Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?
Mr. Speaker, our government has once again shown leadership. The Replenishment Conference, hosted in Montreal, raised close to $13 billion in pledges to eradicate HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.We are proud of our pledge of over $800 million. It will help save an additional eight million lives.
Mr. Speaker, there has been a representative from Atlantic Canada on the Supreme Court for over 140 years. I cannot believe that all 32 Atlantic Canadian Liberal MPs are smiling at how wonderful this is that this seat could be taken away from Atlantic Canada. I want to ask the Minister of Justice how many of these 32 MPs have approached her to tell her what an outstanding idea they think this is.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his excellent question.Yesterday we announced the launch of our consultations for budget 2017. Last year we engaged with over 250,000 Canadians to solicit their ideas for the budget. Those consultations were extremely successful, and we hope to gather even more suggestions this year.Anyone who would like to participate can do so by completing the questionnaire on the Finance Canada website.
Mr. Speaker, it is extraordinarily important to us as a government that all of the people who may not have been able to win their case in court be able to have that reviewed. We have to look at it. I have instructed my department to look at it. We will make sure justice is done.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have told us how wonderful it is for Atlantic Canadians to have a representative from Mississauga in charge of ACOA, and how grateful they should be that some applicants from Atlantic Canada are being considered for the Supreme Court. I am sure for the Liberals that is a beautiful thing. However, this is what they do not get. It is not just their right to apply, these seats belong to Atlantic Canada. Why would the Prime Minister even consider taking away Atlantic Canada's only seat on the Supreme Court? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to achieve reconciliation with indigenous people. However, the Minister of Justice continues to undermine that commitment. The proceedings against residential school survivors are piling up at her department and she is challenging a court decision that found that survivors suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice.Can the minister tell us why she is breaking her government's promise to achieve reconciliation? Why is she continuing to fight in court against residential school survivors?
Mr. Speaker, we will not take any advice from the Conservatives on appointment processes. It was under the Conservatives that their minister of justice, for six of the nine appointments for justices in Nova Scotia, appointed his friends. In fact, he appointed the best man from his wedding to the bench. He appointed his best man's wife to the bench. If the Conservatives had not been turfed out in the last election, they might have appointed his entire wedding party to the bench. The fact is that Atlantic Canadians deserve better than that, and we are giving
Mr. Speaker, I think it is best to go once again to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. What did he say in regard to this policy? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason.
Mr. Speaker, I too have an excellent question.The National Optics Institute, a global leader located in Quebec City, has helped hundreds of entrepreneurs to prosper. This institute has a plan to expand into Ontario and Alberta to create jobs. The chairman of the board called for assistance this morning and got radio silence. The government is not responding to this Canadian gem.The Prime Minister instructed the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development not to address issues from the Quebec City area.Will the Prime Minister allow the minister to help out the National Optics Institute, which is in his own riding?
Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-51, I assure the hon. gentleman that the government will in fact implement exactly what was in our policy platform at the time of the last election. With respect to the Privacy Commissioner, I consider him to be an exceedingly important parliamentary watchdog. His views matter. I welcome his scrutiny on specific issues, and I am very pleased to have him vigorously engaged in consultations about the very best possible national security framework for Canada. His advice will be invaluable.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we see results. It is all well and good for the government to discuss the matter, hold 70 consultation panels, and travel all over the country engaging in political posturing, but it has not achieved any results. Actions speak louder than words. For now, there are no results. What the minister said is all well and good, but the agreement expired last year. There has been a year's grace. We hope that the government will quickly sign an agreement. We need more than just idle talk. We need action.When will we have an agreement?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of their public health care system. They expect their government to ensure that this system will always be there for them.The Canada health transfer was more than $36 billion this year, and next year it will increase by more than $1 billion to more than $37 billion. I am meeting with my provincial and territorial counterparts in the coming weeks. I am very much looking forward to that meeting.
Mr. Speaker, the real change is that, for the first time in 10 years, the federal government is working with the provinces. We are going to discuss how to create a health system that meets Canadians' expectations. We are listening to Canadians, who want a better health system. We will respectfully work with the provinces to provide health care to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from ChâteauguayLacolle for supporting the fight against homelessness.Our government is committed to supporting communities in their efforts to prevent and reduce homelessness through innovative approaches. Yesterday, I had the honour of announcing $12.5 million in new money for more innovative solutions to reducing homelessness, particularly among indigenous Canadians, youth, women fleeing violence, and veterans. Once again, I would like to thank the member for ChâteauguayLacolle for her interest in and support for this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, under the Liberal government, we have demonstrated an unprecedented level of co-operation and collaboration with the provinces.Indeed, the previous government refused to talk about health care, refused to work on this important issue to Canadians with its partners in the provinces. That is exactly what we are doing. The Minister of Health is engaged with her counterparts across the country. We are working to respond to Canadians' desire to have a health system that works and that keeps us all healthy.
