Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2018-10-25 15:40:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood\u2014Transcona, NDP)",
        "fr": "M. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood\u2014Transcona, NPD)"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"5603848\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, in the last Parliament, the previous government made a lot changes to the Elections Act that were controversial. Our party ran to repeal those changes. The Liberal Party ran to repeal those changes. We are three years into this Parliament and we still have not seen those changes made, and we had a pretty clear deadline from the elections commissioner for when those changes had to be made. We knew at the very beginning of the Parliament what it would take to repeal the changes that were made in the last Parliament. There was agreement between our party and the party currently in government, as well as a broad base of Canadians, that those changes needed to be repealed.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5603849\" data-originallang=\"en\">I am wondering how we got to where we are three years later. I will spare the partisan jabs. Why should a typical Canadian who was concerned about the integrity of the elections process, who felt that those changes made in the last Parliament needed to be repealed, not feel disappointed? The government had three years, two ministers of democratic institutions, three if we count an interim minister, who could not deliver just a basic repeal of the nefarious changes made in the last Parliament. That is the lowest bar it had to meet, and it had almost three years to get it done by April 30 of this year. It failed to do it. Why should Canadians not look at this as a major failure? Why should they not feel disappointed that at least those changes were not made by April 30 of this year to make sure that their intended repeal, as discussed in the last election, was on time and implemented by the next election? There are important issues that could have been addressed in a separate bill.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"5603848\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, lors de la derni\u00e8re l\u00e9gislature, le gouvernement pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent a apport\u00e9 beaucoup de modifications controvers\u00e9es \u00e0 la Loi \u00e9lectorale du Canada. Notre parti a fait campagne pour abroger les modifications, tout comme le Parti lib\u00e9ral. Trois ans se sont \u00e9coul\u00e9s depuis le d\u00e9but de la l\u00e9gislature actuelle et, bien que le commissaire aux \u00e9lections ait indiqu\u00e9 assez clairement les d\u00e9lais dans lesquels les changements devaient \u00eatre apport\u00e9s, rien n'a encore \u00e9t\u00e9 fait. Nous savions au tout d\u00e9but de la pr\u00e9sente l\u00e9gislature ce qu'il fallait faire pour abroger les modifications qui ont \u00e9t\u00e9 apport\u00e9es au cours de la derni\u00e8re l\u00e9gislature. Notre parti et celui qui est actuellement au pouvoir, ainsi qu'un grand nombre de Canadiens, ont convenu que les modifications devaient \u00eatre abrog\u00e9es.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5603849\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je me demande comment il se fait que nous en soyons l\u00e0 trois ans plus tard. Je vais m'abstenir de lancer des fl\u00e8ches partisanes. Comment un Canadien ordinaire, qui s'inqui\u00e9tait au sujet de l'int\u00e9grit\u00e9 du processus \u00e9lectoral et qui \u00e9tait d'avis que les changements apport\u00e9s au cours de la derni\u00e8re l\u00e9gislature devaient \u00eatre abrog\u00e9s, peut-il ne pas \u00eatre d\u00e9\u00e7u? Le gouvernement et deux ministres des Institutions d\u00e9mocratiques \u2014 trois, si on compte celui qui a occup\u00e9 le poste par int\u00e9rim \u2014 ont eu trois ans pour simplement abroger les modifications inf\u00e2mes apport\u00e9es lors de la derni\u00e8re l\u00e9gislature. C'est le strict minimum qu'ils devaient r\u00e9aliser, et ils ont eu trois ans pour y arriver avant le 30 avril dernier. Ils ne l'ont pas fait. Comment les Canadiens pourraient-ils faire autrement que de conclure qu'il s'agit d'un \u00e9chec retentissant? Comment pourraient-ils ne pas \u00eatre d\u00e9\u00e7us de constater que ces modifications n'ont pas \u00e9t\u00e9 abrog\u00e9es avant le 30 avril dernier? Lors de la derni\u00e8re campagne \u00e9lectorale, le gouvernement avait pourtant promis d'agir \u00e0 temps pour que les changements n\u00e9cessaires puissent \u00eatre mis en oeuvre avant les prochaines \u00e9lections. Ces enjeux importants auraient pu faire l'objet d'un projet de loi distinct.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2018/10/25/daniel-blaikie-2/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/daniel-blaikie/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4407/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "10330899",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": "Ordres \u00e9manant du gouvernement"
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Elections Modernization Act",
        "fr": "Loi sur la modernisation des \u00e9lections"
    },
    "h3": {
        "en": "Bill C-76\u2014Time Allocation Motion",
        "fr": "Projet de loi C-76 \u2014 Motion d'attribution de temps"
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2018/10/25/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2018%2F10%2F25%2F"
    }
}