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 8072
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 10:21 [p.15335]
Mr. Speaker, no government in recent memory has wanted to have so much talk and political spin. Let me use this bill as an example. If the bill had been law eight years ago, who in Canadian society would not be here today? I would be interested in knowing that.
The issue I face at the door that constituents are concerned about is safety in their communities. What they are looking for, for example, are ways young people can avoid getting into gangs. The national government has a role to play in working with stakeholders to try to get fewer young people involved in gangs. Maybe my collegue could comment.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 10:36 [p.15337]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on two of the member's points.
We see that in the dying days of Parliament this legislation is being brought in. The member made reference, and she is not the only one, to the fact that for all intents and purposes this legislation has more to do with the Conservative Party raising money than it does with the bill actually passing in the House of Commons. The bill is more about trying to give the impression that the government wants to get tough on crime than trying to prevent crimes from taking place. I would ask the member to reflect on that.
I was also intrigued by her comment about Canada's murdered and missing aboriginal women and girls and what a travesty it is that the government has failed to recognize the need for a public inquiry.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 10:49 [p.15339]
Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on a point that I had asked the Conservative member. That is in regard to the fact that here we have legislation that comes across as being really tough on crime, but in reality it is marginal at very best. It is well criticized. I believe that all opposition parties are in opposition to the legislation.
We are in the dying days of the session. Yet, we have very serious issues in our communities in the different regions of the country. I, for example, talk a great deal about what sort of programming we should be doing, and what sort of leadership Ottawa could be playing in terms of coming up with ideas and programs that would get youth out of gangs and into our communities in a more positive way. This is where I believe the government has fallen short.
I wonder if the member might want to take a side step from the bill and provide some comment in terms of the whole idea of preventing crimes from happening in the first place.
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
View James Bezan Profile
2015-06-19 11:08 [p.15342]
Mr. Speaker, for over 30 years, B'nai Brith Canada has monitored the levels of anti-Semitism across the country. Last week B'nai Brith published its annual “Audit of Antisemitic Incidents” for 2014.
Unfortunately, 2014 saw the highest number of anti-Semitic incidents ever recorded, at 1,627 incidents. That is a 28% increase over 2013. This surpassed the previous record of a 21% increase that was set 2012, with 1,345 incidents.
This only confirms what other organizations such as the Toronto Police Service have said, which is that the Canadian Jewish community is frequently targeted by hate crimes and that anti-Semitism is an enduring problem in our country. This is completely unacceptable.
All forms of discrimination are despicable, and the rise of anti-Semitism is particularly troubling in our society. I am proud to be part of a government that supports the State of Israel and the Jewish community here in Canada.
I ask that all members and all Canadians join me in denouncing anti-Semitism.
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
View James Bezan Profile
2015-06-19 11:20 [p.15345]
Mr. Speaker, I want to advise everyone that National Defence has said these helicopters will meet all operational requirements. The manufacturer will make improvements to the helicopters as we go forward. Our government is proud to finally deliver on our promise to provide new maritime helicopters for the Canadian Armed Forces, unlike the previous Liberal government that cancelled the contract for the EH-101s instead of investing to replace the maritime helicopters and the old Sea Kings. We now have new kit, and these are wonderful aircraft that our forces are going to be using well into the future.
View James Bezan Profile
CPC (MB)
View James Bezan Profile
2015-06-19 11:21 [p.15345]
Mr. Speaker, I want to remind members that we inherited a decade of darkness from the previous Liberal government. It has been hard work to replace all of the procurements that are required and to put in place the new aircraft and tanks: C-17 Globemasters, which we have five of now, a brand new C-130J Hercules aircraft, tactical heavy-lift helicopters, Chinooks, and now the new Cylcones. These are going to serve the Canadian Armed Forces, and the Royal Canadian Navy, as they are going to be on board our Hali-class frigates.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 11:23 [p.15345]
Mr. Speaker, my question is about the Prime Minister's failure to deliver to Canadians.
