Journals
 
 
 
RSS feed based on search criteria Export search results - CSV (plain text) Export search results - XML
Add search criteria
2019-06-19 [p.5711]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Trudeau (Prime Minister), seconded by Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), — That Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade;
And of the amendment of Ms. Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh), seconded by Mr. Masse (Windsor West), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“the House decline to give second reading to Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, because it:
(a) fails to improve labour provisions that are necessary to protect good jobs;
(b) allows for an extension of drug patents that will significantly increase the cost of medicine for Canadians;
(c) leaves the environment vulnerable due to the absence of clear, enforceable protection provisions;
(d) is being rushed through the legislative process, without adequate time and attention for such a crucial trade agreement;
(e) will shift the levers of power within the economy away from governments and workers, in favour of corporations, by weakening public regulations on public health and the environment; and
(f) puts the poorest and most marginalized Canadians at further risk by failing to ensure the protection of human rights, gender equality and inclusive economic growth.”.
The debate continued.
2019-06-19 [p.5712]
Pursuant to Standing Order 57, Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. Lametti (Minister of Justice), moved, — That, in relation to the consideration of Senate amendments to Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, the debate not be further adjourned.
Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, the House proceeded to the question period regarding the moving of the closure motion.
2019-06-19 [p.5712]
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 1378 -- Vote no 1378) - View vote details.
YEAS: 149, NAYS: 67
2019-06-19 [p.5713]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Lametti (Minister of Justice), seconded by Mr. Goodale (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), — That a Message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, the House:
agrees with amendments 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12(b), 13 and 14 made by the Senate;
proposes that amendment 3 be amended to read as follows:
“3. Clause 239, pages 90 and 91:
(a) on page 90, replace lines 2 and 3 with the following:
“dictable offence that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment, other than an offence listed in section 469, the justice”;
(b) on page 90, replace lines 18 and 19 with the following:
“able by 14 years or more of imprisonment, an offence listed in section 469 that is not punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment or an”;
(c) on page 90, replace line 44 with the following:
“section 469 that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment,”;
(d) on page 91, replace lines 20 and 21 with the following:
“offence listed in section 469 that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment, the justice shall endorse on the informa-”;”;
proposes that amendment 4 be amended to read as follows:
“4. Clause 240, pages 92 and 93:
(a) on page 92, replace line 11 with the following:
“14 years or more of imprisonment, other than an offence mentioned”;
(b) on page 92, replace lines 25 to 27 with the following:
“offence that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment, an offence listed in section 469 that is not punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment or an offence mentioned in section”;
(c) on page 92, replace line 41 with the following:
“section 469 that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment,”;
(d) on page 93, replace line 20 with the following:
“is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment, the justice or”;”;
proposes that, as a consequence of Senate amendments 3 and 4, the following amendment be added:
1. Clause 238, page 89: Replace line 33 with the following:
“fence that is punishable by 14 years or more of imprisonment is be-”;
proposes that amendment 6 be amended by replacing the words “an intimate partner — and, in particular, a partner” with the words “a person” and by replacing the words “on the basis of sex or is an Aboriginal person” with the words “because of personal circumstances — including because the person is Aboriginal and female”;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 10 made by the Senate because the Bill already provides flexibility to the provinces and territories with respect to agent representation while also recognizing regional diversity in respect of how legal representation is regulated across Canada, and because the amendment could have unintended repercussions for the provinces and territories; and, the Government continues to work with the provinces and territories to support the effective implementation of these reforms;
proposes that amendment 12(a) in the English version be amended by replacing the words “apply in Bill C-45” with the words “apply if Bill C-45”.
The debate continued.
2019-06-19 [p.5715]
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 1379 -- Vote no 1379) - View vote details.
YEAS: 161, NAYS: 58
2019-06-19 [p.5716]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Trudeau (Prime Minister), seconded by Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), — That Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade;
And of the amendment of Ms. Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh), seconded by Mr. Masse (Windsor West), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“the House decline to give second reading to Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, because it:
(a) fails to improve labour provisions that are necessary to protect good jobs;
(b) allows for an extension of drug patents that will significantly increase the cost of medicine for Canadians;
(c) leaves the environment vulnerable due to the absence of clear, enforceable protection provisions;
(d) is being rushed through the legislative process, without adequate time and attention for such a crucial trade agreement;
(e) will shift the levers of power within the economy away from governments and workers, in favour of corporations, by weakening public regulations on public health and the environment; and
(f) puts the poorest and most marginalized Canadians at further risk by failing to ensure the protection of human rights, gender equality and inclusive economic growth.”.
The debate continued.
