Tensions flared in the Canadian House of Commons as the leader of the opposition Conservatives Pierre Poilievre was asked to leave after he called Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a 'wacko'&nbsp;during a verbal assault regarding the PM's failure to address drug overdoses.

The verbal clash ensued amid concerns of the opposition regarding drug decriminalisation in&nbsp;British Columbia in January 2023 under a three-year pilot project.&nbsp;British Columbia has been urging Ottawa to reassess its pilot program.

This incident which took place in the Commons has once again spotlighted the strained relationship between the two ahead of the contentious elections in 2025. Poilievre's remark targeting Trudeau came as the opposition leader questioned him over the efficacy of the drug policies.&nbsp;"When will we put an end to this wacko policy by this wacko prime minister?" Poilievre asked the Canadian PM.&nbsp;“No, no,” the speaker said, adding, “That is not acceptable.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/binance-crypto-former-chief-gets-four-months-in-prison-after-pleading-guilty-to-money-laundering-716832">Binance crypto former chief gets four months in prison after pleading guilty to money laundering</a>

Speaker Greg Fergus repeatedly asked Poilievre to withdraw the comments, however Poilievre did not flinch, and even suggested he could use the word 'radical'. Fergus refused it and&nbsp;expelled the opposition leader from the chamber for the remainder of the day's session.&nbsp;

<h2>Heated exchange&nbsp;</h2>

Poilievre termed the Canadian PM as “the guy who spent the first half of his adult life as a practising racist.” Trudeau also called Poilievre out for “showing us exactly what shameful, spineless leadership looks like."&nbsp;

Poilievre's subsequent social media post reiterated his criticism of Trudeau's drug policy.&nbsp;"This is a wacko policy from a wacko PM that's destroying lives," he wrote on X social media platform.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-sends-first-voluntary-asylum-seeker-to-rwanda-amid-anti-migration-agenda-716831">UK sends first voluntary asylum seeker to Rwanda amid anti-migration agenda</a>

"The radical Trudeau plan for public use of hard drugs has brought death &amp; destruction to our streets. Trudeau could end the chaos today, but he's refusing to," he added.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/china-russia-trade-deal-paves-way-for-brics-de-dollarization-716829">China-Russia trade deal paves way for BRICS De-Dollarization</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/china-russia-trade-deal-paves-way-for-brics-de-dollarization-716829/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Reacting to the comments, Liberal parliamentarian Steven MacKinnon condemned Poilievre's actions. He denounced the comments made by him as disrespectful to parliamentary institutions.

(With inputs from agencies)

Tensions flared in the Canadian House of Commons as the leader of the opposition Conservatives Pierre Poilievre was asked to leave after he called Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a 'wacko' during a verbal assault regarding the PM's failure to address drug overdoses.

Tensions flared in the Canadian House of Commons as the leader of the opposition Conservatives Pierre Poilievre was asked to leave after he called Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a 'wacko' during a verbal assault regarding the PM's failure to address drug overdoses. The verbal clash ensued amid concerns of the opposition regarding drug decriminalisation in British Columbia in January 2023 under a three-year pilot project. British Columbia has been urging Ottawa to reassess its pilot program. This incident which took place in the Commons has once again spotlighted the strained relationship between the two ahead of the contentious elections in 2025. Poilievre's remark targeting Trudeau came as the opposition leader questioned him over the efficacy of the drug policies. "When will we put an end to this wacko policy by this wacko prime minister?" Poilievre asked the Canadian PM. “No, no,” the speaker said, adding, “That is not acceptable.” Also Read | Binance crypto former chief gets four months in prison after pleading guilty to money laundering Speaker Greg Fergus repeatedly asked Poilievre to withdraw the comments, however Poilievre did not flinch, and even suggested he could use the word 'radical'. Fergus refused it and expelled the opposition leader from the chamber for the remainder of the day's session. Heated exchange Poilievre termed the Canadian PM as “the guy who spent the first half of his adult life as a practising racist.” Trudeau also called Poilievre out for “showing us exactly what shameful, spineless leadership looks like." Poilievre's subsequent social media post reiterated his criticism of Trudeau's drug policy. "This is a wacko policy from a wacko PM that's destroying lives," he wrote on X social media platform. Also Read | UK sends first voluntary asylum seeker to Rwanda amid anti-migration agenda "The radical Trudeau plan for public use of hard drugs has brought death & destruction to our streets. Trudeau could end the chaos today, but he's refusing to," he added. Watch | China-Russia trade deal paves way for BRICS De-Dollarization × Reacting to the comments, Liberal parliamentarian Steven MacKinnon condemned Poilievre's actions. He denounced the comments made by him as disrespectful to parliamentary institutions. (With inputs from agencies)

