Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 100 of 456
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been consultations among the parties and, given concerns around the delta variant, I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, the provisions in paragraph (q) of the order adopted on Monday, January 25, concerning the proceedings of standing, standing joint, special and legislative committees, delays on committees as well as any of their subcommittees, shall remain in effect: (i) between Friday, June 25 and Tuesday, June 29; (ii) between Friday, July 16 and Friday, August 20; and (iii) between Monday, September 13 and Sunday, September 19, provided that any requests made under the provisions of Standing Order 106(4) shall be signed by any four members of the committee who together represent at least two recognized parties.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
View Gérard Deltell Profile
2021-06-21 15:11 [p.8855]
Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, when a member rises to move a motion in the House, they must always have the proper equipment. We saw that the leader of the Bloc Québécois did not have the necessary equipment. That being said, I think that all parties know what the leader of the Bloc Québécois wants to talk about, and I seek the consent of the House to let him continue.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
View Gérard Deltell Profile
2021-06-21 15:11 [p.8855]
Mr. Speaker, I think we all recognize that the member for Beloeil—Chambly is not set up correctly to address the House of Commons. We also know what he wants to talk about today.
What I would suggest to my colleague for Beloeil—Chambly is that he first make his presentation in French and then after that, if he can, translate it to be sure that every member will have access, in both official languages, to his proposition of the day.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
The problem with the interpretation is due to the fact that the member does not have the proper equipment. Does the hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly agree to proceed as the member for Louis-Saint‑Laurent suggested?
View Yves-François Blanchet Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure about the nature of the request because I cannot simultaneously interpret—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
The problem is that we cannot hear the member for Beloeil-Chambly properly because he is not using the official equipment provided by the House.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Order. I would ask for the attention of the House.
Even if we could understand—barely— what the hon. member for Beloeil-Chambly was saying, it was not clear enough for the interpreters. It was therefore suggested that the member start in one official language and then repeat the same thing in the other official language so that everyone could understand. Is that agreeable to everyone?
Hon. members: Agreed.
The Speaker: That is how we will proceed. The hon. member for Beloeil-Chambly will start in the official language of his choice and then repeat the same thing in the other official language. The hon. member for Beloeil-Chambly.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that, if they are going to do something in a different location than they are used to, they should please make sure the equipment is at hand and tested previously. It will just make things work so much more smoothly, and it will make things a lot easier.
The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent on a point of order.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
View Gérard Deltell Profile
2021-06-21 15:19 [p.8856]
Mr. Speaker, I will make myself clear so everyone understands what I am saying.
We have to follow certain rules. Yes, there are technical considerations, but location matters too. I completely understand what motivated the member for Beloeil—Chambly, the leader of the Bloc Québécois, to do this on National Indigenous Peoples Day and to do it in an indigenous centre. That puts us all in a positive frame of mind. Plus, his proposal, which he read in both official languages, was unanimously adopted.
I invite the Speaker to issue a recommendation about whether we are supposed to be in the House, in our parliamentary office or in our riding office. If it should so happen that we are not in one of those three places, I believe, although we would have to reread what has been said about this, that we are expected to inform the House in advance so officials can make sure everything is working properly.
For today, it is understandable. I would be the first to agree, because Wendake is in my riding. We can move symbolic motions like the one moved today. However, I think we need a rule, should a member choose to speak from somewhere other than the House of Commons.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I thank the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent, who raised a very good point.
I would like to remind all members that the House is a neutral place, as free of symbols as possible. Sometimes, we do not notice it at all, but it is very important to make sure that the House is as neutral as possible.
It being 3:22 p.m., pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 17, it is my duty to ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to admit Mr. Iain Stewart.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
All those opposed to the request of the hon. member will please say nay.
Some hon. members: Nay.
The Speaker: There is no unanimous consent.
I would like to remind the hon. member for Cambridge that his face does show up when he speaks online. I do not want to embarrass him, but there is enough tension in this room. We do not need it coming in.
Mr. Brian May: I am not embarrassed, Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker: Mr. May, please stand down.
The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.
View Mel Arnold Profile
CPC (BC)
View Mel Arnold Profile
2021-06-21 17:30 [p.8872]
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am not sure how it showed up on the broadcast, but someone else's image appeared on the screen as I was presenting the complementary report. If that is the case, I would like to present it again so it can be recorded properly.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
We are verifying that now. Since, we are still checking, in the interest of time, the hon. member for North Okanagan—Shuswap can again present his complementary report.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I want to remind the hon. member to maybe adjust her microphone next time so it is a bit higher. There was a lot of interference.
