2016-05-30

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case we would have to ask why Liberals stacked Liberal members on the committee picking the new voting system. Details matter, and Liberals have proposed a system in which Liberals could unilaterally change our voting system. On the weekend, the minister said she is looking forward to, and I quote “broad support”. Two-thirds of the House were elected on a promise of electoral reform. Some have accused the minister of damaging the credibility of the process with her platitudes and vague answers to straightforward questions. Therefore, we implore the Liberals to answer this one simple question. Are the Liberals actually willing to go it alone and unilaterally change our voting system, or will they require the support of at least one recognized party in the House?

Mr. Speaker, I do not think Canadians realized that sunny ways would be quite this expensive. Here are the facts. The Conservatives left the Liberals a surplus. Canadians were enjoying the lowest tax burden in 50 years, and in one month the Liberals spent a $10-billion deficit, obliterating the Conservative surplus. Why has the Minister of Finance been so reckless with the tax dollars of hard-working Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is transparency. The finance minister is cooking the books to suit his reckless political spending and agenda. He was left with a Conservative surplus. He did turn that into a Liberal deficit. The finance minister needs to come clean and show some transparency. Will he tell Canadians exactly how he spent $10 billion on the reckless Liberal schemes in March?

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to take a look at what has happened over the last number of years in March with the previous government. What happens is in March revenues go down. This year what happened was what has happened in previous years, only worse. The measures put in place by the previous government led revenues to go down at the end of the year, leaving us with a deficit. We are starting with a deficit left by the previous government and now we are making efforts to really improve our situation going forward.Canadians expect growth for this generation and the next generation, and we are going to deliver it.

Mr. Speaker, the government wants to change the electoral system, but it does not really know how to change it, so it is making things up as it goes along. Nobody knows how long this will take. All we know is that the key players are a bunch of confused Liberals. The minister says she does not want to change anything unless she has broad public buy-in. She obviously has no idea where she wants to go with this. It is hard to have faith in the process when the Liberals have been dragging their feet for seven months and have stacked their committee with Liberals.Will the government fix things by changing the committee membership so that no political party has a majority?

Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the backbone of the economy. Just this morning, I was at Ottawa 2017 where I spoke to the tourism industry because we know that is where growth can occur. We have to support the tourism industry. We have to support small businesses as well.That is why we are investing in the middle class. Middle-class Canadians are our small business owners and they are our customers. By putting money into the pockets of Canadians, they can support our small business owners and they can support the products and services that they offer, because small business owners would prefer increased revenues over decreased taxes any day.

Mr. Speaker, the minister thinks that tracking a topic on Twitter is a better way of consulting Canadians than a referendum; #logical? Their motion gives Liberals on the committee total control of the process to fundamentally change the way Canadians vote; #thatseemsfair. We know the Liberals do not respect Parliament, and now we can see that they do not respect Canadians either; #arrogance #outoftouch #disrespect. If the minister truly wants widespread consultations, could she finally agree to holding a #referendum?

Mr. Speaker, by withdrawing our CF-18s in order to keep an election promise, the Liberals are putting our soldiers' lives at risk, even more so now that we are on the front line of the offensive in Fallujah. Officers with the U.S. Army have confirmed that our special forces are on the front line. There is no doubt that our troops will face enemy fire.Can the minister tell us how we went from a training mission to a combat mission and whether our troops are risking their lives on the front line?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are all over the place on international development.The minister has launched yet another review and another consultation to determine how Canada can refocus its international assistance. On one hand, the Liberals say they are reviewing the system, but at the same time, the minister keeps promising Canadians' money at the international forums.Does this not make the Liberals' consultative process a big sham?

Mr. Speaker, I could just give him my question. It seems like he is ready. I know the Liberals are in denial about the Conservatives and the surplus, but it is there. Those are the facts. It is clear they do not understand economics and they do not understand the consequences of deficit spending. They can deny it all they want. They talk about decisions made by science. Here are the facts. We left them a surplus, and the spending habits of the Minister of Finance are simply out of control. Why is the finance minister doing what every other Canadian knows is dangerous, running a budget on a credit card? When will the finance minister admit his spending is out of control?

Mr. Speaker, on electoral reform the Liberals keep claiming that they are listening to Canadians but three-quarters of Canadians want a referendum on any changes to their system of democracy. It seems that Canadians have already spoken.Will the Liberals drop the lip service and listen to Canadians and hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend General Jonathan Vance acknowledged that today's conflicts do not have the characteristics of those in the past. The chief of the defence staff recognized that one of Canada's signature peacekeeping missions in the Sinai is growing more violent. As well, Canadian troops are now on the front lines in the fight against ISIS in Iraq.However, the Prime Minister said we are only training Iraqi troops. Why is the Prime Minister misinforming Canadians about these dangerous combat missions?

Mr. Speaker, to get broad buy-in we have to do what frankly has not occurred in the past, which is to reach out to Canadians in ridings across the country, to have real and genuine conversations around how to improve our democratic institutions, to take this historic opportunity to move our democracy to a new place where we empower voters to have a stronger say in our system.In order to do that we have to talk about options and dialogue and something other than the status quo. That is what I have not heard from members opposite. I have not heard them positing ideas on how we can improve our system. I would like them to please start participating in this debate.

Mr. Speaker, every month that goes by under the leadership of the Liberal Party looks the same: deficit, deficit, deficit. Last Friday, we learned from the Department of Finance's monthly “Fiscal Monitor” that the government is running a $9-billion deficit. That same department said that the Conservative government left a surplus of $1 billion last November. We leave surpluses and the Liberals leave deficits.Will the Minister of Finance finally admit what all Canadians know? The Liberal government has completely lost control of the public purse. That is the reality.

Mr. Speaker, General Vance has actually done us all a service in pointing out that the conflicts that will be going on now and in the future will largely be conflicts that will not get easily resolved; hence, the important emphasis on assisting, training, advising, and intelligence. That is what the minister and the chief of the defence staff have been emphasizing as they engage further in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, the current Liberal government promised during the election to restore Canada's historic relationship with our veterans. First and foremost was the pledge to end the Conservatives' court battle that would deprive veterans of the benefits they deserve. The Liberals promised to honour those benefits, but now we learn they are backtracking and again taking our veterans to court. Why are the Liberals punishing our veterans and forcing them to fight in court for the benefits they deserve and have earned in service to Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the evidence continues to pile up that the finance minister has a serious problem when it comes to transparency. Page 7 of his own February economic update details how his Liberal spending spree was already well under way last year. Again in March he burned through billions in one month and has driven us into a deficit. Why does the finance minister refuse to take responsibility for his own deficits?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to seize total control of the House of Commons just because he did not get his own way.Motion No. 6 was only withdrawn after a massive backlash. However, it is not his only undemocratic attempt to seize control. Motion No. 5 sets up the committee to alter Canada's electoral system in the Liberals' favour. It gives Liberals a majority on the committee, ensures that the Liberal majority in the House will control the bill, and the final say will be made by the Liberal cabinet.Will the Liberals do the right thing and withdraw this motion as well?

Mr. Speaker, government members keep hiding behind the June 6 deadline, as they call it, as an excuse, but now even former Liberal leaders, Bob Rae and Paul Martin agree there is nothing to fear.If this bill does not pass next week, the Carter decision itself provides the criteria for determining who is eligible and the provinces are now prepared and have already released guidelines for their physicians.We have the time we need to fix this, so will the government stop ramming through this deeply flawed bill and work with us to get it right?

Mr. Speaker, from the onset we have been committed to engaging Canadians to ensure that any proposal we bring forward has broad support from the Canadian public. Let us remember the objective we are trying to achieve here. The objective we are trying to achieve is to enfranchise voters, to give them more power, more say, a better spot at the table in our Canadian democratic system.I would offer to members opposite who clearly are engaged in this issue, who clearly want to have a discussion about it, let us talk, let us have an opportunity to look at what the options are to improve our system and get to work on it.

Mr. Speaker, more and more people are concerned about whether Bill C-14 on medical assistance in dying is constitutional.On the weekend, we heard from some of the Liberal Party faithful, former prime minister Paul Martin, and former Liberal leader Bob Rae. The government cannot get such an important issue wrong. It is not too late. This evening, Bill C-14 can be amended.Will the Liberals work with the opposition to ensure that Bill C-14 complies with the charter and the Supreme Court decision?

No, Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Seventy-five per cent of them want a referendum.The Minister of Democratic Institutions claims that a referendum is not the best way to consult Canadians but at the same time the minister is speaking out of the other side of her mouth by saying that she is listening to all Canadians. How better to know that one has the broad-based support of all Canadians than with a referendum?Will the Liberals stop pulling the wool over Canadians' eyes and hold a referendum, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, reporters from Iraq noted that Canadian troops are on the front line in preparation for the coalition's efforts to take the city of Fallujah. As Roméo Dallaire said, “Canada's soldiers are first and foremost [combat] specialists..”. The CBC acknowledged that Conservatives were on the right track. It reported, “As for ISIS, it was the Liberals and the NDP who were out of step with public opinion..”.Why is the Prime Minister misleading Canadians by saying that this is not a combat mission, but actually has our troops in combat against ISIS?

Mr. Speaker, instead of keeping their promise to restore home mail delivery, the Liberals chose to create a committee to examine this issue. The problem is that we know nothing about the procedure or what this committee will do.We learned that the deadline to make submissions is around June 23 for groups and sometime in July for individuals. As of Friday, there was nothing anywhere. When the NDP called out the government, a date appeared on the website, as if by magic.Is this the kind of transparency the Liberals promised us?

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised to keep the tax cuts for small businesses, but now they are breaking that promise and cancelling those tax cuts in the omnibus bill. The government is going to take $2.2 billion away from the businesses that create the most jobs in Canada. Fortunately, it still has a chance to keep its election promise by voting in favour of the NDP's amendment to reinstate the tax cut for SMEs.Will the Liberals join us in helping the best job creators in the country and vote in favour of our amendment?

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the support of Canadians is behind the proposals we bring forward.The process we are going to engage, of talking to Canadians from coast to coast, not just about changing our voting system but looking at electronic voting, looking at the possibility of mandatory voting, recognizing that in a modern age our electoral systems, like the rest of the world, need to evolve, is something to which we are committed.I would ask the member opposite to engage constructively in that process, to engage in that dialogue, and work with us to create a better electoral system.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Over 60% spoke, voting for parties that said we need to modernize our electoral system. Canadians stood up in the last election and said they needed a system that would better reflect their will, that would better enfranchise their vote, and that would give them a better voice in our democratic process. We are committed to exactly that. I would encourage the member opposite to work with us in this process. Let us improve our democracy. Let us get it done.

Mr. Speaker, the government needs to stop giving incomplete information. There is no rush.The professional associations are prepared. They have directives in place to protect the vulnerable. We need to get this right.The government is insisting on passing a bill that a number of experts have deemed unconstitutional. We are talking about charter rights. The government knows very well that its law will be challenged if it is not amended. When will the government work with the opposition to bring the bill in line with the charter?

Mr. Speaker, this is a priority. I went to Lac-Mégantic with my colleague from Sherbrooke last week, and I can say to the minister that the residents are not impressed with how this government is dragging its feet.The Lac-Mégantic tragedy was three years ago, and yet we still have a long way to go to ensure a safe rail system. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is telling us that there have been more and more problems with runaway trains and that Transport Canada is not doing enough to improve safety procedures.Will the minister stop with the rhetoric and finally do something to guarantee a safe rail system?