After calling Trudeau 'Wacko', oppn leader expelled from Canadian House of Commons

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, in a pivotal Commons vote, emerged victorious over internal party dissidents, securing approval for his contentious Rwanda deportation bill. Sunak's Rwanda policy, which will allow the UK government to send asylum seekers who arrive without permission in Britain to Rwanda, cleared the last obstacle in the Commons. A total of 320 lawmakers voted in favour of the bill against 276.

Meanwhile, 11 Tory MPs dissented. Former home secretary Suella Braverman, who earlier called on Sunak to harden up his stance on the Rwandan bill, and ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick, also voted against the bill.&nbsp;

The contentious legislation will now advance to the House of Lords where the bill may face potential amendments. The third reading was a major win for Sunak. If it had failed, the UK Prime Minister would have been in a tough spot with the general elections coming up and his perceived weakening leadership.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/sheryl-sandberg-former-coo-of-meta-platforms-announces-exit-from-board-after-12-years-681052">Sheryl Sandberg, former COO of Meta Platforms, announces exit from board after 12 years</a>

Even as Conservative rebels threatened to derail the legislation, most from the party opted not to challenge the bill.

<h2>Injunctions by&nbsp;European Court of Human Rights troubling Sunak&nbsp;</h2>

Even as the Rwandan bill was given a green light in the House of Commons, there is a greater worry for Sunak in the form of&nbsp;Injunctions by the European Court of Human Rights which can halt deportations to Rwanda.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-launches-attack-in-iran-day-after-deadly-balochistan-strike-report-681019">Pakistan retaliates with multiple strikes in Iran a day after deadly Balochistan attack</a>

The government earlier pledged to eliminate this guidance which directed civil servants to comply with these injunctions.

Rwanda's President Paul Kagame has declared willingness to refund UK taxpayers' money if no asylum seekers arrive in the African nation. A total of £240 million is already paid to Rwanda, with an additional £50 million pending.

Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/election-commission-of-pakistan-warns-of-poll-delay-due-to-symbol-changes-681056">Election Commission of Pakistan warns of poll delay due to symbol changes</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/election-commission-of-pakistan-warns-of-poll-delay-due-to-symbol-changes-681056/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The prime minister's allies perceive this outcome as a decisive victory against the right wing.&nbsp;

Despite the win, discontent lingers within the Conservative party, with moderates expressing frustration over the damage caused during the rebellion.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, in a pivotal Commons vote, emerged victorious over internal party dissidents, securing approval for his contentious Rwanda deportation bill.

