Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that RCMP officers spied on journalists without authorization. There needs to be an investigation into this. In the meantime, the Liberals still have not made good on their promise to revisit Bill C-51, which they voted for.Bill C-51 is an affront to liberty and gives unprecedented powers to our intelligence services without any accountability.When will the minister keep his promise and take action to respect our civil liberties?
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, many of our commitments were focused to better help Canadian families. Measures such as the Canada child benefit and added flexibility for parental leave will help improve the situation of many Canadian families.However, another popular commitment was in regard to flexible work. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour update the House on the government's commitment to flexible work?
Mr. Speaker, I am proud, as a Canadian, of the overwhelmingly positive welcome Canadians have afforded to the Syrian refugees. The downside is, to be frank, the welcome has been so enormous that my department has not been able to keep up with the number of refugees generous Canadians have been demanding. We have taken measures to guarantee that for all those who applied by the end of March of this year, the refugees will be here by the end of this year or early next year.Canadians have been overwhelmingly
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question. We are doing everything we can to protect Canada from this infectious disease.Last week, the Minister of International Development and I were pleased to announce that Canada will be contributing close to $5 million to the global fight against Zika.This money will be used to conduct more research, develop improved diagnostic tests, better prevent the transmission of the disease through more effective mosquito control measures, and contribute to humanitarian aid.
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the electoral reform stacked process she is recommending is designed to serve the best interests of Canadians and not political parties.Let us be clear. The government wants the Liberal majority controlling the committee to opt for the preferred Liberal system to be approved by the Liberal cabinet, to be adopted by the Liberal majority in the House, notwithstanding any dissent, including from 35 million Canadians.Nothing could be clearer. The Liberals are trying to rig the system by and for the Liberal Party. Why not allow Canadians to protect the legitimacy of our elections through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to profile the promise we made to restore Canada's place on the international stage.Canadians are proud that Canada is participating in Syrian peace talks. After 10 years, we are being asked for our advice and our involvement. Engagement is giving Canada a place and a voice at the table. Our participation means that we are better placed to help restore peace and provide crucial humanitarian aid. As well, we call on all parties to return to UN-led intra-Syrian peace talks.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Brampton East for his tireless commitment to helping our Canadian youth. We are proud of the $379-million commitment in budget 2016 to support the Canadian Space Agency. That is why I was honoured to announce that David Saint-Jacques will be the next Canadian astronaut to go aboard the international space station. This is a proud moment for all Canadians. This is an exciting new chapter for space and of course for the next generation of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, in no other workplace is it acceptable to arrive at work, pull the fire alarm, and make all of one's colleagues cancel their meetings in committees. Today alone, more than 20 witnesses will be disrupted at committees.
Mr. Speaker, veterans who have served this country extraordinarily well deserve more than people trying to play politics on their backs. Veterans across this country know that, in budget 2016, we put forward historic measures that would fix the 10 years of neglect
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging what a great honour it is to be in this House, today especially. I recognize that electoral reform, democratic reform overall, will not be easy. It has never been easy. It requires the collective will of every single member of this House to come to the table and work together to ensure that the voices of those in their communities, who are often unheard and ignored, are included in this conversation.My challenge to the member opposite is to come to the table with constructive and effective conversations that can allow us to meet our mutual goal.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful. The Liberals are betraying our country and betraying our veterans. During the campaign election, the Liberals promised to restore environmental protections to the Fisheries Act. It is even in the minister's mandate letter. Over 35 environmental organizations have called on the government to immediately reinstate previous habitat protections in the Fisheries Act. It is time for the minister to act.When will the minister make good on this commitment and restore the fish habitat protections?