Mr. Speaker, on the softwood lumber issue, Quebec reaffirmed last week that our forestry regime is fully compliant with NAFTA in every respect and that there was absolutely no reason for Ottawa to accept the imposition of any quotas or tariffs on our exports.However, in order to bail out British Columbia, the government is currently negotiating a protectionist agreement with the Americans, even though it could kill Quebec's forestry industry.Will the Minister of International Trade clearly tell the Americans that our lumber is not subsidized and that she will never agree to a protectionist agreement, unless Quebec is exempt from it?

Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Safety Board is reporting more accidents, runaway trains, and other serious, preventable accidents, yet Transport Canada is delaying tougher measures that could stop not only disasters like Lac-Mégantic but 500 runaway trains over the past two decades. Transport inspectors and rail workers have called for strengthened controls and stepped-up inspection and enforcement. So far there has been nothing. When will the minister stop talking and start taking action to make our rail system safe?

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, Finance Canada confirmed what we always said would happen, that the government took a Conservative surplus and turned it into a Liberal deficit. We know how this works. They had the best March madness ever. It was fantastic. Therefore, what we want to know is whether cabinet ministers were actually urged to splurge in order to make sure that the finance minister got the deficit he predicted.

Mr. Speaker, public consultation comes in many forms. The ability to engage Canadians happens in many different ways. We are absolutely committed to making sure that all Canadians' voices are heard in this process. What we want to do right now, and I would encourage the member to join us in the process, is to have a discussion on exactly how we are going to do it. Right now, I do not even know what the member would want a question on. It is important to posit ideas, to have a debate and a discussion about how we can improve our system and once we get to that point let us look at the next steps.

Mr. Speaker, we understand very clearly what inappropriate spending can do because we are witnesses to what happened in the last government: tens of billions of dollars of spending with the lowest growth rate in decades. We are faced with that now, as well as with a deficit left to us by the previous government because of the low growth that it left us with.Something needed to be done and Canadians understood that. That is why they chose a new government that was going to be optimistic and invest in the future of our country, a new government that is going to bring in a new era of growth so that we can turn the page on this difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, at some point the Liberals are actually going to have to come forward with some new proposal instead of suggesting everyone else should do it. When they do that we want to have a referendum. It is not just we who want a referendum, 73% of Canadians want a referendum. Sooner or later, there will be a proposal from the Liberals saying, “Here is the new electoral system we suggest”. When that happens, will there be a referendum, as 73% of Canadians want, or will they deny Canadians their democratic say?

Mr. Speaker, the“ Fiscal Monitor” confirms the fact that the Liberals inherited a surplus from the Conservative government. It also confirms, though sadly, that just one short month, at the very end of the year, they were able to turn that surplus into a deficit. While they preach the gospel of deficit spending, they stand alone because their G7 partners are still stuck on this whole balanced budget thing. Did the minister engineer this deficit? Is he just proving to Canadians that he can spend it as quickly as we left it for him?

Mr. Speaker, the “Fiscal Monitor”, a publication of the Department of Finance, indicated that there was a $1-billion surplus. The latest edition shows that there is now a $9-billion deficit. That is what officials are saying. If the Minister of Finance does not believe his officials, does he at least agree with his Prime Minister, who said just a few days ago that the $30-billion deficit was an estimate and that it could be worse?Can the Minister of Finance assure us that the deficit will not be worse than what he promised?

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I would quote the chief of the defence staff, who said that we are in a state of “armed conflict” with a “non-state actor”. There is no doubt that this is a mission of significance. This is a mission where there will be danger. Our coalition partners have welcomed us into the theatre, and we are providing really useful and effective services to our coalition partners.

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to actually look at the “Fiscal Monitor”. What he would find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. Revenues are lower and expenses are higher in the last month. The only difference is that this year the revenues are even lower in March as a result of the measures put in place by the previous government. That is the situation we face. This is why Canadians decided they wanted a new path: a path towards growth, a path towards making investments, and a path towards a better future for themselves and their families. We are going to do that for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that we have in place by the Supreme Court deadline of June 6 a legal framework for medical assistance in dying in this country.I know that there is an incredible diversity of opinion around this incredibly complex and challenging issue. As legislators, we need to answer the 36 million people who live in this country in terms of putting in place a regime.Again, I am confident that this is the best approach for Canada in terms of medical assistance in dying right now, and it is the first step.

Mr. Speaker, yes, we have been taking action. I have been very clear since the beginning that rail safety is my top priority. In fact, I am very glad that in this last budget $143 million was put aside over three years for rail safety. Yes, we have taken measures. In fact, the member's party was present when we announced some of these measures. Therefore, we are taking rail safety very seriously. I have said it many times. The measures put in place since Lac-Mégantic are a beginning but they are not sufficient and we will be doing more for rail safety.

Mr. Speaker, over the past week, I have heard from many Canadians who strongly support our “free the beer” campaign. If we can free the beer by removing internal trade barriers, we can also create jobs and create growth in our economy without adding debt. Will the government raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court and free the beer?

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the minister's response is that the Alberta Court of Appeal, the Canadian Bar Association, Barreau du Québec, constitutional experts, and now even former Prime Minister Martin all agree, Bill C-14 in its present form is likely not constitutional.Even if the bill is passed next week, it will be tied up in legal challenges for years to come, and costly, exhausting court battles for suffering Canadians who just want to see their legal rights vindicated.Why will the government not do the right thing and work with us to get the bill right the first time?

Mr. Speaker, the goal of this mission is to achieve long-term success through self-sustainable security. Hence, we are in a mission that advises, trains, assists, and provides intelligence. That is the way forward in order to minimize the unwanted consequences of this conflict. As we go forward, I would encourage the hon. member to support our troops as we engage in this conflict with a non-state actor.

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, torrential downpours and landslides in Sri Lanka created a humanitarian crisis across the island. Over 600,000 people have been displaced from their homes, and nearly 250,000 people are stuck in emergency evacuation centres. The crisis is ongoing and individual victims need our help. Over 100 people are still reported missing and 100 more have been confirmed dead. Could the hon. Minister of International Development advise the House of Canada's efforts to assist these victims?

Mr. Speaker, I have had many occasions to talk and work with the member opposite. I know that he is very earnest in his desire to improve our electoral system. I know that he has many ideas he wants to bring forward to the process. Let me tell him that in this process certainly each and every one of us is going to be given the opportunity to vote on that system. Each and every one of us is going to be given an opportunity to give input to it. Each and every one of us has a responsibility to engage our constituents and Canadians, on a pan-Canadian basis, to make sure their voices are heard. I look forward to working with him on it.

Mr. Speaker, we were not the only party to campaign on the idea of changing our electoral system, on modernizing our electoral and democratic institutions. The NDP did. The Green Party did. There were many different parties that posited this idea and in cumulative total that reaches more than 60%.The bigger point here is that there is an historic opportunity to improve the way Canadians interact with their democracy, to empower them and give them a chance to have a stronger voice in this process. I would encourage the member to work with us in that process, to begin that process of debate and ideas. Let us start it right now.

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians must have the opportunity to express their opinion on electoral reform.This weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said, “As far as any changes around democratic reform, we’re not going to proceed with any changes unless we have broad support.”We have a good idea for the broad support: have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, the motion to create the committee is coming forward.There is going to be ample opportunity to hear from each and every member of the House around his or her ideas to improve and modernize our electoral system. The reality is that in the last election Canadians looked at the problems of the past, looked at the decade that preceded the last election, and said, in huge measure, that the status quo was not good enough, that we needed to do better.That is precisely what we are working on. That is precisely what the committee is getting to the heart of. I encourage members to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions also said, “So Canadians can rest assured that unless we have their broad buy-in, we're not moving forward with any changes.”Perhaps voting Canadians and those who contributed to greater voter participation in the last election because we did a good job want to keep the current electoral system.Will the Prime Minister recognize that the best way to find out what Canadians want is to hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have participated in three international summits recently. One was on the status of women, another was on humanitarian aid, and the third was on health.My opposition colleague will not be surprised to learn that, as in past years, we pledged contributions to the Central Emergency Response Fund to ensure that Canada will always be among the first to respond to disasters. We also pledged to respond to major humanitarian organizations' annual appeals.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times in the House, at the end of the year, revenues are lower and expenses are higher. That is nothing out of the ordinary. That was the situation in previous years. Now, things are more difficult because of the measures taken by the previous government. It is a different situation. The Conservatives left us with a deficit. That is why we are going to make investments to improve our economic growth.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the member to actually go through the “Fiscal Monitor” line by line to find out the facts. When we take out the measures that we have put in, what we find is that the previous government left us with a deficit. It is absolutely clear, and it is something that they are going to need to look at and realize. We are going to do what Canadians asked us to do, which is to deal with what was left to us by the previous government. We are going to invest to make a real difference for Canadians in the future. We are improving our country through improved growth.

Mr. Speaker, maybe the parliamentary secretary could sort out some of the confusion left by his minister this weekend when she contradicted herself by saying on the one hand, “I haven't been persuaded that referendum alone is the best tool that we can use in the 21st century”, but on the other hand she said, “And we will not proceed with any changes [to how Canadians vote] without the broad buy-in of the people of this country”.How do we get a broad buy-in if we do not actually consult broadly? How do we do this without having a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to inform the House that next Thursday, June 2, will be an allotted day.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, facts matter. I would urge the members on the others side to actually read the “Fiscal Monitor”. What they will find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. What they will find is that, as in previous years, revenues go down and expenses go up at the end of the year. This year revenues went down precipitously because of the measures of the previous government. That is the situation we face now. We are focused on how we are going to deal with what was left to us by the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, the national president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers said that the review of Canada Post was welcome news for Canada Post workers and that the government had a historic opportunity to reinvent Canada Post.Canada Post management indicated that it supported the review of postal services in Canada and that it looked forward to this national discussion.The union supports the review, management supports the review, Canadians across the country support the review—

Mr. Speaker, as I have been saying in the House for many months, the government before us left us with a deficit. The “Fiscal Monitor”, this past Friday, told us in black and white what is absolutely the case. Due to the economic realities left by the measures from the previous government we have a deficit, a deficit from the previous government. Now the question is, what are we going to do moving forward? We are going to invest to make the future rosier than the past for Canadians by focusing on growth.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development confirmed that he wants to automatically sign up seniors for the guaranteed income supplement by no later than 2018.As this has been a longstanding demand from seniors and from the Bloc Québécois, we must therefore commend him. However, it has taken the federal government a quarter century to do it. Since those affected have already waited too long, will the minister promise to make payment of the GIS automatic in the next tax season?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the parliamentary secretary that his government was elected by 39% of voters, not 60% as he has been saying. For the past few weeks, the Minister of Democratic Institutions has repeatedly stated that the referendum option is not on the table. This despite the fact that 73% of Canadians are in favour of a referendum. Will the Minister of Democratic Institutions and her government finally listen to Canadians and hold a referendum on the electoral system? #referendum.

Mr. Speaker, let me talk about what we will not do.Last time major democratic changes were introduced, it was by the Conservatives. It was the Fair Elections Act, which disenfranchised many voters. There were no consultations that occurred during that process. They did not engage Canadians.We want to do things differently. We want to ensure that the voices of Canadians are heard, that they are given the proper opportunity to be involved in modernizing their system. This was a clear campaign promise we made in the last election. More than 60% of Canadians voted for parties that said they wanted change. We are committed to making that change happen.

