Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 60 of 32112
View Mona Fortier Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Mona Fortier Profile
2021-05-14 10:03 [p.7229]
moved:
That, in relation to Bill C-15, An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the third reading stage of the bill; and
That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration of the third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
Pursuant to Standing Order 67(1), there will now be a 30-minute question period.
I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places or to use the raise hand function so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in the question period.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Madam Speaker, we are sorry to see the government shutting down debate yet again. I want to ask a specific question about the legislation, though.
Right now in Canadian law, we have a duty to consult around the development of resource projects. The government has said that this legislation does not create a veto for all communities that may be affected. The existing law has duty to consult, and the Liberals are saying it is not a veto. FPIC, the doctrine of free, prior and informed consent, is ostensibly somewhere in between these two extremes, according to the government, but there is still a lot of clarity required. What does “free, prior and informed consent” mean if it is not a duty to consult and it is not a veto?
What precisely is meant in the context of this legislation by “free, prior and informed consent” if it is something more than the duty to consult, but something less than a veto?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, the hon. member has asked this question a number of times, and I will give what I believe is the same clear answer that I have given a number of times before.
FPIC is a process. FPIC is about meaningful consultation, discussion and dialogue with indigenous peoples affected by a particular decision, say a resource development project, that they be at the table from the beginning. Yes, there is a duty to consult under Canadian law. That has had further refinement and guidance from the Federal Court of Appeal in the Trans Mountain process. We, as a government, were taken to task for not having meaningfully consulted the first time through, and we got it right the second time through.
FPIC is a process. It is going to continue to be a process. It will be contextual, so there is no way to precisely define it at the outset, and there is no way it should be precisely defined at the outset. The hon. member knows that. It is about discussion and dialogue. It is about putting indigenous peoples at the table, where, heretofore, they have not—
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Saint-Jean.
View Christine Normandin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Christine Normandin Profile
2021-05-14 10:07 [p.7229]
Madam Speaker, that is a little ironic because, yesterday, when we were debating the Bloc Québécois's opposition day motion, I talked about how one can be for a bill but against using closure to pass that bill.
The same principle applies here. I agree with Bill C-15. I realize that it needs to go through quickly. However, I do not agree with the government's approach. It has clearly done a poor job of managing its legislative calendar, and now it is shutting down debate on a very important subject that many members wanted to speak to. We got just two hours of debate on this.
Is this because we will not be able to debate it in September because there will be an election between now and then? Is that why the government had no choice but to bring in time allocation?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
The answer is no. This is a priority for the government, for indigenous peoples, and for indigenous leaders across the country.
The fact is, we have already covered this. We have already debated the substance of Bill C-15 because we debated its previous iteration, Bill C-262, which was introduced by our former colleague, Romeo Saganash. The previous Parliament passed that bill after a debate to which the Bloc Québécois contributed its opinion.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples itself has been around for 15 years, so it is not new.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Madam Speaker, the government is certainly using speed to get this bill through. Fair enough, but one wonders why it does not use speed to resolve community issues that have come up. First nations communities have desperate need to end boil water advisories, and we have heard the government is now extending the deadline. For over a decade, first nations communities continue to wait for that government support. Indigenous-led housing is also something the government has not tackled with any speed whatsoever, and we have seen first nations kids taken repeatedly to court rather than having their basic needs met.
The question is very simple. Liberals are using speed when it comes to this bill. Why do they not use the same speed to meet the needs of indigenous peoples in this country?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his support on this bill generally, as well as the support of his party. I obviously also salute the work that Romeo Saganash did in the last Parliament and continues to do in support and promotion of this bill.
We are working hard to solve infrastructure problems, drinking water problems. We have done a great deal of work on it, but we have admitted honestly that more work needs to be done. The same is true for resolving cases around Jordan's principle. We are working very hard to resolve those cases out of court where possible, and we are doing our best to move all of those files forward.
I think the hon. member and I share the same end point and the same goals, and we are pushing hard to make them happen.
View Jamie Schmale Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, I share the concern on this side of the House at the way the government is ramming through this piece of legislation. We heard at committee many times from indigenous groups themselves that said they have not had the opportunity to be consulted. We still have the outstanding question about the very important piece of FPIC, free, prior and informed consent, and what it means, and the minister, in his previous response to my friend from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, was quite dismissive of it. The fact that the legislative branch is not doing its job in creating a definition so that industry and first nations communities themselves have an idea of what this means, and then chart a path forward that is best for them, is quite concerning.
