Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Cambridge for his dedication to veterans.This government recognizes the service and sacrifice of Canada's veterans by making it easier for families to access the funeral and burial program for a dignified burial. We are expanding the program eligibility to more families of lower-income veterans by increasing the estate exemption from $12,000 to $35,000 and applying an annual cost-of-living adjustment.We are committed to delivering services veterans need and this includes a dignified burial.
Mr. Speaker, the people in my riding of Cambridge and North Dumfries and across this great nation are proud of the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve our country with pride and distinction, and of their long history of valour, both at home and abroad.Given their service and sacrifice, it is incumbent on this government to ensure they receive a dignified burial worthy of their dedication.Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs explain his plan to ensure veterans and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces receive the funeral benefits they have earned?
Mr. Speaker, as I was trying to explain, this is an excellent program that serves Canadians well, both the parents of young children who need care and older Canadians who need care as well. As our population ages, this need for care will accelerate, so more Canadians will be the beneficiaries of a child care program and a caregiver program that serves all across the country.
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, we are very pleased to accept the recommendations of the commissioner of the environment. The Minister of Health is engaged to follow up on some of these troubling issues.It is important to protect the health and safety of Canadians. That is the responsibility of any government, and that is exactly what we will do.
Mr. Speaker, Alison Redford called, and she is glad that he changed the channel for her.The Liberals love to travel. Whether it is the Minister of International Trade jetting off to Hollywood or the Minister of Finance gallivanting around the globe, they travel best when it is on the public dime. Yesterday, the finance minister refused to answer questions about his five-star travel. He travelled to New York with three staff members, all with round-trip tickets costing $4,000 each. When will the minister realize the money he is burning through is not his own trust fund, and start reining in his reckless spending habits?
Mr. Speaker, we have always shown a willingness to work with the provinces, while respecting jurisdictions. That is exactly what we are going to do. The fact of the matter is, we drew a great deal of inspiration from the reflections of the Quebec National Assembly and its approach to medical assistance in dying.We are proud of the legislation we are proposing to Canadians. It is a responsible proposal that will allow us to do things right.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.Our government is well aware of how important the forestry industry is to Quebec and Canada. Officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative met with our teams last week and they will be meeting again soon. I am meeting with representatives from the Quebec industry on Monday in Montreal. We are working to negotiate a good deal for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.We care very much about this sector.To illustrate that point, we made an important investment, in conjunction with the provincial government in Quebec, in Bell Helicopter. This production will allow 900 jobs to maintain a footprint in Mirabel. It will also create an additional 100 new jobs, with this investment.When it comes to Bombardier, the member opposite knows we believe in the company. We want to be part of the solution. We understand the importance of the aerospace sector, not only for Quebec but for Canada.We are going to make sure we create the environment to produce an outcome that will be in the best interests of all Canadians, including Quebeckers.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to carefully protecting consumers and ensuring that we have a competitive market in everything Canada does. To the specific question asked, we have a voluntary obligation for the credit card companies to move forward on a fee review. We are awaiting the results of that review in order to understand how best to make sure we can keep this market competitive and to the benefit not only of merchants but of consumers.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, the Liberals muzzled their own party faithful. During the convention, they did not want to talk about medical assistance in dying. We all witnessed the Liberals' refusal to debate this important issue. Considering how they treat their own supporters, imagine how they will treat the rest of Canadians. Will the Prime Minister pledge to listen to the people and hold a referendum on changing the voting system?
Mr. Speaker, like the ministers of finance before me, I know that it is very important to visit Canadians and international investors and tell them about Canada, our budget, and why they can invest in Canada.That is what I did, and I will soon be travelling again to explain future budgets because I know that it is very important for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, the debate about the motion to strike the all-party committee, which we committed to during the election, has yet to take place in the House.The makeup, the mandate, and the ways that the committee will engage in the conversations are up to every member in the House, to shape that conversation. I hope the members opposite will engage in a respectful, productive, and constructive conversation about how the committee could act as a productive forum for Canadians to be part of this conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise to correct the record. There were actually 16 amendments from different parties accepted throughout the committee process, but indeed the Supreme Court gave us a deadline of June 6, which we are endeavouring to meet. It is important to put forward a framework that both protects vulnerable people and defends and respects the rights and freedoms of Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am happy to underline the fact that it was obviously a free vote last night on all sides, and that is a victory for Parliament.