Mr. Speaker, let us be sure that this House has the facts correct. We are not cutting health transfers. We had the biggest transfer ever this year, more than $36 billion, but next year it is going to be even bigger than that, more than $37 billion.We are interested in collaborating and working with our colleagues in the provinces and territories who are doing such a good job delivering care.We want to invest in areas where we have agreed upon priorities, including increased investments in home care.
Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.Once again, what exactly are personalized cash payouts?
Mr. Speaker, this policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the Harper Conservatives in 2008. It was revisited in 2011. They chose to do nothing.What this government recognizes is that more can be done. This government recognizes that we need to review the policy, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the secretary of the Treasury Board to review the policy.
Mr. Speaker, we are working very actively with the provincial and territorial governments to implement the commitments that were made in the Vancouver Declaration agreed to by all premiers, which include the price on carbon. We understand very much that unique circumstances exist in some of the provinces and territories, and we are working to find solutions to meet their individual needs. We know that a broad-based price on carbon is very important to reducing emissions, but it is also important that each province and territory have flexibility.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken meaningful steps to help communities combat homelessness. Budget 2016 increased funding for the homelessness partnering strategy for the first time since 1999.Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell the House about new measures being taken to fight homelessness?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to make decisions in the interests of all Canadians, and that is why we are focused on making sure that there is no longer a false choice put forward between being good for the environment and building strong jobs. We are actually going to do them both together on a broad range of projects. That is what Canadians expect, that we defend our environment and create economic growth, and do that while respecting communities and partnering with indigenous peoples. That is what Canadians expect of their government and that is exactly what this government is going to do.
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a commitment to do things better for our veterans and their families. I was given an aggressive mandate from our Prime Minister to do just that. Included in that is working on our transition for all members leaving the Canadian Armed Forces. Our department's job is to assist them in getting to a better place. I know I am working very hard with the Minister of National Defence to reduce complexity, overhaul the system of service delivery, and strengthen partnerships between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence. We are making progress on that front and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker, the decisions taken by the Supreme Court affect us all.The process that was employed by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. That is why our government has announced a new Supreme Court of Canada appointment process that is open and transparent. Under this process, the advisory board will identify suitable candidates who will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country.I am pleased to report that the list contains candidates from Atlantic Canada, and we can certainly compete
Mr. Speaker, so often the Prime Minister's words simply do not match reality.He said that last October 19 marked the start of a new era in labour relations with the federal government, but Canadian workers need more than words. They need a government that provides real support for labour rights. If the Prime Minister truly believes in the right of collective bargaining, can he tell us if he will support our legislation banning the use of scabs, once and for all?Here is a straightforward question for the Prime Minister. Will the Liberals vote for or against our anti-scab bill?
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, we are very much engaged with the institute. We have heard their funding request. As we do with all requests, we base it on merit. We look at the best possible outcomes to commercialize these ideas, to help make sure we help small businesses and grow the economy.This is a great initiative and we look forward to supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, I have always taken pride in my math. It has always been pretty good, but I will tell members that I have been racking my brain trying to think of how it is possible for someone to rack up more than $120,000 in moving expenses to move down the 401 from Toronto to Ottawa. Even if the Prime Minister's Office moved its staff by dog sled and pack mule, and if I use Liberal mathematics, I still cannot come up with $126,000 in costs.Will the Prime Minister please stand up and explain to the House why it cost so much to move one of his staff 450 kilometres down the 401?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians still overwhelmingly oppose Bill C-51, and the Liberals promised a major rollback, even though they voted for this Conservative legislation. Yesterday, I introduced a bill that would repeal each and every section of Bill C-51. If the Liberals want to keep any part of that bill, I invite them to make their case here in the House. However, today the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government for not doing enough to review the impacts of Bill C-51 on democratic and privacy rights.Will the Liberal government implement all of the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations, or will it support my bill to repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister promised that he would usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and territories. Yet the Minister of Environment and Climate Change recently confirmed that she plans to impose a massive carbon tax grab on the provinces whether they like it or not. So much for co-operative federalism and so much for those sunny ways. Can the minister tell us exactly which provinces and territories have agreed to her plan to increase the tax burden on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, in the previous election, we made a very clear statement that we would both protect the environment and create the jobs and prosperity that Canadians expect.It is no longer a question of making a choice on one side or the other. That is why we are moving forward in a responsible way to analyze various projects. We are going to make the decisions in the best interests of all Canadians, whether it is communities, whether it is indigenous partners, whether it is people concerned about the environment or, indeed, people concerned about growth.That is our responsibility, and that is what we are going to live up to.