Why will the government not do its work and get that definition done here so it is not challenged in the courts later, further delaying this process?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his work on committee. The answer is the same. The best expert opinions we have received throughout this and the most convincing arguments made have been that FPIC should not be defined in the legislation, cannot be defined in the legislation, because the very nature of FPIC is in a process.
We said from the beginning that we would consult as many indigenous leadership groups as we possibly could before the tabling of the bill. We did that. Those groups had an impact on the form of the bill before it was tabled. We continued to consult after the bill was tabled, and the indigenous groups, in making appearances at committee and in working with the government, have proposed a number of amendments, many of which we have accepted. Again, that consultation process continues, and the consultation process with indigenous leadership groups across Canada will continue as we move through the action plan and the co-development of it.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-05-14 10:13 [p.7230]
Madam Speaker, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has called upon all levels of government in Canada to adopt and implement the UN declaration as the framework for reconciliation. I am wondering if the minister could provide his thoughts as to why it is so important in moving forward with reconciliation that the Government of Canada and the Prime Minister continue to push this bill so it ultimately can get passed.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his commitment to the reconciliation process generally. It is an important question. TRC called UNDRIP a road map to reconciliation, and we firmly believe that. This bill is about human rights. It is about the human rights of indigenous peoples. It behooves me to understand why people could be opposed to recognizing human rights for indigenous people, who simply want to have the same rights that other people in this country have.
Yes, this is a priority for our government. Yes, this helps the road map to reconciliation. It is fundamentally important. People like Dr. Wilton Littlechild, former Conservative member of Parliament and one of the architects of UNDRIP, have said that precisely.
View Andréanne Larouche Profile
BQ (QC)
View Andréanne Larouche Profile
2021-05-14 10:14 [p.7231]
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for this morning's debate, which will be very short.
As the critic for the status of women, I would have liked to see the government have the same sense of urgency when it came to applying the recommendations of the final report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls as it did this morning for Bill C-15.
How much time has been spent so far debating a document as important as Bill C-15? I will give the House just one guess: barely an hour and 43 minutes and the minister is already imposing time allocation.
Does the minister think that one hour and 43 minutes is enough time to debate this important issue? What about the time allocation on Bill C-19, prorogation of Parliament and obstruction in committee? This government behaves like a majority government when voters gave it a minority mandate.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question. It is true that she was not here in the last Parliament when we fully debated Bill C-262, which is the foundation for the current Bill C-15. The House even passed Bill C-262, but it died on the Order Paper in the Senate because of the Conservative senators' political games.
This is therefore the second time the House is studying this issue, so much of it is very familiar. Everyone is indeed aware of the content of the bill and we are proceeding in this way because it is a priority for the country.
View Alexandre Boulerice Profile
NDP (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague. This issue is obviously a priority for the country. I must point out that Bill C-262 was introduced by our former colleague, Romeo Saganash, as an NDP initiative. Therefore, we are in agreement with the substance of Bill C-15.
However, if this bill were truly a priority for the government, why was it incapable of managing its legislative agenda and the activities of the House in such a way as to move it forward without having to resort to time allocation? This is another example of inept management by the Liberals, who now claim the bill is a priority.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his support for the substance of this bill.
I will once again highlight Romeo Saganash's work on the previous bill, which is the basis for Bill C-15. I also want to remind members that Mr. Saganash continues to promote Bill C-15 to this day.
We must proceed in this way because, as the House has noticed, certain dilatory tactics are being used, especially by one opposition party.
View Elizabeth May Profile
GP (BC)
View Elizabeth May Profile
2021-05-14 10:17 [p.7231]
Madam Speaker, I am torn on this matter and I am going to be very candid with the minister. I am rarely less than decisive. I fully support the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but the process by which we come to this place has left indigenous communities, first nations, Métis and Inuit, divided on the matter. The right path, the right way to vote, is not at all clear to me, and it certainly is the case that we cannot wait any longer to take the steps we need to take for reconciliation.
