Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 31 - 45 of 223
View Mélanie Joly Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to answer my colleague, for whom I have such great respect.
I wonder if he has read the budget, which allocates $120 million to supporting post-secondary education in French in Canada. I would be happy to work with him to explain exactly how we plan to distribute the funds. Communities know they can count on us. We will be there to support francophones across the country because we know post-secondary education is important, whether it is in northern Ontario, Alberta or elsewhere in Canada.
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
2021-04-21 15:29 [p.5929]
Mr. Speaker, I am rising today to respond to the question of privilege raised by the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London with regard to Bill C-288, which I introduced in the House on Monday.
I would like to begin by thanking the member for bringing this matter to my attention. It is true that I spoke to reporters about my bill between the time it was put on notice and its introduction in the House.
That was a mistake on my part. I thought that, since I had described my bill during the emergency debate last Wednesday evening, it was okay to repeat the same comments outside the House. I did not know that one should not talk about a private member's bill during that period.
I would like to sincerely apologize to all members. I did not intend to breach the parliamentary privilege of the House. I now understand the implications of that decision, and I pledge to become more familiar with the rules and practices of the House.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain myself on this important issue.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I want to thank the member for his intervention. As the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London mentioned, the practice concerning the confidentiality of all bills on notice exists so that the House is the first to learn of new legislative measures.
In fact, I want to remind the members once again that, although they are allowed to conduct consultations during the development of a bill or to announce their intention to table a bill on a specific issue, they must not disclose the specific provisions contained in a bill when it is put on notice. Only the title is made public when the Notice Paper is published and remains so until the first reading of the bill.
In my ruling on March 10, 2020, on a similar matter, the Chair accepted the explanation of the member for Markham—Unionville, where he also apologized.
Under the circumstances, I am prepared to do the same for the member for Sudbury. Thus, in light of what has been presented, the precedence in the matter and the apologies from the member for Sudbury, the Chair considers the matter closed.
Because this is not the first time this has happened, I would like to remind members of the importance of respecting confidentiality when they are preparing bills or having them put on the Notice Paper.
I want to thank the hon. members for their attention.
The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue on a point of order.
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
2021-04-20 14:10 [p.5862]
Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the situation unfolding at Laurentian University in Sudbury. What I want to focus on today are the students affected by this tragedy.
Like most universities, exams at Laurentian started on April 12, the same day as the job losses and program cuts were announced.
Hundreds of students have to do their exams knowing that their program will no longer exist next year.
The hockey and swim teams were cut, casting student athletes adrift, with nowhere to play, train or study.
As the father of a university student athlete, I cannot imagine the pain of losing one's team, teammates, academic program and dream all at the same time.
I talked to the students about the devastating effects the cuts have had on them. No one has been spared.
As concerned and frustrated as I am about the enormous impact currently felt by Laurentian University students, I remain resolved to see the university emerge as strong as possible from this terrible situation. We owe it to our students, who have sacrificed so much to get this far in their studies, to search for a way forward so they can complete their studies and launch their careers.
View Karen Vecchio Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning the premature disclosure of the contents of Bill C-288, an act to amend the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. This bill is sponsored by the member for Sudbury.
On Sunday, April 18, 2021, the Toronto Star posted an article entitled “Liberal MP's bill aims to keep turmoil at Laurentian University from happening at other schools”. The member is quoted in the article disclosing the contents of his bill. The problem is that the bill, which was on notice at the time the article was published, was not introduced until Monday, April 19, 2021. The article attributes several statements to the member for Sudbury. The article says:
“I’m going to add post-secondary institutions to the exemptions for institutions that cannot avail themselves of CCAA protection. It’s as simple as that,” [the member stated], referring to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, which allows for court protection during financial restructuring....
The article also quotes the member as saying:
“This includes additional financial support from our CCAA lender in order to continue to operate as Laurentian implements its plans to position the university for long-term sustainability and a basis for recovery for its creditors and stakeholders.”
On March 10, 2020, the Speaker, ruled a prima facie case of privilege following the premature disclosure of the contents of Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying). The Speaker said:
...based on a reading of the Canadian Press article on Bill C-7 on medical assistance in dying, and in the absence of any explanation to the contrary, I must conclude that the anonymous sources mentioned were well aware of our customs and practices and chose to ignore them. It seems clear to me that the content of the bill was disclosed prematurely while it was on notice and before it was introduced in the House....
