Parliament AIIndependent · non-official

All sittings← 2013-05-102013-05-22 →

Tuesday, May 21, 2013 · sitting No. 252

House spends longest on labour shortages report amid Senate questions

The House devoted the largest share of its sitting to concurrence debate on the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities concerning labour and skills shortages. NDP MP Chris Charlton moved concurrence and defended the report's call for better training and wages, while Conservative MP Kellie Leitch pressed for details on absolute shortages and temporary foreign workers.

Question period was dominated by exchanges on the Senate expenses affair. NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair asked when the Prime Minister learned of negotiations between his former chief of staff Nigel Wright and Senator Mike Duffy and whether current chief of staff Ray Novak knew of the $90,000 payment, while Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird replied that the Prime Minister learned only after media reports and that two independent reviews are under way.

Decided that day

  • Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources passed
  • Bill read a third time and passed
  • Opposition motion on missing funds defeated
  • Amendment on sitting hours defeated

From the Hansard record of the sitting. Full Hansard

No CPAC Question Period upload is on file for this day. CPAC’s channel goes back to December 2019.

Who held the floor · 2013-05-21

Government (Conservative)OppositionOver the day: government 61%, opposition 39% of the words spokenPrivate membersQuestion PeriodRoutine proceedingsGovernment business▲ Government side held the floor▼ Opposition held the floorOpened 11:0513:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:00Last speech 23:10Time of day, Ottawa · the House sat 12 h 5 min · each dot is a stretch of debate, placed at the minute it began
62Bills Advance While Questions Mostly DeflectedThe House passed one committee report and advanced two bills while rejecting two opposition motions. Question Period produced few direct answers and much of the day was spent on supply and ethics debates.AI-rated Score out of 100; the verdict and the answer ratings behind it are a model’s reading. How the AI rates this

AI-rated The sitting score and the rating of each answer come from a language model reading Hansard. How the AI rates this

Other moments

Extension of Sitting Hours

Government House leader Peter Van Loan defended the motion to sit until midnight until June 21, saying it would allow votes to proceed without disrupting committees, while NDP House leader Nathan Cullen accused the government of abusing procedure to avoid scrutiny of omnibus bills.

Read the exchange

Criminal Code

Conservative MP Mark Warawa introduced Bill C-489 to give courts discretion to keep certain offenders away from victims' homes, telling the House it arose from constituents who asked why victims must move after an offence.

Read the exchange

Points of Order

NDP House leader Nathan Cullen raised a point of order under Standing Order 13 arguing the extension motion undermined members' privileges, while Government House leader Peter Van Loan countered that the NDP was simply trying to avoid extra work.

Read the exchange

Government Appointments

NDP MP Robert Chisholm asked about alleged job rigging at ACOA to favour a defeated Conservative candidate, while Labour Minister Gail Shea said an independent Public Service Commission investigation found no evidence of ministerial influence.

Read the exchange

Food Safety

Parliamentary Secretary Pierre Lemieux announced new mandatory E. coli testing rules and labelling for tenderized beef under the safe food for Canadians action plan.

Read the exchange

Question Period, exchange by exchange

AI-rated Each answer’s rating (answered, partly answered, deflected, answered something else) is a model’s reading of the exchange. How the AI rates this

