Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 43
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2019-06-20 10:04 [p.29463]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
We have just received the sad news that our colleague Mark Warawa, the member for Langley—Aldergrove, has passed away.
I believe that if you seek it, you will receive unanimous consent to go through Routine Proceedings and then to suspend the House until 12 noon.
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
View James Bezan Profile
2019-06-17 12:21 [p.29166]
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. It is over 100 times now that the government has used closure or has limited the amount of debate we can have any time on these bills.
This stands in stark contrast to what the minister used to say when he was in the third party. The member for Winnipeg North used to stand and holler every time there was a closure motion or anything to limit the debate we were having on any motions before the House.
We only had four minutes on Friday to start the debate on the amendments that were proposed by the Senate. I still have to go back and talk to my UCCO members who work at Stony Mountain Institution in my riding to ensure that the health and safety provisions that are in the bill are going to be properly enforced and how that is going to occur. They still have those questions.
However, because the Liberals are stifling debate here in the House, I will not have the time to go and consult, and discuss this with UCCO members and with penitentiary staff on how this will impact our riding and how it is going to impact the care and incarceration of those who are currently serving sentences.
There are still so many questions out there. The hypocrisy that we are seeing from the Liberals continues to amaze all of us, because when they were in the third party, they used to scream and holler at the top of their lungs every time the previous government tried to do this.
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Mr. Speaker, the minister is being very disingenuous here. I sat in on the hearings of Bill C-68. Not a single opponent of what we did in 2012 could prove, in any way, shape or form, that those changes had any effect on fish populations or fish communities. Colleagues can look at the record.
Under our former Conservative government, in 2010, for example, the Pacific salmon run in the Fraser River was a record. In 2014, that run was even higher. Under the Liberal government's watch, Pacific salmon stocks are collapsing and the Chinook salmon stock is the poster boy for that.
Our committee produced a unanimous report on Atlantic salmon, with a number of recommendations. We saw the minister's response. Not a single part of that letter dealt with the 17 unanimous recommendations, such as smallmouth bass in Miramichi Lake, overfishing by Greenland and excessive predation by seals and striped bass. The response did not deal with any of that.
Why is this department so inept and uncaring for fisheries communities and fish stocks?
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Mr. Speaker, again, the minister cannot provide a single example of any harm to a fish population from the Fisheries Act of 2012. However, his government caused harm to fisheries.
I remember early in the Liberals' mandate when Denis Coderre, who is a former Liberal member and was then the mayor of Montreal, begged and pleaded when we were in government to allow the dumping of millions of litres of raw sewage. Our Conservative government said no. As soon as the Liberal government came in, it allowed the dumping into the St. Lawrence of millions of litres of raw sewage. Was there a Fisheries Act charge? Absolutely not.
Recently, the Liberals introduced the new marine mammal regulations, which will throttle the economy of Churchill, Manitoba, where whale watching is an integral part of that struggling economy. I have contacted the minister on a number of occasions about this and he simply does not care about communities. He only cares about his cronies in the Liberal Party, who do their best to destroy fish habitat, without him even caring. Why is that?
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-04-11 10:54 [p.26981]
Mr. Speaker, I know of individuals who, in their early years of life, made the mistake of using marijuana and were charged with the offence of possession. In order to save court costs and save themselves money in legal fees, they pleaded guilty. Outside of that charge, they have a completely unblemished record. Individuals like this are justly considered for a pardon.
However, an RCMP officer spoke to me about situations in which a plea bargain was reached with individuals who had committed much more serious offences, like trafficking and the use of different substances, and had agreed to settle for a lesser conviction of simple possession of marijuana. If we are offering a pardon to those types of individuals, I have grave concern as do many other individuals. The problem is that the records indicating the original charge are difficult to ascertain.
Does the minister have any idea how the Parole Board will filter out those two different scenarios?
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2019-03-21 5:37 [p.26295]
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I just noticed the new member for Outremont left her seat before the results of the vote were read.
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2019-03-21 15:59 [p.26386]
Mr. Speaker, this goes to the heart of what we do in this place. These are confidence votes. We have been here now for just about 24 hours, probably every 30 minutes offering the Liberal government an option to get out of here and to finish up these confidence votes.
It is not our problem that the Liberals are out there sleeping on the cots, having naps and hanging out at camp cover-up, when we are coming here, possibly having more members than they have and getting ready to defeat them on a vote. When members are coming in while you are reading, as has been identified by my colleagues and colleagues from the NDP, it is very serious. It has happened a number of times over the last 24 hours.
I would ask that we do not continue with the vote until we identify precisely who walked in. We will get the tape if we have to of who walked in while you were reading the vote so that those individuals will not be allowed to vote. Liberals are not above the rules in this place.
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2019-03-21 16:13 [p.26388]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to my hon. colleague's point of order. He indeed does have the right to hear the question. If he was in his seat, as I believe he was, when you began reading the question and he could not hear it, he could have asked you to repeat it.
However, what the Liberals do not have a right to do is that while you are repeating the question, to scurry in and think that they can become part of the votes. Once you begin the question, Mr. Speaker, at that precise moment only members of Parliament who are in their seats are eligible to vote. You could certainly repeat it 45 times until the hon. member has heard it. However, what we cannot have in this place, on a vote of confidence, are members who were not in their seats when you began the question, which you have already acknowledged you did, being allowed to participate in this vote of confidence.