There have been over 30 incidents of gun violence in Surrey and Delta in the last few months alone. The Conservatives made a promise to help, and again they have failed to deliver. The mayors of Surrey and Delta and the residents of those two communities are concerned about the safety of their communities.
When will the new RCMP officers actually arrive in Surrey and Delta?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 11:24 [p.15345]
The talk but no action continues, Mr. Speaker.
Canadians have lost patience with the tired old Conservative government and its failed economic policies. We think of stalled incomes, record-setting trade deficits, record-setting government deficits, soaring household debt, and the slowest job growth since the recession of 25 years. After a decade in office, the Prime Minister has earned the dubious distinction of having the worst economic growth record of any prime minister since the great depression.
On its last day in the House of Commons, does the government have any regrets when it comes to economic incompetence?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 12:32 [p.15360]
Mr. Speaker, my question is related to my first-hand experience when there was a discussion in Manitoba to look at expanding it from a half day to a full day in terms of the statutory holiday. There was a lot of the resistance to moving to a full day which actually came from veterans. They indicated their concern was they did not want people to see it strictly as a holiday to go off and enjoy themselves. The veterans seemed to lobby that what we should be doing is encouraging school activities and programs. Ultimately, it was decided that we would stick with the half day. It seems to be working in Manitoba. This was debated in the 1990s.
Has the member had any indication from veterans who believe that a half day would suffice, and that what they are more interested in is those moments of remembering and opportunities to educate the public as a whole?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-19 12:45 [p.15361]
Mr. Speaker, this will likely be my last opportunity to address the House. Some members might be somewhat disappointed to hear that.
For a very brief moment, I would like to acknowledge what a privilege it is to be in the House of Commons and to be afforded the opportunity to be able to communicate a message to Ottawa on behalf of the constituents I represent. What a privilege it is to represent the constituency of Winnipeg North.
I also want to very briefly comment on the degree to which all of us, as elected officials, have phenomenal support groups that enable us to do what we do, whether they are our families or our friends—close friends in particular, but friends in general. Without those individuals, we would not be where we are today.
I also want to acknowledge the incredible work done within our constituencies by our support staff, who make it so much easier for us to do the things that are important to our constituents and our parties.
I want to acknowledge the phenomenal efforts and incredible talents that we have within our party. I suspect that applies to all parties, but I am going to be a bit biased here. I am referring to the support staff. Whether outside in the lobby or upstairs, people on and off the Hill contribute so much in terms of ensuring we are able to operate as a party on the floor of the House of Commons and beyond.
Again I emphasize my gratitude and my thanks to everyone from the people who do the recordings to the Speaker of the House to the support and security staff, and to everyone else who in essence makes the House the best place in the world when it comes to participating in democracy. I still believe that Canada has the greatest democracy in the world, although there is always room for improvement.
That said, how appropriate it is that we are speaking on something that is of great importance to all Canadians.
Bill C-597 deals with remembering Remembrance Day in particular. How important it is that we remember those who have lost their lives or who have been maimed in significant ways, both physically and mentally, in ensuring that all Canadians have what we have today: the rule of law, the freedoms. These are things we should never forget.
Across this great nation we have monuments. We have murals. We have all forms of dedications. People want to express the fact that we will not forget. They want to express how much we love and appreciate the modern-day force that is there to protect us. We know that the sacrifices they make can never really be repaid.
That is one of the reasons we aggressively pursued the issue of Veterans Affairs when we saw closures of offices or when we saw government policies that affected our veterans. Both as a member of Parliament and as a person, I want our vets and members of the regular force to know that the Liberal Party is going to be there in a very real and tangible way. We do care about what is taking place in our Canadian Forces today. We understand and appreciate the sacrifices that are made.
I have had the good fortune of being a member of the regular forces, and I am not alone. The member from Montreal was also a member of the regular forces. Although it was short, just over three years, it was a wonderful experience to serve in the forces. I know first-hand the sense of pride that members of our Canadian Forces have for what they do. Whether they were throwing sandbags in Winnipeg during our great floods or serving abroad in the world wars, we understand and appreciate the important role of our Canadian Forces, not only in the past and today but also into the future.
