Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2011-02-14 15:55:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena\u2014Bulkley Valley, NDP)",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"2317616\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madam Speaker, the argument of the Conservatives to this point is that there is a great need for urgency. This is why they are doing this super closure motion that denies all debate. It does not allow parliamentarians to do the very thing we are in the House to do, which is to scrutinize laws and try to understand their implications.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317617\" data-originallang=\"en\">When we have asked government members for evidence on costing, on how many criminals we are talking about and who they are, they come back with PMO spin lines, which is not very much of a debate at all.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317618\" data-originallang=\"en\">The other argument is the government blames the opposition for any delays that may have happened. However, the bill was killed twice at the government's own hands. Every time it kills it, it adds another 6, 12, 18 months to the whole process. Yet the government pretends that those prorogations, that shutting down and locking of the doors of Parliament, never happened. On the argument of urgency, obviously this was not urgent for the government because it killed it twice.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317619\" data-originallang=\"en\">The argument of efficacy is that this will do something to better Canadians and stop the Earl Joneses of the world. It is too late to stop Lacroix because he has already been released. The Conservatives say that the effectiveness of this bill will somehow be everything that Canadians need with respect to white-collar crime.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317620\" data-originallang=\"en\"> On both of those arguments, we have asked the government members time and again to give us some shred of evidence that the urgency is needed now, that we must ram this through without debate, or that when this does come into law, it will actually do what the government promises to do.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317621\" data-originallang=\"en\">My colleague sits on the committee. Has evidence been brought forward that proves this must happen now? If the bill does come into law, because of the new coalition arrangement between the Bloc and the Conservatives, will it somehow stop the Earl Joneses of the future from doing what he did to our pensioners?</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"2317616\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madame la Pr\u00e9sidente, \u00e0 ce propos, les conservateurs soutiennent qu'il y a urgence. Voil\u00e0 pourquoi ils pr\u00e9sentent cette motion de cl\u00f4ture extraordinaire, qui emp\u00eache tout d\u00e9bat. Elle emp\u00eache les parlementaires de remplir leur r\u00f4le \u00e0 la Chambre, soit d'examiner attentivement les lois et d'en comprendre les r\u00e9percussions.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317617\" data-originallang=\"en\">Lorsque nous demandons des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de preuve concernant les co\u00fbts, le nombre de criminels dont il est question et l'identit\u00e9 de ceux-ci, les minist\u00e9riels nous r\u00e9pondent \u00e0 l'aide d'explications provenant du CPM, ce qui est bien loin de constituer un v\u00e9ritable d\u00e9bat.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317618\" data-originallang=\"en\">L'autre argument du gouvernement consiste \u00e0 bl\u00e2mer l'opposition pour tous les retards encourus. Toutefois, c'est le gouvernement qui, \u00e0 deux reprises, a fait mourir au <em>Feuilleton</em> le projet de loi. Chaque fois que cela se produit, il faut ajouter 6, 12 ou 18 autres mois au processus tout entier. Pourtant, le gouvernement agit comme si ces prorogations n'avaient jamais eu lieu, qu'il n'avait pas ferm\u00e9 le Parlement et verrouill\u00e9 ses portes. La question ne devait pas \u00eatre si urgente puisque le gouvernement a mis fin au projet de loi \u00e0 deux reprises.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317619\" data-originallang=\"en\">L'argument de l'efficacit\u00e9 veut que ce projet de loi am\u00e9liore la situation des Canadiens et mette un terme aux agissements des Earl Jones de la plan\u00e8te. Il est trop tard dans le cas de Vincent Lacroix parce que celui-ci a d\u00e9j\u00e0 \u00e9t\u00e9 lib\u00e9r\u00e9. Les conservateurs affirment que l'efficacit\u00e9 de ce projet de loi sera telle que celui-ci r\u00e9pondra \u00e0 tous les besoins des Canadiens en mati\u00e8re de criminalit\u00e9 en col blanc.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317620\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Nous avons demand\u00e9 \u00e0 maintes reprises aux minist\u00e9riels de nous donner une preuve quelconque qu'il y a urgence d'agir imm\u00e9diatement, qu'il faut adopter ce projet de loi \u00e0 toute vapeur, sans en d\u00e9battre, ou qu'une fois qu'il aura force de loi, il fera bel et bien ce que le gouvernement a promis. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"2317621\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le d\u00e9put\u00e9 si\u00e8ge au comit\u00e9. A-t-on pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 des preuves qui montrent la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 d'agir imm\u00e9diatement? Si le projet est adopt\u00e9, en raison de la nouvelle coalition entre les bloquistes et les conservateurs, emp\u00eachera-t-il les futurs Earl Jones de faire ce que ce dernier a fait \u00e0 nos retrait\u00e9s?</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2011/2/14/nathan-cullen-5/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/nathan-cullen/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/1287/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "3742333",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Disposition of Abolition of Early Parole Act",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2011/2/14/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2011%2F2%2F14%2F"
    }
}