The hon. member for Nepean.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I am not going to refute it. I will ask the hon. member to do that.
However, before I ask the hon. member to do that, I am going stop the clock and ask him to maybe unplug and then plug in his mike again. There seems to be an issue for the interpreters. If he could do that and then maybe give me a quick test.
We can continue, and if there is an issue, I will raise it again.
The hon. member for Ottawa South.
View Marilène Gill Profile
BQ (QC)
View Marilène Gill Profile
2021-06-14 14:18 [p.8332]
Mr. Speaker, with regard to the interpretation, the volume is the same for both the English and the French, so I am having a lot of trouble hearing either one.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Is everyone experiencing that problem or just those who are attending virtually?
I am being told it is a technical problem. Can it be fixed?
Can you hear me well? Are we still having a problem?
Can you hear me well in French?
View Marilène Gill Profile
BQ (QC)
View Marilène Gill Profile
2021-06-14 14:20 [p.8332]
Mr. Speaker, the volume of the French interpretation is lower.
View Diane Lebouthillier Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I can hear you very well. There is no problem with the interpretation.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I think we have resolved our problem.
The hon. deputy leader of the opposition. I will let you take it from the top.
View Marilène Gill Profile
BQ (QC)
View Marilène Gill Profile
2021-06-14 14:21 [p.8332]
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly the same, and I am not the only one having this problem. People have written to me to tell me that they cannot hear anything and that the volume is set at the same level in both languages.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I thank the hon. member for Manicouagan.
I will give the technical team a few minutes to resolve the problem.
I am going to conduct a very unscientific test. Can everyone who is out there listening in French hear me in French at different levels?
Apparently not. I think there is still a problem.
Are those listening to the English interpretation having problems?
It is English to French that is the issue. We will see what our technical folks can do about this.
Can you hear me properly in French?
The francophones seem to be hearing me properly, but there is still a problem. Most people are hearing me properly.
Would someone please find out if it is a problem with the member for Manicouagan's computer?
View Marilène Gill Profile
BQ (QC)
View Marilène Gill Profile
2021-06-14 14:24 [p.8332]
Mr. Speaker, I will wait for a call from the technical team.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe that if you were to go back and look at the rules that were set out with regard to the hybrid session, there is no indication that people must have their cameras on to be considered to be in the House.
Unless there are strict rules with respect to that, I would submit that all of the people who are currently online, as you have indicated, are in fact considered to be seated in the House of Commons right now.
View Michelle Rempel Garner Profile
CPC (AB)
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
I did not make a ruling. I have just been told by the table officers that at the moment they have more than 20 members who have been accounted for.
View Alex Ruff Profile
CPC (ON)
View Alex Ruff Profile
2021-06-14 23:23 [p.8409]
Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, being a relatively new MP in the House of Commons, what I recall is that when quorum is called is the time period we attribute it to.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, as members know, when quorum is called by a member as he just did, quite often prior to the hybrid version of sitting if there were not enough members, provided that the members entered the chamber, then quorum would be considered to have been reached and the meeting would continue. Even if one could argue that having their camera turned off meant that they were not here, which I submitted to you previously was not the case, the fact that they have now restored their cameras to being on would definitely cover the matter as it normally would during any regular sitting of the House.
View Michelle Rempel Garner Profile
CPC (AB)
Madam Speaker, there are members with their cameras on, but they are not in the shot of the camera. They are clearly not present in debate, so I think you also need to rule on whether or not they count for quorum, because their cameras are on, but they are clearly not in their chair, they are clearly not in the video and they have not come back during this discussion.
View Heather McPherson Profile
NDP (AB)
View Heather McPherson Profile
2021-06-14 23:25 [p.8410]
Madam Speaker, I figured I would just point out that while there may be members who are not in their camera shot, they could very well be listening and taking notes on another part of their desk.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
I have been reassured there is quorum. The moment the hon. member asked, obviously people started coming in and started turning on their cameras.
I will allow the hon. member for Calgary Centre to resume his speech.