2019-06-19 [p.5717]
The question was put on the amendment and, pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 28, 2019, the recorded division was deferred until Thursday, June 20, 2019, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
2019-06-19 [p.5717]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Goodale (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), seconded by Mr. Champagne (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities), — That a Message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act, the House:
agrees with amendments 1, 4(a) and 5(b) made by the Senate;
proposes that amendment 2 be amended by replacing the text of the amendment with the following:
“(c.1) the Service considers alternatives to custody in a penitentiary, including the alternatives referred to in sections 29 and 81;
(c.2) the Service ensures the effective delivery of programs to offenders, including correctional, educational, vocational training and volunteer programs, with a view to improving access to alternatives to custody in a penitentiary and to promoting rehabilitation;”;
proposes that amendment 3 be amended by replacing the text of the amendment with the following:
“(2.01) In order to ensure that the plan can be developed in a manner that takes any mental health needs of the offender into consideration, the institutional head shall, as soon as practicable after the day on which the offender is received but not later than the 30th day after that day, refer the offender’s case to the portion of the Service that administers health care for the purpose of conducting a mental health assessment of the offender.”;
proposes that amendment 4(b)(i) be replaced by the following amendment:
“1. Clause 10, page 7: replace lines 25 to 28 with the following:
“(2) The Service shall ensure that the measures include
(a) a referral of the inmate’s case, within 24 hours after the inmate’s transfer into the structured intervention unit, to the portion of the Service that administers health care for the purpose of conducting a mental health assessment of the inmate; and
(b) a visit to the inmate at least once every day by a registered health care professional employed or engaged by the Service.”;”;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 4(b)(ii) because it may not support the professional autonomy and clinical independence of healthcare professionals and does not take into account the inmate’s willingness to be transferred to a hospital or the hospital’s capacity to treat the inmate;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 5(a) because it would result in a significant addition to the workload of provincial superior courts, and because further assessments and consultations with the provinces would be required to determine the probable legislative, operational and financial implications at federal and provincial levels, including amendments to the Judges Act and provincial legislation and the appointment of additional judges;
proposes that amendment 6 be amended to read as follows:
“6. Clause 14, page 16:
(a) replace line 7 with the following:
“48 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a staff member of the same sex as the inmate may”;
(b) add the following after line 15:
“(2) A body scan search of the inmate shall be conducted instead of the strip search if
(a) the body scan search is authorized under section 48.1; and
(b) a prescribed body scanner in proper working order is in the area where the strip search would be conducted.”;”;
proposes that amendment 7(a) be amended by replacing the text of the French version of the amendment with the following:
“c) l’identité et la culture autochtones du délinquant, notamment son passé familial et son historique d’adoption.”;
proposes that amendment 7(b) be amended to read as follows:
“(b) replace lines 32 and 33 with the following:
“ing the assessment of the risk posed by an Indigenous offender unless those factors could decrease the level of risk.”;”;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 8 because extending the concept of healing lodges designed specifically for Indigenous corrections to other unspecified groups is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation, and because it would impede the ability of the Correctional Service of Canada, which is responsible for the care and custody of inmates pursuant to section 5 of the Act, to be part of decisions to transfer inmates to healing lodges;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 9 because extending of the concept of community release designed specifically for Indigenous corrections to other unspecified groups is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 10 because allowing offenders’ sentences to be shortened due to the conduct of correctional staff, particularly given the existence of other remedies, is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation, including with provincial partners, victims’ representatives, stakeholder groups and other actors in the criminal justice system;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 11 because five years is an appropriate amount of time to allow for robust and meaningful assessment of the new provisions following full implementation.
The debate continued.
