Hon. Mark Gerretsen · TranslatePolitics.ca

Government Orders

2026-06-17

“Let's just copy our votes from before. My team all says yes on this one.”

Government Orders

Government Business No. 13—Proceedings on Bill C‑22

2026-06-17

“I want the Conservatives and Liberals to switch their speaking order. Keep the regular rules and time limits for those spots though.”

Private Members' Business

2026-06-17

“I take back the unparliamentary word I said.”

“I want the other member to apologize for saying the Prime Minister voted against a motion. The Prime Minister didn't vote at all. He's not even in the country.”

Statements by Members

Kingston's Town Crier

2026-06-17

“I'm praising a local celebrity from my riding to make myself look good.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a Kingston icon and one of the most celebrated town criers in the world: our very own Chris Whyman. This year marks more than four decades since Chris first donned the regalia and stepped into the role of Kingston's official town crier in 1984. What began as a one-year appointment has become a remarkable career, representing our city with pride, humour and a voice that can carry across Market Square. Over the years, Chris has earned provincial, national and international acclaim, including multiple world championships, all while serving as an ambassador for Kingston's history, culture and community spirit. Whether he is welcoming visitors, opening festivals or representing Canada abroad, he brings an unmistakable energy that reflects the very best of our city. On behalf of the residents of Kingston, I congratulate Chris Whyman on his extraordinary service and thank him for more than 40 years of dedication to our community. Hear ye, hear ye. Well done, Chris.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Oral Questions

Points of Order

2026-06-16

“You're not just a little out of order. I think you should apologize for being so disrespectful. Cake in the House! That's so wrong.”

“I want to control debate. I want to pass this bill quickly. I don't care about what others think. The government should have the power to censor people. It is good that we can rush this bill through.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to respond to the point of order raised by my colleague, respecting the effect of the programming motion related to Bill C‑22 in the context of our collective and individual privileges. I submit that the matter is a question of whether the House has the ability to regulate its proceedings that appear to restrict the privileges of the House. I can state categorically that the House does have the powers to limit and, in some cases, waive its privileges. Page 65 of the fourth edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice states: As a collectivity, the House of Commons has privileges that enable its members to fulfill their constitutional duties.... The two most dominant rights or powers are the right of the House to regulate its own internal affairs and the power to discipline. The programming motion that would govern the consideration of Bill C‑22 seeks to achieve to set a procedural process for the disposal of the bill. The House is no stranger to innovative and constructive ways to dispose of business before the House and in committees. During the pandemic, the House adopted motions that would have normally been seen as a restriction on the privileges of members and the House more generally. Indeed, the exclusive power of the House to regulate internal affairs is the cornerstone of the architecture of parliamentary privilege. The ability to regulate and control its own debates, agenda and proceedings relating to the legislative and deliberative functions is one of the most important privileges that the Constitution bestows upon Parliament. I submit that the exercise of these powers is central to the matter before the House. The House can give direction to committees, which are creatures of the House. The House can decide, by a majority of the voices, to structure the legislative process for any given bill. This is precisely the case with the proposal before the House. Therefore, I conclude that the matter is clearly within the House's powers to regulate its internal affairs in respect of the legislative agenda.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Combatting Hate Act

2026-06-15

“We can do this because we've done it before. That's all. If it worked before then it has to be okay.”

Government Orders

Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

2026-06-15

“You play games too. That's why we always run out the clock on every bill, even ones everyone agrees on.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, the hon. member was critical of the parliamentary secretary. He was suggesting that the parliamentary secretary was inaccurate when he said that Conservatives are just filibustering everything. He tried to make the offer that Conservatives come here in good faith. We can look at Bill C-25, the strong and free elections act. The reality is that it is a bill that passed the House unanimously, passed committee unanimously and ultimately passed the House unanimously, yet we still had to move time allocation on it. Even with a bill they completely and fully supported, the Conservatives would not let it go through the House. It is a little bit much for the member to stand up and suggest that we are the ones accusing them of games, when, in reality, he knows full well that Conservatives are playing games on every bill, including the bills they support.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Act

2026-06-12

“I think we should all agree to say the day is over and go home now.”