View Blake Richards Profile
CPC (AB)
View Blake Richards Profile
2021-06-10 10:55 [p.8196]
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the rules established for voting via the app were that all members voting by app must be in Canada and could not be abroad. It is my understanding that the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance was in fact outside of Canada at the G7 meetings. We noticed that she voted today. I want to ask if she can confirm if she is, in fact, within the country. I am sure she would not want her vote to be counted if she voted contrary to the rules.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, to this point of order, I have been informed that the Deputy Prime Minister was, indeed, in the country when she cast her vote.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
Unfortunately, there is no way for me, as Speaker, to know whether the member actually voted out of the country or in the country. At this point in time, I will allow the vote given the fact that I anticipate members do know the protocols and have voted accordingly.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
The problem seems to have been resolved.
The hon. member can restart his response.
View Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, maybe it is just me, but even though I have my earpiece set to “French”, there is no interpretation, so I could not understand my hon. colleague's message.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to restart his question.
We will restart the time on the question.
View Blake Richards Profile
CPC (AB)
View Blake Richards Profile
2021-06-09 17:34 [p.8170]
Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Lethbridge had asked for unanimous consent, and I know it was denied, but I want to raise some information that I think may cause a reconsideration of that.
The member did, in fact, seek to change her vote because she realized she had made an honest mistake. She did try to change her vote, but was unfortunately prevented from doing so. I think maybe a technical difficulty caused her to run out of time to change it. I would ask you to seek unanimous consent again for that vote to be reconsidered based on the fact that the member did make the effort to change her vote and was unable to do so. I hope that causes government members to reconsider.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
The hon. member clarified that the member for Lethbridge ran out of time to change her vote. Ten minutes was allotted to change the vote, and the question was posed in the House as to the hon. member receiving unanimous consent to change the vote. Therefore, I will stand by the decision that was made. It is obvious that the vote was asked twice and was rejected.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe that my colleague from Banff—Airdrie was suggesting that the app did not allow a change. We are allowed in the app, during the 10 minutes, to change our vote, and if it is not working, it is a technical difficulty. I wonder if maybe that is a better explanation. The app, within that 10 minutes, was not allowing her to do it and that makes this a technical difficulty.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
The decision has been made and I am not going to call the question again.
The hon. member for Sturgeon River—Parkland is rising on a point of order.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2021-06-08 18:02 [p.8139]
Madam Speaker, that is exactly why I am rising.
The interpreter is completely unable to do her job because there is a problem with the member's microphone.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I just asked him to check that.
I want to make sure the hon. member has picked the right mike.
The hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South.
View Bruce Stanton Profile
CPC (ON)
View Bruce Stanton Profile
2021-06-07 12:30 [p.8005]
An hon. member's audio is on, and I would ask that we try to cancel that.
We will go back to the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands to finish her question.
View Bernard Généreux Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, during question period, in one of the responses we heard from the heritage minister, the sound quality was so poor that I had to remove my earpiece.
On top of that, on two occasions, two Bloc Québécois members left their microphones on at certain points, one of them continuously, which I think is totally unacceptable after 14 months of using these technologies.
When I was in Ottawa last week, I had an opportunity to observe the tight spaces the interpreters work in, crammed in like sardines, not to mention the awful conditions using technologies that hurt their ears.
Mr. Speaker, I urge you to take the necessary steps to ensure that the technology used to address the House of Commons is used appropriately, and that the sound quality when members are speaking is decent. It is very disruptive.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I thank the hon. member for bringing this matter to our attention. He is right, it is very disruptive. Every member has a responsibility to ensure that their microphone is on mute when it is not their turn to speak, and I would once again like to remind all members that it is important not to speak when your microphone is on, but it is not your turn.
The hon. member is also right about the sound quality. We were having problems, but they have been resolved. I was prepared to stop the minister, but he fixed the situation and the sound was good. If anyone is aware that there could be a problem, it might be worth checking to see if their microphone is working.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out that the name of the department in French is “le ministère du Patrimoine”, not “Heritage”.
More to the point, I want to acknowledge that I was having technical problems that I spent several minutes unsuccessfully trying to resolve with the House technicians. New equipment should be sent to me soon.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 28, 2021 by the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London concerning the conduct of the member for Pontiac.
During her intervention, she reported that the member for Pontiac had admitted on social media to committing a breach of conduct in front of the camera during the virtual proceedings of the House in committee of the whole last May 26. Citing the relevant authorities, she argued that this was an unprecedented breach and an offence to the dignity of the House. She added that the behaviour of members participating in the proceedings by video conference must be treated the same as that of members who are physically present in the chamber, whether or not they are on camera.