Mr. Speaker, I am uncertain if my critic has been paying attention to what this government has done, so I will remind him. In budget 2016, we delivered significantly for our veterans and their families. We delivered on extending the earnings loss benefit from 75% to 90% of pre-release salary. We expanded the career impact allowance. We retroactively paid the disability award. We are opening the nine offices that his government closed, and restoring staff to the front lines. We are doing things better. The member should applaud us for what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, the Prime Minister said he wanted Parliament to hold the government to account. Well, we did, and his response is nothing short of tyrannical. Now that the opposition has become an inconvenience to the Prime Minister, he has lost his temper. This is not about giving members of Parliament more time to debate. This is about taking away the tools that exist for the opposition to hold the government to account. If this is how the Prime Minister reacts when the House of Commons holds him to account, how can we trust him to manage the changes to the democratic electoral system this summer?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, we have tremendous respect for Parliament. That is why we are proposing to extend sitting hours to allow members of Parliament to contribute thoughtful, responsible interjections on a broad range of topics. We made the commitment to Canadians that we would make this government work for them, that we would put forward the kinds of issues that mattered to them and that they voted for in the election. That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting forward an agenda on which they have asked us to deliver. We are inviting all members in the House to speak at length and share their perspectives on all the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, flex work is good for families, workers, and businesses. We know, from other countries that have implemented a modern flextime system, like the U.K., that it results in greater employee loyalty, innovation, satisfaction, and higher sales.At the same time, it also improves the work-life balance for working Canadians. I encourage everyone to participate in sharing their views on a modern flextime work system for
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of transparency, our complete election platform is still available at www.liberal.ca. If he checks the website, he will see that we promised to make sure Canadians are getting the services they need at a reasonable price. That is why we pledged to do what the former government did not: consult Canadians, talk to mayors, and work on figuring out how to provide Canadians with the quality postal service they expect.
Mr. Speaker, democratic reform requires leadership, leadership to engage and to consult Canadians, but also leadership to act and do the right thing.When this right was extended to women and to indigenous persons, without restrictions, this House did so by demonstrating true leadership.Let us do that again. Let us work together to ensure that the voices of those who do not traditionally get an opportunity to be included in this process are included this time.
Mr. Speaker, democracy is more than just about voting. It is about working together to ensure that every voice and every perspective is engaged and included in governance. In the past, the Progressive Conservative Party extended the right to vote to women and indigenous persons. The party did not hold a referendum. It came to Parliament and collectively worked together to do the right thing.Let us do the right thing. Let us work together and modernize our electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, so it is not the Liberal culture to respect the majority of Canadians on the precise question of how they elect their representatives to their Parliament. This place does not belong to the Liberal Party, and the very question of legitimacy is at stake here. It is absolutely clear if the Liberals thought they could get a majority of Canadians to endorse their rigged system, they would hold a referendum. Is it not true? The only reason they refuse to do so is because Canadians would veto the Liberal rigged electoral system.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have shown strong support to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria to Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that the number of Syrian refugees is more important than the care they receive. Organizations and churches that raised up to $70,000 to privately sponsor a refugee family were told they would arrive in February. Here we are, three months later, and nothing. There has been nothing in three months.When will the minister make good on these promises and unite these refugees with their sponsors?
Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of Canadians would like us to have a referendum with regard to this issue. The minister of democratic reform does not understand that the voice of millions of Canadians in a referendum is far better than the hundreds that a committee might be able to hear.She has claimed countless times that she would like to put the interests of Canadians ahead of party interests. I would encourage her, then, to live up to her words of commitment and to put Canadians first.Why will the Liberals not let Canadians have the final say by holding a national referendum?
Mr. Speaker, 60% of Canadians voted in favour of parties that promised to change the current voting system. Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted the most recent election to be the last one conducted under the existing system. We promised to consult Canadians, listen to them, and talk about what type of democracy and process they want in order to give them a better government. That is exactly what we are going to do.
