Committee
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 4922
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Welcome back, everyone. This is clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-10.
I just want to point out to everybody in this room that I know the bells are ringing and that I'll be seeking unanimous consent in just a few moments.
Okay, I know I said some time ago that I would try to give you as ample notice as I could about a meeting, and when I seek out meetings, I will do just that. I will be cognizant of the time. I'll be cognizant of your situation.
The whips amongst our parties—again, I am not specifically pointing out any particular whip of any recognized party, and there are four groups in question—decided that they would put this meeting together. I received notice shortly before you did.
Now, because we passed a motion on March 26 that states that we will seek out meetings—and it didn't say anything about notice—we must have this meeting as of right now.
That being said, I'm going to say this publicly. I'm going to say this in front of you, my colleagues. I'm going to say this while we're in session. As chair, I have the floor, so I'm going to say it.
This is a message for the benefit of my colleagues, the staff, the analysts, the clerks, the interpreters, the technical staff, and everyone involved. I ask you to please consider the fact that these people have families, that these people live in rural areas like me. We are not emergency workers. We're not paramedics. We're not firefighters. We're not on call like that. These are planned meetings—normally.
So, to the four represented whips at this meeting—and I know you're on this call—please consider this when we do this again. I'm asking this not just as a chair but as a human being. Thank you.
That being said, do I have unanimous consent to continue?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
The meeting is suspended.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Welcome, everyone, to clause-by-clause on Bill C-10. This is the resumption of the meeting. Welcome back.
We are going to pick up where we left off the last time, if you want to get out your song sheets once more.
Some hands are up.
Mr. Shields, do you want to move a motion? Go ahead; you have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I'm assuming you moved CPC-9.2.
I only say that, Mr. Rayes, because CPC-9.2 is in your name, but did I hear correctly that Mr. Shields is going to?
Mr. Shields, I'll put the floor to you.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Correct. Go ahead, sir. The floor is yours.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes. I think it's Mr. Ripley who you want to respond to that?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Okay. I'll bring in my point later on.
Go ahead, Mr. Ripley.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Ms. McPherson, before I go to Mr. Rayes...I'm assuming you meant Mr. Rayes, not Mr. Shield.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Okay, first things first: Ms. Rempel Garner is next, but with your permission, can I go to whom the question was asked? I see Mr. Rayes' hand up.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Rayes, go ahead.
You have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Sorry, are you questioning Mr. Rayes again? Okay.
We soon have to go on to Ms. Rempel Garner. She's been waiting patiently.
Mr. Rayes.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Okay, we'll go to Ms. Rempel Garner.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Sorry, Ms. Rempel Garner.
Mr. Champoux, go ahead on your point of order.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Champoux.
Ms. Rempel Garner, for the most part, I feel that you've been veering into the debate on this particular amendment; there's no doubt it. I love it when we all stay on the level playing field. Once in a while, I allow colleagues to meander through the bleachers; however, I need you to come back to the playing field if you want to talk about this particular amendment.
Thank you so much, Madam. You have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you.
I forgot to mention this at the beginning. Welcome to the committee, Ms. Rempel Garner. I think this is the first time in this Parliament that you've been on this committee. I go from one rookie for the committee to another.
Mr. Arnold has an astonishingly beautiful riding in British Columbia. I say that with a great deal of bias in his favour.
Mr. Arnold, you have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One moment, please.
Yes, Ms. Dabrusin, go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Arnold, as wide swinging as the arc may be for your comparison, perhaps we could swing back to the amendment in question.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Arnold, the floor is yours.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One moment, Mr. Arnold. I'm going to have to ask you to stop for a moment.
Mr. Sidhu, you have a point of order.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes, you're on the Canadian heritage committee, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Sidhu.
As you know, Mr. Arnold, again, we try to be germane to the point. I'm enjoying the story—don't get me wrong. However, I do have a job to stay on track. Perhaps you'd like to continue with the advice of others.
Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Arnold, but I don't see any hands up right now. Therefore, with that—
Oh look—I do.
Mr. Rayes, you have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Rayes.