This bill is about Remembrance Day. The legislation cannot mandate a statutory holiday all across Canada, but we can try to bring some influence to bear. There are many people who truly believe it should be a statutory holiday, coast to coast to coast. There is a great argument to be made for that.
That said, it is important that we respect provincial jurisdictions. As was pointed out, Manitoba has a half day. There was consultation in that regard. There are some provinces that have a full day as a statutory holiday; there are others that do not have a statutory holiday at all.
The Liberal Party has indicated its support for Bill C-597. As much as possible, we want to see our provinces deal with this issue in a fair and compassionate way and to respond and put into place what they believe their veterans and their citizens as a whole would like to see done in their provinces.
There are many within the Liberal caucus who believe it should be a full statutory holiday coast to coast to coast. Others, myself included, would like to ensure that the provinces play a stronger role in recognizing the requests from many to examine full statutory holidays. However, Bill C-597, at the very least, heightens the importance of recognizing the significance of Remembrance Day. To that degree, every member of the Liberal caucus is in full support. We voted for the bill at second reading and we were encouraged by the comments we heard at committee stage.
We recognize that it is an important issue, and it would be nice to see it resolved in a very positive way. I personally think it is important to look at ways we can honour our vets. Our vets are, and should be, an inspiration to us all.
There are certain things we can do as individual members of Parliament. We can approach local businesses, encourage our local schools, and get involved in worship centres to encourage some form of activity such as the laying of wreaths. We can do things within our communities to make sure people understand how important it is that we not forget.
I would like to close, as I started, by thanking the good citizens of Winnipeg North for choosing to support me in 2011. What a wonderful privilege it has been to represent Winnipeg North.
View Niki Ashton Profile
NDP (MB)
View Niki Ashton Profile
2015-06-18 10:21 [p.15258]
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition signed by many incredible women, strong feminists from Newfoundland, who are calling on the government to enact a national action plan to end violence against women. The petitioners are showing their support for a motion that I put forward, Motion No. 444. They do not want to stop at the defeat of that motion, but push for action to end violence against women in Canada today.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-18 10:31 [p.15260]
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's decision to allow Canada Post to end door-to-door delivery has upset a great number of Canadians. As such, Canadians from every region of the country have been signing petitions. I present yet another petition in opposition to the ending of door-to-door mail delivery. People are upset with the number of people who will be fired from Canada Post and with the increase in postal rates.
The petitioners are calling on the government to restore door-to-door delivery and to cut out the hidden agenda against Canada Post. They believe the Government of Canada should support Canada Post.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-18 10:43 [p.15262]
Mr. Speaker, we often hear that things can best be found in the details. When I think of Bill S-2, I cannot help but look at this as a bill that provides a great deal of detail.
My question is with respect to the idea of international standards and the impact they have on different departments in terms of their responsibility to make sure that there are high standards. To what degree does Ottawa work with nations in dealing with trade agreements, as an example? To what degree has the Government of Canada worked with the EU or Ukraine, for example, to finalize agreements for which we would have regulations that would be more in sync?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-18 11:23 [p.15266]
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in this place to add some thoughts on a particular issue. After reading the title of Bill S-2, many might think it is a somewhat dull bill, maybe a little boring to read, but as I asked in my question for the parliamentary secretary, the details are in fact very important.
My view of the structure under which our system operates is that we do not give enough attention to regulations. Canadians would be surprised at the degree to which our society is regulated. It does not happen just here in Ottawa; it also happens internationally, and it affects Canadians' lives. It happens at the national level, which is what we are primarily talking about this morning, and it also happens at the provincial and municipal levels. Regulations are a part of everyday life for all of us.
They are important and they have a very profound impact. Some forms of legislation that come to the House of Commons are pretty straightforward and very easy to comment on; on others, such as this one, we have to be somewhat more diligent as we examine them.
The Liberal Party has a great deal of concern with regard to Bill S-2. Overall, we are not in a position to support the bill, because we have a number of concerns.