The rule on the confidentiality of bills on notice exists to ensure that members, in their role as legislators, are the first to know their content when they are introduced. Although it is completely legitimate to carry out consultations when developing a bill or to announce one’s intention to introduce a bill by referring to its public title available on the Notice Paper and Order Paper, it is forbidden to reveal specific measures contained in a bill at the time it is put on notice.
On April 19, 2016, the Speaker, in finding a prima facie case of privilege regarding the premature disclosure of contents of Bill C-14, an act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other acts (medical assistance in dying), stated:
As honourable members know, one of my most important responsibilities as Speaker is to safeguard the rights and privileges of members, individually and collectively. Central to the matter before us today is the fact that, due to its pre-eminent role in the legislative process, the House cannot allow precise legislative information to be distributed to others before it has been made accessible to all members. Previous Speakers have regularly upheld not only this fundamental right, but also expectation, of the House.
Another question of privilege was raised on March 19, 2001, regarding a similar matter. Speaker Milliken, on page 1840 of the House of Commons debates, supported this principle and said:
In preparing legislation, the government may wish to hold extensive consultations and such consultations may be held entirely at the government's discretion. However, with respect to material to be placed before parliament, the House must take precedence. Once a bill has been placed on notice, whether it has been presented in a different form to a different session of parliament has no bearing and the bill is considered a new matter. The convention of the confidentiality of bills on notice is necessary, not only so that members themselves may be well informed, but also because of the pre-eminent rule which the House plays and must play in the legislative affairs of the nation.
In addition, there was another case of contempt on October 15, 2001, where the Department of Justice briefed the media on the contents of a bill prior to the legislation being introduced in the House.
Given the contents of the article, and that it was published before Bill C-288, an act to amend the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, was introduced in the House, I ask that you find a prima facie case of privilege. I am prepared to move the appropriate motion.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I would like to thank the hon. member. I will take it under consideration and return with a ruling.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands is rising on a point of order.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Before you rule on this, I would ask that you provide a little time, so we could come back to the House and provide some feedback on it as well. We will do that as soon as possible.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-20 15:19 [p.5874]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. My colleague indicated that we will get back to the House.
I just want to indicate to the Speaker that I have had discussions in the past in which there was a general lack of knowledge in regard to private members' bills and the need to keep them secret until they are introduced. I would be very surprised if this situation were unique. It may be worth having the Speaker's office invest a little time in looking at how members, particularly those who are introducing a private member's bill, are informed of their responsibilities.
In other words, this may have been done accidentally, and it might have actually happened on several occasions. It would be worthwhile to look into it.
View Charlie Angus Profile
NDP (ON)
View Charlie Angus Profile
2021-04-19 14:46 [p.5808]
Mr. Speaker, 60 years of education at Laurentian University is being trashed. Professors who built unique programs are being kicked out of the door without even access to their severance, students are being told not to come back even though they are halfway through their studies and the midwifery program has been gutted even though it has had its own funding.
The member for Sudbury is saying, “Hey, don't look to the Liberal government for any help”.
Here is the thing. We had an emergency debate, and the Liberals made all kinds of positive talk about Sudbury. Where is the plan to show up and work with the province to save this important francophone, anglophone and indigenous institution? Where is the backbone to help Laurentian and the people of Sudbury?
View Mélanie Joly Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
It goes without saying that we are extremely concerned about what is happening at Laurentian University. We are concerned and we are obviously thinking of the professors who have lost their jobs and the students who have been negatively affected.
That is why we are in talks with the Government of Ontario, which had jurisdiction over education, to find solutions. We will be there to help the francophone community and, of course, the people of Sudbury and northern Ontario have access to post-secondary education in French. We will be there as allies.
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Paul Lefebvre Profile
2021-04-19 15:37 [p.5815]
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-288, An Act to amend the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I am introducing my private member's bill, which would amend the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, CCAA, by simply adding publicly funded post-secondary institutions to the companies excluded from CCAA protection. It is seconded by my colleague, the MP for Nickel Belt.
As members of the House know, Laurentian University filed for protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act on February 1.
