Martin Champoux

“The government says changing committee seats is not a political game and calls for cooperation. I am asking my colleague if he thinks the Liberals are actually playing political games.”

“Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Elgin—St. Thomas—London South on his speech. In the speech that he gave here in the House, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons said, “We are proposing to adjust committee membership proportionally to reflect the party standings in the House. It is as simple as that. There are no games, no untoward tactics and no strategies here.” He also said, “My fear is that some members across the aisle are more interested in scoring political points and creating divisions for their own partisan gain, at a time when we really need to co-operate and collaborate in good faith to deliver on issues of critical importance for our country.” He then went on to say, “Collaboration is the approach to politics that Canadians...want in this place for all elected representatives. They do not want partisan gamesmanship.” Does my colleague think that is what the Liberals are doing?”

“The government is using questionable tricks to force a majority and shut down debate. They are also changing how committees work. I want to ask the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, who has been here for a long time, what advice she has for our newest members.”

“Mr. Speaker, I also want to congratulate the Green Party member, who represents a riding in British Columbia. I commend her on her intervention and for having the determination and endurance to rise in the House even though she is her party’s only representative. That is entirely to her credit. While I do not want to play up her seniority too much, my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands has been here since 2011, if I am not mistaken, and she has seen a lot of water flow under the bridge. Some members are new here, arriving just after the by-election a few weeks ago. As my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk said, tomorrow will mark one year since a number of new members arrived in the House. However, they are seeing the government engineer a majority in a highly questionable way and impose a gag order on the first day of this majority to alter the composition of committees in an equally questionable way. I would like to know whether this is the government’s idea of democracy and parliamentarism. I would also like to know whether my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands has any advice for the new members who have just taken their seats in the House.”

“I agree that we should vote against this motion. I am upset that the government is shutting down debate to force through changes to our committees. I want to know what my colleague thinks this means for the next three years.”

“Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from Montmorency—Charlevoix on his speech. He concluded his speech by saying that we need to vote against Motion No. 9. We can debate the substance of the motion, and I would tend to agree with him on that. That being said, what truly bothers me, what irks me and what is so contrary to my values is the way the Liberals are preparing to pass Motion No. 9, in other words, by imposing closure. That does not work. That takes the debate out of the equation. What I find particularly rich and particularly difficult to accept is the fact that the first thing this Liberal government does as a majority government is to use a closure motion to shove down our throats an overhaul of committees that is not even representative of Parliament. I would like to hear my colleague’s comments on that. If that is the Liberals’ first move as a majority government, what does he think the next three years have in store for us?”

“The Liberals say we should follow parliamentary tradition, but they are not doing that with committee seats. By tradition, committee seats match election results. I want to know if my colleague thinks the Liberals really believe their own spin on this.”

“Mr. Speaker, I was somewhat surprised to hear the member for Winnipeg North refer to parliamentary tradition when asking my Conservative colleague whether he thinks we should follow parliamentary tradition. My colleague just answered the question, but I find that quite rich considering that parliamentary tradition would require, say, that the composition of committees follow the composition of the results of the general election that kicked off the current legislature. I would like to ask my colleague something. Does he think that our Liberal colleagues have fallen for the spin, as we say in proper political parlance? Did they drink the mystery Kool-Aid and now genuinely believe that the Liberal government’s current actions respect parliamentary tradition regarding the composition of committees?”