Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 8 of 8
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2020-05-26 10:07 [p.2399]
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to one petition. This return will be tabled in an electronic format.
While I am on my feet, I move:
That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.
View Todd Doherty Profile
CPC (BC)
View Todd Doherty Profile
2020-02-21 12:28 [p.1392]
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand today to speak to Bill C-3.
The bill before us was introduced in the dying days of the last Parliament as Bill C-98, and the Conservatives supported it at through all steps.
Bill C-3, while it is an important bill, undoubtedly will be seen as another Liberal failure with respect to consultation. We saw this time and again in the last Parliament. Promise after promise was broken or unfilled. I think we will see the exact same thing with Bill C-3.
I want to bring to the floor again, and I do not think we can say it enough, the voices of the Wet'suwet'en. I would never say that we are speaking on behalf of or for the Wet'suwet'en, but it is important we bring their voices to the floor.
I would remind the House and my colleagues that the House is not ours. It does not belong to us or the Prime Minister. The House belongs to the electors who voted in the 338 members of Parliament. Those are the voices that really matter here.
Today we are debating Bill C-3 when our country is seized with a crisis. What we have seen over the last three weeks is no leadership whatsoever from the Prime Minister.
Yesterday, we had a motion before the House, on which we will vote on Monday. Speaker after speaker, at least on the Conservative side, brought the voices of the Wet'suwet'en to the floor of the House. A lot of people have stood in the House, with their firsts in the air, saying they are standing with the Wet'suwet'en. The reality is that they are not standing for the real voices of the Wet'suwet'en.
Yesterday I heard from two chiefs from my riding. One was the former chief of the Haisla Nation. He thought I should ask the Prime Minister about aboriginal titles and rights and to whom he thought they belonged. They belong to the first nations communities.
The Wet'suwet'en and 21 nations voted in favour of the Coastal GasLink. They voted for bands, chiefs and councils to represent them. Those chiefs and leaders within their communities voted in favour of lifting their communities out of poverty. They chose economic prosperity, not economic despair.
Ellis Ross wanted me to ask the Prime Minister why so many leaders outside of first nations were standing against lifting their first nations up? They voted in favour of something that could bring so much hope to and opportunities for these communities. In northern B.C., these types of game-changing opportunities are few and far between.
Yesterday, the Liberals said that they would not support our motion, because we used the term “radical activists”. They believed that we were talking about our first nations, that they were radical activists.
The other chief asked me why it was okay to have the Rockefellers and the Tides Foundations limit opportunity for first nations. This is the truth. He said that if the Prime Minister was standing in front of him, he would give him a piece of his mind. I am paraphrasing, because it would be unparliamentary to say the exact words.
It is disappointing that the voices of the Wet'suwet'en, who voted in favour of lifting their communities out of economic despair and who chose hope, are being silenced. They are not being heard; they are being discounted. We are here today because of that.
While Bill C-3, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, is important, we should be continuing to bring the voices of the Wet'suwet'en to this floor, ensuring they are heard. That is what is important.
Therefore, I move:
That the House do now adjourn.
View Bruce Stanton Profile
CPC (ON)
View Bruce Stanton Profile
2020-02-21 13:11 [p.1393]
I declare the motion defeated.
We will now go to questions and comments with the hon. member for Cariboo—Prince George.
The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.
View Randy Hoback Profile
CPC (SK)
View Randy Hoback Profile
2020-02-21 13:17 [p.1394]
Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting day to be discussing Bill C-3 when we see what is going on in Canada and what we could be talking about.
There are so many things that are happening that this House should be discussing and debating today other than Bill C-3. I have nothing against Bill C-3. However, if we look at what is going on in Canada and happening across our great country, we see our country being ripped apart and torn to shreds.
I will give members a couple of examples of some of the things we could be talking about that have a day-to-day impact on Canadians.
We could have spent some time this week talking about the coronavirus. We have Canadians who are still trying to get out of China. We have situations around the world where passengers cannot leave cruise ships. We could have been debating that and what we should be doing about it. We could have been making sure that we have the proper safety protocols in place and that we are immensely prepared for this type of virus. However, we did not.