In response, the member for Kingston and the Islands agreed that it was a deplorable and unacceptable incident, while also pointing out that the member for Pontiac had accepted full responsibility and that he had stepped aside from his parliamentary secretary responsibilities and from his committee responsibilities in order to obtain the appropriate assistance. For that reason, he was again apologizing on his behalf. He concluded by saying that the incident was not a question of privilege because there was a long tradition in the House of accepting members’ apologies.
The Chair has on many occasions reminded members that virtual sessions are an extension of the proceedings of the House and that their conduct must respect our rules and practices, even if they are participating remotely. I want to reiterate, yet again, the importance of everyone adjusting to the temporary measures put in place in response to the pandemic and exercising continued vigilance to prevent such incidents from recurring. As soon as a member connects to a virtual sitting and opens their camera, they are considered to be, for all intents and purposes, in the House.
There is no dispute about the facts in question, and they constitute a serious breach of the rules of decorum and an affront against the dignity of the House. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states, at page 60, “Any conduct which offends the authority or dignity of the House...is referred to as a contempt of the House.”
I obviously take note of the apology from the member for Pontiac. He recognized that his behaviour was completely inappropriate and confirms his commitment to obtain the necessary assistance. Nevertheless, the Chair is required to determine whether the alleged facts are a breach of the rules governing contempt and thus merit priority consideration.
That is the case here. I would add that the new reality of members participating virtually, as well as its attendant rules, is unquestionably exceptional in the history of this House, but it is not without challenges. As such, more attention should be paid to this general and fundamental issue, perhaps even more so than to the more limited question on which I am required to rule today.
For those reasons, the Chair rules that there is a prima facie question of privilege. I thus invite the member to move the appropriate motion.
View Karen Vecchio Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I move:
That the prima facie contempt, concerning the misconduct of the Member for Pontiac committed in the presence of the House, be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
I will be sharing my time with the member for Banff—Airdrie.
View Blake Richards Profile
CPC (AB)
View Blake Richards Profile
2021-06-07 16:04 [p.8036]
Mr. Speaker, I certainly commend your ruling. It is important that this matter be examined. Obviously, when we have a case of someone literally exposing themselves to the House on two different occasions, that is a pretty serious matter and one that does deserve to be reviewed by the procedure and House affairs committee.
I would also note that what we have seen is maybe a bit of a pattern of a general degradation of decorum and debate in the chamber by the fact that we have had the hybrid type of proceedings. No one denies that this has been necessary because we have been dealing with a pandemic. Certainly, we have seen everything from issues with connections, sound quality, right through to instances like we have seen in the case of the member for Pontiac on a couple of occasions.
A lot of that stems from the fact that people are a bit more relaxed and comfortable because they are at home or in their offices. Sometimes members forget that they are still in proceedings of the House of Commons. It is something that is very difficult, if not impossible, to do when we are here in the chamber. We understand the gravity and the respect that we must provide this institution when we are part of the proceedings here in the chamber, whether we are speaking, or observing debate or preparing for our opportunity to speak. I think that relaxation does lead to things like this.
I look forward very soon to the day when we are able to see the end of hybrid proceedings, as we see vaccination rates go up in the country, etc., and have the opportunity for all members to be back in the House of Commons, where we belong and where we all want to be. Hopefully, that will help to prevent instances like this as well as bring back elevated debate and decorum in this place.
Again, I look forward to that opportunity very soon for all of us to be back in the chamber in person, so hopefully we can move on without these kinds of instances in the future.
View Martin Champoux Profile
BQ (QC)
View Martin Champoux Profile
2021-06-07 16:24 [p.8040]
Madam Speaker, I wish to intervene because we often talk about how much we value the work of our interpreters.
If my colleague could speak a little slower, it would give the interpreters a chance to do their job more easily and perhaps a little more accurately. That would make it easier for us to follow our colleague's speech.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
It is very important for us to have interpretation. I must therefore support the request that was just made and ask the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan to speak more slowly, because it is very important for the interpreters.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind all members who have their speech written up to send a copy to the interpreters. This helps them follow what is said more closely.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Madam Speaker, on the same point of order. I appreciate the point. I wonder if you can tell me how much time I have left because that will allow me to calibrate how fast I need to speak, but I do want to share with you it is a good point of advice to share the text with the interpreters and I have done that in this case.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
The hon. member has four and a half minutes. The time has stopped for the point of order. I do want to advise the member that I understand it is not just about the interpretation; it is very difficult for even the viewers to listen if the hon. member is talking too quickly. If it could be at a good pace, but not so quick that people cannot follow, that would be important. I am sure that the hon. member wants to make sure that everybody is able to hear and understand what he is saying.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am afraid we are still having trouble. I am not sure what it is, but I am sure we will get it figured out. You are going to have to work with IT.
