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": "2017-12-12 13:15:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park\u2014Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)",
"fr": "M. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park\u2014Fort Saskatchewan, PCC)"
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"5187487\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, when it comes to this particular issue, the arguments being made by the government are the height of absurdity. The Liberals want to use the legitimate importance of the specific areas covered by the sub-ministers as the basis for suggesting that these are in fact equally important issues to those that full ministers deal with. However, if the Liberals simply took the time to observe their own orders in council when they appointed the ministers, those orders clearly say that those ministers are subject to the authority of full ministers. For example, the minister of state for the status of women is formally in place to assist the minister of heritage in carrying out the latter minister's responsibility. Therefore, these secondary ministerial positions are not secondary because of the importance of the work they are doing; they are secondary because they are formally or administratively subject to the authority of someone who is a full minister. That is why traditionally they have been paid less. Members should understand that and members who are debating this issue should know that. Does my colleague have any comment on that?</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"5187487\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, en ce qui concerne cette question particuli\u00e8re, les arguments invoqu\u00e9s par le gouvernement sont le comble de l'absurdit\u00e9. Les lib\u00e9raux s'appuient sur l'importance des portefeuilles dont sont charg\u00e9s les ministres de second rang pour sugg\u00e9rer que ces portefeuilles sont en fait d'une importance \u00e9quivalente \u00e0 ceux dont sont responsables les ministres de premier rang. Cependant, si les lib\u00e9raux se donnaient la peine d'examiner les d\u00e9crets qu'ils ont publi\u00e9s lorsqu'ils ont nomm\u00e9 les ministres en question, ils constateraient que ces d\u00e9crets indiquent clairement que ces ministres rel\u00e8vent des ministres de premier rang. Par exemple, la ministre d'\u00c9tat charg\u00e9e de la Condition f\u00e9minine a comme fonction d'aider la ministre du Patrimoine \u00e0 s'acquitter de ses responsabilit\u00e9s. Par cons\u00e9quent, les postes de ministre de second rang ne sont pas secondaires en raison de l'importance du travail \u00e0 accomplir, mais bien parce qu'ils rel\u00e8vent officiellement ou sur le plan administratif d'un ministre de premier rang. Voil\u00e0 pourquoi leur salaire a jusqu'\u00e0 pr\u00e9sent \u00e9t\u00e9 inf\u00e9rieur \u00e0 celui des ministres de premier rang. Les d\u00e9put\u00e9s devraient le savoir, tout particuli\u00e8rement les d\u00e9put\u00e9s qui d\u00e9battent actuellement de cette question. Mon coll\u00e8gue a-t-il quelque chose \u00e0 dire \u00e0 ce sujet?</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2017/12/12/garnett-genuis-1/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/garnett-genuis/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4383/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "9893034",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": "Initiatives Minist\u00e9rielles"
},
"h2": {
"en": "Salaries Act",
"fr": "La Loi sur les traitements"
},
"document_url": "/debates/2017/12/12/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2017%2F12%2F12%2F"
}
}