Now we go to another tourist who has come by to visit—and I mean “tourist” in the best sense.
Mr. Poilievre, before you start, we're going to need a sound check from you. I just spoke of Mr. Arnold's beautiful riding. It's absolutely stunning. I want you to talk about your riding and just how stunning it is in one sentence or less, please, so I can get a sound check.
Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One second. I'll just get confirmation from our interpreters.
We have a thumbs-up. Okay.
Mr. Poilievre, welcome. The floor is yours, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One second, Mr. Poilievre. Hang on to that editorial for just a moment. I'm sure you will have ample time for it.
Mr. Housefather, go ahead on your point of order.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Poilievre, first of all, we're on amendment CPC-9.2, moved by Mr. Shields. The last three numbers of the reference number are “583”.
Goodness knows I appreciate any reference to Shakespeare and the like. However, as I've said to them before, although thinking outside the box is allowed, and I'm fairly flexible, I can't have you wandering outside the warehouse.
With that in mind, Mr. Poilievre, the floor is yours, please.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One moment please, Mr. Poilievre. I'm sorry.
Folks, when someone raises a point of order, can we please just, everyone, be silent once they say that? What's going to happen is that we're all going to escalate our voices to the point.... I just want you to remember that someone's ears are attached to your microphone—they would be the interpreter's—and when we elevate the sound, it's hard on them. I don't know if you've noticed, but recently there's been more of that going on. I ask you humbly to please not do that. If someone says, “Point of order,” let's try to stop right there, and I'll deal with such.
Ms. Ien, you have a point of order. Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Ms. Ien.
Mr. Poilievre, go ahead, again with the advice of others about staying within the confines of our amendment. You have the floor, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes, stay within the confines of the Standing Orders, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Poilievre, please, once again, when someone says, “point of order”, I really would love it if everyone gave me the floor so I can deal with it.
Ms. Ien, you have a point of order again.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Ms. Ien, I apologize, but that's not a point of order. That's more debate.
Mr. Poilievre, you have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I'm sorry, everyone.
Mr. Housefather, is it a point of order?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Housefather, okay.
I think Mr. Housefather is referring to the standing orders that talk about the issue of relevancy.
Is it on the same point of order, Mr. Rayes?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Shields, I apologize. Your hand was up. Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes, I'm just looking at the timing. How about when we—
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Rayes, is it on the same point of order, as in the bio break, or is it the same point of order Mr. Housefather brought up? Do you have something different?
Before you get to that I just want to deal with Mr. Shields' point. Yes, there will be one rather shortly. I'm probably going to do it in about 15 or 20 minutes. I try not to interrupt people to do this.
There's no pressure on you, Mr. Poilievre.
Mr. Rayes, go ahead. You have another point.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes, I understand. Okay.
I'll say two people constitute critical mass for a bio break. May I take it upon myself to make that judgment?
Mr. Poilievre, my apologies, but it seems that the break is outweighing your time on the floor. You will have the floor when we return.
I just want to remind everyone how we normally do this. It's up to about five minutes. Turn off your video, but turn it back on when you come back so that it gives me an idea that we've reached a critical mass of members to reconvene.
When we do that, Mr. Poilievre, you will have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
We will now suspend for five minutes.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Welcome back, everybody. I hope you enjoyed your break.
Mr. Poilievre, you had the floor, sir. We invite you to resume.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Poilievre.
Seeing no further discussion....
Oh, I do.
Mr. Waugh, you have the floor, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Waugh.
Okay, seeing no further conversation or debate on this particular amendment, once again I want to point out to everybody where exactly we are.
Again, open up your hymn books to page.... Well, it doesn't have a page, but it's CPC-9.2, for which the reference number, the last three numbers, is 583. It was moved by Mr. Shields. This is clause 7, after line 19.
Shall CPC-9.2 carry?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I hear a no.
Madam Clerk, please proceed with a recorded vote.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Madam Clerk, one moment, please.
Yes, there seems to be some confusion as to who is on and who is subbed in and who is not.