I will ask the minister if he heard enough of the question to answer.
The hon. minister.
View Elizabeth May Profile
GP (BC)
View Elizabeth May Profile
2021-06-03 15:13 [p.7910]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Given the technical difficulties the hon. member for Vancouver Granville just experienced, I return to the point that we should have more time within question period for members with a status such as hers, whose voice is so important in this country. Perhaps we could add one slot to next Wednesday so she could ask her question again.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Adding another slot somewhere for the repeat of that question is definitely something worth discussing. We will discuss it and get back to the chamber.
The hon. member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères on a point of order.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I want to remind hon. members that when setting up and they know they are either going to ask a question or possibly answer one, to hook up where the ISP is solid so everyone can hear and it does not damage the ears of translators. It is a courtesy of which I want to remind all the members.
View Martin Champoux Profile
BQ (QC)
View Martin Champoux Profile
2021-06-01 14:53
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. To add insult to injury, there was no French interpretation coming through the headset; it must have gotten lost in the woods.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am going to ask the hon. minister to try answering that again. We did not get the translation because of the quality of the sound. Again, the question is on the transmission quality. I will let him try again.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I also rise on a point of order.
I would like to start by pointing out that the current Prime Minister was exactly six months old at the time the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle was referring to when she talked about his father.
We all recognize that we are at the beginning of June and in the last stretch of this session. We all recognize there are some serious and concerning issues for each and every Canadian that we have to debate in the House of Commons.
The House is currently meeting in a hybrid format because of the pandemic. When we accepted the procedural rules of the pandemic, we did so in good faith to ensure the health and safety of parliamentarians and of everyone we work with here in the House, in the buildings around Parliament Hill and in our ridings.
This provision is very serious, and we shall respect it based on the health of the people.
Just because the House is meeting in a hybrid format does not mean members, let alone ministers, can sit outdoors. Oral question period is a serious affair. It is inappropriate to see a minister sitting outside in a forest, even in a hybrid sitting of the House. That is our opinion.
More than that, I have to raise the point that during question period, for a full 10 minutes no Liberal members were in the House of Commons.
It is totally unacceptable that for 10 minutes during question period, not a single Liberal parliamentarian was sitting in this House—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but I must remind him that he cannot say whether members are present in the House or draw attention to their absence. I know the hon. member is already aware of this rule, but I will take this opportunity to remind all hon. members.
While I am at it, before I move on to the next point of order, I would ask all hon. members who are going to ask or answer questions to set up in a neutral location where the connection is good and they can be heard clearly. This will ensure that their colleagues who are interested in what they have to say are able to hear them. It also allows the interpreters to hear them and interpret what they are saying, so that those who do not speak the same language can understand what is being said.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands is rising on a point of order.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, it is on the same point of order. Notwithstanding that we are not supposed to reference the presence of members in the House, I suggest that indeed many members from the Liberal Party were in the House. They are participating virtually. This goes to the rules we adopted. They specifically say that members can be—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am going to stop this right now. I am not sure I want to continue this argument, because we are not supposed to be referring to anyone in the chamber. Also, the fact that we are discussing it means it becomes a debate.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I am just trying to say that they are in the chamber—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
We want to make sure that everything is clear. Referring to someone's presence in the chamber, whether it is an absence or presence, is not allowed, and that rule has gone on for a long time. The main reason for it is that during sessions, MPs have obligations that sometimes take them out of the chamber and it is impossible for them to be here. I am sure we do not want to insult anybody or hurt anyone's work. I am sure they are doing work on behalf of the government, no matter where they are.
The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.
View Cathy McLeod Profile
CPC (BC)
Mr. Speaker, one a point of order, I am looking for some clarification. I have always been aware that we cannot speak of the presence or absence of a specific member, but I did not think that this extended to empty benches. I guess you are saying that it does extend to empty benches.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I also want to remind the hon. members that we cannot do indirectly what we cannot do directly. I thank the member for her intervention, but members are in the House, according to the convention, because they are joining us virtually.
The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, you were right to call me to order. I will be more careful next time.