We ask you, Mr. Speaker, to suspend the House until we can ascertain, with full confidence, who was in their seats on both sides when you began the question.
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2019-03-21 16:40 [p.26391]
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate what you are asking. It is important, considering what the Minister of National Defence just stated. He said he felt he was in here because he came in while points of order were going on. However, what you need to clarify, Mr. Speaker, is that the question had begun, which is the time when we would expect that the minister should have been in the chamber.
You need to clarify, Mr. Speaker, that your reading of the question began just moments prior to the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader rising and saying he could not hear you. That is the time period, those seconds.
That is the beginning of the question. If members were not in the House at that point, they need to rise. It is not whether they were present while points of order were going on. It is important that you clarify that, and then you can continue as you did.
View Larry Maguire Profile
CPC (MB)
View Larry Maguire Profile
2019-03-21 17:14 [p.26395]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
I want to acknowledge that I may have had a lapse, given that I asked for a point of order after you started reading the previous motion. It is perhaps the same lapse that the member for Winnipeg North had earlier when you started reading Motion No. 126.
My colleagues from Durham, New Westminster—Burnaby, Barrie—Innisfil and Perth—Wellington made a very good point. What we witnessed two votes ago is a very serious situation. If we do not see the video of who on the Liberal side was legitimately here for the vote, and if 52 Liberal members were not here—
View Larry Maguire Profile
CPC (MB)
View Larry Maguire Profile
2019-03-21 17:15 [p.26395]
Mr. Speaker, my point is that this Parliament may not be legitimate if that vote failed for the government. Everything that happened from then on may not be legitimate.
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2018-12-13 10:14 [p.24802]
Mr. Speaker, I am so disappointed to see this happen yet again. I believe this is the 50th time the current government has shut down the ability of members of Parliament to speak, in only three short years.
The Liberals came in on this self-righteous platform that they were going to be respecting Parliament and not moving time allocation and not shutting down debate, and this is the 50th time they have done it. They are doing it on a bill that would be rigging the system to help them in the next election. This is unbelievable to see yet again.
We are in our last few days in this beautiful place, which will be shut down for a number of years. This is what the Liberals are leaving us to remember them by as we head off into the Christmas holidays: that this is the 50th time in only three years they are cutting off our ability to speak on behalf of our constituents.
How in the world can these Liberals say they respect Parliament, that they respect democracy and that they respect fairness? If this is their example, we really are in big trouble.
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
View Candice Bergen Profile
2018-10-23 10:12 [p.22706]
Mr. Speaker, this is indicative of what the Liberals have been doing overall on this bill, which is very disturbing to see. This is a bill that would have a direct effect on the men and women who put their lives on the line every day dealing with the most dangerous, horrific criminals in Canada.
Corrections officers do not like this bill. The government has not talked with them about this bill. It has not talked or consulted with them on the very dangerous and very real implications for the men and women who serve as corrections officers.
This bill would be taking away the ability of corrections officers to put individuals in solitary confinement for the protection of other inmates, the protection of themselves or the protection of guards.
We are again seeing the Liberals focusing on protecting criminals, focusing on worrying about the comfort of criminals who are serving their time in federal penitentiaries, and shutting down any discussion or debate. It is shameful to see.
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Madam Speaker, it is quite clear this is the backdoor gun registry coming back. Under Bill C-71, if a firearms owner sells a firearm to another individual, he or she would have to call a registrar and that purchase would now be registered. Even though both individuals have a valid possession and acquisition licence and show that they are valid, they would still have to call the registrar to have that purchase registered.
It is quite clear from the research done on the old Liberal firearms registry that law-abiding citizens complied with it. I certainly did. However, at the same time, there was zero evidence it reduced crime. On the other hand, we have Bill C-75, where the Liberals would be making punishment for violent crimes and criminals more lenient, while at the same time, under Bill C-71, they would be punishing law-abiding citizens. In the Liberal world, it is far easier to punish law-abiding citizens because they obey the law and the criminals do not. Why this dichotomy? Why are criminals treated better than law-abiding citizens under the Liberal government?
View Robert Sopuck Profile
CPC (MB)
Mr. Speaker, as a member of the environment committee who has been involved in the discussion and debate on Bill C-69, I have never been so appalled in my entire life at how bad this particular bill is.
For example, Chris Bloomer, the president of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, likened Canada's regulatory environment to a toxic regulatory environment.
Recently Don Lowry, past president and CEO of Epcor Utilities, wrote a piece in the Edmonton Journal on June 5:
Investor flight from energy sector is a national embarrassment
Over the last few years, a thicket of regulatory approvals and processes, both provincial and federal, have crept into place, effectively suffocating through delay and denial anything getting timely approval.
As someone with an environmental background who has worked in pipeline assessments, I can assure the minister that every single pipeline in Canada is built to the highest environmental standards.
Why is the minister piling unnecessary regulations on the Canadian energy sector and denying Canadians the economic opportunity that they need to build this country?
Results: 1 - 15 of 43 | Page: 1 of 3

1
2
3
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data