2019-06-19 [p.5719]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Goodale (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), seconded by Mr. Champagne (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities), — That a Message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act, the House:
agrees with amendments 1, 4(a) and 5(b) made by the Senate;
proposes that amendment 2 be amended by replacing the text of the amendment with the following:
“(c.1) the Service considers alternatives to custody in a penitentiary, including the alternatives referred to in sections 29 and 81;
(c.2) the Service ensures the effective delivery of programs to offenders, including correctional, educational, vocational training and volunteer programs, with a view to improving access to alternatives to custody in a penitentiary and to promoting rehabilitation;”;
proposes that amendment 3 be amended by replacing the text of the amendment with the following:
“(2.01) In order to ensure that the plan can be developed in a manner that takes any mental health needs of the offender into consideration, the institutional head shall, as soon as practicable after the day on which the offender is received but not later than the 30th day after that day, refer the offender’s case to the portion of the Service that administers health care for the purpose of conducting a mental health assessment of the offender.”;
proposes that amendment 4(b)(i) be replaced by the following amendment:
“1. Clause 10, page 7: replace lines 25 to 28 with the following:
“(2) The Service shall ensure that the measures include
(a) a referral of the inmate’s case, within 24 hours after the inmate’s transfer into the structured intervention unit, to the portion of the Service that administers health care for the purpose of conducting a mental health assessment of the inmate; and
(b) a visit to the inmate at least once every day by a registered health care professional employed or engaged by the Service.”;”;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 4(b)(ii) because it may not support the professional autonomy and clinical independence of healthcare professionals and does not take into account the inmate’s willingness to be transferred to a hospital or the hospital’s capacity to treat the inmate;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 5(a) because it would result in a significant addition to the workload of provincial superior courts, and because further assessments and consultations with the provinces would be required to determine the probable legislative, operational and financial implications at federal and provincial levels, including amendments to the Judges Act and provincial legislation and the appointment of additional judges;
proposes that amendment 6 be amended to read as follows:
“6. Clause 14, page 16:
(a) replace line 7 with the following:
“48 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a staff member of the same sex as the inmate may”;
(b) add the following after line 15:
“(2) A body scan search of the inmate shall be conducted instead of the strip search if
(a) the body scan search is authorized under section 48.1; and
(b) a prescribed body scanner in proper working order is in the area where the strip search would be conducted.”;”;
proposes that amendment 7(a) be amended by replacing the text of the French version of the amendment with the following:
“c) l’identité et la culture autochtones du délinquant, notamment son passé familial et son historique d’adoption.”;
proposes that amendment 7(b) be amended to read as follows:
“(b) replace lines 32 and 33 with the following:
“ing the assessment of the risk posed by an Indigenous offender unless those factors could decrease the level of risk.”;”;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 8 because extending the concept of healing lodges designed specifically for Indigenous corrections to other unspecified groups is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation, and because it would impede the ability of the Correctional Service of Canada, which is responsible for the care and custody of inmates pursuant to section 5 of the Act, to be part of decisions to transfer inmates to healing lodges;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 9 because extending of the concept of community release designed specifically for Indigenous corrections to other unspecified groups is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 10 because allowing offenders’ sentences to be shortened due to the conduct of correctional staff, particularly given the existence of other remedies, is a major policy change that should only be contemplated following considerable study and consultation, including with provincial partners, victims’ representatives, stakeholder groups and other actors in the criminal justice system;
respectfully disagrees with amendment 11 because five years is an appropriate amount of time to allow for robust and meaningful assessment of the new provisions following full implementation.
The debate continued.
2019-06-19 [p.5722]
Mr. Dubé (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Ms. Trudel (Jonquière), moved the following amendment, — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the amendments made by the Senate to Bill C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Abolition of Early Parole Act, be now read a second time and concurred in.”.
Debate arose thereon.
2019-06-18 [p.5684]
Pursuant to Standing Order 57, Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. Garneau (Minister of Transport), moved, — That, in relation to the consideration of Senate amendments to Bill C-48, An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia's north coast, the debate not be further adjourned.
Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, the House proceeded to the question period regarding the moving of the closure motion.
2019-06-18 [p.5684]
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 1373 -- Vote no 1373) - View vote details.
YEAS: 157, NAYS: 113
2019-06-18 [p.5685]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Garneau (Minister of Transport), seconded by Mr. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence), — That a Message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-48, An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia's north coast, the House:
agrees with amendment 1 made by the Senate;
proposes that, as a consequence of Senate amendment 1, the following amendment be added:
“1. Clause 2, page 1: add the following after line 15:
“Indigenous peoples of Canada has the meaning assigned by the definition aboriginal peoples of Canada in subsection 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982. (peuples autochtones du Canada)”;”;
proposes that amendment 2 be amended by replacing the text of the amendment with the following:
“32 (1) During the fifth year after the day on which this section comes into force, a review of the provisions and operation of this Act must be undertaken by any committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that is designated or established for that purpose, including a review of the impact of this Act on the environment, on social and economic conditions and on the Indigenous peoples of Canada.
(2) The committee referred to in subsection (1) must submit a report of the results of the review to the Senate, the House of Commons or both Houses of Parliament, as the case may be, on any of the first 15 days on which the Senate or the House of Commons, as the case may be, is sitting after the report is completed.”.
The debate continued.
2019-06-18 [p.5686]
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 1374 -- Vote no 1374) - View vote details.
YEAS: 190, NAYS: 86
2019-06-18 [p.5687]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Trudeau (Prime Minister), seconded by Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), — That Bill C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade.
The debate continued.
Results: 1 - 15 of 4174 | Page: 1 of 279

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|