You mentioned earlier in response to our colleague from Kingston and the Islands that we were having connection problems and that the connection was not good. Technically, the connection is working fine here in the House of Commons.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Again, I must remind the House that we cannot do indirectly what we cannot do directly.
The hon. Minister of Justice is rising on a point of order.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I rise to respond to the question of privilege raised by the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London. I understand the concerns raised by the member. This was indeed an unfortunate and unacceptable incident.
I would simply like to point out that the member for Pontiac has taken responsibility for this incident. He has apologized and proactively disclosed that the incident occurred. He has stepped aside from his parliamentary secretary responsibilities and from his committee responsibilities. He has stated publicly that he will seek assistance.
In light of the fact that the member has indicated that he is taking some time to seek assistance, he cannot apologize in person or virtually for this incident, but he has apologized in his statement on social media. He has also asked that I convey this apology to members in this House on his behalf.
While this incident is indeed unfortunate and unacceptable, I do not believe that it constitutes a question of privilege. There is a long-standing tradition in this House that, when a member apologizes, the House accepts that apology. I believe the member for Pontiac understands the seriousness of the incident, has apologized for it and is taking the appropriate steps to ensure that nothing like this happens again.
View Karen Vecchio Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, I recognize that Canadians are being challenged right now. There are many issues and problems that we must face, but it is my regretful duty to rise today on a question of privilege concerning the admissions published late last night by my colleague, the member for Pontiac, concerning his conduct while attending the House on Wednesday.
In a statement released on Twitter at 10:34 p.m. last night, the member admitted, “Last night while attending the House of Commons proceedings virtually, in a non-public setting, I urinated without realizing I was on camera”.
This shocking event is, in my respectful view, a contempt of the House. On page 81 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, it explains that :
There are, however, other affronts against the dignity and authority of Parliament which may not fall within one of the specifically defined privileges. Thus, the House also claims the right to punish, as a contempt, any action which, though not a breach of a specific privilege.... ....or is an offence against the authority or dignity of the House
To do what he did within the House is quite frankly an offence to the dignity of Parliament. Though a very quick scan of our precedents does not reveal any past cases of contempt of this specific nature, I would suggest two things: First, such shocking and reckless conduct is likely unprecedented, and second, no specific precedent is required for the House to act.
On page 81 of Bosc and Gagnon, it explains:
The House of Commons enjoys very wide latitude in maintaining its dignity and authority through the exercise of its contempt power. In other words, the House may consider any misconduct to be contempt and may deal with it accordingly. This area of parliamentary law is therefore extremely fluid and most valuable for the Commons to be able to meet novel situations. Throughout the Commonwealth most procedural authorities hold that contempts, as opposed to privileges, cannot be enumerated or categorized.
On page 83, it continues:
Just as it is not possible to categorize or to delineate every incident which may fall under the definition of contempt, it is also difficult to categorize the severity of contempt. Contempts may vary greatly in their gravity; matters ranging from minor breaches of decorum to grave attacks against the authority of Parliament may be considered as contempts.
Even though it is impossible to complete an exhaustive list of what might constitute a contempt of Parliament, the United Kingdom's Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege included in a 1999 report a collection of various categories of contempt. At the top of the list was: “interrupting or disturbing the proceedings of, or engaging in other misconduct in the presence of, the House or a committee”
That list, including the item I quote, is favourably cited by Bosc and Gagnon at pages 82 and 83. The actions of the member for Pontiac without a doubt represent the engagement in misconduct in the presence of the House.
I know that some could be quick to stress the part of the member's statement that he was “in a non-public setting”, but frankly, there is no part of the House of Commons that is non-public. While I am speaking right now, the cameras are on me and more than 95% of the rest of the chamber is not in the camera shot. That does not mean that what is happening outside of the camera shot is non-public or what not happening inside the chamber. It certainly does not stop us from properly calling to order those who are disorderly, wherever they may be.
I would also refer the Chair to paragraph (c) of the special order adopted on January 25, 2021, which authorizes our current hybrid proceedings, as follows:
any reference in the Standing Orders to the need for members to rise or to be in their place, as well as any reference to the chair, the table or the chamber shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the virtual nature of the proceedings
Consistent with the decision of the House and by all logic, to turn on our camera and to log onto the House Zoom feed is the same as opening one of those doors behind me and walking down to any of the 338 seats in this majestic room. The use of our webcams in our proceedings is less than an year old and, if I have anything to say about it, only temporary.