They waited until April before introducing their bill. We all agree on that. After the Liberals refused calls from the NDP to refer Bill C-14 to the Supreme Court, the Alberta Court of Appeal called out the Liberals for pushing a bill that flies in the face of the Carter decision. Now the Ontario courts are raising concerns about whether the bill respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How many court decisions will it take before the Liberals finally admit they have made mistakes? Why would the Prime Minister prefer that suffering Canadians spend years in court fighting for their rights instead of getting his new law right the first time?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians had their say in the last election, on October 19, when they voted for a party that promised to change our electoral system. We made that very clear.We are going to consult Canadians, listen to their concerns and build an electoral system that will better reflect the democracy they want.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are very intelligent. That is why the vast majority are asking for a referendum. We also know that there is little information about how the committee will consult Canadians. However, what we do know is that the Liberals will have complete control.Why will the minister not acknowledge that consultation is legitimate by confirming that all Canadians will have a say in a referendum, after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Conservatives announced a free the beer campaign calling on the government to raise the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court for clarification. Since then, the response from Canadians has been overwhelmingly in support. People want to buy Canadian. Buying Canadian should mean buying from Canadians in all Canadian provinces and territories without interprovincial roadblocks.Why will the Liberals not elevate this to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that this is a big step in our society. It is one that must be taken responsibly and with full awareness of both the concerns around vulnerability and the need to defend Canadians' rights, freedoms, and choices. That is exactly what we put forward.We understand that this is the beginning of a conversation that will go on for the coming years, as court cases, evidence, concerns, and doctors evolve in their thinking as we approach this. However, this is a big step. It needs to be taken right, and that is exactly what Bill C-14 does.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from LongueuilCharles-LeMoyne for her question.Indeed, humanitarian needs have skyrocketed in recent years, and it was against this backdrop that I took part in the World Humanitarian Summit last week in Turkey. It was the perfect opportunity to announce a total of $331 million in funding for 171 humanitarian aid projects in 32 countries, as well as our contribution of $274 million to the Central Emergency Response Fund.We are currently engaged in nationwide consultations. However, humanitarian aid cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to put forward the following.The conversation we are having about a possible end game, that of a referendum, is taking away from the important conversation we need to have here and now about ways to engage Canadians in the process so we can arrive at an outcome that is appealing and responsive to their needs.If the members opposite are truly interested in conversing with Canadians, then let them come forward with their ideas on how they will engage their constituents on this important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, this year's G7 science meeting was held in Tsukuba, Japan, and it was the first time in three years that Canada has attended such a gathering. As we have seen across government, Canada can make an important international contribution by choosing to engage on the world stage. Could the Minister of Science update the House on the outcome of the G7 science and technology ministers' meeting?
Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote this evening. The government always talks about co-operation and respect for the provinces. The Quebec minister of health and social services has said that the federal bill is unenforceable.I would like to know what the Prime Minister's response is this afternoon to the Quebec minister of health and social services, considering what I just mentioned.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk to Canadians through the House about what we plan on doing. We were clear that we wanted to improve the lives of middle-class Canadians and those striving to get in it. Therefore, we put measures in our budget, such as reducing taxes, taking the child care benefit and making it better for families that really needed it. We are helping them today.We talked last night about long-term investments, investments that would improve our growth rate, change so future generations would be better off. We are facing up to the challenge of a low growth environment left to us by the previous government.
Mr. Speaker, like finance ministers before me, I believe it is important to go across the country to talk about our budget. I believe it is important to go abroad to talk to investors, people who might invest in our country, to let them know what we are doing here. Unlike previous finance ministers, however, we had a fantastic reception internationally, where they received us and listened to our activities. They know now that Canada is a place where they can make investments and bring their money here. We are back. We want to help Canadians through investments internationally.