Mr. Speaker, all members in this House have heard what I have to say. Yes, I repeated it several times so we can remember that the former prime minister Stephen Harper's office also approved $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one of $93,000 for a single individual.More importantly, why do we not share what Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper, had to say? He said: The federal relocation programwhich applies to hundreds of moves annually, including moves by employees of government, military and RCMPexists for a very good reason. Our government is committed to reviewing the policy.
Mr. Speaker, the last agreement expired under the previous government's watch, as the opposition is well aware. We, on the other hand, have been actively involved in negotiations. I was pleased to hear the member for CaribooPrince George express appreciation for our work in committee. On August 18, he said, I can appreciate that there's been a considerable amount of work to this point done by both Global Affairs and the minister.We want the best deal for Canadian workers, not just any deal.
Mr. Speaker, on national security, we will provide new scrutiny by a committee of parliamentarians, plus a new office for community outreach and counter-radicalization, plus faithful compliance with the charter, plus more specific definitions of propaganda, plus repairs to the new no-fly list, plus protection for the right to protest, plus a statutory review after three years; and for the first time, Canadians are being thoroughly consulted about what other steps are necessary to keep Canadians safe and to safeguard their rights and freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, when the royals arrived in Canada over the weekend, the Prime Minister said: The Great Bear rainforest is no place for a crude oil pipeline. British Columbians give that a big high five.What he seems unwilling to do is to say whether he thinks the Great Bear rainforest is a place for a natural gas pipeline. Can the Prime Minister reassure British Columbians on that, or is he just going to leave them hanging?
Mr. Speaker, we were elected on a platform of creating growth and strength for the middle class in this country. We know that labour is an essential partner in creating that economic growth. We are focused on growing the economy in ways that support middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class. That is why in our close working relationship with organized labour, like our close working relationship with business leaders, like our good working relationship with the provinces, we believe in collaboration and respect to make sure that growth for the economy helps the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, we warned the Prime Minister that his reckless spending and higher taxes would not create jobs, and now this is Canada's new reality. It means less jobs and less economic growth. However, there are solutions. We have workers in this country with the skills, the ambition, and the ability to get to work today, but too many projects are stuck waiting for the Prime Minister to make a decision.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and approve job-creating pipeline projects so we can get our hardest-hit families back to work?
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese Premier confirmed that they were negotiating an extradition treaty between the two countries.Then, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Canada's top diplomat who is aware, one would hope, that the treaty is being negotiated with China, contradicted the Prime Minister saying that we would never negotiate an extradition treaty.Who are Canadians to believe, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, we have a job crisis here in Canada. In western Canada, over 125,000 energy workers have lost their jobs, thanks in great part to the current Liberal government's anti-energy policies. Canada is unable to get top dollar for its energy products because our oil is landlocked. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost.When will the Liberals start growing Canada's economy by creating jobs, employing the middle class, and helping Canada's energy sector to get our products to new international markets?
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer the member's question, and I will quote once again from Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He said, The relocation process is run by an independent third party. The third party determines the actual cost according to the program criteria.... There's a reason the system has an independent third party decide on actual costs and apply the rules fairly and consistently to everyone. Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the hon. member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in this House time and time again, this relocation policy has been in place since the 1970s. This policy was last updated under the previous government. We have also heard how Stephen Harper's office, when he was prime minister, approved over $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Our government recognizes that more can be done, and that is why our Prime Minister has asked the Treasury Board to revisit the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health signed off on an official response to Parliament stating that she had not expensed any charges for limos, but we found out she actually charged thousands of dollars for that very thing. The Minister of Natural Resources did the exact same thing. Now we have the immigration minister hiding moving expenses in an official response to Parliament.Can the Prime Minister stand up and explain to Canadians, if his ministry is hiding all of these things, why Canadians should believe anything his government says?