It is important at the get-go to recognize that incorporation by reference enables the federal government or agencies to give legal effect to material that has been published elsewhere. We should all be concerned about that.
We have talked a great deal within the Liberal caucus and we have shared some different ideas and thoughts in two-way communications with Canadians. Time and time again, and in fact earlier this week, we talked about how Ottawa is broken and how we do not see the type of progress that is important.
This is one of the pieces of legislation that I would use to cite that. We have standing committees of the House. We have a standing committee that deals strictly with the issue of regulations. Its primary function is to get a better understanding of regulations. It is there to provide diligence. We in the House might spend relatively little time dealing with the regulations, but there are other ways in which members of the House of Commons deal with regulations, from their creation to their being passed in the House to their appearance in the Canada Gazette. We need to have a decent understanding of what happens today and what the bill is proposing to do.
A department I choose to follow quite closely with regard to regulation is the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. A number of pieces of law, many of them very targeted and not very positive, have been passed in this administration, but when the law is passed after hours and hours of debate at committee, let alone what takes place outside of committee, that law does not actually deal with the regulations per se, and it is the regulations that will provide the details to either complement or, in some cases, detract from a piece of legislation that has been passed.
Let me give a specific example. We pass legislation dealing with the issue of citizenship; then we pass regulation to support some of those decisions that were made. As an example, the government passes legislation with an objective of creating additional resources or properly resourcing citizenship in order to speed up the process of acquiring citizenship. Then a regulation that follows stipulates what it would now cost to have that citizenship. We have seen some pretty bizarre things occur in that area, such as the quadrupling of citizenship fees. That has upset not only a good number of my constituents but also a good number of Canadians across the board.
How does that actually happen? The legislation passes here, and then the regulation comes up. Typically, the minister who develops the regulation brings it forward to the full cabinet. The full cabinet ultimately passes it. Then it ends up in the Canada Gazette. All Canadians could then be familiar with what has actually taken place.
Through that process, even though all members of Parliament are not necessarily privy to the dialogue in cabinet, there are some eyes on it from parliamentarians. That is a very important aspect when we deal with regulation. That is because, at the end of the day, if something appears in the Canada Gazette, we should have a sense that there was a Canadian member of Parliament who had eyes on it. Perhaps it was a cabinet member, because the cabinet ultimately approves it prior to its appearance in the Canada Gazette. There is that direct link of accountability. The government is ultimately responsible.
Through this particular piece of legislation, we would change that somewhat. One could argue that incorporation by reference already exists. It does occur. However, this particular piece of legislation would enhance that. It would enable more of it to take place. Concerns have been raised in regard to the impact it would have on the Canada Gazette. Concerns have also been raised in regard to the impact it would have on the House of Commons and on the ability of members of Parliament to hold the government accountable for regulations that would increasingly be changing without any sort of real diligence from the House of Commons.
That is a concern that we should all have. It is something that has caused the Liberal caucus and the Liberal Party to express our concern, and it is the reason we will not be supporting Bill S-2.
Bill S-2 would reduce the oversight of federal regulations by allowing sub-delegation of regulation-making power that is already delegated by Parliament to the Governor in Council and other persons. The current government, as I cited, cannot be trusted to use this power responsibly. We have seen that time and time again. Its willingness to abuse oversight mechanisms through its omnibus legislation and its disregard for the Department of Justice's constitutional review procedure are but a couple of examples.
I have had the opportunity to talk about some of those specifics. We have talked about those massive budget bills into which the government incorporates numerous pieces of other legislation, attempting to pass legislation through the back door of the budget, attempting to avoid accountability, attempting to avoid the eyes of MPs, attempting to avoid scrutiny beyond that by many different stakeholders. It tries to sneak legislation through in these large budget bills.
In fact, when the Prime Minister was in opposition, I can recall him stating very clearly how wrong it was to be use budget bills as a back door to bring through legislative agendas. No government has done it more than the Conservative government.