Mr. Speaker, last night the Minister of Finance had four hours to answer some pretty simple questions. For example, when did he plan on balancing the budget? Sadly, no answer. One thing he did like to talk about after four hours and the one question he could answer was about how would spend taxpayer dollars. The answer was as fast as he could get his hands on it. We know where this ends. Could the Minister of Finance just level with Canadians. When is he raising our taxes to pay for his out of control spending?
Mr. Speaker, when we look at the fine print it is no surprise that this government spent $9 billion in only one month.Three members of the Minister of Finance's staff spent more than $12,000 on round-trip airfare to New York last March. That is not even remotely close to economy class airfare, which costs 10 times less.Can the government tell us why round-trip airfare from Canada to New York for three people cost more than $12,000?
Mr. Speaker, our commitments require a dedicated minister, a dedicated ministry, and a dedicated DM in order to deliver on the expectations of Canadians. We needed new spaces for our staff and new spaces for our DM and his staff, and that is what the investment is for.
Mr. Speaker, before November 4, 2015, infrastructure did not have a dedicated minister and we did not have a dedicated ministry to deliver on the commitments. We did not have a dedicated DM. Therefore, in order to accommodate the new office, we have to have space. We need space for our staff, we need space for the DM's staff, and that is what we have done. It is a new office, new staff, and that is where the expenditures have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the government always tells the truth when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses.I would like to remind my colleague that that is something the NDP was very slow to do in the previous Parliament. We have been leaders when it comes to the proactive disclosure of expenses, and the expenses are there.However, the trip to Washington was a historic trip. As I have said many times, a lot was done for Canadians in Washington, and we are proud of the visit that our Prime Minister and his team made to Washington.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear. The Liberals are not prepared to give Canadians the freedom they need. Even if the Liberals do get a new agreement on internal trade, they have made it clear that there will exemptions, including beer.Ultimately, the question to free the beer should not be a political one, and section 121 of our Constitution is clear that this is in fact a legal question that needs clarity from the Supreme Court. Why are the Liberals ignoring our Constitution in favour of a side deal that will not deliver for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding its pretended openness to all potential new voting systems, the government has already hired a communications consultant who is an advocate for the preferential model the Prime Minister has favoured all along. It sure looks like the fix is in. There is no way Canadians would vote for a system designed for the sole purpose of rigging the next election in favour of the Liberal Party. Is this the reason why the Liberals refuse to hold a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows, for the last 10 years the Conservatives very rarely met with their provincial and territorial counterparts. That is why they were unable to deliver on this issue and many other issues.However, we are committed to working in collaboration with our counterparts to find solutions, to create an environment so we can have alcohol from one jurisdiction sent to another jurisdiction, but it is much broader than that. It is about an agreement that will be more comprehensive, that creates an environment for us to grow, that allows our businesses to grow and benefit our consumers, and we are committed to doing that.
Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of the importance of the forestry industry to Canada and to B.C., and I am working hard on this issue. Last week we had a visit by officials from the USTR to Ottawa to discuss the issue. I spoke two weeks ago with the head of the USTR Ambassador Mike Froman at APEC in Peru. Our ambassador in Washington met with him.I would also like to quote the premier of B.C. Christy Clark with whom I met 10 days ago. She said our federal government was a strong voice for Canada as we seek a new softwood lumber deal.
Mr. Speaker, the government reneged on its promise to cut taxes for businesses and refused to expand the Billy Bishop airport. One wonders if it knows anything at all about economic development.Will the government show some faith in Canadian entrepreneurs and open domestic markets to spur stronger economic growth? This measure would inject an estimated $14 billion into the economy. They are wasting time, and time is money. Will the Minister of Economic Development commit to taking action and raising the Comeau decision to the Supreme Court?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the government is refusing to work with the opposition to make Bill C-14 consistent with the Supreme Court decision and the Canadian Charter of Rights. The reality is that medical assistance in dying is currently possible under the Supreme Court's criteria. Yesterday, a court granted a woman in Manitoba the right to seek medical assistance in dying. In the meantime, the government is insisting on limiting access to it.Why is the government insisting on moving forward with this bill, knowing that it does not comply with the Charter of Rights?