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the consultations we have on a pan-Canadian basis hear from all Canadians on how they want to modernize and improve our electoral system.I encourage the members opposite to participate in that discussion. I have not heard any ideas or thoughts about how they want to modernize that system yet, but it is important they put those forward. I really invite all members of the House to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, this question gives me an opportunity to explain why it is so important that we get a piece of legislation in place at the soonest possible date.Without legislation in place, health care providers will not have the legal framework that they require to proceed. They will be advised to seek legal consults. This will cause serious problems in accessing. Not only that, the Canadian Pharmacists Association has made it clear that there will be no protection for pharmacists to dispense medication.We need to get this legislation in place as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions backed down on the weekend on the issue of electoral reform. She said, “It means that there needs to be a conversation in the House of Commons including all parties.” Naturally, we agree with her, but she must go even further. I invite the minister to open up to the public.Will the Prime Minister hold a referendum so that all Canadians can have a say on electoral reform? A referendum is required.

Mr. Speaker, I hear the hashtags opposite. I hear the member wanting to use different forums. Obviously there are many different ways that people can engage on this issue. There will be forums held in nearly every riding. I encourage members to host town halls. I encourage members to engage with their constituents. We will have a digital portal where Canadians' voices can be heard. It will be a dynamic conversation, and as we said, we will ensure that the will of Canadians is behind whatever we put forward.Help us to change the status quo, improve our system, and modernize our electoral system to bring us into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Scarborough—Rouge Park for the question.I would like to begin by offering our deepest condolences to the people of Sri Lanka and expressing Canada's solidarity with them. Our government acted swiftly by making a $310,000 contribution, which helped Oxfam Canada and the Red Cross provide water, sanitation and hygiene services, household items, living allowances, and protection to some 50,000 affected families. We continue to monitor the situation.

Mr. Speaker, I do share the enthusiasm by the member opposite, and I welcome expanded opportunities for alcohol between provinces and territories. This is a matter that I have raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts as we negotiate on a comprehensive agreement on internal trade. This is a broad agreement where we want to reduce barriers and harmonize regulations. It is about growing the economy and making sure that we benefit, not only businesses but consumers. I look forward to working with the member opposite on this file.

Mr. Speaker, it is true that we do not know where this process is going to conclude. The party opposite may already have an idea of where it is going to go, but we want to actually engage in a meaningful dialogue that finds middle ground and the best solution. I imagine that solution should and must evolve as the dialogue and input from Canadians take place. If we simply step forward and say that this is the system we want, here it is, and we put it to a vote, frankly, that is how things were done, but that is not how things should be done. We need to work in an inclusive manner and work together to find the best system.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what I just said.I have the utmost respect for the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. We listen every time it makes any recommendations.As I have clearly stated, rail safety is my top priority. If my colleague would take a little time to look at the measures we have taken, he would see that we have already taken action. Is it enough? No. As we have said very clearly, additional measures are needed, and there is money in the budget for that purpose.We will address rail safety, because it is my top priority.

Mr. Speaker, I realize this may not be something the member has seen a lot of, and we need to see a lot more of, which is the ideas brought forward by government are informed by not only broad-based consultations with the public but also all parties in the House. It is certainly our desire in this process to have each of the parties participating and helping form the modernization of our electoral system. To get to the point where we have something to talk about we need them to engage in that dialogue, bring forward their ideas, and move away from just hanging on to the status quo.

Mr. Speaker, today, dairy producers began a three-day tractor trek from Quebec City to Ottawa to remind the government of its election promises.They are travelling across Quebec to protest the importation of diafiltered milk, which robs them of thousands of dollars every week. They are criss-crossing Quebec to remind the government that compensation was promised when international agreements such as the trans-Pacific partnership and the European Union agreement were signed.When will the 40 Liberal members from Quebec speak out in support of Quebec's dairy producers?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to moving forward with Bill C-14 and have engaged very broadly on this really complex and deeply personal issue. We have a deadline of June 6 to meet that has been directed by the Supreme Court of Canada. We are committed to having in place, it is our responsibility as parliamentarians, a legal framework in this country that ensures we find the right balance between personal autonomy, protection of the vulnerable, and ensuring there is access in this country.

Mr. Speaker, the facts are now clear.The “Fiscal Monitor” has made two things very clear. The previous government left us a deficit. That is the situation. What is more, our level of growth is very low because of the measures taken by the previous government. Now, we are going to make investments to improve the situation for the future.

Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago the Minister of Finance said “facts are the facts”. We agree with that. For that reason I ask for the consent of the House to table the “Fiscal Monitor”, a Department of Finance publication.It states, “April to November 2015: budgetary surplus of $1.0 billion”.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to working with all parliamentarians and have done so on this piece of legislation as we move forward. We have the utmost respect for the Supreme Court of Canada. We are ensuring that we do everything possible to meet the deadline of June 6.We have the utmost confidence that this is the best public policy approach to medical assistance in dying in this country right now. We will ensure that we can move forward with that legal framework to provide access as well as the protection of the vulnerable.

Mr. Speaker, as the member is aware, this lawsuit emerged under the previous government. I can say that this government is moving forward on treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We are moving forward on an aggressive mandate that is ensuring financial benefits to them. We saw that in budget 2016 with a $5.6-billion investment that would improve the lives of our most disabled veterans and ensure financial security for them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, our government created supply management, and our government will defend it.As promised, we are meeting with industry stakeholders from across the country. Over the past few weeks, we have listened to them and had many very productive discussions. We will help develop a sustainable, long-term strategy for the entire sector.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the hon. member for Northwest Territories for his tireless efforts on behalf of northern communities.Our government has made unprecedented commitments to support public infrastructure. The Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway will help to connect people, create jobs, and support economic development in the north.We are very encouraged by the progress of this project, and I look forward to touring this exciting project with my colleague in the future.

Mr. Speaker, my riding of the Northwest Territories has significant infrastructure needs and faces particular challenges because of our northern climate.In April, experts from Canada and the United States gathered in Inuvik to discuss new techniques for infrastructure projects at the International Symposium of Permafrost Scientists. One of the projects they discussed was the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway that has just finished its third construction season.Could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities please update the House on the progress of this important project?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made it abundantly clear that the 2015 election would be the last to employ the first-past-the-post system and that the status quo is not an option. However, during the Liberal convention this weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions indicated that the government would not proceed with changes without the support of the people.Will the minister commit to holding a referendum on a subject as important as the electoral system to find out whether there is public support?

Mr. Speaker, the aerospace sector is one of the most innovative in the country. The industry includes more than 180,000 quality jobs in Canada. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada recently announced the relocation of assembly operations to Mirabel, Quebec, which will maintain and create about 100 jobs.Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development tell the House about the role played by the Government of Canada in relocating this assembly line?

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to also thank my colleague for all her efforts in recent years and to especially thank the FADOQ network for bringing this very important matter to our government's attention.In addition to substantially increasing the guaranteed income supplement, restoring the retirement eligibility age to 65, and investing $200 million in housing for seniors, we are announcing today that the automatic enrolment process for the guaranteed income supplement will be completed in 2018.

Mr. Speaker, facts matter. The facts are that the “Fiscal Monitor” shows us—

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question.I am very proud of Bell Helicopter Textron Canada's decision to relocate its assembly line for the new helicopter to Quebec. We have worked with the Government of Quebec to create a positive business environment for companies. This collaboration has meant keeping 900 jobs and creating more than 100 new jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government recognizes the importance of forestry to Quebec and to Canada. In fact, I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec sector next Monday, in Montreal. I spoke with my U.S. counterpart, Michael Froman, about this specific issue two weeks ago at the APEC meeting. We are working hard to reach a deal that will be good for Canada and for Quebec.

Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the backbone of the economy. Just this morning, I was at Ottawa 2017 where I spoke to the tourism industry because we know that is where growth can occur. We have to support the tourism industry. We have to support small businesses as well.That is why we are investing in the middle class. Middle-class Canadians are our small business owners and they are our customers. By putting money into the pockets of Canadians, they can support our small business owners and they can support the products and services that they offer, because small business owners would prefer increased revenues over decreased taxes any day.

Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago the Minister of Finance said “facts are the facts”. We agree with that. For that reason I ask for the consent of the House to table the “Fiscal Monitor”, a Department of Finance publication.It states, “April to November 2015: budgetary surplus of $1.0 billion”.

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend General Jonathan Vance acknowledged that today's conflicts do not have the characteristics of those in the past. The chief of the defence staff recognized that one of Canada's signature peacekeeping missions in the Sinai is growing more violent. As well, Canadian troops are now on the front lines in the fight against ISIS in Iraq.However, the Prime Minister said we are only training Iraqi troops. Why is the Prime Minister misinforming Canadians about these dangerous combat missions?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the parliamentary secretary that his government was elected by 39% of voters, not 60% as he has been saying. For the past few weeks, the Minister of Democratic Institutions has repeatedly stated that the referendum option is not on the table. This despite the fact that 73% of Canadians are in favour of a referendum. Will the Minister of Democratic Institutions and her government finally listen to Canadians and hold a referendum on the electoral system? #referendum.

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case we would have to ask why Liberals stacked Liberal members on the committee picking the new voting system. Details matter, and Liberals have proposed a system in which Liberals could unilaterally change our voting system. On the weekend, the minister said she is looking forward to, and I quote “broad support”. Two-thirds of the House were elected on a promise of electoral reform. Some have accused the minister of damaging the credibility of the process with her platitudes and vague answers to straightforward questions. Therefore, we implore the Liberals to answer this one simple question. Are the Liberals actually willing to go it alone and unilaterally change our voting system, or will they require the support of at least one recognized party in the House?

Mr. Speaker, government members keep hiding behind the June 6 deadline, as they call it, as an excuse, but now even former Liberal leaders, Bob Rae and Paul Martin agree there is nothing to fear.If this bill does not pass next week, the Carter decision itself provides the criteria for determining who is eligible and the provinces are now prepared and have already released guidelines for their physicians.We have the time we need to fix this, so will the government stop ramming through this deeply flawed bill and work with us to get it right?

Mr. Speaker, as I said, facts matter. I would urge the members on the others side to actually read the “Fiscal Monitor”. What they will find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. What they will find is that, as in previous years, revenues go down and expenses go up at the end of the year. This year revenues went down precipitously because of the measures of the previous government. That is the situation we face now. We are focused on how we are going to deal with what was left to us by the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, the “Fiscal Monitor”, a publication of the Department of Finance, indicated that there was a $1-billion surplus. The latest edition shows that there is now a $9-billion deficit. That is what officials are saying. If the Minister of Finance does not believe his officials, does he at least agree with his Prime Minister, who said just a few days ago that the $30-billion deficit was an estimate and that it could be worse?Can the Minister of Finance assure us that the deficit will not be worse than what he promised?

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to take a look at what has happened over the last number of years in March with the previous government. What happens is in March revenues go down. This year what happened was what has happened in previous years, only worse. The measures put in place by the previous government led revenues to go down at the end of the year, leaving us with a deficit. We are starting with a deficit left by the previous government and now we are making efforts to really improve our situation going forward.Canadians expect growth for this generation and the next generation, and we are going to deliver it.

Mr. Speaker, I could just give him my question. It seems like he is ready. I know the Liberals are in denial about the Conservatives and the surplus, but it is there. Those are the facts. It is clear they do not understand economics and they do not understand the consequences of deficit spending. They can deny it all they want. They talk about decisions made by science. Here are the facts. We left them a surplus, and the spending habits of the Minister of Finance are simply out of control. Why is the finance minister doing what every other Canadian knows is dangerous, running a budget on a credit card? When will the finance minister admit his spending is out of control?

