Taleeb Noormohamed

C-264 Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to speak to Bill, and I will say at the outset what the central problem with this bill is. It is a one-line proposition dressed up as serious policy. It is a slogan in legislative form. It asks this Parliament to do something that the legislative record, the scientific record, the consultation record and the conservation record of this country have all [more]

Mr. Speaker, yet again, it is either misinformation or disinformation coming from the Conservatives. Either way, Canadians need to understand the facts. The facts are that the government is appealing the Cowichan decision in the courts today and that the government has stood up for the rights of private property owners. It is also important that Canadians understand that not a single Canadian [more]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month, I attended the blessing ceremony of Sen̓áḵw, a housing development in my riding of Vancouver Granville. When complete, Sen̓áḵw will bring more than 6,000 rental homes to Vancouver open to everyone, including much-needed affordable and below-market housing units for families, workers and newcomers alike. However, Sen̓áḵw is more than a housing project. It is a [more]

leader Mr. Speaker, it is sad that we have to rise in the House to even address this issue. I suppose when we are dealing with an opposition party whoseonce said that indigenous people needed a better work ethic, not support, this is what we get. There are members across the way who have made comments that have disparaged indigenous people, directly and indirectly. Their arguments about this [more]

Mr. Speaker, I noted that in the member opposite's comments, he expressed that somehow these Musqueam agreements were secret. If he would like, I am more than happy to share with him the links online, where they are available to the public. North Island—Powell River He also spoke about the need for true reconciliation, which he alleges his party believes in. Does that strategy of true [more]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for yet again, like his colleagues, making light of what is a very serious situation for folks in Vancouver and across British Columbia. There are people who listen to the debates in this Parliament and expect serious discussion and serious debate. What they hear is misinformation, which leads to market uncertainty. Market uncertainty leads to builders [more]

South Surrey—White Rock Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for. I rise this afternoon to speak about a court decision that has caused real worry in my province and to speak directly to the Canadians, particularly British Columbians, who have been watching this debate and wondering what it means for them and for their homes. Let us begin with the facts, because the facts have [more]

Mr. Speaker, I think the simple answer is no. I would invite members opposite to read beyond the first line of the directive because they would see there is substantial depth there. They should choose to look at the facts. I know my hon. friend here, who is a lawyer, has read the entirety of the decision and would understand why we have to read the whole thing, not just the headlines.

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased the member opposite chose to hang his entire argument on the word “viable”. The whole premise of our legal system is based on viable argument, on the fact that we make arguments that can stand up in court and that we win or lose decisions on the basis of the quality of our arguments and our understanding of the law. I would invite the member opposite to look at the [more]

Your time stops every time.

For avoidance of doubt, as is process, a number of witnesses were requested by the committee, some ministers, some CEOs and others. No one is compelled to attend unless a motion calls for them to attend. Is that correct? I want to be sure, because what I don't want is a bunch of misleading clips to say that ministers deliberately didn't come to committee.

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.