Mr. Speaker, the evidence keeps piling up that the Liberal plan to change the way Canadians vote is completely rigged.We now know that the Prime Minister has hired a former activist for the ranked ballot system, the very system the Prime Minister says he prefers and that experts say would rig the system in his favour. Canadians are not buying it. They know that this Liberal process is a complete sham.When will the Prime Minister admit that he cannot change something as fundamental as the way we vote without a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, during our convention in Winnipeg last weekend, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice answered a whole lot of questions. We had formal and informal conversations with our members. Those were some of the topics we discussed. As everyone knows, the Liberal Party is always ready to discuss various issues with all Canadians, and that is what we will continue to do.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, it is disheartening to see the member opposite characterize parliamentary process as a waste of time.Second, on legalizing marijuana, we have always been very clear that it is about protecting young people from the easy access to marijuana that they have right now. It is about preventing criminal organizations, street gangs, and gun runners from getting significant sources of funding through the sale of marijuana. That is what our focus is on, and that is why, until the law is changed, the current system still applies.
Mr. Speaker, again, I share the enthusiasm and the excitement of the member opposite. This is an issue that we have raised very clearly when we discuss the agreement on internal trade with my provincial and territorial counterparts. This and many other topics are discussed because we want to create an environment across our borders, where we can have the flow of products and goods and services in a timely manner without red tape. That is why we are focusing on reducing barriers. That is why we are focusing on harmonizing regulations. We are going to create an environment for products like this to be sold in a manner that allows our small businesses to grow and provide better options and opportunities and price points for our consumers.
Mr. Speaker, after that Freudian slip, let us take a moment to reflect on how we got here. Our commitment to increase the trust and confidence that Canadians have in our democratic institutions began as a result of 10 years of trampling on our democratic institutions by the party opposite. Canadians asked us to review the options available to us, not just the way we vote, not just online voting and mandatory voting, but to take partisanship and patronage out of our Canadian democratic institutions. That is what we are doing. It is time for the other side to come on board and help us.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the need for Ottawa to have a state-of-the-art hospital in its centre, and this is the reason why I asked the NCC to review possible sites for the Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus through a rigorous and transparent process in order to provide the government with recommendations. The NCC's first-hand experience in public engagement and land use makes it the right choice in leading the review of possible sites, and our government looks forward to working with the NCC to find out where the new hospital will be located.
Mr. Speaker, we know Liberals just cannot help themselves when it comes to spending. Immediately after getting the keys to their new offices, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change spent $20,000 on furniture and TVs, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development spent $60,000 on renovation, and the Minister of Health even spent $27 on a towel bar when Walmart has over a dozen options for under $10. However, the show stopper is the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, who spent $835,000 on renovations and paintings. Do the Liberals really think it is okay to spend $1 million on TVs and towel racks?