On that issue, Mr. Speaker, it is not about delivering something more. It is about not doing something: not taking veterans to court.The Prime Minister was a little embarrassed on Monday, because 25% of his caucus was caught taking the day off. He promised to make Parliament more independent by empowering individual MPs and opposition parties. Now his pride has got the best of him, and he is planning on suppressing every rule that he does not like. Everything the Prime Minister ever said about respecting Parliament was obviously a sham. This is simply a vindictive act of spiteful retribution. By suppressing the rules of our House of Commons, is the Prime Minister not showing a clear disdain for Parliament and contradicting everything he said during the campaign?
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows and we agree, the Fisheries Act is an essential tool to support conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat and the sustainability of fisheries. I take very seriously my mandate to restore the lost protections of the Fisheries Act and look forward to consulting with scientists, environmentalists, and indigenous people in finding the best path forward to safeguard our oceans and waterways. We are currently looking at options to move forward. I want to assure the member and everyone that we will do it and we will do it right.
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I certainly do not think he is suggesting we have displayed an indifference toward refugees in general. That has been one of our major commitments. We are also highly aware of the situation of refugees in other countries, including the Sikhs in Afghanistan. I can assure the hon. member this is one of the areas we are looking into with great interest and attention.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I believe that the Canadians who are watching at home are confused because they know that we are giving opposition members more opportunities to share their opinions and give speeches so that parliamentarians from all parties have a chance to express their views in the House.Canadians expect us to keep the ambitious promises that we made. That is exactly what they expect us to do.
Mr. Speaker, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions over the past week in this House, it is not just up to the committee to do this work. It is up to all of us in this House to do this work.My parliamentary secretary and I will be announcing further methods of outreach in the days and weeks to come. However, if there is no collective will by all members of this House, we will not do this process the justice it deserves. Let us work together to serve the best interests of Canadians and not our political parties.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of that Alberta decision was, indeed, the need for a proper framework whereby requests for medical assistance in dying can be evaluated. That is why in the bill we put forward there is a strong framework for consultation of physicians and participation in that.With regard to amendments, they have already been studied at committee and we have made our determinations around those.
Mr. Speaker, everyone loves space, and space exploration is a source of inspiration, but also a rich source for research and innovation. The investments we make to deepen our research work in space increases our innovation capabilities. It also captures the minds of young people and promotes their interest in science and technology. Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please give this House an update on the progress of the Canadian Space Agency and the next steps of human space travel?
Mr. Speaker, as stated earlier, we remain committed to treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect by implementing the mandate letter as given to me by our Prime Minister. Budget 2016 delivered on a lot of those items, including financial security for many of our most disabled veterans. We will continue to work through our mandate items and deliver for veterans and their families going forward. This will be a new day for veterans, and our government is following through for them.
Mr. Speaker, now we know what the Prime Minister really thinks about democracy. During the election he said, We will not resort to legislative tricks to avoid scrutiny. Now, without any justification, he has changed the rules to eliminate accountability and take power away from the opposition parties. Instead of a government and an opposition, he just wants a government and an audience. How can the Prime Minister justify such a lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, first, it amazes me that the member opposite could think that offering more opportunities for the members opposite to weigh in and give speeches in the House would somehow count as limiting democracy. Second, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, we understand that this is a big step for Canada. We are creating a responsible regime that will allow us to move forward in a thoughtful way that defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what Canadians expect us to do. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that the former Conservative government did nothing to address, concretely, the Magnitsky case. There are two aspects here and it is important to understand Canadian legislation. First, we already have the ability to ban individuals involved in the Magnitsky murder from entering Canada under our Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Second, with regard to sanctions, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development has been tasked with reviewing the Special Economic Measures Act. That is where our sanctions take place and we all look forward to its report.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the ruling by the Alberta Court of Appeal indicated that we need a legislative framework to ensure that Canadians who are seeking medical assistance in dying can do so, knowing that the physician will not face legal repercussions as a result.We need a legislative framework. This bill represents a big step forward for our society, and we must be responsible about it. That is exactly what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, finally the government has announced a replacement to the office of religious freedom, but its proposal sound more like something out of the British comedy, Yes Minister. It is quite simply an office of everything. In spite of lofty ideas, it is not clear at all what the functions of the office would be on a day-to-day basis. The government could take some concrete action on international human rights by restoring funding to projects on the ground that the previous office was already successfully operating. Why create an office of everything that will accomplish nothing?
Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value that is enshrined in the charter. The unauthorized surveillance was entirely unacceptable. It was contrary to a ministerial directive. It was contrary to RCMP policy. It was stopped when RCMP headquarters became aware of it, and the investigators have been reprimanded.
Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for electoral reform keeps repeating that six months will be enough to study the various models for reform thanks to the new methods of communication we have in the 21st century. Apart from a reference to Twitter, she has not provided any other information on the methods that will be used.The minister is accusing us of focusing too much on a referendum, so I want to give her a chance to explain how she plans to consult Canadians, and above all, how the methods she is proposing would be better than a referendum.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that our public broadcaster is finally looking to the future.CBC/Radio-Canada has presented two good proposals for its current site that respect the federal government's historic and social responsibility towards the neighbourhood.I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner and hold ongoing discussions with the unions, employees, and other local stakeholders.I would remind members that CBC/Radio-Canada operates at arm's length from the government and it must also prove the quality of the selected proposals to all stakeholders.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentioned the Liberal platform. What did he say? He said, We will not resort to legislative tricks....The Prime Minister has failed, because is already breaking his campaign promises. He does not like answering to a strong opposition. We are going to continue asking questions. He said he wanted to give parliamentarians more power and muscle, but instead he is muzzling them.Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians and Quebeckers why he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do during the election campaign?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected because of our ambitious platform for Canadians and to introduce change and honour the serious commitments we made to them.We are actually offering opposition members much more time to share their opinions and perspectives. We truly believe in the robust participation that must happen here, but we also believe that Canadians expect this government to keep the promises that brought it to power.
Mr. Speaker, my friend across the aisle knows very well that what we are seeking to do, in fact, is to allow more members of Parliament to speak to ensure that important government legislation can have a full and complete debate in this House. That is why we were disappointed when, yesterday, I proposed exactly the same wording that my friend in front had proposed to extend the hours of debate on government legislation. What a surprise when it was turned down.
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the significant contributions veterans and Canadian Armed Forces members have made and continue to make in protecting peace and security for all Canadians. I was given a mandate to re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for veterans and remain committed to this, as to all items in my mandate letter. Veteran stakeholders have asked us to get this right, not rushed. As this matter is currently before the courts, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.
Mr. Speaker, the plan with respect to Bill C-51 was laid out very clearly in our election platform.Step one, in respect of that, will be taken, hopefully, before this Parliament rises for the summer. That is the presentation of legislation having to do with a new overview mechanism, involving a committee of parliamentarians. Step two was in the budget. That was the creation of a new office on counter-radicalization. We will be conducting major national consultations with Canadians to determine what further they want to see to happen.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to announce the office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion, which reflects our ongoing commitment to advancing human rights at home and abroad. It is a comprehensive vision that includes all human rights, of course including religion. I would like assure the House that the expanded office builds on the work of the previous office. For example, the external advisory committee on religious freedom will stay. To support our enhanced approach, we are significantly increasing the budget. The office of human rights, freedoms, and inclusion reflects the fact that human rights are universal, indivisible, and interdependent.
Mr. Speaker, we knew that the Prime Minister admired basic Chinese dictatorship, but we did not think he would actually emulate it.This week, we are discovering the Prime Minister's true nature. Parliamentary democracy is just a joke to him. Instead of having a government and an opposition, the Liberals have created a government and an audienceHow can the Prime Minister justify this lack of respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that he does not have a clue about that issue.We have lost track of how many promises the people on the other side of the House have broken. Together with Mr. Jackhammer himself, Denis Coderre, the Prime Minister promised to restore home mail delivery. Now that he is in power, he is setting up a committee.Quebeckers and Canadians said what they wanted during the election campaign. They want home mail delivery back, as the Liberals promised.Why is the Prime Minister breaking this promise too?
Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit ironic that a Conservative member would talk about government being accountable to Parliament.One of the tools that my friend may be upset that we will temporarily suspend would be his ability to get up in the middle of the day and try to adjourn the House of Commons.We are here to work, and in no other workplace
Mr. Speaker, once again, the minister did not answer my question.The minister says that a referendum is not the right way to consult Canadians. She repeated that yet again. Let us do a little math together.Let us take the number of registered voters in Canada, which is 26 million. Let us assume that only 50% of those individuals would vote in the referendum in question. That is still 13 million.Can the minister explain how she thinks a parliamentary committee would be able to consult over 13 million Canadians in less than six months?
Mr. Speaker, now the cat is out of the bag. The Minister of Foreign Affairs caved in to the Putin regime in exchange for a seat at the International Syria Support Group table this week.It is clear that the minister broke a Liberal campaign promise to implement the Magnitsky Act in order to secure an invite from his new friend, Putin. However, members of the Liberal caucus support the Magnitsky Act. Our allies support the act.Why is the minister turning his back on his colleagues and allies, and instead embracing Putin and his thugs?
Mr. Speaker, the 10 years of neglect by the government opposite left us an awful lot to do to make things right for veterans. This is why I am so proud of our Minister of Veterans Affairs who has been working with them, listening, and putting forward concrete measures to reopen closed offices and offer them more support. We, of course, are looking forward to continuing to work with veterans and advocacy groups across this country, to deliver.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The last 10 years under the Conservative government were nothing but a sham in terms of treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We have delivered on this extensively in budget 2016. We are moving on financial security for our most disabled veterans. We are expanding the career impact allowance and the disability award. We remain committed to our mandate letter. We will be returning to the table to ensure that veterans and their families are treated with care, compassion, and respect, and in a better fashion than they were under the former government.
Mr. Speaker, this time last week, we took the first step. We delivered on a promise that we made to Canadians to bring together an all-party committee to review various options to study electoral reform and consider the possibility of online voting and mandatory voting.That was a first step. That step and every other step from here on requires the collective will and leadership of every member of the House. We need to display that leadership, because the people who put us here are counting on it.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the attention that is being paid to the Magnitsky case. It is a horrendous situation and we obviously condemn Russia's human rights record. But I would like to say that our policy of engagement is allowing us to speak more clearly and more broadly to the world about our role and our constructive contribution to holding Russia and its deplorable human rights record to account.
Mr. Speaker, the agreement was that the most recent election would be the last one that was conducted in that way.The Liberals say they want to consult Canadians, but they are already making decisions. Consulting Canadians means listening to what they have to say and taking their opinions into account. The decisions that the Prime Minister is currently making show a lack of respect for members of the House.Will he at least show some respect for Canadians and give them the right to vote in a referendum about their future?
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, and I want to start by quoting this from yesterday's unanimous decision by the Alberta Court of Appeal: ...the declaration of invalidity on Carter does not require that the applicant be terminally ill.... The decision itself is clear. No words in it suggest otherwise.... The interpretation urged on us by [the Government of] Canada is not sustainable. In light of this, would the government be willing to entertain the amendments now before this place at report stage to ensure that Bill C-14 is compliant with the charter?
Mr. Speaker, the press is reporting that the Equitas lawsuit between a group of veterans and the Canadian government is back in full swing.The Conservative government managed to secure an agreement in this case. After countless broken election promises, such as reinstating the lifetime disability pension, the minister is getting his government involved in a case that seeks to reduce our veterans' rights.How does the minister explain this affront?