Mr. Speaker, the government needs to stop giving incomplete information. There is no rush.The professional associations are prepared. They have directives in place to protect the vulnerable. We need to get this right.The government is insisting on passing a bill that a number of experts have deemed unconstitutional. We are talking about charter rights. The government knows very well that its law will be challenged if it is not amended. When will the government work with the opposition to bring the bill in line with the charter?

Mr. Speaker, the government wants to change the electoral system, but it does not really know how to change it, so it is making things up as it goes along. Nobody knows how long this will take. All we know is that the key players are a bunch of confused Liberals. The minister says she does not want to change anything unless she has broad public buy-in. She obviously has no idea where she wants to go with this. It is hard to have faith in the process when the Liberals have been dragging their feet for seven months and have stacked their committee with Liberals.Will the government fix things by changing the committee membership so that no political party has a majority?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to moving forward with Bill C-14 and have engaged very broadly on this really complex and deeply personal issue. We have a deadline of June 6 to meet that has been directed by the Supreme Court of Canada. We are committed to having in place, it is our responsibility as parliamentarians, a legal framework in this country that ensures we find the right balance between personal autonomy, protection of the vulnerable, and ensuring there is access in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think Canadians realized that sunny ways would be quite this expensive. Here are the facts. The Conservatives left the Liberals a surplus. Canadians were enjoying the lowest tax burden in 50 years, and in one month the Liberals spent a $10-billion deficit, obliterating the Conservative surplus. Why has the Minister of Finance been so reckless with the tax dollars of hard-working Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, as I have been saying in the House for many months, the government before us left us with a deficit. The “Fiscal Monitor”, this past Friday, told us in black and white what is absolutely the case. Due to the economic realities left by the measures from the previous government we have a deficit, a deficit from the previous government. Now the question is, what are we going to do moving forward? We are going to invest to make the future rosier than the past for Canadians by focusing on growth.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times in the House, at the end of the year, revenues are lower and expenses are higher. That is nothing out of the ordinary. That was the situation in previous years. Now, things are more difficult because of the measures taken by the previous government. It is a different situation. The Conservatives left us with a deficit. That is why we are going to make investments to improve our economic growth.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions backed down on the weekend on the issue of electoral reform. She said, “It means that there needs to be a conversation in the House of Commons including all parties.” Naturally, we agree with her, but she must go even further. I invite the minister to open up to the public.Will the Prime Minister hold a referendum so that all Canadians can have a say on electoral reform? A referendum is required.

Mr. Speaker, we understand very clearly what inappropriate spending can do because we are witnesses to what happened in the last government: tens of billions of dollars of spending with the lowest growth rate in decades. We are faced with that now, as well as with a deficit left to us by the previous government because of the low growth that it left us with.Something needed to be done and Canadians understood that. That is why they chose a new government that was going to be optimistic and invest in the future of our country, a new government that is going to bring in a new era of growth so that we can turn the page on this difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the member to actually go through the “Fiscal Monitor” line by line to find out the facts. When we take out the measures that we have put in, what we find is that the previous government left us with a deficit. It is absolutely clear, and it is something that they are going to need to look at and realize. We are going to do what Canadians asked us to do, which is to deal with what was left to us by the previous government. We are going to invest to make a real difference for Canadians in the future. We are improving our country through improved growth.

Mr. Speaker, on electoral reform the Liberals keep claiming that they are listening to Canadians but three-quarters of Canadians want a referendum on any changes to their system of democracy. It seems that Canadians have already spoken.Will the Liberals drop the lip service and listen to Canadians and hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, facts matter. The facts are that the “Fiscal Monitor” shows us—

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Scarborough—Rouge Park for the question.I would like to begin by offering our deepest condolences to the people of Sri Lanka and expressing Canada's solidarity with them. Our government acted swiftly by making a $310,000 contribution, which helped Oxfam Canada and the Red Cross provide water, sanitation and hygiene services, household items, living allowances, and protection to some 50,000 affected families. We continue to monitor the situation.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are all over the place on international development.The minister has launched yet another review and another consultation to determine how Canada can refocus its international assistance. On one hand, the Liberals say they are reviewing the system, but at the same time, the minister keeps promising Canadians' money at the international forums.Does this not make the Liberals' consultative process a big sham?

Mr. Speaker, today, dairy producers began a three-day tractor trek from Quebec City to Ottawa to remind the government of its election promises.They are travelling across Quebec to protest the importation of diafiltered milk, which robs them of thousands of dollars every week. They are criss-crossing Quebec to remind the government that compensation was promised when international agreements such as the trans-Pacific partnership and the European Union agreement were signed.When will the 40 Liberal members from Quebec speak out in support of Quebec's dairy producers?

Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to inform the House that next Thursday, June 2, will be an allotted day.

Mr. Speaker, on the softwood lumber issue, Quebec reaffirmed last week that our forestry regime is fully compliant with NAFTA in every respect and that there was absolutely no reason for Ottawa to accept the imposition of any quotas or tariffs on our exports.However, in order to bail out British Columbia, the government is currently negotiating a protectionist agreement with the Americans, even though it could kill Quebec's forestry industry.Will the Minister of International Trade clearly tell the Americans that our lumber is not subsidized and that she will never agree to a protectionist agreement, unless Quebec is exempt from it?

Mr. Speaker, every month that goes by under the leadership of the Liberal Party looks the same: deficit, deficit, deficit. Last Friday, we learned from the Department of Finance's monthly “Fiscal Monitor” that the government is running a $9-billion deficit. That same department said that the Conservative government left a surplus of $1 billion last November. We leave surpluses and the Liberals leave deficits.Will the Minister of Finance finally admit what all Canadians know? The Liberal government has completely lost control of the public purse. That is the reality.

Mr. Speaker, I hear the hashtags opposite. I hear the member wanting to use different forums. Obviously there are many different ways that people can engage on this issue. There will be forums held in nearly every riding. I encourage members to host town halls. I encourage members to engage with their constituents. We will have a digital portal where Canadians' voices can be heard. It will be a dynamic conversation, and as we said, we will ensure that the will of Canadians is behind whatever we put forward.Help us to change the status quo, improve our system, and modernize our electoral system to bring us into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, the facts are now clear.The “Fiscal Monitor” has made two things very clear. The previous government left us a deficit. That is the situation. What is more, our level of growth is very low because of the measures taken by the previous government. Now, we are going to make investments to improve the situation for the future.

Mr. Speaker, our government created supply management, and our government will defend it.As promised, we are meeting with industry stakeholders from across the country. Over the past few weeks, we have listened to them and had many very productive discussions. We will help develop a sustainable, long-term strategy for the entire sector.

Mr. Speaker, to get broad buy-in we have to do what frankly has not occurred in the past, which is to reach out to Canadians in ridings across the country, to have real and genuine conversations around how to improve our democratic institutions, to take this historic opportunity to move our democracy to a new place where we empower voters to have a stronger say in our system.In order to do that we have to talk about options and dialogue and something other than the status quo. That is what I have not heard from members opposite. I have not heard them positing ideas on how we can improve our system. I would like them to please start participating in this debate.

Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Safety Board is reporting more accidents, runaway trains, and other serious, preventable accidents, yet Transport Canada is delaying tougher measures that could stop not only disasters like Lac-Mégantic but 500 runaway trains over the past two decades. Transport inspectors and rail workers have called for strengthened controls and stepped-up inspection and enforcement. So far there has been nothing. When will the minister stop talking and start taking action to make our rail system safe?

Mr. Speaker, as the member is aware, this lawsuit emerged under the previous government. I can say that this government is moving forward on treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We are moving forward on an aggressive mandate that is ensuring financial benefits to them. We saw that in budget 2016 with a $5.6-billion investment that would improve the lives of our most disabled veterans and ensure financial security for them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, more and more people are concerned about whether Bill C-14 on medical assistance in dying is constitutional.On the weekend, we heard from some of the Liberal Party faithful, former prime minister Paul Martin, and former Liberal leader Bob Rae. The government cannot get such an important issue wrong. It is not too late. This evening, Bill C-14 can be amended.Will the Liberals work with the opposition to ensure that Bill C-14 complies with the charter and the Supreme Court decision?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made it abundantly clear that the 2015 election would be the last to employ the first-past-the-post system and that the status quo is not an option. However, during the Liberal convention this weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions indicated that the government would not proceed with changes without the support of the people.Will the minister commit to holding a referendum on a subject as important as the electoral system to find out whether there is public support?

Mr. Speaker, the“ Fiscal Monitor” confirms the fact that the Liberals inherited a surplus from the Conservative government. It also confirms, though sadly, that just one short month, at the very end of the year, they were able to turn that surplus into a deficit. While they preach the gospel of deficit spending, they stand alone because their G7 partners are still stuck on this whole balanced budget thing. Did the minister engineer this deficit? Is he just proving to Canadians that he can spend it as quickly as we left it for him?

Mr. Speaker, at some point the Liberals are actually going to have to come forward with some new proposal instead of suggesting everyone else should do it. When they do that we want to have a referendum. It is not just we who want a referendum, 73% of Canadians want a referendum. Sooner or later, there will be a proposal from the Liberals saying, “Here is the new electoral system we suggest”. When that happens, will there be a referendum, as 73% of Canadians want, or will they deny Canadians their democratic say?

Mr. Speaker, this question gives me an opportunity to explain why it is so important that we get a piece of legislation in place at the soonest possible date.Without legislation in place, health care providers will not have the legal framework that they require to proceed. They will be advised to seek legal consults. This will cause serious problems in accessing. Not only that, the Canadian Pharmacists Association has made it clear that there will be no protection for pharmacists to dispense medication.We need to get this legislation in place as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to actually look at the “Fiscal Monitor”. What he would find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. Revenues are lower and expenses are higher in the last month. The only difference is that this year the revenues are even lower in March as a result of the measures put in place by the previous government. That is the situation we face. This is why Canadians decided they wanted a new path: a path towards growth, a path towards making investments, and a path towards a better future for themselves and their families. We are going to do that for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the motion to create the committee is coming forward.There is going to be ample opportunity to hear from each and every member of the House around his or her ideas to improve and modernize our electoral system. The reality is that in the last election Canadians looked at the problems of the past, looked at the decade that preceded the last election, and said, in huge measure, that the status quo was not good enough, that we needed to do better.That is precisely what we are working on. That is precisely what the committee is getting to the heart of. I encourage members to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the minister's response is that the Alberta Court of Appeal, the Canadian Bar Association, Barreau du Québec, constitutional experts, and now even former Prime Minister Martin all agree, Bill C-14 in its present form is likely not constitutional.Even if the bill is passed next week, it will be tied up in legal challenges for years to come, and costly, exhausting court battles for suffering Canadians who just want to see their legal rights vindicated.Why will the government not do the right thing and work with us to get the bill right the first time?

Mr. Speaker, the current Liberal government promised during the election to restore Canada's historic relationship with our veterans. First and foremost was the pledge to end the Conservatives' court battle that would deprive veterans of the benefits they deserve. The Liberals promised to honour those benefits, but now we learn they are backtracking and again taking our veterans to court. Why are the Liberals punishing our veterans and forcing them to fight in court for the benefits they deserve and have earned in service to Canada?

