This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
{
"time": "2017-12-11 12:45:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Mr. Murray Rankin (Victoria, NDP)",
"fr": "M. Murray Rankin (Victoria, NPD)"
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"5184948\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madam Speaker, on section 176, the Liberals would like to take credit for accepting this. Although I am not a member of the justice committee that was dealing with this issue, I know my colleague from Niagara Falls was and I understood that the Conservatives brought in amendments to section 176 and they were defeated by the Liberals. The Liberals then came back a few moments later to simply make the language a bit more gender-neutral and then that was accepted. Therefore, the Conservatives brought in an amendment to fix it, it was defeated, moments later the Liberals, because it has to be their idea, brought it forward and it was fixed. I wonder if my colleague could confirm that is how it went down. </p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"5184948\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madame la Pr\u00e9sidente, j'interviens au sujet de l'article 176. Les lib\u00e9raux aimeraient s'attribuer le m\u00e9rite de l'avoir accept\u00e9. M\u00eame si je ne suis pas membre du comit\u00e9 de la justice qui a trait\u00e9 de cette question, je sais que mon coll\u00e8gue de Niagara Falls l'a \u00e9t\u00e9, et je crois comprendre que les conservateurs ont propos\u00e9 des amendements \u00e0 l'article 176, que les lib\u00e9raux ont rejet\u00e9s. Quelques moments plus tard, les lib\u00e9raux ont simplement propos\u00e9 de rendre la langue l\u00e9g\u00e8rement plus neutre; ensuite, l'article a \u00e9t\u00e9 accept\u00e9. Donc, les conservateurs ont propos\u00e9 un amendement pour corriger l'article, et l'amendement a \u00e9t\u00e9 rejet\u00e9. \u00c0 peine quelques moments plus tard, les lib\u00e9raux \u2014 puisqu'il fallait que ce soit leur id\u00e9e \u2014 ont pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 leur propre amendement, et l'article a \u00e9t\u00e9 corrig\u00e9. Je me demande si mon coll\u00e8gue pourrait confirmer que c'est ainsi que cela s'est pass\u00e9.</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2017/12/11/murray-rankin-1/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/murray-rankin/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4152/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "9886055",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": "Initiatives minist\u00e9rielles"
},
"h2": {
"en": "Criminal Code",
"fr": "Le Code criminel"
},
"document_url": "/debates/2017/12/11/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2017%2F12%2F11%2F"
}
}