The television cameras filming us have been here since 1977. The House of Commons is, on the other hand, an ancient institution and its rules and its rights long predate cameras and broadcasting equipment. To claim that what happens in the House is only what is broadcast on the outgoing television feed is nonsense and it cheapens what is the institution and what it represents.
Whether something happens right here on the floor of this chamber, either in or out of the camera shot, or in the extension of the chamber through the video conferencing, we must apply equal treatment to members' conduct. It falls to us to respond to offensive behaviour in the same manner too.
The member's behaviour, whether committed right here or via Zoom, cannot be condoned.
Finally, let me address one further technical matter. On Wednesday evening, the House was sitting in committee of the whole, though it is not clear whether the misconduct of the member for Pontiac occurred before or after the House resolved itself into the committee of the whole. In normal practice, questions of privilege arising in committee shall first be reported to the House from the committee itself. However, given the practical realities surrounding how committees of the whole conduct their business, you ruled on July 22, 2020, at page 2,701 of the Debates:
I accept that the particular circumstances of this situation, notably the challenge surrounding the committee of the whole format, do make it appropriate to bring the matter to the Speaker.
In closing, this is not the first time the member for Pontiac has exposed himself while virtually attending a sitting in the House. It is not even the first time this spring. I recognize that he has apologized, and acknowledged that he requires some form of assistance or intervention, but it does not absolve him of the responsibility for his conduct and his choices while attending a sitting in the House.
Even if the member's conduct was unintentional or lacking in malice, we must also recognize that it still puts his colleagues, plus all of the hardworking staff of the House of Commons administration, in a very uncomfortable position. It is incumbent upon us to ensure that the House of Commons is, and remains, a safe and respectful workplace.
Canadians send us to Parliament to represent them because they believe we possess the good judgment necessary to make these important decisions on their behalf. The reckless conduct the member for Pontiac admitted completely undermines that for himself, for each of us and for the institution of Parliament as a whole.
What is more, it is becoming clearer by the day that we must draw a bold, bright line that confirms that logging into the virtual House is the same as entering into this room, and that standards of behaviour in both places must be the same. Perhaps the procedure and House affairs committee would be able to make this point should the matter eventually be referred to it.
Madam Speaker, should you agree with me that there is prima facie contempt, I will be prepared to move an appropriate motion, even if I wish these circumstances had never happened.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I wish to thank the hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London for the detailed information she has provided. I will review the information and will return to the House with a response.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I would ask the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni to make sure his microphone is off.
The hon. member for Vancouver East has one minute to finish her speech.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I must interrupt the member. Someone has forgotten to mute their microphone.
I now invite the member to repeat his question.
The member for Burnaby South.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order rising out of question period. I know we tried to address this issue during question period, but we continue to have members who are participating virtually interjecting into the debate and making comments, which is making it extremely difficult for members who are participating virtually to participate. I know that on at least one occasion it was the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. He has routinely been called out by you or the Chair occupant at the time to discontinue this practice.
I would encourage you to ensure, by whatever means you have possible, Mr. Speaker, that those who are participating virtually have the ability to do so unimpeded by members who are participating in this manner.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, if you will indulge me, I will just briefly address the same point, because it is important for members to hear what is at stake in this conversation. Canadians of Asian origin are speaking out about the impact of—
An hon. member: This is not a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Some hon. members: Debate.
Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Speaker, I note that I am being heckled—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Order please. I am going to interrupt. It sounds like it is getting into debate, so I am going to leave it there. However, on that note as well, when someone speaks, the Chair usually determines whether it is debate or a point of order. I appreciate the help, but I would like a few seconds to determine what the member is about to say or is saying so we can determine whether it is debate.
While I do appreciate the people shouting out and trying to help, it just makes it very disorderly, which leads us to the point of order from the member for Kingston and the Islands, where, if we are here and someone does interject, it does make it difficult for everyone. This is about respect for each other in the chamber, and that is what I am asking.
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
View Gérard Deltell Profile
2021-05-26 15:16 [p.7377]
Mr. Speaker, I remind the House that the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands is the one who brought up the participation of the member from Alberta who spoke earlier. I apologize, but I cannot remember his riding name.
If he was called out by the government member, it is perfectly normal and appropriate for him to get a chance to explain himself. That is why I think he should have the floor.
