Parliament AIIndependent · non-official

All sittings← 2016-05-192016-05-30 →

Friday, May 20, 2016 · sitting No. 60

Commons debates assisted-dying bill under time allocation as report stage ends

Government orders on Bill C-14 consumed the largest share of sitting No. 60. Liberal MP Kim Rudd said the legislation supplies a necessary framework while Conservatives and New Democrats pressed for more time and broader access. Debate on the bill concluded after a time-allocation motion, leaving the measure at report stage with third reading expected next week.

Question period featured repeated Conservative demands for a referendum on electoral reform. Conservative MP Andrew Scheer said Canadians must have the final say, while Minister Maryam Monsef replied that any change requires public consent. Other exchanges covered Kinder Morgan pipeline reviews, access-to-information rules and steel-dumping complaints.

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 · 2016-05-20

Government (Liberal)OppositionOver the day: government 47%, opposition 53% of the words spokenGovernment businessQuestion PeriodRoutine proceedingsGovernment business▲ Government side held the floor▼ Opposition held the floorOpened 10:0511:0012:0013:00Last speech 13:35Time of day, Ottawa · the House sat 3 h 30 min · each dot is a stretch of debate, placed at the minute it began
32Another sitting that went nowhereThe sitting devoted most time to Criminal Code and democratic-reform debate yet recorded no votes and advanced no bills. Question period produced few direct answers while order was never called.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

Natural Resources

Conservative MP Candice Bergen said the National Energy Board report supports approval, while Liberal MP Kim Rudd said a ministerial panel would consult further before a December decision.

Read the exchange

Softwood Lumber

Conservative MP Brad Trost pressed for progress on a new agreement within the 100-day timeline, and Minister Chrystia Freeland said U.S. negotiators would arrive in Ottawa next week.

Read the exchange

Veterans Affairs

Conservative MP Alupa Clarke accused the government of breaking its promise not to force veterans into court, while Parliamentary Secretary Karen McCrimmon cited new funding in budget 2016.

Read the exchange

Status of Women

NDP MP Sheri Benson asked whether proactive legislation would arrive within six months, and Liberal MP Anju Dhillon pointed to budget measures and a special committee review.

Read the exchange

Agriculture and Agri-Food

NDP MP Alistair MacGregor criticized the lack of labelling, while Agriculture Minister Lawrence MacAulay said the agriculture committee would examine the issue.