I could check with my colleague, the member for Charlottetown, about the issue of oversight and the importance of that. The Liberal Party has advocated for parliamentary oversight with respect to CSIS and security related issues. We went through a fairly significant debate on Bill C-51. The Conservatives try to give the public the impression that there is a terrorist under every rock. Then the NDP in essence believes that there is no problem, that there is no need to be fearful. Those are two really different approaches.
The Liberals understand the importance of safety. We understand the importance of security. However, we also understand the importance of individual rights. We are the party that brought in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
We talk about diligence and we look at the importance of our parliamentary committees in providing that kind of oversight. Through Bill S-2, there will be less parliamentary oversight on regulations. I believe the parliamentary secretary would recognize, or at the very least should recognize, that.
It would have been more encouraging to hear the parliamentary secretary talk about the importance of parliamentary oversight. He and the government are very enthusiastic about this legislation, but we do not hear whether the Government of Canada is prepared to give away a very important part of making regulations through the incorporation by reference. That will have a very important impact not only today but especially into the future, as Canada is becoming a bigger player in the global market. Therefore, parliamentary oversight is of critical importance.
Unfortunately, we lost that debate on Bill C-51, but we will correct that come fall if we are afforded the opportunity to do so.
What about parliamentary oversight on these issues, because these issues are important also? Once again, the government feels we do not need to worry about oversight. The government is wrong. Canadians have a higher expectation of what they want parliamentarians to do. Let me give members an example that is quite tangible.
We are all aware of the hundreds of thousands of tax dollars that the Prime Minister has used for the European trade deal photo ops. There are no lack of resources when it comes to taxpayer dollars to support photo ops on the EU agreement, which is not finalized. I believe Canada is the only signing officer to that agreement. We will have to wait until the next administration comes in to finalize it.
What about the details of the agreement? The parliamentary secretary acknowledged that a lot of work needed to be done on regulations once the EU agreement was finalized. We should all be concerned with that very important aspect. In part, those regulations play an important role in whether Canada will be on a level playing field.
Whether it is the leader of the Liberal Party or any other member of my caucus, we are very proud of our businesses in every region of our country. We know that if we put them on a level playing field, we will excel. We saw trade surpluses during Liberal administrations. We have confidence in our business community and we are there to support it in getting those new markets. Therefore, we should be concerned. When we talk about these agreements, the regulations will follow them.
To what degree does this legislation, for example, say that regulations related to certain aspects of trade agreements through incorporation by reference will not be determined by the House of Commons or that there will be no role for the House? We know that will occur. That is why I asked the member how things were going with respect to that as well as with Ukraine.
If I can just sidetrack for a bit, I have a personal favourite. I would love to see the Prime Minister forgo some of the photo ops, get down to work and get that agreement with Ukraine. The European Union already has done that. Why has Canada not dealt with Ukraine? The regulations would have followed. The Prime Minister needs to focus on how we can help the people of Ukraine in a more real and tangible way. At the same time, it also helps Canada.
With respect to those regulations, people need to recognize that the government has again been found wanting in explaining why it does not feel there is an enhanced role for members of Parliament to play. We are moving more and more into a global situation. MPs need to play a stronger role of monitoring and providing that oversight. We have a standing committee of the House that is responsible for regulations. As we move toward a stronger role for incorporation by reference, given the international laws and more trade, and the importance of Canada to be engaged in that trade, why not include a stronger role for our standing committee for oversight in legislation?
The Liberals have a website called realchange.ca. I would encourage members to go to visit it. They will see opportunities that would allow for additional oversight. When it comes to regulations such as—
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2015-06-18 11:43 [p.15268]
Mr. Speaker, it is nice to know the parliamentary secretary is so eager to ask his question.
I was giving my sales pitch with respect to www.realchange.ca. On that website are all sorts of opportunities to get a better understanding of the importance of oversight, among many other things. I would encourage all members to tap in and feel free to steal some of those ideas. There are plenty of them there.
Results: 1 - 15 of 8072 | Page: 1 of 539

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

For more data options, please see Open Data