There are a number of very significant first nations policy analysts and a number of legal analysts who are on both sides, and of first nations themselves that say they were not consulted in the development of Bill C-15. It is therefore really important that we hear the different perspectives and we ask the hon. minister if he does not regret that there was—
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
The hon. minister.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member's observation that it is rare that she is less than decisive on a matter. I always appreciate her opinions and I take this question very seriously.
Yes, in a minority government context, we consulted as many indigenous leadership groups in a variety of forms as we possibly could. As I said, they had an impact on the original Romeo Saganash bill before tabling. We continued to consult, and they had an impact on the bill at committee. I commit to the hon. member that I will continue to consult as many indigenous leadership groups as I possibly can, in particular in the development of the action plan as we move forward.
I would just point out to her that although there is disagreement, there is an increasing trend, particularly after the last set of amendments in committee, to be supportive of the bill on the part of indigenous leadership.
View David Sweet Profile
CPC (ON)
View David Sweet Profile
2021-05-14 10:19 [p.7231]
Madam Speaker, for the better part of 16 years I have left it up to my colleagues to always comment on a hatchet closure motion, but I think it is time for me to speak up in this regard.
For 10 straight years I sat on the other side and listened to the weeping, gnashing and howling from the Liberal Party every time the Hon. Peter Van Loan stood and moved closure on a bill. The Liberals said that they would never do it, that it was undemocratic. They promised in an election that they would never do it. Now, at the height of hypocrisy, they continue to do it over and over again. As my NDP colleague said, it is simply because they cannot even manage their own House agenda.
This needs to stop. The Liberals need to start respecting the House and debate bills appropriately.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, the reason why we are here is because of the general dilatory tactics of the member's party on every single matter that comes up in front of the House. We can recall the fall economic statement, which got more debate time than a budget. The Conservatives keep throwing up tactic after tactic to delay debate, which has forced our hand.
I would imagine the hon. member was here in the last session and would remember the high-fiving of certain Conservative members who voted against Romeo Saganash's bill. That is not reconciliation; Bill C-15 is reconciliation.
View Marilène Gill Profile
BQ (QC)
View Marilène Gill Profile
2021-05-14 10:21 [p.7232]
Madam Speaker, I just want to comment on the fact that the government cannot even manage its own legislative agenda properly. That is why we are in this situation today.
The government introduced Bill C-19 rather than prioritizing Bill C-15, and yet the Liberals claim they do not want an election. This government prorogued Parliament last summer, when we could have used that time to work faster and more responsibly.
I would just like to point out to the minister that there seems to be a real leadership problem when it comes to the government's legislative agenda.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her comments.
Obviously, I disagree. As she might well recall, we debated Bill C-262 in the previous Parliament, and it received significant support in the House. The foundations of this bill had already been laid and were well known before the debate began.
We are moving forward like this because it is a priority for indigenous people across Canada and it is important to our reconciliation process.
View Taylor Bachrach Profile
NDP (BC)
 Madam Speaker, I believe this bill has strong support among indigenous people in northwest B.C., but there are also some misgivings. I wonder if the minister could inform Canadians, especially indigenous people in the region I represent of northwest British Columbia, about the tangible changes the bill would create in the near term for indigenous communities.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his commitment. I salute the leadership of British Columbia generally on UNDRIP. The Province of British Columbia has UNDRIP legislation and a road map. It is moving forward and doing quite well economically, among other things.
The bill is a reset for the path that indigenous and non-indigenous peoples have to walk together in our country. It would put us at the same table from the beginning with respect to major decisions that have an impact.
Symbolically and substantively, it articulates a set of rights for indigenous peoples. Symbolically and substantively, it rejects a number of doctrines—
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, when ministers rise usually a day before or a couple of days before to indicate that they will be moving this motion, the first thing they say is that an agreement could not be reached with the parties. Indeed, there is always the behind-the-scenes work of trying to come to some co-operation and agreement of when a bill can be put through the process and eventually voted on. However, as we are seeing time and again, the Conservatives are absolutely refusing to let certain legislation go through. It is their way of saying they do not want the legislation.
Could the minister comment on how frustrating it must be for him to go through this time after time?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I salute the member's resilience in the House of Commons, holding down the fort.
It is frustrating to watch the dilatory tactics of the Conservative Party on a number of important pieces of progressive legislation. MAID, for example, was something that Canadians wanted, that would reduce the suffering of Canadians, yet there was delay after delay. It is the same on this bill and on other bills I have had in front of the House. I have had a number, and still have a number.