Folks, I want to make sure this is right, on this vote. Why don't we start with the Conservative Party again.
Mr. Rayes, I believe we started with you. Is that correct?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One moment, please.
Mr. Genuis, you are subbed in.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Sorry, I was asking the clerk.
Madam Clerk, okay, he is subbed in.
Folks, I don't want to get this wrong.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Let's start with the Conservatives again, with Mr. Rayes.
One moment, please.
Mr. Genuis, go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
It's virtual. You just....
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
You most certainly can, but we're still in the middle of voting.
Mr. Poilievre.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Yes. I was wondering the same thing.
Madam Clerk.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I'm sorry, sir. You're not subbed in.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
No, not by our clerk, not officially. You might want to check with your whip.
Let's start with Mr. Rayes once more. We'll start with the vote from the Conservative Party.
Go ahead, Madam Clerk.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Poilievre, we've already checked. I'll do it again because—
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
—you know I'm probably one of the nicest people you have ever met, so I'm just going to give you a bit of flexibility here.
Madam Clerk, is Mr. Poilievre signed into the committee?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Okay. That's settled.
Continue with the vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I apologize for the confusion, folks. Just remember that if you're subbing in for someone on the committee, that has to be cleared with the clerk. I see a lot of faces come and go here, so please make sure beforehand.
The next time we have a vote, I'm going to pause so that everybody can, through whatever device they contact their whip with in this virtual world, please check so that we can make this go a little smoother.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Madam Clerk, do you want to clarify that?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
We're moving on to CPC-9.3. Again, I remind everyone that if you look at your song sheets once more, you'll see that the end of the reference number is 641. That is CPC-9.3. That's where we are currently.
Mr. Arnold, your hand is up. I'm assuming that's your legacy hand from the last comment you made.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I think, Mr. Genuis, you wanted to get on the list. We're now on CPC-9.3.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I'm looking for Mr. Rayes.
Go ahead, sir. You have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Go ahead, Mr. Champoux.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Rayes, please respond to the point of order, brought to you by whatever muffin you are holding.
Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
That is not a point of order. It is a very good point of generosity, but I'm afraid I'll have to rule it out of order.
Now we're all on a culinary track, so let's move off it for a moment and go back to Bill C-10.
Before I go any further, I see Ms. Dabrusin and Mr. Genuis. However, I think, Mr. Genuis, I referred to you earlier, so I'm going to put you first. Then I'll have Ms. Dabrusin follow.
Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Genuis, for bringing that up.
From one generous offer to another, Ms. Dabrusin, you have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Ripley, would you like to take this?
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Okay.
Go ahead, Mr. Genuis, you still have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Mr. Ripley, go ahead. Sorry.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Ms. Dabrusin, on a point of order.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Go ahead, Mr. Genuis, on the same point of order.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Genuis.
Before you go on any further about that, I understand. I can read the amendment where there's a lot of latitude here in the debate, and I'm hearing a lot of it. I do have to caution, sometimes, as we go a little bit off target, to come back to the middle.
I suggest that we try to zero in on target once more to what you're asking. I believe you were about to ask Mr. Ripley a question, so I'll let you have the floor again.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
One moment, Mr. Genuis. We have a point of order from Mr. Waugh.
Go ahead.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
Before we launch into that, it was probably the most celebratory point of order I've heard in ages. I want to wish you, sir, if I may be so bold as to say it's from all of us here at the committee, a big happy birthday.
Going back to your point about the timing, as I've said before, and I'll say again, it's always with implied consent that we end at the scheduled time.
Now I know it was 8:45 eastern time, but what happened was that there was a delay in allowing some members to get back to this particular virtual meeting because of the votes that were taking place.
However, that time is not far away. The way that this works is this: Even though there's implied consent that we end, if people are speaking, I am not one to stifle debate; the debate will continue.
That being said, I've been notified that services will allow us to go beyond 8:45. We can exceed it and go to 9:30 or 9:45, if you wish. I'm just saying that for the sake of absolute transparency. I'm not saying you have to go to that time. If you feel that this has gone on too long, there is a remedy for that, and I don't think I need to explain what that remedy is.
