lots of opportunity to ask questions when they stand.

One of the things I would say that I think is unique and positive about this proposal is that it does put two opposition parties in the chair, one that was for the act and one that was against the act, and it allows the Senate to appropriately choose its co-chair. The Conservatives on this committee actually have the same number of caucus members as the government. They have three caucus members and we have three caucus members. I see this as a pre-eminently fair, reasonable proposal.

It is time to get on with it. In fact, this committee has to report back within seven sitting days. We do not have a lot of time to waste.