We have started NAFTA hearings at committee. This would have been a great week to show all the problems with NAFTA. This party is here to support and pass it, because we are being told to and we would never play silly bugger with it. We have expressed that right from day one, but there are things in NAFTA that need to be talked about.
This week at committee we heard from witnesses who will be negatively impacted by this agreement. They are not saying we should not sign it or that we should not move it forward. They understand how important it is to the Canadian economy and that it has to happen. However, they are asking the Liberal government for a plan to help them mitigate the downside of the agreement.
Aluminum producers in Chicoutimi are asking for some support in taking their product to the next level to add value to their aluminum products. That would be a plan, but there is no plan from the government. We could have had great debates on that and what we could do to help the different sectors.
The dairy sector is being kneecapped in this agreement. Not only is it facing importations of 3.5%, it is also facing restrictions. It is being told what it can sell, when it can sell it and who it can sell it to. That has never happened in a trade agreement. That would have been a good debate here to look at ways to mitigate that type of scenario.
We could have been talking about the China-Senegal situation, which is the PM's cost for a UN Security Council seat. He has his Mastercard out, paying $50 million here and $50 million there. We should have had a debate this week in the House on just how expensive this seat is going to be and if he will actually have success in getting it. However, we did not talk about it.
The Lima Group was here in Ottawa talking about Venezuela. I do not think anybody realized that. That is ironic, because that is where our country is heading to right now. If we do not have trains running, there will be no toilet paper in the stores in a couple of weeks. That is the reality.
The Liberals can deny it all they want, but their inaction on this file has been so terrible it is unreal. Canadians are going to pay.
The other thing we should have been talking about in light of all these things is the impact it is having on the economy, jobs and growth. There is going to be a huge cost. Nobody is even talking about that cost.
Hon. Ed Fast: It's billions.
Mr. Randy Hoback: Billions is right.
The Liberals can say they are doing what they can and are seized with it at the moment, but the reality is they have done nothing. They have let it go on and now we have the result. Somebody is probably going to get hurt. It is really disappointing.
Canadians can expect more than a debate on a piece of administrative legislation when thousands are facing job losses because of radical activists who are exploiting divisions within the Wet'suwet'en community and holding the Canadian economy hostage.
Therefore, I move:
That the debate be now adjourned.
View Bruce Stanton Profile
CPC (ON)
View Bruce Stanton Profile
2020-02-21 13:57 [p.1395]
I declare the motion defeated.
We will now go back to questions and comments.
The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth.
View John Barlow Profile
CPC (AB)
View John Barlow Profile
2020-02-21 14:02 [p.1396]
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to this important legislation. It is also important that we highlight some of the issues that go along with this piece of legislation.
It is about empowering the RCMP and empowering the CBSA, which has been kind of an interesting topic over the last several weeks as we talk about empowering the RCMP.
I am glad to see that the Liberals are becoming frustrated with what is going on in the House today. It is very difficult when people are trying to do their business and just a couple of people can throw up blockades to prevent people from trying to be successful and getting work done. Whether it is the farmers, people in the lumber business, mill operators, manufacturers, business owners and the entire economy, that is what Canadian industry has been trying to navigate over the last two weeks.
Fortunately, in this House we will eventually get that work done. However, what is going on in the Canadian economy right now that the Liberals need to understand is these blockades have brought Canada's economy to its knees. There are close to 100 ships off the port of Vancouver and the port of Prince Rupert, and a backlog of 20,000 railcars. That is what is at stake. We cannot allow this to go on one more week.
These are the issues that should be discussed in this House, legislation that would actually make a difference to the Canadian economy. Therefore, in saying that, I move:
That the House do now adjourn.
View Bruce Stanton Profile
CPC (ON)
View Bruce Stanton Profile
2020-02-21 14:29 [p.1397]
At this time, and in accordance with past precedents as stated at page 579 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, I must interrupt the clock, and the motion that the House do now adjourn has now expired.
It being 2:30 p.m., this House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)
Results: 1 - 8 of 8

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data