Mr. Speaker, it is the beginning of a conversation. This is going right back to the Supreme Court. It is a waste of time and it is hurting people's lives.Here is our Liberal government on pot. After promising to legalize it right away, it is continuing to hand out thousands of criminal records. The Liberals named a former police chief to lead the file, who encourages police to crack down on personal use. The Toronto Board of Health has just joined the many voices begging the Prime Minister for lucidity on the issue. Why is the Prime Minister playing politics with young people's futures? Why will he not take a clear step and decriminalize right away?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that the Charlottetown accord referendum was not about the way we vote. It was about how the country as a whole would move forward.The member opposite knows that past referenda on electoral reform have disengaged half of the population.Let us use the tools available to us in the 21st century to gain the interests and the opinions of as many Canadians as possible. He is not up to the challenge, but we are.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to economic development, we have been very clear, it is a priority for this government. That is why, in the budget, for example, we invest over $4.5 billion for the innovation agenda, an agenda that will help large businesses, small businesses, and the economy to grow. We are investing in broadband connectivity, $500 million for that. We are investing $2 billion for strategic infrastructure funding for our universities and colleges. We are investing in accelerators and incubators and for businesses, $800 million. We are spending $100 million in industrial research assistance programs. The bottom line is, we are making investments to grow the economy and hope the member supports that.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I always find it mildly humorous when the opposition talks about changing our electoral system and the way we vote without consultation, because that is exactly what the Conservatives did with the unfair elections act, making it more difficult for minorities, for vulnerable populations, to actually vote in the last election.The fact is, we were very clear that we would replace our electoral system. In doing so, we will be consulting with Canadians in multiple ways to ensure that we are creating a better electoral system for Canadians that will better reflect the concerns that people have.
Mr. Speaker, first, Bill C-14 does comply with the Charter of Rights and the Supreme Court's rulings. That is exactly what we have been maintaining for a long time now.Second, as of June 6, Canadians will not have the framework provided by the Supreme Court while we work on this bill. That is why it is so important to ensure that we have a framework on June 6 that will protect the vulnerable, while safeguarding Canadians' rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, today's National Post observed, the ranked ballot system would produce Liberal majorities until [the prime minister] qualifies for a seniors' bus pass. The National Post is right. With ranked ballots, the Liberals could get 50% of the seats in this place with less than 35% of the vote. Is this the reason why the Liberals do not want to have a referendum on their
Mr. Speaker, taking the reins of the government at a time of low growth left to us by the previous government means we need to be prudent in our expenditures. We looked at the state of our finances and we looked at the challenges we were facing, challenges because the last decade was the lowest growth in the last eight decades, and we said we needed to be prudent. We put in a factor for prudence, a factor that makes sense. From there, we are going to make investments that are going to make a real difference, that are going to turn the dial on low growth. They are going to make it better for this generation and the next generation.
Mr. Speaker, apparently it is well cherished by the Prime Minister as well. The Prime Minister applied for a second nanny under the caregiver program after the appointment of his first nanny ended. One could argue that while that application was in process and he was criticizing the program that thousands of Canadians used that would perhaps be the definition of hypocritical.Why does the Prime Minister ask Canadians, with this drastic cut to the caregiver program, to forgo benefits that other Canadians need?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Liberals need some help with their math homework. First, the Minister of Democratic Institutions announced eight principles to guide electoral reform, but then, poof, a couple of weeks later, those principles were magically down to five. Now the minister thinks that the broad buying of Canadians on electoral reform equals stacking six Liberals MPs on a committee.Will the Liberals finally cut the charade and give 30 million Canadians a direct say through a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a big proponent of work-life balance. That should apply to everyone.Because of a 2014 decision that will take effect on July 1, not-for-profit day cares in federal buildings, which have enjoyed free rent until now, will have to pay market prices for rent going forward. As a result, the day care in the Statistics Canada building in Ottawa may have to close its doors, and the same goes for the day care in Montreal's Guy-Favreau Complex.When will the Liberals overturn the Conservatives' bad decision?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made unprecedented engagement opportunities with businesses across the country, and what did he hear from them? They wanted the government to make investments. That is what we heard during the campaign as well.That is why we made historic investments on innovation that would improve our productivity and would improve our competitive footprint. This is what small businesses are looking for. They are looking for a government that would create an environment for them to succeed. That is why we made investments, not only with small businesses, but through the accelerator program, incubators, new broadband connectivity, for R and D. All these components will improve our position going forward.
