Hansard
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 96253
View Chris d'Entremont Profile
CPC (NS)
View Chris d'Entremont Profile
2024-03-01 10:01 [p.21531]
The hon. government House leader is rising on a point of order.
View Steven MacKinnon Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Steven MacKinnon Profile
2024-03-01 10:01 [p.21531]
Mr. Speaker, Canada is in mourning. Canadians and all members of the House are lamenting the loss of a great patriot.
Brian Mulroney was a leader of this country, with exceptional qualities that made his country a better place. Not only was Brian Mulroney a great prime minister, he was a man who respected Parliament and made this place better for having been part of it.
When the House resumes, there will be tributes from members of all parties in the House. Until then, I believe that I speak on behalf of all of us in extending our deepest condolences to his family and countless friends.
I would also like to inform the House that the opposition day planned for today will be postponed until Monday, March 18.
Furthermore, in light of the passing of the Right Hon. Brian Mulroney, I would like to seek the unanimous consent of the House to adopt the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House:
(a) on Monday, March 18, 2024, if a recorded division is requested pursuant to Standing Order 45(4)(a) during the proceedings related to the business of supply, it shall not be deferred; and
(b) the House do now adjourn pursuant to Standing Orders 24 and 28.
View Chris d'Entremont Profile
CPC (NS)
View Chris d'Entremont Profile
2024-03-01 10:04 [p.21531]
Is it agreed?
The Deputy Speaker: Accordingly, pursuant to order made earlier today, the House stands adjourned until Monday, March 18, at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 28(2) and 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 10:04 a.m.)
View Greg Fergus Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Greg Fergus Profile
2024-02-29 10:01 [p.21467]
I am now ready to rule on the point of order raised on January 31 by the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan and the question of privilege raised on February 9 by the member for Edmonton Strathcona concerning the government's responses to their written questions. While they were raised distinctly, given the procedural similarities of the two questions, the Chair intends to provide a single ruling.
The member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan shared his concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the government’s response to Question No. 2155. The member claimed that the response tabled on January 29, 2024, failed to identify the sub-implementing partners who are involved in delivering aid to Palestinian refugees. He argued that his question was seeking information about all organizations providing Canadian aid, which implies both implementing and sub‑implementing partners.
By way of a question of privilege, the member for Edmonton Strathcona made a similar complaint, expressing dissatisfaction with multiple elements of the government's responses to three of her written questions, namely, Questions No. 2068, 2069 and 2070. She argued that the inadequacy of the responses was so glaring that it interfered with her ability to carry out her parliamentary duties, including holding the government to account.
She contended that the government specifically failed to answer several sub-questions embedded in the larger questions and that one response appeared to contain the wrong information. She asked that the Chair review her questions and the responses in conjunction with relevant procedural authorities and precedents in the hope that her complaint rises to the level of a prima facie question of privilege.
On February 12, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons tabled a revised response to Question No. 2070, stating that inaccurate information had been provided in the initial response; this was due to an error. He also stated that the Minister of Foreign Affairs had apologized to the member for Edmonton Strathcona for this mistake.
Members have frequently complained to the Chair about their dissatisfaction over government responses to their written questions. There are abundant precedents from past Speakers’ rulings on these kinds of grievances. I would refer members to the Debates of April 25, 2022, at pages 4310 and 4311, for such a similar example.
While the Chair can empathize with the frustration that members may have about not receiving the type of information they think should be included in a response, precedents show that the Chair cannot direct the government to respond in a given way.
House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, at pages 529 and 530, summarizes the situation:
There are no provisions in the rules for the Speaker to review government responses to questions. Nonetheless, on several occasions, Members have raised questions of privilege in the House regarding the accuracy of information contained in responses to written questions; in none of these cases was the matter found to be a prima facie breach of privilege. The Speaker has ruled that it is not the role of the Chair to determine whether or not the contents of documents tabled in the House are accurate nor to “assess the likelihood of an Hon. Member knowing whether the facts contained in a document are correct”.
Having reviewed the specific concerns raised by both the members for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan and Edmonton Strathcona, the Chair is not of the view that their complaints deviate from similar ones in the past. As such, I am left with little option but to apply established precedents consistent with the approach my predecessors have taken.
Consequently, I do not find that there is a prima facie case of privilege concerning the request made by the member for Edmonton Strathcona, and I consider the matter closed for both submissions made to the Chair.
That being said, the Chair notes the comments made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House after he supplied a revised response to Question No. 2070. He acknowledged that it is the right of members to have the best information available to do their important work.
As many Speakers before me have done, I would emphasize the essential purpose written questions serve in our parliamentary institution. Not only are Order Paper questions an important part of our accountability mechanisms, forcing the government to justify its choices, but their responses are also instrumental in helping members to better understand the government's programs, activities and expenses. When members receive complete and accurate answers to their questions so they can make informed decisions, it serves everyone, including those who elected us.
The Chair therefore strongly encourages the government to follow through on its statement and provide to members the best information available.
I thank all members for their attention.
View Greg Fergus Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Greg Fergus Profile
2024-02-29 10:10 [p.21468]
It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to section 10.5 of the Lobbying Act, a report on investigation from the Commissioner of Lobbying.
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), this report is deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.
View Anita Anand Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Anita Anand Profile
2024-02-29 10:12 [p.21468]
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the Main Estimates, 2024-25.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2024-02-29 10:13 [p.21468]
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 111.1, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, a certificate of nomination and biographical notes for the proposed appointment of Konrad Winrich von Finckenstein to the position of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2024-02-29 10:14 [p.21468]
moved:
That, in accordance with section 81 of the Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C., 1985 c. P-1, the House approve the appointment of Konrad Winrich von Finckenstein as Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, for a term of seven years.
View Greg Fergus Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Greg Fergus Profile
2024-02-29 10:14 [p.21468]
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.
It is agreed.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2024-02-29 10:14 [p.21468]
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to one petition. This return will be tabled in an electronic format.
View Anita Anand Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Anita Anand Profile
2024-02-29 10:14 [p.21468]
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the departmental plans for this government, representing 90 departments and agencies, for 2024-25.
View Anita Anand Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Anita Anand Profile
2024-02-29 10:15 [p.21468]
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, on behalf of the Minister of Finance, a document, in both official languages, entitled “Report on the Federal Tax Expenditures” for 2024.
View Mark Holland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Karen Vecchio Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 10th report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, entitled “Act Now: Preventing Human Trafficking of Women, Girls and Gender Diverse People in Canada”. I would like to table this.
Through this study, we saw 55 witnesses, received 57 briefs and travelled the greater Toronto area, including Peel, as well as Vancouver, Sault Ste. Marie and Halifax.
I would like to thank the women who have taken part in this, specifically, the analysts and clerks. We had two incredible clerks who worked on this, Stephanie Bond and Danielle Widmer. We also had incredible analysts who were able to help us: Dominique, Clare and Alexia.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
View Anna Roberts Profile
CPC (ON)
View Anna Roberts Profile
2024-02-29 10:18 [p.21469]
Madam Speaker, I rise to present a supplementary report on behalf of my Conservative colleagues. We felt that the report did not contain enough regarding training for police and judges, nor did it speak to the absolute torture endured by those who have been trafficked.
I am saddened to report that some of the perpetrators and the users of human trafficking are abusing children as young as nine years old. We need to ensure the laws of these crimes fit. The penalties, right now, do not fit the crimes. We would like to ensure that these measures are reviewed so that we can protect all our citizens, especially the most vulnerable, and those are our children.
Results: 1 - 15 of 96253 | Page: 1 of 6417

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data