  1. deflected
    EthicsThomas Mulcair (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer avoids the request to call in the RCMP and release documents by restating awareness and referring to independent bodies.this matter has been referred to two independent bodies for review.
  2. answered
    EthicsThomas Mulcair (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer directly addresses the timing of the Prime Minister's knowledge and the new chief of staff's awareness.the Prime Minister was not aware of the payment until last week after it was reported in the media, and neither was his current chief of staff.
  3. deflected
    EthicsThomas Mulcair (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer rejects the premise of the question and restates the Prime Minister's lack of awareness without addressing the use of taxpayer-funded lawyers.I reject much of the premise of his question.
  4. deflected
    EthicsMs. Françoise Boivin (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer avoids specifying what the Prime Minister knew and when by sarcastically dismissing the question while repeating prior statements.one has to be able to roll during question period.
  5. deflected
    EthicsMs. Françoise Boivin (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer repeats a categorical denial without engaging the challenge to the credibility of the claim that the Prime Minister knew nothing.I have stood in this place and I have answered the question categorically as to when the Prime Minister was made aware of this issue.
  6. partly answered
    EthicsMr. Justin Trudeau (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses the request for documents by stating there is none but does not detail the secret deal itself.Our understanding is there is no document.
  7. deflected
    EthicsMr. Justin Trudeau (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer avoids describing the deal by claiming the Prime Minister could not know about an agreement he was unaware of and refers to independent bodies.the Prime Minister obviously not having known of the payment could not know about any alleged agreement to which the leader of the third party refers.
  8. deflected
    EthicsMr. Justin Trudeau (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer denies the existence of a document and refers to independent authorities without addressing the call for an investigation or apology.with respect to a legal agreement to which the member opposite refers, our understanding is there is no such agreement.
  9. deflected
    EthicsMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer addresses reimbursement facts and resignation but avoids all questions on involvement or obstruction.No taxpayer money was involved with respect to this reimbursement.
  10. partly answered
    EthicsMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer explains referral to independent authorities rather than directly addressing whether the PM will call police.This issue has already been referred to two independent authorities that will appropriately look into this matter
  11. deflected
    EthicsMr. Craig Scott (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer rejects the premise and restates known facts without addressing whether a crime may have been committed.I reject much of the premise of his preamble.
  12. deflected
    EthicsMr. Craig Scott (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer rejects the premise and points to independent reviews without addressing the alleged crime.once again, I reject much of the premise of the question from the member opposite.
  13. deflected
    EthicsMs. Alexandrine Latendresse (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer discusses the audit report and expenses but avoids the question on when the PM was informed or directives given.the other place had auditors come in.
  14. deflected
    EthicsMr. Alexandre Boulerice (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). rhetorical question.The answer refers to independent authorities without addressing the call to shed light or answer questions.There are two independent authorities that are looking into this matter.
  15. deflected
    Government AdvertisingMr. Alexandre Boulerice (NDP) asked Ms. Kellie Leitch (Conservative). substantive question.The answer promotes the jobs program and skills training but does not address why ads run before program approval.we want to ensure that, moving forward, the provinces have an opportunity to negotiate with us
  16. answered
    Government AppointmentsMr. Robert Chisholm (NDP) asked Gail Shea (Conservative). loaded question.The answer directly addresses the investigation findings on political influence and actions taken.the independent investigation by the Public Service Commission did not find evidence of any wrongdoing or influence on the part of the ministers or political staff in this matter.
  17. deflected
    EthicsMr. Pat Martin (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer avoids addressing the 2005 promise or any jail time by restating lack of awareness and general principles.the Prime Minister was not aware of this reimbursement until after it became public through media reports.
  18. deflected
    EthicsDominic LeBlanc (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer sidesteps whether the PM asked about compliance by repeating lack of awareness and deferring to reviews.This issue is already before two independent officers to review the situation.
  19. deflected
    EthicsDominic LeBlanc (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer evades mechanisms or authority used by questioning the premise of awareness rather than addressing the agreement details.how could the Prime Minister have expectations on a reimbursement that he was not aware of until it became public?