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. partly answered
    Public Services and ProcurementMr. Andrew Scheer (Conservative) asked Ms. Joyce Murray (Liberal). substantive question.The answer addresses the pay issue in general terms but provides no specific immediate actions for current unpaid staff.There are a few glitches on the way. They are being attended to as quickly as possible, and we will have a system that pays accurately and effectively in short order.
  2. deflected
    Democratic ReformMr. Andrew Scheer (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer avoids any commitment to a referendum and instead restates general principles about legitimacy and inclusion.We will work with all members of the House to ensure that the voices of those Canadians with disabilities and exceptionalities, new Canadians, indigenous persons, and those who are often marginalized are included in this important conversation.
  3. deflected
    Democratic ReformMr. Andrew Scheer (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer sidesteps the referendum demand by offering a vague assurance about Canadians having the final say without addressing the specific request.be assured that we will go out of our way to ensure that Canadians have the first and the final say in how we go about our electoral reform priority.
  4. deflected
    Democratic ReformMr. Jacques Gourde (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer ignores the referendum question and restates the government's plan for a parliamentary committee without engaging the transparency concern.We committed to bringing together a group of elected parliamentarians from all party lines to study the options available and to make a recommendation to the House.
  5. misdirected
    Democratic ReformMr. Jacques Gourde (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). loaded question.The question contains a loaded premise about destroying democracy; the answer rejects the premise and pivots to defending inclusive tools rather than addressing the referendum.I do not accept the premise of that statement.
  6. partly answered
    The EnvironmentMr. Peter Julian (NDP) asked Catherine McKenna (Liberal). substantive question.The answer explains interim principles and a separate review process but does not directly address how the four-month review compensates for prior system flaws.The Minister of Natural Resources announced a separate process to review this project, and we will be going forward in this manner.
  7. deflected
    Access to InformationMr. Peter Julian (NDP) asked Ms. Joyce Murray (Liberal). loaded question.The answer avoids the secrecy and veto-power accusations by focusing on general modernization efforts and consultations instead of the specific criticisms raised.for the very first time since 1983, we are modernizing and updating access to information to ensure openness, transparency, and accountability in government.
  8. deflected
    Access to InformationMs. Brigitte Sansoucy (NDP) asked Ms. Joyce Murray (Liberal). substantive question.The answer sidesteps the veto-power question by listing already-taken steps like fee elimination and format improvements rather than addressing the proposed ministerial veto.The government has already eliminated the fees associated with access to information requests, except for the initial $5 fee.
  9. answered
    Physician-Assisted DyingMs. Brigitte Sansoucy (NDP) asked Mr. Sean Casey (Liberal). loaded question.The answer directly corrects the premise on the Alberta ruling and justifies the bill via Carter.I want to point out that the Alberta Court of Appeal did not rule on Bill C-14 .
  10. deflected
    Democratic ReformMrs. Sylvie Boucher (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer avoids the referendum question by attacking the prior government instead.We will not take any lessons from the former government.
  11. deflected
    Democratic ReformMrs. Sylvie Boucher (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer sidesteps the current referendum demand by listing past non-referendum changes.All of these changes occurred without a referendum.
  12. deflected
    Democratic ReformMr. Martin Shields (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer evades the referendum question by pivoting to historical voting extensions.if the members opposite believe that extending the right to vote to women is a little change, it appears we are on completely different pages.
  13. deflected
    Democratic ReformMr. Martin Shields (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). substantive question.The answer ignores the FPTP and referendum query to discuss the inherited system.the system we currently have was inherited from the 19th century.
  14. misdirected
    Democratic ReformJason Kenney (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). loaded question.The answer attacks the asker on turnout instead of addressing the national referendum claim.I understand that the voices of half of Canadians who will be affected by these changes are not relevant to the member opposite.
  15. misdirected
    Democratic ReformJason Kenney (Conservative) asked Maryam Monsef (Liberal). loaded question.The answer turns to philosophical disagreement and young voters rather than the turnout facts raised.
  16. partly answered
    InfrastructureMr. Erin Weir (NDP) asked Ms. Leona Alleslev (Liberal). substantive question.The answer addresses procurement balance but does not specify actions for Canadian steel.We are committed to looking at that and understanding what the best balance in those procurements will be.
  17. deflected
    International TradeMr. Scott Duvall (NDP) asked Chrystia Freeland (Liberal). substantive question.The answer emphasizes ongoing consultations without specifying any concrete actions against steel dumping.We are working hard, particularly with our EU and U.S. counterparts on this issue.
  18. deflected
    Natural ResourcesCandice Bergen (Conservative) asked Ms. Kim Rudd (Liberal). substantive question.The answer focuses on the ministerial panel process instead of addressing approval of the project.We have asked that the panel members travel the pipeline route to hear from and talk to indigenous peoples and local communities, and report back to the minister by November 1, for a decision on or before December—
  19. deflected
    Natural ResourcesCandice Bergen (Conservative) asked Ms. Kim Rudd (Liberal). substantive question.The answer highlights relationship-building and the panel's role without addressing the NEB process or delays.We are building bridges and relationships with our indigenous peoples, industry partners, and communities along the project.