It is important we get these bills through.
View Jamie Schmale Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Chair, again, we are hearing over and over the fact that the government cannot seem to manage its legislative agenda. Again, we are being forced to undergo a closure motion, yet this bill has barely been debated in the House. Of course, the Liberals, which they do best, play the blame game, saying it has to be someone else's fault. No matter what goes wrong, it is never their fault, which is a common theme.
Why did we not debate this bill when Parliament was shut down? Why did we not keep going longer throughout the summer, rather than the one-day sitting a month, to debate this bill? Why did the Liberals prorogue Parliament?
This could have been done a lot better, and it was not. We still do not have certainty through indigenous communities that have relayed their concerns through committee. Those concerns have not been addressed. Why not?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, we are continuing to engage with indigenous leadership groups from across the country, particularly in the development of amendments to this bill. We have done that.
We will continue to work with indigenous leadership groups as we develop an action plan together. The law requires us to do that within a period of two years. That is intense, and it will be intense, but we will do it.
The hon. member should ask his Conservatives senators why they let this bill die. They used every procedural manoeuvre possible to let the previous bill die in the Senate. If they had not done that, we would not be here; we would be working on an action plan.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
View Matthew Green Profile
2021-05-14 10:27 [p.7233]
Madam Speaker, this is another example of Liberal words not meeting their actions. It is another example of how the Liberals do not prioritize their actual work.
I am going to talk about Six Nations and 1492 Land Back. We have heard the government talk about how it is committed to working collaboratively to address historical claims at Six Nations and how it is willing to work with the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Council. It has been almost a year of a reclamation process happening there. The Liberals have not had the courtesy of taking the trip down the road to visit them and open up the negotiations.
Will the minister commit, today, to actually doing something toward reconciliation by visiting Six Nations and opening up the negotiations to finally settle that land claim?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, the member knows that this part of our mandate falls with the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations. I know she is working on that file. I support the minister in her efforts to settle land claims and to push for these kinds of settlements around the cabinet table.
While I have not been to the Six Nations reserve as a member of Parliament or a minister, I have visited other Haudenosaunee reserves and territories. I do my best to work closely with them.
View Eric Melillo Profile
CPC (ON)
View Eric Melillo Profile
2021-05-14 10:28 [p.7233]
Madam Speaker, working on the INAN committee, we heard testimony from a lot of witnesses, a lot of indigenous people and organizations that did not feel they were adequately consulted in the process of this bill. That is very concerning for me and should be concerning for a lot of people.
I wonder if the minister would agree that pushing through legislation that would greatly impact indigenous people without proper consultation is contrary to the spirit of reconciliation.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I certainly share the member's concern.
From the beginning, we have tried to consult with as many indigenous leadership groups as possible. It is a complex web with a complex variety of leadership groups. There are treaty nations, modern treaty nations, nations with no treaty, regional groups, national leadership groups and groups that focus on women.
We have done our best to consult with as many as possible. In fact, we prioritized those groups that we had not met in our recommendations to committee, so these groups would be heard. I continue to do this. I have continued to work through this. Even now, I continue to schedule meetings with groups that I have yet to meet to push this process forward in a truly consultative fashion.
View Gary Anandasangaree Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his hard work on Bill C-15 and for getting it to this point. I want to ask him about the amendments made by committee and his comments with respect to going forward. Does he believe they strengthened the bill and is he satisfied with the amendments made at the committee stage?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his work on the committee and his leadership as well as the fact he is posing this substantive question.
I am very pleased with the amendments. They are things I have believed in for a long time, such as a better recognition of systemic racism in the preamble, an explicit rejection of the doctrines of discovery and terra nullius, which for 20 years teaching in a law faculty property, I consistently reminded my students. I will put this euphemistically of the real meaninglessness of these doctrines and the historical distortion and the colonial basis that existed for them.
The other is that indigenous rights are not frozen. This is an important amendment that is in accord with Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Madam Speaker, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples speaks to free, prior and informed consent. The same government is trying to ram through the Trans Mountain pipeline at nearly $20 billion despite the fact that there is strong opposition from first nation communities.