Mr. Waugh, God love you. It's your birthday, and I appreciate that. However, in the meantime, I do have to run the committee.
I think that deals with the points of order that were raised. I'm going to go back to Mr. Genuis, unless somebody else wants to weigh in on that point of order as well.
I know there are hands up, but I am assuming that's only for the debate.
Mr. Champoux and Mr. Rayes, I'll get to you during the debate.
In the meantime, Mr. Genuis, you still have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I apologize, Mr. Rayes. I didn't realize that you were rising on a point of order.
Go ahead, sir.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I don't want to launch into that debate all over again, sir, but I will say that the remedy I spoke of earlier, of course, would be an adjournment. However, we are in the middle of the point of order, and I can't allow a motion to be put forward on a point of order.
Therefore, I go back to Mr. Genuis.
You have the floor.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
I'm sorry, Mr. Rayes. I see that your hand is up, but we are officially adjourned.
Did you want to say happy birthday? That's the only thing I can allow, because I want to be nice.
View Scott Simms Profile
Lib. (NL)
All right, everyone. The meeting is adjourned.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Thank you, Chair. Thank you for joining us tonight, Minister Garneau. We're happy to have you here.
This committee presented a report to the House of Commons on February 25, 2021, recommending that the Government of Canada convey to the ambassador of the People's Republic of China to Canada that any interference with the rights and freedoms of people in Canada was unacceptable, will not be tolerated, and will result in serious consequences for those responsible.
Was that message communicated to the ambassador of the People's Republic of China to Canada, and if so, what was the response of the ambassador?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
I'd rather hear it from you, sir, while we have you. I can ask her that afterwards.
Alliance Canada Hong Kong and other witnesses have come before our committee in the past year telling us they've been interfered with. Human rights defenders who are protesting, Tibetan nationals who are running for student office and others have been threatened by agents of the People's Republic of China or parent agents.
What is the government doing in response in order to protect these defenders of human rights or citizens going about their business?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
The suggestion by Alliance Canada Hong Kong to this committee—and we've heard it from others as well—was that Canada should require any agents of foreign governments operating in Canada, including China, which we understand has a number of them, to be registered.
Is Canada considering putting in place a foreign agent registry to at least require people to identify themselves?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Can you be specific about the question asked, sir?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Alliance Canada Hong Kong also complained that there appears to be a foreign takeover of Chinese-language newspapers in Canada by agents of China or companies that are related to the Chinese government. A suggestion was made that independent Chinese-language publications in Canada don't have the support they need. Would the Government of Canada consider looking at ensuring that there are independent voices able to communicate with the Chinese-speaking community in Canada, free from interference from the Chinese government?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
On another topic—quickly, as it seems I have a minute and a half left—since GAC has a responsibility and one of their roles is to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or the export of dual-use technologies, according to the 2020 report on military goods from Canada, there has been a significant increase in the rejection of exports of dual-use goods to the People's Republic of China.
Why has that increased in the last number of years, from very few three or four years ago to a substantial number now? In 2020, 40 applications were refused. What kinds of items were refused export to China on the basis of this concern?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
I understand the rules, sir—
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
—but can you give us an example of the kinds of things that have been rejected by Canada for export to China?
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
My time is up, sir.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
That was clear. I thought it was 10 minutes as well, Mr. Chair, but I'll have to settle for two and a half.
Mr. Garneau, the security issue comes to light every now and then. Before our committee, we've heard some security concerns about equipment being used or contracted by the Government of Canada. Nuctech, for example, has a standing offer for X-ray equipment in our embassies. In Beijing, our immigration department contracted a company being operated by the Beijing police to look after collecting data for immigration visas. You mentioned the 43 export permits being denied to China these last number of years. Is it fair to say that in the past we took less seriously these issues of security with respect to China? Is that something that the government is prepared to admit, or is everything going according to plan all the way down the line?
Results: 1 - 100 of 4922 | Page: 1 of 50

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

For more data options, please see Open Data