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, torrential downpours and landslides in Sri Lanka created a humanitarian crisis across the island. Over 600,000 people have been displaced from their homes, and nearly 250,000 people are stuck in emergency evacuation centres. The crisis is ongoing and individual victims need our help. Over 100 people are still reported missing and 100 more have been confirmed dead. Could the hon. Minister of International Development advise the House of Canada's efforts to assist these victims?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development confirmed that he wants to automatically sign up seniors for the guaranteed income supplement by no later than 2018.As this has been a longstanding demand from seniors and from the Bloc Québécois, we must therefore commend him. However, it has taken the federal government a quarter century to do it. Since those affected have already waited too long, will the minister promise to make payment of the GIS automatic in the next tax season?

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the support of Canadians is behind the proposals we bring forward.The process we are going to engage, of talking to Canadians from coast to coast, not just about changing our voting system but looking at electronic voting, looking at the possibility of mandatory voting, recognizing that in a modern age our electoral systems, like the rest of the world, need to evolve, is something to which we are committed.I would ask the member opposite to engage constructively in that process, to engage in that dialogue, and work with us to create a better electoral system.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government recognizes the importance of forestry to Quebec and to Canada. In fact, I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec sector next Monday, in Montreal. I spoke with my U.S. counterpart, Michael Froman, about this specific issue two weeks ago at the APEC meeting. We are working hard to reach a deal that will be good for Canada and for Quebec.

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is transparency. The finance minister is cooking the books to suit his reckless political spending and agenda. He was left with a Conservative surplus. He did turn that into a Liberal deficit. The finance minister needs to come clean and show some transparency. Will he tell Canadians exactly how he spent $10 billion on the reckless Liberal schemes in March?

Mr. Speaker, we were not the only party to campaign on the idea of changing our electoral system, on modernizing our electoral and democratic institutions. The NDP did. The Green Party did. There were many different parties that posited this idea and in cumulative total that reaches more than 60%.The bigger point here is that there is an historic opportunity to improve the way Canadians interact with their democracy, to empower them and give them a chance to have a stronger voice in this process. I would encourage the member to work with us in that process, to begin that process of debate and ideas. Let us start it right now.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to seize total control of the House of Commons just because he did not get his own way.Motion No. 6 was only withdrawn after a massive backlash. However, it is not his only undemocratic attempt to seize control. Motion No. 5 sets up the committee to alter Canada's electoral system in the Liberals' favour. It gives Liberals a majority on the committee, ensures that the Liberal majority in the House will control the bill, and the final say will be made by the Liberal cabinet.Will the Liberals do the right thing and withdraw this motion as well?

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have participated in three international summits recently. One was on the status of women, another was on humanitarian aid, and the third was on health.My opposition colleague will not be surprised to learn that, as in past years, we pledged contributions to the Central Emergency Response Fund to ensure that Canada will always be among the first to respond to disasters. We also pledged to respond to major humanitarian organizations' annual appeals.

Mr. Speaker, maybe the parliamentary secretary could sort out some of the confusion left by his minister this weekend when she contradicted herself by saying on the one hand, “I haven't been persuaded that referendum alone is the best tool that we can use in the 21st century”, but on the other hand she said, “And we will not proceed with any changes [to how Canadians vote] without the broad buy-in of the people of this country”.How do we get a broad buy-in if we do not actually consult broadly? How do we do this without having a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, reporters from Iraq noted that Canadian troops are on the front line in preparation for the coalition's efforts to take the city of Fallujah. As Roméo Dallaire said, “Canada's soldiers are first and foremost [combat] specialists..”. The CBC acknowledged that Conservatives were on the right track. It reported, “As for ISIS, it was the Liberals and the NDP who were out of step with public opinion..”.Why is the Prime Minister misleading Canadians by saying that this is not a combat mission, but actually has our troops in combat against ISIS?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to working with all parliamentarians and have done so on this piece of legislation as we move forward. We have the utmost respect for the Supreme Court of Canada. We are ensuring that we do everything possible to meet the deadline of June 6.We have the utmost confidence that this is the best public policy approach to medical assistance in dying in this country right now. We will ensure that we can move forward with that legal framework to provide access as well as the protection of the vulnerable.

Mr. Speaker, General Vance has actually done us all a service in pointing out that the conflicts that will be going on now and in the future will largely be conflicts that will not get easily resolved; hence, the important emphasis on assisting, training, advising, and intelligence. That is what the minister and the chief of the defence staff have been emphasizing as they engage further in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, this is a priority. I went to Lac-Mégantic with my colleague from Sherbrooke last week, and I can say to the minister that the residents are not impressed with how this government is dragging its feet.The Lac-Mégantic tragedy was three years ago, and yet we still have a long way to go to ensure a safe rail system. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is telling us that there have been more and more problems with runaway trains and that Transport Canada is not doing enough to improve safety procedures.Will the minister stop with the rhetoric and finally do something to guarantee a safe rail system?

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what I just said.I have the utmost respect for the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. We listen every time it makes any recommendations.As I have clearly stated, rail safety is my top priority. If my colleague would take a little time to look at the measures we have taken, he would see that we have already taken action. Is it enough? No. As we have said very clearly, additional measures are needed, and there is money in the budget for that purpose.We will address rail safety, because it is my top priority.

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to also thank my colleague for all her efforts in recent years and to especially thank the FADOQ network for bringing this very important matter to our government's attention.In addition to substantially increasing the guaranteed income supplement, restoring the retirement eligibility age to 65, and investing $200 million in housing for seniors, we are announcing today that the automatic enrolment process for the guaranteed income supplement will be completed in 2018.

Mr. Speaker, I realize this may not be something the member has seen a lot of, and we need to see a lot more of, which is the ideas brought forward by government are informed by not only broad-based consultations with the public but also all parties in the House. It is certainly our desire in this process to have each of the parties participating and helping form the modernization of our electoral system. To get to the point where we have something to talk about we need them to engage in that dialogue, bring forward their ideas, and move away from just hanging on to the status quo.

Mr. Speaker, my riding of the Northwest Territories has significant infrastructure needs and faces particular challenges because of our northern climate.In April, experts from Canada and the United States gathered in Inuvik to discuss new techniques for infrastructure projects at the International Symposium of Permafrost Scientists. One of the projects they discussed was the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway that has just finished its third construction season.Could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities please update the House on the progress of this important project?

Mr. Speaker, the minister thinks that tracking a topic on Twitter is a better way of consulting Canadians than a referendum; #logical? Their motion gives Liberals on the committee total control of the process to fundamentally change the way Canadians vote; #thatseemsfair. We know the Liberals do not respect Parliament, and now we can see that they do not respect Canadians either; #arrogance #outoftouch #disrespect. If the minister truly wants widespread consultations, could she finally agree to holding a #referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I do share the enthusiasm by the member opposite, and I welcome expanded opportunities for alcohol between provinces and territories. This is a matter that I have raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts as we negotiate on a comprehensive agreement on internal trade. This is a broad agreement where we want to reduce barriers and harmonize regulations. It is about growing the economy and making sure that we benefit, not only businesses but consumers. I look forward to working with the member opposite on this file.

Mr. Speaker, from the onset we have been committed to engaging Canadians to ensure that any proposal we bring forward has broad support from the Canadian public. Let us remember the objective we are trying to achieve here. The objective we are trying to achieve is to enfranchise voters, to give them more power, more say, a better spot at the table in our Canadian democratic system.I would offer to members opposite who clearly are engaged in this issue, who clearly want to have a discussion about it, let us talk, let us have an opportunity to look at what the options are to improve our system and get to work on it.

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the consultations we have on a pan-Canadian basis hear from all Canadians on how they want to modernize and improve our electoral system.I encourage the members opposite to participate in that discussion. I have not heard any ideas or thoughts about how they want to modernize that system yet, but it is important they put those forward. I really invite all members of the House to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, the evidence continues to pile up that the finance minister has a serious problem when it comes to transparency. Page 7 of his own February economic update details how his Liberal spending spree was already well under way last year. Again in March he burned through billions in one month and has driven us into a deficit. Why does the finance minister refuse to take responsibility for his own deficits?

Mr. Speaker, yes, we have been taking action. I have been very clear since the beginning that rail safety is my top priority. In fact, I am very glad that in this last budget $143 million was put aside over three years for rail safety. Yes, we have taken measures. In fact, the member's party was present when we announced some of these measures. Therefore, we are taking rail safety very seriously. I have said it many times. The measures put in place since Lac-Mégantic are a beginning but they are not sufficient and we will be doing more for rail safety.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the hon. member for Northwest Territories for his tireless efforts on behalf of northern communities.Our government has made unprecedented commitments to support public infrastructure. The Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway will help to connect people, create jobs, and support economic development in the north.We are very encouraged by the progress of this project, and I look forward to touring this exciting project with my colleague in the future.

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians must have the opportunity to express their opinion on electoral reform.This weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said, “As far as any changes around democratic reform, we’re not going to proceed with any changes unless we have broad support.”We have a good idea for the broad support: have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, let me talk about what we will not do.Last time major democratic changes were introduced, it was by the Conservatives. It was the Fair Elections Act, which disenfranchised many voters. There were no consultations that occurred during that process. They did not engage Canadians.We want to do things differently. We want to ensure that the voices of Canadians are heard, that they are given the proper opportunity to be involved in modernizing their system. This was a clear campaign promise we made in the last election. More than 60% of Canadians voted for parties that said they wanted change. We are committed to making that change happen.

Mr. Speaker, public consultation comes in many forms. The ability to engage Canadians happens in many different ways. We are absolutely committed to making sure that all Canadians' voices are heard in this process. What we want to do right now, and I would encourage the member to join us in the process, is to have a discussion on exactly how we are going to do it. Right now, I do not even know what the member would want a question on. It is important to posit ideas, to have a debate and a discussion about how we can improve our system and once we get to that point let us look at the next steps.

Mr. Speaker, over the past week, I have heard from many Canadians who strongly support our “free the beer” campaign. If we can free the beer by removing internal trade barriers, we can also create jobs and create growth in our economy without adding debt. Will the government raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court and free the beer?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Over 60% spoke, voting for parties that said we need to modernize our electoral system. Canadians stood up in the last election and said they needed a system that would better reflect their will, that would better enfranchise their vote, and that would give them a better voice in our democratic process. We are committed to exactly that. I would encourage the member opposite to work with us in this process. Let us improve our democracy. Let us get it done.

Mr. Speaker, the goal of this mission is to achieve long-term success through self-sustainable security. Hence, we are in a mission that advises, trains, assists, and provides intelligence. That is the way forward in order to minimize the unwanted consequences of this conflict. As we go forward, I would encourage the hon. member to support our troops as we engage in this conflict with a non-state actor.

Mr. Speaker, I have had many occasions to talk and work with the member opposite. I know that he is very earnest in his desire to improve our electoral system. I know that he has many ideas he wants to bring forward to the process. Let me tell him that in this process certainly each and every one of us is going to be given the opportunity to vote on that system. Each and every one of us is going to be given an opportunity to give input to it. Each and every one of us has a responsibility to engage our constituents and Canadians, on a pan-Canadian basis, to make sure their voices are heard. I look forward to working with him on it.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that we have in place by the Supreme Court deadline of June 6 a legal framework for medical assistance in dying in this country.I know that there is an incredible diversity of opinion around this incredibly complex and challenging issue. As legislators, we need to answer the 36 million people who live in this country in terms of putting in place a regime.Again, I am confident that this is the best approach for Canada in terms of medical assistance in dying right now, and it is the first step.

