Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1306-1320 of 1392
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I know we have tried this before, but the third time is the charm. Given the importance of debate on this issue, it is important that we have another opportunity to extend it without affecting the timeline for the Supreme Court decision. Therefore, without moving the votes, we could extend debate on this.

May 20th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, at second reading, I was quite inclined to agree with some of the arguments members put forward on the need for a federal law. I agree that ultimately we need to have a federal law, but we need to proceed cautiously. However, the way the bill has been handled, ultimately having a bill that we already have good reason to believe is not going to meet the constitutional test, is of great concern to me.

May 20th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, I am concerned that the death of the bill is becoming reasonably foreseeable because it is in a grievous condition, but the good news is that it is not yet irremediable. We heard from the Alberta Court of Appeal this week that the bill already does not meet the requirements of the Supreme Court decision and that it will not be deemed constitutional.

May 20th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I just want to start by expressing my disappointment at the way the government has come to use time allocation so routinely when we've hardly even been in this place for six months. The government's arguments about the time constraint because of the Supreme Court ruling are troubling to me because a tight timeline is not an excuse to pass a bad law.

May 11th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I am still confused because I do not understand how this all works. If discussing sexual harassment at the bargaining table is an option, why is it a problem for the government to conduct more investigations and take action to improve things with respect to sexual harassment in the RCMP?

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, to say that pay equity is a human right and to want that legislated does not preclude employees from bringing to the bargaining table in their own workplace proposals about how pay equity can be better realized or from bringing to the table facts about the workplace that say that pay equity, despite whatever legislation is on the books, is not being adequately realized.

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I would like to emphasize again that I think that is where this ultimately is headed and I do not see a need to wait. We talked about many of the challenges that face the RCMP as an organization. I believe that collective bargaining, as one piece of a multi-faceted puzzle, one other way of addressing those issues, could actually help the institution resolve some of those long-standing issues by bringing a new approach.

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I think it is important not to let the debate on an amendment that has to do with harassment and whether or not RCMP members would be allowed to bring issues of harassment to the bargaining table to get derailed by questions of process on certification. There will be time for that in the debate.

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I will start by noting that regardless of whether this bill passes, RCMP members are going to get the right to collective bargaining. It is not a decision being made by the government and whether or not it passes this legislation. It is a decision that unfortunately had to be made by the Supreme Court.

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Public Service Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for bringing this amendment forward. It is, as she said, an opportunity to bring some improvement to a bill that, in my opinion, would not do a good job of bringing in a proper collective bargaining regime for RCMP officers.

May 9th, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, obviously it is the case that if we are to deliver better palliative care in Canada, it will have to done in collaboration with the provincial governments and the federal government. However, what I would say matters greatly, what matters in this place is if we are going to do that, we need to see federal leadership.

May 3rd, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I would agree that people who do not have adequate resources can end up making choices they would not otherwise make. That is not a true expression of autonomy, and it is important to provide that. Providing more and better palliative care and other health care options, whether it is home care or long-term care, to people is part of ensuring they are making an actual choice and not feeling forced into that choice.

May 3rd, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying I have had occasion to listen to much of the debate that has been going on and I want to note that for the most part it has been very civil and the tenor of the debate has been very good. It has lent itself to thoughtful consideration of what is a very challenging bill because it is a challenging issue.

May 3rd, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, it is kind of funny to hear government members say that palliative care is a priority for them considering that there is nothing for palliative care in the budget. Can my esteemed colleague help us figure out what is going on?

May 3rd, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his compelling speech. The one piece that stood out to me is more of a process issue. He talked about the need to get this bill to committee so that it can be improved. That is something I would like to see. I could go on about some of the things that I do not think the government got right in this bill, but given that a special committee did a lot of great work on this and issued a report, and the government legislation does not really reflect much of anything that came out of that report, why should we have confidence that the government is going to respond appropriately to the next committee that looks at this bill?

May 2nd, 2016House debate

Daniel BlaikieNDP