Mr. Speaker, I have said, and will continue to say, this is an important opportunity for all of us to engage in an inclusive listening exercise with our constituents.I understand the members opposite have a hard time with the concept of listening, but my job as minister is to listen and to reflect on the voices of those I have heard. I will continue to listen to Canadians. I will continue
Mr. Speaker, I will give the minister an idea on how to engage Canadians. Have a referendum.In 1992, a referendum was held on the Charlottetown accord, and nearly three-quarters of eligible Canadians voted; that is 13,736,634 Canadians. To reach the same number of people, 40,000 Canadians would have to show up for a town hall meeting in every riding in the country.Will the Liberals finally actually listen to Canadians and hold a referendum, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, first, we need to say how much the family has been courageous in this tough time. Second, I want to thank all colleagues from both sides of the House who worked very hard for Mr. Alaradi to be free and will not stop working hard until he is actually free.
Mr. Speaker, the report on the next softwood lumber agreement that the government promised to give us in 19 days might well be written on the back of a napkin.Canadian negotiators met with the Americans last week. However, we are being told that we have nothing, that no progress has been made and no other date has been set. With the American election fast approaching, analysts are not optimistic about an agreement being reached in the next few days.Why is the government dragging its feet? Why is it jeopardizing the livelihoods of 60,000 workers in Quebec, 5,000 of whom live in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean?
Mr. Speaker, the Old Port of Montreal's 300 employees have been on strike since Friday, and it is easy to understand why. They are the most poorly paid of all federal employees. Their pay scale starts at $10.67 per hour. That is ridiculous; it is below the poverty line.Under the NDP's proposal, those employees would earn a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.How can this government, which says it wants to help people gain entry into the middle class, justify paying federal employees so poorly?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my meeting with the member opposite following question period.Canadians asked us to bring our electoral system into the 21st century. We will do that after listening to Canadians, especially those who have traditionally been marginalized. We will not move forward on any reforms unless we have the broad buy-in and support of Canadians. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to that end.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are bent on changing the electoral system no matter what Canadians want.This approach is an insult to the intelligence of all Canadians. A stacked committee and Twitter do not provide Canadians with an opportunity to share their views.Will the Prime Minister trust Canadians and let them have their say in a referendum?
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment today reported that Health Canada is failing Canadians by withholding basic information around harmful ingredients in consumer products, from lead in baby pacifiers, to cadmium in children's jewellery, Canadians are being exposed to harmful toxic substances. These chemicals can cause allergies, asthma, and even cancer, but the government is negligently refusing to protect us.Why is the government refusing to protect the public from these toxic substances?
Mr. Speaker, why is the member opposite trying to mislead Canadians? The Charlottetown accord referendum
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government likes to hold consultations and lots of them. However, consultation is about listening. On the issue of electoral reform, it seems that the minister is not listening. Even though 73% of Canadians support a referendum, the minister has categorically ruled out this option.Can the minister tell us why she is not listening to Canadians and is refusing to hold a referendum after her so-called consultations?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to correct the record. This individual was hired by the Privy Council Office to work as a communications adviser. As a member of Canada's non-partisan public service, I trust the public service and its decision. I hope the opposition will as well.
Mr. Speaker, our government has committed to doubling the infrastructure investments over the next 10 years. That requires
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes that Canadian families need support and that all Canadian children are entitled to an equal opportunity to succeed.Public Services and Procurement Canada is working with Statistics Canada and the day care to find ways to ease the transition.
Mr. Speaker, as members know, federal employees' wages are related to the individual jurisdictions where they are employed. That has been the practice of the House and that is how it is continuing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague from CloverdaleLangley City. The G7 is a key forum for Canada, and I was honoured to attend as the Minister of Science. While in Japan, ministers committed to international collaboration on global health, oceans, open science, women in science, and youth enrolment in STEM disciplines. These meetings highlight the importance of international co-operation and underline the role of research in helping to address the challenges the world faces.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the World Competitiveness Center stated that Canada had fallen to 10th place for business competitiveness. Today, Stats Canada tells us the economy contracted for the second straight month and has reduced the economic outlook for the year down to 2.4%. That is no surprise. The Liberals broke their promise to reduce taxes on small business. When will the Liberals finally listen to businesses, reduce their taxes, and restore the Canadian competitive advantage in the global marketplace?