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, in a pivotal Commons vote, emerged victorious over internal party dissidents, securing approval for his contentious Rwanda deportation bill. Sunak's Rwanda policy, which will allow the UK government to send asylum seekers who arrive without permission in Britain to Rwanda, cleared the last obstacle in the Commons. A total of 320 lawmakers voted in favour of the bill against 276. Meanwhile, 11 Tory MPs dissented. Former home secretary Suella Braverman, who earlier called on Sunak to harden up his stance on the Rwandan bill, and ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick, also voted against the bill. The contentious legislation will now advance to the House of Lords where the bill may face potential amendments. The third reading was a major win for Sunak. If it had failed, the UK Prime Minister would have been in a tough spot with the general elections coming up and his perceived weakening leadership. Also Read | Sheryl Sandberg, former COO of Meta Platforms, announces exit from board after 12 years Even as Conservative rebels threatened to derail the legislation, most from the party opted not to challenge the bill. Injunctions by European Court of Human Rights troubling Sunak Even as the Rwandan bill was given a green light in the House of Commons, there is a greater worry for Sunak in the form of Injunctions by the European Court of Human Rights which can halt deportations to Rwanda. Also Read | Pakistan retaliates with multiple strikes in Iran a day after deadly Balochistan attack The government earlier pledged to eliminate this guidance which directed civil servants to comply with these injunctions. Rwanda's President Paul Kagame has declared willingness to refund UK taxpayers' money if no asylum seekers arrive in the African nation. A total of £240 million is already paid to Rwanda, with an additional £50 million pending. Watch | Election Commission of Pakistan warns of poll delay due to symbol changes × The prime minister's allies perceive this outcome as a decisive victory against the right wing. Despite the win, discontent lingers within the Conservative party, with moderates expressing frustration over the damage caused during the rebellion. (With inputs from agencies)

UK House of Commons OKs bill to send migrants to Rwanda, 320 back PM Rishi Sunak's plan

Parliament is finalising laws that will formally end Britain's membership of the European Union, a process which has forced the government to make some important concessions that will change the dynamic of Brexit negotiations.

Below is a summary of what has happened so far and what it means for Brexit.

The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill is being finalised in parliament after more than 250 hours of debate. It repeals the 1972 laws which made Britain a member of the European Community and provides the basis for existing EU law to be transferred into British law.

Having been debated by both the lower house of parliament, the Commons, and the unelected upper house, the Lords, the bill is in its final stages.

The Commons is now debating whether to accept any of the 15 changes made by the Lords against the government's wishes.

The debate began&nbsp;on Tuesday, and will resume at around 1200 GMT&nbsp;Wednesday.

Prime Minister Theresa May was forced into promising a major concession to pro-EU lawmakers&nbsp;on Tuesday&nbsp;which could give parliament a greater say over the exit deal Britain negotiates with the European Union.

May had to do this because she does not have a clear parliamentary majority and faced defeat. Her party is split between Brexiteers who want a clean break from the EU and a pro-European faction who want to retain close ties.

So far, the government has rejected all the other changes proposed by the Lords, including an attempt to remove the fixed Brexit date of&nbsp;March 29, 2019, from the bill.

The government has always promised to give lawmakers a vote on the final exit deal it negotiates with the EU. Ministers originally wanted to make this a vote to either accept the deal or to leave without a deal.

To avoid a rebellion, May proposed a plan whereby, if parliament rejected its deal, ministers would have 28 days to come up with a plan of action and present it to lawmakers.

This was not enough to convince the rebels. Ministers then agreed to discuss ways to add additional checks and balances to the process. The government said it would discuss a three-part alternative proposal put forward by one of the rebel lawmakers.

The government has agreed to consider ways to implement the first two parts of pro-European lawmaker Dominic Grieve's plan.

The first part of Grieve's plan means that if parliament votes against the government's deal, ministers have 21 days to come back with a plan of action, which must then be approved by a vote in parliament&nbsp;within seven days.

Compared to the government's proposal, this is a shorter time to respond, and gives parliament a vote to approve the response.

The second part of Grieve's plan specifies that if the government has not reached a deal with the EU by&nbsp;November 30, ministers must submit a plan of action to parliament. This plan of action must then be approved by parliament in a vote.

This adds an extra backstop in case the government's stalled negotiations with the EU are delayed. The government is aiming to have a deal agreed in October.

A third part of Grieve's amendment, which the government has not agreed to discuss and is likely to resist, would hand control of the Brexit negotiations to parliament if an exit deal has not been agreed by&nbsp;Feb. 15&nbsp;next year.

The final compromise has yet to be agreed and will be discussed in private over the coming days.

However, whatever form it takes it will give parliament a greater say over the final deal in the event that the government either fails to reach an exit deal, or proposes an exit agreement which parliament does not accept.

This is significant because a majority in parliament wishes to see a softer Brexit deal that would retain closer customs ties with the EU after Britain leaves.