Mr. Speaker, last week, we confirmed that we established a dialogue on security and rule of law to show that our government is prepared to work with the Chinese government on issues that matter to Canadians. We now have a robust way to have regular discussions on important matters, such as consular affairs and human rights. We will continue to uphold the principles of Canadians and to meet their expectations when it comes to extradition treaties. We have extremely high expectations in such matters.
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the number one concern for Canadians is jobs. We can create jobs by approving projects and we can protect jobs by making decisions and negotiating things like a new softwood lumber deal with the Americans, for instance.The former Liberal government abandoned the forestry industry, which suffered the consequences for years. October 12 is just around the corner. I hope we can reach a deal with the United States so that we can continue logging. I hope this issue does not have to go to court. Is the Prime Minister willing to make a commitment to the forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, workers are losing their jobs. Governments are losing revenue. The middle class is hurt by the downstream economic effects from the loss of energy markets, and he is going to undertake another study.No matter what part of Canada we live in, we have a stake in ensuring Canada has the energy infrastructure in place to access new international markets. When will the Liberals approve pipelines and get Canada's energy to new emerging international markets?
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the last agreement expired on the previous government's watch.The Conseil du patronat du Québec commended the government for all that it has done in defence of the Quebec forestry industry. The Quebec Forest Industry Council is pleased with the government's position on Quebec's forestry regime. Only the opposition refuses to acknowledge the work we are doing to protect Quebec and Canadian workers.
Mr. Speaker, one of the core responsibilities of any government is to help get our natural resources to market, but in a sustainable fashion. The only way we can do that is to restore public trust in the way we evaluate major projects.This government introduced the interim principles as a first step to addressing some of the concerns that exist. We have now launched an environmental assessment review, which will go through the process of revitalizing our environmental assessments, and we are about to embark upon a modernization of the National Energy Board. We are going to continue to ensure that these processes carry the confidence of Canadians going forward so we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, the process used by the previous government to appoint Supreme Court justices was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. We have announced a new appointment process that is open, transparent, and will set a much higher standard for accountability. As mandated by our Prime Minister, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates, developed by the advisory board, includes candidates from Atlantic Canada.I am very pleased with the new-found interest in Atlantic Canada expressed by the member for Niagara Falls.
Mr. Speaker, the policy that the member is referring to has existed since the 1970s. The previous government had no problem approving it. As recently as 2011, the previous government had no problem approving $300,000 in relocation expenses, including one for $93,000.Let us go back to Guy Giorno, former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper. He asked, Do we want a fair and independent determination based on consistent rules, or do we want [the member for SaskatoonUniversity] to impose his arbitrary and personal opinion on people
Mr. Speaker, if I had any hair, with an answer like that, I would pull the rest of it out.If I had known that a U-Haul was this expensive, I would have offered to take a load of stuff for Gerry in my Ford F-150.The fact is that this is classical Liberal entitlement. The government keeps repeating that these were policies that have been in place for years. However, I can tell members that it is true that no government before the current government has ever abused this policy.Will the Prime Minister come clean and admit that the million-dollar move was way out of line?
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians know is that the previous government did not do the work it was elected to do. This government recognizes that these policies can be improved.Members on this side of the House have recognized where improvements can be made, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stood in the House and corrected the record. It is something that the previous government would not know much of, but when it comes to correcting Order Paper questions, the previous government did it more than 10 times.
Mr. Speaker, we know that in order to build a strong economy we have to be serious about protecting the environment, and a price on carbon is part of that. It will help us to reduce our emissions, foster innovation, and give businesses the certainty that they need to plan. We are working actively with all of the provinces as we approach the development of the pan-Canadian framework. However, I would in this regard note the statement made by the Premier of British Columbia yesterday. She said: ...I want to be clear that British Columbia remains committed to a pan-Canadian carbon pricing framework.... British Columbia has established a $30 per tonne broad-based carbon tax and consistently challenged others to join us.... We are encouraged to have a federal partner in advancing carbon pricing across Canada....
Mr. Speaker, let me read what the current Minister of Public Services said in the House before the election: It is not right that throughout our country we are seeing reduced health care funding to the provinces by nearly $36 billion.... Now in government, the Liberals have adopted the health care plan of Stephen Harper. Do members hear that applause? Was this always the Liberal plan? Attack Stephen Harper's policies to get elected and then, once in government, adopt those exact same policies?