Mr. Speaker, The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties of the House, and I seek unanimous consent to allow that, in relation to the annual conference of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees and the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in August 2016, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.I have two other requests.
Mr. Speaker, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises has exploded over the past decade.Conflicts in the Middle East have led to the largest movement of displaced people since the Second World War. Climate change is causing phenomena such as droughts and record temperatures.Can the Minister of International Development update the House on some of the recent measures that the Government of Canada has taken to meet these urgent needs?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are learning that when it comes to this Prime Minister, his instinct is to shut down debate. With Motion No. 6, he tried to take complete control of Parliament, and he has repeatedly shut down debate in the House of Commons. Just last night, the Prime Minister rammed through the assisted suicide legislation by refusing to accept any amendments from any of the opposition parties.Does the Prime Minister respect that each of us has a job to do here and that Parliament actually belongs to Canadians, not the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government said that the Prime Minister's trip to Washington with his entourage cost $25,000.However, today, we learned that it cost $257,000, which is 10 times that amount. The Prime Minister may be an expert in quantum computing, but he is not nearly as good at math. If he likes, we can lend him a calculator. My question is simple. Why did the Liberal government not tell taxpayers the whole truth?
Mr. Speaker, while Australia and 28 European countries have credit card transaction fees as low as 0.3% and 0.5%, Quebec's merchants have to pay between 1.5% and 4% in transaction fees when their clients use credit cards. On average, the 6,400 members of the Quebec convenience stores association pay $36,000 in annual fees.When will the minister impose a ceiling on the exorbitant credit card transaction fees being charged to merchants?
Mr. Speaker, far from cutting this program, we cherish the program. The processing times have been coming down over time.As the population ages, older people like my mother, who takes advantage of a Filipino caregiver, will increasingly benefit from the system. As the population ages, it will be of increased benefit for both younger and older Canadians.It is a program that we cherish.
Mr. Speaker, I am surrounded by former cabinet ministers, so I will ask one of them if there has ever been a hiring that took place that was not based on something other than non-partisan considerations. It seems to me there is a
Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Liberal government had 8,000 placements from the caregiver program. Many Canadian families make use of this program to care for sick loved ones or for their children. The Prime Minister himself has made use of the caregiver program in order to hire nannies for his family.Why are the Liberals cutting this program so drastically when the Prime Minister has benefited from it?
Mr. Speaker, the minister last night talked about his $6-billion contingency fund that he had padded in there just in case. When asked whether he was going to return it to Canadians, he said that he was going to spend it. That is simply irresponsible. I know it was late so I want to give him a chance to clarify today.Will the Minister of Finance return the $6-billion contingency fund back to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of examples with this spendthrift government. We also learned that renovations to the offices of the minister and deputy minister of infrastructure cost almost $1 million.How can this government justify cutting family and small business tax credits when it spends money hand over fist to renovate its own offices?
Mr. Speaker, the 92-year-old Ottawa Hospital desperately needs a new building. Starting in 2007, an expert panel researched 12 sites, and federal land right across the street topped the list. Then minister John Baird okayed it, but suddenly six months later, Ottawa's current regional minister slammed on the brakes. Now we learn she is punting the matter to the NCC, which means a total delay of two years.When will Ottawa's regional minister stop blocking a desperately needed hospital in her community and our city?
Mr. Speaker, Salim Alaradi's nightmare continues. In 2014, he was falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates on false charges. The charges were dropped in March, and yesterday, after almost two years in prison, he was acquitted of any wrongdoing. Yet today, he continues to be detained without reason. Mr. Alaradi's family still waits anxiously for him to return home. What is the government doing to secure the immediate release of Salim Alaradi?
Mr. Speaker, 100 days have now passed and we still have no deal on softwood lumber. The American industry claims Canadian producers are unfairly subsidized. We have fought 4 expensive trade battles in the last 35 years. In spite of assurances by the Minister of Trade little has been done to fix the problem, leaving Canadian producers, including those in British Columbia, to fight to survive.Why is the government putting our forest industry at risk?