  20. deflected
    Natural ResourcesMrs. Shannon Stubbs (Conservative) asked Ms. Kim Rudd (Liberal). substantive question.The answer promotes an online engagement tool rather than addressing uncertainty or investment concerns.Canadians have asked that their views be heard on these important decisions.
  21. partly answered
    Natural ResourcesMrs. Shannon Stubbs (Conservative) asked Ms. Kim Rudd (Liberal). substantive question.The answer acknowledges the NEB report and outlines the review timeline but does not commit to approval.When that report is received November 1, it will be considered, with a decision on or before December 19.
  22. misdirected
    Temporary Foreign WorkersMs. Niki Ashton (NDP) asked Mr. Rodger Cuzner (Liberal). substantive question.The answer shifts to criticizing the questioner's committee priorities instead of outlining a plan against worker abuse.That is why I was surprised as a parliamentary secretary to see that the member, when she had an opportunity to convince the committee to undertake a study, led with EI and not with temporary foreign workers.
  23. answered
    Agriculture and Agri-FoodMr. Alistair MacGregor (NDP) asked Lawrence MacAulay (Liberal). substantive question.The answer directly states the government's approach by referring the issue to the agriculture committee for examination.That is why I have asked the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food to examine the issues around genetically modified animals.
  24. answered
    Softwood LumberMr. Brad Trost (Conservative) asked Chrystia Freeland (Liberal). substantive question.The answer specifies recent meetings and upcoming negotiations to secure U.S. market access.I am pleased to report to the House that a U.S. negotiating team for softwood lumber is coming to Ottawa next week to continue our negotiations.
  25. deflected
    Softwood LumberMr. Todd Doherty (Conservative) asked Chrystia Freeland (Liberal). loaded question.The answer avoids addressing the current negotiation timeline or job protection by blaming the prior government and restating ongoing work.I would like to remind the hon. member that the previous softwood lumber agreement expired under his government's watch.
  26. deflected
    Government AppointmentsMr. Mark Strahl (Conservative) asked Mr. Serge Cormier (Liberal). substantive question.The answer describes panel meetings and consultations but does not explain the choice to appoint a member with stated bias.The ministerial advisory panel is an independent committee that provides advice to the minister on the last in, first out policy.
  27. deflected
    Government AppointmentsMr. Mark Strahl (Conservative) asked Mr. Serge Cormier (Liberal). substantive question.The answer reiterates that the panel is independent and consultations are occurring without addressing the alleged conflict of interest or removal request.All stakeholders in this segment of the fishery will have an opportunity to express their views.
  28. partly answered
    Status of WomenMs. Sheri Benson (NDP) asked Ms. Anju Dhillon (Liberal). substantive question.The answer lists budget measures related to the wage gap but does not commit to introducing proactive pay equity legislation within six months.Budget 2016 announced a number of important measures that would support women's labour market participation and help address the gender wage gap
  29. deflected
    Mining IndustryMr. Robert Aubin (NDP) asked Chrystia Freeland (Liberal). substantive question.The answer praises Canadian mining companies and mentions ongoing study without explaining why an ombudsman with investigative powers has not been appointed.We are looking into ways to strengthen protections concerning the work of our mining companies abroad.
  30. misdirected
    Veterans AffairsMr. Alupa Clarke (Conservative) asked Mrs. Karen McCrimmon (Liberal). substantive question.The answer highlights new benefits but does not address the promise not to force veterans into court or the Equitas lawsuit.In budget 2016 we have included $5.6 billion to increase the benefits for earnings lost, for permanent impairment and disability awards.
  31. deflected
    Veterans AffairsMrs. Cathay Wagantall (Conservative) asked Mrs. Karen McCrimmon (Liberal). substantive question.The answer declines to comment on the specific case and points to budget spending without addressing the broken promise on court action.The hon. member knows that I cannot comment on a specific case, let alone one that is going before the courts.
  32. misdirected
    Veterans AffairsMrs. Cathay Wagantall (Conservative) asked Mrs. Karen McCrimmon (Liberal). loaded question.The answer attacks the prior government's record on offices and staff instead of addressing the covenant or lawsuit.the previous government closed offices, laid off staff, and made access to financial benefits for veterans very difficult.
  33. deflected
    Agriculture and Agri-FoodMr. Larry Maguire (Conservative) asked Lawrence MacAulay (Liberal). loaded question.Answer restates general border measures without addressing the Manitoba PED protocol changes or intervention request.That is exactly why CFIA is ensuring that trucks are washed before they come across the border into Canada.
  34. deflected
    Intergovernmental RelationsMr. Dan Albas (Conservative) asked Mr. Greg Fergus (Liberal). substantive question.Answer notes past amendments but avoids any commitment on referring the court ruling to the Supreme Court.He has the time, I have the beer; let us get together.
  35. partly answered
    Agriculture and Agri-FoodMs. Monique Pauzé (Bloc) asked Lawrence MacAulay (Liberal). substantive question.Answer explains referral to committee for examination but does not address labeling requirement or number of studies needed.This is a new issue. It is important that it go before the agriculture committee and we let the committee do its work.
  36. deflected
    PensionsMrs. Marilène Gill (Bloc) asked Mr. Greg Fergus (Liberal). substantive question.Answer expresses concern and promises review but provides no timeline or commitment on preferred creditor status.We are going to take a closer look at this issue.
  37. answered
    Physician-Assisted DyingMr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Bloc) asked Mr. Sean Casey (Liberal). substantive question.Answer directly states the amendment was rejected and explains the rationale for retaining the condition.the amendment mentioned by the member was presented in committee and rejected.