Again, Mr. Speaker, I am always bemused to hear the members opposite talk about how important it is to engage and consult Canadians when they brought in the unfair elections act, ramming it through to try to help them get re-elected. The fact is that we committed to making this past election the last one in our country under first past the post. We committed to consult broadly with Canadians and pay particular attention to minority groups and under-represented groups, which would be allowed to weigh-in on how to make our electoral system and indeed our governance better. That is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, the bizarre spectacle yesterday of the minister arguing that referendums are non-inclusive shows that she has no idea how they work. A referendum will not and does not replace the minister's ultra-inclusive, super-de-duper consultation process, which has been received with such accolades in the media over the last few days. Rather, a referendum is a final step. It is the one in which Canadians get to say yes or no to what came before, including finding out whether or not the government will pay any attention at all to what took place in their consultation process. Why, therefore, would she not hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has set up a special committee without consulting the opposition; he is using his artificial majority of seats that he, himself, says is illegitimate in order to ram through a system that only benefits Liberals; and he refuses to consult Canadians in a referendum. Canadians should have the final say on this matter.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and agree to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, what arrogance. They are breaking their promise. They are attacking the very foundation of democracy in Canada.After promising a real discussion on medical assistance in dying, this government is shutting down debate at every stage. The Alberta Court of Appeal just warned us that the government's proposal is unconstitutional.How will the Prime Minister explain that he has broken his promise to the people who need this law?
Mr. Speaker, we have a historic opportunity to finally get rid of first past the post, but Canadians are growing increasingly worried and disappointed with the government.The minister claims that she wants to work together with opposition, then Liberals shoot down exactly every idea we give them. She claims she wants to be non-partisan, then Liberals stack the deck on the committee choosing the new system.Let us have a clear answer to a clear question. Will the minister respect the millions of Canadians represented by the opposition and agree not to pass any changes to our electoral act without the support of one of those parties, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, even the Conservatives on their worst days never tried to stifle democracy the way the Liberals are doing it today.On the very important issue of physician-assisted dying, after Liberals shut down debate, the Alberta Court of Appeal has now declared that the government is contradicting the Supreme Court's ruling. This is exactly as most experts had predicted.With this new court ruling, will the Prime Minister either refer the bill to the Supreme Court or make the necessary changes to make it constitutional?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of a lack of respect, the Prime Minister is also intent on changing the rules of democracy without giving every Canadian a say. This House belongs to Canadians. When we change the rules of democracy, every Canadian should have a say. It is obvious to Canadians that the only way this process will be transparent and open is if we have a referendum. Why is it not obvious to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, I have been seeking the support of the opposition since I began my mandate. We need to do this work together.However, if the members opposite have already made up their minds and are not coming to the table with progressive and constructive options, then they cannot criticize us for not doing the work that we promised we would do to the Canadians who elected.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about inclusiveness. We have a parliamentary committee that meets with, say, 1,000 people over the next six months, which would be quite an accomplishment: inclusive. Then as the minister said, it goes off to the cabinet for a final decision: not inclusive. Then, if she takes the advice we are giving here, it goes to 35 million Canadians for ratification or rejection. That is inclusive.Why is the minister opposed to inclusiveness? Why does she think that only her cabinet colleagues get to decide whether or not we get
Mr. Speaker, allow me to take this opportunity to remind all members of the House that the final decision on what reforms we bring forward will be the decision of all 338 members of the House, and to believe otherwise is undemocratic.
Mr. Speaker, while taking advantage of their majority may have been the norm within the former government, that is not the culture within our government.
Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has allowed a truce in the Equitas veterans lawsuit to fall apart and her lawyers are back attacking veterans in court. The Prime Minister promised to uphold the sacred obligation our country owes to our veterans, yet his justice minister has turned her lawyers on veterans. Will the justice minister denounce these tactics and treat our veterans with care, compassion, and respect?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs appears to be two-faced with respect to the Veterans Affairs files. The minister is now siding with the Department of Justice, which has chosen to prevent veterans from obtaining benefits that the minister and his party had promised during the last election. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs no longer believe that the government has a sacred obligation to veterans?
