TranslatePolitics.ca

Recent debates

8 latest topics

06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 57 statements 06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 19 statements 06-18 Arab Heritage Month Act 5 statements 06-18 The Economy 15 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Housing 12 statements 06-18 The Environment 2 statements

Government Orders

2026-04-27 Sitting 111 Showing 21–29 of 29

A bill to create new criminal offenses for promoting hatred and intimidating people at religious or community sites. During discussion, members mostly argued about unrelated partisan disputes and parliamentary tactics, rather than the substance of the bill.

Official Hansard ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 1:50 p.m.

“I want to change the topic to something nice that recently happened. I also want to mention something else nice that happened today. Then I want to imply my party is responsible for those nice things.”

Shannon Miedema

Liberal 1:50 p.m.

“I want everyone to work together and pass bills.”

Mel Arnold

Conservative 1:50 p.m.

“You set committees to 60% Liberal instead of the 51% this government actually won. Are you shutting down opposition completely, or do you have some other sneaky reason?”

Shannon Miedema

Liberal 1:50 p.m.

“We chose to pack committees with extra Liberals instead of removing Conservatives. We wanted to look nice while still keeping control.”

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas

Bloc Québécois 1:50 p.m.

“You're packing committees with extra Liberals to grab more power than you deserve.”

Shannon Miedema

Liberal 1:50 p.m.

“We should have a majority on every committee because we're the majority in Parliament. That's how it's always been done.”

Leah Gazan

NDP 1:50 p.m.

“This government keeps passing laws I don't like. Now they'll have a majority on every committee too. Doesn't that worry you?”

Shannon Miedema

Liberal 1:50 p.m.

“Floor crossings are legal. We didn't break any rules. I have nothing more to say.”

Kelly McCauley

Conservative 1:55 p.m.

“I want to argue that the other party is attacking democracy. They betray voters and don't allow enough debate. A past leader grabbed someone. We should get to lead some committees and they shouldn't get to decide what we can debate. This is about transparency. They tax and spend too much without asking us. They call us obstructing when they don't want to show the budget. I'm mad they want to decide things without asking me.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to fit in so much on an attack on democracy and explain it in four and a half minutes, but I will try. I am pleased to rise on Motion No. 9, another attempt by the Liberal government to quash all opposition and criticism of its government. Now, this is not about the legitimacy of the Liberal majority, however vile the betrayal of their constituents was by the MPs who crossed. It is still allowed within the Westminster system and I do respect that. I recognize the government as a majority. The Prime Minister commented that he was going to do things differently, with a less partisan approach to governing. Of course, that comment aged about as well as his comment that affordability is at its best in the last 10 years. I am fine with the Liberals adding more members to committees. I would note that when the Liberals formed the committees in June, they actually reduced the number of committee members they normally had, stating they did not have enough members to do the work. It is funny to see them now actually bumping up two people on committees, when really they could make do with one. Again, I am perfectly fine with it. They do have the majority. However, this House and Canadians deserve oversight from this government. For the sake of accountability and transparency, we need better oversight. That is why we are proposing that the operations committee, known as the mighty OGGO, the public accounts committee, the access to information committee, also known as the ethics committee, and the status of women committee maintain the current setup, which is traditionally led by the opposition, with the Conservatives and the Bloc making up the majority. Again, this is for accountability and transparency. Now, we have seen the contempt the Liberals have for this Parliament. It is clear again and again, and this goes back to 2015. The Liberal government always seems to say that it wants an audience and not an opposition. We have seen motions like this in the past. Going back to the 42nd Parliament, we had Motion No. 6 from this government. Many of the Liberals here today were here for Motion No. 6. That was a motion that would have gutted Conservative opposition members' ability to submit Order Paper questions. The government was going to decide what was a valid Order Paper question, not an elected MP. The minister would decide. Also under Motion No. 6, the government stated that it would decide what was an appropriate amount of debate. The Liberals would stop the Conservatives, the Bloc and the NDP from debating certain issues. Of course, we all remember that famous night of Motion No. 6, known as “elbowgate”, when the former prime minister manhandled the late Gord Brown and also elbowed an NDP member in the chest. During COVID, we saw Bill C-13 under the Trudeau government, and again, a majority of the members opposite were part of that government. With Bill C-13, the Liberals brought in a bill that would allow them, for 21 months, to have unlimited taxing and unlimited spending without any oversight or vote in this Parliament. The whole reason Parliament exists goes back to King Edward I, 1295, when calling the model Parliament, stating that “ what touches all should be approved by all”. Here we have the Liberal government under Bill C-13 saying that, for 21 months, what touches all should only be approved by the Liberals and not by all elected members. This government has a long history of trying to stamp out opposition. We have seen this government and my colleague from Winnipeg North constantly call out any opposition to Liberal plans as obstruction. Let us remember that the finance minister refused to table a budget last spring. He said there would not even be a budget in 2025, and yet when the Liberals finally tabled a budget, 10 months later, they accused the opposition of purposely delaying it. I understand I am out of time for this half of my speech about Liberal obstruction and blocking accountability. I look forward to continuing it afterwards.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

What they said. What they meant.

Recent debates