As a result, it has been a long and difficult two months for the Laurentian University community, for Sudbury and for Northern Ontario.
As a Sudburian, I was shocked by the scope and depth of the cuts announced last Monday. I spoke to students, professors and staff about the cuts and about the devastating effects they will have on the entire community.
The fact that the Laurentian University administration felt that it had to cut more than 188 professors and staff and dozens upon dozens of academic programs, and that it had to throw thousands of students into chaos right in the middle of their exam period by using the CCAA process to salvage Laurentian University, demonstrates the need to amend the CCAA. This restructuring process was not created for such an institution or, obviously, such an outcome.
Until now, it was reasonable to assume that the provincial governments responsible for these institutions would ensure that their finances did not get out of control, but unfortunately, here we are. What is happening at Laurentian University should never be allowed to happen at any other university or college in Canada.
In my opinion, it is clear that the CCAA process was never intended to be used by publicly funded institutions in this way. With this bill, I want to guarantee that no other publicly funded post-secondary institutions in Canada, nor their students, professors or communities, suffer in the way that our Laurentian University community is suffering right now, and that provincial governments finally ensure the oversight and proper funding of our publicly funded post-secondary institutions.
View Charlie Angus Profile
NDP (ON)
View Charlie Angus Profile
2021-04-15 12:55 [p.5661]
Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague. He talked about what went on in his backyard, the lack of consultation with first nations people and the fact that first nations youth had to leave the north, again and again. What is happening in his backyard is the destruction of the indigenous languages, the indigenous education, the indigenous politics and environmental programs at Laurentian University. There has been no consultation with them and that member has gone to ground.
The member talks about how great it is that indigenous people can learn to drive trucks. Yes, they know how to drive trucks all right, but we have a world-class program at Laurentian to ensure access for indigenous youth not to have to leave the north, but to stay and be doctors, nurses or teachers. It is being wiped out and that member has not bothered to stand up and fight for them.
How can he have the nerve to talk about consultation with first nations now while this program is being wiped out on his watch?
View Marc Serré Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Marc Serré Profile
2021-04-15 12:56 [p.5662]
Madam Speaker, it is always interesting hearing the member speak, because he could not be further from the truth. We all agree that the program cuts that are happening at Laurentian University are unacceptable. The indigenous, the environment and what is happening is unacceptable during the court proceedings.
However, I want to assure the House, members of Nickel Belt and Greater Sudbury, indigenous peoples and people all across my riding that I have been standing up. Our government will be supporting a plan that has been proposed. This is something we have to do.
Today, we are debating the consultation approach that we have taken. We are debating UNDRIP. We need to pass this legislation. We need to do this now. The urgency is here. We have supported it over the years and now we need to pass it. I hope that tomorrow my colleague and all the members of the House will take that initiative to ensure it is passed.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
Mr. Speaker, as part of the CCAA proceedings, Laurentian University is cancelling the only midwifery education program that trains students in French and serves northern Ontario.
In a region that has trouble finding doctors, midwives help fill that void, ensuring that pregnant women get better primary care for childbirth and so much more.
These courses also benefit indigenous students, many of whom return to provide midwife services in their home communities.
As we work through the pandemic to protect health care workers and hospital resources, cancelling programs that help women safely give birth at home makes little sense. This decision will cost the public more when fewer midwives will be available for the north, and across Ontario, and more doctors will be needed to deliver babies.
The CCAA was never intended for public institutions. These cuts to health care courses limit opportunities in the north for indigenous, francophone and racialized students, and reduce access to services women rely on. We must act now.
View Lindsay Mathyssen Profile
NDP (ON)
View Lindsay Mathyssen Profile
2021-04-14 14:51 [p.5561]
Mr. Speaker, Laurentian University is a valued community hub in Northern Ontario. It is Canada's sole university with a tri-cultural mandate to support French, English and indigenous communities. Deep cuts and layoffs were announced this week. These threaten francophone and indigenous education, courses on violence against women, in-demand bilingual midwifery training and world-class research. The government talks about supporting education, research, women and reconciliation, but when it comes to taking action it is absent.
Will the government help to save Laurentian University?
Results: 31 - 45 of 223 | Page: 3 of 15

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

For more data options, please see Open Data