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money.Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers. Why do the Liberals only believe these expenses were unreasonable once caught?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is failing when it comes to backing our resource workers and their families. He has been faltering on making decisions on major energy projects, and this has to stop. The Pacific NorthWest LNG would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in investment at no cost to taxpayers. These workers and families need the Prime Minister to make a decision. They cannot afford to wait any longer.Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision that is in the interests of energy workers?
Mr. Speaker, the government promised to ensure that justice will be served to the victims of this dark chapter in Canadian history and that they will receive the compensation to which they are entitled.We are very concerned about the possibility that some victims have been refused the compensation they are entitled to. I asked my department to look into how this situation can be rectified. Justice must be served.
Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Superior Court has ordered immediate compensation for a residential school survivor who suffered a perverse miscarriage of justice under the IAP. It was a brutal case. For what possible reason would the justice minister send her lawyers to try to have that case overthrown? The Prime Minister promised survivors that he would end these tactics. Whether it is supporting Site C or fighting residential school survivors, will the Prime Minister tell the House why his justice minister is still using the discredited Stephen Harper playbook to impede indigenous rights in court?
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, when caught misusing taxpayers dollars, the Prime Minister's friends, Gerry and Katie, said that when they reviewed their expenses, they found that there were some that were unreasonable.The government continued to say that it was following the rules and was forced to make these payouts because of the rules, but in fact, the senior vice-president at Brookfield Global Relocation Services said just minutes ago that they were not forced to do this. As a matter of fact, they would have been briefed on the exact expenses they themselves were claiming.The question is, did Gerry and Katie believe that these expenses were unreasonable when they claimed them or only when they got caught?
As I have said a number of times, Mr. Speaker, the previous government had many conversations around issues of extradition, of rule of law, of consular affairs with China, but always on an ad hoc basis. What we have established is a rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to bring up difficult issues and emphasize that Canada has very high expectations around rule of law and process around any such things as extradition. That is something that Canadians expect us to hold to.
Mr. Speaker, the question definitely means a lot coming from the member reading her question.I will remind members in the House that this policy has existed since the 1970s. I will remind members in the House that this government recognizes that this policy needs to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has asked Treasury Board to review the relocation policy.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about those consultations. Today, the Privacy Commissioner criticized the government because the Bill C-51 consultations are not examining the impact of this bill on democratic rights and privacy. He said, The scope of these consultations is too narrow. They dont appear to be looking at key privacy concerns....Will the minister acknowledge that his government has done nothing and has no proposal, and will he recognize people's real concerns about privacy and repeal Bill C-51?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning I had the pleasure of attending an announcement made by the Minister of Finance at La Cité collégiale in Ottawa. The minister announced the launch of the prebudget consultations for his second budget, budget 2017.I wonder if the minister could share his objectives with the House.
Mr. Speaker, to strip someone of their Canadian citizenship is a very serious matter.Stephen Harper's Bill C-24 took away due process for Canadians, even in the case of an honest mistake. The Liberals promised a full repeal of Bill C-24, but so far they have failed to deliver. In fact, the government is aggressively pursuing citizenship revocation for up to 60 Canadians every month.When will the minister fix Bill C-24? Will he halt citizenship revocation until fairness has been restored?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years the previous government was unable to approve large projects simply because it did not have the public's confidence. It did not demonstrate that it understood that building a strong economy requires one to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are focused on.The Conservatives also do not understand that the only taxes we have raised are on the wealthiest 1% so we could lower them for the middle class, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, the axe has fallen. The Minister of Health has decided, in the Liberal tradition, to unilaterally decrease health transfers. What a great way to work collaboratively with her Quebec counterpart. This is a direct attack on the Quebec health system. There is less money for access to doctors, less money for nurses, and less money for care and surgical procedures.Why are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec saying nothing and letting this government attack Quebec's health care system?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank each and every member of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans in this country, who have supported this nation for a long time. I know we are working actively toward getting veterans the benefits they need for financial security, for employment, and for other retraining initiatives. At the core of my mission is assisting that transition. We are working hard to do so with the Minister of National Defence, as well as ensuring that as many veterans as possible receive the benefits that are due and owing to them for their service.