I want to point out that members on the government side are enthusiastic advocates of virtual participation, so they certainly know what they are talking about.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-05-26 15:17 [p.7377]
Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, over the last number of months, I, as have many of my colleagues, tune in virtually and understand what our obligations are. If we want to get the attention of the Chair, we put our hand up and then we wait until we are recognized.
On several occasions during question period, members, and in this case it was the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, intentionally undo the mute button to interject. It is one thing to do it by accident, but it is the same member on several occasions, and there needs to be a consequence—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am going to have to interrupt, because it sounds like we are getting into debate again. The point of order is not interjecting in the chamber. We will deal with that one a little at a time.
Again, I want to remind all members that it is on the individual member's honour that we are in here following the rules. I want to encourage everyone to follow those rules so we can run smoothly.
View Michael Barrett Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Speaker, it seems as though, in raising the point, which has been raised before by the member opposite and by the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader, that it is in effect itself an attempt at a commentary or debate or to name and shame particular members, in this case the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
However, while that member was responding to that point, the member for Milton and the member for Winnipeg North also took their microphones off mute in the same way that the member for Kingston and the Islands said was inappropriate, and the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader and the member for Kingston and the Islands were seeking for the Chair to sanction the member for doing just that.
I defer always to the judgment of the chair occupant. Perhaps, if there is to be a ruling in the opinion of the Chair, we just ask members to appeal to their honour and the regular traditions and customs of this place and not look to tattletale every time they hear a member engage in what has been a traditional practice in this place for many years.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Speaker, the intent of my rising to indicate this point of order was because of the fact that the particular member has done it repeatedly on a number of occasions. He routinely does this where he interjects. It is not affecting the ability for those in the House to listen to the debate; it is affecting those who are online, because suddenly the entire feed and sound is eliminated and they are unable to hear anything.
The point is that those who are doing this are doing it repeatedly, and I would encourage you, Mr. Speaker, to somehow enforce some kind of rule that would prevent this from continuing to happen.
View Stéphane Lauzon Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, in connection with that same point of order, I would like to note that the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan keeps turning his microphone on and off to interject deliberately and repeatedly.
Interjecting once and being called to order is not the same as repeatedly failing to listen to the Speaker of the House. On this point of order, I would ask that you watch the videos and see how many times the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan has deliberately raised a point of order in the House.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, I was, with all due respect, interrupted when I was initially trying to make some comments on this matter. Many members have now intervened with various aspersions about me, and I have been very interested in setting the record straight about some matters of the context. I will be in your hands as to whether I can share that context.
As I was saying before, Canadians of Asian origin are speaking about the impact on their lives of foreign state-backed interference, and this is part of the racism being faced by Asian Canadians. It is the pressure from foreign governments, in particular the Government of China, to deny them of the freedom—
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am going to interrupt the hon. member there. Normally when we get up on a point of order—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Can I have the attention of the chamber, please.
Normally when we get up on a point of order, it is because the process was broken. If we are not staying within those parameters, it becomes debate.
I will ask the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan to go on, but remember that it sounds like he is debating something, and I would like to know the point of order and what was disrespected.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will try to jump to it, simply in this sense. Fighting racism, which is something I know we all should wish to do, requires us to understand that Canadians are individuals, not extensions of foreign governments, and it is always important to make a distinction.
That is why what the Prime Minister said in question period today was itself deeply racist, because he was failing to make the necessary distinction—
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am sorry, but I am going to have to interrupt. This is becoming a debate; it is not about the process itself. I am going to have to cut the hon. member off.
View Christine Normandin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Christine Normandin Profile
2021-05-14 12:12 [p.7246]
Madam Speaker, there was no interpretation during the last intervention.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
The translation does not seem to be working. It is working now.
I would ask the member for Cariboo—Prince George to restart his question.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
We had some interference with the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain.
I want to remind all the members, if they are not on, to please check to see that their mikes are muted. I know inadvertently they may ruin somebody else's speech, and we do not want to do that in the chamber.
That being said, I will let the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain do his over again, if he would like.
View Carol Hughes Profile
NDP (ON)
I have to interrupt. There seems to be someone who has their microphone on. I just want to remind members that, if they do not want their private conversations being heard when they are not meant to be, they should have their microphones off.
It really impacts the House of Commons and the speakers when those microphones are left on. Again, out of respect for members in the House of Commons, I ask those who are joining virtually to please have your microphones off if you are not up to speak.
We will continue with the hon. parliamentary secretary. I do apologize for that interruption.
Results: 1 - 100 of 456 | Page: 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data