Yeah... going to need to jump in here, again, with a quick correction.
The Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, provided notice to the House on May 17 of the Government's intention of proposing time allocation; and when the motion was moved on May 18, there was in fact a half-hour period for members of the House to discuss the merits of whether or not debate on the remaining stages of Bill C-14 should have been limited to two sitting days. This half-hour question and answer period was as per Standing Order 67(1). (I add that citation, of course, given your incessant propensity for claiming that the Government has acted against the House's rules and customs.)
Perhaps we can discuss the time crunch that has been caused by the opposition parties in all of this. Perhaps we should recall that the opposition parties, despite the due date established by the Supreme Court, refused to permit the House to meet beyond its usual time of adjournment on May 17 and 18 to make headway on Bill C-14 (
here); perhaps we should discuss how the opposition parties delayed creating a special committee to more comprehensively study the issue of physician-assisted dying (
here). The Government has attempted to create ample opportunities for our elected representatives to study and debate this issue in depth, blockaded by the opposition benches.
Let us recall, too, that there were also sixteen meetings of the Special Joint Committee on Physician-assisted Dying, which saw senators and MPs study the issue of physician-assisted dying, and providing recommendations to the Government on the best course of action in crafting the legislation that is now before the House. The idea that there has not been debate on physician-assisted dying is a reckless exercise in imagination and fallacy, and one which does a disservice to the seriousness of the Supreme Court's decision on the right to die with dignity.