Mr. Speaker, for years Canadians governments have been bringing up security and rule of law concerns with the Chinese government, but the fact is that it has always been done on an ad hoc basis. What we have actually established is an ongoing rigorous security and rule of law dialogue that will allow us to advance the issues of consular affairs and cybersecurity, issues that matter to Canadians in a robust way that is going to get results. For too long the previous government's back and forth and dilly-dallying on engagement with China did not produce the results that Canadians need.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to improve the government's relationship with our veterans, and yet, in his report released today, the military ombudsman indicated that the current benefits system is simply not working. He said it is too complex and difficult for veterans to navigate. It is simply unacceptable.Veterans are already waiting too long for the benefits that they are entitled to, but this government continues to make life difficult for them.Will the minister correct this injustice so that our veterans can transition more easily to civilian life?
Mr. Speaker, last month, the immigration minister said that an extradition treaty with China was off the table because of its human rights record. Then last week, the Prime Minister and the Chinese premier indicated that they were negotiating an extradition treaty. Then this past weekend, the foreign affairs minister publicly contradicted the Prime Minister and said they would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China.Will the Prime Minister let us know once and for all, is he or anyone in his government negotiating an extradition treaty with China?
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to learn details about the Prime Minister's secret negotiations on a cybersecurity agreement with China. Let us be clear. The Chinese have hacked into our National Research Council; they have hacked the government's networks thousands of times; Canadian companies are under a constant threat of Chinese hacking to steal their ideas and intellectual property, and this illegal activity has gone on for decades.How dangerously naive can the Prime Minister be to enter into a cybersecurity agreement with the country that poses the largest cybersecurity threat?
Mr. Speaker, the fifth replenishment conference of the Global Fund was recently held in Montreal. Canada generously pledged $800 million from 2017 to 2019 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Will the Minister of International Development update the House on the leadership role played by Canada and on the progress made at this conference to eradicate these three terrible diseases that have claimed so many lives?
Mr. Speaker, today the military ombudsman released a report warning that the application process for injured veterans is broken, complex, and difficult to navigate. Injured Canadian Armed Forces members will not automatically get the new benefits but will have to apply through what the ombudsman described as a dizzying process. Veterans have already waited far too long for their benefits. Will the minister proactively reach out to injured service men and women to ensure they get the higher benefits promised by the Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians to be open and transparent. These expenses were entered under proactive disclosure nine months ago, but it turns out they were entered under the wrong column. I realized this earlier today and just over an hour ago I recorded this point in the House of Commons. I will be resubmitting the answer to the Order Paper question as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver accord did nothing of the sort because we now note that the three premiers of our northern territories, Premier of Saskatchewan Brad Wall, and even Premier McNeil of Nova Scotia have all said that they oppose the imposition of a federal carbon tax on their provinces. Yet the environment minister continues her threat to force a harmful carbon tax grab on all of the provinces and territories, betraying the Prime Minister's promise to work collaboratively with the provinces.Again, to the minister, why has she broken that promise, and what happened to the new era of co-operative federalism?
Mr. Speaker, today another member of the Prime Minister's cabinet had to stand in the House of Commons and admit that he personally signed off and submitted false information to parliamentarians. Once again this confession only came after the Liberals were caught. When it comes to transparency, the buck stops with the Prime Minister.Parliamentarians on behalf of the Canadians they represent should not have to rely on access to information requests to uncover the truth. Will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to Canadians for letting his cabinet hide information from them?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill. It has now passed through the House of Commons and will be considered in the Senate.Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal.
Mr. Speaker, 19 ministers and the Prime Ministerthat is more than half of themsigned off on outrageous relocation costs for a handful of their friends. It was not until they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar that they claimed these so-called relocation costs were unreasonable and agreed to pay some of the money back. If these expenses are unreasonable and wrong today, then why did they accept the personalized cash payments in the first place?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, under the previous administration, not one kilometre of pipeline was built to tidewater. The reason was that it had undermined the integrity of the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board process. We intend to re-establish the confidence of Canadians in these processes to ensure that we can get our resources to market in a sustainable way.
Mr. Speaker, last week, the Liberal government adopted Stephen Harper's deplorable greenhouse gas reduction targets. This week, the government is adopting Stephen Harper's draconian health care cuts even though, before the election, the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticized the Conservative government because it unilaterally refused to extend the funding agreement.Is that what the Prime Minister meant when he talked about real change?
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough that the government House leader keeps hiding behind the rules, saying that the rules were followed. She is misleading Canadians. The rules clearly state that these expenses are at the discretion of the minister and the Prime Minister. The rules did not make them do it.Why is the Prime Minister hiding behind the rules instead of admitting he used poor judgment when he signed off on these unreasonable personal cash payments?
Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally. He added, My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent. The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?