Kevin LAMOUREUX

LAMOUREUX, Kevin
Personal Data
- Party
- Liberal
- Constituency
- Winnipeg North (Manitoba)
- Birth Date
- January 22, 1962
- Website
- http://www.mpkevin.ca
- PARLINFO
- http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=07cf5767-802c-406c-92a7-7dc92af79b40&Language=E&Section=ALL
- Email Address
- kevin.lamoureux@parl.gc.ca
- Profession
- air traffic controller
Parliamentary Career
- November 29, 2010 - March 26, 2011
- LIBWinnipeg North (Manitoba)
- May 2, 2011 - August 2, 2015
- LIBWinnipeg North (Manitoba)
- Liberal Party Deputy House Leader (June 1, 2011 - December 1, 2015)
- October 19, 2015 -
- LIBWinnipeg North (Manitoba)
- Liberal Party Deputy House Leader (June 1, 2011 - December 1, 2015)
- Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (December 2, 2015 - )
Most Recent Speeches (Page 5 of 1531)
June 18, 2019
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
Mr. Speaker, on that particular point, we would have to agree to disagree. I believe an economy can in fact be managed while respecting the environment. We have seen that over the last three and a half years.
We have seen very progressive policies developed and implemented on the environment, while at the same time we have been able to generate, by working with Canadians, over one million jobs here in Canada. The economy does matter.
When we look at LNG, which is the largest single government-private working investment in Canadian history, we see it is going to provide cleaner energy. Parties will fall where they may. I know the NDP is having a very difficult time with that issue. The current leader at one time supported it, but now we do not know exactly where the NDP will fall on that particular issue.
If we look at it and just listen, the Conservatives will say that we are not building the pipelines fast enough. If we listen to the Green Party, it would be that we should not build any pipelines. If we listen to the NDP, it would depend on the day and how threatened it is by the Greens. That would determine their policy. In terms of the Liberals, I can say that we appreciate the fact that we can do it in such a fashion that it is still good for Canada's environment and good for Canada's economy.
That is why we would argue that at times it is important for us to recognize that the economy and the environment can in fact go hand in hand, if they are administered properly. That is something we have done in the last three and a half years. Hopefully, we will get a renewed mandate a little later this year.
Subtopic: Business of Supply
June 18, 2019
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:
That, notwithstanding any Special or Standing Order or usual practice of the House, on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, the question shall be put on the opposition motion at 5:30 pm after which all questions necessary to dispose of the business of supply shall be put forthwith and successively, without debate or amendment.
Subtopic: Business of Supply
June 17, 2019
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to nine petitions.
Subtopic: Government Response to Petitions
June 17, 2019
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux
Mr. Speaker, as the member was speaking, she talked about and was very critical of the Access to Information Act. She was very critical of Bill C-91 and Bill C-92, all of these wonderful pieces of historical legislation that have moved the bar significantly forward.
The other day, we talked about national pharmacare, and the New Democrats asked, what about hearing and all of these other things? We talk about a national housing strategy, and they say we need to have more houses. We could never, ever please the New Democratic Party here. There is no legislation before the House that they would say they agree with it in its entirety and that we have done a good job on.
Does the member opposite not recognize that within this legislation, where there are significant reforms that have been long overdue, over 30 years overdue, along with other pieces of legislation, there are a lot of good things happening? They can say some positive things. Even when I was in opposition, I said positive things at times to the government. It is okay to agree that the legislation is good at times. Would the member not agree?
Subtopic: Access to Information Act
June 17, 2019
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the NDP House leader provided comments about the New Democrats being like busy bees. That is not what I think of in terms of the analogy, because bees are kind of sweet and they provide some good things. I see it more as a mosquito sucking the life out of things. At the end of the day—
Subtopic: Access to Information Act