Will the passage of this bill mean that the government will finally halt ramming through this pipeline over the objections of first nations?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, we did get elected saying that we would redo the consultation process for Trans Mountain. We redid it. We redid it imperfectly, and the Federal Court reminded us of that. Therefore, we went back to the table again, with one consultation group being led by Justice Iacobucci and the other being led by Justice Department officials, and we did a better job to the satisfaction of the Federal Court.
The kind of process that FPIC in UNDRIP represents is one that hopefully allows us to avoid these kinds of questions down the road. They will put indigenous peoples at the table from the get-go, as they should be.
View Blake Richards Profile
CPC (AB)
View Blake Richards Profile
2021-05-14 10:33 [p.7234]
Madam Speaker, the minister has claimed that somehow there has been Conservative dilatory tactics used and he has to move time allocation, yet that has not been the case. Maybe the minister could give us the real reasons why time allocation is being moved.
I know he has so far refused to attend the heritage committee hearings on Bill C-10, even though he has been ordered to do so. Perhaps, is he moving time allocation so he can clear his schedule to enable him to appear at that committee as he has been asked to?
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the real sense of humour that he has in posing that question.
There is nothing but government priority represented in the use of time allocation on this, priority for indigenous peoples, the importance of the law. This should have been passed in the last Parliament. It was the will of Parliament and the will of most of the Senate except for dilatory tactics used by Conservative senators. We have seen dilatory tactics in this minority Parliament used very effectively by the Conservative Party only to impede, not on any good, substantive ground. This is an important bill. It is about human rights. It is about the human rights of indigenous peoples.
View Julie Vignola Profile
BQ (QC)
View Julie Vignola Profile
2021-05-14 10:34 [p.7234]
Madam Speaker, it is high time that we passed Bill C-15.
First nations peoples are human beings, and that is precisely what Bill C-15 says. As human beings, they must enjoy the same rights as all other human beings. This is 2021, and it is about time that was acknowledged and implemented.
However, it is not right for parliamentarians, who represent the people, to be denied the right to speak to and discuss these issues.
View David Lametti Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, this is not the first time we are debating this bill in the House. Members of the Bloc Québécois have already participated in the debate.
This bill is already well known. It is based on a former bill, so it is not surprising—
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
Order. It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.
The hon. member for Yorkton—Melville on a point of order.
View Cathay Wagantall Profile
CPC (SK)
View Cathay Wagantall Profile
2021-05-14 10:36 [p.7234]
Madam Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. I am quite concerned about the fact that we are not allowed to lie or mislead in this House and that we are not allowed to call it out when it does happen.
I would request that the minister apologize for his comments with regard to two young, newer members of Parliament who did a high five at the back of the House at an untimely point. He is using that as an excuse to further mislead the House that the reason we are expressing concern about this legislation is simply as a stalling tactic. I would appreciate it if the minister would apologize for making a comment that was misleading to the House and to Canadians.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, before there is a ruling on this point of order I would like the opportunity to provide some comments, then we can dig into the number of times we can reference of that happening on the other side of the House.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
We are getting into debate on both issues. We have started the process, so we will take it up for consideration.
View Greg McLean Profile
CPC (AB)
View Greg McLean Profile
2021-05-14 10:37 [p.7234]
Madam Speaker, pardon me for what might be a rookie mistake here, but I need to go back to my indigenous constituents and tell them why this minister is, in my opinion, misleading the House about why this is only getting one hour of debate on the floor of the House of Commons. There will be unparliamentary language—
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
I am sorry to interrupt the member, but this is getting into debate. We will look into the matter and the Speaker will come back to the House with the ruling.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
The question is on the motion.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
View Mark Gerretsen Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
I declare the motion carried.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Madam Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion.
That, notwithstanding any Standing Orders, special order or usual practice, the House now proceed to Statements by Members followed by Oral Questions and that the usual allotment of time be accorded for each rubric.
View Alexandra Mendès Profile
Lib. (QC)
All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion will please say nay.
Hearing none, it is agreed.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
Hearing none, the motion is carried.
View Gary Anandasangaree Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, on May 18, Tamils in Canada and around the world will mark the 12th anniversary of the Mullivaikkal genocide. They will mourn, they will grieve, they will commemorate and they will resolve to never again be witness to such genocide and atrocity in our world. Sadly, this right to commemorate itself is under attack. The Sri Lankan state continues to desecrate memorials and threaten those who commemorate.