Mr. Speaker, the aerospace sector is one of the most innovative in the country. The industry includes more than 180,000 quality jobs in Canada. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada recently announced the relocation of assembly operations to Mirabel, Quebec, which will maintain and create about 100 jobs.Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development tell the House about the role played by the Government of Canada in relocating this assembly line?

No, Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Seventy-five per cent of them want a referendum.The Minister of Democratic Institutions claims that a referendum is not the best way to consult Canadians but at the same time the minister is speaking out of the other side of her mouth by saying that she is listening to all Canadians. How better to know that one has the broad-based support of all Canadians than with a referendum?Will the Liberals stop pulling the wool over Canadians' eyes and hold a referendum, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, it is true that we do not know where this process is going to conclude. The party opposite may already have an idea of where it is going to go, but we want to actually engage in a meaningful dialogue that finds middle ground and the best solution. I imagine that solution should and must evolve as the dialogue and input from Canadians take place. If we simply step forward and say that this is the system we want, here it is, and we put it to a vote, frankly, that is how things were done, but that is not how things should be done. We need to work in an inclusive manner and work together to find the best system.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions also said, “So Canadians can rest assured that unless we have their broad buy-in, we're not moving forward with any changes.”Perhaps voting Canadians and those who contributed to greater voter participation in the last election because we did a good job want to keep the current electoral system.Will the Prime Minister recognize that the best way to find out what Canadians want is to hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question.I am very proud of Bell Helicopter Textron Canada's decision to relocate its assembly line for the new helicopter to Quebec. We have worked with the Government of Quebec to create a positive business environment for companies. This collaboration has meant keeping 900 jobs and creating more than 100 new jobs.

Mr. Speaker, the national president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers said that the review of Canada Post was welcome news for Canada Post workers and that the government had a historic opportunity to reinvent Canada Post.Canada Post management indicated that it supported the review of postal services in Canada and that it looked forward to this national discussion.The union supports the review, management supports the review, Canadians across the country support the review—

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised to keep the tax cuts for small businesses, but now they are breaking that promise and cancelling those tax cuts in the omnibus bill. The government is going to take $2.2 billion away from the businesses that create the most jobs in Canada. Fortunately, it still has a chance to keep its election promise by voting in favour of the NDP's amendment to reinstate the tax cut for SMEs.Will the Liberals join us in helping the best job creators in the country and vote in favour of our amendment?

Mr. Speaker, by withdrawing our CF-18s in order to keep an election promise, the Liberals are putting our soldiers' lives at risk, even more so now that we are on the front line of the offensive in Fallujah. Officers with the U.S. Army have confirmed that our special forces are on the front line. There is no doubt that our troops will face enemy fire.Can the minister tell us how we went from a training mission to a combat mission and whether our troops are risking their lives on the front line?

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I would quote the chief of the defence staff, who said that we are in a state of “armed conflict” with a “non-state actor”. There is no doubt that this is a mission of significance. This is a mission where there will be danger. Our coalition partners have welcomed us into the theatre, and we are providing really useful and effective services to our coalition partners.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, Finance Canada confirmed what we always said would happen, that the government took a Conservative surplus and turned it into a Liberal deficit. We know how this works. They had the best March madness ever. It was fantastic. Therefore, what we want to know is whether cabinet ministers were actually urged to splurge in order to make sure that the finance minister got the deficit he predicted.

Mr. Speaker, instead of keeping their promise to restore home mail delivery, the Liberals chose to create a committee to examine this issue. The problem is that we know nothing about the procedure or what this committee will do.We learned that the deadline to make submissions is around June 23 for groups and sometime in July for individuals. As of Friday, there was nothing anywhere. When the NDP called out the government, a date appeared on the website, as if by magic.Is this the kind of transparency the Liberals promised us?

Mr. Speaker, instead of keeping their promise to restore home mail delivery, the Liberals chose to create a committee to examine this issue. The problem is that we know nothing about the procedure or what this committee will do.We learned that the deadline to make submissions is around June 23 for groups and sometime in July for individuals. As of Friday, there was nothing anywhere. When the NDP called out the government, a date appeared on the website, as if by magic.Is this the kind of transparency the Liberals promised us?

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, Finance Canada confirmed what we always said would happen, that the government took a Conservative surplus and turned it into a Liberal deficit. We know how this works. They had the best March madness ever. It was fantastic. Therefore, what we want to know is whether cabinet ministers were actually urged to splurge in order to make sure that the finance minister got the deficit he predicted.

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I would quote the chief of the defence staff, who said that we are in a state of “armed conflict” with a “non-state actor”. There is no doubt that this is a mission of significance. This is a mission where there will be danger. Our coalition partners have welcomed us into the theatre, and we are providing really useful and effective services to our coalition partners.

Mr. Speaker, by withdrawing our CF-18s in order to keep an election promise, the Liberals are putting our soldiers' lives at risk, even more so now that we are on the front line of the offensive in Fallujah. Officers with the U.S. Army have confirmed that our special forces are on the front line. There is no doubt that our troops will face enemy fire.Can the minister tell us how we went from a training mission to a combat mission and whether our troops are risking their lives on the front line?

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised to keep the tax cuts for small businesses, but now they are breaking that promise and cancelling those tax cuts in the omnibus bill. The government is going to take $2.2 billion away from the businesses that create the most jobs in Canada. Fortunately, it still has a chance to keep its election promise by voting in favour of the NDP's amendment to reinstate the tax cut for SMEs.Will the Liberals join us in helping the best job creators in the country and vote in favour of our amendment?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for his question.I am very proud of Bell Helicopter Textron Canada's decision to relocate its assembly line for the new helicopter to Quebec. We have worked with the Government of Quebec to create a positive business environment for companies. This collaboration has meant keeping 900 jobs and creating more than 100 new jobs.

Mr. Speaker, the national president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers said that the review of Canada Post was welcome news for Canada Post workers and that the government had a historic opportunity to reinvent Canada Post.Canada Post management indicated that it supported the review of postal services in Canada and that it looked forward to this national discussion.The union supports the review, management supports the review, Canadians across the country support the review—

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions also said, “So Canadians can rest assured that unless we have their broad buy-in, we're not moving forward with any changes.”Perhaps voting Canadians and those who contributed to greater voter participation in the last election because we did a good job want to keep the current electoral system.Will the Prime Minister recognize that the best way to find out what Canadians want is to hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, it is true that we do not know where this process is going to conclude. The party opposite may already have an idea of where it is going to go, but we want to actually engage in a meaningful dialogue that finds middle ground and the best solution. I imagine that solution should and must evolve as the dialogue and input from Canadians take place. If we simply step forward and say that this is the system we want, here it is, and we put it to a vote, frankly, that is how things were done, but that is not how things should be done. We need to work in an inclusive manner and work together to find the best system.

No, Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Seventy-five per cent of them want a referendum.The Minister of Democratic Institutions claims that a referendum is not the best way to consult Canadians but at the same time the minister is speaking out of the other side of her mouth by saying that she is listening to all Canadians. How better to know that one has the broad-based support of all Canadians than with a referendum?Will the Liberals stop pulling the wool over Canadians' eyes and hold a referendum, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the aerospace sector is one of the most innovative in the country. The industry includes more than 180,000 quality jobs in Canada. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada recently announced the relocation of assembly operations to Mirabel, Quebec, which will maintain and create about 100 jobs.Could the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development tell the House about the role played by the Government of Canada in relocating this assembly line?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that we have in place by the Supreme Court deadline of June 6 a legal framework for medical assistance in dying in this country.I know that there is an incredible diversity of opinion around this incredibly complex and challenging issue. As legislators, we need to answer the 36 million people who live in this country in terms of putting in place a regime.Again, I am confident that this is the best approach for Canada in terms of medical assistance in dying right now, and it is the first step.

Mr. Speaker, I have had many occasions to talk and work with the member opposite. I know that he is very earnest in his desire to improve our electoral system. I know that he has many ideas he wants to bring forward to the process. Let me tell him that in this process certainly each and every one of us is going to be given the opportunity to vote on that system. Each and every one of us is going to be given an opportunity to give input to it. Each and every one of us has a responsibility to engage our constituents and Canadians, on a pan-Canadian basis, to make sure their voices are heard. I look forward to working with him on it.

Mr. Speaker, the goal of this mission is to achieve long-term success through self-sustainable security. Hence, we are in a mission that advises, trains, assists, and provides intelligence. That is the way forward in order to minimize the unwanted consequences of this conflict. As we go forward, I would encourage the hon. member to support our troops as we engage in this conflict with a non-state actor.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have spoken. Over 60% spoke, voting for parties that said we need to modernize our electoral system. Canadians stood up in the last election and said they needed a system that would better reflect their will, that would better enfranchise their vote, and that would give them a better voice in our democratic process. We are committed to exactly that. I would encourage the member opposite to work with us in this process. Let us improve our democracy. Let us get it done.

Mr. Speaker, over the past week, I have heard from many Canadians who strongly support our “free the beer” campaign. If we can free the beer by removing internal trade barriers, we can also create jobs and create growth in our economy without adding debt. Will the government raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court and free the beer?

Mr. Speaker, public consultation comes in many forms. The ability to engage Canadians happens in many different ways. We are absolutely committed to making sure that all Canadians' voices are heard in this process. What we want to do right now, and I would encourage the member to join us in the process, is to have a discussion on exactly how we are going to do it. Right now, I do not even know what the member would want a question on. It is important to posit ideas, to have a debate and a discussion about how we can improve our system and once we get to that point let us look at the next steps.

Mr. Speaker, let me talk about what we will not do.Last time major democratic changes were introduced, it was by the Conservatives. It was the Fair Elections Act, which disenfranchised many voters. There were no consultations that occurred during that process. They did not engage Canadians.We want to do things differently. We want to ensure that the voices of Canadians are heard, that they are given the proper opportunity to be involved in modernizing their system. This was a clear campaign promise we made in the last election. More than 60% of Canadians voted for parties that said they wanted change. We are committed to making that change happen.

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians must have the opportunity to express their opinion on electoral reform.This weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said, “As far as any changes around democratic reform, we’re not going to proceed with any changes unless we have broad support.”We have a good idea for the broad support: have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the hon. member for Northwest Territories for his tireless efforts on behalf of northern communities.Our government has made unprecedented commitments to support public infrastructure. The Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway will help to connect people, create jobs, and support economic development in the north.We are very encouraged by the progress of this project, and I look forward to touring this exciting project with my colleague in the future.

Mr. Speaker, yes, we have been taking action. I have been very clear since the beginning that rail safety is my top priority. In fact, I am very glad that in this last budget $143 million was put aside over three years for rail safety. Yes, we have taken measures. In fact, the member's party was present when we announced some of these measures. Therefore, we are taking rail safety very seriously. I have said it many times. The measures put in place since Lac-Mégantic are a beginning but they are not sufficient and we will be doing more for rail safety.

Mr. Speaker, the evidence continues to pile up that the finance minister has a serious problem when it comes to transparency. Page 7 of his own February economic update details how his Liberal spending spree was already well under way last year. Again in March he burned through billions in one month and has driven us into a deficit. Why does the finance minister refuse to take responsibility for his own deficits?