Mr. Speaker, while I would appreciate a different tone from the member opposite, I do not expect it.That said, the people of this country, those in the pockets, who do not normally get engaged in this conversation, those who face barriers above and beyond what members opposite can even comprehend, they deserve to be included in this conversation.I urge the member opposite to come to the table with constructive feedback on how we can work together to ensure that those voices are heard.
Mr. Speaker, if working with other parties was not important to us, we would not have demonstrated the leadership that we did when we ensured that the two unrecognized parties in the House, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party, would be included in this important conversation.I am looking forward to my meetings with all my critics, and I hope that this is an issue on which we can work together and ensure that Canada displays and continues to display the leadership it needs to on this agenda of democratic reform.
Mr. Speaker, another day, another broken Liberal promise. Liberals are dragging wounded veterans back into court to deny them fair benefits. After Conservatives spent $700,000 fighting our veterans, Liberals are taking another cruel hit at them.Veterans have earned our respect. They deserve the benefits they are owed. This is a disgrace. It is shameful. The Liberals must recognize Canada's moral, social, legal, and financial covenant with veterans. Why are they breaking their promises and turning their backs on our veterans?
Mr. Speaker, what is the point of being sought for our advice when we are turning away from Canada's values and Canada's interests?Instead of implementing the Magnitsky Act as promised, the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now musing vaguely about making changes to Canada's Special Economic Measures Act, another Liberal weak-kneed response, another broken promise. What this amounts to is the Minister of Foreign Affairs tiptoeing around Vladimir Putin.Why is the minister shying away from the Magnitsky Act when our allies around the world have already signed on? When will he stand up to Putin and enact this legislation?
Mr. Speaker, it is rare to have the opportunity to have a real discussion on our electoral system. We have an historic opportunity to put an end to an archaic system that creates false majorities, like the one the Liberal Party got in the last election.With the parliamentary straitjacket the Liberals presented yesterday, I find it hard to believe that they are not going to use their false majority to impose their views.Can the Liberals assure the House today that they will do the only honourable thing to improve our democratic life and get the support of at least one opposition party?
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is willing to trade appeasement with Russia for a membership in the International Syria Support Group and turn a blind eye to human rights abusers is appalling, to say the least. Innocent victims like Sergei Magnitsky are routinely subject to unjustified arrest, torture, and murder at the hands of corrupt officials.Will the Prime Minister follow through on the Liberal campaign promise and support the Magnitsky bill?
Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of Bill C-51, the Conservatives' dangerous and ineffective spy bill, the Liberals changed their tune during the election, when they promised to repeal problematic elements of the draconian bill without delay.Seven months later, the minister has accomplished nothing. Meanwhile, we have reports of unauthorized spying on journalists by the RCMP, and Canadians are increasingly worried about their civil liberties.Why are the Liberals breaking their promise on Bill C-51 and leaving Canadians' civil liberties at risk?
Mr. Speaker, the video of him promising to restore door-to-door mail delivery, September 3, is online as well. After campaigning on a black and white promise to end the Conservative court case against veterans, the Liberals are now taking veterans back to court with the same lawyers and the same arguments to try to block them from getting the benefits they deserve and the Liberals promised. It is disgusting. The reaction from veterans is It's a betrayal and They have turned the Liberal election campaign into a lie. Will the Prime Minister show a shred of decency and stop taking our veterans to court?
Mr. Speaker, when the world's population is affected by epidemics such as Zika, Canada does what it takes to protect its citizens and support the work being done abroad.Although the risk that Zika poses in Canada is very small, we still need to be vigilant and prepared.Can the Minister of Health inform the House of what Canada is doing to combat the Zika virus both here and abroad?
Mr. Speaker, a few decades ago, over 200,000 Sikhs lived in Afghanistan. That number has dwindled to less than 2,000 today. Afghani Sikhs continually encounter social discrimination and physical intimidation and now remain stuck in the surrounding countries. Why have the Liberals expressed an attitude of indifference toward the plight of Afghani Sikhs and failed to resettle them to Canada under section 13?
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret. Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?