Despite these restrictions, Tamils on the island and around the world will join hands on May 18 in person or virtually to pay tribute to our fallen brothers and sisters, and recommit to ensuring that Tamils can live on the island with freedom, equality and self-determination. We will continue to be resilient and never be silenced. The monuments to those who were lost is etched in our collective memory and in our hearts. The march towards justice is long and painful, but we will continue until justice is served.
View Marty Morantz Profile
CPC (MB)
Madam Speaker, today we remember the victims of the Pontian Greek genocide, who were brutally exterminated and oppressed a century ago. The Ottoman Empire carried out a campaign of ethnic cleansing against its Christian Greek population during the first World War.
A period of horrific violence took place until 1922, during which hundreds of thousands of Greek Pontians were incarcerated, deported, forced into death marches or systematically executed. Sadly, since these acts of intolerance, violence and hate took place, the world must still learn from our past to prevent similar acts from ever taking place again.
On behalf of our Conservative caucus, I join with the Greek community and all Canadians in remembrance of this horrific chapter in human history. We must never again let atrocities like these happen and always speak out against systemic discrimination and injustices.
View Pam Damoff Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Speaker, did colleagues know that Canada has one of the highest rates of multiple sclerosis in the world? It is not only the COVID-19 pandemic that has had a more pronounced impact on women. Sadly, so does MS, as 75% of Canadians living with MS are women. The pandemic has amplified the significant challenges those with MS face, including barriers to appropriate treatment and care, employment and housing, which makes this MS Awareness Month all the more important.
Organizations like the MS Society of Canada are working to ensure Canadians living with MS can participate in all aspects of life. Every day, people living with MS, like my friend Dave Millar, do everything in their power to persevere.
We must continue to raise awareness about MS, not just during the month of May, but throughout the year and provide funding for significant research, so that one day there can be a world free of MS.
View Randall Garrison Profile
NDP (BC)
Madam Speaker, today I rise to call on all Canadians to come together in the fight against hate next Monday on the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia.
Too many members of my community still face hatred and violence here in Canada and around the world. Last year, here at home, hate crimes based on sexual orientation rose by 41%. We must do better for our neighbours, friends and family members. In particular, we must do better for queer, trans and gender non-conforming youth, who are just trying to find their place in this world in the face of incredible hostility.
We cannot remain silent when we hear of people jailed, tortured and too often murdered for who they are or who they love. Yes, we must speak out against this hate at home and abroad, but we must also make sure that Canada is a place where people can find refuge when their own country is not safe because of their sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.
I look forward to the day we can simply celebrate inclusion and put the fight against homophobia and transphobia behind us once and for all. Let us work together toward that day.
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
2021-05-14 11:27 [p.7237]
Madam Speaker, this pandemic has been extremely difficult for many low-income families with young children.
I am proud that Bill C-14 has received Royal Assent. This will make it possible to provide a $1,200 supplement to the Canada child benefit for low-income families with children under the age of six.
Canadians are feeling the financial burden of the pandemic, and this targeted support will provide some much-needed relief to thousands of families in my riding of Vimy and will help more than two million children in Canada.
The Government of Canada has provided 80% of all the pandemic-related support to Canadians, and we will continue to be there for families until this crisis is over.
View Dave MacKenzie Profile
CPC (ON)
View Dave MacKenzie Profile
2021-05-14 11:28 [p.7237]
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to report on a very successful event that was held in my riding. Each year, the Alexandra Hospital in Ingersoll has a gala fundraiser organized by the hospital board of trust foundation to raise funds for the purchase of equipment for the hospital.
Obviously, due to COVID restrictions, the usual annual event could not be held. Robin Schultz, the executive director of the foundation, and a group of volunteers put on the Stay Home ... Stay Safe virtual gala this past Saturday evening.
The gala was the usual ticket price, but instead of attending for dinner and entertainment, the guests received a charcuterie box that fed two people, prepared by the Elm Hurst Inn. Online entertainment was provided by Ken Archer, Bob Breen, Ted Comiskey, Jim Gonder, Kiley Joe Masson and the Ingersoll Pipe Band.
It was a very enjoyable evening and a successful event. Over 200 tickets were sold, and the attendees could dress up or down as they wished. It was a great event hosted by Robin and her volunteer team, another great gala in a different format. I thank them all.
Results: 1 - 60 of 32112 | Page: 1 of 536

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

For more data options, please see Open Data