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the consultations we have on a pan-Canadian basis hear from all Canadians on how they want to modernize and improve our electoral system.I encourage the members opposite to participate in that discussion. I have not heard any ideas or thoughts about how they want to modernize that system yet, but it is important they put those forward. I really invite all members of the House to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, from the onset we have been committed to engaging Canadians to ensure that any proposal we bring forward has broad support from the Canadian public. Let us remember the objective we are trying to achieve here. The objective we are trying to achieve is to enfranchise voters, to give them more power, more say, a better spot at the table in our Canadian democratic system.I would offer to members opposite who clearly are engaged in this issue, who clearly want to have a discussion about it, let us talk, let us have an opportunity to look at what the options are to improve our system and get to work on it.

Mr. Speaker, I do share the enthusiasm by the member opposite, and I welcome expanded opportunities for alcohol between provinces and territories. This is a matter that I have raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts as we negotiate on a comprehensive agreement on internal trade. This is a broad agreement where we want to reduce barriers and harmonize regulations. It is about growing the economy and making sure that we benefit, not only businesses but consumers. I look forward to working with the member opposite on this file.

Mr. Speaker, the minister thinks that tracking a topic on Twitter is a better way of consulting Canadians than a referendum; #logical? Their motion gives Liberals on the committee total control of the process to fundamentally change the way Canadians vote; #thatseemsfair. We know the Liberals do not respect Parliament, and now we can see that they do not respect Canadians either; #arrogance #outoftouch #disrespect. If the minister truly wants widespread consultations, could she finally agree to holding a #referendum?

Mr. Speaker, my riding of the Northwest Territories has significant infrastructure needs and faces particular challenges because of our northern climate.In April, experts from Canada and the United States gathered in Inuvik to discuss new techniques for infrastructure projects at the International Symposium of Permafrost Scientists. One of the projects they discussed was the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway that has just finished its third construction season.Could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities please update the House on the progress of this important project?

Mr. Speaker, I realize this may not be something the member has seen a lot of, and we need to see a lot more of, which is the ideas brought forward by government are informed by not only broad-based consultations with the public but also all parties in the House. It is certainly our desire in this process to have each of the parties participating and helping form the modernization of our electoral system. To get to the point where we have something to talk about we need them to engage in that dialogue, bring forward their ideas, and move away from just hanging on to the status quo.

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to also thank my colleague for all her efforts in recent years and to especially thank the FADOQ network for bringing this very important matter to our government's attention.In addition to substantially increasing the guaranteed income supplement, restoring the retirement eligibility age to 65, and investing $200 million in housing for seniors, we are announcing today that the automatic enrolment process for the guaranteed income supplement will be completed in 2018.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what I just said.I have the utmost respect for the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. We listen every time it makes any recommendations.As I have clearly stated, rail safety is my top priority. If my colleague would take a little time to look at the measures we have taken, he would see that we have already taken action. Is it enough? No. As we have said very clearly, additional measures are needed, and there is money in the budget for that purpose.We will address rail safety, because it is my top priority.

Mr. Speaker, this is a priority. I went to Lac-Mégantic with my colleague from Sherbrooke last week, and I can say to the minister that the residents are not impressed with how this government is dragging its feet.The Lac-Mégantic tragedy was three years ago, and yet we still have a long way to go to ensure a safe rail system. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is telling us that there have been more and more problems with runaway trains and that Transport Canada is not doing enough to improve safety procedures.Will the minister stop with the rhetoric and finally do something to guarantee a safe rail system?

Mr. Speaker, General Vance has actually done us all a service in pointing out that the conflicts that will be going on now and in the future will largely be conflicts that will not get easily resolved; hence, the important emphasis on assisting, training, advising, and intelligence. That is what the minister and the chief of the defence staff have been emphasizing as they engage further in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to working with all parliamentarians and have done so on this piece of legislation as we move forward. We have the utmost respect for the Supreme Court of Canada. We are ensuring that we do everything possible to meet the deadline of June 6.We have the utmost confidence that this is the best public policy approach to medical assistance in dying in this country right now. We will ensure that we can move forward with that legal framework to provide access as well as the protection of the vulnerable.

Mr. Speaker, reporters from Iraq noted that Canadian troops are on the front line in preparation for the coalition's efforts to take the city of Fallujah. As Roméo Dallaire said, “Canada's soldiers are first and foremost [combat] specialists..”. The CBC acknowledged that Conservatives were on the right track. It reported, “As for ISIS, it was the Liberals and the NDP who were out of step with public opinion..”.Why is the Prime Minister misleading Canadians by saying that this is not a combat mission, but actually has our troops in combat against ISIS?

Mr. Speaker, maybe the parliamentary secretary could sort out some of the confusion left by his minister this weekend when she contradicted herself by saying on the one hand, “I haven't been persuaded that referendum alone is the best tool that we can use in the 21st century”, but on the other hand she said, “And we will not proceed with any changes [to how Canadians vote] without the broad buy-in of the people of this country”.How do we get a broad buy-in if we do not actually consult broadly? How do we do this without having a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have participated in three international summits recently. One was on the status of women, another was on humanitarian aid, and the third was on health.My opposition colleague will not be surprised to learn that, as in past years, we pledged contributions to the Central Emergency Response Fund to ensure that Canada will always be among the first to respond to disasters. We also pledged to respond to major humanitarian organizations' annual appeals.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to seize total control of the House of Commons just because he did not get his own way.Motion No. 6 was only withdrawn after a massive backlash. However, it is not his only undemocratic attempt to seize control. Motion No. 5 sets up the committee to alter Canada's electoral system in the Liberals' favour. It gives Liberals a majority on the committee, ensures that the Liberal majority in the House will control the bill, and the final say will be made by the Liberal cabinet.Will the Liberals do the right thing and withdraw this motion as well?

Mr. Speaker, we were not the only party to campaign on the idea of changing our electoral system, on modernizing our electoral and democratic institutions. The NDP did. The Green Party did. There were many different parties that posited this idea and in cumulative total that reaches more than 60%.The bigger point here is that there is an historic opportunity to improve the way Canadians interact with their democracy, to empower them and give them a chance to have a stronger voice in this process. I would encourage the member to work with us in that process, to begin that process of debate and ideas. Let us start it right now.

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is transparency. The finance minister is cooking the books to suit his reckless political spending and agenda. He was left with a Conservative surplus. He did turn that into a Liberal deficit. The finance minister needs to come clean and show some transparency. Will he tell Canadians exactly how he spent $10 billion on the reckless Liberal schemes in March?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government recognizes the importance of forestry to Quebec and to Canada. In fact, I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec sector next Monday, in Montreal. I spoke with my U.S. counterpart, Michael Froman, about this specific issue two weeks ago at the APEC meeting. We are working hard to reach a deal that will be good for Canada and for Quebec.

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the support of Canadians is behind the proposals we bring forward.The process we are going to engage, of talking to Canadians from coast to coast, not just about changing our voting system but looking at electronic voting, looking at the possibility of mandatory voting, recognizing that in a modern age our electoral systems, like the rest of the world, need to evolve, is something to which we are committed.I would ask the member opposite to engage constructively in that process, to engage in that dialogue, and work with us to create a better electoral system.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development confirmed that he wants to automatically sign up seniors for the guaranteed income supplement by no later than 2018.As this has been a longstanding demand from seniors and from the Bloc Québécois, we must therefore commend him. However, it has taken the federal government a quarter century to do it. Since those affected have already waited too long, will the minister promise to make payment of the GIS automatic in the next tax season?

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, torrential downpours and landslides in Sri Lanka created a humanitarian crisis across the island. Over 600,000 people have been displaced from their homes, and nearly 250,000 people are stuck in emergency evacuation centres. The crisis is ongoing and individual victims need our help. Over 100 people are still reported missing and 100 more have been confirmed dead. Could the hon. Minister of International Development advise the House of Canada's efforts to assist these victims?

Mr. Speaker, the current Liberal government promised during the election to restore Canada's historic relationship with our veterans. First and foremost was the pledge to end the Conservatives' court battle that would deprive veterans of the benefits they deserve. The Liberals promised to honour those benefits, but now we learn they are backtracking and again taking our veterans to court. Why are the Liberals punishing our veterans and forcing them to fight in court for the benefits they deserve and have earned in service to Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the minister's response is that the Alberta Court of Appeal, the Canadian Bar Association, Barreau du Québec, constitutional experts, and now even former Prime Minister Martin all agree, Bill C-14 in its present form is likely not constitutional.Even if the bill is passed next week, it will be tied up in legal challenges for years to come, and costly, exhausting court battles for suffering Canadians who just want to see their legal rights vindicated.Why will the government not do the right thing and work with us to get the bill right the first time?

Mr. Speaker, the motion to create the committee is coming forward.There is going to be ample opportunity to hear from each and every member of the House around his or her ideas to improve and modernize our electoral system. The reality is that in the last election Canadians looked at the problems of the past, looked at the decade that preceded the last election, and said, in huge measure, that the status quo was not good enough, that we needed to do better.That is precisely what we are working on. That is precisely what the committee is getting to the heart of. I encourage members to engage in that process.

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to actually look at the “Fiscal Monitor”. What he would find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. Revenues are lower and expenses are higher in the last month. The only difference is that this year the revenues are even lower in March as a result of the measures put in place by the previous government. That is the situation we face. This is why Canadians decided they wanted a new path: a path towards growth, a path towards making investments, and a path towards a better future for themselves and their families. We are going to do that for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, this question gives me an opportunity to explain why it is so important that we get a piece of legislation in place at the soonest possible date.Without legislation in place, health care providers will not have the legal framework that they require to proceed. They will be advised to seek legal consults. This will cause serious problems in accessing. Not only that, the Canadian Pharmacists Association has made it clear that there will be no protection for pharmacists to dispense medication.We need to get this legislation in place as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, at some point the Liberals are actually going to have to come forward with some new proposal instead of suggesting everyone else should do it. When they do that we want to have a referendum. It is not just we who want a referendum, 73% of Canadians want a referendum. Sooner or later, there will be a proposal from the Liberals saying, “Here is the new electoral system we suggest”. When that happens, will there be a referendum, as 73% of Canadians want, or will they deny Canadians their democratic say?

Mr. Speaker, more and more people are concerned about whether Bill C-14 on medical assistance in dying is constitutional.On the weekend, we heard from some of the Liberal Party faithful, former prime minister Paul Martin, and former Liberal leader Bob Rae. The government cannot get such an important issue wrong. It is not too late. This evening, Bill C-14 can be amended.Will the Liberals work with the opposition to ensure that Bill C-14 complies with the charter and the Supreme Court decision?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made it abundantly clear that the 2015 election would be the last to employ the first-past-the-post system and that the status quo is not an option. However, during the Liberal convention this weekend, the Minister of Democratic Institutions indicated that the government would not proceed with changes without the support of the people.Will the minister commit to holding a referendum on a subject as important as the electoral system to find out whether there is public support?

Mr. Speaker, the“ Fiscal Monitor” confirms the fact that the Liberals inherited a surplus from the Conservative government. It also confirms, though sadly, that just one short month, at the very end of the year, they were able to turn that surplus into a deficit. While they preach the gospel of deficit spending, they stand alone because their G7 partners are still stuck on this whole balanced budget thing. Did the minister engineer this deficit? Is he just proving to Canadians that he can spend it as quickly as we left it for him?