If Brexit is softened in this way, an influential group of eurosceptics in May's party could challenge her leadership. Such an outcome, though far from certain, would cast the Brexit process into disarray.

Talks with rebels will take place over coming days to negotiate a new form of words defining what say parliament will have over the process and will reveal how much ground May has given to the pro-Europeans.

This new form of words will then be presented to the Lords on&nbsp;June 18. Both houses must then agree the final wording before it becomes law. A final end-date for the process has not been fixed, but is likely to come within weeks rather than months.

The Commons is now debating whether to accept any of the 15 changes made by the Lords against the government's wishes

Parliament is finalising laws that will formally end Britain's membership of the European Union, a process which has forced the government to make some important concessions that will change the dynamic of Brexit negotiations. Below is a summary of what has happened so far and what it means for Brexit. The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill is being finalised in parliament after more than 250 hours of debate. It repeals the 1972 laws which made Britain a member of the European Community and provides the basis for existing EU law to be transferred into British law. Having been debated by both the lower house of parliament, the Commons, and the unelected upper house, the Lords, the bill is in its final stages. The Commons is now debating whether to accept any of the 15 changes made by the Lords against the government's wishes. The debate began on Tuesday, and will resume at around 1200 GMT Wednesday. Prime Minister Theresa May was forced into promising a major concession to pro-EU lawmakers on Tuesday which could give parliament a greater say over the exit deal Britain negotiates with the European Union. May had to do this because she does not have a clear parliamentary majority and faced defeat. Her party is split between Brexiteers who want a clean break from the EU and a pro-European faction who want to retain close ties. So far, the government has rejected all the other changes proposed by the Lords, including an attempt to remove the fixed Brexit date of March 29, 2019, from the bill. The government has always promised to give lawmakers a vote on the final exit deal it negotiates with the EU. Ministers originally wanted to make this a vote to either accept the deal or to leave without a deal. To avoid a rebellion, May proposed a plan whereby, if parliament rejected its deal, ministers would have 28 days to come up with a plan of action and present it to lawmakers. This was not enough to convince the rebels. Ministers then agreed to discuss ways to add additional checks and balances to the process. The government said it would discuss a three-part alternative proposal put forward by one of the rebel lawmakers. The government has agreed to consider ways to implement the first two parts of pro-European lawmaker Dominic Grieve's plan. The first part of Grieve's plan means that if parliament votes against the government's deal, ministers have 21 days to come back with a plan of action, which must then be approved by a vote in parliament within seven days. Compared to the government's proposal, this is a shorter time to respond, and gives parliament a vote to approve the response. The second part of Grieve's plan specifies that if the government has not reached a deal with the EU by November 30, ministers must submit a plan of action to parliament. This plan of action must then be approved by parliament in a vote. This adds an extra backstop in case the government's stalled negotiations with the EU are delayed. The government is aiming to have a deal agreed in October. A third part of Grieve's amendment, which the government has not agreed to discuss and is likely to resist, would hand control of the Brexit negotiations to parliament if an exit deal has not been agreed by Feb. 15 next year. The final compromise has yet to be agreed and will be discussed in private over the coming days. However, whatever form it takes it will give parliament a greater say over the final deal in the event that the government either fails to reach an exit deal, or proposes an exit agreement which parliament does not accept. This is significant because a majority in parliament wishes to see a softer Brexit deal that would retain closer customs ties with the EU after Britain leaves. If Brexit is softened in this way, an influential group of eurosceptics in May's party could challenge her leadership. Such an outcome, though far from certain, would cast the Brexit process into disarray. Talks with rebels will take place over coming days to negotiate a new form of words defining what say parliament will have over the process and will reveal how much ground May has given to the pro-Europeans. This new form of words will then be presented to the Lords on June 18. Both houses must then agree the final wording before it becomes law. A final end-date for the process has not been fixed, but is likely to come within weeks rather than months.

Britain's Brexit laws: What's changed and what happens next?

commons

Commons, News on Commons, stories on Commons, articles on Commons, Commons stories at Wion, Commons news, Commons latest news