Government Orders

Bail and Sentencing Reform Act

2026-06-12

“I'm trying to pick a fight. The other guy said I don't answer questions. I'll demand he answer mine. He must be hiding something if he won't say what police think. Police like our bill so he must be wrong.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member for Bow River did not answer the question of the parliamentary secretary. In his speech, he said he spoke with RCMP all the time. The parliamentary secretary asked what the RCMP told him about bail reform and lawful access. In his answer, in which he ironically first started off by accusing Liberals of never answering the question, he then skated around the whole question and talked about what his constituents are saying to him. Why do we not ask the member again what the RCMP has been saying to him? He will not answer that question because law enforcement is wholly behind this bill. That is why he does not want to answer it. Will he just come to terms with the fact that he is at odds with the RCMP and law enforcement on this?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I am going to complain about the opposition party using the rules to delay our bills. They are playing games by making us use closure to pass bills they actually agree with just so they can grandstand about accountability. This slows everything down. I want the opposition to stop delaying so we can pass more government bills faster.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I find it very interesting, listening to Conservatives talk about accountability and how dare we use this opportunity to move closure. Yesterday we moved closure on Bill C-25, the strong and free elections act, which was supported unanimously in the PROC committee and then got to the House. They forced us to move closure on it just so they could vote on it as well. It passed unanimously in the House too. It is clear that all the Conservatives are doing is using any possible delay tactic, regardless of whether they even support a bill. Would the minister not agree that perhaps it is time for the Conservatives to put down the tool of forcing us to use time allocation just because they know they can delay until the point that we have to do this, so they can then use the 30 minutes to stand in the House and say, “Oh, how dare you disrupt accountability?” Meanwhile, it is all about the games that they are playing.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

2026-06-12

“The Conservatives' questions are a personal attack on my new Liberal teammate. She has shown great devotion to her voters and cares only about her community, not party lines. I want her to feel good and talk about all the good things she can now deliver to her riding from our side of the aisle.”

Government Orders

Protecting Victims Act

2026-06-09

“What you did doesn't match your speech. You tried to stop debate earlier, but now you're speaking passionately. I'll point that out to make you look insincere. I'm using the fact that some Conservatives didn't vote to paint your whole party as playing games.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke so passionately about such a serious and important issue, this piece of legislation, but I cannot help reflecting on the fact that earlier this evening, the Conservatives put forward a motion to adjourn the House so that this debate would have ended. He would not have had the opportunity to speak on the bill like he did now. As a matter of fact, whereas every Liberal voted on that adjournment motion, 18 Conservatives did not vote, including the Leader of the Opposition. They did not even vote on the motion they put forward. They would have had all the time to plan this. They could have been planning it since noon today, preparing for the moment. They could have told all their members, “At this specific time, we're going to pull this game. Please make sure to vote,” but they did not. It is more of an indication that this is nothing but a game to the Conservatives. Why are they doing this? Why did he vote in favour of that motion to adjourn?

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Supplementary Estimates (A), 2026‑27

2026-06-08

“If we could just vote the same way as last time, that would be great. You know, with my team all voting yes.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-06-08

“I think 'celebrating' is a bit much, but you get what I mean. Conservatives pounce on any bad news to attack us. They probably jumped at that 0.04% drop. Well, here's some advice: that won't win elections. It's kind of funny though, because if they actually figured that out, we'd be in trouble.”

“Ignore their downgrades. Ignore the deficit. Look, jobs went up in May! Unemployment is low! Those are the numbers that make us look good.”

“I don't want to answer to anyone who questions my position. I'm just going to attack my opponent instead of engaging with the issue.”

“I want to make the other member look bad by listing popular programs she voted against. I don't want to talk about high costs or a recession.”

“I want to make the other member look bad. Maybe this rule will help me do that.”