Mr. Speaker, as the member is aware, this lawsuit emerged under the previous government. I can say that this government is moving forward on treating veterans with care, compassion, and respect. We are moving forward on an aggressive mandate that is ensuring financial benefits to them. We saw that in budget 2016 with a $5.6-billion investment that would improve the lives of our most disabled veterans and ensure financial security for them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Safety Board is reporting more accidents, runaway trains, and other serious, preventable accidents, yet Transport Canada is delaying tougher measures that could stop not only disasters like Lac-Mégantic but 500 runaway trains over the past two decades. Transport inspectors and rail workers have called for strengthened controls and stepped-up inspection and enforcement. So far there has been nothing. When will the minister stop talking and start taking action to make our rail system safe?

Mr. Speaker, to get broad buy-in we have to do what frankly has not occurred in the past, which is to reach out to Canadians in ridings across the country, to have real and genuine conversations around how to improve our democratic institutions, to take this historic opportunity to move our democracy to a new place where we empower voters to have a stronger say in our system.In order to do that we have to talk about options and dialogue and something other than the status quo. That is what I have not heard from members opposite. I have not heard them positing ideas on how we can improve our system. I would like them to please start participating in this debate.

Mr. Speaker, our government created supply management, and our government will defend it.As promised, we are meeting with industry stakeholders from across the country. Over the past few weeks, we have listened to them and had many very productive discussions. We will help develop a sustainable, long-term strategy for the entire sector.

Mr. Speaker, the facts are now clear.The “Fiscal Monitor” has made two things very clear. The previous government left us a deficit. That is the situation. What is more, our level of growth is very low because of the measures taken by the previous government. Now, we are going to make investments to improve the situation for the future.

Mr. Speaker, I hear the hashtags opposite. I hear the member wanting to use different forums. Obviously there are many different ways that people can engage on this issue. There will be forums held in nearly every riding. I encourage members to host town halls. I encourage members to engage with their constituents. We will have a digital portal where Canadians' voices can be heard. It will be a dynamic conversation, and as we said, we will ensure that the will of Canadians is behind whatever we put forward.Help us to change the status quo, improve our system, and modernize our electoral system to bring us into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, every month that goes by under the leadership of the Liberal Party looks the same: deficit, deficit, deficit. Last Friday, we learned from the Department of Finance's monthly “Fiscal Monitor” that the government is running a $9-billion deficit. That same department said that the Conservative government left a surplus of $1 billion last November. We leave surpluses and the Liberals leave deficits.Will the Minister of Finance finally admit what all Canadians know? The Liberal government has completely lost control of the public purse. That is the reality.

Mr. Speaker, on the softwood lumber issue, Quebec reaffirmed last week that our forestry regime is fully compliant with NAFTA in every respect and that there was absolutely no reason for Ottawa to accept the imposition of any quotas or tariffs on our exports.However, in order to bail out British Columbia, the government is currently negotiating a protectionist agreement with the Americans, even though it could kill Quebec's forestry industry.Will the Minister of International Trade clearly tell the Americans that our lumber is not subsidized and that she will never agree to a protectionist agreement, unless Quebec is exempt from it?

Mr. Speaker, on electoral reform the Liberals keep claiming that they are listening to Canadians but three-quarters of Canadians want a referendum on any changes to their system of democracy. It seems that Canadians have already spoken.Will the Liberals drop the lip service and listen to Canadians and hold a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, facts matter. The facts are that the “Fiscal Monitor” shows us—

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Scarborough—Rouge Park for the question.I would like to begin by offering our deepest condolences to the people of Sri Lanka and expressing Canada's solidarity with them. Our government acted swiftly by making a $310,000 contribution, which helped Oxfam Canada and the Red Cross provide water, sanitation and hygiene services, household items, living allowances, and protection to some 50,000 affected families. We continue to monitor the situation.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are all over the place on international development.The minister has launched yet another review and another consultation to determine how Canada can refocus its international assistance. On one hand, the Liberals say they are reviewing the system, but at the same time, the minister keeps promising Canadians' money at the international forums.Does this not make the Liberals' consultative process a big sham?

Mr. Speaker, today, dairy producers began a three-day tractor trek from Quebec City to Ottawa to remind the government of its election promises.They are travelling across Quebec to protest the importation of diafiltered milk, which robs them of thousands of dollars every week. They are criss-crossing Quebec to remind the government that compensation was promised when international agreements such as the trans-Pacific partnership and the European Union agreement were signed.When will the 40 Liberal members from Quebec speak out in support of Quebec's dairy producers?

Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to inform the House that next Thursday, June 2, will be an allotted day.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the member to actually go through the “Fiscal Monitor” line by line to find out the facts. When we take out the measures that we have put in, what we find is that the previous government left us with a deficit. It is absolutely clear, and it is something that they are going to need to look at and realize. We are going to do what Canadians asked us to do, which is to deal with what was left to us by the previous government. We are going to invest to make a real difference for Canadians in the future. We are improving our country through improved growth.

Mr. Speaker, we understand very clearly what inappropriate spending can do because we are witnesses to what happened in the last government: tens of billions of dollars of spending with the lowest growth rate in decades. We are faced with that now, as well as with a deficit left to us by the previous government because of the low growth that it left us with.Something needed to be done and Canadians understood that. That is why they chose a new government that was going to be optimistic and invest in the future of our country, a new government that is going to bring in a new era of growth so that we can turn the page on this difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions backed down on the weekend on the issue of electoral reform. She said, “It means that there needs to be a conversation in the House of Commons including all parties.” Naturally, we agree with her, but she must go even further. I invite the minister to open up to the public.Will the Prime Minister hold a referendum so that all Canadians can have a say on electoral reform? A referendum is required.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times in the House, at the end of the year, revenues are lower and expenses are higher. That is nothing out of the ordinary. That was the situation in previous years. Now, things are more difficult because of the measures taken by the previous government. It is a different situation. The Conservatives left us with a deficit. That is why we are going to make investments to improve our economic growth.

Mr. Speaker, as I have been saying in the House for many months, the government before us left us with a deficit. The “Fiscal Monitor”, this past Friday, told us in black and white what is absolutely the case. Due to the economic realities left by the measures from the previous government we have a deficit, a deficit from the previous government. Now the question is, what are we going to do moving forward? We are going to invest to make the future rosier than the past for Canadians by focusing on growth.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think Canadians realized that sunny ways would be quite this expensive. Here are the facts. The Conservatives left the Liberals a surplus. Canadians were enjoying the lowest tax burden in 50 years, and in one month the Liberals spent a $10-billion deficit, obliterating the Conservative surplus. Why has the Minister of Finance been so reckless with the tax dollars of hard-working Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to moving forward with Bill C-14 and have engaged very broadly on this really complex and deeply personal issue. We have a deadline of June 6 to meet that has been directed by the Supreme Court of Canada. We are committed to having in place, it is our responsibility as parliamentarians, a legal framework in this country that ensures we find the right balance between personal autonomy, protection of the vulnerable, and ensuring there is access in this country.

Mr. Speaker, the government wants to change the electoral system, but it does not really know how to change it, so it is making things up as it goes along. Nobody knows how long this will take. All we know is that the key players are a bunch of confused Liberals. The minister says she does not want to change anything unless she has broad public buy-in. She obviously has no idea where she wants to go with this. It is hard to have faith in the process when the Liberals have been dragging their feet for seven months and have stacked their committee with Liberals.Will the government fix things by changing the committee membership so that no political party has a majority?

Mr. Speaker, the government needs to stop giving incomplete information. There is no rush.The professional associations are prepared. They have directives in place to protect the vulnerable. We need to get this right.The government is insisting on passing a bill that a number of experts have deemed unconstitutional. We are talking about charter rights. The government knows very well that its law will be challenged if it is not amended. When will the government work with the opposition to bring the bill in line with the charter?

Mr. Speaker, I could just give him my question. It seems like he is ready. I know the Liberals are in denial about the Conservatives and the surplus, but it is there. Those are the facts. It is clear they do not understand economics and they do not understand the consequences of deficit spending. They can deny it all they want. They talk about decisions made by science. Here are the facts. We left them a surplus, and the spending habits of the Minister of Finance are simply out of control. Why is the finance minister doing what every other Canadian knows is dangerous, running a budget on a credit card? When will the finance minister admit his spending is out of control?

Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to take a look at what has happened over the last number of years in March with the previous government. What happens is in March revenues go down. This year what happened was what has happened in previous years, only worse. The measures put in place by the previous government led revenues to go down at the end of the year, leaving us with a deficit. We are starting with a deficit left by the previous government and now we are making efforts to really improve our situation going forward.Canadians expect growth for this generation and the next generation, and we are going to deliver it.

Mr. Speaker, the “Fiscal Monitor”, a publication of the Department of Finance, indicated that there was a $1-billion surplus. The latest edition shows that there is now a $9-billion deficit. That is what officials are saying. If the Minister of Finance does not believe his officials, does he at least agree with his Prime Minister, who said just a few days ago that the $30-billion deficit was an estimate and that it could be worse?Can the Minister of Finance assure us that the deficit will not be worse than what he promised?

Mr. Speaker, as I said, facts matter. I would urge the members on the others side to actually read the “Fiscal Monitor”. What they will find is that the government before us left us with a deficit. What they will find is that, as in previous years, revenues go down and expenses go up at the end of the year. This year revenues went down precipitously because of the measures of the previous government. That is the situation we face now. We are focused on how we are going to deal with what was left to us by the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, government members keep hiding behind the June 6 deadline, as they call it, as an excuse, but now even former Liberal leaders, Bob Rae and Paul Martin agree there is nothing to fear.If this bill does not pass next week, the Carter decision itself provides the criteria for determining who is eligible and the provinces are now prepared and have already released guidelines for their physicians.We have the time we need to fix this, so will the government stop ramming through this deeply flawed bill and work with us to get it right?

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case we would have to ask why Liberals stacked Liberal members on the committee picking the new voting system. Details matter, and Liberals have proposed a system in which Liberals could unilaterally change our voting system. On the weekend, the minister said she is looking forward to, and I quote “broad support”. Two-thirds of the House were elected on a promise of electoral reform. Some have accused the minister of damaging the credibility of the process with her platitudes and vague answers to straightforward questions. Therefore, we implore the Liberals to answer this one simple question. Are the Liberals actually willing to go it alone and unilaterally change our voting system, or will they require the support of at least one recognized party in the House?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the parliamentary secretary that his government was elected by 39% of voters, not 60% as he has been saying. For the past few weeks, the Minister of Democratic Institutions has repeatedly stated that the referendum option is not on the table. This despite the fact that 73% of Canadians are in favour of a referendum. Will the Minister of Democratic Institutions and her government finally listen to Canadians and hold a referendum on the electoral system? #referendum.

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend General Jonathan Vance acknowledged that today's conflicts do not have the characteristics of those in the past. The chief of the defence staff recognized that one of Canada's signature peacekeeping missions in the Sinai is growing more violent. As well, Canadian troops are now on the front lines in the fight against ISIS in Iraq.However, the Prime Minister said we are only training Iraqi troops. Why is the Prime Minister misinforming Canadians about these dangerous combat missions?

Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago the Minister of Finance said “facts are the facts”. We agree with that. For that reason I ask for the consent of the House to table the “Fiscal Monitor”, a Department of Finance publication.It states, “April to November 2015: budgetary surplus of $1.0 billion”.

Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the backbone of the economy. Just this morning, I was at Ottawa 2017 where I spoke to the tourism industry because we know that is where growth can occur. We have to support the tourism industry. We have to support small businesses as well.That is why we are investing in the middle class. Middle-class Canadians are our small business owners and they are our customers. By putting money into the pockets of Canadians, they can support our small business owners and they can support the products and services that they offer, because small business owners would prefer increased revenues over decreased taxes any day.