  20. deflected
    EthicsDominic LeBlanc (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer avoids naming who ordered changes by reiterating the report's conclusion and deferring to independent bodies.This issue has been referred to two independent bodies.
  21. misdirected
    Government AppointmentsMs. Chris Charlton (NDP) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer shifts to the new tribunal's merit process instead of investigating past donations or returning funds.Members of the new Social Security Tribunal are appointed by merit.
  22. misdirected
    Government AppointmentsMs. Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet (NDP) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer repeats the tribunal replacement without addressing enforcement of ethics rules on donations by appointees.Members of the Social Security Tribunal are appointed by merit and must undergo a rigorous selection process
  23. misdirected
    Employment InsuranceMrs. Anne-Marie Day (NDP) asked Ms. Kellie Leitch (Conservative). loaded question.The answer pivots to listing unrelated job programs instead of solutions with provinces on EI reforms or tribunal appointments.we have put forward reforms to employment insurance to better connect Canadians with available jobs
  24. misdirected
    Employment InsuranceMs. Chris Charlton (NDP) asked Ms. Kellie Leitch (Conservative). substantive question.The answer attacks the opposition's voting record rather than explaining the advertising spend or fixing the EI system.The opposition members continue to vote against these things, whether it was the budget, economic action plan 2012, or in their case, already stating that they will be voting against economic action plan 2013.
  25. answered
    Public Works and Government ServicesMs. Linda Duncan (NDP) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). loaded question.Answer directly refutes the accusation and details the integrity framework applied.The member knows we have implemented and developed a tough integrity framework to ensure companies that are convicted of crimes cannot do business with public works and are being banned from bidding on contracts.
  26. answered
    Public Works and Government ServicesMr. Mathieu Ravignat (NDP) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). loaded question.Answer directly addresses the query by confirming the company is banned under the integrity rules.we have shut the door on this particular company, CRG, which has been convicted of a crime.
  27. deflected
    Government AdvertisingMr. Mathieu Ravignat (NDP) asked Ms. Kellie Leitch (Conservative). loaded question.Answer ignores the specific advertising criticism and pivots to general job creation talking points.We are about creating jobs and making sure Canadians have the skills they need to fill those jobs that are available.
  28. partly answered
    Library and Archives CanadaMr. Pierre Nantel (NDP) asked James Moore (Conservative). substantive question.Answer addresses the spending issue and resignation but does not speak to the new appointment request.I made it very clear both in the House and privately to Mr. Daniel Caron when he was president of Library and Archives Canada that his spending was irresponsible and out of line with what taxpayers expect
  29. deflected
    EthicsRalph Goodale (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.Answer rejects the premise and refers to a Senate report instead of addressing the requested emails or timeline.A committee in the other place that was looking into this brought in some outside auditors.
  30. deflected
    EthicsRalph Goodale (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.Answer dismisses the question as wild accusations and points to independent reviews without providing details.There are two independent bodies reviewing this matter.
  31. misdirected
    EthicsMr. Nathan Cullen (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.Answer evades naming the bodies and instead attacks the opposition's referrals.the caucus of the House leader of the official opposition has made two referrals to two independent bodies.
  32. deflected
    EthicsMr. Nathan Cullen (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.Answer avoids the yes/no question on calling police and shifts to general statements on public interest.the Prime Minister has been very clear.
  33. deflected
    EthicsMs. Judy Foote (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer restates prior comments and references an ongoing review without addressing whether new details were learned last week.The Prime Minister did say in this House with respect to Senator Wallin that the Senator's expenses were in line with other parliamentarians from Saskatchewan.
  34. deflected
    Citizenship and ImmigrationMr. Claude Gravelle (NDP) asked Jason Kenney (Conservative). loaded question.The answer shifts to positive immigration targets and exemptions without addressing the claimed cuts or targeting of francophones.
  35. partly answered
    Science and TechnologyMs. Laurin Liu (NDP) asked Gary Goodyear (Conservative). substantive question.The answer notes hundreds of millions allocated for basic research in the budget, directly addressing the call for more investment while also correcting the premise.I would like to tell my friends opposite that there are hundreds of millions of dollars for basic research in this budget, just like all the others.
  36. deflected
    Government AdvertisingMr. Jean-François Fortin (Bloc) asked Ms. Kellie Leitch (Conservative). substantive question.The answer explains the government's duty to inform without confirming or denying any end to the ads.the government has a responsibility to inform Canadians about the programs and benefits available to them.